Seuent)-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED RY STUDENTS OF TuF UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CoNTROL OF STUDFNT PUBLICATION!

A Unique Experience in Group Living

.Mae AM Free 4201 NAY ARD ST-. A\N ARBOR \tR II.
llll

NI-XV PHIO\F'764-055:

Editorials printed mn The Michigan Vart, ex press the inidividnal o/unufns of staff unters
o the editors. T'his rmwt be noted in all reprints.
UIDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1966 NIGHT EDITOR: MEREDITH EIKER

}
S
yt
t
S
7
i

Critic Leslie Fiedler:
Stimulant for Discussion

AMONG THE MANY disappointments
which gave last year its lack-luster,
was the unfortunate fact that Lomax
didn't come. For those of you who missed
the rather negative furor, Louis Lomax
was to be -the feature of the revived pro-
gram for a "Writer in Residence" at the
University. Lomax's freak cancellation
spoiled the attempt to bring the program
back after a 40 year lapse since its last
incarnation in the form of Robert Frost.
A failure, after so much rust of time,
might well have crushed any further at-
tempts, but the concept of a Writer-in-
Residence. has persisted. This is a credit
to those students, last year and this, who
have served on the selection committee,
and to their sponsors scattered through-
out the community. But, perhaps as a re-
action to so many years of indifference,
the Writer-in-Residence program has un-
dergone sizable changes since the time of
Mr. Frost.
THIS YEAR'S "Writer-in-Residence" is
Leslie Fiedler, a literary critic of na-
tional reputation. It is certainlyno slur
against Mr. Fielder to say that he is not
a writer; to the full extent of that word.
He is someone who writes. Moreover, Mr.
Fiedler is a vocal social critic, seeking in
literature the plight of minority groups
-American Jews, Negroes and Indians.
Seeing this, and using a little razor-sharp
hindsight, we can discern a trend in the
program. Mr. Lomax is another writer
primarily interested in social and politi-
cal America.
The committee has stated that such
men as Lomax and Fiedler have been se-
lected for their "broader appeal." That is,
as men involved in social controversy,
they are expected to stir far more discus-

sion in the University Community. They
are not "too specialized."
WE MAY WONDER just when, in the
past 40 years, the University public
bgan to feel uneasy with a purely liter-
ary man. Has specialization gone so far
that only a "controversy" can cover all
the student body? Granted that such an,
extensive program should engage a large
audience; must corners be cut in order to
please "everybody?"
The authors currently making artistic
noise are also making a great deal of so-t
cial and political sense. After all, Mr.
Fiedler has found his critical material
in their work. Malamud and Barth, Bel-
low and Albee-such men are vitally
concerned with the drama of contempor-
ary American life. Of course, the prob-
ability of getting any one of these as
Writer-in-Residence is not precisely vast.
But there are other names, not yet notor-
ious. The point is to find a union of inter-
est and art.
THE SELECTION committee has men-
tioned a possible future full of such
"young-authors-on-the-move." Their cur-
rent caution is understandable after 40
fallow years. But unless the program is
renamed "Interesting - People - in - Resi-
dence," it seems doomed from the start.
The fault, if we must point to one, lies
in the strain of facing 30,000 unknown
quantities. The committee just was not
certain that a writer was quite interesting
enough.
In the "Writer-in-Residence" the same
"mass-thinking" which infects such di-
verse ends as television programming and
University administration, seems to be
once again at work.,
--LIZ WISSMAN

By DAVID KNOKE
First of a Three-Part Series
ANNAPOLIS-This is the mad-
dest odyssey I've ever been on.
First came the two plane trips
with a three hour holdover in
Cleveland, hoping there would be
standby room; then by cab and
foot, dragging luggage and type-
writer half way across the conti-
nent until, in the glommering
July evening, I stood at the en-
trance to St. John's College. In a
similar manner did 18 other col-
lege journalists make the eastward
trek.
That was how it all began-six
weeks at Annapolis in a "summer
seminar" sponsored by the U.S.
Student Press Association, ostensi-
bly for the purpose of studying
"issues in higher education" of
relevance to student newspapers-
or so I and 15 others had been
told.
The kids had all arrived by the
second day. They came from ev-
erywhere-Hawaii, Berkeley, Tex-
as, the Rockies and Midwest, the
Seven Sisters girls' schools-laden
with talent, knowledgeability, Mer-
it Scholarships. lack of summer
jobs, boredom or curiosity, eager
and apprehensive about the un-
known experiences ahead.
When they put both men and
women in the same dorm (differ-
ent floors, a concession to bath-
room accommodation) and told us
that the 150 other people sharing
the campus and commons would
speak to us only in Tagalog (Fili-
pino language; they were Peace
Corps trainees), we should have

