LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

[May 11th, 2005] Trouble in the Land of Oz

Nigel Jaquiss did a remarkable job in the April 27 edition of Willamette Week ["Lake O-be-gone"] of weaving together the complex array of issues facing Lake Oswego, including the devastating Parker development. I simply want to add that the City of Lake Oswego and the Lake Oswego Corporation hold the key to resolving the Forest Hill Easement's conflict with Mr. [Jeff] Parker.

Mr. Parker is contractually obliged under covenants recorded with the county to convey to the [LOC] two islands and a significant amount of underwater property. The promised conveyance will make it impossible to build the enormous house with its two-story extension into the lake as proposed because it would violate city lot coverage and setback requirements. In other words, the house will be too big and too close to the property line.

All the LOC has to do is enforce the contract, and all the city has to do is take the promised conveyances into account when considering Mr. Parker's tree-cutting and building-permit applications. Better yet, Mr. Parker could be a hero and sell his property to the Three Rivers Land Conservancy, which would like to preserve this last undeveloped, historical lot on Lake Oswego-which hosts a stand of incredible Doug firs and offers a unique perspective of the lake.

Shelley Lorenzen
Lake Oswego

WW in Hot Oil

I was very disappointed in your review of Fire on the Mountain Buffalo Wings in your recent "Cheap Eats" edition [March 30, 2005]. Your reviewer incorrectly stated that deep frying was not the ideal way to cook Buffalo wings and that baking or broiling would be preferable. I think your reviewer was thinking of barbecue, not Buffalo wings.

The owners of Fire on the Mountain Buffalo Wings are from New York and modeled their basic recipe on the Anchor Bar in Buffalo, where wings were invented decades ago. They have insisted on keeping all ingredients and methods true to the original version. This includes deep frying!

I figured that since your reviewer didn't do their research, I would. Here's what I found in the Food Lover's Companion (a food encyclopedia generally accepted by chefs worldwide as an authority on food-you might want to buy your reviewer a copy): "Buffalo chicken wings-Buffalo, New York's, Anchor Bar originated this dish of deep-fried (my italics) chicken wings served in a spicy hot sauce and accompanied by a blue-cheese dressing."

I never used to like the stringy, fatty, frozen wings I had experienced at other restaurants in the past and had given up on ever enjoying wings until I tried them at Fire on the Mountain. Now I consider myself a chicken-wing addict!

Robb Williams
Southeast 164th Avenue

What's in Store

Several embarrassingly clueless letters recently accused WW of trying to suppress Fred Meyer's and QFC's freedom of speech because WW criticized those stores' promotional displays of the Left Behind novels. Since when is writing an article criticizing some businesses' promotional choices equivalent to actively suppressing those businesses' ability to make that choice? It is not, and therefore the letter writers' criticisms are invalid and illogical.

This series of books, as WW pointed out in its original "Rogue of the Week" column [March 30, 2005] about the stores' displays, celebrates an Armageddon scenario in which everyone who is not a Christian fundamentalist gets kept out of heaven to experience hell and slaughter and Antichrist rule on earth. Would these writers also attack WW if it criticized a store's promotion of a book written by a Klansman who expresses glee at the idea of all blacks going to hell? I'm so glad those writers are ignoring all of the real injustice and censorship in the world and instead are choosing to use their freedom of speech to stick up for the poor, downtrodden, disenfranchised right-wing Christian fundamentalists, who obviously have never tried to condemn or oppress anyone.

All WW did was criticize the stores' choices as to how to use their freedom of speech. The writers, in turn, criticized WW's choice of how to use its freedom of speech. In which case I might ask the writers (using their own logic) why they are so intent on not letting WW have any freedom of speech.

Tom Soppe
Southeast Harold Street

Enough with the Ballgame

Byron Beck's column continues its slide downhill. It's sad that he can't manage to get through an article without making some kind of puerile sexual reference.

Maybe he thinks it's cute that "Mr. Gay Softball" [Queer Window, WW, April 27] likes to take it up the butt and probably has a big bat. In reality, it's demeaning and stereotypical and plays into the right-wing fears that all we care about is sex, sex and more sex. Beck's article is particularly sad because his subject had mentioned he liked gay softball because it was a place that "wasn't about sex."

A gay writer doesn't always have to whip it out and wave it around in order to prove his homo bona fides. Unfortunately, Beck hasn't learned that yet. It's time to find someone else to write that column with some emotional maturity.

Robert Hansen
Beaverton