August 31 - September 6, 1995


Sympathy For The Danehy

To the Editor,
Regarding Tom Danehy's "Dead 'N' Jerried" (Tucson Weekly, August 17): I feel sorry for you, Tom. How could you have grown up coming so close but yet remain clueless? By your own admission, you didn't get it! You didn't get the Dead. You didn't get Hendrix. I suppose you didn't get Frank Zappa either (no drugs necessary). Of all the great musicians in the world, your idols became John Cougar, Chicago and the Average White Band. (I don't get it!). Keep listening to Van Morrison; maybe someday you will wake up and hear the music. Stick to writing about things you do get!
--Bob Clements

Stick To Sports

To the Editor,
As is often the case, Tom Danehy's recent column left a bad taste in my mouth ("Dead 'N' Jerried," Tucson Weekly, August 17). Like those of his fellow "sports nerd" columnist Greg Hanson, his musings are too often a blend of ego, intolerance, spite and irrelevance.

Danehy's passion for sports is excusable, if not understandable, and his columns provide an often interesting view of a pastime that is usually harmless. His recent excursion into music criticism and social commentary, however, was especially pointless and self-indulgent.

If Danehy does not care for the Dead's music (Bob Dylan, Branford Marsalis, Carlos Santana and many others obviously disagree), can not understand the magic of their live shows, nor understand their message, why bother to write?

To paraphrase his words, I guess I just don't understand an extreme reaction of some people to the Dead and Deadheads. But then again, I think I do. For three decades, the Dead have carried a message of peace, sharing, kindness and tolerance of other's differences. The Dead and the Deadhead scene have served as a magnet and a haven for new generations of young people seeking refuge from the violence, competition, sexism, hostility and pressure that is promoted in so much of today's music and popular culture. A person like Danehy, who makes his living through judgmental observations on the competitive, aggressive, and too often violent world of sports, will never "get" the Grateful Dead.

I guess I am not surprised that Danehy took the time to lash out at something that he is unable to understand. That's what intolerant people do. But, if his most incisive analysis of an event that had the entire country talking is "I don't get it. The Dead must be overrated," then The Weekly is not getting it's money's worth.

Danehy, stick to sports!
--Bruce Hilpert

Batting For Danehy

To the Editor,
Please keep Tom Danehy on the payroll. His articles are just a piece of artwork. They keep me and my life humorous. If you happen to let him go, I'll go insane. Also, please let him write more cover stories (like "The Girls of Summer," Tucson Weekly, August 17), although his side bits are bullshit!
--Albert L. Heath

Don't Can Tom

To the Editor,
I believe that Tom Danehy is one of your better writers on the staff. I really look forward to his articles every single week in the magazine. He really makes light of serious sports-related information. Don't can him.
--Ken Urdahl

River Run

To the Editor,
Thank you for printing the ludicrous truth concerning the plight of River Road (The Skinny, Tucson Weekly , August 17). As one of the affected landowners, I truly appreciate how your newspaper sticks its neck out regarding our elected and appointed officials' mismanagement, corruptness and unwillingness to compromise with "we the people."

The last natural stand of desert is about to be obliterated by Huckleberry's goons under the guise of a "safety issue," giving the Tucson Hebrew Academy a suicide turn lane.

We have exhausted ourselves and our resources trying to protect the scenic and natural landscape of River Road.

I guess you can fight City Hall...but you'll never win.
--Benita J. Gettel

City Limits

To the Editor,
Regarding his letter "Wary Of Jonestown" (Letters, Tucson Weekly, August 17), Ricardo Small expressed the feeling that being annexed might be better than the continual fight against it. This is an understandable response to the incessant and largely secretive procedures used by the City of Tucson, which leave residents of annexation targets with the sense that they have little control over their destiny. I am confident, however, though I speak only for myself, that most of us who live in the Rincon Valley and face this threat will not stand by to be annexed by Tucson. It should be the people who decide these matters, not the city, and not money interests who stand to gain by annexation.

A group known at the Rincon Valley Preservation Association has been formed to do what they can to prevent annexation, and to oppose the rampant development represented by Rocking K plans, for which annexation is vital, initial step.

City residents, as well as residents of areas where annexation is proposed, should know that the annexation "blitzkrieg" the city has mounted does not benefit them, and is nothing more than a desperate attempt to stem the tide of a runaway budgetary crisis. Not only will annexations create higher taxes for everyone, they will act as an incentive to even more irresponsible development, which will in turn bring about greater congestion, more pollution, higher crime rates, and an even lower quality to all of our lives.

City and county residents should demand that their "public representatives" not be part of expansionist, developer led "shadow governments." We need to pull back the reins on growth. What the city should be doing is repairing the damage they've already done to overrun areas, and leave the rest of us alone.
--Robert Genovese


To the Editor,
I absolutely loved Rand Carlson's "What Hell Must Be Like" (Random Shots, Tucson Weekly, August 24). I am so sick and tired of hearing "Hi Evahbody" whenever I turn on the TV that I could scream. Jim Click's ads don't go anywhere in my home because I immediately mute him.

I noticed last week that Arizona Bank had started a new series of ads and I thought "at last, some relief from Jim Click." No such luck. Before the commercial ended he had to add his comments.

I don't imagine that he wears hats very often as it is probably difficult to find one to fit his swollen ego.
--Priscilla V.H. Walker

Primal Therapy

To the Editor,
Jeepers! I wouldn't want to get on the wrong side of Jeff Biggers ("Bad Penmanship," Letters, Tucson Weekly, August 17). Golly! By self-admission, he's acquainted with the works of Jack Kerouac, Norman Mailer, Ann Rule, Jack Olsen, John Nichols, Bernard DeSoto, Ed Abbey, Leslie Silko, Russ Meyer, Vincent Buglioso, Ursula LeGuin, Denise Chavez, and Wallace Stegner--just to name a few.

I personally became acquainted with the works of Chuck Bowden about a year ago and was delighted with his adventures in nature. It was a pleasure not unlike reading Abbey's non-fiction.

But now I find out that he is nothing but "a gluttonous bantamweight, a wanna-be white trash poster child in middle class denial." Granted that I have no idea what that means--but it certainly doesn't sound very good.

Speaking of denial, I wonder if Mr. Biggers has given any thought to Primal Therapy. Maybe put a little focus on that anger. Barking dogs, indeed.
--Stanley B. Carruth

Contents  Page Back  Last Week  Current Week  Next Week  Page Forward  QuickMap

August 31 - September 6, 1995

Weekly Wire    © 1995-97 Tucson Weekly . Info Booth