tic ' on Kati
Seventy-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
-- UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
Where poW At - 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MicH. NEWS PHoNE: 764-0552
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
SATURDAY, JUNE 10, 1967 NIGHT EDITOR: WALTER SHAPIRO
School Board Election:
Defeat the Reactionaries
WE ARE DEEPLY concerned about students more adequately, and the need
Monday's (city school board elec- for racially balanced schools.
tion and feel that the importance of The seventh candidate, James Wan-
the race requires that we take a stand. zeck, stands roughly in the middle. Un-
Seven candidates are trunning for like the other candidates, he has not
three vacancies on the School Board. taken an adamant position on any of
Though none of the candidates agree the issues involved in the campaign.
totally on all the issues, they appear
to be aligned into two ideological WE FEEL that the election of John-
camps-those who merely criticize the son, Curby and Lewis-all of whom
board for its past actions and those oppose the millage increase designed to
who feel that the board can be mold- raise teachers' salaries and do not rec-
ed into an effective organization. ognize de facto segregation of the
One of the candidates, Paul Johnson, schools as an issue--would be disas-
a former City Council member, is an trous to the city as a whole. Similarly,
avowed member of the John Birch if any one of theme were elected, God-
Society. He and two other candidates, frey would have someone to back him
Robert E. Curby and Clark Lewis, have in his fight against the progressive
received the support of present board policies of the board, and it would be-
member William C. Godfrey, an out- come so muddled in controversy as to
spoken critic of the board's policies on be totally ineffective.
racial imbalance in the schools and Thus, we feel that in the interest
the cost of the new Huron High. Th ,eeping thadnfhomtrint
Three of the remaining four candi- of keeping the board from takig a
dates are also running on a "ticket." huge step backward we must endorse
CaresGordasephnnngT.n A. e.and Good, Lee and Craine. The other four
Charles Good, Joseph T. A. Lee, and --Johnson, Curby, Lewis and Wanzecks
Mrs. Asho I. Craine have received the-
support of an ad hoc "Committee to we find totally unacceptable.
Elect Good, Lee and Craine." While -DAVID DUBOFF
neither the candidates nor the com- -JILL CRABTREE
mittee supporting them take a similar -ANN MUNSTER
stand on all questions, they appear to -STEPHEN FIRSHEIN
be much more realistic in their atti- Co-Editor
tudes toward federal aid to education, -LAURENCE MEDOW
the need to train non-college bound Co-Editor
,r,.
*'.r.
Y~i {{y'tf' yr t '
*~""l
S [ r"0
Why Not Initiate
A Student Tribunal?
.1
,, , t
.. } P d4 -fit.
t-k l *
8717.L %u
FALCOtNElK
Letters to- the Editor
Questioning Theatre Critique
Nation's Capital
Needs Home Rule
ANN ARBOR has a population of about
50,000. Its citizens are represented 'by
a mayor and city council, representatives
to the state Legislature, Congressman
Esch, Senators Hart and Griffith, and
Governor Romney. Washington, D.C., has
a population of one million. Its citizens
aren't represented at all.
Last week, President Johnson proposed
a reorganization of the District of Co-
lumbia government, effective within 14
days unless Congress specifically blocked
it. The plan, which among other things,
calls for reducing the number of Presi-
dent-appointed D.C. commissioners from
three to one, is of itself relatively unim-
portant, chiefly because congressional re-
action seems likely to kill it before the
week is out. Several members of the House
District Committee have already express-
ed their disapproval, not of the plan itself
(in fact, most of them seem to favor it),
but of the President's attempt to accom-
plish by executive order what most con-
gressmen feel is a strictly legislative
function. And even should the proposal be
reintr9duced in the form of a bill, it is
unlikely that action would be taken be-
fore the legendary Washington August
drives the Congress to the more moder-
ate climes of their home districts.
