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.

April 01, 1965 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1965-04-01

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

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

Michigan MAD
GSC and Bluestone
By Robert Johnston

here opinions Are Free 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MicH.
Truth Will Prevail

NEWS PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
THURSDAY, 1 APRIL 1965 NIGHT EDITOR: W. REXFORD BENOIT

Suggestions for Improving
The Next Convocation

THE SECOND STUDENT convocation did
not succeedin its primary purposes,
to afford President Harlan Hatcher op-
portunity to present his opinions and po-
sitions to the students and to afford all
participants the opportunity to discuss
the, topic of the convocation-participa-
tion and responsibility with respect to to-
day's university students.
The faults and shortcomings of the
convocation can, for sake of discussion,
be divided into two maj or areas. If the
students and the president wish to hold
another convocation (presumably next
fall) they should explore thoroughly the
idea of trying to remedy faults in each
of these areas through structural changes
in the format of the convocation.
The first major shortcoming of the
convocation was that it tried to cover too
much ground. Discussion was "limited"
to the areas of "participation and respon-
sibility."
But in fact discussion was not limited
at all. The concepts of participation and
responsibility can be interpreted as ap-
plying to many areas. At the second
convocation, student unions, faculty mor-
atoria, demonstrations at Berkeley and
the university's responsibility to present
a relevant curriculum to its students were
all squeezed in.
QUESTIONS and conversation ranged
over all these topics and many others
-and accomplished very little. Less than
10 questions were asked after the presi-
dent's opening remarks. These were far
too few to begin to do' justice to the
gargantuan topic chosen for the con-
vocation.;
At the next convocation, the students
and the president should attempt to con-
centrate on a more limited area of in-
terest in the University community. There
are many such areas, each of which could
take up 'n- entire convocation if given a
just treatment.
In the fall, one area will be very per-
tinent-student housing in Ann Arbor,
including the mutual responsibilities and
privileges of the University and the stu-
dent. The University's dormitories will
be overcrowded by about 700 students, and
the apartment building on South Univer-
sity may well not have opened on time
to accommodate the students depending
on it.
A complete exposition of the Univer-
sity's position and discussion of the hous-
ing situation in Ann Arbor will. defi-
nitely be called for. If the president con-
fines his discussion to student housing,
he will be sure of having enough to talk
about and enough people-most of them
with a close, vested interest in his topic

-to listen to him and discuss the prob-
lem.
WHILE NARROWING down the topic of
the convocation, the students and the
president should attempt to change the
structure of the discussion to permit max-
imum communication and as little mis-
understanding,, dissatisfaction and frus-
tration as possible. At the second con-
vocation, students asked some poorly-
phrased and some irrelevant questions.
The president on occasion gave incom-
plete answers to the questions, sometimes
missing central points altogether.
Those pl.anning the convocation could?
help alleviate this problem by splitting
the questions and answers section into
two parts. In the first, the president could
answer questions on the convocation's
topic, questions chosen (for clarity and
relevance) from a group submitted two
days in advance. The president or his
staff would have time to gather a reason-
able amount of material relevant to the
question and thus provide a more com-
plete answer. It proves absolutely noth-
ing for the president to field a question
and then be unable to completely answer
it because of inadequate information at
hand or awkwardness in the phrasing
or emphasis of the question.
In the second question period, the
president could, as he has before, field
questions not submitted in advance. These
kinds of questions have a certain useful-
ness, mainly because they make abso-
lutely certain the students attending the
convocation have a definite role in de-
termining the direction of the discussion.
They also negate the complaint of those
who say that, in selecting and answering
only queries submitted in advance, the
president or those planning the convoca-
tion could stifle the discussion of em-
barrassing topics.
THE PRESIDENT should try to cover the
entire topic of the convocation as best
as possible in his prepared answers. The
second question period should be used
to discuss problems after the president's
basic positions have been made clear in
the first question period and the speech.
Reforms along these lines seem to be
imperative if the next convocation is to
have any significant degree of success.
They would involve increased efforts on
the part of both the students and the
president. But the effort Would be well
worthwhile if the convocation promoted
the true communication and understand-
ing too often lacking in the past between
the students of the University and their
president.
-ROBERT HIPPLER
Acting Associate Editorial Director

