100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

October 17, 1965 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1965-10-17

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

Seventy-SixthYear
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

The Ills of the American University

Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
ruhWil Prevail

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.
SUNDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1965 NIGHT EDITOR: BRUCE WASSERSTEIN

The Poetry of LeRoi Jones:
A Product of Our Tensions

LE ROI JONES stopped by Thursday JONES READ his poetry and cooly shot
night at the Union to toss out some his bitterness at a college audience.
poetry and prose from his copious collec- However, in the midst of all this tension
tion. He dangled a few grubby images, dis- came one line defying bitterness, quietly
played a few unusual spectres from the emphasizing the poet in Le Roi Jones:
gutter, made some oblique references to "Men are no more than ourselves other
modern jazz figures, drew several absurd- places."
ly creative pictures of such people as So Jones must believe that even the
Lyndon Johnson's mother, and above all, "Blue Whities" out in the chromium
hawked some of his arrogantly creative chairs in the audience can fall some-
poetry. where in humanity.
A great global tension produced Jones. University students listened to Jones,
He enunciates the racial grumblings of .ie rsp outsmesmenid to his
many people in many suburbs. He brand-tried to grasp out some meaning from his
ishemyeoresthma y curol.lHegerstu-more elusive illusions, tried to lessen the
ishes memories that many college stu- mrsinf-smofhemrbren
dents hold from high school days in big prducts ofsone'ura oaba.
zities. products of Jones urban vocabulary.
Above all, Jones writes poetry for the Then he finished, and there was a
present. His idioms are fresh, and he tense sigh, and a walk back to the dormi-
peoples his poems with people like Steve tory, where the lad in the honors house
McQueen, Elizabeth Taylor, and Richard refers to Le Roi Jones as "that bearded
Burton. He talks about checking things jig."
out and stepping up to the microphone,
idioms from advertising and the sidewalk. IT IS SUCH an accepting, rejecting
That is why many people can tolerate world that created Le Roi Jones. And
his racial grumblings. Jones can deal in it is this same surrealistic world that
black bourgeoise, "ofay," whities, and oth- needs to call him poet.
er tags that approach extremes of taste. -NEAL BRUSS
McNamara as Salesman:
A Merchant of Injustice

I would like to suggest an-
other principle, that the child
itself must be the end in edu-
cation. It is a curious thing
how many times the education
of Europe has drifted into er-
ror. For two or three centuries
people thought that their var-
ious religious systems were more
important than the child. In the
modern world the tendency is
to think of the nation; that it
is more important than the
child .,. There is a tendency
to subordinate the child to the
idea of the nation ... We should
always see that the child is the
object and not any of our spe-
cial purposes.
--W. B. Yeats
Senate speeches
IN MY LAST column two weeks
ago (The University: Past and
Present), I argued that the "idea"
of a university has changed a
great deal, but that while its
ideals had been continued in word,
they had been perverted in action,
by the adoption of a new image
of justification: Big Business. And
in answering questions I had ini-
tially posited, I suggested that
function and end of the contem-
porary university are in contra-
diction as long as the new justi-
fication is accepted.
Before answering the remain-
ing questions (In what ways is the
University of Michigan a perfect
example of the ills of the con-
temporary university? What can
be changed?), let me be clear on
Big Business.
Big Business is a "dirty word"
for me, not because I am against
organization, "bigness," compu-
ters, but because I find it im-
possible to agree that the end of
Big Business (make money) is in
any way compatible with pre-
viously-mentioned ends, ideas, of a
university. And that to justify the
function of the contemporary uni-
versity by Big Business is to per-
vert whatever it is that can still
be recovered from the past.
In a recent issue of Fortune
Magazine, the author of a two-
part series on universities right-

fully castigates those critics who
fight organization under the ro-
mantic banners of "freedom,"
"anti-authority," "man versus so-
ciety," "individualism versus or-
ganization." Although his first
piece smacks of a pious defense of
capitalism and a wrist-slapping/
whistle-blowing lie about "Marxist
influences on campus," his second
is to the point: organization has
rightfully replaced outmoded tra-
ditions and religious sanctifica-
tions. Yet he refuses to push his
questions farther.
WHILE HE offers student pro-
testors shrewd analyses of "power
structures," he fails to answer
their questions about "ends." What
he refuses to admit is that Big
Business is "spiritually bankrupt."
It has no end but money-making.
Its means are anything inside the
"law" that will advance that end.
The present dilemma is aptly
illustrated by Clark Kerr who
would have his cake and eat it
too if it weren't for students who
have demanded everything they're
paying for.
Kerr is aware that we cannot
have the ideal of the Golden Age
("things as they were") in all
their imagined simplicity, security,
dependability-if only for the fact
that one, they never were that
good, two, this is the 20th cen-
tury. And he is aware that the
principles of organization have
exorcized binding traditions. Yet
he continues to act in the manner
of Big Business while speaking the
language of the Golden Age.
V
At the University of Michigan,
we have as apt illustrations: the
financial arm *of the University
(under the ambitious direction of
Wilbur Pierpont: "I just handle
the business.") often acting in
diametric opposition to the pro-
fessed ideals of Harlan Hatcher.
That is, we know that North
Campus cannot be bulldozed into
grass and returned to nature, but
why must the grass and flowers
and memories of the nearby ceme-
tary be bulldozed into more lab-

