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.

March 28, 1967 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1967-03-28

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


.. - ;;

Seventy-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSrrY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

THE VIEW FROM HERE
Interviewing an Old Image
BY ROBERT KLI VANS

mm

Where OpinibnsAre Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
Truth Will Prevail

NEWS PHONE: 764-0552

_ _
:::..........:.: :.:::::: "::.......,................................:.:. ....,...................,....... ,.,.....,....................... .......,.... ,. .
................................ , ......... 1 .1 .. .i . .. }..1 i., "1 "'.«. . V 111 1. .
.............. .................t..................., ::: }:. V}: /:.t''..:":.^:.V.1.:4.V.':;.V::.'.11'::?.{.,V: a :" .;;V:::::. .V::: }.1 .: t}::'::.1 :: .::A". ". }: }?.".SVT"}.it:1"l: T.'L :V L :t r :4ti ':4'. '1'.'L"rN.1 {. ";1 :::}

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

TUESDAY. MARCH 28, 1967

NIGHT EDITOR: NEAL BRUSS

,.

IFC-FBA- Who Does
the Organization Work For ?

THE INTERFRATERNITY Council has
been blatantly negligent in one of their
major functions - providing member
houses an opportunity to receive food at
lower prices. To do this IFC set up the
Fraternity Buyer's Association, an orga-
nization they are currently investigating.
Up until now their investigation has
turned up little evidence. Whenever any-
one asks an IFC official how a system that
was originally set up for their own bene-
fit managed to turn into one that works
for the benefit of the local merchants,
they simply answer that a few years ago
someone let the situation get out of hand.
VHENASKED WHY something wasn't
done about it sooner about the situa-
tion Bill Sage, executive vice-president of
IFC, said, "FBA was originated by Her-
bert Wagner (still on the board of FBA).
It was his baby, and he's sort of sensi-
tive about criticism. There are two nice
old ladies upstairs who do the bookkeep-
ing. They're not very dynamic, but who
wants to hurt their feelings."
Such a reluctance to evaluate and criti-
cize their own organization has plagued
IFC for a number of years now, and the
consequences of such an attitude become
clear when we examine their mishan-
dling of FBA.
Because of the control that they have

over their members, and thus the possi-
bility of greater unity of action, IFC is
the student organization that is in the
best position to bring the merchants more
in line with student interests-the pur-
chasing power of fraternities (approach-
ing $500,000 annually) was supposed to be
used through FBA towards this end. If a
consumer strike is at all feasible, it must
have the solid base of support of an or-
ganization like IFC.
Students living in off-campus housing
don't have the unity or communications
with each other to initiate such action,
and it is doubted whether SGC, alone, is
capable of rallying the students around
such a cause.
THE DISPARAGING FACTOR isn't that
IFC has hindered student action in this
area, but that they have forfeited their
duties of leadership. IFC should take the
initiative and move to the vanguard of
student activity in the field of marketing,
rather than sit back and ride with the
rest of the student body.
By assuming their rightful position of
leadership, IFC cannot help but to
strengthen their image among students as
well as reaping natural material benefits
for their own members.
-RON KLEMPNER
Associate Editorial Director

THERE HAS BEEN a lot of talk lately about the Uni-
versity's image. It has been reputedly damaged by the
sit-ins,, subpoenas, and protests of the last eight months.
Moreover, the new administration which will succeed
President Hatcher might give the University's image a
veritable facelifting.
To clarify this confusion, I decided it was time that
someone went to the Image and asked him what he
thought about all this attention. For those of you who
don't know, the University Image has an office in the
Administration Building, just down the hall from the
vice-president for University relations. His door is clev-
erly disguised as a broom closet.
At first glance, the Image looks young for his 150
years, say about 130. He has silver-gray hair and a beard
of course, all with the smile of a man confident that he
is a mother of state universities.
1.IMAGE, I NOTICE that your suit is scuffed and torn
and there are several fresh scars on your face. What
happened?"
"It'sbeen a difficult yeah, my friend," he said. "It
began last summer with a subpoena from HUAC. That's
what gave me this scar here," he noted, pointing to a
spot on his back where Joe Pool's knife had cleanly
entered.
"It's all really a very hopeless situation. The intellec-
tual left impugns me for being a tool of the government's
diabloical research programs while the masses and