TWO INDICATIONS of life
among discontented students
emerged this week. One came from
Graduate Student Council. which
recommended abolishing the "E"
sticker for student automobiles.
The second was a demand from
Barry Bluestone and the Uni-
very ty Student Employes Union,
both becoming campus fixtures,
for an administration "white
paper" on "student economic wel-
fare."
The two proposals are a study
in contrast, one making a relative-
ly small but eminently sensible
recommendation, the other call-
ing for a full-fledged statement of
a University philosophy that does
not even exist as yet (if. indeed.
the University has ever had any
philosophy).
The "white paper" is supposed
to give the administration's "ex-
act" position on 'the "University's
role as an economic entity in Ann
Arbor." The first problem here is
that "the administration" referred
to actually consists of a good-
sized number of people who could
not agree on the "University's
role as an economic entity" even
if they were able to define the
terms.
The second problem once
some meaning is found for the
interesting phraseology, is that
one must first explain what -the
University's economic role is now,
then go on to discuss what it
could be-given the many restric-
tions that must necessarily hedge
around any role the University
might want to assume-and then
finally try to reach some sort of
consensus about what the role
should be ideally.
ALL THIS CALLS for a lot of
homework and a lot of discussion
and weighing of problems, re-
sources and alternatives by both
students and administrators. Blue-
stone and the UMSEU haven't
gotten around to doing this yet.
Instead they voice a series of
supposed grievances, some of
which deserve either a decent
burial or a complete presentation
on the students' part-at least
something more than constant
whipping to no purpose.
Contrast the work of GSC. Their
recommendation to abolish the $7
"E" sticker is based on sound,
logical arguments and backed up
withrall$the relevantefacts and
figures. $28,000 per year is being
collected for no good use, though

quite a bit goes for the hWgh costs
of red tape, GSC says.
They therefore claim the "E'"
sticker is an unnecessary financial
burden on graduate students, and
they present a pretty good case.
How about it, Prof. Cutler?
UNFORTUNATELY, the GSC
people end up in the same trap
as Bluestone and UMSEU. Their
second recommendation is for
"The adoption of definite policies
to prevent the catastrophic traffic
problems that will result if the
present trend towards a larger
student body continues towards its
ultimate goal."
What policies are to be adopted
to stave off this presumed disas-
ter when the student body reaches
this "ultimate goal"? (If there
is, in fact, such an ultimate goal
-short of mutual annihilation-
a lot of people would be very in-
terested in knowing what it is
and whose it is.)
Parking lots, besides being ugly
and taking up a lot of space
needed for a well-integrated cen-
tral campus, cost a lot of money.
And, it need hardly be said, there
isn't any. It is, furthermore,
rather dfficult to persuade Mr.
Donor - to - the - $55-million-fund-
drive that a fume-filled parking
structure will be a fitting testi-
ment to his memory.
The Fuller Parkway Alignment
Study released recently has a lot
of eminently intelligent things to
say about traffic in, near and to
the Un'versity campuses. There
are a lot of eminently intelligent
proposals on cleaning up the prob-
lems. But the price tag is $3 9
million. and money is never "no
object."
THE POSSIBILITY of public
transportation eomes up. Again,
millions t$$), though there are
plans in the works. In any case,
somebody better do some fast
thinking-and acting-on how a
thousand or so students at a time
are going to get to central cam-
pus from the North Campus hous-
ing now being built.
GSC speaks of preventing "de-
generation of parking into a
chaotic situation which will be
beyond remedy by simple planning
and reasonable expenditure." Alas,
the planning is not simple, as they
should know, nor the expenditure
reasonable. Chaos, in fact, is al
ready pretty much the rule.
This leavesthe Bluestone fac-
tion, which must somehow be kept

out of trouble to keep members
from insulting administrators, as
they are wont to do. They might
well be concerned with the 18-
story apartment building going
up on South University. Where are
800 gullible students going to
sleep when it isn't done by Sep-
tember 1?
It's a fair bet they will come
screaming to the University for
help, screaming like they would
have screamed if that same uni-
versity had told them they couldn't
sign up for apartments there.
Screaming to administrators who
have repeatedly cited statements
by experts that the building can-
not possibly be finished in time.
ON TUITION and room and
board hikes: Does Bluestone have
any suggestions on how to get a
few million restored to the Uni-
versity's budget up in Lansing? Or
advice on paying off heavy resi-
dence hall mortgages?
Or how to raise student wages
and not raise the rest of the
service wages structure, greatly in-
flating costs?
Plenty of problems, and an-
swers aren't found on picket signs.
BUT AN ATTEMPT, at least,
has been made to tackle what
should be the most overriding
concern in all student, faculty, and
administrator minds, the curricu-
lum--or multiplicity of them or
lack of them-which forms the
hardened educational ground on
which the University supposedly
rests.
The course evaluation booklet,
published Sunday by The Daily,
covered only 53 courses. If one
assumes all of the University's
3000 academic appointees teach at
least one course, it is easy to see
the surface has barely been
scratched. But it has been scratch-
ed-and maybe some blood has
been drawn.
The booklet is overly cautious
at times and never strays far
from a normative sort of descrip-
tion. But, read carefully, it can
provide a great deal of valuable
information-unspectacularly pre-
sented but accurate.
It's about time somebody took
an open, honest and fair interest
in what is being taught here and
how well. The faculty are too busy
elsewhere, it always seems, or
there aren't enough of them,
so the undergraduates once again
must bear the brunt.