THE WASHINGTON beneath what the
tourist sees is a complex city of con-
trasts. It is European in design, American
in problems, cosmopolitan in outlook. Its
museums, art galleries and zoo are world-
renowned, but its schools are among the
worst in the country, and its transit sys-
tem and downtown parking facilities are
insufficient. The crime rate is phenom-
enally high for a city its size, and while
the suburbs include the richest outside
of Long Island and Westchester in New
York, the poverty of its slums-many of
them in the very shadow of the Capitol-
is comparable to that of the ghettos of
New York, Detroit, or Chicago. It is on
the border between North and South and
its Negro citizens-60 per cent of the pop-
ulation-find themselves caught between
both varieties of race prejudice. The love-
ly Rock Creek Park runs through the en-
tire town, but nothing has ever been
done to alleviate the pollution of both the
creek and the river it flows into-the
Potomac. Many of these problems are di-
rectly related to the city's shabby treat-
ment at the hands of Congress. Of course,
home rule would not solve all of its prob-
trict of Columbia. We (the sentiment in
Washington is nearly unanimous) want
not only a mayor and city council, but
representation in the Congress around
whose action our city's life revolves. The
District of Columbia has a larger popu-
lation than eight states, and has an equal
claim to the two senators and two con-
gressmen which its population deserves.
There is a popular myth in the country
at large that D.C. residents pay no taxes.
This is patently untrue. "Taxation with-
out representation" may be a trite battle
cry, but unfortunately it is still valid.
It has even been suggested that the case
of the District of Columbia be brought
before the UN for settlement, like that of
other colonial territories.
It is slightly ridiculous that Congress
after Congress makes such an issue of
denying. Washingtonians their basic
rights as Americans, but the issue isstied
up with many of the ancient traditions of
that august body. District of Columbia
committee posts in both houses are un-
popular, and are usually relegated to
freshmen lawmakers. For any congress-
man from outside Maryland's Fifth or
Eighth, or Virginia's Tenth Congressional
Districts, undue attention of D.C. affairs
means political suicide. Constituents from
say, rural South-Carolina, want their
congressman to represent them, not a
lot of northern "nigrahs." This points
up another important facet of the Dis-
trict's "representation" in Congress. The
key House District of Columbia Commit-
tee operates, like other congressional com-
mittees, on seniority, and southerners
from "safe" rural districts tend to gravi-
tate toward the high places. Self-govern-
ment for Washington, the city with the
highest percentage Negro population in
the country? To the minds of many of
the committee members, a Negro mayor
would be the worst possible evil to in-
flict on the nation's capital. And so
the blundering congressional control con-
tinues.
WE MUST, in all fairness, realize that
there are many valid legal problems
to be overcome before the District of
Columbia could achieve representative
government. A constitutional amendment
would be in order. So would a revision of
the infamous Hatch Act, which forbids
partisan political activity by civil serv-
ants. Finally, a system of federal sup-
port in lieu of real estate taxes (the most
valuable property in the city is govern-
Mr. Andrew Lugg's argument for
"A New Theatre for Ann Arbor"
(June 7) loses whatever force it
might have had as a humble sug-
gestion by condemning all forms
of present, non-experimental the-
atre as "institutionalized academic
theatre," "technological theatre,"
and "Broadway stereotypes." He
speaks knowingly of experimental
theatre groups, like the Brook-
Marowitz 'Theatre of Cruelty,"
and of new, "more relevant" Amer-
ican playwrights, like Claude van
Italie, Ronald Tavel, "and the
rest," presuming mightily that
such sketchy allusion to these
uncommon entities will help car-
ry his appeal.
What Mr. Lugg seems not to
realize about the American the-
atre-going public (and perhaps
any such public), in Ann Arbor
or on Broadway, is that they
simply do not go to the theatre
for the same reasons he does. And
this large, vague fact owes its ex-
istence to essentially the same
fault in the American system
of cultural education as in Mr.
Lugg's partially reasoned exhorta-
tion: that is, the esoteric and ob-
scure kind of half-explanation,
half-apologia which the academ-
ians and pseudo-intellectual crit-
ics offer the plain public by way
of invitation to a given play or
;laywright.
SIMPLY STATED, Mr. Lugg's
article, like so many reviews.
treatises, and "Tulane Drama Re-
view" tracts, would frighten away
even the most determinedly open-
minded, and average, Ann Arbor
resident who "likes to go to the
theatre" (this includes students).
Why? Because the writer takes no
pains to conceal his presumption
of a special "inside" connection to
the heart and vitality of thei
theatre; because he addresses him-
self all too obviously to a select
number of would-be theatre sav-
ants, who, he hopes, will applaud
him as their banner bearer. He
confirms the ordinary playgoer
in his suspicion that anything
created, argued, or praised by an
"intellectual" will be beyond his
comprehension, thus unenjoyable
-a suspicion created largely by
the popular academic notion that
art and entertainment are anti-
thetical.
