Other opinions

IN response to the rash of letters appearing in last Saturday’s Calendar (“Critic’s Comments Are Artless to Some,” Jan. 18) chastising Christopher Knight for calling the impending war with Iraq “imbecilic” and claiming that the media are “left-leaning,” I say hogwash!

In their refusal to cover anything but the White House’s arguments in favor of war, the media have silently endorsed the Bush agenda. Tens of thousands of anti-war protesters marched in Washington in October yet few reporters covered the story. Now, after months of near silence, the media are finally starting to voice alternate opinions about this impending debacle. I only hope it’s not too late.

Cindy Mediavilla

Culver City

*

I don’t understand why art critic Christopher Knight is required by some Times readers to be politically sterile in order to maintain his position as an art critic. This is known as “free speech,” which perhaps these readers would rather eliminate. The exhibition under discussion is that of the Anti-War Graphics Exhibit at Track 16 Gallery in Santa Monica.

Perhaps the same complaints would have been leveled by these writers (or their counterparts) at Pablo Picasso’s large painting “Guernica” in 1937. Displayed at New York’s Museum of Modern Art during most of its existence, it is now permanently installed at the Reina Sofia Museum in Madrid, where its safety is guaranteed.

“Guernica” criticized both the Spanish and German fascists. It was most definitely a political statement of the time, rendered in paint. Perhaps the letter writers mentioned would have demanded its removal as “insulting,” “abusive” and “arrogant,” since artists (and critics) should stick to “landscapes” rather than produce political painting, graphics or commentary.

Sterile critics, I’m afraid, produce sterile criticism.

Shifra M. Goldman

Los Angeles