legislature label me a haven for disasters and crackpots.
Some say I'm too impersonal and others that I don't
fulfill my obligation to enough of society. They say age
breeds respect, but at 130-I mean 150-I still feel at-
tacked from all sides."
"And I suppose this semester you have not seen much
either?"
THERE WAS THE far-away glint of unrealized tran-
quility in his eyes. "It's tragic, you see, for this was to be
my birthday. A year of festivities and honor. Of nostalgia
and self-glorification. But what do I get? Flaming
Creatures, marijuana, Defense Dept. investigations, and
heckling. Is nothing sacred?"
"Have you ever thought of retiring and letting a new
Image take your place?"
"We Images are not like that at all, my friend. We
change-gradually-it is in the nature of the system.
My cousin, the Image of Berkeley, had a nervous break-
down two years ago but he surely wasn't replaced. Berke-
ley's image-as a top-notch educational factory-keeps
coming across. And at Illinois, the image has been ser-
iously shaken in the slush fund scandal. But replaced?
Never."
"TELL ME SOMETHING about yourself, Image.
About your childhood perhaps."
"I was born in eighteen hundred and thirty sev-I

mean eighteen hundred and seventeen. My father was
the Northwest Ordinance and my mother the German
university. I've lived in Ann Arbor all my life and have
grown with the town. I was a football star in my youth,
and am now renowned in every sport. I'm an excellent
doctor and a famous lawyer and have studied in every
field of graduate endeavor."
"With all these qualifications, it certainly seems
foolish to think that student disturbances or Pentagon
reports could really affect your impressive record."
"Ah, but remember, it is not as important what I am
as how other's see me. So it's very hard to remain im-
pressive when the world just doesn't believe it."
"I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND your plight, Image.
But one last question. The appointment of the new
President will probably bring new administrators and
perhaps new policy which could alter the institution.
Wouldn't this change you?"
"Administrators are transient and really have no
effect on the Image. They are but pegs plugged into the
Great System board. No. I certainly can't expect any
great changes in the space of ten years ... or twenty. I
can't see the president or anyone else altering my system.
As the great Frenchman Montesquieu once wrote, 'At the
birth of societies, the chiefs of the republic form the
institutions, but afterwards the institutions form the
chief.'
Long live the University's Image.

Letters: Critical Analysis of Cinema Guild Incident.

Ed Brooke Speaks on the Army

FRESHMAN SEN. Edward W. Brooke (R-
Mass), recently returned from his
fact-finding mission to Vietnam, has be-
gun to expound sweeping changes in the
present selective service system.
Fitting himself somewhere in the radi-
cal middle, Brooke has called for the
gradual elimination of the draft, and
as an alternative, the creation of a vol-
unteer career army. While superficially
this may appear as being the advantage-
ous solution, in the end it is only bound
to create a black mercenary army that
would be fighting as professional soldiers
wherever Lyndon Johnson or some other
president should deem it necessary to send
them.
In submitting this proposal, Brooke, the
first Negro senator since Reconstruction,
is doing the largest possible disservice
to his race.
NEGRO is already caught in an
educational-opportunity bind. With-
in the present system the black man is
only rarely allowed to realize his full po-

tential. Negroes are already being forc-
ed into the army because of the lack of
alternatives available in other fields. By
forming a professional army and raising
the pay scale for soldiers a more dispro-
portionate number of blacks would be
forced into killer status, thus relinquish-
ing the white, bourgeois, middle-class of
its present obligations.
The Negro is already burdened with
insurmountable problems. To try to force
him into the role of a universal soldier
would be to shove him deeper into the
hole he has found himself in. If the
black man is ever to be able to gain the
equality which is the inherent birthright
of all others, he must not allow himself
to become a toy in the white man's world.
IT WOULD APPEAR only logical that
Brooke would in some way attempt to
represent his race in Congress, but he
appears to be just another Uncle Tom;
he comes through as white as the whitest
Southern segregationist.
-JOHN LOTTIER