You can't persuade the com-
placent, paying citizen to patron-
ize an innovational form of enter-
tainment by setting your own in-
telligence above his, nor by im-
pugning his taste for those fa-
miliar "Broadway stereotypes,"
diversionshe's been forced into
enjoying by critics who tell him
that the really valid theatre is,
in effect, too profound for him.
Doesn't Mr. Lugg remember the
time when he was afraid to com-
ment on a play's presentation be-
cause he didn't "know" the play
as thoroughly as his inquiring fel-
lows?
THERE IS, furthermore, a dou-
ble flaw in the logic of his appeal
for a new theatre in Ann Arbor:
first, it presumes, quite unjustly,
the playwright is not good enough,
or the director/producer has been
unfaithful to the playwright, or
something extrinsic to the play-
in-performance has confused the
ordinary spectator about his rea-
son for being in the theatre-or
all of the above.
Furthermore, if the purist com-
plains about the average theatre-
goer saying as he leaves "The
Playboy of the Western World,"
for instance: "I didn't understand
what it meant," the remedy lies
not in instituting experimental
theatre the next day, but in con-
veying to that normal innocent
(who is probably feeling stupid,
too) ,the assurance that his fail-
ure to "understand" the play is
at least 50 per cent attributable
to someone else.
IN THAT "someone else" group
might well be an Andrew Lugg,
who implies that the academic
producers in Ann Arbor are con-
spiring with playwrights to pre-
vent the theatre from being "dy-
namic" or "relevant." He himself
may feel, quite justifiably, un-
satisfied by the "regular theatre
fare," due to his own long ex-
posure to traditional forms of
drama. Let the mystified ticket
buyer decide for himself, then,
whether or not he'll attend an-
other "theatre museum" piece;
and let Mr. Lugg produce his ex-
perimental "Oedipus Rex" in Can-
terbury House.
But, please, let us not have
another dissociated and peremp-
tory voice pronouncing "culture
monger" on those who, with gen-
ius or temerity, attempt to pro-
duce the "old masters" in accord-
ance with the existent texts, and
who prefer the good playwright's
intentions to those of a director
who thinkshimself more enlight-
ened.
If Mr. Lugg wants to produce
experimental theatre, no obstacle
should oppose him. But his partic-
ular need for a "dynamic" ex-
perimental theatre cannot be
transposed into a categorical nec-
essity for the Ann Arbor stu-
dent-citizenry. And if, as it seems,
Mr. Lugg has "outgrown" Soph-
ocles or Shakespeare, one can only
feel sorry for him. We can also,
however, try sincerely to accord
the new Sophocles as much at-
tentiveness as we do the old, and
then be extremely grateful to Mr.
Lugg for something noved to dis-
cuss.
-Peter Ferran, Grad
Reply
Mr. Lugg replies:
Mr. Ferran has missed. or mis-
read the main points of my ar-
gument. For example:
1) I certainly do not condemn
all forms of "present, non-experi-
mental theatre." I argued, in my
article for an investigation into
technological theatre: "they (the
theatre personnel of the town)
should be working on a couple of
major performances which include
is unsatisfactory is that the Speech
and Drama Department habitual-
ly play it safe. If they are always
going to present museum pieces,
nobody is going to find out what
the town will take.
4) Our "Oedipus Rex" will not
suggest that we have "outgrown"
Sophocles. WE appreciate that a
bunch of students with a budget
of less than $200 cannot do Soph-
ocles as he deserves (the Ypsilan-
ti Greek Theatre could not ap-
proach Greek theatre as we know
it can be done). Our piece is dif-
ferent. We start with Sophocles'
idea and then see what we can
reasonably do to extend both our-
selves and our audience. Whether
we succeed or not must be reserv-
ed until after the performances.
Even if I were to correct all of
Mr. Ferran's misquotes and quotes-
out-of-context, nothing would be
gained. He asserts that everything
is all right, whilst I use as a
starting point that this is not so.
The whole of my subsequent ar-
gument simply suggests that the
theatre-people should be attempt-
ing to diversify our theatre-fare
and gives a number of ways in
which this might be achieved. The
real debate is on how to get going
Arab View
Regardless of the outcome of the
"Middle East crisis," one fact re-
mains: the Israelis have made the
Arab their whipping boy for two
millenia of worldwide anti-Sem-
itism. A guilt-ridden Western Eu-
rope and some religious dreamers
amongst the Jews created the very
anachronism of Israel. Because
the Western world failed to rid
herself of her prejudices and some
Jews insisted upon an ancient vi-
sion, the Arabs were made to
shoulder a problem which was not
really theirs but that of the West-
ern world. Europe alleviated her
bad conscience by shoving three
and a half million Jews into a
distant corner of the Mediter-
ranean right in the middle of
an Arabic world. Shall we blame
the Arabs for their resentment to
this unnatural situation or shall
we blame those who dreamed up
the present state of Israel?
-Ernst Soudek, Grad
Multiversity
Those in power like to be reas-
sured that the system is all right.
People fail; not systems. Roger
Rapoport's cefense of the multi-
versity must have been quite re-
assuring to the powers of "U."
"The multiversity can work for
the student willing to bend his
IBM card." And the ghetto can
be a great inspiration to Negroes
willing to take advantage of it
(e.g., James Baldwin and Claude
Brown). But this seems to be a
pretty skimpy defense for either
system.
The following talk was given
to the Michigan Association of
Student Governments, on May
13, by Michael O'Connor, an
economics professor of Central
Michigan University.
When we find students express-
ing very critical attitudes, quite
openly, from Berkeley to Brown,
from Wayne State to Yale, we are
obviously dealing with something
much deeper than personalities,
something that goes to the na-
ture of the system itself, either
the university system or the so-
cial system.
On the basis of a rather super-
ficial analysis, I suggest that the
student protests may be due in
part to the fact that some stu-
dents are beginning to take uni-
versity ideals rather seriously. Ad-
ministrative officers, on the oth-
er hand, .are often too busy with
all the myriad problems of new
buildings, new libraries, new dor-
mitories, to give much attention
to ideals of any kind. The result
has often been that the idealists,
the students, array against the
progmatists, the administrators-
not uncommon only to the ac-
companiment of violence.
WHY HAS studentprotest brok-
en out at this particular time?
Perhaps because increasing stu-
dent maturity has developed dur-
ing a period when erosion is tak-
ing place in the old defenses that
once provided strong support for
administrators in their control of
students. Some of the more ob-
vious of these defenses have been:
first, the bread and circuses of
collegiate athletics; second, vari-
ous types of traditional loyalties
such as those embodied in the
typical phrase: for God, for Coun-
try and for Yale; third, paternal-
ism as a philosophy; fourth and
perhaps the most important, long
established devices for manipulat-
ing the local campus environment,
especially in small towns. Under
the last heading, we should clas-
sify administrative influence over
the student newspaper and other
student publications, administra-
tive control over disciplinary pro-
cedures, over student expulsion,
over student loan funds, and over
the campus police. There are ad-
ministrations that have gone so
far as to maintain files, dossiers,
on student leaders, not unlike the
FBI when dealing with subversive
elements.
Students are normally in a very
poor position to protest. Adminis-
trative power over a specific local
environment has accumulated
gradually over many years with-
out objection from anyone. Sud-
denly students object. When they
do, they are in much the same
position as unions in a strike sit-
uation. Both students and union
members are often called trou-
blemakers since students as well
as workers initiate the action, take
the offensive, precipitate the con-
frontation.
Can anything be done about
that? Are there any ways of grad-
ually and peacefully developing a
stronger position for students in
between the episodes of conflict?
Is there any way in which stu-
dents can operate on a level
above the local one that is so
completely under administrative
control? Is there any way in which
students can get a fair hearing
from an outside tribunal, such as
the public at large?
WELL, there are a quarter of a
million college students in Mich-
igan alone, and, mind you, this
is a flow, constantly renewed, so
it amounts to much,rmore than
250,000. In a few years, the col-
lege student becomes a voter; and
therefore of some political signifi-
cance, likely to be listened to
and heeded. If students could
gradually learn to operate on the
statewide level, as a unified, orga-
nized body, with good communi-
cation among themselves and with
the public, then students could
be far more effective than they
are today.
The statewide level could pro-
vide a vantage point from which
aid could be extended to students
at , a particular campus, from
above and outside the controlled
local environment. Moreover, stu-
dents on the state level could be-
come a force for general prog-
ress in all the higher education
in the state.