COMPOSER CARTER
The World of Sound:
Infinite Possibilities
At Hill Auditorium
"MY LIFE has been an intent to explore new methods of sound"
Elliott Carter said last night at the third concert of the Con-
temporary Music Festival.
The distinguished American composer was honored by the School
of Music in a concert of three of Mr. Carter's own works. After
intermission, Carter gave a brief talk outlining the current state of
music and his own orientation towards composing.
"I don't understand what the composer should learn and what
rules he should obey," he said, contrasting the position of the
composer today with his role in times past. "Suddenly . . . during my
lifetime . .. the world of sound has expanded to infinite possibilities,"
he continued. "It is as if we had combined all the languages of the
world together at once; we don't know the grammar."
THE PULITZER PRIZE WINNER outlined his own position in
trying to establish a "continuous stream of sense." He sees his
attempt as analogous to Brahms' ideal of "sober use of materials."
Carter emphasized he has an interest directed more toward design
and continuity than towards sounds themselves.
His use of meter is the innovative side of his music one thinks
of first. He affirmed his concern for organization of time and cited
Proust and Rilke as important influences on his thinking.
The works performed last night were the "Piano Sonata" of 1946,
the "Sonata for Violoncello and Piano," 1948 and the "Variations for
Orchestra," 1955. Guest pianist Lucien Stark presented the first
work, faculty members Oliver Edel and Barbara Holmquest the second
and the entire University Orchestra under Josef Blatt the third work.
PERHAPS the most impressive performance was the orchestra's
able presentation of the "Variations." In its complexity and careful
delineation of color, the "Variations" was also the most impressive
composition of the evening.
-MARK SLOBIN
'YEOMEN OF THE GUARD':
G&S Exhibit
True Sparkle
At Lydia Mendessoln Theatre
TP TO CURTAIN TIME for the first performance of "Yeomen
of the Guard," Sullivan complained to Gilbert that the first act
was too "serious," that the action was cumbersome. Last evening,
the G & S Society struggled with this inherent weakness and
triumphed in short time. The rest was a breezy romp, brought to
a dead halt at the final curtain in an effectively-portrayed and
directed aura of jubilation tinged with pathos.
The show began to move at the fii'st appearance of Nicholas Batch,
who overplayed the typical Gilbert hero in a fashion that all Gilbert
heroes should be overplayed. His eyes bugged in frozen double takes,
his voice halted, rose, dipped as he described daring deeds done
and undone.
But then he sang, and suddenly this incongruous combination
of clown and hero produced a tenor voice of surprising clarity and
force. From then on, every one of his tricks was an unanticipated
delight.
SUSAN MORRIS as Phoebe and William Moore as Shadbolt
provided the high and low comedy, combining canny timing with
slapstick shenanigans in true G & S style. Miss Morris was more
effective in ensemble than solo but was always ample to her tasks.
Moore's lugubrious baritone was given small opportunity for musical
display, but it oiled his comic monologues and gave them the
requisite sheen of professionalism.
Another excellent baritone was John Henkel in the role of
Sgt. Meryll. With intonations reminiscent of "The Great Guilder-
sleeve," he joined Kathleen Kimmel as Dame Carruthers to carry
the second act to its comic peak. Kimmel was the very embodiment
of the brooding, bloodthirsty Tower of London-until faced with
the prospect of marriage, at which point she displayed a feminine
cunning at once hilarious and engaging.
Dolores Martin and H. Stephen Straight were well cast, almost
naturally evincing the contrast between a melancholy cloaked in
the guise of a fool and the vivacity of a young maid. Each was
consistently able to infuse the songs of Elsie and Point with their
respective leit-motifs.
THE CHORUS proved responsive, if a trifle clumsy. The largeness
of the group gave amplitude and depth of sound, but its actions
were analagous to a small-scale cattle-herd.
Aside from that minor blemish, direction in all spheres- dramatic,
musical and choreographic-created a consistently top-notch produc-
tion with an occasional twist of staging to highlight the action.
Especially impressive were the two finales and the love triangle-
become-rectangle of "When a Wooer goes a-Wooing."