To the Editor:
IT WOULD APPEAR that the
administration and the faculty
are in disagreement with respect
to the case in Ann Arbor Munici-
pal Court involving four Cinema
Guild leaders now facing obscen-
ity charges for the January 18
showing of "Flaming Creatures."
According to a statement by
President Hatcher as published in
the University Record March 10,
1967:
"The Cinema Guild people knew
what they were doing. They knew
the film they were showing. Stu-
dents are citizens like others.
When they run counter to the law,
they are in the same position as
other citizens who encounter the
law."
A headline on the front page of
the March 21 issue of The Michi-
gan Daily reads:
"Faculty Board Urges 'Dismis-
sal' of Case Against Cinema
Guild."
IT WAS HEARTENING to find
an editorial by Ronald Landsman
in the March 22 Daily supporting
the enlightened action of the Fa-
culty Senate's Civil Liberties
Board in opposition to prior ac-
tions of the uninforrhed elements
within the University. Referring to
the "Flaming Creatures" affair,
Mr. Landsman remarks that:
"The Regents, the administra-
tion and the students all commit-
ted themselves in a perfectly pre-
dictable manner to a cause about
which they knew next to nothing.
"The board, however, went to
the trouble of determining what
the real nature and motives of Ci-
nema Guild were. Immediately af-
ter the incident, Hubert Cohen
and Ellen Frank, two of the de-
fendants, appeared before t h e
board and were questioned thor-
oughly. The board wanted to know
whether Cinema Guild was 'just
a group of students trying to cause
trouble or an organization with
serious educational and cultural
goals in mind.' They found out,
and they acted."
It would appear that the poorly
informed administration is willing
to sacrifice well-meaning students
to the local authorities and that
he faculty, after "the Civil Liber-
ties Board studied the film seizure
in great detail" has rushed to their
defense. As one meniber of the fa-
culty who has made an honest at-
tempt to learn as much about this
case as possible, I must state tha
I put a different interpretation on
the facts as I know them:
-Prior to the showing of "Fla-
ming Creatures," Vice President
Cutler called an officer of Cinema
Guild into his office. This officer
was informed that there was some
question as to whether the film
"Flaming Creatures" could be sent
through the mails because it had
been judged to be obscene in the
courts of New York State. Vice
President Cutler further stated
that he understood that the Ann
Arbor Police would be present at

the scheduled showing and that
there was a danger that anyone
who knowingly participated in the
showing of the film might be ar-
rested. Furthermore, if they were
arrested, the University would
take no steps to protect them in
the courts. Vice President Cutler
then told them to make their own
decision based on the facts as pre-
sented to them. The students ap-
parently decided to show the film
anyway. I have no way to judge
the motives of the students. How-
ever it appears to me that they
were apprised of the facts and
took actions which I cannot inter-
pret as being those of "an organ-
ization with serious and cultural
goals in mind." Thus I seem to be
out of step with the faculty, i.e.,
I support the stand taken by Pre-
sident Hatcher.
-Considerable attention has
been given to the role of Hubert
Cohen, one of the four defendants
in the case. Besides mention-
ing Mr. Cohen in his editorial of
March 22, Mr. Landsman states in
his front page article of March 21:
"Prof. Hubert Cohen of the en-
gineering English department, ad-
visor to Cinema Guild, and one of
the four defendants, said he was
'delighted that-they have support.
ed us. There seems to be so few,
now."
First of all, Mr. Cohen is an in-
structor. He is a graduate student
and does not hold any rank with
the title of Professor.
It would appear that Mr. Lands-
man is uninformed. It is interest-
ing that Mr. Landsman should be
critical of "The Regents, the Ad-
ministration and the students
(who) all committed themselves
in a perfectly predictable manner
to a cause about which they knew
next to nothing."
The friend of the court brief
prepared by the Board's lawyers
makes quite a point of the fact
that "At no time was the film in
question ever brought before a
judge or magistrate; nor was any
warrant ever issued for its seizure;
nor was any juddicial determina-
tion ever made as to whether the
film constituted obscene material
within the meaning of the first
amendment." This sounds omin-
ous. The Board's lawyers point up
an even worse danger: "What is
at stake here is whether a police
officer is to have the power to de-
termine, ex parte, that the mem-
bers of the University community
shall not see certain films or plays,
or read certain books, prior to a
determination by a duly author-
ized judicial officer that such ma-
terials may be outside the protec-
tion of the constitutional rights of
free speech."
What the Board's lawyers failed
to mention is that although the
Cinema Guild Board could have
requested a determination by a
duly authorized judicial officer,.
and Vice President Cutler or other
members of the administration
could have likewise requested such
a determination in behalf of Cin-

