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.

July 16, 1966 - Image 2

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1966-07-16

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


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

What Happens After the Machines?

1

PI , w. ^ =,If

ere Opinions Are Free. 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
Truth Will 1Prevail 2 ANR TANABR in

NEws PHONE: 764-0552

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

SATURDAY, JULY 16, 1966

NIGHT EDITOR: MICHAEL HEFFER

I

The Student's Decision:
To Kill or To Hide

A COLLEGE BOY-like so many others,
worried about the draft and in a vague
way about the immorality of his nation's
part in the Viet Nam war-explains why
he would prefer to stay out of the bloody
mess by struggling to keep up his grade
point and retain his II-S, not by CO-ing
It.
"I couldn't object to killing on any
sweeping moral grounds; I just can't ra-
tionalize my feelings about it. I only
know that if I were called up, I'd have to
explain to draft officials that it would
be' better not to send me; I'd be useless.
My first reaction to confronting the armed
"enemy" would be to hide behind a tree"
(said with unabashed honesty and humil-
ity, not cowardice, or even a mockingly
deigned brand of it).
IN A SENSE, the boy's philosophy is ad-
mirable because his objection to killing
was arrived at by thinking of himself as a
potential killer and rejecting that role
on intense emotional grounds, grounds in-
capable of being rationally and morally
explained, yet not really needing that ex-
planation. His reaction is an example of
a well-thought out and committed emo-
tionalism, not that of a momentary ex-
plosion.
Yet, he goes on to say that if he were
to find himself "up against a wall" facing
that same armed enemy, having no
chance to hide, he would shoot or do any-
thing, naturally, to preserve himself. But,
he continued, first, he would try to do
anything possible not to get into that
combat situation.
And what does his "anything" include?
Avoiding the draft-again, by virtue of a
high grade-point or by personally trying
to convince his draft board that he refuses
to kill.
THOUGH HE SAYS he feels that many,
if asked to kill, would share his senti-
ments, organized protest does not appeal
to him because, though it's rhetorical,
sign-waving manifestations may be star-
tling and commanding, its message is not.
It offers vague hortatives about the
killing and criminal intervention, in terms
of the distant sufferers, sufferers in the
mass.
It all evokes no feeling in comparison
to his placing himself in the role of mur-
derer. It's like a poet trying to talk about
beauty, hate, compassion - using the
terms themselves, but forgetting about his
"objective correlatives."
And yet, the only way that the boy may
avoid playing the role of murderer is by
strengthening the bond between himself
and the man he feels would also "hide"
if asked to kill.
FOR WHEN IT IS impossible to retain
his student deferment, how likely is
it that this individual can convince se-
lective service officials --concerned only
with supplying manpower, not with the

rights and wrongs of the operation they
supply it for-that the decision to kill
can only be made by him?
And, how many others who would never
have killed if someone else hadn't "forced
them up against a wall" have already kill-
ed because their voices, heard separately
were to a weak, drowned out in the
grinding of an already all too-well-orga-
nized and efficient war machine?
Unduobtedly, the war's directors, too,
if they stopped to place themselves in the
college boy's war scenario would also re-
ject killing on an individual basis. But, as
the scale of the conflict enlarges, it be-
comes easier to forget about the individ-
ual confrontation and misery and think
instead about battles and mass strategy.
And, individual deaths, when consider-
ed in the mass, are easier to justify by
abstract echoes of "preserving democracy"
(add capitalism and the Protestant ethic,,
though the justifiers would rather not).
BUT IF THE COLLEGE BOY who doesn't
want to kill is repulsed by the abstrac-
tions used to justify that killing, he finds
those, polar but abstract, nevertheless, of
organized protest equally as repugnant.
Anti-war protestors have not alienated
others from joining their movement be-
cause of a lack of fastidiousness in dress
or because their protest lack reasoned ar-
gument against administration foreign
policy, as some writers have suggested.
The college boy speaking above (who
also wears jeans and work shirts) just
wants the whole bloody mess stopped so
he can avoid being a murderer. He doesn't
have to have reasons to justify that de-
sire, nor does he demand reasons from
anyone else. He only asks a little well-
thought out emotionalism that will ap-
peal to his personal experiences and im-
aginings.
T1HE WAY to successfully argue against
those who justify the war in human
abstractions is not to counter their state-
ments with yet more abstractions.
What is needed are more tactics like
the war crimes sign, which a poet and for-
mer Daily staffer defended against charg-
es of "poor taste." She called the arrow
pointing from the sign to a Marine re-
cruiter nearby "decidedly healthy to me,
because it located in time and space the
wrong being protested. If armed forces,
whose purpose is killing, are wrong, then
those recruiters are wrong, those very
ones, right there."
THE COLLEGE BOY will not be added to
the ranks of protestors merely by cries
that all the killing is senseless and im-
miral. He needs to be assured that those
screaming about the immorality have per-
sonally placed themselves in his imagin-
ary combat situation and can feel, if not
explain, why it is all too immoral..
-SHIRLEY ROSICK

