Dear Editor,
Daniel Garcia’s angry name-calling and self-righteous words
insulting/attacking Mark Zappa’s earlier views raise an interesting
point.
Dear Editor,
Daniel Garcia’s angry name-calling and self-righteous words insulting/attacking Mark Zappa’s earlier views raise an interesting point.
He writes: “Being a Catholic, I find (Zappa’s) remarks prejudicial, perverse, radical, discriminate, and false. They don’t have any place in a local paper.”
Being a Dispatch reader, I find Daniel Garcia’s views “prejudicial, perverse, radical, discriminate, and false” – they’re also overbearing, offensive, overdone, obtuse, offal-oriented, odorat, ominous, ornery, oscillating, and odd. Unlike Daniel Garcia, I feel his views do “… have any place in a local paper.”
That’s what “letters to the editor” are about – to let all who feel intensely about anything have the opportunity to publicly express that view. How drab it would be if there were but one acceptable view on any subject published – and all else cast aside.
Letter writers challenge others to reflect, to look within and find a personal sense of agreement or disagreement, to think and then respond.
It’s this unique opportunity to communicate, to share insights and ideas, which allows a community to grow stronger through the written word.
It doesn’t mean carte blanche. There remains the final arbiter, the editor, to carefully balance the ever-changing subjects, visions, and responses, and then set the tone for community betterment.
If that means Mark Zappa’s words offend Daniel Garcia, if Daniel Garcia’s words offend me, if my words offend everyone – GREAT!!! It means readers are thinking, feeling, reacting, and willing to reach out to say so.
James Brescoll, Gilroy
