Letters

COUNTRY MUSIC RECONSIDERED

It seems to me that Mr. Eisenbeis needs to listen to a little more country music before he tries to explain its popularity or lack of same [“It’s My Country…,” November]. In today’s music world, pop hardly exists, and no one can understand the lyrics of today’s rock. There is no longer any innovation in the instrumentation of rock, and country to a lesser degree suffers the same fate. The rock stars of today place themselves above their fans. Country musicians tend to embrace their fans, plus they are more educated than the majority of rock performers. Country performers know the value of attending and lending a hand at charitable events and autograph signings. While country produces a lot of junk, it also produces some great stuff. Country songwriters tend to write songs that reflect current trends, or objectionable practices. Take, for example, “Murder on Music Row,” a protest song against the mainstream country music establishment. Still, it became very popular and won a Country Music Association award as Song of the Year. Look at Alan Jackson’s “Where Were You (When the World Stopped Turning)?” Another Song-of-the-Year winner. Even the latest, very popular “Whiskey Lullaby” sounds as though it was written about an actual event in someone’s life and could very well have been. Songs like these make people stop and listen. Even young people. If you want to know the history of country music, you listen to country music. If you want to know the history of this country, you listen to country music. If you want to know the political climate of this country, you listen to country music. Mr. Eisenbeis seems to want to complicate the reasons for country music’s popularity. The reason is simple, really: The music is real, it is heartfelt, and the performers are honest. Even when they are being bad, they still remain loyal to their music and their fans. That is something that is rare, even in society as a whole, but it is still highly valued by most.

Dale Butler
Fridley

CREDIT (& BLAME) WHERE DUE
You guys must have spent too much time with Eric Utne, doing that cover piece [December]. So it’s no longer just about him, eh? Funny, you don’t act like you believe that. What? Check it out: In the photo caption on page forty. Here are the five people responsible for forming and developing and keeping the Utne Reader going. But four of them are unimportant. They are even unimportant today, years later. They don’t even have names. Shame on you, Rakesters. Just to help you (and I’ve never even been involved at the Utne Reader), without charge, I’ll help your identification process: [from left] Besides Jay Walljasper, Eric Utne, and Julie Ristau, the other people you did not identify are Barbara Mishler, who was the Utne Reader’s librarian for at least ten years, and Helen Cordes, who was one of the originals at UR and was there probably twenty years.
Jon Schultz
Minneapolis

Our readers are frequently smarter than we are. Thanks for the help.–Eds.

A TEA PARTY WITH UTNE
I enjoyed meeting the man, Eric Utne of the Utne Magazine, in the December issue of The Rake. He and his magazine did a great service when they brought back the conversational salon movement. I bought the book Salons, and it all made such an effect on me that I started a conversational salon, and it is still going strong at Mad Hatter’s Tea House in St. Paul. I can’t believe it, but we have had one a week for over two years—poetry, open discussion, and guest speakers. Tea and cake always served. Such a civil thing, really.

So the statement from your article, “the movement itself turned out to be short-lived,” is shortsighted. As Eric says, “the effects live on,” and we at Mad Hatter’s give thanks to him and the Utne Reader for helping a community and culture thrive through conversation. Thank you for the article.

Patty Guerrero
St. Paul