Hood Expansion Isn’t a Match

This is regarding the Hood Museum’s expansion. In the April 2 article (“Will the Hood Be Hidden?”), Hood Director John Stomberg stated, “Preserve has been the mantra of the team. They have shown so much restraint in putting this together; to say other is to mischaracterize it.”

This “mantra” is a dizzying white box with an eerie protruding window. This “restraint” is without any respect to the red brick and copper proportionality of the Dartmouth campus. The line “To say other is to mischaracterize it” frankly assumes that if you don’t jump on the subjective bandwagon of trendy architectural distortion, then you must not understand architecture. It removes any volition from a citizen who would criticize the Hood’s expansion.

For those of you who saw the proposed rendering in the Valley News as a Venetian birthday cake merged with a smashed air-conditioner, fear not, you’re not alone — and more, you’re not mischaracterizing it. That we have somehow missed the obvious nod to Charles Moore’s work is preposterous.

Architecture’s universal standards have fallen in the last 70 years. Moore’s building is a brave exception. He pushed his field forward with a sincere tip of the cap to the Dartmouth vernacular and does so in a fresh, streamlined way, with local symmetries, materials and regularity — including the powerful and inclusive Assyrian-like concrete facade. Far from a $50 million gimmick.

Those who perpetrate the smashed air-conditioner aesthetic are seemingly the only ones who don’t find it universally offensive. More so, they have somehow convinced many others to follow suit, when in reality they are the naked emperors of architecture.

Diverse opinions matter; but please don’t tell the community that our eyes are deceiving us. We can plainly see that this visual disruption does not match, nor was intended to match, the campus in any fashion, nor any aesthetic standard in its own right. Let’s re-establish meaning behind our words, so we may begin again to have honest discussions.

Nick Fabrikant

Vershire

Misrepresentation of Veterans

To the Editor:

I want to express my dissatisfaction with the depiction of the typical Vietnam vet. I’m disappointed that the photograph and accompanying article in the Valley News on March 30 didn’t represent the majority of the veterans present at the 50th commemoration of the Vietnam War held the previous day.

My husband, a Vietnam veteran, and I attended the ceremony conducted by the VA. We sat surrounded by more than 300 other Vietnam veterans from Vermont and New Hampshire, dressed in attire for a typical 40- degree weather in northern New England. The average vet for the most part, wore a hat, and sometimes a jacket with decal indicating service era. Accompanying family and relatives swelled the ranks to around 500. But the photo on the front page of the Valley News and the article about the event failed to portray the majority of men and women present.

I respect the right of the Rolling Thunder members to attend these ceremonies, but they represent only a small segment of the total population. Yet, their members are most often photographed and interviewed as representative of the entire group.

The bulk of the young people returned from the war in the 1960s and ’70s to establish conventional lives. Some furthered their education, many married and raised families, worked at average jobs and have served their communities in a wide variety of ways for the past 30 to 40 years. They became part of society in much the same way as the returning veterans of World War II, considered the greatest generation.

The problem with the media’s portrayal of Vietnam veterans as angry, sometimes dangerous, counter-culture individuals, usually dealing with emotional issues and multiple addictions, is unfair and inaccurate. Certainly many of these veterans have had to deal with the demons from their experience in war, which was made worse by the treatment they received when they returned home. The majority have gone on to live their lives in a respectful and quiet way. The media need to stop perpetuating the image represented in this news article, and the public needs to re-evaluate who Vietnam veterans are, to respect their service, and their contribution to our society since their return.

Nancy Chapman

Tunbridge

Speaking Truth to the Co-op

Michael Whitman (Forum, March 31) says members who see a need for Co-op reform are “single-issue” voters, focused on a non-problem at a perfect Co-op. His opinion is as inaccurate as the link he provided. The correct one is www.mycoopvote.com.

It’s true that the firing of two employees caused members to take a closer look at the Co-op. But what they found made them multiple-issue voters, concerned about documented problems ranging from hiring/firing policy and in-the-red stores to ineffectual board oversight and a profound lack of financial transparency.

Mr. Whitman’s praise fails to mention that the Co-op was, in my view, obliged to settle with the National Labor Relations Board by revising its employee policies and revoking attempts to punish employees for discussing unionization. He doesn’t mention what I consider management’s blatant interference in the last board election, or the subservient board’s attempt to require candidates’ consent to all-encompassing and legally problematic background checks. He doesn’t mention management’s unprofessional human resources practice, which has exposed the Co-op to an expensive lawsuit.

Nor does he mention the many positive changes since members started asking questions. Public pressure has already moved the board to reconsider “at will” firing and work on a revision of hiring policy. The Co-op has taken steps to make its finances more transparent. If the board achieves a reform majority, members will once again have the information they need to assess their Co-op’s financial situation.

Mr. Whitman conflates “the shoppers I hear from” with “the vast majority among about 25,000 members.” His mythical majority may have “no desire to see changes,” but a real majority of Co-op voters voted for last year’s reform candidates.

Yes, Mr. Whitman, the Co-op is a well-loved institution. But like many institutions, it’s not perfect. The folks who love you most are the ones who’ll tell you the truth. I hope members will vote for me and my fellow reform candidates, Liz Blum, Phil Pochoda, Donald Kreis and Ann MacDonald, who want to help the Co-op do better.

William Craig

Thetford Center