CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
September 22, 1990
Krauthammer's column epitomizes the mentality of the reactionary conservative right. Congress, by seeking to qualify the NEA bill, does indeed censor art because, as a sanctioned authority, it imposes its view of what is and what is not art on the populace. Krauthammer's idea for a "Himmelfarb Amendment," which would support only "old, established art," can only be seen as the most dangerous of reactions to the avant-garde. He, like the right, chooses to live in a past that is safely understood and offers no surprises or discomforts; yet he seems to forget that aesthetic opinions of Rachmaninoff, Beethoven and similar artists have been forged in part by the benefit of years of hindsight.
January 8, 1995
"Living Large" (Dec. 27) reports a 400-pound woman sued Southwest Airlines after she alleged she was humiliated by being asked to buy a second seat. Southwest says they do everything they can to accommodate people of all sizes. Perhaps extra-large persons should be required to pay for the extra space needed to accommodate their size. People don't object to the warning of safe-weight capacity posted in elevators, do they? For safety's sake (and just plain old common sense), the FAA should regulate the process and make and enforce rules about weight limit per seat.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
October 4, 1998
Re "Regulators Take a Shot at Portable Hoops," Sept. 24: Not only are Orange County communities continuing to lead the nation in placing property values ahead of the welfare of children, but some of them are now so hypocritical as to pretend that their concern is for safety. What's next? Will they prohibit children from walking across streets? At least the Nellie Gail Ranch manager had the decency to admit that it was an aesthetic issue. From my misguided point of view, an aesthetically pleasing neighborhood is one where there are visible signs of children engaging in normal play at their own homes.
November 19, 1989
I've never before written a fan letter regarding a book review, but I must express my thanks for Richard Eder's thoughts on Umberto Eco's "Foucault's Pendulum" (Book Review, Nov. 5),which I have not yet read and probably never will. When "The Name of the Rose" was published to so much acclaim, I felt like a skunk at a lawn party. Throughout his novel, Mr. Eco grandstanded his own erudition in tedious tangents to an otherwise nifty story. I found the writing just plain literary bad manners.
March 6, 2002
Re "Letterman Bid Reflects ABC's Shift from News," March 2: Yes, let's keep America stupid. We don't need intelligent, thoughtful and incisive news shows like "Nightline" on at 11:30 p.m. when we can watch stupid pet tricks and sophomoric dillydallying on David Letterman's talk show. We have far too many serious things going on, like the World Trade Center bombing and the wars and worldwide terrorism running rampant. We need more Disney entertainment to keep our minds simple so we can absorb, like-minded, our president's simple-minded conception of evil.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
July 12, 1986
We stand at a threshold of a community development. We are in the midst of tremendous change in many areas of life. I am among the first to acknowledge, as a promoter of change, that this condition can be stressful to us all, including managers of change, such as the City Council. However, any contemplative person recognizes that change itself is inevitable. Developers must change too. In fact, "change itself" is the stock in trade of developers. And historically, building technology has continually changed in response to a variety of factors.
January 14, 1990
As a Los Angeles land-use lawyer, I was appalled at the decision of the Los Angeles Planning Commission in the matter of the 10733 Wilshire Boulevard building (Times, Jan. 6). That decision, which denied to landowners the right to construct a building solely because certain members of the commission did not like the building's appearance, is a hard blow to our city's struggle to rise above architectural mediocrity. Early in the century the California Supreme Court held that a man may not be deprived of his property "because his tastes are not those of his neighbors."