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.

September 27, 1962 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1962-09-27

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

Seventy-Third Year
EDrrED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
"Where Opinions Are Free STUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBOR, MIcH., PHONE NO 2-3241
Truth Will Prevail",
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.
THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 1962 NIGHT EDITOR: ELLEN SILVERMAN

"You Forgot Something!"

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Regents' Bylaw
Claim False,

Panty Raids
Con...

Pro..

HERE WE GO AGAIN! A certain madness
seizes upon the quads, and then-"We want
pants!" And puritans, young and old, curl up
in horror.
Are panty raids primitive, irresponsible,
childish, absurd, anti-intellectual, and un-
worthy of the dignity of a great University? Of
course they are! And that is precisely why they
are so wonderful.
Along about half-past midnight in the dorms
on the Hill some girls are sleeping, some are
still studying, some are talking in little groups
in the halls or rooms. From far away behind
Markley comes a low, dull, constant roar that
begins to distinguish itself into individual
shouts as the first vanguard of the raiders leaps
over the low wall into Alice Lloyd courtyard.
Immediately, delighted shrieks of pleased
protest arouse the sleepers and the studious,
and all the girls rush to the nearest windows
and join in the spirit of a modern bacchanale.
The boys pour over the wall in endless dozens
a d mill about for a while, and then, as if by
a secret signal, the chant begins: "We want
pants!"
IT IS ALL DELICIOUSLY UNLAWFUL. Some
girls even remove their screens and toss out
a few sumptuous treasures to the howling mob.
Then, some of the more heroic and daring boys
scale the entranceway roof and run about like
dark, swift shadows in front of the third floor
windows.
Usually, the third-floor curtains are drawn.
Sometimes they are not. There are shouts and
squeals, sneers of derision from those boys who
have gotten nothing for their pains, and then
everyone gradually disperses. But in the dorm,
life seems to have been invigorated; the girls,
even those who were sleeping or studying run
around laughing and chattering for another
hour or more.
'ES, IT IS PRIMITIVE. But any one who has
read the works of Laurens VanDer Post can-
not forget that dark, primintive brother in the
soul of which he speaks so eloquently.
Yes, it is undignified and anti-intellectual.
But we have spent a dismayingly large portion
of our waking hours in scholarly pursuits, and
an hour or so of abandon is not to be denied.
It is certainly no more dangerous than football.
Yes, panty raids are immature and irrespon-
sible. But we are young, and there are times
and places in which we may exercise our ir-
responsibility-just because it is fun.
There is something hideous in the fact that
teenagers these days have to worry about the
bomb. There is something faintly tragic in the
kind of world that is rapidly destroying forever
the carefree quality of youth. We spend most of
our lives, as college students, in learning about
the deepest and most serious ideas that human
minds have developed through the ages.
W E DO NOT REFUSE that responsibility.
Most of us welcome it and live by it to the
best of our ability. All we ask is a few oppor-
tunities to remember that we are young. We
will be mature and completely weighed down
with responsibility for a long, long time.
Do not even those administrators who deplore
our panty raids occasionally reminisce about
their own youth, their own lost moments of
abandon?
We are young, and we are alive. After college,
we will never have another chance for a panty
raid. We have willingly given up much of our
youthful irresponsibility in the pursuit of adult
goals. Soon enough, we too will be gray-flannel
nine-to-fivers. But now, we treasure a few
moments of respite from the world of adult
cares, and no one has the right to take them
away from us.
-MARTHA MacNEAL

