I read Glenn Dixon’s review of “Greg Hannan: Recent Work” (Gallery, 4/11) and found it to be a nicely written, straightforward piece. Obviously, he was touched by the work and is able to communicate his admiration for Hannan’s constructions, as well as explain his own views on “found” art. However, I take issue with the slash-and-burn attitude toward his other reviews under the headline “Beneath Contempt.” How are Washington City Paper’s readers benefited by this spewing of venomous comments at the expense of dedicated, serious artists? Is Dixon trying to present himself as an H.L. Mencken-style curmudgeon? Does he think he can gain literary points by his uninformed, gratuitous screed? Why does City Paper give him space to promote this ill-conceived and malicious journalism, when the public and the artistic community need and deserve constructive reviews of our area artists?
Falls Church, Va.