Page Six

THE MICHIGAN DAILY

Saturday, June S, 1968



Blame it all on
the faculty, baby
By ROBERT JOHNSTON
The Academic Revolution, by Christopher Jencks and David Ries-
man. Doubleday, $10.00.
JN THIS FOURTH year of the American student rebellion "stu-
dent power" has become a nationwide call to arms. With Colum-
bia, the students have succeeded beyond the wildest dreams of
Berkeley's Free Speech Movement; they have brought the Uni-
versity down about the trustees', the faculty's, the administration's
and their own ears. This done, what next? And what can other
campuses across the country stage for an encore? -
This fine book by Christopher Jencks and David Riesman sug-
gests that those who are interested in getting to the heart of the
problem, the real custodians of power in the American university.
migh do well to consider the faculty. Careful though the tenured
professor might be to maintain his absent-minded, threadbare
image, they say, he is in fact not only well-paid, even by the stan-
dards of 10 years ago, but very much in control of American aca-
demic life.
An aggressive student newspaper can penetrate the inner
councils of the administration and the trustees (and will generally
find them of less than all-consuming interest). But no amount
of work will suffice to penetrate the academic veil of tenured ap-
pointment annd curricula committees; or even of full faculty meet-
ings. The faculty tend to their own business with an autonomy un-
paralleled in most other American institutions.
It is an old saw tossed off in first semester economics corses
that "economics" can only be fully defined by saying that it is
"what economists study." Jencks and Riesman make clear that this
has become all too true. Tenured economists and tenured econo-
mists alone decide wl o is to get a Ph.D. and thereby be admitted
to their little fraternity; whose journal articles will be published
and commented upon; who will be hired, fired, promoted; and in-
deed even who will get the federal government's research money.
And so on for the other tightly-knit university departments.
IN GENERAL, it must be said that students have not recog-
nized this crucial role of the faculty in the institutions they have
sought to change. The administration and administrators have
been more obvious targets.
When 10,000 students at Berkeley launched the student revolt
four years ago, they employed a shrewd mixture of peaceful and
not-so-peaceful demonstrations and demands to put their point
across. They sensed a moral malaise in the university's systematic
inattention to themselves as students and to what they felt to be
their own'legitimate interests in the quality of their own lives. And
they were determined to make the university confront these per-
ceived inadequacies.
Students felt these problems in the way their own interests in
the surrounding community, in the ghettoes, or in the South, were
denied; and they probably felt them most of all in the many subtle
ways the university and the society set standards and exacted in-
creasingly more work and attention in areas and pertinent to
questions whose relevance, economic or otherwise, they simply
could not fathom.
But while they would have gotten high marks in ideology from
Marx, Lenin would have considered their tactics a bust. While they
have been aiming their attention at the administration's citadels,
they have allowed faculty to go on with business-as-usual, quietly
building up a most remarkable system of self-perpetuating, self-
reinforcing, autonomous guilds.
IN BOTH THESE respects Jencks' and Riesman's book is il-
luminating. In general, the authors pay little attention to the
problems that have occupied student demonstrators most - only
passing reference is made to student unrest anywhere, and the
Institute for Defense Analyses Is never mentioned.
But Columbia Students for a Democratic Society would cer-
tainly take heart from one set of illustrative observations:
"America seems to have reached the point where it will
not allow a university like Columbia to go downhill even if its
leaderdship is bankrupt, its location dysfunctional, and its fa-
culty deteriorating. Faced with such a possibility the Ford
Foundation or (in a more discreet way) the federal govern-
ment will intervene to save the day-or at least try. Like any
public utility, Columbia must be kept alive and flourishing,
rewarded for its blunders as well as its triumphs"
The authors' point is that the academically affluent, like all
affluent, stick together, and command considerable resources to
maintain their position against all comers. And naturally the aca-
demically affluent have their school ties of friendship, affection,
loyalty, and common interest whose compatible interests they are
only too happy to serve.
It is generally well-known and has been for some time that
faculties in a handful of universities in this country set the stan-
dards against which every other institution of higher education
with a few exceptions is more or less forced to measure itself. Not

