Letters to the Editor

[September 24th, 2003] STUFFED-UP NOSE?

The Nose must have experienced some congestion recently. He was apparently unable to sniff out the truth about Senate Bill 6 [The Nose, WW, Sept. 17, 2003]. He accepted without question some reports that a state health-insurance pool for Oregon teachers could realize "efficiencies" statewide of $35 million to $50 million a year.

But Senate Bill 6 was not about "efficiencies" at all. Its purpose was to reduce teachers' benefits; and by cutting benefits you can, of course, save any amount you wish.

I can't believe the Nose thinks teachers earn too much. Perhaps the congestion went to his head.

Richard Garrett
Southeast 31st Avenue

Editor's Note: Garrett is the former president of the Portland Association of Teachers, which opposed SB 6.

BUCOLICS UNANIMOUS

Reading Nate Berne's superficial review of the Portland premiere of James Benning's California Trilogy [Screen, WW, Sept. 10, 2003], we were sadly reminded of just how deeply the film industry has molded and limited viewers' imaginations.

Berne writes, "Benning captures some interesting contrasts between rustic settings, exploitative industry and social curiosity, but his messages fizzle as the rigidly formal structure dulls and levels just about everything" and "holds us captive and bored." It is precisely our easily evoked boredom and restlessness (among other concerns) that Benning seeks to engage by his use of long, static takes. Yet this rather obvious insight seems to have eluded Berne, who merely proceeds with the glib comment: "He could've used an intervention from Bucolics Anonymous."

Berne is quite comfortable ignoring Benning's long and varied career--not to mention the history of experimental cinema--which together form the proper context for this work. Is Berne even aware of that background? It seems that anyone who likes movies thereby has the credentials to write about them--which, as readers and as artists, we find distressing.

When writers at the liberal weekly refuse to confront work that is in any way challenging, such as the films of James Benning, we can only wonder about the future of the medium. Hollywood's hold on our imaginations must be total, when viewers refuse to entertain films that function in any way other than to entertain them (with predigested characters, linear structures and fast-paced action).

That such a dedicated and brilliant filmmaker as Benning is overlooked so easily by Berne does not bode well for viewers--how will they learn of these rare chances to get outside of the Hollywood box? Unfortunately, those who took Berne's review at face value will have missed Benning's remarkable work.

David Abel, Alain LeTourneau, Pam Minty
Lighthouse Cinema
Southeast 3rd Avenue