By Chris Lane
By Jeff Balke
By Aaron Reiss
By Angelica Leicht
By Dianna Wray
By Aaron Reiss
By Camilo Smith
By Craig Malisow
Rise and Shine
[Re: Trinity Church]: This article was informative and well written. I would hope that it is a wake-up call to dozing Anglicans everywhere.
Psalms of silence or confusion over canons? Open the Episcopal Hymnal and you will find Title II, Canon 5, where it is stated that the member of the clergy (in this case, John Graham) shall have "final authority in the administration of matters pertaining to music." When push comes to shove, the rector reigns over music.
Evidently, the vestry decided to proceed under Title III, Canons 20 and 21, which seem clearly to involve the rector and vestry with an appellate procedure set forth. I wonder about the propriety of a godly admonition against the organist/choirmaster who is not a party to the proceeding even though he may have partly caused the situation.
And, if the Press is correct that Franklin is "permanently barred from those jobs in the future," do not several legal questions come to mind?
Your people do a great job -- the research to document articles like the one on Sheila Jackson Lee ["Flying Miss Sheila," by Tim Fleck, May 14] must be exhaustive. I never liked the Chronicle or the Post -- you folks are like a breath of fresh air.
Keep up the good work.
Making the Grade
Perusing Professor Castaneda's Hawaiian Punch T-shirt mug shot and the accompanying intelligence ["Punches, Passion in Tenure War," by Russell Contreras, June 25], I must come clean and confess how truly entertained I became. Why?
Because it's not about the professor, the school or the grade. Everybody invested in the whole silly deal is missing the point that the man is trying to make. It is not whether you get an F or a D or an A+. It is whether you can hack him or not!
The ego-infested pre-yuppie folk, who won't even be able to chill through little Castaneda's hourlong torture, are the same babes who'll be facing Machiavellian co-workers and employers with all sorts of jungle warfare motives out in that real world of ours.
I say, "Thank God" that there are still classes hell-bent on the philosophy of reality, and that there are still drill sergeants and rogue free thinkers. Doctors Sheridan and Smith, I think you all are suffering a melancholic breakdown and fantasize perversely about the fine ol' days of "Cougar High School."
I am one of the many supporters of Quetzil Castaneda. He is a challenging and driven professor. He forces his students to ask questions about themselves and the world they live in. He so impressed me that, after taking an "intro" course he taught, I changed my major to anthropology and decided to pursue a career in academia. After watching the soap opera that plagues him, however, I changed my mind.
Dr. Castaneda is an academic anachronism, but he shouldn't be. He reflects the atmosphere that prevailed on campuses during the late sixties and early seventies. He asks his students to question the status quo. Yet, in a year of strong economic growth and apathetic citizens, his calls for change and skepticism fall on deaf ears. Most students long for the mythical "real world" where they will earn large salaries, buy houses, cars, cell phones and marry their dream trophy.
Dr. Castaneda wants to educate his students, not necessarily train them for jobs. He doesn't treat his students like children who need to be coddled. He is a great part of our faculty and, unfortunately, he is probably lost. He will undoubtedly go to a more progressive institution of higher learning. In light of all of the UH rhetoric about improving the profile and stature of the university, this situation is shameful.
I'm astounded at Cliff William's assertion ["Attacking the Taxman," by Richard Connelly, June 18]. I'm a member of the State Bar of Texas, perhaps not the easiest organization to respect. But, like all Texas lawyers, I'm licensed by the Supreme Court of Texas, a license I've had framed and displayed. Anyone who doesn't understand the distinction between membership in the bar and licensing by the court should stay out of the game.
You chose to present the ill-considered ramblings of Internal Revenue agent Jennifer Long ["Tales from the IRS," by Steve McVicker, April 16]. That story was serendipitously timed, appearing on the newsstands immediately before an investigation by the Treasury inspector general revealed her to be essentially clueless.
Now, though, you've hit rock bottom. Your June 18 issue contained a story entitled "Attacking the Taxman." Wouldn't it have been more descriptive to call it "Attacking Common Sense"? Or "Whiners Find New Ways to Shirk Their Civic Responsibility"? Or how about simply "Idiots R Us"? The way the protagonists of the piece, James Farmer and Cliff William, hold forth with irrational definitions of common words in an attempt to prove that they, somehow, have no obligation to pay taxes, is just plain silly. It may be only a hair's breadth this side of psychotic. If these guys ever do anything newsworthy, by all means tell us about it. In the meantime, though, do us a favor and give these absurd tax-protester ravings the coverage they deserve: none.