suspected that this was no ordi-
nary educational seminar.
BEFORE I FORGET, the mys-
terious "they" who had arranged
these esoteric maneuvers were Rita
Dershowitz and Ken Winter. Rita
works full time for the USSPA
arranging similar weekend semi-
nars around the country, but this
six-week venture was the climax of
a year's work. Someone once call-
ed her the "youngest grant-swing-
er in the country," no mean com-
pliment, for she persuaded the
Carnegie Corp. to pitch in with
$55,000 worth of assistance.
Ken, as most Daily readers of
yore will recall, was managing edi-
tor of this paper two years ago.
He was co-leading the seminar
with Rita, not improbably because
the editor during his time, Buddy
Berkson, was general secretary of
USSPA in Washington. He was
also irreconcilably original, admit-
ting without duress that his cur-
rent anarchist bent had resulted
in the' unusual structure of the
seminar that unfolded in later
days.
Oh yes, there was a third char-
acter, Jerry Gold, whom we met in
our T-groups the day after arriv-
al. Gold is a professor of social
psychology at NYU and over 30,
but we learned to trust him.
What are T-groups? Jerry was
responsible for that innovation;
T stands for "training" in sensi-
tivity to other people's reactions
to oneself. The groups are run on
a pattern conceived by National
Training Labs at Bethel, Maine,

which have been used to help
businessmen, workers and miscel-
laneous groups adjust smoothly to
each other.
DIVIDED into two sections, we
sat in separate conference rooms
around a table, while a tape re-
corder unwound its threat. Down
at one corner sat Jerry. He told
us that he would not lead a for-
mal discussion, then leaned back
and clammed up. When the silence
became painful, someone started
talking about the weather and
soon there was a debate raging.
about the civil rights movement.
Suddenly Jerry's whispered tones,
"Is this what you really want to
talk about?" stopped everyone in
mid-gesture. A simple request, yet
with great implications for the
course of the T-session.
"Well, what are we supposed to
talk about?" asked one girl. "Why
shouldn't we talk about civil
rights?"
Ken Winter later tried to put
into words his impressions of this
crucial turning point from topic-
centered to group-centered discus-
sion.
"If not civil rights, then what?
Some other public 'issue?' No-
if not that, then what? Talk
about ourselves. People usually
do that and it's usually dull ...
talk about ourslves, as we are
acting and feeling here and now.
Is that a subject at all?-isn't
there an infinite regression: I
talk about myself talking about
myself talking about myself ...
"No, as it turns out: I am

feeling things all along; you are
having an effect on me and I on
you. And I can tell you, and you
me. And when we do that, not
running out of the room or hid-
ing behind our defenses, rich
and unpredictable things hap-
pen: I find there is not a void
inside me, nor one inside you;
those dark and tangled events
in there begin to make sense.
This is worth doing, and you
(whom, in other milieux, I would
have been content to place in
some abstract category and
thense ignore) are worth doing
it with. There is something go-
ing on here and now: me! -
why, until now, did I always at-
tend only to the public, the ab-
stract, the distant?"
AS WE PURSUED these problems
in several two-hour sessions over
the week, the room became the
world-to be ambivalently feared
and sought after each day, as bar-
riers to honesty and trust broke
down or armor became welded
more tightly than ever.
With no rules, no ex-officia
leadership, no pre-established so-
cial order, we grappled with pri-
mary problems of social structure
and interpersonal relationships.
We tried on roles, dared to ex-
pose secret natures, laughed, cried,
attempted-perhaps foolishly, per-
haps sincerely-to communicate
by physical touch, by ESP.
"I think you're superficial;
you're trying to manipulate every-
one in this room."
Words that might provoke anger

and a walkout, instead created
deep concern in the accused that
the others are misunderstanding
and imputing his motives. There
follows a group discussion on why
we form opinions about other peo-
ple on incomplete evidence. Or
how it is very possible, in trying
to reach out and touch another,
unwittingly to injure a third on-
looker who empathizes with one
he thinks you are abusing.
"AS CHARLIE Brown would say
about considering all the effects
of any action, 'the theological im-
plications are astounding'!" This
came from one editor after we
were emotionally wrung from a
particular T-session. Later we
would speculate how desirable it
might be to use T-groups for
freshman orientation to introduce
frightened new students to the
warm college community hidden
beneath the impersonal multiversi-
ty.
T-groups had to end; indeed,
their eventual termination was the
one thing we could be sure about.
For some they were revelatory and
helped them to understand former
inhibitions: for others the exper-
ience was too swift and fright-
,ening. Everyone put on some or
all of their shielding, but the con-
sensus was that the group exper-
ience made adjustment to the new
environment easier. Jerry Gold
had to say goodbye, and we set-
tIed down to the weeks of guest
speakers, study discussions, and
serious (!) reading from our mag-
nificent 250-volume educational Ii-
brary.

.4

I

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:

Vivian Reaffirms HU4C Stand

Ta the Fdi'or:
AN ARTICLE whic'h was pub-
lished on page one of The
Daily. on Saturday, September 3,
states that Mr. Michael Zweig, of
the University of Michigan Eco-
nomics Department. told a rally
on the diag, on September 2, "Vi-
vian refused his appeal to con-
demn the HUAC hearings. . ."
I should like to point out that
I have expressed very specifically
my dissatisfaction with the tac-
tics of the House Committee on
Un-American Activities, for on all
three occasions that its requests
for appropriations have come to
the floor of the House during the
89th Congress, I have voted; on
the record, to deny these appro-
priations. On the first such occa-
sion, on February 25, 1964, I ex-
pressed my dews as follows:

Mr. Speaker, today I vote against
immediate concurrence by the
House to the formal request for
the year's appropriation for, the
House Un-American Activities
Committee. I do so partly because
I believed the amount requested
by the Committee to be exdessive,
but more because I am convinced
that the time has come to curb
the ill-used power of this com-
mittee.
The security of the United
States is a valid and vital concern
of the Congress; the Congress does
have the obligation to protect the
United Stftes from its few disloyal
citizens who would conspire to
overcome our Government by force
or falsehood. But the House Un-
American Activities Committee has
been notoriously active this past
decade in branding many persons

as purveyors of falsehood, when in
fact many of us considered other-
wise. The committee should have
been zealous in protecting the
rights of citizens subpoenaed un-
der its jurisdiction to speak free-
ly and to offer criticisms and to
dissent, for this right is the only
true protection against falsehood.
But such has not been the case.
FOR THIS reason, I vote against
this appropriation and will sup-
port measures to transfer the
functions of the Un-American Ac-
tivities Committee to the House
Judiciary Committee. The Judi-
ciary Committee by virtue of its
membership, staff, purview over
administrative agencies and man-
date from this body, does have the
resources to serve the House and
the Nation as our watchdog
against false subversive propa-

ganda; more important, for many
years it has demonstrated its de-
votion to upholding for every per-
son our constitutional Bill of
Rights.
If the responsibilities of the Un-
American Activities Committee
can be transferred to the Judi-
ciary Committee during the 89th
Congress, I will support a supple-
mental appropriation for the Ju-
diciary Committee, if needed, to
assure that any essential internal
security surveillance may be car-
ried on.
I continue to believe to this date
that this Committee all too often
misuses its powers. And as I in-
dicated to Mr. Zweig, I expect to
continue to vote against appro-
priations for the committee.
-Weston E. Vivian
Member of Congress

Cou rse Evaluation

To the Editor:
PROF. R O N A L D FREEDMAN
said yesterday:
"The student evaluation booklet
printed in last Tuesday's Daily
gives a few students an opportun-
ity to write anonymously sum-
mary comments, based on grossly
inadequate data, which may do
serious damage to the professional
careers of University teachers."
Small world.
The grades and credits printed
on every semester's transcript give
a few professors an opportunity
to write anonymously summary
comments, based on grossly inade-
quate data, which may do serious
damage to the professional careers
of University students.
-Kenneth Winter, Grad.

4

The 18-Year-Old Vote:
Catching the Voters Young

STUDENT GOVERNMENT COUNCIL met
last night to discuss the principle of
the 18-year-old vote and their campaign
for its passage by the people of Michi-
gan on the November 8 ballot.
There are two main arguments used.
The first is the ancient cry "if we're old
enough to fight, we're old enough to vote."
While it is true that if one must accept
the responsibilities of citizenship one
should be able to exercise the rights of
citizenship, it is ludicrous to equate vot-
ing, a rational process, with fighting, an
irrational act.
However, the second argument is con-
vincing and rational: if the 18-year-old
were given the right to vote immediately
after his high school civics course, he
would be able to participate in the sys-
tem with knowledge.
The vote must be extended to the 18-
year-old if he is to participate in the
process of governing. The "old guard" of
the two political parties must be rejuve-
nated by young blood which can be most
immediately brought in by allowing them
to vote.
A T THE PRESENT TIME, the span sep-
arating the 18-year-old from the vot-
ing machine renresents more than a mere
time period: it represents a time in
which his mind forms opinions based on
newly found knowledge; he becomes in-
volved in a career, college life, prospec-
tive marriage.
Surveys show that at the age of 30 he
is often a non-voting voter because he
feels he has better things to do. When
he begins to feel the effects of govern-
ment taxation, social security, education
for his children and salary increases and
decreases, then he pushes the lever and
exercises his right to vote.
President Johnson, speaking to Wash-
ington's summer interns, voiced the
theme of participatory democracy when
Editorial Staff
MARK R. KILLINGSWORTH, Editor
BRUCE WASSERS'IEIN, Executive Editor
CLARENCE FANTO HARVEY WASSERMAN
Managing Editor Editorial Director
JOHN MEREDITH .. Associate Managing Editor
LEONARD PRATT . Associate Managing Editor
BABETTE COHN . .,.... . Personnel Director

he said "Justice means that every man
should have a share in creating his own
destiny,, justice means that those who
live by the rules shall have a part in
making those rules."
He added that "student leaders and
young citizens should have an important
part in answering these questions"-the
questions of government.
THE STATE'S student leaders are at-
tempting to gain the right to "have an
important part in answering these ques-
tions." ' In a political system such as ours,
the major opportunity to answer questions
is through the process of voting. The pep-
ple's representatives appeal to the voter;
it is the voter who determines much of
his policy and therefore the policy of this
country.
The student body presidents of, Michi-
gan's colleges and universities will meet
at Wayne State University September 18
to plan their campaign. They would like,
given enough monetary and volunteer
support, to spread literature to the voters
and have prominent politicians such as
Robert Kennedy (D-NY) campaign.
As Johnson said "Never has the day of
the young person in government been so
promising. And never has the need for
able young, dedicated and trained people
been more urgent and so promising."
BECAUSE THE NEED is so urgent the
SGC campaign should be supported so
the 18-year-old can be allowed to vote,
because, to paraphrase Johnson, our fel-
low citizens have faith in the ability of
young people not just to learn about our
government, but to make a contribution
to our government.
-PAT O'DONOHUE
Heavy Casualties
LABOR DAY WEEKEND offers a wel-
come end-of-the-summer break for
people on nine-to-five, five-day week
schedules. And, of course, every year peo-
ple who are driving look to the weekend
with expectation of a few hundred traf-
fic deaths, but never their own, never
one of their friends.
This past weekend 636 Americans died
on the highways. Poorly designed high-
ways, unsafe automobiles, poorly trained
or enxele r divers killed more neonle

..:~..,4. . . .' 3 3 ,. :r . .-s.' .$'..? . n , F ..F ...... r .. ...... } .... .HM ................. .. ...t :,... . .. .x . a ..,h : 1. t. .. :.' a'.ii , ' :. ,"
.t:.. . .......a . ... . ..... ... ... : ...... $..... . .. . .:. , .. :..t...... } ....."':,.,,...... ..... . .3 . .'{,T.. +"
. .... ... .......... ... ..:. ... ... ... ... . . .......... ........ . 4 . ..... . . . .:. . . . . .. . ... ... . .... ...........t.F . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................$..,\....,........... ....:...$.h:..........:......X........
...... ... . . .. .. .. ... n.v. ... ... ..... ... ..... . ......................... ....... 2 . .:.:... ..C''2. .:
A Malaysian Y Singapore:. Too Late?!

EDITOR'S NOTE: This edi-
torial first appeared in the May-
July 1966 edition of Demos, the
organ of the Democratic Social-
ist Club at the University of
Singapore. -S.S.
BARELY THREE YEARS ago
there were few who seriously
doubted that Singapore and Ma-
laysia by political, economic and
military logic comprised one unit.
Few doubted that merger would
see the end of an historical dislo-
cation. Subsequent developments
in Malaysia and events since sep-
aration are, however, enough to
cause the most ardent advocate of
reunification to reconsider his po-
sition. He must try to resolve the
paradox that, when the fates of
the two territories were in the
hands of the British, they strove
to cooperate, but now that they
are their own masters, they have
chosen to pursue divergent, even
conflicting, policies.
Radical re-thinking on the des-
tinies of Singapore and Malaysia
over the next one or two decades
must be done. The political, eco-
nomicand military logic that we
once assumed have not proved to
be so conclusively logical, for,
despite them, somehow the illogic
of mutual antagonism between the
two territories has prevailed
against the logic of cooperation.
Even with Singapore's separa-
tion, few realized that the desti-
nies of the two territories had
changed. It was believed that with
party recrimina'tions now out of
the way, the two governments
would be able to cooperate. The
old thinking that fundamental po-
litical, economic and military log-
ic would compel both territories
to work closely remained, but this
has not been the case.
Such optimism, in fact, hid two
vital implications of separation.
First, separation marked the fail-
ure of the two governments to
achieve any degree of cooperation
in the 22 months since Malaysia
Day. If anything, it served to un-
derscore the incompatibility of the
two governments. Secondly, sep-
aration decisively committed both
territories to different paths of de-
velopment in the next 15 or 20
years-for the foreseeable future
-during which distinct national
identities would gradually emerge.