In what specific ways could stu-
dents move toward statewide co-
hesiveness and statewide action?
There are many steps that could
be taken, one step at a time over
a period of many years. One as-
pect is essential-communication.
Communication is always basic in
getting and maintaining cohesion
and influence. Possiblye steps to-
ward better communication range
from having the stame statewide
column reproduced in every Mich-
igan college newspaper to other
projects of vastly more ambitious
scope.
In the latter category of am-
bitious projects would be a state-
wide advertising consumer's guide
mnralar n ip ba int; Reaersp
IN ADDITION to the field of
communications, there are other
areas that could be developed by
students on a statewide basis. For
example, universities have long
usednaccreditationsagencies to
maintain and improve the quality
of the degrees and the courses that
are offered. Perhaps students
could, on the state level, have an
organization that would investi-
gate and consider whether or not
to accredit each institution in the
state in terms of the treatment
of students by the particular col-
lege.
This would mean that an orga-
nization would have toswork out
standards of what was thought
to be proper treatment of stu-
dents. It might be decided that
certain things were bad, such as
some types of double jeopardy,
administrative censorship of stu-
dent publications, administrative
monopolistic control of the adver-
tising revenues from student Pub-
lications, and the use of subsidies
to influence student policy.
A list might also be made of
those things considered to be good
and standards set up for evaluat-
ing each institution.tAstatewide
publication of one type or an-
other could bring these accredi-
tation decisions to the attention
of the public as well as to the at-
tention of students throughout
the state. I think you would be
surprised to find how seriously ad-
ministrators would regard these
verdicts on accreditation.
OPERATING on a statewide lev-
el would have a decided impact
on public opinion. In effect, or-
ganized students would be able to
treat public opinion as a tribunal
to which they could appeal.
Such a tribunal would be out-
side the limited, local campus so
dominated by administrators. If
the appeal were proper and just,
there would be many in the gen-
eral public who would listen sym-
pathetically. No administration
could afford to flout public opin-
ion in the way that student opin-
ion is sometimes ignored.
Of course, this type of thing
would have to be done in very
conservative fashion, The pace of
change would have to be slow and
careful.
Only picked students should
handle such a project, using older
advisors selected by the students
themselves. One mis-step could
destroy the value of a rating proc-
ess for many years to come. It
would be wise to begin in positive,
rather than negative fashion. Ac-
creditations could be issued to
those schools that had made prog-
ress in specific aspects of student
relations during the last 10 years,
and such schools praised for such
achievements, but ;making clear
that an accreditation was in 'no
sence a blanket endorsement of
any current school policy.
For a time, it would probably
be best to get a good deal of ex-
perience before condemning any
transgressors, although speciali n-
vestigations and reports could still
be made. It might be possible to
praise a backward school simply
because it began to take a few,
hesitant steps forward.
THE HOPE would be that,
within a few years, considerable
agreement would take place on
what constituted proper standards
of, student relations - standards
by which colleges could be meas-
ured in the broadestrof terms, such
as "acceptable" or not. These
standards would necessarily be rel-
ative since over the years the con-
ception of what ideal student re-
lations are inevitably changes. But
at any given time standards could
be rather specific, dealing with
particular matters, such as dou-
ble jeopardy, grounds for expul-
sion, and similar problems.
All this seems important to me
because I believe we are on the
threshold of a new era in which
the student will play a far more
dynamic role in society than in
the past. In Michigan, for exam-
ple, only a few decades ago the
dynamic contributions came from
such men as Henry Ford, who
never attended, and was never
subdued and polished by, any col-
lege.
But in this new space era, we
have in effect, a" new kind of
business, smoothly organized, gi-
ants, operating throughout the
world. And, in some ways, a new
kind of government, encompass-
ing such varied activities as func-
tional fiscal policy, and selective
service, venturing indeed far be-
yond what we used 'to call hori-
zons, to venture probes and sor-
ties into space.
When a society turns imagina-
tive and creative, every phase of
that society tends to be affect-
ed. Such was the case in the
Italian Renaissance of the 1400's.
Such was the case in Elizabethan
England, in the Shakespearian era.
Today a new type of business and
a new type of government will
see come into existence a new
type of university and a new type
of student. I may be quite wrong
but I believe that whatawe are
witnessing may be the start of a
#I
I
A
Er
V
mA
h
I