Readers talk back about art, our climate quiz, and how much they adore us
Re: Imagine That
“Where are the books? The poems? The plays? The goddamn operas?” Bill McKibben is asking the right question, but looking in all the wrong places.
The concern for subjects such as global warming and peak oil is not reflected in the corporate media or in corporate-funded arts institutions. McKibben will have to go to the grassroots to find the art and literature for these subjects — and it may not be “high art” like operas and oil paintings in museums. It will most likely be grassroots art: comics, zines, etc.
Re: Imagine That
Regarding your article on the lack of art concerning global warming, I can only assume that, Michael Crichton’s latest idiotic work aside, you don’t read any science fiction.
San Francisco, Calif.
I scored nine out of nine [on Umbra’s climate change quiz], and instead of a pat on the back, I was chided for cheating! Please give your readers more credit. Shouldn’t regular readers (most of whom are probably environmentalists, armchair or otherwise) be expected to do well on such a test? C’mon, give us more credit than that!
San Diego, Calif.
I strongly resent you condemning all clear plastics in your article on bisphenol A. Bisphenol A is only used to make one type of clear plastic: polycarbonate (or PC). It is not used to make other types of clear plastic, such as polystyrene (PS) or polyethylene terephthalate (PETE or PET). To condemn clear plastic as containing a toxic chemical when most of them don’t is misleading your readers. It is unfair to those of us who are making products that are safe, useful, and recyclable. Please advise your readers to look on the bottom of their plastic containers. If one has a “PC,” don’t buy it, or if you own it, don’t use it. If it has a “PETE” or “PS,” buy it, and use it with confidence.
Re: Sin City
First of all, thank you for many years of excellent information and insights! I’m writing regarding your environmental confessions story. You’ve probably thought this through and perhaps even debated this among yourselves, but isn’t this ideal fodder for conservatives looking for any excuse to attack environmentalists? Isn’t this the perfect opportunity for them to “confirm” what “hypocrites” we are? I know that they’ll attack us anyway, but why make it any easier for them to do so? I have enjoyed each and every Grist feature that I have viewed over the years, but this one makes me very uncomfortable.
I have just read the exchange with Umbra on her pro-nuclear stance. I am appalled. I have always valued Grist as a responsible voice for the environment. As someone who has been studying and opposing nuclear power for the past 30-some years, I cannot imagine how she could consider this a way to fight global warming responsibly.
Set aside the fact that coal is used in the processing of uranium and that radiation is an ever-present danger with the operation of nuclear plants, the terrible waste products that have no place to go will always be with us. Dry-cask storage will mean permanent nuclear dumps at each plant. Their durability is much in question. We have yet to take [renewable-energy] sources seriously in this country. Surely Umbra needs to rethink her stance.
In response to Larry Goldstein’s letter regarding sophomoric language in Grist, don’t stop the fun! Given that humor is part of the Grist tag line, I don’t imagine this is an imminent threat. However, as Grist grows, I can imagine the issue coming up in editorial meetings. The puns (oh the puns!), dumb jokes, amusing dialogue, and “immature” stuff make Grist fun to read. There are so many other environmental news outlets. Larry, read those.
I am a young person (32), and I am thankful for an environmental voice that sounds like mine. Keep up the good work.
I love you guys, whoever you are. And to the person who writes the headlines, thank you. You really, actually, sincerely do make me laugh out loud on gloomy, sucky days.
Who does your puns? If it’s a woman, I think I’m in love. If not, I think I’m in trouble!