IT MAY BE HARD to get used to,
but someday most of us will
probably be out of a job.
And, it won't be any disgrace,
either.
The ultimate result of the "cy-
bernetic revolution" may be to re-
place most man-hours with ma-
chine hours, in professions from
secretarial work to operating a
steam shovel to accounting to
farming to teaching to almost any
"job" that can be named that
does not involve theoretical or
developmental science.
Even today, many semi-skilled
and un-skilled jobs have been
completely replaced by machines-
such as the development of a com-
pletely automated steel plant.
Communications and data sciences
have begun to replace such hither-
to indispensable workers as the
secretary and the telephone opera-
tor.
FOR THE FUTURE, the pos-
sibilities are unlimited. There are
devices to clean a house com-
pletely by machine and television
telephones that make the idea of
a "store" and clerks to wait on
customers obsolete. The prospec-
tive buyer merely tunes in on a
showing of fashions, foods, or
household goods, and makes se-
lections accordingly.
In education, the teaching ma-
chine has proved more effective
at communicating the basic in-
formation on a particular topic
than most lecturers. With this
problem out of the way, the process
of teaching may become a dis-
cussion by "equals"-the person
possessing the most information
acting as the prompter or the in-
ovator of in-depth exploration of
the topic at hand.

For farming, a radical change
will be the traveling farm. This
is a farm that literally travels on
a conveyor belt through a factory
that nourishes, harvests and prac-
tically processes an infinite variety
of plant foods. The factory needs
only be programmed for each as it
passes through.
THESE ARE NOT idle day-
dreams. They are ideas and in-
ovations that have either been
planned to the point of instiga-
tion or are already in operation.
What of politicans, and the
mechanics of government, one
may ask? Well, don't tell your
local congressman just yet, but
he too may soon be merely serving
in an honorary function.
For, with the mechanics of gov-
ernment located more often than
not in the administrative ma-
chinery set up by each President
(and much more that operates
irregardless of who is in office),
and the increasing tendency for
that function to fall to the
machine, the decisions of elective
government will have less and less
of an effect on the daily life of
the individual.
Machines, after all, do not take
breaks, are difficult to program
incompletely, are highly efficient,
and don't retire or have ambitions
for the supervisor's job.
But with all this inovation in
cybernetics, we will obviously find
most of the country out of work.
The problem of what to do with
these people, and how to make
their roles rewarding and accept-
able to them, then, is the job of
all the working institutions of
society that we have established
through so many years of ma-
chine-less history.

The Associates
by Carney and wolter
THE PEOPLE who must make
these decisions will be the elected
officials, the teachers and the
social theorists. They will have to
realize that the society that they
will be planning may well endure,
with changes made only by ad-
vances in machinery, for many
years.
First, if people do not work,
then they must have some means
of sustenance. This will mean that
they must either be given a salary
by the government, based on
graded scales for number of chil-
dren, etc., or must be given their
food, clothing and shelter for
nothing.
The specific mechanics of this
kind of change are extremely
complex, and will provide jobs for
a number of HEW administrators
for years. Nevertheless, even this
crisis can be overcome with rela-
tive ease compared to the, adjust-
ment that will have to follow.
For, when a man is out of
work, and is living on subsidies
from other sources, under the
traditions of this society, he is
some sort of indigent-he is, by
definition, of a lower status.
Therefore, he must be given a
task, an occupation of some sort,
and he must be made to feel that
his function in society is useful.
Society, up until now, made such
great demands on each individual
in order to progress to the point
of automation and relative com-
fort for all (this, too, is possibility

with machines), that the concept
of "work" is firmly engrained on
the mind of each individual. Con-
sider the agonies of most youth
of today as it tries to select an
"occupation."
WHAT CAN a man, for whom
there is no possible means of em-
ployment that would not be mere
featherbedding, do to feel useful
to society?
For a start; what is disgraceful
about the task of raising a family.
Why shouldn't the "laborer" be
in charge of the job of raising
human beings, and of doing it in
relative comfort, free from the
damaging demands of a competi-
tive society? This is *not a trifle
when one considers the toll taken
by the demands of labor today on
the American family structure.
Though even the family may be
effectively replaced by some sort'
of mechanization, there is no rea-
son that this be done in order to
"advance" society. Therefore, men
have "work."
In addition, unemployed men
need recreation. For this purpose,
they can also be "employed." So-
ciety today, from the most meagre
to the most important occupations,
functions with organization. Men
are needed on planning commis-
sions, on the office bowling team,
to plan the office party. They
take the task seriously, even while
considering the work a trifle.
There is no reason why this idea
cannot be applied to our unem-
ployed man.
Planning a sports event, or a
social gathering, or a community
play is not without responsibility
or reward. It involves a great deal
of commitment, time-wise. The
entertainment arts, (and these

need not be mediocre in artistic
value) then, will become a source
of occupation for many.
FINALLY, we are obviously
reaching for the stars. As we
explore planets, even other solar
systems, we will want to colonize
them, as man must always bring
something of himself to previously
untouched areas.. For this task,
large numbers of enthusiastic
colonists will be needed. They may
very well have to begin society
all over again, as was done with
the discovery of the new world.
And, with the universe that we
can now see through our strongest
telescopes, there are no limits on
our expansiveness.
Society, as we know it will not
entirely disappear with the coming
automation. Neither, thankfully,
will the value of the individual,
if we are willing to make the
necessary provisions for it. As our
technological know-how increases
so do the resources at our com
mand necessary for this task.
Right now, the early conse-
quences of the nascent automation
are taking some nasty forms.
There are crippling strikes, such
as the airline strike, or the mari-
time strike in England. We still
have not learned to accommodate
those who are ethnically or ra-
cially different in our society, and
they are the first victims of the
machine. The divisions of warfare
make the united effort needed
impossible.
BUT THE enormity of the prob-
lem lying ahead has already caus-
ed many to work for these pre-
liminary changes. When we no
longer look at others with dis-
trust, the task at hand can begin.

,4,

Two Movies and Two Excellent Directors

By ANDREW LUGG
THE SHORT LIST of great Hol-
lywood film directors includes
John Ford, Otto Preminger, John
Huston, Alfred Hitchcock and Jer-
ry Lewis.
At the Campus Theatre John
Huston's "Beat The Devil" is
showing whileathe State Theatre
has Jerry Lewis' "Three on a
Couch." So, for a change, we have
two "home-grown" films which
are worth seeing.
"BEAT THE DEVIL" which was
filmed in 1954-and not before its
time!-stars Humphrey Bogart
(Billy), Jennifer Jones (Gwende-
line) and Robert Morley (Peter-
son). For the "cultists" the mere
mention of Bogie should be
enough.
Although "Beat The Devil" is no

"Big Sleep" or "Key Largo" (show-
ing next week at the Cinema
Guild), Bogart's performance in-
cludes all those verbal tricks of
which he is a past-master. The Bo-
gart mystique is summed up nice-
ly in the film in one of Bogart's
"throw-away lines"-"I've got to
have money, doctor's orders, or I'll
be dull, listless and have a poor
complexion."
Beautifully filmed in Italy "Beat
The Devil" has a complicated story
line which runs roughly as fol-
lows. A gang of criminals, a mot-
ley crew of stereotypes, and Billy
who is not quite in the gang and
yet Bogart-wise seems indispensi-
ble, are involved in a shady deal
to purchase land in Africa in or-
der to exploit the uranium de-
posits which are apparently there.

