By Chris Lane
By Jeff Balke
By Aaron Reiss
By Angelica Leicht
By Dianna Wray
By Aaron Reiss
By Camilo Smith
By Craig Malisow
I found the article on Houston's "Screw" culture ["Swangin' and Bangin'," by Megan Halverson, February 27] very irresponsible. This culture, which glorifies converting cars to obnoxious boom boxes, disturbing the peace, doing drugs and drinking like a fish received not one word of condemnation in your expose. Not one word of rebuke for a culture that does not offer even one redeeming quality. This article does not measure up to any reasonable level of journalistic responsibility. I know that the Houston Press can do better -- I hope that you will.
I am an avid reader of the Houston Press. Your recent articles on John O'Quinn and Sheila Jackson Lee were, in my opinion, exemplary. However, the review of the Fakawwee Lodge restaurant by Jim Sherman [Cafe, "What a Joke," February 27] was analogous to character assassination.
I fully understand that Mr. Sherman, like anyone else, has the right to like or dislike anything or anybody. To this end, I fully support the First Amendment that provides for "freedom of the press." With this in mind, I wonder whatever happened to the modus operandi of reporting news in a neutral capacity? I happen to frequent the Fakawwee Lodge, and I have yet to identify with what Mr. Sherman is experiencing ... up to and including the crab cakes and staff problems!
I guess what really got my attention is that Mr. Sherman could have conveyed a review to the public that highlighted some areas that are, according to him, not up to his standard as far as service and cuisine is concerned. His review is nothing short of destructive and vindictive. Unlike Mr. Sherman, I am not an expert in this arena, but I would venture to say that a new facility going through the growing pains of establishing itself will have some flaws -- especially if, according to Mr. Sherman, it is located in the mysterious snakebitten corner of Richmond and Greenbriar. To set out to destroy a place of business simply because you are protected under the First Amendment is tantamount to malfeasance!
To make a long story short, in Mr. Sherman's vernacular: I think when Mr. Sherman was ten years old a bully by the name of Fakawwee, who happened to be a moron, beat the dogshit out of him, and he has finally ventilated his feelings at the expense of someone else!
Robert D. Lee
Holy cornmeal-breaded calamari, Batman! It sounds like someone has a grudge against the Fakawwee Lodge! What would cause such a venomous review? Were Jim Sherman's taste buds on hiatus during his visit to the Lodge? Did his lover dump him there on Valentine's Day? Oh, I see, he had dinner there one evening with the "best cook" he knows, ergo, the best cook could not be in the kitchen preparing his meal.
The Fakawwee Lodge requires no defense. Anyone who frequents the restaurant knows Sherman is dead wrong. And anyone who read the review and visits expecting a good laugh at the staff and an inferior meal will not understand what he was writing about.
I read with amusement your review of Fakawwee Lodge. Amusement mainly because of the ineptness of the writing style. To drone on and on about the name of a restaurant is at best inane. So you had a problem opening and pouring a bottle -- why write about your stupidity? No restaurant working staff deserves being called names or being put in such a mean-spirited article. It's only a restaurant, for Pete's sake.
I don't own it, but have been to the restaurant and always have had personal service. No one should have to bear the onus of your "mister cutie" and your snobbishly indelicate palate.
Editor's note: The last time we looked, the Fakawwee Lodge was closed -- not because of Jim Sherman's review, but for non-payment of rent, at least according to the sign on the door.
Counseling Sought for Midlife Loser
The profile on Russian immigrant Fabian Vaksman was hilarious! ["Lunch with LLaughing BBoy," by Jim Simmon, February 27]. I must commend you for not totally castigating him. I doubt that the poor man could have stood it.
It is clear to me that the only "advantage of this country" that Vaksman is interested in is America's propensity for giving attention to juvenile shock-talk, especially when it spews from adults dumb enough to speak (or write) absurdities publicly. Let's not be confused by this man. He has absolutely nothing of value to say. Look at him. Twenty years in America, and what's he got to show for it? Nothing but excuses. And now he thinks he's found a target -- the black man? Hardly. I mean, I'm laughing too hard now to swallow.
Vaksman has proved that he's just another midlife loser. It sounds as if he wastes enormous amounts of energy whining and seeking attention of the sorts that he apparently sits up late at night worshipping. Look at his stats: 20 years seeking a degree, no real job, sponsored trips to Russia by people he cannot comfortably disclose. Come on, guys. This is too easy. What Vaksman really wants is to be on TV. And any other freebie he can swindle.