Letters to the Editor: 10.30.97
Letters to the Editor: 10.30.97
Old South Bay Cat
Sag Harbor
October 25, 1997
Dear Helen,
What a pleasure for my friend Pennebaker and me to see that splendid photograph of our old South Bay cat Windward on the front page of last week's Star.
We first came upon her in the early '60s, lying in a creek at East Quogue, a classic South Bay cat with a long, graceful overhung stern. We discovered she had been built by a man named Carter and then we discovered Carter himself, in his 90s, still building boats in his workshop hard by the creek where Windward lay. He directed us to the owner, who was willing to sell, and Penny and I bought her for $500. Old man Carter died not long after the transaction. As an archetypal native craftsman, he received a long celebratory obituary in The New York Times.
Having bought her, we faced the problem of getting her to Sag Harbor. It was then early April and, after determining that she was relatively seaworthy, we decided to sail her under the bridge out of South Bay, through the canal, and then down Peconic Bay and through the North Haven cut to Sag Harbor.
I will never forget the morning we set out from East Quogue. It was a beautiful day rather on the cold side with a strong southwest wind. Unused to Windward's ways, we got into a pickle trying to go under the bridge and were swept by wind and tide against the shore near the bridge. The bridge keeper called the Coast Guard, who hauled us clear and through the bridge. I remember they rather peevishly demanded our number and Penny informed them that, since we had no power, we needed no number.
Our next hurdle was getting her through the canal into the bay and it was no picnic but we finally accomplished it. After that, we set the huge gaff-rigged sail for a broad reach, hauled up the centerboard, and skimmed home to Sag Harbor with the southwest wind behind us. With the board up, Windward drew only inches. It was a glorious day's sailing.
We kept Windward for several years, sailing her with great enjoyment. Windward was her name and windward was her nature. In a strong breeze, sailing close hauled, the helmsman had to fight to keep her from going up into the wind. Finally, she was sold when Penny bought a larger boat from the Mystic Museum. A two-masted sharpie, she was also an antique. I saw Windward around Sag Harbor for a few more years and then she disappeared from sight. Now it appears her home is Mecox Bay.
All best,
JOHN SHERRY
'Q Is Not For Quasar'
Moriches
October 27, 1997
Dear Helen Rattray,
I was shocked that my recent "Guestwords" story, "Q Is Not for Quasar," could elicit such an angry response from a reader.
Mr. David Swickard, chair, department of social studies, East Hampton High School, expressed, as he put it, "humorless outrage" as a result of reading my story. He called my story "a funny little commentary on how advertising and technology work together to subvert old-fashioned ways of thinking. . . ."
As the author I can tell you my intent was much less elaborate than Mr. Swickard suggests. I see it more as a funny little commentary on how school mornings can be for a mother of school-age children.
The fact that Mr. Swickard is able to derive quite so many negative lessons from my helping my 5-year-old son with his homework one morning bewilders me. As a mother of three sons I can attest that 5-year-old boys do need help with their homework. Not that the parent needs to "stand over them," but perhaps sit next to them as I do with Danny to make sure that his letters are shaped properly and that they are on the line.
In all fairness, though, Mr. Swickard was right about one thing. Danny should have found his own picture that morning. But if I had trouble finding a Q picture, do I really think Danny would have been able to find one?
Another point I would like to make as a result of reading Mr. Swickard's scathing letter is that I feel it would behoove him to get his facts straight before making hurtful and disparaging remarks in a newspaper. He was wrong when he said that my older son was rewarded for doing what was minimally required. He was not doing the minimal, having given a five-minute speech the day before in this world history class. That was his assignment, to give a five-minute speech.
As a matter of fact my 16-year-old son has never worked at minimal capability. He is an honor student enrolled in advanced placement classes. Not only that, he gets up on his own on school mornings and commutes, using public transportation, to a high school 30 miles west of where we live. Furthermore, I think that my 16-year-old is mature and responsible enough to decide whether or not he could miss a day of school.
In the real world, at my place of business, I'm given three personal days every year to use at my discretion. Am I not teaching my son a lesson in responsibility by allowing him to make an informed decision about staying home from school? Poor school attendance has never been an issue with any of my sons.
In closing, I would like to say that I take pride in the fact that I have provided a healthy and stable environment for my sons. I have been married for 18 years to a wonderful and caring husband and we have three fine sons. Contrary to what Mr. Swickard mentions in his letter, the art of "hoodwinking" is not promoted nor condoned in my family. Rather, I strive to teach my sons love, respect, kindness, and honesty, and of course, the value of hard work.
Do I sometimes make mistakes as a mother? Yes. Do my children sometimes get Pop Tarts for breakfast? Yes. Mr. Swickard closed his letter by telling us that apples don't fall far from their trees. Well, I hope and pray that my sons will raise their children as I have raised them.
Sincerely,
PEGGY HACKETT
Not A Witch
Springs
October 23, 1997
Dear Editor,
Re: Witches, Schoolhouses
Thank you for providing an opportunity to clarify the following question: "Is an anthropologist who studies witchcraft the same thing as the witches she studies?"
On page I-3 of last week's edition of The Star, you announced the lecture-presentation on the subject of witchcraft in colonial East Hampton that my husband, Hugh R. King, and I performed for the East Hampton Historical Society last Saturday. I was described as an anthropologist and Wiccan witch.
To be called a witch can be a rather serious, even life-threatening insult, depending on what one thinks a witch is. I am certain that some well-intending person believed that saying I am a witch would enhance my credibility as an expert on the subject. That would be true if I were teaching people how to be witches.
It has the opposite effect when I am trying to enlighten people about the meaning of witchcraft as a social and historical phenomenon. I have long found it odd - and, frankly, irritating - that my colleagues who studied headhunters were never asked if they were headhunters while I am constantly asked if I am a witch, even by them! They should know better.
Such is the mystique of the witch, I guess. Others who are not aware of the research strategy of cultural anthropology cannot be expected to know better unless it is explained to them. I will explain. My discipline is cultural anthropology, our research methodology is participant observation. We participate in, as well a observe the lives of our subjects. We do not feel qualified to interpret other people's culture unless we have first grasped it from the insider's point of view. That is not the same thing as becoming indistinguishable from our subjects. The product of cultural anthropology is an authoritative interpretation of culture, not the transformation of the anthropologist.
It would have been more appropriate to mention the product of my research, my book about witchcraft, "Never Again the Burning Times; Paganism Revived." That is the basis of my authority to enlighten others on the subject. It is wrong to expect that one can learn what a head-hunter or Wiccan witch is by merely making the acquaintance of scholars on the subjects; one must make the acquaintance of their products.
What I know about witches is in the book and in my words when I speak about it. I am something else. I do many things, including teaching witchcraft and other topics in the fields of anthropology and sociology at Hofstra University. I am a qualified social scientist. I also teach French at Springs School. I am a qualified teacher, but I'm not French.
Sincerely,
LORETTA ORION