HEADLINES [click on headline to view story]:

Animal Rights vs Human Rights

Is someone missing the point?

Animal Rights vs Human Rights

Editor;
In response to last week’s letter on Animal Rights, I would suggest that there was likely more to the story than Grant Waldman let on. Most likely the woman wouldn’t have tried to poison the dogs out of pure spite or maliciousness, and there was something that drove her to do it.

My guess would be that Mr Waldman’s dogs either bark loudly in an otherwise quiet neighbourhood, perhaps even all night, or that they are let loose to defecate on or in front of this woman’s property, or, worse yet, they are “nippers” that nip at neighbourhood children and/or the woman in question. Although I would never condone poisoning a dog, I, too, have an obnoxious neighbour who’s dogs do all the above, and I can understand the woman’s feelings of desperation.

Walking out to get your morning newspaper and stepping in dog poo is something we can all live without, and it can become quite frustrating when the offending dogs’ keeper not only refuses to either prevent or clean up the mess, but in fact encourages it despite all pleas to do otherwise. There is also nothing more frustrating than trying to get to sleep when the neighbour’s dogs are barking all night. And if the dogs bite children, then the woman won’t have to poison them; one major bite is all that is needed for the authorities to spring into action.

I don’t know the woman Mr Waldman wrote about, nor do I know Mr Waldman, but the woman seemed to be driven to extremes, and perhaps the situation might have been avoided if Mr Waldman had shown some courtesy by keeping his dogs under control. For Mr Waldman’s sake, I hope I’m wrong, but if not, I also hope that he is able to see this as a drastic measure taken by a desperate woman, and that Mr Waldman will control his animals so that others aren’t driven to take such insane measures.
Pauline Millard

Is someone missing the point?

Dear Editor,
I am writing with more than a little embarrassment after reading Lang Reid’s review of Olivia Joules and the Overactive Imagination by Helen Fielding. I was only in the second paragraph of the review when it became painfully obvious that Mr. Reid simply “didn’t get it”, as the young people in my university classes would say.

Helen Fielding has created a heroine who is a comically obnoxious female Austin Powers but far less polished than James Bond. Not intended as serious literature and certainly not as social commentary, the characters have campy names and fall into outrageous situations with little or no effort. A case in point is the terrorist named Zaccarias Attif, whom the CIA discovers hiding in plain sight in Florida. The entire idea, in short, is a spoof.

While Olivia Joules has received mixed reviews internationally, those reviews are not clearly divided between macho male reviewers and “nauseatingly sugary” women reviewers. Your reviewer, however, has a history of writing about such deep and profound books as Pole Dancer and Bangkok Knights (revised) so I was not surprised by his approach.

It would be interesting if Mr. Reid would take the time to inform himself better on the process of critical writing, which involves far more than picking up a nearby book and sitting down at the computer. At a bare minimum:

1) The reviewer does not have to write on every book presented to him by the publishing company;

2) Having more than one publishing company offer books produces a better variety and usually higher quality of book;

3) You should understand the genre before you attempt to critique it.

With hopes for a better informed tomorrow,
Paulette Edwards
(Lang Reid replies: If an author has failed to get the message across, so grossly that the reviewer “didn’t get it”, this is hardly justification for asking the reviewer to fall on his or her own poison pen. Despite your assertions to the contrary, it is necessary for reviewers to read all books that come across the desk, otherwise none will be forthcoming, but if nothing else, the publishing company becomes more critical in the selection sent for review. Since you have been reading the column, you would also have noted that more than one publishing company has been offering their wares. Thank you for your bare minimum guide. Both of us will be better informed tomorrow.)