Letters to the Editor: 08.14.97
Car-Free Day
East Hampton
August 11, 1997
To The Editor:
News from Aspen, Colo., tells us that the townspeople are fed up to their eyebrows with endless summer festivals - as enjoyable as they are. So the folks have declared enough already and are soon going to have a much desired festival-free weekend called "The Nothing Festival."
Hey! Out here we are in over our heads with traffic, so how about we put the brakes on, one summer day a year, and have a car-free day called "The Hampton Leg On." No one is allowed to move anyplace, anywhere, anytime except on their own legs (emergencies exempt). Of course, the roads might end up butt to butt instead of bumper to bumper, but think of it! Turtles and deer, among others, could finally make it to the other side. People could walk, trot, and stop to smell the roses without a tad of road rage, fuss, or fumes. The patter of all the feet accomplishing their missions would, for one day, make us feel like we were walking on air.
"The Hamptons Leg On" could be a breeze. All you have to do is put one foot in front of the other.
Nothing to it!
BARBARA HOTCHKISS POSENER
Not A Sanctuary
East Hampton
August 9, 1997
Dear Editor,
I was disturbed by the first page story titled "Threaten Hockey Suit." It is difficult for me to imagine the audacity of anyone "demanding that a roller rink be padlocked until a decision can be made to dismantle the rink entirely or relocate it." Does anyone else have a say in this? This area has been designated for park use for 30 years. Underage drinking? Public nuisance?
Let me begin by welcoming Ms. Carla Van de Walle to the area. I understand she purchased her home in September of 1995. Didn't anyone explore this area before purchasing this house? If a person buys a house near the East Hampton Airport would you then have the right to complain about the noise from planes? If you bought a house near a school, would you then complain about the children in the schoolyard?
Lawsuits have become very trivial. Often they are frivolous and petty. Frivolous lawsuits, in my opinion, only serve to demean Ms. Van de Walle's very own profession. Let's also not forget the detrimental effect they have on our court system. East Hampton Town is not a sanctuary for one person. If it has come down to this sort of complaint having any substance at all, perhaps a time should be designated for swimming in pools and visiting with friends and family. These sounds can also be echoed up to a mile. Where does this sort of thinking begin and end? What constitutes noise?
Finally, if the town is going to impose a morning ban on hockey players, I suggest they also do that for tennis players out there in the early morning. I don't think we want to discriminate against any one particular sport, or group of people. That would not be politically correct.
To Ms. Van de Walle and her staff of lawyers, I wish them well. Instead of trying to undermine the Town Board, congratulate it for the efforts it makes for the residents, young and old, in this beautiful town. It seems to me that the Town Board has accommodated you in every way, already imposing a weekend morning ban on hockey, without anyone else's opinion being expressed. Why now threaten to sue the Town of East Hampton?
One final comment. As a hockey mom, the sound of pucks crashing against the boards is not a violent echoing sound. It's "music to my ears."
DENISE SAVARESE
Life Of Dependency
East Hampton
August 11, 1997
Dear Helen,
Re: Justin Spring's interview with Nathan Kernan (Star, Aug. 7) in which he asserts that the poet James Schuyler "lived most of his life in poverty and obscurity."
Yes, this wonderful poet was not as well known as he should have been. Before he had the label of "Pulitzer Prize-winner" attached to his name, many of us thought of him as the best unknown poet in America. But it is erroneous to say that he lived in poverty.
Mr. Kernan himself hints at the actual circumstances of Schuyler's life when he is quoted as saying that the poet "relied heavily on the generosity of friends for financial and emotional support." But this statement does not go far enough. Indeed, I would say that Schuyler depended upon his friends to such an extent that he could not have written his poems without them. He would have gone under; he would have been destroyed by his madness.
I'll be specific - and personal. It is noted in the interview that Schuyler shared an apartment with Frank O'Hara in the early '50s. Right; and he was living elsewhere by 1955, at which point I began living with O'Hara in the same apartment. All went well with Frank and me until a couple of years later when Jimmy, in the midst of his first major breakdown, moved back and, without meaning to, made life hell for us.
That was the beginning of his life of dependency: To the end, he was supported, cared for, looked after, and encouraged in his writing by scores of friends and admirers, beginning with Anne and Fairfield Porter, with whom he lived for so many years. Of course, it was no wonder that he was treated like a prince, for he was a poet of unique gifts.
Unique, too, is the story of how his glorious poems came to be written, and I hope whoever writes his biography gets it right. His was an achievement shared by many people who loved his work and were moved by his terrible plight, chief among the them the Porters, Kenward Elmslie, Donald Droll, Robert Dash, Morris Golde, Joe Brainard, Darragh Park, and, toward the end of his life, younger poets like Mr. Kernan, Tom Carey, and Eileen Myles.
Now, lest one get the impression that I am being self-serving, let me make clear that I do not claim to be one of the people who came to Jimmy's rescue. Like Frank O'Hara, I recognized from the outset that I wasn't up to the task. "I'm getting a place of my own," I suddenly announced to Frank one Sunday afternoon, near my wit's end, after some especially unsettling behavior of Jimmy's. "Don't leave without me," said Frank.
Jimmy didn't stay long in the East 49th Street apartment after we moved out because there was no way he could live alone and look after himself. How fortunate, then, that others appeared in the breach to save him from a tragic end!
Sincerely,
JOE LeSUEUR
Beach Stickers
East Hampton
August 11, 1997
Dear Mrs. Rattray,
I highly take offense to the response by David Goodman to Julian Knaster's letter regarding designations on beach stickers. Were it not for the "residents of East Hampton Town supporting the small number of "village" residents at the "village" beaches and village shops and services, where would the Village of East Hampton be? How many villagers are there to support the services, no matter how limited the services may be (as described by Marilyn Bregman in the July 31 edition of letters to the editor), at Main and other village beaches? Village folk do not have to pay at all.
Although another writer in the Aug. 7 letters described the way it has been at Main Beach, that is not the way it now is. He is not there daily as many of us are to see the general decline and lax attitude of the beach workers, the dirt, and the dog . . .
If the "residents" and "summer renters" did not pay for beach parking stickers, villagers could not sustain their wonderful beach. The village is so small and so gerimandered that we are precluded from being residents. The old power elite survives, but we pay for you and your "village resident" permits.
Sincerely,
SUSAN AMERLING
Return Rights
Sag Harbor
July 24, 1997
Dear Editor:
We have finally been sold out by the people we elected to protect us.
Again, we as baymen were told we could not catch shellfish in Three Mile Harbor due to the fireworks. Let's not stop polluting our bays; Let's stop our local baymen from working.
We called East Hampton Town Hall to be told that boats cannot be restricted at the fireworks because, after all, it is a tradition.
Our family tradition for 13 generations has been fishing and shellfishing. We now know how the community feels about us. We don't want to ruin their fun so we can work.
Local, hard-working people are being punished so our town can provide fun and games. Let's get our priorities straight. Return rights to the baymen.
By haulseining, we were in the way of the sun and fun people, so they stopped us.
An overload of boats were allowed in our harbors, and shellfish grounds were closed.
Houses were allowed on wetlands and too close to beaches, and again waters were closed.
Wake up. Stop allowing pollution. But no one really cares. Money talks.
FRED and CAROLE HAVENS
Please address correspondence to [email protected]
Please include your full name, address and daytime telephone number for purposes of verification.