To the editors:
I hate to start another one of these chains of letters, but I wish to reply to the letter in the 12-7 issue dealing with the Mapplethorpe photo.
Children will expose themselves at will, and think nothing of it, until they are scared into feeling that it is evil. The photo published in the Reader was not a violation of anyone to me, I view it as a display of innocence, although some will see it as a "beaver shot."
I think many of us can appreciate beauty without feeling compelled to put our penises in everyone/everything we find attractive.
The Crash Palace ad [section two, November 9] was obviously intended to shock, and so it did. Not my dish of tea, but the Constitution does not specify any "Right not-to-be-offended." For balance, though, I wish George had gotten trashed as severely the following week. Not even full frontal!!!
I must also agree with the letter [December 7] slamming your 'XRT article [November 16]. There are college radio stations who don't have large ad budgets (spent on inserts to the Reader for example) who are much more adventurous, and more in need of publicity. If the Trib furnished such a blowjob to a big advertiser, I can bet that your Hot Type column would be whining about it.
Actually, it IS rather like the Saturday Home Guide in the Trib. An Editorial/Advertising supplement where any distinction between the two is non-existent. Poo-sniffing, yeah, it fits!!!!