“New Meaning for the Term ‘Art Cars,'” City of Warts, 4/28
Speculation on a rumor
Mr. Thompson’s article may provide compelling reading, but it must be noted that, in his eagerness to produce something of interest, he has managed to misrepresent the true nature of a relationship between an arts and crafts organization in West Berkeley — Nexus Institute — and the Berkeley East Bay Humane Society.
To begin with, Mr. Thompson would do well to report the facts accurately. Nexus Institute is not for sale, and the BEBHS is not interested in buying it. In fact, the BEBHS already owns the property on which Nexus stands. Nexus has two years remaining on a lease that was originally negotiated at fair market rates in 1975 and then renegotiated in 1991.
Secondly, the BEBHS and Nexus are seeking ways to move forward in a relationship that is beneficial in the current climate — economically and otherwise — for the animals and the arts as well as the communities that have come to depend on these organizations. When Mr. Thompson asked me to speculate on a rumor that the BEBHS is seeking to sell the property on which Nexus resides, I responded with caution and was given assurance by him that what I offered would be used as “background information only” — a term which it is safe to assume means “off the record.” In violating that confidence, he only partially quoted my words, “They thought this was an opportunity to get them out of the red.” While he shouldn’t have printed them at all, as long as he couldn’t resist the temptation, he might have included the word that prefaced the statement — “Perhaps” — thus placing it in its proper context — speculation on a loose rumor.
Two more bits of speculation: first, perhaps the fact that such a rumor is in circulation is telling of a community that cares; second, perhaps a little self-restraint on the part of a journalist would go a long way toward mending his tattered reputation within the arts and animal-loving communities.
Steph Zlott, co-president, Nexus Institute, Berkeley
CHRIS THOMPSON REPLIES
I have no recollection that Steph Zlott’s comments were off the record, nor do my notes reflect such a caveat. If indeed I created that impression, then I’m distinctly sorry for the miscommunication. As for the quote, however, my notes do not include the word “perhaps.”
“Best of the East Bay,” 5/5
The people have spoken
Only in Oakland could some local hipster get a foot in the door of a local publication and write a selfish Best Of over their own readers’ picks. The people have spoken, but won’t be heard. Why would the READERS’ PICKS be published at the bottom of a page with no background on their business?
Tom Benaliard, Oakland
And the runner-up is …
May I suggest a new category for the annual “Best of the East Bay”? As well as “Best Pizza,” let’s have “Second-Best Pizza,” or perhaps “Best Pizza Other Than Zachary’s.” It would be useful.
David Goldfarb, Oakland
Best city
As mayor of Berkeley, I take great pride in all the wonderful stores, restaurants, and cultural opportunities in this city. Having read your recent “Best of the East Bay” edition, I was pleased to see that you and your readers agree. In case anyone missed it, Berkeley had more “bests” than any other city. In fact, according to our quick tally, almost 35 percent of all the editorial staff and reader recommendations were for Berkeley stores, restaurants, people, cultural arts, and the like. Whether you want a great microbrewed beer or a unique store to find the perfect gift, this is the town for you.
Tom Bates, Berkeley
“Top of the Bottom,” Bottom Feeder, 5/12
Worst city
Three words for you: What’s your function? To mock Berkeley? Instead of your mockery, photographing places to “pass out,” and putting down People’s Park, why don’t you photograph city officials doing nothing about the homelessness and lack of affordable housing in Berkeley? If you think it is such a delightful spot, why don’t you go sleep there for a while and see how really delightful it is? Take more pictures of people struggling with poverty. The best place for people to sleep if they are homeless is a HOME, not the street.
Take pictures of the super-expensive high-rises in downtown Berkeley and the wheeler-dealers planning to build more of them, and more pictures of them laughing on the way to the bank, and THEN take some pictures of the poverty in Berkeley. And, while you’re at it, take some pictures of the empty lot at the corner of Telegraph and Haste; it used to be an affordable hotel a few years ago, until it mysteriously burned down, putting a lot of people into that “homelessness” you mock so well. Take some more pictures of city officials and wealthy land speculators. Your mockery of this situation does nothing to solve it.
John Delmos, Berkeley
Worst column
While I have always appreciated politically incorrect humor, I think Bottom Feeder exhibited gross insensitivity to both the poor and to Oakland residents in his column last week. As a health-care provider for the homeless who witnesses their misery on a daily basis and as a community activist in Oakland, I was deeply offended by his jokes about the “Best Place to Sleep If You’re Homeless” and “Best Place to Get Murdered.” With continued cuts in care for the homeless and an epidemic of violence and hopelessness in poor Oakland neighborhoods, enlightened citizens are not laughing — nor are the poor or young African-American men. I think you owe both the homeless and all Oaklanders an apology. You might redeem yourself by listing some resources to aid both of these groups.
Meredith Florian, family nurse practitioner, Oakland
Worst columnist
Lo and behold, there among all things undesirable, listed under the headline “Top of the Bottom,” we find “Judaism.” Do you think you’re funny, or are you just plain stupid? I won’t even bother trying to appear respectful or responsible, or try to reason with you. I’m just too damn mad. And did I mention? Fuck you.
Allan Marcus, Richmond
“Oakland’s Choice: Cops or Caseworkers,” City of Warts, 5/19
We are as diverse as Oakland
I am writing to correct a factual error in Chris Thompson’s article. Safety First is not an “ad hoc” group of residents from the Highland Hospital area. Rather, we are a group of concerned citizens who have come together to work for a Crime Reduction Measure in November that will address the severe manpower shortage in the Oakland Police Department, and also ensure that present and future antiviolence social programs in our city have clear performance goals that they are required to meet. We also support a measure that is adequately funded and raises taxes in a fair and equitable manner.
As to who we are: Safety First is composed of members from every single City Council District in Oakland. Our members range from lifelong residents to those who moved here two years ago; from the young to the old; from all socioeconomic backgrounds; and from a wide range of ethnic and racial groups. In short, we strive to be as diverse as Oakland is itself.
Ken Lupoff, co-spokesman, Safety First, Oakland
“Pitt and the Pabulum,” Film, 5/12
Real warriors are laughing
Retitle Bill Gallo’s Pitt-ifully pandering piece “The Pitts and the Improbable Peplum!” Scrawny, wimpy Brad-the-Pitts has no “pecs,” nor is he “incredibly buff,” and is no more believable as a “fierce Greek warrior” than flabby and jowly Russell Crowe (out-of-shape-accountant-turned-toga-costumer) was as a supposed “Gladiator.” Tough as nails, you say? Brad-the-Pitts couldn’t credibly warrior his way out of the proverbial wet paper bag! And the more that you pander to this incredibly WISHFULLY THINKING crapola, then the longer it will take Hollywood to cast an authentic epic whose mythical heroes we can truly believe in again!
If you want to watch a real warrior with genuine pecs (not to mention beautiful women and not underdeveloped adolescent girls) then try Steve Reeves’ The Trojan Horse (1961-62). And don’t even mention Cecil B. DeMille in the very same unbelievable breath: he’s doubtless squirming in his grave in the dry bottom of the Dead Sea-bed at previewing Troy-the-TRAVESTY! Print THAT, Pitt-Sycophants!
Joseph Covino Jr., Berkeley
“Frank’s War,” Feature, 4/28
Nits Must Be Picked
Multiple nits to pick about your “nasty academic debate” between Sulloway, Townsend, and Harris.
NIT #1: HISTORY AS FACT OR INTERPRETATION: Regardless of birth order, historical assessment plays a large role in whether a person is considered a revolutionary. One period’s revolutionary is another period’s failed visionary or dictator. One of your examples, Chiang Kai-Shek, a laterborn, led an extremely successful revolution in the 1920s against the Imperial Family (the last Chinese emperor). The Kuomintang were the Chinese revolutionary party, fighting the British and Americans in the cause of democracy, and then allying with them (us) against the Japanese in the cause of independence, until the end of the Second World War, when the Western powers abandoned him and China. If Chiang had died young, he would have been in the revolutionary pantheon along with Che Guevara. However, he survived and had to practice politics in the real world as leader of a poor country juggling alliances between competing imperialistic super-powers.
NIT #2: DIFFERENTIAL STANDARDS OF ACCURACY: Contradictions abound in any discussion of human growth. You cite Harris as positing that “Parents have little long-term influence on their children’s personalities. Genetics and peer influences are what most shape a child’s character.” Where did the child’s genetic makeup come from, if not parents? I am the third of five generations of cheerful extroverts. If my children and grandchildren would have been cheerful extroverts had I died young and they went into an orphanage, was it my parental influence or their great-grandmother’s genes?
NIT #3: STATISTICS: As far as the statistical analyses, the old saw that “figures don’t lie, but liars figure” is still true. Meta-analysis and other statistical tools can be powerful indicators of correlations. Whether the correlations are causal or something else requires research. It’s like filling out tax forms. The IRS, the Department of Labor, the Commissioner of Corporations, all want information derived from the same raw data. But each one sorts it differently, depending on the goal. A perfectly valid analysis for continuing nonprofit status is invalid for questions of racketeering.
NIT #4: SCIENTIFIC METHOD: Nobody seems to have been setting up research designs or doing research; they are just analyzing and reanalyzing previously published data. The published data is not necessarily high-quality data. It is quite likely some of the original research needs to be redone before it can be held up as valid. However, the arguing parties have no claim to scientific rigor until a set of suggested experiments has been set up to validate the ideas, and some experiments have been tried by two or more experimenters. Maybe you can revisit this in five years or so, when some real research, not just paper shuffling, has been done.
Teddy Knight, Berkeley
