I am embarrassed by this editorial. In a world where every day new allegations are made against men who are actively promoting evil, flouting public will and burying our children's and grandchildren's futures for a quick buck,-- these men who are IN POWER, mind you-- you choose to single out the best president of the lifetimes of most of us, one moreover who has distinguished himself by his virtue and compassion, all because he chooses to get fair market value for a speech. No, I am not embarrassed by the strident naivete of this piece. I am embarrassed and ashamed.
Re: “Feedback 10/3”
With regard to John Kastner's letter, there is an unearned assumption and a non sequitur. The assumption is that the artist has changed. Where is the slightest indication this is true. A very late apology? I don't think so. The non sequitur is this: "Michael Nighan does a great disservice to art by implying that the man who murdered that unfortunate dog is the same one who designed that playful, whimsical park at the corner of University and Goodman enjoyed by hundreds of people every day." But nothing in this "work of whimsy" shows any sea change of Otterness. He is indeed the same person, except that he has learned what to do and what not to do with museum boards. Michael Nighan has done no disservice to art but has reminded us of its responsibilities.