Kathleen Battle

* “Brava” to The Times for publishing the perceptive commentary by Michelle Krisel concerning Kathleen Battle’s dismissal from the Metropolitan Opera (Feb. 21). Opera lovers such as myself were dismayed and bewildered by the news accounts of the career setback sustained by this fine artist. Krisel’s penetrating yet compassionate analysis is the only account I have read that makes clear the circumstances that led to this saddening event.

PAUL KEMPF

Los Angeles

* I found Krisel’s hatchet job on Battle to be presumptuous, poorly informed, spiteful and rude. It’s easy to see why someone like Krisel, a business person, would be unable to understand the temperament of a dedicated artist like Battle. Or how Krisel might fail to fathom the degree to which ambience and atmosphere weigh on an artist’s performance, making her sensitive and demanding. But making jokes about someone’s name, as Krisel did with her “Battle-Ax” crack, is the lowest form of sophomoric insult, and reveals the vindictiveness behind Krisel’s article.

Krisel lays the phony sentiment on pretty thick while telling us of how sorry she is that Battle’s “sudden stardom” (20 years is sudden?) has ill-prepared her for the demands of the Met. She then goes on to whine about how sad she is to find that an “Olympian” like Battle could be petty. Who cares what Battle (or Krisel, for that matter) does offstage? We love Battle for her dedication to art, her flawlessly professional performances, her keen insight and intuition, and her enormous talent. What facts about Battle has Krisel offered that could discredit any of these?

DON DORNON

Davis