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.

May 17, 1966 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1966-05-17

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


Of4rffl-mian Uall
Seventy-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

POWE??S' y a Rr .r ~ "aN Nw:
nd Mexico i"' ~::.Youet Trvel I Broaenin
POERY y MRK . KLLIGSW.T
.{Y' . ..h'. "..* . . . . . . . .

I4

0=0!01_7w

Trt pinl re Fre 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MiCH.
?rutbWtfl revaP

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 all reprints.

TUESDAY, MAY 17, 1966

NIGHT EDITOR: SHIRLEY ROSICK

Ohio State Lantern:
Time for a New Light

THE AMAZING THING is that anyone
would find the Ohio State Lantern
destructive enough to want to control it.
The Lantern does not cover in depth
areas which are vitally sensitive to the
administration, nor is it the type of paper
to go on crusades. Its editors change
once every three months, and it is phys-
ically small.
Limited to journalism students, it is,
quite simply, a laboratory paper, dedi-
cated to learning and practicing objec-
tive journalism, whose writers and editors
receive university credit and grades as
such for their work on the Lantern. The
paper's credo is "Service to the Univer-
sity."
AND YET, a recent faculty investiga-
tion-culminating in the Kettler re-
port-acknowledges noticeable "pressure"
and "administrative oppression" concern-
ing the contents of the Lantern. Dean
of student relations, John Bonner, is cit-
ed (from another source) as explicitly
contacting the Lantern to object to the
printing of an article which dared to rec-
ognize a student organization distasteful
to the OSU administration.
And, Ohio State President Novice G.
Fawcett last summer instituted a quar-
terly budget review so that he might
meet with the head of the journalism
school every three months to allocate
Lantern funds in accordance with a "re-
view of its performance."
On the one hand, such actions brand
the OSU administration, at least at the
top, as a figurehead one. No university
president with enough inherent power to
warrant self-respect would waste his time
day after day making public statements
such as "I can't remember a specific in-
stance when the Lantern hasn't present-
ed both sides of a story, but I'm sure there
have been lots of them," unless his job
consisted of making sure some sort of
picture is being painted for someone and
little else. Perhaps his constant cry that
the Lantern "prints too much of the bad
side and not enough of the good side of
the university," says it best.
MICHIGAN with an undergraduate pop-
ulation of 15,000 received 39 Woodrow
Wilson fellowships this year. OSU with
about 30,000 undergraduates received
two. Yet, President Fawcett is worried
about the Lantern.
But then, I remember Fawcett's refer-
ence to "a few unfortunate appointments
we made from an Eastern school," and
look at the one-newspaper, reactionary
environs of Columbus, and shudder and
hurriedly seek shelter in the smallness of
the subject of the Lantern (the problems
of a university in Columbus are dealt with
quite well in Eric Solomon's "Free Speech
at Ohio State" in November's Atlantic
magazine-must reading for anyone who
believes it can't happen here).
BUT AS FOR THE LANTERN, it is
caught in the middle. It is too honest
to suit the tastes of the OSU administra-
tion, and, whether the student body real-
izes it or not, it is too tame to fulfill
their needs. No matter how strong the
editorials may sound, no matter how un-
afraid some of the news stories may seem,
when you have a newspaper a) within
the university structure itself, and b) ded-
icated to the process of journalistic teach-
ing, then you have a bulletin board, al-
beit a very good one-but not a voice.
The reason for objection a is a fairly
obvious one. Whenever you have a group
of people operating within an institution
-be it one newspaper within another's
building, or a school of journalism with-

in a university administration's domain-
you cannot have complete freedom. A
word here, a friendship there, a salary
Editorial Staff
CLARENCE FANTO ...................... Co-Editor
CHARLOTTE WOLTER .................... Co-Editor
BUD WILKINSON ...................Sports Editor
BETSY COHN..... ........... Supplement Manager
NIGHT EDITORS: Meredith Eiker, Michael Heffer,
Shirley Rosick, Susan Schnepp, Martha wolfgang.
Business Staff
SUSAN PERLSTADT..............Business Manager

raise, a promotion, a pat on the back in
the hall, or a grade-it all adds up, and
it certainly doesn't have to be explicit.
The result is that certain "stories"-.
personal ties, overlapping interests (much
in abundance at OSU), basic power and
influence structures (who actually runs
Ohio State? Fawcett? the Trustees? the
governor? the Dispatch? and why?) -
are not brought to print, and certain im-
plicit editorial viewpoints become more
readily at hand than others.
THE POWER of a newspaper lies in its
agenda-making function - deciding
what is to be read and what is not to be
presented. The process of selection is
subtle and implicit, but it is the heart of
a newspaper. Because it is a part of the
institution which it has been assigned the
function of examining, it can never suc-
ceed. There are worlds at OSU which the
Lantern will never bring to light.
Nor is the Lantern itself, as everyone
at OSU seems to be forgetting, even dedi-
cated to that process. The journalism
school and its students are interested in
running a newspaper for its own sake,
and, in doing so, learning about the
newspaper business.
The Lantern outlook is not one of re-
form, but rather one of covering a test
area and learning process for its own sake.
AS SUCH, the aim and realm of the
Lantern, as the journalism department
and journalism students to whom it be-
longs see it, is fine-but it is not signifi-
cant to the Ohio State campus as a
whole. Thus, the fumes and furor over
administration control of the Lantern are
merely attacking symptom, not the basic
problem of student representation.
The OSU administration has been more
than reticent where the question of stu-
dent voice is involved. Often unwilling to
talk to students, guarding the inner ad-
ministrative mechinations from sight,
bragging about the number of students
on "advisory" committees while shutting
those students off from the information
and decision-making flow, the OSU ad-
ministration has laid no foundation for
student participation. "Student govern-
ment" at Ohio State is such a farce that
nearly 45 per cent of the student body
voted in the last election to abolish it.
A stiff univerE7ty power structure has
refused to recoglize that, quite simply,
students are also an interest group, and
quite a capable interest group at that.
And, when such an interest group is de-
nied a voice through normal channels, it
must find new ones-the visible public
protest, for one. Or, for another, an on-
going, strong, and above all independent
organ of unfraid but objective student re-
porting.
THE LANTERN is an excellent paper-
but it is not a student newspaper, nor
can it ever be strong or independent
enough. As the Cincinnati Enquirer put
it, the Lantern "will go on being a lab-
oratory newspaper" under its new depart-
ment head, with varying degrees of ad-
ministration influence.
But for the student body as a whole, a
new newspaper must be formed. Printing
by the off-set method is not prohibitively
expensive, and there may be even one or
two courageous advertisers. The recent
demonstrations have at least somewhat
shattered the unfortunately inaccurate
image of OSU as an agriculture-engineer-
ing factory.
If there are enough people with the in-
terest and energy to carry on two full-
scale fights in two years, there must cer-

tainly be enough people from the various
fields of study who are interested enough
in speaking their piece to put out a news-
paper. There are always off-campus base-
ments (many abandoned by old anarch-
ists) available for press rooms.
OF COURSE, Columbus' only evening
newspaper will label the new paper's
editors as Communists or Communist
dupes, and half the town will believe it
(another quarter will know it-boat-rock-
ing is not popular in Columbus), some rule
will be devised to keep the paper off cam-
pus for a while (with enough national
publicity this rule will fall), and various
university personnages will refer to the
editors as "schoolboy Horace Greeleys

Special To The Daily
CIUDAD J U A R E Z, Mexico -
Travel broadens.
In fact, it broadens even before
the traveler (in this case, to Cen-
tral America) has really left. It's
quite a jolt for him to compare
the campuses of the University
and the University of New Mexico,
located at Albuquerque, where his
trip begins.
THE UNM CAMPUS, though it
may evoke the traditional colleg-
iate dreams of oak and ivy, is in
reality one of sand, sunshine and
an occasional sombrero. The jour-
nalism bui 1d in g,rsurprisingly
enough, looks like a frontier out-
post from the days of the Alamo
and Kit Carson.
The biggest surprise of all, how-
ever, comes when one visits some
of the sororities (yes, the Wild
West does have sororities). The
surprise is the delightful abode/
pueblo style architecture of the
Kappa house (and, for that mat-
ter, of the rest of them). It's in-
eredibly in congress and a far cry
from Ann Arbor's Delphic tem-
ples, but it has a charm all its
own.
TRAVEL NOT only broadens-
it amuses.
After a brief inspection of his
documents and automobile, a
gruff scribble of green chalk and
application of several seals and
customs stickers, the visitor is
finally and officially in Mexico.
Juarez - named after Benito
Juarez, the first full-blooded In-
dian to become Mexico's president
(in the 1850's)--is right across
from El Paso. As such it acquires
most of the attributes of border
towns anywhere-plus a special
repulsive quality all its own.
FOR, AS ONE finds out quickly
here, everything is cheap. Food?
The visitor can find a meal which

will challenge the most capacious
(and the most cast-iron) stomach
for less than 20 pesos (one peso
equals eight cents).
Souvenirs? Everything f r o m
sleazy knives and shoddy clothing
to hideous portraits of Jackie
Kennedy and Jesus Christ. Serv-
ice? Unemployed and hungry
Mexicans will open your car door
for you, carry your bags and shine
your shoes for 50 centavos or so-
less than a nickel.
For years, however, one of the
biggest industries here and in
many other border towns was
liquor. Tequila sells for about $5
a gallon-yes, per gallon, not per
fifth-which would always conjure
up enthusiasm from college stu-
dents, lushes and almost every
other American close to the border
who tried to mix alcohol and
economy.
IT WAS beautifully simple, and
simply beautiful. You don't even
need tourist cards to get into
Juarez for less than a day-and
as a result thousands of Ameri-
cans became smalltime liquor im-
porters for themselves and their
friends.
They would arrive in Juarez
early in the morning, load up, go
back to the U.S.,wait until the
border officials changed shifts,
and go back again. You could im-
port liquor this way all day.
Then, however, tragedy struck.
The U.S., worried over its growing
balance-of-payments problem, de-
cided to cut the legal liquor max-
imum its citizens could bring back
per month of foreign travel with-
out duty from 1 gallon per person
to 1 quart. Any excess hard stuff
got a tax of nearly $11 a quart
slapped on it.
Overnight, scores of booming
Mexican border towns turned into
depressed areas.
As a result of the new liquor

laws, the visitor tends to try to
enjoy his tequila in Mexico rather
than pay through the nose to try
to get it back into the U.S. And
therein lies a story.
PULLING INTO Juarez in the
early evening, and hungry after
a long drive, the writer headed
immediately for a restaurant. Te-
quila was available at the bar for
three pesos (24 cents) a glass,
which seemed absurdly low, and,
since this would be his first te-
quila and since it is more or less
the national drink (second only to
Pepsi and Coca-Cola), it seemed
the thing to order.
So the waiter brought to the
table a small glass full of a clear
liquid, a plate of lime sections
and another small glass full of
thick, red liquid which looked
vaguely like tomato juice. And
then walked away.
The clear liquid, I quickly sur-
mised, was tequila. The red liquid,
I remembered from a Playboy ar-
ticle I had read several months
ago, was probably sangrita, a mix-
ture of rtomato juice. a sort of
Worcestershire sauce and one of
those unanalyzeable Mexican hot
sauces.
But I felt the slightest twinge
of apprehension. What to do with
all this stuff?
THE COMPOSITION of san-
grita was about the only thing
I could remember about tequila
from Playboy, having devoted
most of my attention in the mag-
azine to other considerations.
On the other hand, the only
other memory I'd had of tequila
was of bullfight movies, where
the old toreador would clonk into
the local bar, cut open a lime with
a stiletto (which he for some rea-
son would then stick into the bar),
suck at a lime, drink some tequila
and then have a pinch of salt.

(Occosionally, in true High Noon
style, some senorita would try to
talk him out of carrying through
with the bullfight, but I couldn't
count on that happening to me
in the restaurant.) But nothing
about sangrita.
It was a terrifying situation. I
didn't want to make a fool out of
myself by asking a waiter how to
procede (and it wouldn't have
done me any good to try, since all
the Spanish I knew was in my
Berlitz handbook, which was at
the hotel.)
I DIDN'T SEE any Americans
to ask. And I could scarcely sit.
and do nothing.
Well, I decided to take the bull
by the horns, so to speak. I sucked
hard at a lime, swallowed all the
tequila, added a pinch of salt and
then swallowed all the sangrita.
So far, so good. Downed like a
true toreador.
Then I looked at one of the
waiters, who was looking at my
table. He winced.
Well, it was pretty clear I had
committed a terrible faux pas (to
mix metaphors and languages). I
would have to try over again, so
I ordered another tequila. And I
sat and thought.
It seemed doubtful, on reflec-
tion, that youdswallow everything
at once. That must have been why
the waiter winced - those crude
Americans, never bothering to sa-
vor fine gustatory experiences. So
I repeated the same process (lime-
tequila-salt-sangrita), only taking
little sips this time.
AGAIN, I WAS quite pleased.
Then I looked over at one of the
other tables and saw someone else
having a tequila. But he didn't
seem to be using any limes.
Maybe, I thought, when you
have sangrita (I still couldn't re-
member any link between the tor-
eador-tequila sequence and the

Playboy-sangrita description), you
squeeze some of the lime into
the tequila. So I did, having te-
quila, salt and sangrita in that or-
der.
Then the waiter came by and
took my salt shaker to another
table which didn'tkhave one. Oh,
no, I thought. Maybe you don't
use salt at all, except when you
have tequila bullfighter-style?
Back to the drinking board.
,BY THIS TIME I was getting
very tense. My intellectual abili-
ties (not to say my physical capa-
cities) were being challenged.
When I got the next tequila I
nervously poured everything into
everything else and gulped it all
down.
No, that wasn't right either.
One of the waiters seemed to be
snickering at me. Try again.
Now I was considerably more re-
laxed, but far more confused.
With what was left of my specula-
tive powers, I came to the horri-
ble realization that - assuming
you used each of the four items in
sequence - there were 24 pos-
sible ways of drinking tequila, on-
ly one of them the right one.
Then I remembered, dimly, that
thanks to the waiter I might elim-
inate tequila. That would cut the
problem down considerably. But
then I remembered the limes. You
don't use them either? Or maybe
the guy at the other table was
wrong?
I DON'T REMEMBER how long
after that it took to hit on the
right answer. For that matter, I
don't remember how I made It
back to the hotel. But I succeeded
at both.
The right way to drink tequila?
Actually I'd rather not say. The
Mexican ambassador told me later
that disclosing it would really
make the Juarez a depressed area.

Book Review: Midwestern Megalopolis

Megalopolis Formation
in the Midwest
By Richard L. Meier
Department of Conservation
School of Natural Resources
University of Michigan
EDITOR'S NOTE: Ivan Alten
is a member of the American In-
stitute of Architects and Is asso-
ciated with Architects and City
Planners, Ltd., in Ann Arbor.
By IVAN ALTEN
MEGALOPOLIS Formation In
The Midwest by Richard L.
Meier is an extremely challenging
and often aggravating study. The
emergence of a dense urban set-
tlement from Toronto to Chicago
stirs the imagination, but at the
same time the document is an-
noying because Dr. Meier took 13
different studies and tried to
unite these into a single logical
unit.
It didn't come off too success-
fully. The various styles of ex-
pressions, depths of understand-
ing, and degrees of research in
the individual reports may have
been well rounded but individually
became awkward when reshuffled
into a single document.
If he had left the individual re-
ports each in its particular style,
the study would have read more
easily and the reader could have
used his own matrix to tie them
together. Some subjects are re-
ported in great depth, others are
far too sketchy or groping and
leave too many questions unans-
wered.
DR. MEIER STATES in his in-
troduction:
"The procedure in this in-
stance was to combine forces
with thirteenadvanced students
from ten different departments
in the University. Together we
reviewed the macroscale data
(population, industrial activity,
area of settlement, mainline
transport routes, etc.), and con-
sidered the local impact of me-
galopolitan functions. The ap-
proach was holistic in concep-
tion rather than comprehensive.
"At this stage Alan B. Back-
ler, Richard Botti, Thomas A.
Crandall, Howard Deardorff,
Elwood Holman, Robert G.
Johnston, Kenneth M. Karch,
Tom Maher, Margaret Maki,
Walter L. McPartlin, Patrick
Pruchnik, Charles Turofsky and
Joann Vanek were involved.
"Later I undertook a synthe-
sis of these reports, filling in
the gaps, checking references,
and integrating it with the new-
est discussions of urbanism. In
this effort, I was assisted by
Ralph A. Luken, who handled
the editing and publication
stages."

colored lights, like the colored
marbles on a Chinese Checker
board, seem to be located accord-
ing to some logical means. The
darker areas with street lights
only (or the really dark rural
spots) form the background into
which the patterns are set. Old
ribbon developments reach from
one brightly ilt spot to the other.
One more pattern emerges, the
superhighway system with the
white headlights of the moving
cars showing movement in one di-
rection and the red taillights sig-
naling the opposite direction. We
are flying over a phenomenon
never known to man before: me-
galopolis.
WHY IS THIS different from
the past? Because
"Data concerning the size and
location of settlements are oor-
ganized by the concept of cen-
tral place theory. This theory
says that ideally several vill-
ages will depend upon a town in
their midst for services they are
individually unable to support
with local demand, similarly se-
veral towns will depend upon a
city, and a handful of cities
will have an analogous relation-
ship to a metropolis.
"By extrapolation, then, sev-
eral metropolises in proximity
to each other may be expected
to elevate the metropolis most
accessible to the whole group to
a primate status. The primate
metropolis no longer adds "tree-
rings" of incremental growth at
the periphery as in the nine-
teenth century.
"Instead, it promotes an ex-
tension of the ribbons and is-
lands of urbanism that follow
in the wake of new transport
facilities, particularly along
those lines that connect it with
the closest metropolises.
"The c h a r a c t e ristics of
growth are different from those
of smaller, more isolated "cen-
tral places." The essentially con-
tiguous cluster formed by met-
ropolitan interaction will be
called a megalopolis."
ONE OF THE most intriguing
parts of the document deals with
the question of population density
and with the type of settlement
which can be expected to appear
on the Toronto-Chicago line.
"Dispersed urban settlement
is a phenomenon associated
since 1950 with the vast in-
crease in rural non-farm hous-
ing, p a r t - t i m e agriculture,
"winterization" of s u m m e r
homes, and mobile home courts.
It implies multiple car owner-
ship in the household, a strong
preference for residential space,
and a leapfrogging of industrial

automobiles from late 1953 and
continuing through 1965 must
be attributed in large part to
a transition from the family car
tradition associated with subur-
ban ways of life to the personal
car pattern which is much more
a feature of dispersed urban
settlement.
"Multiple car households need
more space, otherwise the con-
gested roads would become ex-
tremely annoying to residents.
The increased levels of auto
ownership serve as a predictor
of housing demand a few years
hence; it suggests that many
more people will choose spa-
cious living in the, next few
decades.
"FROM THIS indirect evi-
dence, as well as a sampling of
the preferences of "stylesetters
of the future" which is reported
upon later, we have assumed
that 70 per cent of the added
population between now and
1981 will adopt one of the var-
ious dispersed urban ways of
life.
An average of 1000 persons
per square mile seems to fit the

necessary compromise between
income, access, and freedom
from crowding. The remainder
will extend the boundaries, of
suburbs and smaller cities with
gross densities averaging about
4000 persons per square mile."
THE MOST IMPORTANT ques-
tion presented is that of the po-
tential structure of such a vast
complex of communities. Center
by center, the role has to change.
The predictions for Ann Arbor-
Ypsilanti may not be too revolu-
tionary, but as a part of the total
picture, they are very important:
"The largest graduate and
professional school in the world
is forced to expand much fur-
ther due to inadequate capacity
in other state institutions. Ann
Arbor's function as a national
research center, a major focus
for the creative arts, and a pro-
ducer of tools for automation
attracts many short term vis-
itors, a large share of them
seeking outdoorsrecreation to
the north as a bonus.
"A 5 per cent year growth rate
in population, mostly of high
educational attainment, is not
unlikely. No other metropolitan

center on the mainline ap-
proaches the dynamism exhibit-
ed here."
THE WHOLE STUDY opens up
vistas, relationships, an analysis
of modern man and what he de-
mands from his environment as
well as what he must contribute
to provide the mode of life he
wants. The signs which point to
solutions are here and visible to
anyone who cares to look.
It certainly is as Dr. Meier says,
a holistic collection of essays, but
it had to be such. The possibilities
it points out sentence by sentence
keep hounding the reader and are
really frightening. How far we
have come in a few decades from
the man still closely dependant on
nature, from the man still part
destructive but still very much
part) of an understandable ecol-
ogy-to a creature who allegedly
will be able to control most of his
environment.
I DON'T THINK this is really
possible, but it is worth trying
since there seems to be little else
we ca~n do until lemming-like we
all march back to the sea.

I

+ }
Y ,-0
2 . . 4, 1 1fY 3

..

,~2'74
:.h'

Back to Top

© 2020 Regents of the University of Michigan