PANTY RAIDS are not larks, but riots,
dangerous and damaging to both students
and the University. They may lead to injury,
property damage, and a bad name for stu-
dents and this institution. They accomplish
nothing.
Fortunatey, no one has, as yet, been injured
in panty raids. However, the possibility is
always present. A charge to or from a wo-
men's dorm could trample an unwary raider
who happened to be going in the wrong
direction. The acrobatics on Alice Lloyd's or
Markley's ledges could lead to injurous falls.
This year raiders have had the good sense
not to attempt to break into women's resi-
dence halls in their quest of panties. However,
this is always a possibility and students may
be injured in a melee and the dorms damaged.
OF EQUAL importance is the damage these
useless larks do to the reputations of stu-
dents and the University. These raids are
extremely unfortunate for the raiders' actions
undermine all attempts to gain more student
rights which demand student responsibility.
"The student must be considered a partici-
pating member of a community of scholars
with responsibilities and opportunities com-
mensurate with his capabilities, last spring's
Reed Report urged Vice-President Lewis. He
should be expected to participate fully in deci-
sions affecting his welfare. He should help to
formulate, uphold and enforce the rules by
which he is to live in the University."
Student Government Council's comments on
the report went further: "The Council believes
that students generally have fully adequate
abilities to participate in the making of Uni-
versity decisions. College students are capable
of at least the following responsibilities: full
participation in decisions affecting their wel-
fare; participating in formulating, upholding
and enforcing the rules by which they are to
live in the University community; (and) as-
sumption of responsibility for their conduct."
WHAT SORT of responsibility does a panty
raid show? Only the empty-headed follow-
ing of a mob, a cheer, and a few firecrackers.
This gives the University a legitimate-
sounding rationale for not granting students
basic citizenship rights. As Regent Carl Brablec
observed at the Regents dinner with SGC,
students' desire to be treated as adults, which
the Regents assume, includes responsibility for
their actions. But panty raids, he said indicate
that perhaps students are not to be always
treated like adults. Thus the students who
would benefit from these reforms ironically
preclude their establishment.
Panty raid publicity in the metropolitan
newspapers puts a great deal of pressure on
the University for a more paternalistic student
affairs policy. Added to the vocal criticism that
accompanies any University consideration of
new OSA policy, the bad publicity created by
the raids makes the University's position more
difficult and the administration more hesitant
to act.
Last summer the OSA took a few halting
steps toward recognizing the maturity of stu-
dents. The functional structure somewhat miti-
gates the paternalism of the OSA and the new
advisory structure at least recognizes that stu-
dents have some voice in the conduct of that
vital office.
AS LONG as students regard panty raids as
innocent, harmless larks, neither an end
to panty raids nor a whole-hearted adminis-
tration acceptance of the student capacity to
be responsible will be forthcoming. Panty raids
only delay the implementation of the rights of
students.
--PHILIP SUTIN

HELSINKI FESTIVAL:
Boycott Limits Expression

(EDITOR'S NOTE: This is the sec-
ond of two articles analyzing the
Helsinki Youth Festival.)
By MICHAEL ZWEIG
HERE ARE several reasons
which bring people to a World
Youth Festival. Some come to
make friends; many come for the
intellectual stimulation of discus-
sing knotty world questions and
ideological differences with a hope
of furthering their own under-
standing and clarity of mind.
Others come to accomplish the
practical work of coordinating ef-
forts and movements on an inter-
national level; almost all come to
enjoy themselves.
The value of the Festival must,
at least in part, be decided in
terms of the possibilities and at-
mosphere afforded there for ac-
tual achievement of these aims,
for no satisfactory argument can
be made in objection to the aims
themselves.
The Festival brought together
more than 12,000 young people
from all over the world. The motto
was "Peace and Friendship," and
at least many did come and par-
ticipate in friendship, or perhaps
more accurately tolerance. In any
gathering of 12,000 gregarious stu-
dents, it is not difficult to de-
velop at least embryonic friend-
ship, later developed by mail and
further contact.
.*. \
AN OFT asked question in Hel-
sinki was "What are you doing in
your country to exert stu-
dent pressure?" From the re-
sponses to that question, it was
sometimes possible to see cooper-
ative, parallel courses of action on
common problems, either directly
political or concerned with the
education process itself.
While the organized seminars
offered disappointingly littlein-
formation on the practical work of
young people, there were many
other times and places to find out,
and nothing prevented a speaker,
from describing events along these
lines at the seminars.
Every meeting of delegates,
every discussion at the Interna-
tional Students' Center, every
inter-delegation meeting even-
tually centered around political
and ideological issues. In fact,
there was so much stimulation and
exposure to Soviet policy (each one
at the same time eliciting an ex-
pression of Western policy), that
some nations preferred toboycott
the Festival entirely rather than
expose themselves to sharp face-
to-face disagreement.
* * *
I PERSONALLY managed with
no difficulty to achieve those four
aims and can cite atsleast one
example in each case. Others
whom I know also succeeded.
This is of no small significance,
not only personally, but also (at
least to some degree) interna-
tionally when these experiences of
12,000 participants are compound-
ed into a single effect of the Fes-
tival.
There is one other important
aim which a participant might
seek-propagandizing, prdselytiz-
ing, and conversion of people to
a particular ideology or political
viewpoint.
It is in the light of these "big
stakes" especially that so many
Americans oppose and mistrust the
Festival. The objection centers
around the belief that the Festival
is a tool of Soviet policy designed
to inculcate Communism into the

