David Kane
via the Internet
Going in Cycles
Robin Chotzinoff, thanks for your article on beater bikes ("The Beater Goes On," November 26), which will hopefully open some people's eyes (i.e., Harley types) to the basic joy of being a motorcycle rider, period. As the proud owner of two classic Hondas ('75 550 Four and '80 CM400T), I truly enjoyed your article. Although my '75 (not currently running) isn't really a beater--I've had Harley guys tell me they think it's a great-looking bike for a Honda--my '80 is a true beater, but it gets me around!
Beaters rule!
Christopher R. Smith
via the Internet
Forgive, Don't Forget
This is regarding the letter about Joanne Cordova, published in the December 10 issue. "Name withheld" is a perfect example of why so many pitiful and lost souls such as Joanne do not survive. The world is full of these unforgiving individuals--unable to forgive and unable to try to understand. Yes, Joanne does owe society an apology, and I believe that her willingness to put her life in jeopardy by testifying against Robert Riggan is a good beginning. She has also paid her debt in many ways not known to the general public.
To "Name withheld," may a higher power see fit to grant you compassion for your fellow man. Merry Christmas.
Connie Carpenter
via the Internet
Editor's note: And speaking of forgiveness, the next installment in Steve Jackson's series on Joanne Cordova and Robert Riggan, "Trial and Tribulations," did not appear in the December 10 issue, as indicated in this space last week. Our apologies. Look for it on page 14 of this issue. And if you missed the November 19 and November 26 stories, they can still be found on www.westword.com.
Beer Today, Gone Tomorrow
Regarding Michael Paglia's November 19 Art Beat and Randy Hughes's December 10 letter:
As one of the exhibiting artists on the night of the Jones/Stockman debacle and, more important, as a direct witness of the events in question, I feel the need to truly add "clarity" to the latest of the Pirate soap operas.
From what I could overhear of the argument (I was standing about ten feet away), it was clear that Jones did not want to bartend for the shift she had signed up for, and Stockman felt she had a duty to fulfill her obligation. As the argument grew more heated, Stockman did not, as Hughes claims, take her "violently by the arm and...throw her out of the building." He did touch her arm and tried to lead her away from the crowd so as not to cause a scene. There was nothing violent about it--in fact, he didn't even raise his voice. There was no need for Jones to protect herself; in truth, when she threw the beer pitcher a few seconds later, Stockman was actually several feet away from her. (And incidentally, if she intended only to "soak him with beer," she needn't have heaved the entire pitcher in his face with such force as to break it. We can all imagine how hard you'd have to hurl a thick plastic pitcher for it to break across someone's chin.) She also did not gather her things and "(almost) quietly" leave. She stormed out the door before even seeing the considerable damage she had done; her coat was still there the next morning. The exhibiting artists--who should have been enjoying the opening and talking to visitors--were left to clean up the beer and blood, find a replacement bartender, talk to the police and usher Stockman to the hospital, where he spent the remainder of the evening and received nine stitches. (And no, I don't think plastic surgery is going to be necessary.) In other words, some of us still had to act like professionals and adults.
As most of the Denver art world knows, there is a sordid history behind this little tiff, one which I think does not need to be discussed in the papers. However, assaulting another artist at a reception is highly inappropriate behavior, and it indeed marred the evening for the four artists who worked months to put our exhibits together. I doubt Jones would have appreciated the same sort of rabid display at one of her openings.
Of course, we all have our own biases--I have tried to report the facts as honestly and completely as I remember them, and I think Michael Paglia gathered the facts as honestly and objectively as he possibly could. I think accusations of favoritism are ludicrous, considering the amount of press both artists have received from Paglia in the past. And I must admit that I resent Hughes's insinuation that these exhibits were not worthy of press attention without the temper tantrum that sullied the opening. Rather than feeling that this brought attention to our shows, I feel it only sapped attention (and valuable column space) away from the real reason people were there that night: the art.
Now, can we all put this stupidity behind us and move on? I, for one, am completely sick of the subject.
Lauri Lynnxe Murphy
Denver
Letters policy: Westword wants to hear from you, whether you have a complaint or compliment about what we write from week to week. Letters should be no more than 200 words; we reserve the right to edit for libel, length and clarity. Although we'll occasionally withhold an author's name on request, all letters must include your name, address and telephone number. Write to:
Letters Editor
Westword
P.O. Box 5970
Denver, CO 80217
or e-mail (include your full name and hometown) to: editorial@westword.com.
Missed a story? The editorial contents of Westword, dating back to July 1, 1996, are available online at www.westword.com/archive/index.html.