THE FILM is a "study" of the
gang's pre-voyage preparations
and their voyage to the "Dark
Continent."
The Chelms are at first sight
part of that odd institution, the
British aristocracy-as Bogart puts
it "with more pomp than circum-
stance." But later we learn that
they are just "rudy refugees from
Earls Court." Mrs. Chelm (Gwen-
doline) dotes on Billy and Billy.s
wife on Harry Chelm. So we have
the "sub-plot."
With Robert Morley, frog-like;
Bogart, smooth; Jennifer Jones,
sweet and Gina Lollobrigida as
seductive as a horse-radish, the
plot rolls out in quiet hilarity to
its inevitable conclusion-the hang
"put away" and Bogart free to
deal with the "sub-plot."

ANOTHER CULT is centered
around Jerry Lewis. Perhaps it is
not so great here as it is in France
where Lewis' films are completely
endorsed by such "highbrow" film
magazines as "Postif" and "Cah-
iers du Cinema." This is probably
due to the fact that Lewis' humor
which seems to work even better
when not encumbered by dialogue.
Another reason is that Lewis as-
pires to being an "auteur"-one
in complete control of all the var-
ious aspects of making his mo-
vies. Lewis is director, produces
and leading actor and this in the
French critics' eyes is a place
where judgment may begin.
Amistophee Pride (Jerry Lewis)
has just won an art competition
which, as part of the prize, in-
cludes a commission to paint a
mural in Paris. His affianced, Eliz-
abeth (Janet Leigh) is a psychia-

Reply to Stein beck's Defense of ti

The City and the Suburb

CERTAIN UNIVERSITY supremacists be-
lieve Detroit is a suburb of Ann Arbor,
and make it their business to follow De-
troit affairs.
Such events as the Northern Rebellion,
the Ecorse teachers' strike, the shakeup
in police headquarters, and the opening
of a new wing to the city's Art Institute
have been made known to the University.
Coverage of Detroit affairs is important
for University students, and not merely
because the city and its industry are so
close to campus.
HIGHWAY PLANNERS, architects, Paul
Goodman, and others talk about
America evolving into a network of ex-
panding urban centers with minimal sub-
urban buffers between.
Detroit is important because it is The
City moving toward 1985 and shows all the
symptoms.
Its official population is dropping while
its suburban population is rising. Its un-
employment level is down but its annual
crime rate is up.
Its city council is subordinate to its
mayor. Its municipal school system is
pitifully atrophied while its fire depart-
ment is the best in the country.
In less than half a year it has been
scandalized by its computerized Friend

of the Court welfare agency, its prosti-
tutes, and its urban renewal program.
STILL, ITS SYMPHONY has never
sounded better.
Its commuter university, Wayne State,
is devouring slum land.
The city itself expands in three direc-
tions; in the fourth, the south, is the De-
troit River, and it is fashionably polluted.
Detroit is pleasant to watch because it
keeps its problems in perspective. Its citi-
zens have not felt the bitter despair not-
able in New York, Philadelphia, Roches-
ter, and Los Angeles.
IT IS A GOOD TEXT for students who
will eventually get into the rhythm of
the megalopolis.
As long as Detroit continues to grow
up and out in three directions, it will have
a message for Ann Arbor, college town in
the West.
-NEAL BRUSS
On the Job
THE SENATE has decided, 1-28, not to
increase the size or change the com-
position of its surveillance group keeping
tabs on the Central Intelligence Agency.
The move is a good-sized victory for Sen.

EDITOR'S NOTE: This let-
ter to Yevgeniy Yevtushenko
was stimulated by his recent
appeal to John Steinbeck and
by Steinbeck's reply, excerpts of
which were published in the
Ann Arbor News.
Mr. Yevgeniy Yevtushenko
c/oTEditor, Literaturnaya Gazeta
30 Tsvetnoi Bulvar
Moscow I-51
U.S.S.R.
Dear Yevgeniy Yevtushenko:
JUST READ exerpts of John
Steinbeck's reply to your ap-
peal where you urge him to raise
his voice against the crimes per-
petrated by our armed forces in
Viet Nam. I feel compelled to
write to you to tell you that I am
ashamel of Steinbeck's reply. If
Steinbeck were a spokesman for
the Johnson administration, I
would feel contempt but no shame,
because I do not identify myself
with that administration.
But Steinbeck is (or was) a
member of a large community,
with which I do identify, as I am
sure you do, a community which
knows no national boundaries, a
community which, in spite of
ideological differences, shares a
devotion to life, depicting it,
examiningtit, glorifyingtit--the
community of thinkers and schol-
ars, of scientists, artists, and poets.
Steinbeck once served well as
a member of that community, and
we, Americans, were proud of him.
And this is why I feel ashamed
of his reply, for members of a
community feel responsible for
each other. In a way, I feel re-
sponsible for the hypocrisy and
mendacity of Steinbeck's reply.
HE WRITES: "Surely you don't
believe that our pilots fly to bomb
children . . . " I don't know
whether you believe this, Yevgeniy,
but let me assure you that I
believetit. It issclearly on record
that our pilots fly to poison rice
fields, so as to deny food to the
peasants who have rebelled against
onrIV riiint ~in SaiDyon.

OUR PILOTS are instructed to
drop their "excess" bombs on vil-
lages "suspected" of harboring
revolutionists. There are children
living in those villages and the
bombs kill them. Perhaps Stein-
beck wants to say that our pilots
to not aim their bombs at chil-
dren; that the children get blown
up, incinerated, and maimed, be-
cause they happen to be in the
way. This may be so.
But then, I would ask Steinbeck
why are Ameriran children able
to stay out of the way of falling
bombs, the splattering napalm,
the sizzling white phorsphorus. I
suppose this is because the bombs
and the napalm and the white
phosphorus fall far away from
American children, in fact, 12,000
miles away, as far away as one
can get from America on this
planet. Does this say nothing /to
Steinbeck about who is fighting
whom and for what? Can one
meaningfully equate the "two
halves" of this war?
STEINBECK calls the Viet Nam
war "the work of Chairman Mao,
designed and generaled by him in
absentia, advised by him and cyni-
cally supplied with brutal weapons
by foreigners who set it up."
Two years ago, our government
declared that the Dominican Re-
public revolution against the mili-
tary dictatorship was mastermind-
ed by Fidel Castro.
Seventeen years ago our govern-
ment insisted that the Chinese
Revolution was ordered by the
Kremlin.
Forty-eight years ago our gov-
ernment implied that the Russian
Revolution was engineered by the
German General Staff.
Now Steinbeck has evidently
joined the progeny of the Bour-
bons, who, it was said, never
learned anything not forgot any-
thing."
SINCE STEINBECK insists on
condemning both "halves" of the
Viet Nam war, it is conceivable
that he might answer "yes" to
all those questions, like a true

the pacifist view), they tell all
the ugly facts about the origins
of both Viet Nam wars (the French
and the American) and the dis-
graceful role which three succes-
sive American administrations
have played in both.
The pacifists keep proposing
reasonable and honorable peaceful
solutions to both sides. They some-
times argue that non-violent re-
sistance would be a more effective
way of frustrating aggression than
armed resistance. But the pacifists
never pretend that both sides are
"equally guilty" or that had it not
been for the evil Chinese. Viet
Nam would be at peace and
democratic.
STEINBECK'S most amazing
statement, however, is that he
doesn't know a single American
who is for the war. Is it possible
that a man who writes as bril-
liantly as Steinbeck cannot read?
Or perhaps he does not choose to
read? That might be conceivable,
for a sensitive man could well
decide to cut himself off com-
pletely from what goes on-a
cowardly but understandable ges-
ture.
But no, Steinbeck must read, or

else where would he have got all
those yarns about the Viet Nam
revolution being designed and gen-
eraled by "Chairman Mao in ,ab-
sentia?" He must have got them
from the same sources where I
read them-from Time, Life,
Reader's Digest, etc., which lie
around in every barber shop.
But if he reads that "literature,"
how did he miss the boasting, the
gloating, the blood-thirsty rejoic-
ing on those pages? Has he not
read articles on how Viet Nam
serves as an ideal testing ground
for new weapons? Has he never
heard the talk of a Bircher, a
Goldwaterite, an American Legion-
naire, or read a speech by Senator
Dodd, Senator Stennis, Senator
Long, nor a column by David
Lawrence or Joseph Alsop? Has
he never seen Lyndon B. Johnson
on TV?
CAN A MAN who, in view of his
literary achievements, may justly
claim an understanding of the
human psyche, seriously maintain
that all these people are against
the Viet Nam war? If so, what
does it mean to be against war?
To wish that you could get your
way without having to fight? Is

trist torn between being doctor
and "human being." She can't
leave three of her patients, young
girls who are having problems
with men.
In order to get his woman to
Paris with him Jerry Lewis um.
dertakes some "housewife's" ther-
apy which consists of him dating
each of the girls. Jerry Lewis be-
comes cowboy, sportsman, zoologist
and Heather, the zoologist's sister.
Thus there is a fine vehicle for
Lewis who is at his best as a "sit-
uation" comic.
Lewis is superb,
THE CAMERA work and the use
of color is of the best Hollywood
has produced. It is for these rea-
sons that Lewis may be consider-
ed as an "auteur" and that he
appears in the list of directors
heading this review.
te War
that, perhaps, the source of Stein-
beck's "personal hatred" of the
Viet Nam war? Or does he per-
haps dislike the war in the same
way as a gambler dislikes losing
or a drinker dislikes a hangover,
or a glutton dislikes being fat?
I realize, Yevgeniy, that I have
told you nothing new. But I simply
had to write to, you, perhaps in
order to reassure you that there is
still a great deal of decency left
in this country, which will not be
easy to root out even with Stein-
beck's help. Also please believe
me that men of Steinbeck's ar-
tistic stature who support the war
are very few.
MOST OF THE outstanding in-
tellectuals in America, those who
have gained the respect of the
world regardless of their positions
on the political spectrum, are dis-
gusted with the present policy of
the Johnson adminstration and
are working to restore America's
honor in the eyes of the world.
Allow me to take this oppor-
tunity to thank you for what your
voice, the voice of conscience,;is
doing for humanity.
-Anatol Rapoport
Prof. of Mathematical Biology

0

-4

4

REVIEW:
Serkin: Maturity Is Needed

By JEFFREY K. CHASE
Program
Beethoven. . . Sonata in E
major, Op. 14, No. 1
Beethoven . . . Sonata in G
major, Op. 14, No. 2
Beethoven . . . Sonata in E
major, Op. 109
Bach . . . Three-part Inventions
(complete)
PETER SERKIN doesn't look
much like a pianist. He's tall,
big-boned, and will be only nine-

poser's music displayed by his
father.
SERKIN PLAYED the Beethoven
Op. 14 sonatas with the delicacy
of Mozart, and with the rhythmic
freedom of the romantics. It just
didn't fit. A good guess might be
that he learned these works in
sections, because he played them
that way. Serkin had very little
sense of a unified unfolding in his
playing and evendseemed to be at
a loss for the direction certain
notes were taking-what they were
leading to or what they were
coming from.

nice to hear in succession, be-
cause they contain so much vary-
ing material and mood. Serkin
played them in general better
than the Beethoven. although one
grew to expect the not always
appropriate and often awkward
ritard at the conclusion of each.
Many of his editorial ornaments
were in the fine Baroque tradition,
but there were some that just
didn't seem to fit.
Peter Serkin demonstrated that
he has the ability to produce
beautiful tones on the piano. It's

IF

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan