We don't even know where to start. We know, Mr. Nevius, that the pressures of coming up with something new to complain about, analyze, or denigrate three times a week for your opinion column must be daunting. And we know that your wife and/or your fans probably tell you to be more positive, write about something inspiring for a change, and stop just being the voice of the grumpy old man with somewhat traditional values who likes to play devil's advocate in San Francisco's bubble of political correctness, liberalism, NIMBYism, and compassion for the indigent. And perhaps during the past week of joyous, post-election celebration, you just wanted to keep with positive themes. But really, Chuck? Really? Another column about your favorite "dapper" shoeshine guy, Larry Moore, who may or may not have a persistent pill addiction and who has once again benefitted from your spotlight to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars in donations? This is the third column in two weeks, and about the tenth in the past few years, and we truly question the depth of your sincerity here as you create this popular character whom readers from the outer Bay Area now love to throw money at.
You may say it's cynical of us even to question the inherent good of a downtrodden individual who makes a scant living shining shoes benefitting from a journalist's attention and getting a much deserved nest egg, and a boost toward a better living situation. And, honestly, it's wonderful that you were able to give that to him. (For the third time in three years.) But we'd argue that your intent focus on, and exploitation of, this particular man over time is more cynical. For one, you're capitalizing on the fact that the public likes a feel-good story about the homeless, since the subject itself is inescapably depressing. You want to cast Larry as a homeless (or housing-challenged) addict who's made good, who works hard each day, who wears a tie, and who deserves public sympathy and support especially after one of his shoeshine chairs got torched by Giants fan hoodlums.
In reality, no one can say that he won't end up cycling back through another low period, addiction-wise, just like all his other brothers and sisters of the Tenderloin SRO community. We'd say it's cynical of you to cast him as special, and hold him up before your readers as someone more deserving than any of those other people of their financial help. Just think what you could do for the homeless community at large if you actually believed in any of the local charities that serve them, found a story inside one of our local shelters to serve as a poignant microcosm, and instead of encouraging your loyal readers to write checks to one individual, they instead wrote checks that helped the community. If you weren't so turned off by the idea that many of these people are ill, hopelessly addicted, or dabbling in petty crime, we could see your column having some incredible power. We're not saying, necessarily, that your readers' money will be wasted on Larry you're quick to point out in today's column that Larry's friend and lawyer Loren Lopin is allegedly overseeing Larry's bank account and keeping tabs on his behavior. "Hopefully," you write, "the money will help move him into a safe and more secure location. He hopes to find a place where he could pay rent in advance." But, both you and Larry admit that when you did this exact thing for him two years ago, getting an outpouring of financial help from your readership after writing about Larry's back surgery, it only helped him back into a pain-pill addiction. By convincing your Pinole and Peninsula readers that Larry's work ethic and heart of gold make him more deserving than the average panhandling drunk, you're only playing into the Republican, pull-yourself-up-by-your-bootstraps mythology that impacts funding for homeless programs nationwide. Maybe Larry actually needs to be in a rigorous recovery program, and face some deeper demons than you're willing to delve into. But you'd rather just float this story out there with an air of vague hope, concluding, "With support like that, how can this fail?"
Does Larry deserve another chance? Absolutely. But are we satisfied that your obsession with him, and repeated use of him as a column subject, comes from a place of pure compassion and not from a desire to play on easy sympathies and frame the homeless debate in your own, reductive way? Absolutely not.
Previously: Somebody Needs to Find Nevius a New Homeless Person to Sponsor
Another Casualty of World Series Vandalism: Shoeshine Guy's Chair
