Letters To The Editor

Sat., Sept. 6, 1997

SCHOOLS AND EDUCATION

Why heed Kevorkians of culture?

The arrows of political activism have been aimed at the heart of Western culture: its literature. I refer to “Schools rethinking literature” (Aug. 24).

The marksmen (excuse me, markspersons) of Lewis and Clark High School would pierce “To Kill a Mockingbird,” “dead white men” authors and a list of books commonly referred to as classics. The accused are guilty of portraying racial tensions realistically, being male and demanding superior reading skills, respectively.

Ferris High School teachers deserve credit for defending the Western Canon of literature, citing its historical guideposts and literary merit. Noted Professor Allan Bloom takes the argument further in his best-seller, “The Closing of the American Mind,” stating, “Openness used to be the virtue that permitted us to seek the good by using reason. It now means accepting everything and denying reason’s power.”

While promoters of the new “openness” profess to broadening the reading list, they actually narrow its historical scope to recent works and confine its artistic value to obscure works of debatable literary merit. Is the contemporary tale of a gay man’s life in the text “Multitude” artistically refined, historically illuminating and morally seeking the good?

The Western Canon is not sacred or perfect. By definition, it is not exhaustive. It remains, however, the best representation of our culture’s ideas and ideals. Eliminating or subjugating it amounts to literary affirmative action.

In truth, we die impaled upon our own ignorance and disinterest. It is not so much a murder as a suicide. Rebecca J. Stewart Spokane

No steps forward, two steps back

Miroslav Plzak, a famous Czech psychiatrist, once wrote: “If you want to train somebody to hate coffee, grab him every morning, open forcefully his mouth and pour a cup of coffee into him.” This simple wisdom is somehow hidden to some officials of Spokane School District 81.

Let’s say that classics like the works of Mark Twain will be pulled off library shelves and replaced by works of Maxine Hong Kingston, as interactive editor Rebecca Nappi daydreams. Students would correctly see it as an act of censorship.

Is somebody stupid enough to think that this would create in them an interest to read Hong, let alone to understand her?

The same is true about so-called equity programs. Once you start pushing kids to call the third baseman “third baseperson,” the message coming across is not respect for women but that you’re being weird, to put it mildly.

Think about the situation in Seattle where some people suggested that first and second graders read books promoting alternative sexuality, families and lifestyles: “Heather’s Two Moms,” “Daddy’s Roommate,” etc. While kids in that age group have no big interest in sexuality - homo or otherwise - this action upsets parents, who then create an environment really hostile to gays.

In today’s world, tolerance is a very important feature of a mature person. We all want our children to achieve this type of maturity. The acts of administrative stupidity that District 81 is contemplating are a step against this goal. Peter C. Dolina Veradale

HIGHER EDUCATION

EWU student-faculty ratio best

In the Aug. 20 story about Eastern Washington University (“EWU devises recovery strategy”), it was noted that faculty positions will be reduced over the next couple of years. This is true, but as the dean of a college that will absorb many of these cuts, I worry that the public will not fully understand what this means.

EWU currently has an incredibly student-friendly student-faculty ratio of 16 to 1. The state’s Higher Education Coordinating Board, our governing body, has mandated that we increase this ratio to 20 to 1. We have no choice in this matter.

Even at 20 to 1, however, we will continue to have small-sized classes with individual attention. In fact, we will still have the most favorable ratio among the state’s public colleges and universities.

Eastern has already eliminated 26 faculty positions, with all but three being vacant positions. We will cut additional positions over the next two years, but hopefully, many of these will be through retirements and other vacancies.

On the issue of liberal arts, there is the mistaken notion on the part of some students that degrees in these fields aren’t practical. The opposite is true. In a future where an individual will change careers five or six times, the ability to think creatively, to write and speak well and to be broadly educated will be vital. These are the qualities that are so well developed in liberal arts majors.

We will continue to offer quality academic programs. Our faculty will continue to be effective teachers in the classroom and will be available to help students outside of class as well. Edmund J. Yarwood, dean College of Letters, Arts and Social Sciences, EWU, Cheney

GRASS FIELD BURNING

Growers, you really made our day

Re: “Winds push Idaho smoke into Valley” (Aug. 21) and “Weekend brings burning reprieve” (Aug. 22).

On Aug. 20, Linda Clovis, who speaks for the Intermountain Grass Growers, said that grass growers wouldn’t burn the next day “out of deference to people attending the Kootenai County Fair,” unless “conditions were so perfect, the smoke would absolutely immediately go up and out.”

Thursday morning promised to be a beautiful summer day. The skies were blue, the air was clear until midmorning. I watched in sadness as the huge clouds of smoke once again began to turn the blue sky brown. The smoke blacked out Silverwood and endangered travelers on Highway 95.

The next day, when asked why the growers burned when they said they wouldn’t, Clovis said, “Conditions were pretty perfect.”

For all of the people who thought they would have a nice day at Silverwood, for all the residents of all the small communities north of the burn sites, and especially for all of the folks up in Sandpoint, where the smoke came to rest: Thanks for the perfect day, Linda. Elaine M. Dobbs Mica

Problems are being addressed

I appreciate the coverage by The Spokesman-Review of the grass field burning issue. However, I must challenge a recent story that implies the Department of Ecology may abandon its goal of ending this annual threat to the health of many residents in the region.

Grass field acreage allowed to be burned in Washington this year will be about one-third of the 1995 level. Ecology still pledges to find and certify alternatives to grass field burning that will eliminate burning or at least reduce it to the point where the lives of people sensitive to smoke are not thrown into turmoil each summer.

My staff demonstrated exceptional effort as they built this regulation and defended it in the Legislature and the courts. We are not about to turn back now.

However, we also realize that it may take longer than we had hoped to put certified alternatives in place.

The Agricultural Burning Practices and Research Task Force, which has members from all sides of the issue, is working on those alternatives. I have told its members that unless “reasonably available and economically feasible” alternatives are identified soon, Ecology will step in and make decisions for them.

Given that framework, it is premature to judge whether or not alternatives will be certified by summer. Instead of posturing interest groups as working against each other, let’s support the efforts those groups are making together to develop common interests and find a long-term solution. Tom Fitzsimmons, director Washington state Department of Ecology

Locke has a promise to keep - by 1998

When Gary Locke was in Spokane during his gubernatorial campaign, he shook my hand and asked for my vote. I asked him about his position on grass field burning and he emphatically claimed to be against burning.

Locke promised to uphold the Department of Ecology’s three-year phase-out, if elected. I promised him my vote.

Now, I hear that the new head of the Department of Ecology, a Locke appointee, plans to change course. He wants to refer the decision to a committee that will study the matter. This committee is largely composed of people who are biased in favor of burning. Isn’t this a bit like having the wolves study the chicken coop?

I kept my promise and voted for Locke. Now that he is governor, I urge him to keep his promise to end field burning by 1998. Heidi M. Gann Spokane

No more time, no more burning

I am disgusted with Department of Ecology Director Tom Fitzsimmons, who has decided not to uphold the 1990 ban on grass burning (Spokesman-Review, Aug. 23). Doesn’t he know that his boss, Gov. Gary Locke, is on record in support of the ban? What does he think he’s doing?

He says the grass growers need a little more time. Grass growers have been telling us they need just “a little more time” since the burning began decades ago. They keep promising that alternatives are just around the corner. Somehow, “a little more time” has become more than 30 years.

I raised my daughter here. She never knew a summer without grass smoke and suffered with allergies when they burned. She now lives in another state and just came home for a visit. She can’t believe they’re still doing this.

Fitzsimmons should have the courage to finally tell this small group of superpolluters, “no more.”. If they haven’t found alternatives by now, they should grow something else until they do. I’ll bet if they couldn’t burn, those alternatives would appear like magic.

They’ve had enough time. Locke and Fitzsimmons should keep the promise and stop the burning. Vivian Burgard Spokane

Choose targets for blame with care

Recently, some of our area grass growers made a pledge to the community that we have all been waiting for: a 10-year phase-out. Finally, an end in sight to this annual ritual that pits the farmers against environmentalists, neighbor against neighbor, tearing at the heart of our community.

Oh, but wait, this is now not enough! Since I moved here, the media and the clean air groups have complained ardently for an end. Well, you got it. While we don’t have all the farmers agreeing to this pledge to stop, we at least have a step in the right direction.

Rather than criticize the few who have made a very tough decision that obviously will cause some economic hardship, shouldn’t the media be targeting the farmers who still ignore the community concerns and refuse to change with the times? Penny A. Stokes Rathdrum

Burning not sole or main problem

Re: “Growers getting another political fix” (Letters, Sept. 2).

We all want clean air. Patricia Hoffman, president of Save our Summers, is spearheading a protracted fight to have grass burning banned. Problem is, Hoffman is myopic in evaluating the problems of air quality in Spokane County. Grass burning isn’t the culprit.

Grass growing is one of the most environmentally sound agriculture practices there is. Grass fields build soil, filter water and runoff, replenish water tables, cool our air, filter airborne particulates, provide foraging and habitat for wildlife, and reduce the threat of floods.

Grass fields produce oxygen and prevent 13 tons of topsoil per acre each year from being blown and washed away. As a rotation crop, plowed-under soil is replenished for growing grain and other food crops.

Why burn? Kentucky bluegrass propagates by producing seed and satellite plants from rhizomes. Without burning these new plants, fields becomes overpopulated and run out of moisture before the seed can be fully developed. Bluegrass has to be burned to trigger the plant’s reproductive systems. The burning lasts only a few days a year. For hundreds of thousands of years, fire has been nature’s way of stimulating plants.

Hoffman scapegoats farmers as if burning bluegrass fields is the fundamental problem of air pollution in our area. She deduces grass burning is some sort of scheme perpetuated by farmers for industry profits. The sinister theory is ridiculous.

Let the farmers do their jobs. In doing this, farm land will be protected. Remember, this area has some of the best farm land in the world. Ben L. Holstrom Spokane

Meet Our Journalists

Jesse Tinsley

Meet Jesse Tinsley. As a certified drone pilot, this veteran Spokesman-Review photographer often can be seen capturing beautiful aerial photographs of our region. Sometimes though, the job requires getting down with the dogs.
Jim Meehan

Jim Meehan is no stranger to Zag Nation. As the lead writer covering the Gonzaga men’s basketball team, he tells the stories behind the game and gets fans a bit closer to their favorite players.
Molly Quinn

There is no artist in Spokane like Molly Quinn. Her whimsical style is instantly recognizable to readers of The Spokesman-Review. She has painted gorgeous illustrations that instantly elevate the journalism accompanying it. She brings to life the stories that defy photography. She makes our pages better.
Rob Curley

Spokesman-Review editor Rob Curley loves to talk with people and learn about their lives, whether it's a best-selling author or a stranger he meets downtown on his walk to lunch. It's that inquisitive nature combined with a playful sense of storytelling that helps make our newspaper different than most.