I Parenthesis
By GEORGE ABBOTT WHITE
oratories? Simply because it is
"expedient" that we do so? And
if the physical concern is as real
as Mr. Hatcher told us last week,
why must the University "acquire"
property and buildings, renting it
to students at the same high pri-
vate rates (paying no taxes), for
as long as it takes the University
to begin building upon that pro-
perty?
All these, however, are some-
what minor concerns when seen
against the backdrop of the Uni-
versity's relative indifference to
the minds of its students, to the
life of the mind at the University
of Michigan. This cannot be pooh-
poohed by some bureaucrat be-
hind a window: students at this
university are not taken seriously,
IF THEY WERE, the University
would be moving as hard for ne-
cessary reforms as it appears to be
moving for sesquicentennial cele-
brations, for Homecoming parades
and Go-Go girls.
IF THEY WERE, curriculum re-
form would not remain read in the
Daily, agreed to by everyone from
department heads to teaching fel-
lows, and done nothing about. Re-
forms would take place and not
the senseless shifting to provide
jobs or secure departments.
Courses would be addressed to
the students, not overspecialized,
but inter-related. Students would
be allowed time to develop a
framework on which to hang the
bits and pieces of fact, to savor
and understand, rather than cram
for an exam and forget.
IF THEY WERE, the University
would not be paraded in front of
the Michigan, the world public, as
a "knowledge factory," -but as a
center for serious study. What this
means is that the University would

not prostitute its engineering stu-
dents by asking them to do "de-
fense research" at Willow Run or
for that matter, allowing those
areas to remain connected with
the University. Psychology would
not concern itself with brain-
washing, chemistry with germ
warfare.
In short, the University would
not be some kind of automat for
society: a place where the people
of Michigan can send their dar-
lings in droves to be "trained," to
crowd classrooms beyond reason-
able limits, to tax instructors be-
yond endurance and effectiveness;
where Michigan industry can es-
tablish laboratories for "industrial
research," or the military for "de-
fense research."
The University of Michigan
should and must be apart from its
society. It should be able to turn
down Washington if it feels a
project would jeopardize its In-
tegrity, determine areas of growth
that don't need emphasis, reduce
the role of department chairmen,
departmental committees. It
should be able to determine its
own destiny and not be cowed into
that destiny by strong-willed leg-
islators or industrial giants.
-VI
It is fine to theorize, to talk-
what can be changed?
For one thing, it might be to
the good if everyone knew what
was going on. This doesn't just
mean gift giving under the Re-
gents' table, but clarification of
the lines of responsibility.
Clark Kerr says, "The ends are
there." But at the University of
Michigan, we aren't sure whether
or not Vice-President Richard Cut-
ler can remove a sign, Harlan
Hatcher authorize a new theatre,
the State Board of Education
create a new college. No one seems
to know, or admit to knowing,
anything.
To decide direction, not have it
decided for you, I suggest the
lines of responsibility be defined.
Hopefully once done, students and
faculty alike will then know where
and how to put on the pressure.

It may take some doing.
Clark Kerr points out that such
clarification is so unlikely of suc-
cess that it may as well be con-
sidered impossible. The faculty,
says Kerr, are not interested in
education or educational policy.
Nor the students (those apathetics,
football-loving, party goers, who
are never, strangely enough, con-
sulted). Nor the vice-presidents
and deans, who, under the present
system, are middle-management
mediators a la Kerr in their own
right. Nor the alumni, the Regents
(uninformed, Big-Business people),
the State Legislature, the govern-
ment, a committee of outside ex-
perts.
I BELIEVE Kerr can be proved
(if he hasn't already been) ab-
solutely wrong. The faculty have
some pretty strong ideas about
elucation. And if the commitments
on both sides of the Viet Nam issue
can be taken as an indication-
they are willing to stand up and
pay up. As for students, well, I'm
just not sure. After witnessing the
Diagndemonstrations against U.S.
policy in Viet Nam, I was willing
to admit that all students at heart,
would like to say to hell with
everything by combing their hair
like an idiot-child behind serious
speakers.
Yet one or ten or fifty scream-
ing idiots are not a true picture.
I like better the one of 3000 in
Hill Auditorium: listening, react-
ing, thinking.
The artificial divisions between
these two groups can easily be
eliminated and they, being part-
ners in the true idea of a univer-
sity-learning-can establish re-
sponsibility.
It is either that or the Univer-
sity of Michigan will continue to
be organized so that ruthless com-
petitive success by its members
(high grades and prestige for stu-
dents, high salaries and prestige
for faculty members) will come to
be the lone criterion of value and
reward.
Next week: Recovery of the
Past: The Residential College

*

'0

{

ONCE ROBERT McNAMARA sold auto-
mobiles, and he was very good at it.
Now, in addition to his other duties, he
sells arms, and he is just as good in that
line. He has announced that -since mid-
1961 the United States has sold $9 bil-
lion worth of arms to free world nations,
and intends to keep up the pace indefi-
nitely.
Mr. McNamara justifies America's role
as a merchant of death--in the quaint
phrase of the thirties-on the ground that
'greatness
'"WEREN'T THEY GREAT?" Suzy coed
said Friday when referring to a
group of University students who were
picketing the protestors against the war
in Viet Nam with signs such as "Ask Me
If I Care," "What Me Worry?" and "We
Protest Protesting."
No Suzy, they were not great. They were
pathetic and you and your friends are
pathetic. Your political apathy is both
shocking and dangerous.
You will lament when your boyfriend
or brother dies in the rice paddies, but
you do not seem to care why they will die.
You can support the administration's
policies or reject them, but don't wallow
in lethargy.
-BRUCE WASSERSTEIN
Editorial Staff
ROBERT JOHNSTON, Editor
LAURENCE KIRSHBAUM JEFFREY GOODMAN
Managing Editor Editorial Director
Business Staff
CY WELLMAN, Business Manager
Subscription rate: $4.50 semester by carrier ($5 by
mall); $8 yearly by carrier ($9 by mall).
Second class postage paid at Ann Arbor, Mich.

since 1961 it has brought nearly a billion
dollars of profit to American industry,
and eased the balance of payments prob-
lem by $5 billion. This is the economic
side of it, but of course Mr. McNamara
always has a moral reason for what he
does. In this case the arms buttress the
Free World's defenses against Commu-
nism.
One of these grievously threatened na-
tions is Argentina. Here McNamara saw
to it that the Argentine generals got a'
real bargain. The French were trying to
sell them Mirage jet bombers, which are
rock bottom at $600,000 apiece. Instead,
Argentina will receive 50 A4-B Douglas
jet attack planes at about $250,000 each,
a saving of more than $7 million, a con-
dition which, conditions in Argentina be-
ing what they are, is no small consid-
eration.
WHO THREATENS Argentina? Red
China, perhaps? Or Ecuador? Neither
seems very plausible, nor does any other
probable enemy arise, yet we know there
must be one, since Mr. McNamara surely
would not be pushing these aircraft if
there were nobody to shoot at. There
IS somebody, however, and Jack Scott,
the Latin American correspondent of the
Toronto Star, has discovered who it is.
Argentina, to no one's surprise, is to
be saved from Communism once again,
and once again by the army, navy and
air force. A military coup is in prepara-
tion by the armed forces, supported by
business groups, industrialists, and, says
Scott, right-wing elements of the Cath-
olic Church.
What are we to conclude? Obviously,
that Argentina, or at least the upper crust
there, has no better friend than Robert
McNamara. And the same goes for the
American arms manufacturer.
-THE NATION

The Implications of Civil Disobedience

To the Editor:
THE ISSUES arising out of the
practice of civil disobedience
and the efforts to justify that
practice are extremely complex.
They are also very important, and
therefore I am constrained to re-
ply to a recent discussion of one
facet of these problems by Mr. J.
Goodman, a discussion which was
well-intended but seriously in er-
ror.
Like Mr. Goodman, I shall not
try to say whether one should or
should not engage in civil dis-
obedience, either in particular
cases or in general. Like him, too,
I strongly urge those who do con-
template such action to reflect
upon the consequences and im-
plications of what they will then
be doing. Breaking the law delib-
erately is serious business.
But it is a mistake to believe
that the civil disobedience is en-
gaged in "opposition to the whole
social system." Such a view miss-
es the spirit and purport of civil
disobedience altogether. An act
of civil disobedience is an act of
public protest which deliberately
violates the law. Those who en-
gage in this form of protest know
that they are acting unlawfully,
and do so with 'the full expecta-
tion that they will be punished
accordingly. They adopt this line
of conduct because they believe
their public protest and public
punishment is more important in
the long run than their private
convenience or present reputation
with the authorities. They may be
right.
IT IS NOT THE CASE, however,.
that the civil disobedient rebels
against the entire system. It is
not the case that civil disobed-
ience is "a 'When in the Course
of Human Events' type of thing."
The civil disobedient is not "of-

