Printer Friendly

Email to A Friend

Friday January 19, 2007

Letters

‘Range of emotions’

Joe Eskenazi’s Jan. 12 articles on Homewood Terrace opened a range of emotions for me since, after the death of our parents, my brother, Walter Halperin, and I spent four years there starting in 1938 when I was 7 and my brother 6.

The three personal stories made me realize that we had been “fortunate,” because he and I were placed together in Cottage 42, where we provided emotional support for each other and where every effort had been made to make these cottages as home-like as possible.

Melvin Shero is correct in that “grief counseling (for children) didn’t exist” at Homewood Terrace or in that era.

Children are resilient, and when we left in 1942 to live with relatives in Connecticut, who adopted us, we had become very mature, self-sufficient children. This is not to imply that we haven’t had to deal with the emotional trauma of our early circumstances for the remainder of our lives.

It would be a worthwhile sociological study to follow up on those Homewood Terrace alumni still living regarding the “benefits” of an orphanage vs. foster care.

We eventually led stable lives, he as a college professor and I as an elementary school teacher.

Elaine Gould | San Jose

‘Special meaning’

I remember the summer of 1956. I worked as a recreation assistant at Homewood Terrace (Jan. 12 j.). I was engaged to marry my future husband, who grew up there due to difficulties in his family. We were both undergraduates at U.C. Berkeley. 

I remember the Ballin brothers. They were cute and fun loving, and it seemed like everyone there loved them. But there was sadness in all of the children as well because of not being with their families. 

I wrote a paper about the cottage plan for my social welfare class. It was not ideal, but it was more tuned in to the children’s needs than the old system of an orphan asylum. 

Many of the alumni have thrived and done well. Many have not. 

We were married the following summer at the small synagogue at Homewood Terrace because of the special meaning that place had for both of us.

Mae Bragen | Bay Point

‘Pleasure, sorrow’

I read your Jan. 12 stories of Homewood Terrace with great pleasure and sorrow — pleasure because it brought back many memories, and sorrow because it changed so much since I had lived there from 1942 to 1946.

I was a refugee from Austria, and my experiences in the Home were good for the most part, although I had my share of troubles.

Psychological help was available, but not for dealing with the trauma of separation from parents.

I have written about my experiences in “War Orphan in San Francisco: Letters Link a Family Scattered by World War II” (Stevens Creek Press, 2005, www.stevenscreekpress.com). Dan Pine interviewed me for your paper in December 2005.

I am happy to report that my life turned out well, that I achieved higher education, became a college instructor, and, now, an author.

Many of the things available to us — the possibility of working for spending money, going to good schools, having good medical and dental care — were often not available to poor children not living at the Home.

I speak about my experiences at schools and other venues, and people are often surprised by the good life I had at the Home.

Phyllis Mattson (nee Finkel) | Cupertino

Apex of naiveté

Ann Cohen’s letter of outrage shows naiveté at its peak. The Orthodox rabbis who appeared in Ahmadinejad’s conference in Iran did not participate out of their own volition but rather out of fear for their lives, their families and the few remaining Jews in Iran.

In order to give credibility to the conference, Ahmadinejad forced those rabbis to attend in order to legitimize the idea of the Holocaust being a hoax.

As an Egyptian Jew who lived during Nasser’s time, I am aware of the ploys those tyrants often use to reinforce a disgusting idea and help spread its merits around the world.

Rather than outrage, please feel sorry for them. I am sure their hearts were bleeding not only during their attendance but also for many, many weeks afterwards.

Henry Mourad | Los Altos

Crossing the line

Our Jewish community is a diverse one and includes different political opinions on every possible topic, and we embrace them all. However, there must be a line one must draw, and that should not be allowed to be crossed.

I believe the so-called Jews who chose to attend the Iranian-sponsored conference on the Holocaust have crossed that line. 

We condemn, and rightfully so, the non-Jewish participants as anti-Semitic.

How should we address Jews who found it appropriate to support the denial of the Holocaust and to join those who call for the destruction of the state of Israel and the implied new genocide?

I am extremely disappointed by the lack of response by the Israeli government and the organized Jewish community.

I would expect a stronger reaction of all of us to the “Jewish” participations in Teheran. More than that, I would expect both the Israeli government and the Jewish community to take action against them.

Israel should revoke any visas to Israel these people have, and should deny them entry to the country in the future. Jewish communities all over the world should publicly denounce them and declare it severs any ties with them.

Reuven Segev | San Rafael

‘Morally wrong’

Regarding “Making A Case For A Larger Israel,” a view by David Naggar in the Jan. 12 j., his argument that Israel needs to be larger is similar to imperial Japan’s argument in WWII that it needed more land.

The idea that Jewish people are entitled to the land, but the Palestinians are not entitled to any, is morally wrong.

Israel’s destruction of the homes, farms and businesses of Palestinians along with the wall inside Palestinian territory, and its refusal — with U.S. support — to accept a contiguous Palestinian state is creating more anti-Semitism and making more enemies for Israel and the United States in the Middle East.

The United States needs to move to a more evenhanded policy that will bring the Israelis and the Palestinians together to a peaceful settlement. In Israel, there is much more debate on this matter than there is among Jews and everyone else in this country.

Walter Ballin | Chico

An insult

I recently read on your Web site an article using the phrase “Polish concentration camps.”

Concentration camps were set up on Polish soil by the Nazi-German occupation forces and administered by Hitler’s SS. Thousands of Poles also died in those camps (my grandfather died in November 1944).

To say that the camps were “Polish concentration camps” is an insult to their memory and slander against Poland and the Polish nation, which had suffered enormously in WWII and whose forces fought valiantly side by side with the Allies against the Germans.

Andrzej Chodorowski | Krakow, Poland

Did you find this article interesting? Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and you'll be notified each week when "J." goes online. We'll tell you about the most important stories of the week and give you a link to each one.

This page contains a BETA version of Amazon contextual links. They are marked by the dashed underline.  Your purchases support our site. At times they point to items which are not related to the actual link. Please alert us by email if you discover objectionable links.