Letters to the Editor Skewed Perspectives To the Editor: Tanuja Surpuriya did a fine job in this week's cover story on V. Lane Rawlins (March 16th issue). She covered the elements that are most identifiable with the man (and the university) in a manner that was fair and objective. I feel like I know V. Lane a little better. One remark broke my heart a bit. Rawlins is quoted as saying the shortfall of books at the new library is "simply a budget issue, and [the library] is one of the places we've had to cut corners." I'm hardly blaming Rawlins -- and I know the way the world turns -- but there is something amiss when a university's library suffers while a basketball coach is hired for (at least) a half-million dollars per year. We all know people don't buy "U of M English!" or "U of M Biology!" T-shirts, much less buy tickets to classrooms. But how far off-track has the collective perception of our city's university (not to mention our city) gotten when a basketball fan says, "Tiger basketball is the only success story this city's got." That's about as skewed a perspective on Memphis as any I've read or heard in my nine years here. How the hell would the people at St. Jude respond? I'm as excited about the hoops buzz as the next guy. I just hope we can somehow maintain perspective. There are happy diversions, and then there are the things that are truly important. Frank Murtaugh Memphis (Editor's Note: A university librarian contacted us to say the empty bookshelves are not as much of a problem at the McWherter Library as the publication dates of the titles. The library has not been able to buy new books at the rate they need to because of state budget cuts.) To the Editor: Who could blame Lane Rawlins for taking $90,000 more than he currently gets as president of the University of Memphis. I'm proud of the legacy he left at my alma mater -- a new library and student center, a marquee basketball coach, a more diverse student body, and the largest single endowment in the university's history. His successor has some big shoes to fill. Mark Schuermann Memphis Hunt-Phelan To the Editor: Mark Jordan's article on the Hunt-Phelan Home ("For Sale?" Cover Story, March 9th issue) was revealing in many respects. I am a member of Memphis Heritage and the National Trust for Historic Preservation, as well as a former board member of Memphis Heritage. I was also the restoration architect working with Mr. Bill Day on the Hunt-Phelan Home. The fruits of this not so small effort resulted in local (including Memphis Heritage and Memphis Landmarks Commission), state, regional and national recognition. Having worked with Bill over those many years, I can personally testify to his intense personal commitment to the preservation of his family's heritage, represented by the stately Hunt-Phelan Home and its incredible contents. His efforts have been nothing but valiant. The sometimes scurrilous remarks made by representatives of Memphis Heritage are counter productive to the goals Mr. Day and Memphis Heritage hold common; that is, the preservation of this most important piece of local and national history. Come on, friends, let's get together and try a positive approach to saving the Hunt-Phelan heritage for Memphis and our nation. David M. Schuermann Memphis To the Editor: Thank you for writing a great piece on the Hunt-Phelan House. You have done a good job shedding light on the issue, making Bill Day look as much like a victim as the house. I hope both survive Jeff Bradley Boulder, Colorado To the Editor: After three years downtown, I can truly say that it is the most enjoyable, vibrant, energetic neighborhood we have experienced in Shelby County. Upon moving downtown, my initial perception of Memphis Heritage was that it was a good organization, dedicated to preserving historical buildings. After three years of first-hand experience, my perception has changed. Thanks to community leaders and concerted efforts of many downtown organizations, many of the ugliest, most blighted blocks of downtown real estate became AutoZone Park. A developer entered Memphis proposing conversion of additional blight remaining just outside the ballpark into extremely attractive apartments. The people would live and work in downtown, where occupancy could use a boost. In time, the developer will pay real estate taxes to the city and county. Memphis Heritage stepped forward and vigorously opposed the project because the project called for removal of a "Historic Horse Barn." I submit that 98 percent of us would rather have the productive development of the land in place of keeping the barn and blight around it. Fortunately city leaders approved the project. Now Memphis Heritage is opposed to Bill Day having to auction the Hunt-Phelan property to keep from going under completely. [Memphis Heritage] executive director Judith Johnson has come up with a $2,000 "grant" to hire an attorney to block him. Apparently Memphis Heritage has not been able to provide Mr. Day with any suggestions as to how to save the home, but has no concerns about bankrupting him for having spent his money trying to save it. It seems to me that Memphis Heritage should be more of a partner in doing constructive things for the good of many, whereas, in reality, it appears to be more of a small group of people who prefer to protest those who do have plans. I recognize the need for historic preservation, but Memphis Heritage needs to position preservation within economic reality and the overall good. Dave McComas Memphis Without Wit or Grace To the Editor: After reading and enjoying the acerbic and usually on-target art reviews of Cory Dugan and Frederic Koeppel (wince -- oooh -- ouch -- giggle), it is disappointing to find that The Memphis Flyer has on staff a critic with a healthy dose of venom but little of the wit, grace, and self-control of the aforementioned writers. I am referring to the feature article by Chris Davis titled "[Art]-ificial Respiration" (February 17th issue) in which he sarcastically and systematically belittles the participants, the moderator, the sponsor, and the dialogic structure of a Writing Art Criticism workshop held at the U of M. I attended the workshop and, while recognizing the scenarios and personalities about which he writes, I feel that the article was written from a highly biased perspective by a reviewer who is infatuated with his own verbal gymnastics. Not only did he misperceive a couple of the situations about which he writes, but a greater concern of mine is the mean-spiritedness of his writing; i.e., using his prodigious verbal gifts as a weapon. To lash out at individuals and ideas is not criticism, but a particular form of slash-and-burn egotism which reveals far more about the writer than about his subject. Even a critic who must write analytically and harshly about others' creative endeavors must possess an underlying fondness and passion for art and artists along with a willingness to explore ideas alongside them. In the ridicule Davis displayed during his "practice" analysis of an artwork while in the workshop and in the resulting feature article on the workshop, I just don't see that characteristic in Chris Davis. Pat Brown Cleveland, Mississippi The Memphis Flyer encourages reader response. Send mail to: Letters to the Editor, POB 687, Memphis, TN 38101. Or call Back Talk at 575-9405. Or send us e-mail at letters@memphisflyer.com. All responses must include name, address, and daytime phone number. Letters should be no longer than 250 words.