fering revolution." Quite the con-
trary, in fact. In publicizing his
act and accepting his punishment
the civil disobedient recognizes
the legitimacy of the legal system,
and recognizes its rightful author-
ity over him.
He says, in the loudest and most
effective way he can, "I respect
the authority of my government
so much that I will sacrifice my-
self to help improve its laws and
its administration." Not only does
he not reject the system of laws,
but his conduct gives public rec-
ognition of their force; he seeks
to make that system stronger by
making it more just. Sometimes
unlawful conduct to this end may
be morally justifiable.
Sometimes revolutions are justi-
fiable too-the American, French,
Mexican, Russian, Cuban - one
must evaluate each case on its
merits. But the weighty task of
justifying rebellion, a rebellion in
which one kills and may be killed,
is not the burden to be carried by
the non-violent civil disobedient.
His burden is heavy enough with-
out the gratuitious additions of so-
cial revolutionaries.
Finally, it may be true that some
who join in a disobedient protest
would like to foment all-out revo-
lution. The burden of justifying
such a revolution rests on them.
But in the United States over this
past decade the many participants
in civil disobedience have rarely
had that intention. One has only
to read what they say about their
protests and their purposes.
Confounding civil disobedience
in our society with total opposi-
tion to the social system is there-
fore not only theoretically inade-
quate but is as well false to the
facts.
MR. GOODMAN is to be genu-
inely complimented, however, for
his concern with these issues, and

for his intelligent and proper
warning that one who engages in
civil disobedience should under-
stand fully what he is about.
-Prof. Carl Cohen
Department of Philosophy
Legal Marijuana?
To the Editor:
WISH to take issue with the
article on marijuana that ap-
peared in the Oct. 8th Daily.
While I support the article's gen-
eral thesis-legalization of mari-
juana-I consider its tone and
conclusions sophomoric, naive, and
irresponsible. To include mari-
juana in the same category with
the so-called "psychedelic" drugs
is. sheer speculation, based ondsub-
jective opinion and skimpy evi-
dence, and is certainly no argu-
ment for its legalization. Whether
or not marijuana expands con-
sciousness is open to question,
though it is generally believed not
to be a depressant.
My most serious bone of con-
tention is with the conclusions
reached and implied at the end
of the article. First, legalizing
marijuana in order to lower the
number of crimes committed
makes as much sense as legalizing
murder for the same reasons.
Second, to compare marijuana
to alcohol in terms of replacing
the latter, and in termsi of break-
ing up the "liquor trusts" is un-
realistic, even preposterous. There
is no evidence to support these
conclusions, for most marijuana
smokers show no tendency to es-
chew the use of alcohol. Alcohol-
ism is a mental and social dis-
ease, and excessive use of alcohol
is usually for the purpose of dull-
ing consciousness.
There is no reason to assume
legalization of marijuana would
change this. To place the blame
for suppression of marijuana on
the "liquor trusts" (which would
not necessarily be hurt by its
legalization) is to seek solace in
the typically right-wing "con-
spiracy explanation" for unex-
plained phenomena. Finally, to
assume that "repeal of the Mari-
juana Tax Act of 1937 would pro-
vide an uplift for the nation's
psyche . . ." is to reiterate the
article's general tone which treats
marijuana as a panacea, a pro-
position I do not accept. Further,
this conclusion seems to be no
more than a reflection of the
writer's own self justification.
THE CASE for legalization can
be made, I think, on only two
premises. First, there is no evi-
dence that consumption of mari-
juana leads to either addiction
or anti-social behavior. Its inclu-
sion in legal statutes with the
opiates is unrealistic, and hence
the penalties for its use and pos-
session are unjust. Second, given
the above, I believe it should be
a matter of personal, individual

Public Opinion
To the Editor:
'OMEONE should thank those
who have so faithfully arous-
ed and alienated from their po-
sition American public opinion on
the Viet Nam problem. This has
been effectuated by their, biased,
uninformed statements and im-
mature actions in protesting pres-
ent administration policy.
The Lou Harris Poll (through
late September) shows that in
March, 1965, 38 per cent thought
the U.S. should try to negotiate
and withdraw its support and
troops from South Viet Nam.
However, a spring and summer of
teach ins, boarding troop trains,
harassing wives and next of kin
of U.S. soldiers killed or wounded
in Viet Nam and painting in pub-
lic places slogans as "American
Warmongers and Criminals-Get
Out of Viet Nam" has significantly
altered public opinion. Thanks to
their hard work in late September
only 11 per cent wanted to ne-
gotiate and withdraw.
IN MARCH, 49 per cent wanted
to "hold the line" and prevent a
Communist takeover. Only a mea-
ger 13 per cent wanted to carry
the war to North Viet Nam. How-
ever, the fine public information
programs of the protestors-in-
cluding some historical inaccura-
cies by Prof. Morgenthau (such
as China has never occupied any
Vietnamese soil), the expertise in
foreign relations displayed by the
professors of art, psychology and
physics, and, of course, the solemn
utterances of Martin Luther King
-has brought firm support to the
administration's position. Now,
59 per cent support the "hold the
line" position and, 30 per cent
want to carry to war to Hanoi.
It would be unfair to many
people. to attribute this total
Nero Far,
RighteousJ
HOMECOMING weekend enter-
tainment rocked its way along
this year with the Four Tops on
Friday night and a double-fea-
ture Saturday, when the Right-
eous Brothers and Peter Nero. To
sum it up, two hits and an error.
For those willing to participate
in the annual I.M. Dance Squeeze-
In and patient enough to worm
their way through the crowd, Mo-
town's fabulous Four Tops backed
by the big band of Choker Camp-
bell were well worth the effort.
As with all the members of Ber-
ry Gordy's stable of stars, the
Tops were professional, exciting
and fantastic crowd pleasers. They'
danced, they sang and they tore
up the crowd.
No greater accolade could be

change to the antics of these pro-
testors. However, it would be .fit-
ting for the administration to
thank all those protestors ,who
in their own small way helped
show the American public the un-
tenability of the withdraw and
negotiate position.
--Phyllis Sager, '66.
-Alan M. Sager, '65L
Referendum
To the Editor:
PROF. ROBERT WEEKS' letter
to the editor Friday urging a
favorable vote for Ann Arbor's
low-income housing commission is
to be commended. The city ref-
erendum Tuesday, Oct. 19, can
have serious consequences for stu-
dent economic welfare.
This proposal for a housing
commission is being opposed by
Ann Arbor conservatives, the Ann
Arbor Board of Realtors, and two
Republican city councilmen. It is
being favored by a majority vote
of the city council, by three Re-
publican councilmen, by five Dem-
ocratic councilmen including Prof.
Weeks, by Ann Arbor's mayor, by
many church groups and by the
Graduate Student Council. Yet it
may fail, as a similar well-
supported drive did in Kalamazoo.
MARRIED STUDENTS and
single apartment dwellers, no elec-
tion issue could affect your pocket
book more directly!
Low cost housing is a must in
Ann Arbor, and as Prof. Weeks
says, it "may well be defeated in
Tuesday's election." Unless there
is enough interest among the ma-
jority of the electorate to turn out
a large vote for the referendum,
"the tiny, group of extreme con-
servatives who have created this
situation may succeed."
-Christopher Cohen, '67L
Gs Flame;'
hTos. Fizzle
great disappointment. Those who
have seen the two perform before,
or who have listened to their rec-
ords were led to expect much more
than the flat, dry experience at
Hill. And the inclusion of a tal-
entless marionette and a lacklus-
ter back-up band for half of the
program is pouring salt on a
wound. The only righteous ele-
ment of the concert was the au-
dience who politely applauded and
waited for the excitement.
THE EXCITEMENT came, but
from unforeseen quarters. The
talented hands of Peter Nero and
his trio proceed to perform with
more "soul" and more profession-
al ability than the first half of the
program had even attempted. Mr.

'U

4

FEIFFER

I
I

UPA Or
OF U6
SKY
UeII
StAA-L

AUK -1W6
AUTUMN
9FTH&
AVGS.
1

i
3
i
Z
i

t
3
i
Z

NA
FVA'1.

ANVD I UIFTED' L)PRD BIZA DEP
H 1 pI! HAP X55. FO
pcOP..FR GPLDU?.FOR.
FW-AT I M S9AL-LPL-ACE 1k.)IT.

1j ==kJJ

I

T CAO.
r'JVvR
Our
m)t .

!! i

AP 612A ' ,1
TAC)P~.T

AU r
F{A PPIM % I
SJUST
3F (4

-e--w

I

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan