_______________ THE LITTLE OPERATING SYSTEM THAT COULD BY ANDREW LEONARD (06/26/98)
	Thank you to Andrew Leonard for one of the best Linux articles to ever appear in the mainstream, online or in print. Most writers seem moved to critique Linux on the grounds that it is esoteric or difficult; however, Leonard has moved beyond this to see through to what is the real miracle of Linux: people united in a "cause." Linux enthusiasm is now everywhere. Like computer animation, it used to be solely the realm of geeks and gear-heads. Now computer animation appears in movies, commercials and television sitcoms. One can hardly watch TV for more than a few minutes without seeing it! It won't be long before the Linux world finds itself in a similar situation. As intelligent writers such as Leonard give more balanced coverage to Linux, and corporate America begins to realize that Microsoft isn't going to save the world with NT5, more people will "come over to our side." Linux is not something that the bullies in Redmond can stop or slow down either -- it is a movement fueled by the enthusiasm and passion of its followers, rather than the pursuit of the almighty dollar. Leonard deserves much praise for a thoughtful and well-written article. I look forward to seeing more of his work on the pages of Salon. -- Cal Godot Thank you for writing about Linux -- and writing that it's not for the timid computer user. If there is one thing that is good for the computer industry, it's truth. Hearing that newbies can have trouble with Linux is hard to swallow, but it's the truth, and it makes us fix the things that need to be fixed, so thanks. I, for one, came from the Macintosh, with a bit of hacking background. Hey, a Mac or Windows user can become a Linux user. And while I still use my Mac for the "experience," I like the power Linux gives me to make my computer do things that I can't make any other OS do without spending lots of money. -- Hans Cathcart Redwood City, Calif.
_______________ CONSPICUOUS CONSUMPTION, HIGH-TECH STYLE BY JANELLE BROWN (06/24/98)
	I found the recent article regarding accessorizing high-tech devices such as laptops and PalmPilots quite amusing. Conspicuous consumption will always be the preferred method used by image-conscious, nouveau-riche parvenus to try to impress others with their "class" (or should I say "crass"). It is also easy to understand why people would want to personalize articles that they use every day. I would like to point out, however, that the Japanese term "wabi-sabi" does not really mean the "aesthetic beauty of random expression in nature," although I suppose that such expressions could be considered to have the quality of "wabi-sabi." Taken together, "wabi" and "sabi" refer to a quality of quiet, elegant simplicity that, due to the influence of the tea ceremony, became the defining characteristic of Japanese art. Essential to real wabi-sabi is appropriateness to the time and place combined with a complete lack of ostentation that allows the intrinsic nature of an object (or activity) to be displayed without unnecessary and distracting adornment. It may be very expensive and require a lot of training to achieve this quality, so an object, such as a tea bowl, that has wabi-sabi can be extraordinarily expensive. However, it is vital that this not be obvious. A boar-skin computer cover may very well be tactile, natural and way cool, but to the extent that it is ostentatious and out of place, it lacks wabi-sabi. Toyotomi Hideyoshi, a commoner who became the supreme ruler of Japan just prior to 1600, was a great devotee of the tea ceremony. To show off his power, he ordered the construction of a tea room and tea service that were completely covered in gold leaf. Of course, by doing so he showed that he completely missed the point. No wabi-sabi, but he would have been a great customer of the companies you describe in your article. -- Earl Hartman
_______________ BEHIND THE RHETORIC BY JONATHAN BRODER (06/26/98)
	I have enjoyed immensely Salon's unique coverage of the Clinton crisis, but I was quite disappointed with your two recent articles on China. Both articles, Jonathan Broder's interview with James Lilley and Loren Jenkins' report on "The Peony Pavilion," simply fall in line with the typical way the media deal with the Middle Kingdom: We are experiencing a demonization of China. Former U.S. diplomat Lilley rightly notes the hypocritical and inconsistent way in which the U.S. deals with human rights for specific countries. China's population is 1.3 billion, and it is estimated that there are around 3,000 political prisoners or 0.0023 percent of the population. China can thus hardly compare to Stalinist Russia or Nazi Germany. Yet, in spite of these two facts, human rights in China has become, as Lilley observes, a cause célèbre for the media. But this does not stop Broder from his wish to stand firm on the topic, as he valiantly continues to question Lilley on the matter. In his Newsweek article, Jonathan Alter writes: "The country is not free, but it is freer, a point that American correspondents in Beijing keep reporting, but that falls on deaf ears at home." Broder's interview, by harping on the human rights issue, squandered a chance to hear what Lilley had to say about our relations with China in general. In any case, the interview certainly did not help us hear more clearly. Loren Jenkins' report on "The Peony Pavilion" further bolsters the negative image Americans have of China. Americans seem to view China as a mirror image of the Soviet Union at its worst. This is evident in polls, where Americans erroneously believed that most people in Hong Kong did not wish to be reunited with China. And now Jenkins tells us that the cancellation of an opera confirms not only that the comparison with the Soviet Union is correct, but that this proves that the niceties we all hear about China (which I, at least, seldom hear) are just a layer of "Chinoiserie" hiding a dark despotic nature that is endemic to China's evil history. History in China, according to Jenkins, is cyclical, a sort of genetic trait which can be traced back to the first emperor, who by the way, happened to pull off one of the greatest feats of history in unifying China. Indeed, Jenkins seems to relish the fact that China can never escape its dark fate, McDonald's and bowling alleys be damned. I had thought that Reagan's ugly and demonizing proclamation that the Soviet Union is the "evil empire" could not be topped. But Salon has proved me wrong. How else would you judge the headline "In China, despite currents of change, the deep despotism of the centuries is never far below the calm surface waters"? Americans beware. -- Peter Dy-Liacco Seattle
