Letters to the editor
Fresh perspective
Editor:I'm writing to praise the first two columns by Thomas Willman that have
appeared in the Bruin Arts & Entertainment section. Midway through both the
Oct. 31 and Nov. 14 articles, I found myself double-checking the newspaper
banner to make sure someone hadn't slipped a section of the NY Village
Voice into my copies of your college paper.
This guy not only has a unique perspective on American society - partly
understandable, since he's straight off the boat from Germany - but he also
packs a remarkable amount of wit and wisdom into his various takes on
Hollywood filmmaking, the prestidigitations going on with CD-ROM
technologies, and their impact on our late 20th century notions of history
and public memory.
You'd have to wake up pretty early in the morning and fan through a lot
of journals and publications to gather up what this writer casually spins
out in his commentaries.
I look forward to Willman's future writings on his new life here in Los
Angeles. And, I hope he continues to explore American culture's influence
on his imagination - as well as on those of other visiting students - as
engagingly as he's already done. I recommend his conversational style -
kind of makes you feel like you've just landed at his table in some
bohemian Munich cafe to enjoy rich food for thought.Eric L. Vollmer
Los Angeles RepertorySurvival of the kindest
Editor:You know, love is a uniquely human concept. I don't think any other
species on the planet really uses the idea of love. I mean, look at why
they have sex: They have it to propagate the species. How do they choose
who they're going to have sex with? They do it by ramming heads and finding
out who is the most physically powerful so that the strong survive. Does
love equate with this? Well, maybe, but I don't really see much more than a
physical attraction working here.
Seriously, you look at some species, and they have the strongest male
basically running a harem. Humans don't usually do that. Love is a truly
human quality because it makes absolutely no sense.
No sense, you're saying. What the hell do I mean by that? Really, think
about it: If we analyze it, do humans really make sense? Should we really
be the dominant species? I mean, look at how frail we are in comparison to
other animals. Look at how we can't do anything really spectacular. If we
were to listen to Darwin's theories, as all of the other animals do, we'd
only have a few humans around, and they'd all be pro athletes in
physique.
If we were really practical creatures, we would've eliminated all of the
weaker members of the species years ago. People with disabilities, or who
are short or just not very well-endowed: GONE!! I know it sounds crass, but
it's the truth. I'm willing to admit that I wouldn't fit in a world based
on survival of the fittest because really, I don't have the physical
abilities to survive.
But you know what? Humans are the dominant species on this planet. We
can tame almost any animal. Our species overruns the earth. How is this?
Because we don't make any sense. People have the capacity to love each
other, and that gives the ability to see beyond our physical attributes, to
see what's inside.
People love each other, and they help each other, and while that doesn't
help the stronger individual become dominant, it helps the entire group
become stronger. When people love each other, they open themselves up to
becoming vulnerable, but the stronger being that they become more than
compensates for this. Imagine if we could get all the people in the world
to love each other.
Colin Chan
Second year
English
Plucking the pole
Editor:A note of appreciation for the reasonably fair article, "God only
knows," Nov. 13, about Jews for Jesus, written by Sarah Krupp. A word of
response is in order to Chaim Seidler-Feller.
Elsewhere in the same Daily Bruin issue ("Rabin deserves respect for
transformation toward peace," Nov. 13), he charged "teachers of tradition,"
implicating rabbis like himself with culpability of crimes committed by
individuals whose passion for hatred is stirred up by their teachers'
inflammatory language.
To paraphrase a great teacher, I suggest Seidler-Feller pull the
telephone pole from out of his own eye before he attempt to pluck the
splinter from that of another. I hold Seidler-Feller responsible for what I
see as his own incendiary and bigoted statements about the good people in
the office of Jews for Jesus.Tuvya Zaretsky
Chief of Station
Jews for Jesus