January 2, 2004

I read the responses before writing this and have to say that they all have good points. My slant is that you are probably right. If not, be prepared to someday defend yourself against libel/slander. Given that none of the ADM parties deign you or your expose with a response is very interesting. Are they laying in wait or unable to refute the charges? While their silence may be "taking the high road", I find that their unwillingness to discuss you, your magazine or your charges very disturbing. If what you say is true, perhaps they are embarrassed that they lost complete control and now are trying to save face?

What do you want as an end result? A museum? Zilka banished? All of the above? The current ADM leadership is a closed society. [I was asked] to join the museum and I politely said I'd look into it. There is no reason to be a member. The publications are sporadic and amateurish. The Dinerama concept is nice, but has fallen by the way(side). They certainly are not lobbyists for diner owners. The website/Yahoo group is censored (yes, you are not the only one who doesn't get his posts in). I will give my money when there is value to be found, much like a diner.

I firmly disagree with the viewpoint expressed by one responder that these politics detract from the nostalgic essence of Americana. What passive poppycock. Should the best-informed of people in this field sit around on their rears, appreciating nostalgia, while demolition of diners, signage, and the like continues? And who better to take action on these causes than someone like yourself, who is well-informed, networked, and has access to publication?

That said, the stridency of some criticisms has made me uncomfortable at times, and perhaps that is what is bothering the above reader. Recall the editorial guidelines in Roadside? If you can't say anything good about a diner, don't say anything at all or something along those lines -- unfortunately, this adage doesn't always seem to apply when it comes to PEOPLE in the roadside field. And what usually happens when we talk badly about someone else is that it makes US look pedantic and hostile, and the other party comes up smelling like roses. I think that goes for many of us in the roadside community.

Like anything in life, sometimes it's not always what we say, but the WAY we say it. So, regarding the Diner Museum (and other similar issues), maybe a less personal and more moderated level of argument could help. The tone of some editorials on the subject has become obsessive, esoteric, and strident and will likely turn the uninitiated off. A suggestion might be to do more work within your network of closer contacts. The magazine and website could then be used, as needed, to announce objective developments and updates and provide contact info for people who want to help or learn more.

I guess I can throw in my two cents! Because I don't know any of the parties involved, perhaps I can be somewhat objective. On the other hand, I don't have any inside information, so I may be off the mark. Basically I am a casual observer who has given some thought to the issue.

I've learned the hard way that almost every issue has murky, gray areas. Unfortunately (in terms of winning debate points) , there are always two sides to every story. It often boils down to a close judgment call.

For example, when I first subscribed to your old magazine, I only got one issue before it stopped publishing. I never got a refund. I know that is no fault of yours - the problems with you and the publisher were complicated. Nevertheless, from my narrow perspective (and narrower wallet!), I got "ripped off." That is why I've been reluctant to subscribe now. I didn't want to get stung by an unseen bee again!   

I mention this only to illustrate the point that Daniel may have a different point of view or a different way of seeing the world. I do not know him, and have only spoken to him twice. The first time was when I was working on my Old Route 7 book, and the second time was right before he left to donate a kidney to a relative.  I remember thinking later, he must be a wonderful person to do such a thing.

Your reports about Daniel and the museum have been fascinating, but I must admit that I winced at their toughness. I remember thinking that you were either very courageous, or somewhat heartless to take such a stand. Since I don't know you, I didn't come to a conclusion. I think that monitoring the status of the museum is a good thing. But to the extent possible, try not to let it sound too personal. Look within and make sure you have no axe to grind. Ultimately, I think that you both have the same goals - to preserve diner history. I'm sure there is a right way and a wrong way to do this. But chances are, the efforts of only a few people with small budget will be quite limited. Maybe Daniel needs to reexamine his priorities with clients, I really don't know. But to the extent that you can point out the concerns you have -- with diplomacy and objectivity -- the greater the possibility that he and the museum folks will listen to your concerns. They probably won't be receptive to your criticisms and suggestions if they are offered in a mean or hurtful manner. 

You are obviously dedicated to the preservation of roadside history. To the extent that you can point Daniel in the direction you think is correct, without rancor,  I think you and the "movement" will be better off. 