surprisingly, few come anywhere near the level of the pace-makers,
nor have relative positions at or near the top changed more than
slightly since before World War II.
This is perhaps all well and good, at least at the level of
graduate research and training with which Jencks and Riesman
are most concerned. Certainly it has given this country the finest
self-perpetuating scientific and social scientific research appar-
atus in the world.
BUT WHILE THE authors argue that students in general and
undergraduates in particular have been getting their due share,
their analysis is entirely impressionistic and seemingly contradict-
ed elsewhere in the book.
What in fact seems to have been happening over the past 10,
years or so is that the academic world has been receiving a rapidly
rising allocation of the national wealth for "higher education" and
has seen to its allocation within academia very much on the fac-
ulty's terms. And this has meant that it has been overwhelmingly
invested in the development of the academic profession Jencks
and Riesman discuss. And the academic profession, let it be said
once again, has overwhelmingly seen to its own needs first -
job security, professional control within the elders of the "guild,"
pay, control over apprentice training and selection, research, and
lesser perquisites like offices, secretaries, etc., all in that approxi-
mate order.
And that is what students have been complaining about.
If undergraduates and nonprofessionally oriented graduate
students really wanted to see some action in their education,
they would occupy not the citadels of the administration but
those of the faculty. They would sit-in on faculty curricula and
appointments meetings until their voices really were heard.
They would stand their ground against the well-heeled pro-
fessional professor until he really did pay attention to teaching,
They would make sure that professional appointments were 50
per cent based on established teaching record, rather than vir-
tually none at all as is generally the case now. They would make
4~r fia. a .,mrmpv~f'~ axe 4'11if11' fpp, re~ally wre ~alocated toi

sbooksbooksbooksbooksb
What the hippies do, hie says, is deal dope

l*

By URBAN LEHNER
We are the people our par-
ents warned us against, by
Nicholas von Hoffman. Quad-
rangle, $5.95.
The average straight- Uni-
versity student, immobilized
through the spring of 1967 in
Ann Arbor by a heavy class
lad, and through the summer
--"the loving summer" of 1967
-in Birmingham or Chicago or
Buffalo by vacation jobs, had
two sources of information
about Haight-Ashbury.
He could read Time maga-
zine (et. al.) for an insight
into how a relative handful of
turned-on, wide-eyed young
Americans in sandals and beads
were building the kingdom of

love on earth in an out-of-the-
way nook of San Francisco. Or
he could imbibe the endless and
fascinating speculation of such
fully-credentialed pop culture'
watchers as Leslie Fiedler, serv-
ing a stint as the University's
writer - in - residence a few
months before he himself was
arrested on drug charges. In
Fiedler's view, the hippies were
the student activists who
marched South with SNCC in
the early sixties, got their heads
bashed in by redneck cops,
failed to change American so-
ciety, became disillusioned,
dropped out, and ended up on
Haight Street where they were
now trying to build a righteous
new society to replace the cor-
rupt old ones

Only later, in the fall of 1967,
did the straight student trapped
in college towns on the wrong
side of the Sierre Nevadasrbe-
gin to hear a different story.
When the two top acid dealers
in the country were mysterious-
ly killed and the third disap-
peared, when the headlines be-
gan to read "Murder in Hippie-
land" with increasing regular-
ity, a number of explanations
were proffered. The Mafia had
moved in, the real hippies had
deserted the Haight and the
East Village to establish rural
communes, the whole bit about
love and flowers had been a
lot of hooey in the first place.
Even the straights who had
flown, driven and hitchhiked to
California during the summer

