Page 20


Most additives are unnecessary. The benefits are to industry; the risks are to the consumer. Refrigeration is the ideal preservative. For more information see: The Poisons in Your Food by William The individual can partially protect himself by buying fresh, unrefined, and unprocessed foods, organically grown when possible; but any large-scale improvement in the safety of our food supply must come from Washington. The present laws are full of loopholes, and can only be changed by Congress. The following bills are now before Congress: S. 76 The Food Additive Safety Act Senator Gaylord Nelson wishes to eliminate the GRAS list \(generally additives. He also wishes to extend the Delaney cancer clause to cover teratogenic and mutagenic chemicals. H.R. 14768 Representative Joseph Minish’s bill would provide for a review by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences of all substances on the GRAS list. \(The In support of Senator Nelson’s Food Additive Safety Act 1.The Senate Labor and Public Welfare Committees, c/o Senator Harrison A. Williams, Jr., Senate Office Bldg., Washington, D.C. 20510. 2.Senator John Tower, Senate Office Bldg., Washington, D.C. 20510. 3.Senator Lloyd Bentsen, same address. In support of H.R. 14768 of Representative Minish, please write to: 1. The House Commerce Committee, c/o Rep. Harley 0. Staggers, House Office Bldg., Washington, D.C., 20515. In each letter, ask for effective pesticide 24 The Texas Observer legislation, too. They may listen. After all, Congressmen have to eat, too. Mrs. John H. Hicks, 2305 Wilke Dr., Austin, Tex. 78704, 444-1168. Man of letters In re Mr. Barthelme’s comment in your last issue that Moving On is a book “false. dull and ugly,” he might pay attention that much of Texas life is false, dull and ugly. Also, on his question, “Why must Texas develop a literature? Does Minnesota have a literature? Oregon? A famous Oregonese?” he would be mindful to observe that Oregon and Minnesota do have a literature, witness: Oregon, End of the Trail, Writers Project travelogue, H. M. Corning; Mark Hatfield, a famous Oregonese ; and Minnesota’s Major Historical Sites by Holmquist and Brookins. We have this sort too, but we some critics. \(H. Mewhinney and, now, relics of the past, such as Dobie, Webb, Duval and the like. “Partaking of everyone else’s?” Well, at my university we have an English Department, not a Texas or American department. Yes, we do have our own pro-football teams and Astrodome. So? with being a literary critic. A literary critic is one who criticizes literature. Hence, he is a literary critic, unless he claims Moving On is not literature, and he did say it was a novel, and I always thought novels were literature. Finally, Mr. Barthelme may be only a literary critic now, but he is fast becoming a man of letters. James Cody, 1805 S an Gabriel #1 Austin, Tex. 78701. `Tedious dialogue’ Larry McMurtry writes funny letters but mediocre books. Steve Barthelme doesn’t do either very well. \(We are told in one of his earlier pieces that he is “writing his first novel.” If their tedious dialogue is to continue, may I suggest that it be by private correspondence? Perhaps the Observer could pay them both for their magnanimous contributions, in postage stamps. Bill Hamilton, 1805 Alguno Road, Austin, Tex. 78757. Drop it The only thing duller than Moving On is Barthelme and McMurtry talking about it. Why don’t you all just drop the whole thing? Don Graham, Box 223, Kyle, Tex. 78640. On ethics committee Next time you refer to the Speaker’s Committee of 100, whose letterhead states the mission as “To study the duties, responsibilities, ethics and compensation of Members of the House of Representatives,” please remind your readers that actually 150 people studied the legislators’ work at $400 per month salary. As I re-read an old newspaper clipping about the committee being set up, I find all sorts of humor, like Mutscher saying that despite a code of ethics adopted in 1957, “occasional criticism is directed at alleged breaches of those standards.” Lillian Rountree, 4503 W. 18th, Lubbock, Tex. 78416. Fantastic Fagan Dickson’s letter to President expressed the opinions of a great percentage of people now. My thanks to you and Dickson for your efforts for peace. Gary Floyd, 301 Sixth Street, Palestine, Tex. 75801. Against rough language This is to protest once again your continued unnecessary use of “rough” language in your paper. I did write once before at length. Apparently my letter went astray. There are people with whom I’d like to share some of the good fare in the Observer, but inevitably, it seems, I have to back down because of expressions which to them would overshadow the good which I find by sort of gritting my teeth over words that are revolting to me. I am renewing my subscription for another year, hoping for more contributions from Ronnie Dugger, who seems the least prone–. Mrs. A. A. Luckenbach, 5335 Windemere Dr., Houston, Tex. 77033. Mrs. Luckenbach’s earlier letter was published in the May 29, 1970, Observer.Ed. Thanks for help . Thank you for the articles which the Observer has run regarding pollution problems in the Corpus Christi Ship Channel and Nueces Bay. My personal thanks for the supportive remarks in your last article, “Thou shalt not believe thine eyes.” It’s nice to have a shared cause with the Observer and Ronnie Dugger because you both have a reputation of journalistic integrity which many of us in Texas have come to admire and rely upon. Jim Alice Scott, OPUS, Inc., 533 Handover, Corpus Christi, Tex. 78412.