I agree with you about the preservation aspects of significant architecture in the US and would include diners. I belong to a Frank Lloyd Wright house site organization and also the Route 66 organization. Proper preservation and advocacy are high on these organizations list. When I was in Providence, RI several years ago I was disappointed to see the state of the so-called museum and as I understand it there has been no progress since then. So I appreciate your efforts in this area.

GRRRRRRRRRR...my blood's a boiling.  I am outraged at the conduct of Mr. Zilka and the endangerment of diner history and artifacts. I believe the investigation of the American Diner Museum and its director, Daniel Zilka, is worth the effort.  I hope you will take your findings to the appropriate State authorities so they can conduct an investigation and bring charges against Mr. Zilka.

I'd say if you have factual data to back up your concerns about Zilka and the diner museum (and I'm sure you do), you should continue to speak out on the issue.

I think that an expose is of the museum is important, but I worry that anything you do will not be viewed on a scholarly/research level, but rather as someone with an axe to grind. As you said, the topic of preservation is controversial, and you sir, tend to be a controversial figure, for better or worse. I'm concerned that you could present (as you have) loads of information documenting infractions, but it doesn't have the credibility necessary because for whatever reasons, you are not perceived as being impartial.

There are a couple of things you can do. First, (and I suspect you're doing this with the poll), is make some alliances. If you can get either the board, membership or even interested laymen on your side, you demonstrate that it's not just you out to nail Zilka - the battle of the diner geeks. Secondly, do a little research into other small museums/non-profits and find out how long it took them to get up and running - funding, cataloging, etc. to see if what the museum is (or isn't) doing is along the norm. It may be as easy as just contacting some of the other participants in the Heritage Harbor to see what they've been up to.

This sort of advocacy is definitely worth it. Many organizations have problems that need addressing, and charities especially, since they tend to start from the eccentric passion of someone whose then using other people's money. What the Diner Museum needs is someone like you, of which there's unfortunately only one. The difference between your magazine and the museum is that people can just quit if you don't deliver. (I recently renewed my subscription because you've proven for years that even with an occassional delay you're still the only one delivering this information.) With the museum, it can piddle along for years with no one privy to how poorly its doing. Keep it up. Positive suggestions for replacement people and a business plan are helpful ways to dispel the notion that it's a personal hatchet job you're interested in.

Randy, I've read your columns on the subject, but my question has always been, "who are you trying to reach?" "what action are you asking for?" Okay, so if I believe you that the guy is incompetent, in over his head, and maybe even crooked, then so what? What am I supposed to do about that?

If you're going to do something, find the injured parties (the donors I guess who have trusted him) and get a lawyer and sue his ass. Standing on a corner and pointing reminds me of those labor union "demonstrations" with two bored-looking guys outside the parking lot of some office building, holding hand-lettered signs that say "Conglomerated Conglomerates Violates Fair Labor Practices -- United Union #12" So frikkin what? It's not a picket line, they'd tell me, it's "informational" -- so what the hell is someone supposed to do about it? You got a plan? You got a goal? Speak up! Spit it out! What's the deal???

I think if you don't keep on top of that museum situation, nobody else will--important historical materials are at stake, and I admire your energy & righteousness.

Your politics detract from the nostalgic essence of Americana.

Having read all the dirt you dug up on the Museum, I'm inclined to believe that some of it is true. That said, I don't consider it a totally objective report. The personal slant is obvious and does not help its credibility.

Whether or not the musueum ever opens will not stop Walmart from raping and pillaging my local neighborhood. They are planning on opening a new store 1/2 mile from my home. Their master plan includes taking property from some of my neighbors' homes to widen a road to 4 lanes. The Target 1 mile away was not enough and now the seed has been planted for another generation of smock-clad, disinterested, low-wage workers.

It will not stop the local diner from being demolished so we can have an Eckerd Drug store as well as a Rite Aid and Walgreens adjacent to each other.

These are the real issues I appreciate hearing about. I don't think an exhaustive invesitgation of the "evildoers" in Rhode Island is going to change the world.