In a self-criticism, Arthur Sullivan best summarized his creation:
"Pretty story, no topsy-turveydom, very human and funny also."
-GLENN LITTON
NEARLY SOPHISTICATED:
The Inevitable Garg
Getting There
LIKE DEATH and taxes, the Gargoyle is inevitable. But the latest
36-page compendium of satire, humor and cartoons shows the
magazine is coming alive.
Through what must have been an editorial oversight, the magazine
is funny at times. The layouts, pictures and drawings approach
sophistication and the MUG fold-in is clever, if not hilarious.
Perhaps the cleverest piece in this, the best Gargoyle of the year,
was "Real Winners," which gave prizes like the Mathematics Award
to people like Director of Housing Eugene Haun.
PERHAPS A FEW CO-EDS were squeamish reading that 18-story
University Towers won the Phallic Symbol Award, but it was just
in jest. After all, Gargoyle Editor John Ward will be living in Uni-
versity Towers next fall
Ron Weil cleverly ridicules literary analysis.
In his examination of the symbolic implications posed by the
story, "Jerry Buys Deodorant," he asks, "Is the Empire State Building
really the symbol of a castrated worm.
Ann Aborte gives the inside story why the Michigan State ZBT
house burned down-a short circuit in Christmas tree lights. The
Garg also scores with its Poppyfield Ad and Car game.
UNFORTUNATELY, some of the Garg writers are still struggling
with impossible satires. For example, satirizing James Bond is dif-
ficult, since Bond himself is a satire. The Garg tries, and fails.

t
I

a

A

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Engineers and Specializatioi

A

Fascist-Baiting-the Newest Fad

IF YOU FIND YOURSELF getting bored
at the next all-night teach-in, try the
new game that is sweeping the country-
"Fascist-Baiting."
Fascist-baiting is the modern sequel to
the McCarthy-era witch-hunting game
of Red-baiting. It's so easy to play the
whole family can be indoctrinated so
they, too, can join in the fun. All you
need is someone who disagrees with you
on a contemporary issue.
For instance, find a person who tries
to analyze the Alabama situation without
great emotion and malice; then harangue
him about the atrocities, stormtroopers
and evil people in Alabama. When he says
the deprivation of the right to vote is un-
constitutional and segregation immoral
but that hating Southerners, Governor
Wallace and state police will not solve
the problem, call him a Fascist-Racist.
Soon the people around will recoil in hor-
ror from him. You have honestly and fair-
ly baited your first fascist.
ANOTHER FINE AREA in which to try
a little baiting is a discussion of Viet
Nam. You decry the two schools destroyed
by government aircraft and the violations
of the 1954 Geneva Accord on Indo-
China by the U.S. and South Viet Nam
(neither of whom were signatories to it).
When your opponent says the first viola-
vi l - in + th e A nrvr l m a hu N rnrth i t

Another easy place to fascist-bait is in
a discussion of local police. You pro-
claim the brutality of all police, decry
the strong-arm tactics they use on mi-
norities in large cities and urge the end
to all organized police protection. When
the opponent says he thinks there is cer-
tainly room for improvement in police
methods but basically they are doing a
fairly good job in keeping law and order,
call him a Fascist Brute.
DISCUSSING THE EXTREME right will
also hook a few good fascists. You just
assert that the John Birch Society, The
Minutemen, the American Nazi Party
and other far-right groups are the most
dangerous groups in America today and
that such war-mongering, capitalist, ra-
cist organizations should be outlawed.
When the opponent says the far left is
just as great a danger and that outlaw-
ing any group because of their ideas-so
long as they do not advocate overthrow'
of the government-is probably unconsti-
tutional, call him a Fascist Extremist.
After you've mastered these basic sug-
gestions, you and your friends will be
able to have even more fun thinking of
other ways to bait fascists. Also, you
will find fascist-baiting useful in every-
day discussions. When you cannot find
an effective argument to counter your op-

