Sir, - In response to the letters of Brian Kennedy, Shirley Fletcher, Mark Beevers and the comments made by Spectator in recent weeks about the Saltburn sculptures, I feel that what is being discussed is taste, and never can two people agree on what is to their taste, be it food, clothing or the colour of window frames.

I know friends of mine cannot bear the colour of my kitchen walls, and in turn I could not live with the sentimental china figures that adorn their mantelpiece. All this is taste and informs how we are to a wider world.

This discussion about the sculptures made for Saltburn has been presented as a discussion about good and bad art but in truth it comes down to taste. We live in interesting artistic times, when Chris Offili's paintings with elephant dung on the canvas surface, and Damien Hirst's sculptures of preserved cows in tanks of formaldehyde win the Turner prize, and Tracy Emin's sexually explicit autobiographical works are widely exhibited and shown on TV. All these are establishment art.

Michael Johnson and I have undertaken, between us., 96 commissions for publicly-sited artwork from Lambeth and Tower Hill in London to the castle in Edinburgh.

The most local works to you are along the coast of County Durham, where Michael Johnson was the lead artist for the coastal regeneration which resulted in the installation of more than 60 individual pieces of work from Hartlepool to Seaham.

A sculpture similar to the one I have made of Henry Pease stands outside the Theatre Royal in Nottingham. Every commission we undertake is different as we research the sites and develop the design for the artwork from the results of this work. We have made the sculptures the way we have as a result of our research and the brilliant collaboration with the writer, William Mayne.

At present the sculptures stand in our yard and are commented on by everyone who comes into it. The materials are robust and beautiful and the forms result in a string of questions. They stand there as a splendid advertisement of what we do.

HILARY CARTMEL

Cartmel Johnson Sculptors

Styrrup,

Doncaster.

Too demotic?

Sir, - It is obvious that Mr William Mayne (D&S, August 31) has some close link with Saltburn Improvement Company's "statues," although he has, as yet, not revealed the full extent of that involvement.

He does, however, share, with Saltburn Improvement Company, an overweening contempt for the views of others, dismissing letters from other correspondents as needing no comment - despite having already commented on them - and dismissing the exemplary, even-handed commentary by Spectator (August 17) as vapid - a curious choice of word.

He hopes, if the "statues" are erected, "they will then be understood", implying that those who object to those "statues," on any ground, are simply lacking in understanding - unlike, presumably, Mr Mayne and his ilk.

That is nonsense.

No amount of explanation will ever change a five-pronged instrument into a spade, nor undemocratic procedures into democracy, nor rubbish into art.

I wonder if Mr Mayne would ever be able to accept that residents of Saltburn do not welcome their considered views being totally disregarded - or would that be too much of a culture shock for him - too "demotic" perhaps?

BRIAN KENNEDY

Gill Street,

Saltburn-by-the-Sea.

Peta out to poison

Sir, - I am not a member of the Countryside Alliance, but I am appalled by the letter (D&S, Sept 7) from Bruce G Friedric of the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta).

It may have started with good intentions, though Ingrid Newkirk, a co-founder of Peta, is quoted as saying: "even if animals research resulted in a cure of Aids, Peta would be against it". A director, Alex Pacheco, said: "arson, property destruction, burglary and theft are 'acceptable crimes' when used for the animal cause".

So it seems that we have here a small bunch of fanatics who, armed somehow with a fortune in dollars, want to throw their weight about in Britain. They aim to impress those who are gullible. They think if something is printed often enough it is factual. They tried it on in America, and failed.

They now think they can get free publicity by making outrageous statements and they succeed, because there are gullible TV programme directors and, sorry to say, editors or journalists.

Last week, they issued packs of playing cards to children, purporting that dairy products were bad for health (they previously urged students to drink beer instead of milk). They were soon disabused, but the scientific evidence in favour of dairy products did not get the same publicity.

They want to ban angling because fish feel pain when hooked, alleging that "the scientific concensus is absolutely unanimous" on this. This, of course, is nonsense. After the Medway report in 1980 first raised the question, a thorough investigation was carried out by a scientific group which undertook a detailed research also consulting both British and American papers.

They concluded that fish do not feel pain as understood by human beings. More recently, the subject was again researched in depth, by the independent Institute of Fisheries Ecology which arrived at the same conclusion.

Peta's attack both on dairy products and angling is directed particularly at children. They are trying to poison the mind of future generations by their untruths. It is time the media stamped on them.

COLIN DAVIES

Brompton,

Northallerton.