to find out for themselves
didn't know what the truth was.
With We are the people our
parents warned us against,
Nicholas von Hoffman, a re-
porter for the Washington 1ost
who spent the summer in the
Haight, has essayed a plausible
synthesis of some of t h e
theories about the hippies. He
develops his major thesis
("What they do regardless of
philosophy and world-view, is
deal dope.") with a vast cumu-
lation of details which he pre-
sents in unstructured episodes
spliced with unrelated bold-
faced squibs from the news-
wires, epigrams, underground
poetry and sundry graffiti.
Although the reporting is%
first-rate (von Hoffman was

apparently accepted by the
community and eyewitnessed
tabbing sessions, speed parties,
and transactions of acid), at
times the proliferation finci-
dents does become dull and re-
dundant. What saves the book
are the sections where the
author stops to analyze the
personalities and the weltan-
schauungs of the Haight in the
context of a well-heeled society'
of household gadgets and com-
puter programs and a rational-
istic, utilitarian polity. His ap-
proach is academic without be-
ing rigid, creative without be-
ing facetious, critical without
being prejudiced.
Von Hoffman discards' Tinie's
view of the hippies as children
of love as propaganda the Dig-

Cold War: Order

-- at the co's't ofwa t?

By AZINNA NWAFOR
Containment and Revolu-
tion, edited by David Horo-
witz. Beacon Press, $5.95.
This is a highly explosive,
radically brilliant re-interpre-
tation of the Cold War, the
first in a series of monographs
by the Bertrand Russell Centre
on "Studies in Imperialism and
the Cold War." Forthcoming
volumes in the series include
Liberation and Coexistence, The
Corporations and the Cold War,
and United States Imperialism;
and if this important volume is
indicative of what is to follow,
it promises to be a fine series.
The distinguished contribu-
tors to this volume - Isaac
Deutscher, William Appleman
Williams, John Gittings, John
Bagguley, among others - seek
to relocate the origins of the
Cold War in historical perspec-
tive, in the context of the
American determination to op-
pose all social revolutions start-
ing with the intervention in the
Russian revolution of 1917
down to the present conflict in
Vietnam - indeed from Pet-
rograd to Saigon and beyond -
and in the process assuming the
role of a world counter-revolu-
tionary gendarme.
This role is succinctly
summed up in the Truman Doc-
trine's promise - with the
Greek revolution as its imme-
diate progenitor-that "it must
be the policy of the United
States to support free peoples
who are resisting attempted
subjugation by armed minori-
ties or ,by outside pressure."
This carte blanche indicates a
warm preference for any sort
of regime, however repressive,
however militaristic or fascist,
rather than acceptance of the
necessity of a revolutionary
change. It constitutes in effect
the consecration of the status
quo; all the more shocking in
being upheld by a nation which
itself boasts of a revolutionary
origin.
This desire for order - even
the order of a graveyard - is
beautiful and fearful. One is
reminded of the same conjunc-
tion of aestheticism and bar-
barism which led Adrian Lev-
erkehr in Thomas Mann's Doc-
tor Faustus to declare that
"even a stupid order is better
than none at all." To which one
can reply: "So much the worse
for order." For this quest for
order which thinly camouflages
the continuance of unbridled
oppression, for peaceful change
where the forces of order have
ascertained that no meaningful
change can be peaceful - this
surely will not serve as an ade-
quate answer for the impulse to
revolutionary change.
T h i s counter-revolutionary
impulse of the Cold War is ex-
plored in the book's essays on
the decision to intervene in the
Russian Revolution; in the are-
na of World War II; during the
abortive Greek revolution and
the successful Chinese revolu-
tion; and finally in an examin-
ation of the roots of the cur-
rent conflict in Vietnam. The
analyses are highly unexcep-
tionable and most impressive,
as the authors pursue their
quarry with an implacable
logic. The blurb says - with
justice - that Containment
and Revolution is the output of
"an impressive group of com-
mitted researchers." And these
researchers, one might add,
have moreover maintained a
consistent awareness of Regis
n~hr~v~ w~nin tht "hn

