Sunday, February 4, 2018


Dear Editor: It has come to my attention that you do not allow titles on “Letters to the Editor.” I have learned this through direct experience, having recently submitted several “Letters to the Editor.”  None of the titles were printed. They all originally had titles, and very good ones, I might add. This seems rather odd. Peculiar. Dumbfounding. Every article in the Voice has titles. “Meeks returns as managing editor.” “Chamber, Voice, announce merger. I mean, award nominations.” “Nalley addresses questions, concerns.” Each is followed by a story that relies on, plays on, explains, the title. When there is no title, but only “Letter to the Editor,” it doesn’t sound very interesting. Why would I write a “Letter to the Editor?” I don’t even know the editor. I’m writing a letter to address the public. Something I see as unusual. Alarming. Perhaps a view opposite of the status-quo. A rebuttal. Maybe a plea: for justice. Fairness. Perhaps just a thought. Maybe a good deed has been done. Recognition.  Thankfulness. Magazine articles have titles; people have titles; movies have titles; newspaper articles have titles; books have titles. Most certainly “Letters to the Editor” should have titles. Something that draws attention. Captures the imagination. Informs the people in few words (300 is plenty). Something of which the body of the written work can dance around. Tease. Elevate. At the very least, explain.  Clearly, “Letter to the Editor” serves none of these purposes. I have not, however, let “no title allowed” deter me from my work, which is to CONSTANTLY STIR THE POT. This may ruffle some feathers. Upset some. Make people uncomfortable. But it’s all in good fun. A curmudgeons job. Cantankerous. So please, let us put titles on our “Letters to the Editor”. Everything has a title. Everything.

No comments:

Post a Comment