Letters //

Letters – Week 9, Semester 2

All the comments, gripes, grumbles and responses from Week 9, Semester 2.

This is what legal pressure looks like

Dear Honi,

I would like to apologise for my letter last week. I retract it.

Whilst I dispute Patrick Massarani’s effectiveness as a representative in his current position, I apologise for implying he had the wrong intentions and questioning his motivations.

I dispute the notion that any candidate running, not least Patrick, has bad intentions.

Patrick and I may disagree on exactly how best to advance the student interest, but there is no doubt that he genuinely believes that what he is doing will help the cause. For implying otherwise, I apologise.

This election must be about who has the best plan to improve student outcomes. To move the debate to a level where we question the person and not their policies, is not conducive to this. I once again offer my sincere apologies and retraction.

I would ask you publish this in the same manner the original letter was published, to ensure equal coverage. I understand putting it on “Page 81” as the original was, is impossible, but please put it it in a location similar to that original to ensure this gets the equal exposure it should.


Dean Shachar

Commerce (Liberal Studies) II

God’s back, and this time it’s personal

Dear Alex Rothman,

While it is unclear why you being a “doctor to be” is relevant in any way to our discussion at hand, I was intrigued by your response to my letter.

Firstly, thank you for pointing out that in Australia we do, in fact, live in a democracy, not a theocracy. I don’t know how I lived the first 20 years of my life under this misapprehension, but thank you for correcting me. I am thoroughly embarrassed. I can’t believe I missed passages like Romans 13:1–7 or Mark 12:13–17 where Christians are called to respect and obey their governments as much as is possible. Silly me.

But anyway, this is small potatoes.

The crux of your letter is your challenge for me to “lay out the best possible defence for this beings [sic] existence”. Sadly, I feel this probably isn’t the best medium in which to do this. And anyway, greater minds than mine have outlined arguments for the Christian faith. Have you actually read any John Lennox or Timothy Keller? They’re both already doctors in case you were wondering.

But ultimately I don’t believe in a “being”. I believe in a man: Jesus Christ, who lived and breathed ca. 2000 years ago and claimed to be the son of God.

I’m sorry if this feels like me prevaricating, but do you have a better explanation? Seriously, do you have a better theory than the explanation presented in the Bible? It’s easy to throw stones at other people’s explanations, but can you present a better one for consciousness, history and creation itself? I can’t and that’s why I’m a Christian.

Luke Tucker (History teacher to be, probably), Arts II

Just drunk on life, you’ll find

To the ‘Several Members of Queer Revue MMXIV’,

I would like to offer heartfelt congratulations to the Queer Revue cast and crew for your performance. Your passion and dedication was truly evident on stage, and I am proud to be part of an organisation which helped facilitate it.

Congratulations aside, however, I am writing in response to a letter to Honi by ‘Several Members of Queer Revue MMXIV’ which speculates on why I left the Revue during intermission on Friday night. Their claims that I left during intermission because I had a night of “excessive drinking” and because I was “booze-scented” are simply untrue. I wholeheartedly dispute any imputation that I was near incapacitation, or even simply drunk. I had come to the performance with a headache (brought on from a stressful day and a long Board Meeting) which peaked during the first Act of the Revue. In addition, I have a history of migraines which I have received medical treatment for in the past.

Despite feeling quite unwell, I chose to remain in the Reginald Theatre and close my eyes, rather than leave midway through skits. The structure of the theatre would have actually required me to cross the stage to exit – I did not wish to disturb the performance, nor distract the audience – and I did this out of complete respect for the cast and crew of the Revue. I left during the intermission in order to get some fresh air with the full intention of coming back inside for the remainder of the performance, however decided that it would probably best to go home.

I find the letter written by ‘Several Members of Queer Revue MMXIV’ to be callous and unfounded. I have always respected my peers, and it is truly hurtful to hear claims that I do not. To speculate on my condition in that Revue was disrespectful, unnecessary and hurtful, and it pains me that I have to write a letter to Honi Soit to clear my name about something as simple and innocent as a headache.

Regardless, I have had boundless amounts of pleasure and fun watching the Revues of the 2014 season, and it continues to astonish me how students are able to balance their academic workloads with their co-curricular commitments. To see talent like I have seen across these last few weeks is truly amazing.

Kind regards,

Tara Waniganayaka