old expectations will only provide
grounds for continual conflict.
IF THE TWO territories in two
decades from today should come
togther again, it would be in vast-
ly changed circumstances and un-
der vastly changed terms. The
emotional, political, economic, mil-
itary and international implica-
tions would have changed. Noth-
ing ever resembling the circum-
stances and the terms that led to
Malaysia in 1963 would come to
pass again. We must expect a
transformation in the approach,
in the very nature of any re-
combination of the two territories
in the future. We can never go
back to the old expectations, the
old aspirations that led to merger
in 1963. Whatever the new situa-
tion separation has brought, how-
ever bitter, however cruel, from
the new situation we must go for-
ward. This is the most important
thing.
Separation has brought about
great changes In the relative posi-
tions of the. two territories. There
must be a radical reassessment of
the relative positions of the two
territories such that a reasonably
firm basis for cooperation be-
tween the two territories over the
next decade or so can be con-
structed.
Now there are two separate and
equal, independent and sovereign
nations. Each government expects
to be approached on this basis of
equality. It is the only basis on
which both governments will agree
to cooperate. Thus there must be
a systematic re-evaluation of the
affinity of the two territories: for
it is only out of this that a hap-
pier relationship can be forged.
THE DIFFERENCES that have
set the two territories apart must
be recognized. Ideology, for in-
stance, distinguishes the two gov-
ernments. Faced with different
political and economic circum-
stances, the political development
of the two territories have pro-
ceeded in different directions. The
racial composition of the two pop-
ulations are also different. Race-
let us say it-is a more serious
problem than many would admit.
Before there can be any at-
tempt at cooperation. politicians

I

_4

IN SEPTEMBER 1963 BRITISH AND MALAYAN NEGOTIATORS agreed to form a Federation of Ma-
laysia embracing all of the former British Empire in southeast Asia, particularly Malaya, an independ-
end Commonwealth member and Singapore, a semi-colonial territory. Traditional racial antagonisms
between the Chinese and Malays had persisted from the time of formation of the federation. Violence
flared in the summer of 1964 when Chinese and Malays clashed in the streets of Singapore during a
Malay demonstration celebrating the birth of Mohammed. On Aug. 9, 1965 Singapore withdrew and
became' an independent, sovereign nation, charging that the federation had forced her withdrawal.

the two governments today are a
continuation of the disagreements
that arose while Singapore was
still part of the Federation. The
constant friction suggests that
there are enduring causes-- the
racial compositions, the different
ideologies of the two territories-
behind the conflict.
Invitably the people in both ter-
ritories come to question what
they accepted for nearly two dec-
ades after the war: that the ter-
ritories share a common destiny.
Once there was this implicit be-
lief that both peoples would com-
bine to form a single nationality,
that they would accept a common
government. So before merger it
tva. fal a nnl Rri ,.h ta~.i ,.

ments urged in favor of merger
were, till the very day of separa-
tion, confidently, if grimly, held
on to. No one could accept that
experience had begun to mock log-
ic. But the dispute struckroots
deeper than anyone ever dreamt.
For those who believed that the
two peoples formed a single na-
tionality, separation was a trau-
matic experience. After separation
the gulf has, indeed, widened.
As the old thinking has not prov-
ed adequate, there must be a re-
assessment of the destinies of the
two territories. Relations between
Singapore and Malaysia ever since
merger have developed against all
the expectations of the old think-
ivrT_ f C r.n r n ~i-- - JTlrn- -

cally workable as well. Such a re-
lationship was never established.
But there were complications. The
dispute led to campaigning for
popular support by the political
parties. The issue at stake too
changed. The dispute now was
over the very political nature of
the Federation as a whole. On this
issue the dispute foundered. The
issue raised such implications and
generated such emotions that a
crisis was reached. The Federation
as it stood could no longer be
maintained.
Despite developments since sep-
aration, the old thinking has still
linered.I T is rpeirahle that there

A:
4