ema Guild and/or the University,
it is next to impossible for the lo-
cal authorities to force either the
Cinema Guild Board or the Uni-
versity to submit any film such
as "Flaming Creatures" to a de-
termination by a duly authorized
judicial officer. Statute MSA 27A.
2938 of the State of Michigan un-
der which the local authorities
must operate in such cases author-
izes them to require such a deter-
mination only when sufficient evi-
dence is on hand to support the
contention that the film consti-
tutes obscene material within the
meaning of the first amendment.
"Hearsay" evidence is unaccept-
able. Thus without factual evi-
dence, a determination by a duly
authorized judicial officer cannot
be obtained through the courts. If
this rational approach is not
available to authorities outside the
University, the suggestions of the
Board's lawyers that the police-
man should have acted under an
order issued by a Judge following
an adversary proceeding and/or
that a warrant should have been
issued have little or no validity.
The Board's lawyers state that
"the power to act as arbiter of
public performances, which the
Supreme Court has prohibited ev-
en to courts in the absence of a
prior adversary hearing, and
which t h e University d o e s
not - under academic freedom
principles-permit to be exercised
by any official acting as Univer-
sity censor, has been here exercis-
ed by a single employee of the
city police department."
The Board's lawyers undoubt-
edly know the Regents' bylaws
much better than I do. Therefore
I request them to refer me to the
proper authority for their state-
ment that all University officials,
including .the President and all
Vice-Presidents,Pare prohibited
from exercising judgement in
stopping the showing of films on
campus which might be judged
to be pornographic and for which
admission is charged. If such a
rule exists, the Regents might now
be interested in changing it.
There have been many com-
ments on the contents of the film,
"Flaming Creatures". According to
Time (Feb. 17, 1967) "Jack
Smith's four-year-old Flaming
Creatures, an incredibly tedious
parody of a sexploitation picture,
demonstrates how easy it is to fall
asleep in the steamy midst of an
hour-long transvestite orgy." Tim
Ayers and Dennis B. Webster, in
a letter to the Daily (March 9,
1967) stated that "Jack Smith's
"Flaming Creatures" is an artistic
presentation of socially significant
attitudes." Paul Krassner, editor
of the Realist, indicated "that
'Flaming Creatures' did not, per-
haps, have the artistic merit
which some have claimed it does,"
according to a front page article
which appeared in the Daily (Feb.
15, 1967). He was further quoted:
"The part of 'Flaming Crea-
tures' that's so offensive to police-
men is the transvestite orgy scene.
I saw one of the original previews
of the film and all these upper so-
ciety people were watching it and
screaming with laughter. We
thought it was a bad movie." A
description of the first twelve
minutes of the film was filmed in
the United States District Court
in Detroit on February 16, 1967
(File No 29497) and is a matter of
public record. Copies can be ob-
tained from the Court clerk for
the cost of duplication. Interested
citizens cannot, at this time, le-
gally view the film and therefore
are forced to make judgements on
such "hearsay" evidence as pre-
sented above. The University Ad-
ministration is in a more fortunate
position in that they and/or the
nf-an rin ,, ronnec. a ch .n

. 1

C

All-American River

WHAT EVERY "All-America" city needs
is a good, unpolluted river.
Young and old alike have always de-
lighted in the many pleasures that a river
offer's. No site is better for a picnic or a
serene afternoon of reading and sleep-
ing. And what beats an early spring day
spent wading in a clear, sparkling strea
spent wading in a clear, sparkling
stream?
Since last weekend was the first one of
spring, the obvious thing to do was to for-
get academia and go for a walk. And so
coatless, tramping through mud puddles
and leftover dirty snow, we ambled north
to the banks of the Huron.
"There's the river!" we chortled, and
raced each other across the railroad
tracks to its edge. "Oh." We'd forgotten
one small detail.
RIVERS ARE SUPPOSED to be crystal,
sparkling affairs. The Huron is an
opaque shade of mud brown. Any river of
consequence makes lots of delightful
noises. This one rippled apathetically.
Rivers have been a traditional inspira-
The Daily is a member of the Associated Press and
Collegiate Press Service.
Subscription rate: $4.50 semester by carrier ($5 by
mail; $8 for two semesters by carrier ($9 by mail).
Published at 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.,
48104.
Daily except Monday during regular academic school