To the Editor:
HANK YOU for your annual
slamon the engineering college
and the engineering profession
(Robert Johnston's editorial, Hu-
manistic Engineering, March 28).
I am happy to take part in this
year's annual response.
First, I would like to join John-
ston in criticizing the lack of non-
technical electives in the engineer-
ing curriculum. Those of us in-
terested in forming a broad, liberal
base for our technical careersrfeel
painfully the curriculum's pres-
sure on us to "forget those lit-
college courses and get down to
some hard work."
The all too-prevalent opinion
among the engineering faculty is
that political science, literature,
history of art and similar sub-
jectscan be studiedsafter grad-
uation, without need of direction
from the experts. Many of us de-
plore this philosophy.
We find it the result of an un-
fortunate misinterpretation of the
value of early attainment of tech-
nical prowess-the need to "hurry
up and get your degree"-both
on the part of the faculty and the
students. We also find it the re-
sult of a shortage of classrooms
and teachers, which in part neces-
sitates the fast pace of present-
day engineering education.
THIS IS NOT to say the en-
gineering college's program in
English is ineffective. On the con-
trary, the program is definitely
commendable.
As was noted with some accur-
acy, the program is "geared . . .
to teaching students how to write
and speak . . ." In their fresh-
man year, engineering students
are required to take two courses
in basic composition and one' in
public speaking. The literary col-
lege's present requirement is one
course in basic composition.
In this the engineering college
is taking the more realistic point
of view, I believe. Whether stu-
dents should have learned how to
write in high school or not is un-
important at this level.
The fact is that incoming college
students in both the literary col-
lege and the engineering college
.I.. -n+ L -,xv h izto vri.Q Tn

in the engineering college aim at
interpretation and analysis just
as they do in the literary college.
Finally, and most important, I
wish to take issue with John-
ston's analysis of the engineer as
a member of his society. Obvious-
ly, the ideal engineer should be
able to apply his special abilities
to social, political and economic
problems as well as engineering
problems. Many will agree that a
broad early education and con-
tinuing study in non-technical
areas will help in attaining this
goal.
Per'haps many will disagree,
however, on the effects of speciali-
zation on the attainment of this
goal. I believe specialization, in
and of itself, does not at all im-
pair the engineer's abilitytto apply
engineering techniques to all kinds
of problems. In fact, specialization
allows the engineer to understand
most fully the application of
scientific principles to specific
phenomena.
As a specialist, thetengineer-
or the humanist, for that matter
-deals with events on the "atom-
ic" and "sub-atomic" levels, where
things really happen. The person
who remains unspecialized can
note only the gross effects of the
phenomena surrounding him. He
lacks real understanding and with
it, perhaps, the ability to be truly
useful to his society in any capa-
city.
FOR ME, then, Johnston's
phrase, "shattering example of
specialization and self-centered-
ness gone to extremes," has no
meaning. It is.a pretty phrase, but
an empty one.
The valid criticism of the Uni-
versity's engineering curriculum
rests on the lack of opportunity
for non-technical study. As long
as the University requires-allows
is better, perhaps-only 15 per
cent of student time to be spent
in non-technical courses, and as
long as Cal Tech requires 42 per
cent of student time to be spent
in non-technical courses, then Cal
Tech will consistently turn out a
better engineer.
The valid criticism of the en-
gineer as a member of his society
rests on his inability to apply

in the humanities. The lack of
humanities, he continues, inade-
quately prepares the student for
his full role in life.
What Johnston does not realize
is that his own overspecialization
has led him into a trap. He does
not under'stand his own type of
education or appreciate that of
others. What he is doing is making
a category mistake, using the cri-
teria of a good liberal arts edu-
cation and applying them to a
good engineering education, an
education based on a different set
of criteria.
The conclusion Johnston draws
is like claiming that a cow makes
a lousy race horse. True, they are
both quadripeds, but one keeps a
cow for the milk it provides. One
keeps a race horse for sport, ex-
citement and prestige.
SIMILARLY, the basis for an
engineering education is torpro-
vide a modern society with the
people it needs to harness man's
physical environment.
A liberal arts education pro-
vides society with people to an-
alyse and understand the intri-
cacies of man's relationship with
his neighbor and himself .
Tonjudge an engineering edu-
cation by the latter criteria is
ridiculous. Indeed, it would be
ridiculous for me to claim that
Johnston is overspecialized be-
cause he has not taken 30 hours
of credit in engineering subjects.
PRECISELY because these two
systems of education are striving
for different goals, it is wrong to
judge one in terms of the other.
Both systems are needed. As long
as each is aware of its limitations
and recognizes the existence and
goals of the other, neither sys-
tem's students are overspecialized
or narrow minded.
-Dean L. Smith, '66E
Donor Retaliates
To the Editor:
WE HAVE just torn up our an-
nual donation check to the
University Alumni fund. We will
not allow our money to support
any such irresponsible "freedom"

i

f

I

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan