MAILBOX

This Week: A Catholic reminds us that Protestants didn’t get to the radical Christian living thing first; after Armond White’s review of The Dark Knight, we received a slew of mail. Here’s a few of the negative (and positive) reactions by Batman’s biggest defenders.

Catholic Workers Did it First
While Joseph Huff-Hannon’s article is interesting (“Roommates for Jesus,” July 13-22), I was surprised by the lack of historical context. The Catholic Worker Movement was founded in New York City in 1933 by Peter Marin and Servant of God Dorothy Day and is still going strong all over the world with newspapers (The Catholic Worker is still published here), houses of hospitality and soup kitchens (two still active in the Bowery) and farms. With no support from either governments or from the institutional Church, the Catholic Worker Movement stridently seeks to witness the Gospel though communal living, radical giving, pacifism and anarchism. The old is new all over again, one must suppose.
—Bill Fox, Farmingdale, NY

Twentysomething Takedown
I am writing in response to Armond White’s recent review of the film The Dark Knight (“Knight to Remember,” July 13-22). I want to specify quickly, in light of the notion that your publication undoubtedly got bombarded by Batman fans throwing obscenities at Mr. White for giving the film an unfavorable review, that this has nothing to do with Batman at all (I have not even seen the film, I cannot disagree).

Instead, I have to say, as a person nearing the age of 21, that Mr. White has shown a scathing hatred of my generation in several of his reviews, and at its pinnacle in The Dark Knight article, it has become unacceptable.
It speaks to common sense to recognize that, despite perhaps being against the norm, there are 21-year-olds with a firm grasp of reality, an appreciation for the arts and oftentimes the same abrasive cultural politics that Mr. White so dominantly displays in his reviews.

My point simply is that Mr. White has literally insulted Heath Ledger (who’s recent and untimely death deserves at least a polite criticism if negative), Christopher Nolan (his age-wise peer and not to mention a Brit, which makes a lot of Mr. White’s “American consumers” babble absolutely nonsensical), and every one of the millions of young adults in the country in one fell swoop.

Twenty-year-olds are legal adults with the same rights as any 42-year-old in this nation. Many historical and contemporary figures have made amazing contributions by their 21st birthday. Stereotyping all 21-year-olds as nihilistic, mindless consumers is as inappropriate and inaccurate as calling all 65-year-olds senile old fools. Unfortunately, age is not congruent with wisdom; the years between 21 and 42 only provide an opportunity to accumulate and ponder more knowledge of the world, an opportunity that Mr. White has apparently squandered in regard to his knowledge of writing inoffensive, entertaining and informational film reviews.

I would appreciate it greatly if Armond White’s inappropriate writing style could be brought to his attention.
—Scott Pomykalski

Batman or Bust
Before you assign Armond White, or any writer for that matter, to review a film like The Dark Knight, please make sure that they fully understand the entire Batman mythology. I am a fellow journalist and I would be deeply ashamed if I wrote about a topic that I had not researched thoroughly, even if it’s just a review. Armond White’s narrow range of knowledge makes him a target for well-versed fans, critics and writers alike. The most ardent Batman followers do not necessarily regard Tim Burton’s 1989 film or the 1960s show as authoritative examples of Batman lore, and yet these two serve as White’s entire argument against The Dark Knight. Batman is not supposed to be fluffy and campy, which makes White’s assessment of the new film’s gloomy nature outright ridiculous. I have not seen The Dark Knight yet, but all I ask is just a little more thought and expertise from your writers.
—Oscar Pascual,
Contributor, SF Weekly

Not Your Mama’s Nihilism
A lone voice of sanity in the howling wilderness (or is it chaos of noise) is Armond White’s spot-on review of this “movie” [The Dark Knight]. Someone had the insight first and guts second to actually speak up about what is wrong with the whole thing. I was almost beginning to think something was wrong with me for not being in the least moved by the entire horror Batman genre and this nihilistic nonsense. Thanks for a moment of clarity.
—Cassandra LM Toth

Teach ‘Em What’s Right
Armond White’s review of The Dark Knight was spot on. Right from the moment I viewed the trailer, the film’s nihilistic point of view troubled me. Even though I may be in the target audience of high school students and twentysomethings, I do not buy into the film and its nihilistic tone. It’s ironic that such a dark and disturbing film, with its message of despair, should be so embraced by critics. Hardly anyone, even those who claimed they did not like the film, bothered to address the problems with the film’s central message. For this reason, I greatly appreciated Mr. White’s acute analysis that openly said something I myself had been thinking. I, too, found the quote, “You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become a villain,” that was found in the trailer very troubling and not at all a good message to teach young people.
—Nadia Qazi