Love-Hate Mail
John, the bigot?
Mr. Spragens: I’m curious—have you launched any vociferous attacks against Tom Hanks, Ron Howard or Dan Brown for attacking Christianity in The Da Vinci Code (“A Political Web,” April 13)? Was Scorcese ever high on your target list for Last Temptation of Christ? Google says no, you’ve never written about them, despite the fact that those works unarguably attack Christianity far more profoundly than Bill Hobbs ever criticized Islam.
So where does that leave us? Obvious options: a) you are perfectly content with attacks on Christianity, making you an intellectually inconsistent, bigoted, Islamist shill, and/or b) out of fear and cowardice you are trying to make criticism of Islam another politically correct mortal sin. Allah forbid we should criticize the prophet.
Bigoted Islamist shill or coward? Not great choices John.
PAUL FLYNN 1913 Arrowwood Dr. (Flower Mound, Texas)
Well, it’s no Family Circus
John Spragens’ comparison of Mohammed and Jesus cartoons contains a great irony (“A Political Web,” April 13). He contends that Bill Hobbs’ stick figure of Mohammed holding a bomb, captioned “Mohammed Blows,” is as bad, say, as one depicting Jesus sipping lemonade while black servants are being whipped, captioned “Jesus Slays.”
The fact is that Mohammed did pray nearby as his men tortured a black slave. Not that I expect Spragens to know that; he shows his ignorance of Islam’s holy texts. He probably also doesn’t know that Mohammed had two poets assassinated for writing unflattering verses about him. So the “group of fanatics who pervert the religion’s teachings,” as Spragens calls the millions rioting around the world, are right in line with Mohammed’s example.
Here’s a better analogy, a real one, actually: a crucifix in a bottle of urine at an art show—remember that? No Christians rioted, or murdered, or burned cars, nor was there much outcry from columnists like John Spragens.
Spragens says his cartoon of Jesus is the “best analogy five minutes of thought will yield.” My advice: don’t think, get informed.
SUE SPARKS (Nashville)
Fashion-profiling
I was disappointed that the writer who reviewed Nashville’s men’s specialty clothing stores in last week’s “Style Reprise” (“Dress like a Man,” April 13) chose to marginalize Joe Clothing, saying we served only one particular group. The fact that Joe carries some of the top clothing lines in the market at the most reasonable prices in the city, and has a modern, European boutique-style look that most refer to as “hot,” was lost due to this marginalization. We appreciate all our customers, and have worked hard to make our store “everybody friendly.” Our customer base truly reflects the diversity of the city, not one particular group. Our hard work creating a store with broad appeal was damaged by your writer’s characterization.
I think Nashville is often a forward-thinking city. Labeling businesses based on the ethnic identities or lifestyle characteristics of its owners or by other businesses that are located close by is prejudicial “business profiling” at its worst. It is counterproductive to moving Nashville forward. The Scene has always been at the forefront of Nashville’s progressive movement, and your readers respect you for that. My hope is that future feature articles represent the diverse readership the Scene enjoys and that we move away from labeling in an effort to continue to create a better Nashville.
TODD ROMAN (OWNER, JOE CLOTHING) playclothingco@aol.com (Nashville)
Where’s Bernie?
I must admit, for an out-of-state reader of your online edition, I am always on the lookout for articles from Bernie Sheahan, but she seems to be out of the picture lately in the Scene. Her articles on TennCare and the mental health issues facing Tennessee were great. Any plans to have her write more?
EILEEN BURMEISTER eileenburmeister@chiwest.com (Roseburg, Ore.)
Correction
The owners of Joe Clothing (see “Fashion-profiling” on this page) say their boutique doesn’t have a “primarily gay clientele,” as we wrote last week. We regret the error.
Comments (0)