tion for poets. Can you imagine anyone
writing "Flow Gently, Sweet Huron?"
For children, the local river should be
a place to catch things-crayfish, tad-
poles, tiny fish. What good is a river with-
out inhabitants? But not the lowliest of
crayfish, unless he had definite suicidal
tendencies, would ever venture into the
ugly Huron.
OUR CONCERN would not be so great if
the Huron were not Ann Arbor's only
body of water. But it is, and it's de-
pressing to watch it die.
Ann Arbor was given its recent award
from Look in part for its beautification
program. The Huron was probably beau-
tiful-once. So why did the "All-Amer-
ica City" neglect its river?
The situation may change, however. A
number of local groups, notably the Hur-
on River Watershed Council and the Ann
Arbor Hownship Huron River Beautifica-
tion Committee, have been working on
the problem and are expected to make
public certain 'concrete proposals in the
near future. We wish them well, and we
hope they hurry.
In the meantime, we'll have to settle
for the annual puddle in the middle of
the Diag.
--SUE REDFERN
-ROB BEATTIE
Does It Matter?

immature to understand the im-
plications of their decision. The
coverage of this matter in the
Daily has been, at best, juvenile.
The Civil Liberties Board of the
Faculty Senate is, I'm certain, act-
ing in good faith, but I firmly be-
lieve that the Board does not re-
flect the opinion of the majority
of the informed faculty and
should not act as an official Uni-
versity organ in the future without
suitable restraint. In my opinion
the real responsibility for this tra-
gedy rests squarely with the ad-
ministration in general and with
the Vice-President for Student Af-
fairs in particular.
-Prof. John E. Powers,
Professor of Chemical and
Metallurgical Engineering
SGC Selects
To the Editor:
STUDENT Government Council
seems to have conducted the
entire procedure of selecting posi-
tions of SGC Vice-Presidential
Advisory Boards in a definitely
slanted manner. As an applicant
for one of these positions, I feel
extremely qualified to comment
on their procedure.
In filling out a petition, I made
a point that my views differed
from those of many participants
in student government activity,
and that this point of view might
deserve representation.
When I finally went for my in-
terview before representatives of
SGC, GSC, and The Daily, I ex-
pected to be asked to clarify this
statement and explain how I
thought I could contribute to the
operation of a meaningful advis-
ory board. I found something quite
different.
There were several relevant and
important questions that a good
candidate should have been able
to answer. But there were also
several extremely leading ques-
tions irrelevant to my representa-
tion on an advisory committee.
Not one question arose concern-
ing the main point I had raised
in my written petition, and I ser-
iously doubt that anyone on that
itarvi ineommitHjwas aware

representation of the student body
as in seeing that the boards were
staffed by individuals sharing the
beliefs of some present members
of SGC.
If, however, in forming the at-
titude I think I detected in my
brief encounter with it, SGC does
not subscribe to the rationale just
mentioned. I think its position
may have even more serious im-
plications. If it considers its pres-
ent point of view an impartial one,
I think it has an extremely dis-
torted perspective' Student lead-
ers complain that the vast ma-
pority of students are apathetic,
as many, in fact, are; but by the
type of standards I suspect are
being applied, how many students
are damned for apathy when their
only "crime" is disagreeing with a
majority on SGC or with certain
activist elements in the student
body?
To what extent is SGC devoted
to representing the interests of
the student body and to what ex-
tent devoted to representing the
interests and opinions of its own
members? Under certain circum-
stances these two interests, which
in SGC propaganda are identical,
may be quite distinct.
I BELIEVE in strong student
government and would like to see
it move toward taking a respon-
sible part in running the Univer-
sity. In doing so, however, it
should avoid the close-mindedness
and "we-they" mentality that
students rightly condemn in
others.
-Bill Walsh, '69
Rapping Rapo
To the Editor:
ROGER RAPOPORT'S editorial
of March 22 led me to believe
that he considers radicalism, stu-
dent rebellion, protest intrinsically
good-desirable for their own sake.
Complaining that there are too
few hard-core radicals, that the
students seem contented, he dis-
parages the campus attitude;
Rapoport presupposes in the essay
that the status-quo is wrong and
thus that we should demonstrate

U

*

MI I s. %,. _SA op I

Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan