MITT AND HIS MONEY

A taxing refrain; Microsoft's debacle; poring over Hitchens; bettering Baldwin; musing on monuments; reporting from the front lines; and more

I just finished Nicholas Shaxson's nice piece of Mitt Romney scholarship ["Where the Money Lives," August], Having done my own research on the politician's past, I have made some of the same discoveries. Something else worth noting: a close read of Mitt and Anris I.R.S. Form 1040 reveals even more manipulation venues on the Romney worldwide tax-avoidance whistle-stop tour. There's Frankfurt, Germany, lots of action in Dublin, as well as in places such as 01ten, Switzerland, and the virtually unknown Munsbach, Luxembourg, whose population is around 600. (Romney also has other accounts in Luxembourg, the world's definitive tax-ducking destination.)

His lone obsession is to avoid paying taxes, which has allowed him to hold on to many millions of dollars, money that could be used to repair our nation's crumbling infrastructure, help the helpless, and further cancer research. That such fiscal avarice should be rewarded with the presidency is beyond comprehension.

DENNIS SHREEFERRoebuck, South Carolina

Romney has merely used the benefits of the tax laws afforded him V-by prior presidential administrations. He has done what all of us taxpayers wish to do: pay what we owe and nothing more. His wealth is a nonissue for me. What is a plus in my book is his business acumen. I don't want a leader who is uneducated and unsuccessful. Romney has the business experience to take this country out of the financial sandpit in which we currently find ourselves. I hope he uses his experience at Bain Capital to sell government properties that are unused and valuable to developers, who can add them to the tax rolls—military facilities occupying prime real estate, for example. In addition to streamlining overstaffed functions in our government, he would be inclined to partner with business leaders to expand our economy. Romney's biggest challenge will be to stop the congressional bickering and actually accomplish all that is in the best interests of the American public.

CINDY WALSHScottsdale, Arizona

After reading your expose on the semi-secret life of our would-be president Mitt Romney, I had the irresistible urge to watch the 1987 movie Wall Street. After viewing it again for the first time in many years, I realized that Romney is an outsize version of Michael Douglas's Academy Award-winning depiction of Gordon Gekko, the avaricious-investor character, whose creed in the film was "Greed is good." And that mantra seems to adequately sum up Romney's own financial history. While the presidential hopeful attempts to keep his deep, dark financial secrets hidden, his arrogance continues to expose itself on new and unbelievable levels.

JEFFREY R. MARKChatham, New Jersey

RUNNING OUT OF MEMORY

Your recent article about Microsoft ["Microsoft's Lost Decade," by Kurt Eichenwald, August] missed a few things. Since Steve Ballmer took over as C.E.O., right before the dot-com bubble burst, Microsoft has actually tripled revenue from $23 billion in 2000 to $70 billion in 2011; has increased profits from $9 billion in 2000 to $23 billion in 2011; has returned $194 billion to shareholders via dividends and stock buybacks; and has donated more than $3 billion in cash, software, and services to charity.

One of the great things about the tech industry is that it's intensely competitive and constantly changing. You don't hit a home run every time, disruption is a way of life, and, as Andy Grove famously said, "only the paranoid survive." Steve has done a great job of leading Microsoft through an incredibly challenging decade for the entire industry, and positioning us well for the future. He has taken bold steps and made big bets that have paid off, and the coming year is shaping up as one of the most exciting in Microsoft's history, with transformative new versions of Windows, Office, Windows Server, Windows Phone, and many other products.

Despite Vanity Fair's armchair diagnosis of a "lost decade," Microsoft is the third most valuable company in the world, with a market capitalization around $250 billion and an incredible pipeline of products and services.

A lot of companies would like to have that kind of lost decade.

FRANK X. SHAWVice presiden t Corporate Comn tun ic at ions Microsoft Corporation Redmond, Washington

What an interesting article on the decline of such an iconic company. The symbolism should not be lost on us. The United States, like Microsoft, got so big and so powerful that it was generally believed it was too big to fail. Yet, here we are with a declining company and country while the individuals within both wander around dazed and confused, trying to figure a way out. A basic principle, known to every smart child— what goes up must come down—makes it obvious that the American Dream, on which the company and the country are built, is destined to fail: what goes up must come down.

JENNIFER THUNCHERBurnaby, British Columbia

The Microsoft article wasn't lost on me. And to further highlight your sadly accurate reporting on employee dissatisfaction with Ballmer's direction and management style, I would like to share one sentence—and there were only three—from my husband's decisive resignation letter, dated July 2004: "This company is no longer innovative enough to warrant my employ." And for eight years he has been happily ensconced at Apple.

KATHRYN SIGLERKirkland, Washington

WHY HE WROTE

I got a few paragraphs into "The Importance of Being Orwell" [by Christopher Hitchens, August] when I was overtaken with a terrible sadness. Although I frequently disagreed with Hitchens's opinions, I totally loved his wonderful mind. Oh, how I miss him. And reading his article on George Orwell makes me wonder how Hitchens could leave this earth with so much still to do and think and share. I wish I had been born with his incredible intelligence, but at least I had the thrill of reading each and every article this amazing man gave me through V.F.

SHELLEY MALONEKey West, Florida

Hitchens's piece on Orwell was challenging reading, provoking me to dig in and follow along. It also reminded me that, when reading, sometimes it is better to just sit back, appreciate my limitations, enjoy the story as it unfolds, and commit to learning from the experience. Best of all, the article inspired me to incorporate "quotidian," "neologism," and "exigent" in my vocabulary at the office.

DAVE THOMPSONWilmington, Delaware

CONTINUED ON PAGE 96

More from THE V.F. MAILBAG

"There is nothing, I mean NOTHING, that makes my day more perfect than when I pull up to my house after work and see a newV.F.poking out of the mailbox." So says Elissa Leno, of New Orleans, but there are other points of view. The August issue, poking out of another mailbox, was found to have a "strong extinctionist agenda," according to Elisa Bryce, of Ottawa. "Every fashion spread had pictures of deadanimal products, from a flock of birds on page 4 to fur-trimmed Prada lapels, to Rachel Weisz apparently emerging from a dead crocodile." She further cites "the mounted white rhino head on page 38" and "the stuffed giraffe on page 117," and then signs her letter "Toodles," which in this context sounds less like a valediction than, maybe, a pet we somehow overlooked and failed to exploit as a photo prop or accessory.

"The photograph of [Steve] Ballmer at his desk says it all," writes Cathleen Casey, from Portland, Oregon. "(1) Small computer screen: large versions are so much more efficient. (2) Large, clunky, and ugly keyboard, not white or gray but dirty color in between. (3) Old-fashioned corporate phone with rows of buttons for different lines; absence of cell is huge. (4) Mouse with black, not matching, cable. (5) Standard picture frame, not current digital one. (6) Large black box in page gutter: is that an IBM logo? (7) Paper and pen ..." Then again: "I found the article on Microsoft very interesting, and hope-inspiring," writes DeVallon Bolles, of Winchester, Massachusetts. Interesting and hope-inspiring! That's nice. "My dream for years has been to see Microsoft go down, and I've felt all along it wasn't a pipe dream ..." Ah, never mind.

Grammarians' convention: Sander Fredman, from Leesburg, Virginia, points (and points) out ("Let me make it easy," "Let me make it easier") an instance where the phrase "took a decision" would have been preferable to "made a decision" (and even preferable to "had taken a decision," which after all is the pluperfect and therefore uncalled for). And Harvey Meyer, of Cambridge, Ontario, apologizes for a letter he sent V.F. in which his misuse of the word "his" made it sound as if soldiers had died not under General Eisenhower's command but under Frank Gehry's.

"I just wanted to let you know that I don't read your magazine every month," begins Simone Garcia, of Maple, Ontario. "I savor it the way a person would savor a really nice meal, slowly and deliberately." She closes with "Thank you for inspiring me, for keeping me going, and for feeding my soul." The paragraphs in between were just as agreeable—free, even, of complaints about our myriad grammar misdemeanors.

CONTINUED FROM PAGE 94

After plowing through "The Importance of Being Orwell," I tried to figure out the point Christopher Hitchens was making—the picture of George Orwell he was painting. I finally settled on the summary that (a) Orwell used his membership in the privileged class to spy on the less fortunate while holding his nose; (b) Orwell was an unrepentant, obnoxious, and self-righteous anti-Semite; and (c) Orwell is to be admired for his knack with words and for novels that he intended to be prophetic but that were really howls of indignation, consternation, and frustration. But I still believe that Hitchens would have far preferred the company of Orwell to that of, say, George Bernard Shaw.

HOSEA L. MARTINChicago, Illinois

A MAN OF PARTS

Although his portrayal of Alec Baldwin is, on balance, fairly reasonable, nevertheless it must be stated that Todd S. Purdum leaves out a good deal of who the actor really is ["Happy Landing, Mr. Baldwin," August],

As one who lives in one of Mr. Baldwin's bailiwicks (namely East Hampton, New York), I can say only that he devotes an amazing amount of time and energy—and, yes, money—in support of our local causes and organizations. He is involved with our library, the Y.M.C.A., and our arts center, Guild Hall, not to mention other philanthropic activities that impact us regular people of the East End.

It is a pity that Purdum cites Democratic consultant Hank Sheinkopf, who dismisses Mr. Baldwin's potential political prospects because "he's an entertainer, and New Yorkers have never looked to entertainers as politically serious."

Well, Mr. Baldwin is very serious, and his above-described selflessness and largesse make him a far more formidable person than the profile reveals. He has my vote.

STEVEN MORRISEast Hampton, New York

Well finally! Todd S. Purdum puts a proper and much-needed perspective on Alec Baldwin. Mr. Baldwin is clearly as acute as hell, multi-layered, complex, smart—and ripe for being bullied. On New Year's Day several years ago, I was leaving a party on West 11th Street in Manhattan. Along came Mr. Baldwin in the snow while juggling a bunch of papers. I went up to him to say how sorry I was that he had taken such a hit during the previous Sunday's episode of 60 Minutes. Yet before I could even say anything, he awkwardly and gently stuck out his hand and said, "Hi, I'm Alec." It was uttered with a humble, most unpretentious, spirited, and well-meaning—almost child-like—tone, as though we were new neighbors. The guy is honest and has class, and I think those qualities scare a lot of people into making him a target for criticism. Give Baldwin the benefit of the doubt and be happy for him. He is a true New Yorker—not merely an outstanding actor with a volatile temper.

LIZA WHERRYNew York, New York

In your article on Alec Baldwin you neglected to mention the actor's longtime involvement in animal activism and support for PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). A pescatarian, Baldwin serves as an advocate for the organization and was the M.C. of PETA'S 30thanniversary gala, at the Hollywood Palladium, in September 2010.

ELIZABETH COLLINSVancouver, British Columbia

THE EISENHOWER EFFECT

While Paul Goldberger's article about the tussling over the Eisenhower memorial in Washington was both entertaining and elucidating ["A Monumental Conflict," August], it is curious that he omitted any mention of the contemporary memorial to Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Goldberger effectively positions the dichotomy between memorial designs that incorporate the language of classicism and those that are abstract in nature—even when incorporating representational elements, as Frank Gehry's does—but there is an alternative design approach that he neglected to mention that is manifest in the F.D.R. memorial: narrative as the basis for design.

It is the story of Roosevelt's four terms in office—not classicism or straight abstraction—that drives the core design of the F.D.R. monument. For this reason alone, I find it odd that the article does not include any mention of it, if only for the sake of contrast. LORAINE FOWLOWCalgary, Alberta

...Andfrom the VF.COM LETTERBOX

Though The Dark Knight Rises premiered in July and will likely remain in theaters until Christmas, debate about Anne Hathaway's performance as Catwoman is poised to continue long after the entire franchise is rebooted, headlined by Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield, and marketed as a daring and original new take on the Batman origin story (The Incredible Story of the Bat Man, coming summer 2016).

Writing on VF.com,Vanity Fair deputy editor Bruce Handy called Hathaway "the best Catwoman ever." Handy, who admits he "never thought there would be a better Catwoman than Julie Newmar, never," writes of Hathaway, "She's flip, she's funny, and she looks great astride the bat cycle thingee. She kicks credible ass, and she doesn't overdo the cat business. She's just right."

The claws of Internet commenters came out. An overwhelming majority of responders on Facebook lauded Michelle Pfeiffer as history's greatest Catwoman, citing her favorable appearance in a leather onesie, her sinewy glamour, and her hypnotic femininity. Hathaway doesn't have "the look or the attitude Catwoman needs. Michelle Pfeiffer was the best, paws down," Kristy Lynn wrote. Points for the pun, Kristy Lynn. And, per Emma Gaffy, "Michelle embodied the role of cat woman perfectly—Anne just looked like a princess dressing up for a day."

Yet others fell into the Handy-Hathaway camp. "Her representation of Catwoman (Anne's) is the most faithful to that of the comics. Plus, she looked and performed superbly and convincingly. Catwoman was never meant to be a demented troublemaker. Sorry, Michelle Pfeiffer (doesn't mean her performance wasn't great, though)," Alexander Rivero wrote.

Other nominees for superlative Catwoman? "Eartha Kitt is the best to don the cat suit!!!," according to Jana Davenport. And Bernie Allen wrote, "There's only one true Catwoman—the weird old lady I used to live next door to."

But should the entire debate be dismissed on the basis of a technicality? On VF.com, commenter Vanquisher wrote, "Note to Author: Anne Hathaway played Selina Kyle, expert cat burglar, and not 'Catwoman.' Yeah, yeah ... Selina Kyle is Catwoman in the Batman Universe, but not in the Batman/Christopher Nolan Universe." At least there's no question about who the best nerd ever is. (It's Vanquisher.) Me-ow!

EDITOR'S NOTE: Goldbergers original article did in fact discuss the F.D.R. Memorial. The mention was cut due to space constraints.

In his article on the growing opposition to the design for the National Memorial to President Dwight D. Eisenhower, Paul Goldberger doubted whether the Eisenhower family's denunciation of Frank Gehry's deconstructionist plan should matter at all.

In 1964 the Roosevelt family condemned the modernist design for the F.D.R. Memorial, which was the work of one of the country's leading architecture firms. Speaking for his family, the president's eldest son said about the proposed monument, "We don't like it, and I'm sure father wouldn't either." That was enough to kill it; the architects had the good grace to withdraw their plan.

Likewise, there is no doubt that Eisenhower, who was famous for his modesty, would have hated Gehry's grandiose avantgarde design. Disdaining modern art and architecture, which he did not believe represented the taste of the American people, the president said in 1962, "We see our very art forms so changed that we seem to have forgotten the works of Michelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci_What has hap-

pened to our concept of beauty and decency and morality?"

Goldberger also makes a telling omission. Despite the thousands of words in his article, he does not defend Gehry's design. Instead, he merely defends the architect. Whether or not Gehry should gracefully heed the Eisenhower family's fierce opposition, not to mention the president's own taste in art, he should listen to what his friends are saying—or pointedly are not.

JUSTIN SHUBOWPresident and chairman The National Civic Art Society Washington, D.C.

LIFE ON THE BATTLEFIELD

Fortunately regret does not often surface in my life, although it certainly did after reading your amazing article on the war reporter Marie Colvin ["Marie Colvin's Private War," by Marie Brenner, August], The remorse was attended by my questioning whether I had been living in a cave for the last few decades: how was I not aware of Colvin and her selfless work? I wish only that I had known about her—her stories, her sacrifices—'while she was alive. Learning of her death had an even deeper impact on me, as she was killed at the same time some dear friends of mine were at long last able to move their parents out of their home in Syria, bringing them safely to the United States. Colvin touched many people while she was alive. And now that she is dead, we are left to realize our great loss.

M. L. KRISTIANLos Angeles, California

Having been both a Marine pilot flying combat missions in Vietnam out of Da Nang and a soldier on board an active battleship, I, along with my squadron-mates, was able to distinguish between the real war correspondents, who were working in the field (the minority), and the officer-club reporters (the majority), who got their stories hanging around saloons talking to aviators. We had great respect for the former lot, a group that included people such as Marie Colvin; they actually spent time with the troops in combat. And in return we gave to those brave reporters our time, helping them hie better stories back home. To the others, we gave nothing but scorn, bogus intelligence, and the bum's rush when they tried to buddy up at the bar.

History's most courageous journalists—Colvin, Christiane Amanpour, and my all-time favorite, Dickey Chapelle, to name only a few—established a standard of war reporting that is difficult for a runof-the-mill correspondent to reach. And it is no accident that two of the three writers I've mentioned are now dead. I salute them and their fellow brave, dedicated reporters and photographers who put themselves in harm's way in the name of truth.

MAJOR BUD JONES, U.S.M.C. (RETIRED)Park Ridge, Illinois

LOULOU ORTOO-TOO?

I have just finished reading A. A. Gill's latest piece on the phenomenon that is the members' club Loulou's ["Life Begins at 8:30," August], The prose was beautiful, and the pictures [by Jonathan Becker] offered enticing glimpses into the world of the Other Half.

That being said, it strikes me as slightly obscene to venerate a place that is itself a symbol of all that is wrong in society. The riots in London last year brought sharply into focus the deep division between the city's rich and poor—a divide that continues to widen. I am sure that Loulou's glossy patrons are having a terrific time, and even more so because the great unwashed are prevented from walking down the same corridors. This causes me to believe that the rich—or, in the author's words, "the abiding, amused oligarchs of old England"—are clinging desperately to any island of exclusivity and blissful ignorance in this harsh world. And I find it strange that this kind of old-world order is presented as something to which one should aspire.

AMY MCGRATHEpping, England

NORSE CODE

Like A. A. Gill, I have been wondering why all things Scandinavian seem so de rigueur today ["Nordic Exposure," August], Unlike A. A. Gill, however, I am Norwegian, so one might think I would have some inkling. When he writes that Scandinavia is held up as "the paragon of a decent, evolved society," I think he gets close to the correct answer. For who among us would not ultimately want to be seen as decent and evolved? Whenever my English husband assembles yet another piece of uncomfortable Ikea furniture, he is tapping into just those virtues. I, however, am comfortable in my smug Nordic skin and am therefore content to saunter off for a cup of coffee while my husband pores over yet another set of impossible assembly instructions.

JUEIE AEBREKTSENLondon, England

It would seem the intent of the article was to whimsically reflect on the growing cultural exports from Scandinavia appearing in U.S. markets. Instead, sentence after sentence seemed to be condescending stereotype thinly veiled as humor. I have no Nordic heritage, connections, or sympathies for Scandinavia—and I certainly don't approve of Ikea's popularity—but was offended nonetheless.

In addition, the characterization of a sensible, though conformist and boring, welfare society versus a freewheeling, warm, and fun (not to mention glamorous) Southern European or U.S. society is not only hastily constructed and necessarily inaccurate but downright tawdry. If this was the meat on the article's "whimsical" bones, it was an entirely dissatisfying meal.

SEAN McCARRONLos Angeles, California

Letters to the editor should be sent electronically with the writer's name, address, and daytime phone number to letters@vf.com. All requests for back issues should be sent to subscriptions@vf.com. All other queries should be sent to vfmail@vf.com. The magazine reserves the right to edit submissions, which may be published or otherwise used in any medium. All submissions become the property of Vanity Fair.