famous "X" article in Foreign
Affairs in 1947 is generally re-
garded as having served as the
marching hymn of U.S. cold
warriors - to show that NATO
powers "had drawn a line ar-
bitrarily across Europe against
an attack no one was planning."
Indeed, Russia, bled white and
exhausted by World War II,
and depending, moreover, on
American foreign aid, would
not conceivably mount an at-
tack on anyone even if it had
so desired.
Nor was Russian leadership
particularly bent on painting
the world Red. Stalin was after
all the architect of Socialism in
one country and his essentially
conservative mind is shown by
several of the contributors in
this book: a caste of mind
which Churchill - with his as-
tuteness - discovered and pro-
claimed. The Russians were
very much interested in pre-
serving the war alliance and
in promoting international in-
struments for peace-keeping
(as their role in the establish-
ment of the UN points up
clearly.)
Indeed, the presumed aggres-
siveness existed more tangibly
in the minds of certain West-
ern statesmen - as in Church-
ill's sabre - rattling F u 1 t o n
speech. Stalin did everything in
his power to discourage revolu-
tionary movements in Greece,
Yugoslavia, and China - im-
pressing on Mao Tse-tung, un-
successfully, the need to sur-
render leadership to Chiang
Kai-Shek. He also urged the
communist parties of 'France
and Italy to join the coalition
governments of their parlia-
mentary systems rather than
seek to overthrow those very
systems.
Here, we are forced with an-
other assumption of cold war-
riors in the opposition to revo-
lutions: that is, the overhasty
readiness to discern the ma-
chinations of foreign hands as
the motive forces of revolution-
ary and national liberation
movements. To minds readily
addicted to the maintenance of
the ,status quo, this is a very
convenient and Pavlovian im-
pulse. Hence the designation
of the Russian Bolsheviks in
1917 as conscious "German
agents," "masters of the Ger-
man intrigue' and of the Rus-
-sian revolution itself as master-
minded by Imperial Germans;
the equally facile tendency to
regard, in face of the stubborn
evidence to the contrary, the
Chinese revolutionaries as be-
ing no more than the tools of
Stalinist policy of Russian ex-
pansionism, even while Stalin
was busy undermining the
strength of the Chinese revo-
lution in an all-out effort to
prevent its success. Against the
willfull obstruction of Stalin,
Mao initiated the final mili-
tary offensives thatmwere to
culminate In the triumph of
the revolution. In so doing, he
ignored Stalin's insistent per-
suasion to yield to Chiang and
to allow his partisans to be in-
corporated in Chiang's armies.
Disregarding these instruc-
tions, Mao went on fighting till
his struggle was crowned in
victory. Yet, in spite of all this,
we are fed the Byzantine pro-
nouncements of a Dean Rusk
when he asserted, in 1951, that
China is "a colonial Russian
government - a Slavonic Man-
chuko on a large scale. It is
not the government of China.
i does nt n sth first test.

the tendency. This also in spite
of the Great Schism in the
world Communist movement;
in spite of the visible absence
of' Chinese and Russians on
the theater of war; in spite of
charges by Russia that China
impedes arrangements for the
movement of material Russian
aid to North Vietnam; and in
spite of Chinese government
proclarations that, revolutions
are not exportable and that
people who are going to make
revolutions are going to make
them for 'themselves.'
One should not deny that
governments which are com-
mitted to, the triumph of revo-
lutionary movements and gov-
ernments which, moreover, are
themselves products of revolu-
tionary upheavals will not be
displeased by stirrings of revo-
Iutionary ' activity anywhere,
and would in fact be very fa-
vorably disposed to such move-
ments.
Yet to credit them with suc-
cess of these movements is to
award them more than they

deserve. It is to accord them a
victory that they mcst anxious-
ly would envy. Surely no one
now believes that Castro is a
pawn of the Soviets or of the
Chinese. What one achieves in
viewing history from this Cold
War perspective is to overlook
the importance of' the popular
support and the popular roots
of these movements without
which victory is most certainly
unattainable. It is indeed to
disregard the significance of
the dedolonization and nation-
alist tides that have been so
prominent a feature of, the
post-war international arena,
in which new nations, emerging
on the world scene from the
clutches of European domina-
tion, are determined to regain
and assess their humanity. They
are not willing to replace Brit-
ish imperialism with Russian
imperialism. To them, contem-
porary history has its signifi-
cance in the rejection of the
domination of one group of na-
tions as subject peoples of an-
other group of nations.

This volume clearly seeks a
rethinking on the Cold War,
and it deserves to get it. This
is an imbpressive casefor the
left as well as for historical ob-
jectivity. It not only drastically
corrects the dominant and pre-
vailing explanation of the ori-
gins of the Cold War; indeed,
in the light of the new empha-
sis, the previous writings emerge
as impressionistic, lacking in
intellectual rigor, highly ideo-
logical and instruments. of the
Cold War itself.
The next move must now be
made by the traditional in-
terpreters of the Cold War.'
They need to rise ,to the level
of analysis of their challengers,
and in the process - py the in-
scrutable workings of the Heg-
elian Unity of opposites no'
doubt - we shall gain a clearer
understanding of the Cold War
phenomenon. Only thus can we
seriously begin to grapple with
the demands for survival which
the Cold War urgently presents.
One rwaits the next move with
considerable interest.:

gers fed the first reporters wht
ventured into the Haight, but
he finds it significant that
those dreprters swallowed it.
For the individual and political
forces which created the hip-
pies, according to von Hoff-
man, have, been present in
America for at least 20 years.
Where the silent generation of
the late '40's and early '50's
found refuge from a plastic
and programmed society in the
security of family life, the hip-
pies have relied on drugs (es-
pecially LSD) which awake the
senses, senses dulled by de-
terminism and materialism.
The New Left, -he continues,
has found 1that refuge in a
politics which demands abso-
lute consistency between per-
sonal conscience and political
action, a consistency which
leads people to storm the Pen-
tagon and pour blood on draft
tiles. And, withF iedler, he
sees the logical connection be-
tween the communalism of the
small segment of the hippies
who are college-educated ex-
SNCC members and the irra- 4
tionalistic politics of the small
revolutionary segment of the
New Left. Both demand an end
not to the social structure but
to the society and a rebuilding
from the soil.
This is fairly heady stuff, but
von Hoffman's touch is closer
to Mailer's or Tom Wolfe's
than to Riesman's. He is at
his best when he takes a small
detail or piece of local color
and expands on it, uses it to
symbolize.something larger and
more complicated. He is at his'0'
worst when it comes to making
suggestions or predictions, for
althoigh he' sees and under-
stands the situation, he either
lacks or does dot show the vi-
sion to deal with it, to do any- ,
thing but keep it in hand. Ie
grasps what the arguments are
about, but he fails to assess
them.

- -

WORSHIP

FIRST CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH
On the Campus-,
Corner State and William Sts.
Terry N. Smith, Minister
Ronald C. Phillips, Assistant
Summer Worship Service at 10:00 a.m.
Church School through Sixth Grade.
HURON HILLS BAPTIST CHURCH
Presently meeting at the YM-YWCA
Affiliated with the Baptist General Conf.
Rev. Charles Johnson
761-6749
9:30 a.m.-Coffee.
9:45 a.m.-U Fellowship Bible Discussion.
11:00 a.m.-"Faith-Means to Meaning in
Our Chaotic World."
7:00 p.m.-Special Presentation: "Building
for What?!"
8:30 p.m.-College and Careers Fellowship.
UNIVERSITY LUTHERAN CHAPEL
IThe Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod)
Alfred T. Scheips, Pastor
1511 Washtenaw
Sunday at 9:45 a.m.-Service, sermon by Pas-
tor Scheips, "Answers for Intellectuals."
Sunday at 11:00 a.m.--Class, John's Gospel.
Sunday at 7:0 0 p.m.-Meet at 801 S. Forest,
Lutheran Student Center, the Rev. Donald
Luther, speaker.
Wednesday at 8:30 p.m.-Discussion Class on
WCC Bible Studies.
Wednesday at 10:00 p.m.-Midweek Service,
the Rev. Alfred T. Scheips.
ST. ANDREW'S EPSICOPAL CHURCH
306 N. Division
8:00 a.m.-Holy Communion.
9:00 a.m..-Holy Communion and Sermon.
11:00 a.m.--Morning Prayer and Sermon.
7:00 psm.-Evening Prayer,
FIRST CHURCH OF CHRIST,
SCIENTIST
1833 Washtenow Ave.
SUNDAY
10:30 a.m.-Worship Services. Suhday School
m -on oc

FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
Phone 662-4466
1432 Washtenaw Ave.
Ministers: Ernest T. Campbell, Malcolm G.
Brown, John W. Woser, Harold S. Horan
SUNDAY
Worship at 9:00, 10:30 a.m., and 12:00 noon.
Presbyterian Campus Center located at the
Church.
ALDERSGATE STUDENT
FELLOWSHIP and THE ANN ARBOR
FREE METHODIST CHURCH
1700 Newport Road
David E. Jefford, Pastor
945 a.m.-Discussion.
7:00 p.m.-Vespers.
For transportation call 663-2869.
PACKARD ROAD BAPTIST CHURCH-
Southern Baptist Convention
1131 Church St.
761-0441
Rev. Tom Bloxam
9:45 a.m.-Sunday School.
11:00 a.m.-Morning Worship.
6:30 p.m.---Training Union.
7:30 p.m.-Evening Worship.
ST. AIDEN'S EPISCOPAL CHAPEL
(North Campus)
1679 Broadway
9:00 a.m.-Morning Prayer and Holy Com-
munion.
11 :00 a.m.-Coffee in the lounge.
LUTHERAN STUDENT CENTER
AND CHAPEL
National Lutheran Council
Hill St. at S. Forest Ave.
Rev. Percival Lerseth, Pastor
SUNDAY
10:30 a.m.-Worship Service.
7:00 p.m.-Rev. Donald Luther, Detroit,
"Inner City Church Work."

THE CHURCH OF CHRIST
W. Stadium at Edgewood
Across from Ann Arbor High
Roy V. Palmer, Minister
SUNDAY
10:00 a.m.-Bible School.
11:00 a.m.-Regular Worship.
6:00 p.m.-Evening Worship.

WEDNESDAY
7:30 p.m--Bible Study.
Transportationfurnished for all
NO 2-2756 .

services-Call

* '

FIRST METHODIST CHURCH AND
WESLEY FOUNDATION
At State and Huron Streets
Phone 662-4536
Hoover Rupert, Minister
Eugene Ransom, Campus Minister
Bartlett Beavin, Associate Campus Minister
SUNDAY
9:00 and 11:15 a.m.-Worship Services.
"A Man Stood Up," Dr. G. Merrill Lenox,
guest speaker.
UNIVERSITY REFORMED CHURCH
1001 East Huron
Phone 662-3153
Ministers: Calvin S. Malefyt, Paul Swets
General Synod:Reformed Church in America
10:00 a.m.-Special Service and Communion
in Rackham Auditorium.
8:00 p.m.-Service in church.

BETHLEHEM UNITED
CHURCH OF CHRIST
423 S. Fourth Ave.
Telephone 665-6149
Pastors: E. R. Klaudt, Armin
W. C. Wright

C. Bizar,

9:30 and 10:45 a.m.-Worship Services.
9:30 and 10:45 a.m.-Church School.
CANTERBURY HOUSE
330 Maynard
11:00 a.m. - Sermon by Craig Hammond.
Music by the New World Chamber Or-,

I

I

E

"1

11