_______________A MATCH MADE IN POP HEAVEN BY STEPHANIE ZACHAREK (10/01/98)
	Stephanie Zacharek's review of this CD is itself a work of heart and mind ... of art! -- John Moose Thank you so much for your review of the Elvis Costello/Burt Bacharach CD. And many thanks to Stephanie Zacharek for her comments about Costello's loss of hip cachet. I'm amazed that a musician who keeps getting better and keeps taking chances is backhanded by rock critics. Of Costello's contemporaries, only Joe Jackson and Graham Parker continue to write good music, and with a similar dwindling of audience. And both Jackson and Costello have to contend with bad reviews that seem to carp about the fact that their new albums don't sound like albums they made 15 years ago. Actually, if we want to look for something with a chic factor of less than zero, read Rolling Stone's record review section. -- Joe Taylor Thank you for publishing such a passionate and articulate essay. The songs Costello and Bacharach created are as real and emotional as they come, and your writer hit all the reasons: the poignancy as well as the sparkle of it, and the knife-twisting turns of phrase. I am one of the editors/writers for a pro audio magazine, Mix, in which I will also review the album, and I find myself jealous of the space your writer has online to say all she means. Her remarks in response to Rolling Stone's Greg Kot, for example, are really right and were especially welcome: It's regrettable that music has become so commodified that an artist's "chic factor" is even mentioned in criticism. She is also right about Costello's singing now being the best it's ever been, on this album and in performance. As a fellow journalist and a fan, I appreciate everything Stephanie Zacharek had to say about this dark and beautiful work of "actual music." -- Barbara Schultz
_______________ROOTING FOR THE CRASH BY DWIGHT GARNER (10/02/98)
	Ay caramba! And I thought I was the only one in the world who felt this way! I have a sizable portfolio, and you know what? If the market tanked and wiped out the conspicuous consumption ethic, I'd dance like a ballerina in the street. Why? My stocks would come back, eventually. I'd live -- but would all the sickening ranks of Cuban-chomping, 4WD driving spiritual sons and daughters of Rubin? I doubt it. Let 'em eat dirt, to paraphrase a big-spender from a bygone era (who met a similar end). Thanks again -- loved it! -- J. Angel Los Angeles I suppose I should show some basic human compassion for Dwight Garner's less-than-spectacular success in the market, or at least some peevish hatred for those who are doing better than him. But what Garner seems to want more than anything else is for everyone to feel as sorry for him as he feels for himself -- which isn't likely. I am sorry that he and Mrs. Garner lost $10,000 in 1996 -- money from an inheritance, not their savings -- but they chose the market, and therefore took their chances. Were there no other options? Could they not utilize savings accounts, bonds, CDs? Or were they looking to get rich quick just like everybody else. In case Garner didn't notice, quite a few have lost money in the market -- he's not the first, and he won't be the last. But to complain about the fickleness of Wall Street is a shallow attempt to avoid his own fiscal responsibility. And his responsibility is not going to be assuaged by the fact that CEOs are making much more than he is. Because it finally comes down to his need to be "tony." So his friends have been forced to move to the suburbs? He's not driving a Range Rover? His rent has gone up in (who knew?) Manhattan? Cry me a river. He quotes Mr. McCoy from "Bonfire of the Vanities," but seems to have overlooked the elder banker's true wisdom: that Sherman was a moron for spending all that money to live in the city when he could have bought a house in the suburbs for a lot less. The moral of the story was pride, not "insulation." Maybe if Garner had read the book more closely, he'd have more than $6,000 in his 401K right now, and wouldn't be whining to us about it. -- Jack E. Chambers Nashville, Tenn.
_______________THE DARK HOTEL (10/02/98)
	I don't think I've had a bigger online disappointment than reading the initial installment of "Dark Hotel." What an amazing set-up: world-class authors, brilliant site design, wonderful context materials. However, put plainly, two to four panels do not a narrative make! I can't believe that anyone at Salon thought that reading what amounts to half a page in a graphic novel would be even remotely satisfying. As one of the most respected and widely read online journals, you really had a chance here to advance a new standard in storytelling, but you seriously dropped the ball. When you ask readers to patiently download pages and pages of graphic-intensive narrative, you've got to reward them with more than a few seconds of story. I just can't imagine the editorial philosophy behind this -- at the very least, please consider printing nine to 12 panels of a single story rather than two to three of three separate stories. Do you really think I'll be waiting with baited breath to return to these fragments every week? You did such a good job with the Zap Comics piece a few weeks back -- what happened? -- Jay O'Rear
_______________AN ITALIAN ROMANCE: CHAPTER TWO BY LAURA FRASER (09/29/98)
	Laura Fraser's stories about her affair in Europe are tender, lovely and incredibly romantic. I want more! September has ended. Did M. come to San Francisco? How was the visit? -- D. Carter
_______________UNZIPPED BY COURTNEY WEAVER
	Thank goodness we won't have to put up with Courtney Weaver's insipid tales of the romantic lives of her and her uninteresting friends anymore. I've often wondered why, if Susie Bright is willing to write an intelligent column on sexuality and eroticism for you, you chose to keep publishing Weaver's giggly, sophomoric drivel. Weaver never learned that it takes more to write a good sex column than being female, cute and getting laid a lot: You actually have to have something to say. Read any random installment of Susie Sexpert alongside any random installment of Unzipped, and you've just had the only lesson you'll ever need about what works in this field and what doesn't. -- Paul H. Henry Seattle Step away for a minute and your favorite columnist is gone! What happened to Unzipped? The loss of Weaver's fresh, honest take on the oldest of subjects is a disappointment. Please tell this Salon fan when she can look forward to reading more by this talented writer. -- Stephanie Stephan Martinez, Calif. SALON | Oct. 6, 1998

R E C E N T L Y+| SALON EXCLUSIVE: SCAIFE TELLS WHY HE CUT OFF SPECTATOR'S FUNDING BY MURRAY WAAS

If you would like to submit a letter to the editor for publication, please e-mail us at salon@salonmagazine.com. Letters sent by fax or "snail mail" are less likely to be accepted. Do not send attachments. Please include your full name and a phone number where you can be reached during business hours, so we can confirm your identity. This information will not be used for any reason other than verification and will not appear on the site. Letters may be edited for clarity and conciseness. Brief letters are more likely to be published. Place the name of the article you are responding to in the subject heading of your e-mail. If you do not wish your letter to be published, please say so in the subject line. For more information on Salon's letters policy, click here.