If you could, please clarify Lance Winkler’s remarks in the editorial “Round Town a tradition that won’t go away...” Is Mr. Winkler being sarcastic? Is he suggesting that Oakwood is really a society divided by class and dare I say it race? Does he approve of this type of class structure/re-structuring, which, ironically undermines America’s constitutional values, especially if you believe that the Constitution is a “living document” and that “all are created equally”?
Finally, my kudos to Lacie Sims. As a Dominican I believe in veritas, so it’s always nice to hear someone saying what many of us only want to deny.
Letter from the east side
Dear Oakwood Citizens:
I am a true born-and-bred Oakwoodite. I was born here, raised here, and I am raising my three children here as well. My husband had only heard horror stories about this “Domed City” growing up and he automatically assumed you needed a pass code and credit check at the gate to enter, but he has since discovered this is not the case.
I want to make one last point about ‘Round Town and then we can move on to better and more mentionable topics. First of all, I am in complete agreement with everyone who is upset by this column because it does point out only the social elite and old money that makes Oakwood the city everyone mentions. Look at it this way, if these people are so desperate to have their name mentioned in a tiny local paper to know that they have “arrived” socially, think how empty their lives must be- I pity them! Everyone in my family has been mentioned in this paper several times through the years from when I was in school all the way up to my husband and I being scout leaders and church members. Wow, I guess even us “poor East-siders” have arrived! I do not need some insignificant column about parties and trips to make me feel important...and neither should you!
Next, the only positive about the column is the GREAT publicity that has been given to Culp’s Cafe lately at Carillon park. I graduated with Molly Blumer and she and her husband, Jeff, are doing a fantastic job...but they are lowly East-siders too....hmmmm.
Last, I just want to say how dare you speak to the taxpayers and citizens of Oakwood not deemed good enough to be ‘elite’! The editorial was uncalled for because it was a slap in the face to everyone! Do not judge me, my friends, or other people you know from a five-second encounter at Starbuck’s. It seems that the only reason a Great Wide Divide exists in this city is because people like you keep driving that wedge between the east and west side of Oakwood. Some of the nicest people I know live on the west side of Far Hills and you would never guess they come from “money”.
It goes back to the old adage about how everyone puts their pants on one leg at a time...well, everyone here pays an exorbitant amount in taxes to have their children attend Oakwood City Schools and ALL homeowners pay taxes to live here. My point is this...you may THINK you are better than me but that is all it is, a thought. You are not better than me, I am not better than you and we should all learn to stop dividing this great city and come together for the fact that it is a great place to live and raise children, otherwise, most of us would have left a long time ago.
My final rant and I will gladly step down from my soapbox...if the ‘Round Town section is that bothersome to you (which it IS getting old), visit www.oakwoodregister.com. The web site is FANTASTIC and you can totally bypass this section all together!
A Proud East-sider,
“Outside the Beltway”
After reading your latest editorial, “Round Town a tradition that won’t go away,” I feel the need to comment on several aspects:
The mildly annoying: When using a direction to refer to a locality it is capitalized, as in “East Dayton,” not “east Dayton.”
The mildly condescending: Apparently you can coach youth sports teams and volunteer at the schools all you want , but you haven’t “arrived” until your “lavalier pin” is mentioned on page five. (also of note, “lavalier” is a type of microphone; “lavaliere’ is the proper spelling of the jewelry you’re referring to.)
The plainly offensive: As a former resident of an East Dayton historic district, I resent the broad brush that labels the entire region a “socio-economic sabbatical” that would cause someone to “devolve into an aboriginal grit.”
What I find most disturbing is that you felt it necessary to pen this column at all. A few weeks back, one of your readers provided what you could have taken as constructive feedback on how to make the content of your paper more relevant to a wider portion of your audience. When this touched off a mini-uproar, I would expect an editor to move and defuse it, or at least remain above the fray. But in you step with a self-aggrandizing, hyperbole-filled piece that can basically be summed up as “shut up you Starbucks-swilling philistines.” You then reach a level of audacity rarely seen outside the Beltway, defending the content of your “society column” by labeling those who would dare question it as “culturally elitist.” I’m sure that was good for a chuckle over “High Tea.”
Personally, I could care less about the content of ‘Round Town because I never read it, it’s your response that has me incensed. I have to ask, would it have been so difficult to concede that perhaps ‘Round Town might include more about the whole town, even if you had no actual intention of following up on it? Instead, you foster division of the community into the “dinner” side and the “supper side,” compare yourself to the New York Times (who I daresay would know when to capitalize east and how to spell lavaliere), and summarily inform us that you will ignore until they are “blueblood in the face.”
I too have lived in several different cities, and I can cite one thing in common between all of their newspapers. From the Washington Post and the Arizona Republic to the San Antonio News and even the lowly Daytona Beach News-Journal, not one of them showed such a clear disdain for such a large portion of their readership.
The Supper Side of Oakwood
A little sense of humor needed
With regard to the editorial “’Round Town a tradition that won’t go away” (March 17 issue), apparently a few people have taken issue with what I wrote. To answer Mr. Reed’s query (letter at top of page) on whether I was being sarcastic – yes, I was.
I didn’t mean to coin the previously unknown term “the Great Wide Divide” and get anyone in a stew. It was just a play on words I thought up at the moment. And as for the ‘supper’ and ‘dinner’ side of Oakwood, it is another humorous term coined by a fellow long-time Oakwood resident who wrote that and sent it to us. I thought it was hilarious and couldn’t wait for the opportunity to work it into some editorial or humorous story about Oakwood.
Both Ms. Lawson and Mr. Hendrix read me completely wrong on what I wrote. I usually don’t write opinion pieces anymore because I invariably get myself in hot water with the “PC-police.” All I wanted to do was defend ‘Round Town and say it wasn’t goin’ nowhere no-how.
In reacting to Ms. Souder’s assertion (March 10 issue) that “real citizens of Oakwood” are to be found at Starbucks or Central Perk, well, I took exception to that opinion. I tried to take the two most singularly humorous aspects of the two cafes that I regard as humorous, i.e. 1) the three-tier “High Tea” baked goods racks at Central Perk, and 2) the notebook computer frenzy at Starbucks, and give them a bit of run through in a jesting sort of way. I did not intend to say, as Mr. Hendrix has put words in my mouth, “Shut up you Starbucks-swilling philistines.” By the way Mr. Hendrix, I believe you should capitalize Philistine. Secondly, the folks that frequent Starbucks are the diametric opposite of the definition of Philistine.
Finally, I have lived on the east side of Oakwood for the past 10 years. I am a regular both at Starbucks and Central Perk and was writing from experience, not hurling marshmallow brickbats from behind some “elitist” wall.
I’m sorry some of you misread what I was saying. Yes, I was hoping to get some sort of a response, but where is your sense of humor?
The Oakwood Register
Have beef with bailout pork
President Obama is learning on the job. He doesn’t know what to do. From a large outlay to AIG ($165,000,000 was spent on bonuses). Now another corporation that taxpayers funded has bought a couple of airplanes. If we are going to spend money on bailouts, the Secretary of the Treasury needs to put some controls on it. This raises a whole
other question regarding Secretary Geithner. Is he competant to serve? He has been unable to round out his staff which needs 17 additional individuals. I’m glad the President found time to appear on The Tonight Show.