Letters

Inside the New American Home

To claim that lavish, glamorous homes are representative of a trend in America is elitist. These places are toys for the rich. EVAN AXELBANK Ithaca, N.Y.

The modern home, growing in size in proportion to one's SUV, filled with technology for those too lazy even to open their window blinds and flooded with the mind-numbing drivel of billboard-size televisions, seems more a reflection of the external world's chaos than an escape from it [LIFESTYLE, Oct. 14]. Sadly, as you noted, this new American home is not about "family cohesion" but about "accommodating different lifestyles." It may not be the American Dream, but I like my cozy walls, miniature television and blinds that I actually walk across the room to adjust. JENNY WISNIEWSKI Wauwatosa, Wis.

Everything in your article was so true! Since Sept. 11, people everywhere seem to be cocooning and decorating orredecorating. Custom kitchens and media-entertainment rooms are encouraging family togetherness, while tony bedrooms pamper all. At my carpet business, I see customers opting for the more opulent shags of years past. Everyone is indulging in comfort. Instead of taking extravagant vacations, it's all about being cozy at home. JOE ZELDIN Calabasas, Calif.

These new homes look beautiful, but I couldn't spot a single bookcase. I hope books will still be in vogue in the future. Reading on the Internet is convenient, but nothing beats having a book in hand. ELISABETH STEPHENS Castro Valley, Calif.

Although I found the homes in your article interesting, you may keep them. We are a family of five living in a five-room, 200-year-old log home and running a small dairy farm. We have one small television that my husband and I watch the news on, in bed, at night. Our children share one bedroom, and the entire family uses one closet. But we eat, work and play together. You will never see us sitting around a big, fancy room staring at a huge screen, oblivious to the fact that we are a family. By some standards we may look pathetic. But that is how the houses in your story looked to us. BECKY REITER Narvon, Pa.

I feel bad for the kids who grow up in luxurious homes like the ones in your story. Good luck to them as they adjust to sharing a bathroom with a bunch of people in a college dorm. As for parents who feel that they need a buffer zone from their children, maybe they shouldn't have kids in the first place. Americans ought to stop keeping up with the Joneses and instead own a modest home, live a debt-free lifestyle and get a dog. That's the plan my husband and I have. LISA GIASSA Bogota, N.J.

Those of us in the middle and lower-middle class do not have chef's kitchens, master suites, home theaters or bathroom spas. We less privileged Americans are lucky if we can afford a 1,000-sq.-ft. apartment, let alone a 2,000-sq.-ft. "starter home." And we cannot afford $100,000 renovations done by contractors. Get real! MARGARET E. LANGSTON New York City

Americans now want their homes to be supersize. Are their choices being influenced by the fast-food industry? Perhaps it's time to downsize before we collapse under the weight of monster master bedrooms and huge mortgages. ANN DOW Thorofare, N.J.

--Are the new dream homes nothing more than ugly symbols of capitalist excess? Some of our readers thought so. "Your cover story left me sickened and ashamed," wrote an Idaho woman. "While we are happily consuming everything we can, we might reflect on why the millions of people without shelter, food or even safe water might see Americans as their enemy." A reader from Washington State condemned the story as "a sad commentary on the American way of life. The rooms and furnishings in these houses would adequately serve a small village in many parts of the world." And a Californian declared, "Your story perpetuated the stereotype of the ugly, rich, dissatisfied American that has caused al-Qaeda and other militant groups to hate us."

Protecting Women's Health

"Jesus and the FDA" [NOTEBOOK, oct. 14] reported that the Bush Administration wants to appoint W. David Hager, a doctor with antiabortion views, to a Food and Drug Administration panel on women's health policy. You've got to be kidding! That a man who doesn't support women's reproductive rights may be in a position to make important decisions about their health care is truly horrifying. Bush's naked pandering to the far-right wing of his party is beyond contempt. KATHY FRYER HELMBOCK Cincinnati, Ohio

I am a committed christian woman, and was deeply alarmed by the influence conservatives have used to threaten women's health rights through the pending appointment of Hager to chair an influential FDA panel. Why hasn't a woman been appointed to chair this key group dealing with women's health? Surely there are qualified women available. JANE FISLER HOFFMAN Chicago

Catch-Up Classes

Re your story on conservatives' plans to get rid of remedial-education classes in colleges [EDUCATION, Oct. 14]: You noted that several states banish remedial students to two-year campuses; critics contend the practice will discourage students from ever making it to four-year colleges. The larger mission of community colleges is to provide learning opportunities for students of all backgrounds and ages. Many of these students start off in developmental courses and receive the preparation they need for productive careers without going on to a four-year university. WILLIAM K. CASSELL Sierra Madre, Calif.

As a teacher of developmental english and reading, I work with many students who are older than 22 . What they lack in classroom skills they often make up for in passion and determination. Their diverse life experiences enrich their writing and strengthen their ability to contribute to class discussions. They want the same thing as other students: a chance to prove themselves. PAMELA ARLOV Macon, Ga.