_______________ SALON'S COVERAGE OF THE CLINTON CRISES (01/21/98 - 06/23/98)
	David Talbot, Murray Waas, Jonathan Broder, Joe Conason, Salon magazine and now, although he is late, perhaps Steven Brill have by themselves shamed the entire multibillion dollar news/entertainment media establishment through "real" investigative reporting and "real" journalism. Polling data consistently have shown that the American public has grown just as distrustful of their appointed national news icons as they are of politicians and television evangelists. From the absolutely pathetic "Cokie and Sam Hour" to the rumor-mongering tabloid now known as Newsweek, the transparent pretense of objectivity in their ever "breaking stories" is perhaps the most nauseating of all. Jerry Springer should look down on them all -- at least his show is truthful in advertising what it really is. Yet quietly, far away from the news carnival, Talbot, Waas, Broder and Conason have been hard at work at their craft bringing a sexless, yet riveting, story of abuse of power by a religious nutcase prosecutor who needs a blow job far more than anyone he thinks he's investigating. Keep writing; there are a hell of a lot of us reading. -- David Jacks
_______________ NURSING DEATH BY DAWN MACKEEN (06/16/98)
	I just finished reading "Nursing Death," by Dawn MacKeen, and a comment made by Dr. Ruth Lawrence struck a bad note with me. Dr. Lawrence said: "All hospitals tell mothers the following: You want the baby to wet at least six to eight diapers a day, you want the baby to have three or four stools a day, or at least one per day. The mother should also have some sensation of her breast filling a little and becoming softer after a feeding, she should see milk in the baby's mouth and her breasts should drip when stimulated. There is a litany of things that we tell mothers to look for and if there is any faltering, they should be seen." The first thing that bothers me is that "all hospitals" do not tell mothers everything they should expect, just as all doctors and nurses do not. My doctor didn't tell me anything that I hadn't already read in my own medical texts, and he left out some things that he probably should have spoken to me about, including breast-feeding information. The nurses that took care of me after the birth (I had a C-section) talked more to me about my wound care and worried more about my Pitocin dosage than any other aspect of our stay at the hospital. I was fortunate enough to have on hand some very expert lactation consultants who were there for me during the tough 3-4 weeks after our discharge; however, lower-income mothers seem to not be told that they can utilize these services if the hospital has them, or that they can call on the La Leche League and WIC for support. The second thing that bothers me is that, from my own experience with birth and breast-feeding, the time when the mother gets the bulk of the information about what to look for in their children and their bodies is within hours of delivery. Most mothers are not prepared to absorb that information at that time. They're still in pain, exhausted and not thinking too clearly. Childbirth is such a traumatic experience, even though it is one of the most joyful at the culmination, yet our medical establishment still seems to treat new mothers like nothing much has happened to them. Prepared Childbirth classes, given by hospitals, are generally not attended by lower-income mothers because they can't afford the $20-$30 charged for these classes, and information on breast-feeding still seems to be scant in these classes since they are geared toward preparing the mother for the birth process. The third thing is that the "litany of things that we tell mothers" tends to be barely a few sentences for a lot of people. We heard about the wet diapers and the stools, cord care and bathing, but that was all I remember hearing in the hospital. I spoke to a couple of other new mothers, who just happened to be single young women and lower income, and they hadn't received much information either. I was very glad that I had been prepared through my own reading during the pregnancy. No one can say in a blanket statement such as Dr. Lawrence's that every mother gets all the information she needs from the medical community, regardless of her socio-economic background. It is obvious from the two cases in question (without knowing all the facts in the cases, mind you) that mothers don't get all the information or help that they need. I applaud Dr. Lawrence if she truly tells each and every one of her patients the "litany," and doubly applaud her if she keeps telling them throughout their pregnancy, delivery and postpartum period. -- Sandra Tucker Illinois SALON | July 3, 1998

R E C E N T L Y+| IS TIME BRAIN-DEAD? BY JANELLE BROWN

If you'd like to submit a letter to the editor for publication,
please e-mail us at salon@salonmagazine.com.
Letters may be edited for clarity and conciseness.
If you do not wish the letter to be published, please say so.