The real problem is the poor educational standards in high schools that make these remedial college courses necessary. We need to push for stronger educational standards in high schools JOHN HEBERT Loveland, Colo.

The Sanctions Question

The humanitarian consequences of the sanctions against Iraq furnish Arabs and Muslims in the region with yet another reason to loathe the U.S. [IRAQ, Oct. 14]. This lingering catastrophe poisons public opinion in the Middle East and gives terrorists a rationale for their acts. The solution to the poverty and malnutrition of the Iraqi people is straightforward: lift most of the sanctions on Iraq and retain only the ones that keep military equipment out of Saddam's hands. MAT KORICA Toronto

The Iraq Debate

Johanna McGeary's article about going to war with Iraq raised the questions we should ask ourselves [IRAQ, Oct.14]. The Bush Administration has whipped up post--Sept. 11 fear to a froth, just in time to stop freewheeling discussion of the string of economic and moral disasters that should have buried Republicans' chances in the midterm elections. These audacious political tactics, brilliantly orchestrated, imperil the future of the U.S. and of world peace. JOYCE GEHRINGER Pleasant Ridge, Mich.

Re the seven questions on Iraq: here are three more. 1) What the hell do we think we're doing? 2) How are we going to catch Saddam Hussein if we can't catch Osama bin Laden? 3) How far into the toilet is the economy going to go as Bush pursues his objective? MARJORIE HINDS Houston

Is Saddam a threat to U.S. security? It is nightmarish to think he could be that stupid. What we have is a President who has a personal quest to get Saddam. Bush said Saddam tried to kill his dad. Does that justify starting a war? DENO PASCUCCI Coconut Creek, Fla.

Perhaps I could be swayed into considering the possibility that President Bush is not motivated purely by politics if he were to insist that his daughters enlist in the military. LYNN KURTH Austin, Texas

Attack Now, Later or Never?

The debate about whether to go to war with Iraq in a few months (General Wesley K. Clark's position) or now (Kenneth L. Adelman's view) is no debate at all [VIEWPOINT, Oct. 14]. Both men assume war is appropriate. The real question is, Why should the U.S. go to war at such extreme cost and hazard on the basis of nothing more than speculation? I supported the last war against Iraq because it was a necessary response to Iraq's war of aggression and conquest. I do not support Bush's planned invasion of Iraq because it is a war of aggression being pursued for political ends. THOMAS D. WALKER Carmichael, Calif.

Attacking Iraq will simply invite the kind of war we want to avoid. It will certainly give Iraq an excuse to use whatever weapons it has. It will make the rest of the world view us with a jaundiced eye. JAIMIE MULVEY Asheville, N.C.

Although Clark very persuasively promoted his position to delay military action against Iraq, I must strongly disagree with that stance. Saddam will have weapons of mass destruction in the very near future. A delaying action to plan and organize would not necessarily mean more domestic support for an attack. Americans have a short memory. If we don't resolve to take action soon, we could slip back into a false sense of security and forget how serious the threat of the Iraqi dictator really is. The U.S. needs to act now, or it will face the consequences later. GRACE MORGAN Downey, Calif.

The U.S. must support Clark's arguments that we take the time to "do the whole job the right way." Rushing into war will not improve the U.S.'s reputation in the Arab world. As Clark points out, we will be responsible for a postconflict plan to rebuild Iraq after years of neglect, self-inflicted damage and social repression. We cannot hope to understand the urgent needs and challenges facing the Iraqi people in a post-Saddam nation without the input of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other countries in the region. Let's make sure we take the time, as Clark suggests. MARSHA VIERS Warren, Mich.

Saddam may be a monster, but there is no convincing evidence that he presents an imminent threat. There is surely a much greater risk in going to war now, without friends and allies, than there is in waiting for U.N. inspection teams to do their job and for proper post-war planning. That Iraq can be transformed into a democracy is a farfetched notion. Are we prepared for the incalculable loss of life, chaos and destruction that will result from a war with Iraq? War should be a very last resort. RABBI H. DAVID TEITELBAUM Redwood City, Calif.

Starting Over

Re the report on unemployed white-collar workers [BUSINESS, Oct. 14]: In today's competitive hiring market, candidates must build a marketing campaign to sell themselves. The burden is on job hunters to identify how they can solve business problems for prospective hiring organizations. These candidates have to learn the rule of "SW" when targeting prospective employers: some will, some won't, and someone's waiting to hire you. KATE SCHWARZ Fairfax, Va.

Clarification

The graphic with our report on spyware programs installed on your computer without your consent [PERSONAL TIME: YOUR TECHNOLOGY, Oct. 7] referred to B3D, a product of Brilliant Digital Entertainment, saying that when you download a copy of Kazaa's file-sharing software, B3D is installed. We also said that B3D allows your PC's spare computer power to be used by Brilliant's network. This power-sharing feature has not yet been activated, and, the company says, it will not be used without the computer owner's specific consent.