To the extent that non-Com-
munists took part in the Festival,
to the extent that they spoke in
public sessions and made use of
the vast opportunity for personal
contact, to the extent that they
were capable of explaining and
defending Western politics, non-
Communist views were also pros-
elytized and spread.
It is not enough to point. to the
instances of repressed free speech
and conclude that non-Commun-
ists could find no opportunity to
express their views. This narrow
conclusion blots out the context
in which the discrimination took
place, neglecting the many pro-
Western speeches which were in
fact given and the wide opportun-
ity to meet people and discuss
serious political questions freely
outside of any organized political
session.
* * *
JUST AS the instances of re-
pression of free speech in some
seminars cannot honestly be used
to justify condemnation of the
Festival as a whole (or even cast
serious doubts on its actual over-
all freedom), the opportunities for
real contact and exchange -annot
serve to gloss over the deliberate
discrimination against some speak-
ers. They must be condemned,
but kept in perspective at the
same time.
It is patently absurd to claim
that the Festival was unfair in
not "including" delegates from all
nations. To say that the majority
of Finnish student opinion was
not expressed within the Festival
is true, but it is so because the
SYL, the Finnish youth organiza-

tion representing 90 per cent of
Finnish students, boycotted the
Festival completely.
The same is true for USNSA
and students from South Korea,
South Vietnam and some other
Western allies. If these people re-
fuse to participate in the Festival,
they have no right to complain
that .their views were not ade-
quately represented.
THE BASIS for the boycott has
been the large number of Com-
munists attending the . Festival
and the feeling that anti-Soviet,
Western interpretation cannot be
voiced at the Festival in the face
of a Communist dominated IPC.
The effect the neutrals of
meeting skilled Communists and
unskilled, often naive, Westerners
is difficult to assess,,but Commun-
ism must have seemed clearer and
more forceful than Western poli-
cies after all was said.
The' Festival offered quite ade-
quate grounds to meet the Soviet
position with the Western one in
a free exchange. If that oppor-
tunity was in fact not fully real-
ized, it was because many West-
erners boycotted the Festival, and
many of those who went were
informationally incapable of offer-
ing counter-arguments.
The Festival is the only inter-
national, multi - political event
which is offered to the youth of
the world. We must support it and
attend it prepared to take ad-
vantage of whatever facet appeals
to us, be it the cultural participa-
tion or the serious ideological dif-
ferences which are discussed there.

To the editor:
IT IS OBVIOUS that we, as stu-
dents interested in obtaining as
complete an education as possible,
must protest the action taken by
the Regents in regard to Bylaw
8.11. The Bylaw as it now stands
is bad enough, but the proposed
revision is even worse.
The claim is made that precen-
sorship of speakers will no longer
occur. This claim is false, for why
else has a new committee been
formed to review the application
of each student group sponsored
speaker. If no precensorship is to
exist then this committee will
have no function to perform and
will not exist at all. Calendaring
could and should be handled in
the regular fashion by SGC and
not through a lecture committee
of any sort.
Also; holding a student organi-
zation responsible for what a
speaker says is unconstitutional. If
a speaker says something 'illegal
or immoral' he and only he should
be held responsible for whatever
he says.
THIRD, the very wording of the
proposed Bylaw 8.11 indicates that
anyone who is the least bit off
center (left or right) and might be
inclined to urge changes in any
laws cannot speak on this campus.
It has been pointed out that even
National Panhel or IFC officers
cannot advocate protestation of
SGC's action in the membership
statements because this is speak-
ing against a "University" rule.
I also ask, "When will they trust
us"? When will the leaders of
the "University" realize that our
minds will not be "poisoned" by a
single speech; and that our minds
are inquisitive? We want to learn.
This is why we are here.
-Stan Lubin, '64
Implications...
To the Editor:
THE RECENT action of George
Romney in questioning the loy-
alty of Neil Staebler seems to me
so reprehensible, such a perfectly
gratuitous act of political savag-
ery, that I urge all those who are
thinking of voting for him to in-
vestigate seriously his qualifica-
tions for the governorship of the
state of Michigan.
Neil Staebler is one of the most
respected citizens of this state,
a man who has done more than
any other man in the history of
Michigan to put polities on a de-
cent plane, and one who is known
and liked personally by thousands
of men and women, Democrats
and Republicans alike. To see him
smeared with the McCarthy brush
by the very man who entered this
campaign preaching idealism, po-
litical morality and bi-partisan-
ship is a bitter irony and a sad
disappointment, even to those who
oppose him.
LET US look for a moment at
the implications of his remark, in
the event that he should be elect-
ed governor. Would he call every-
one who opposed him disloyal?
Would he cast slurs on the Ameri-
canism of Democrats generally?
Would he eliminate the partisan-
ship which he professes to find
so damaging to the state of Michi-
gan? The Democratic party,
whether he is elected or not, will
remain the majority party of the
state and it is hardly likely that
its members will forget and forgive
that one of their most valued lead-
ers has been called disloyal and
has been personally damaged in
favor of a man who himself was
one of Sen. McCarthy's staunch-
est supporters. The partisan battle,
far from ending under a Romney
regime, might conceivably become
even more inflamed than it is now
and the whole state would surely
suffer from such a long guerrilla
war.
Even assuming that the remark
was made in an unguarded mo-

ment, it betrays such a cold lack
of ordinary human consideration
and decency that it casts much
doubt on Romney's temperamen-
tal qualifications for the post he
seeks. He is suffering from a deep
boss-complex, so deep that he ap-
parently thinks he is justified in
using whatever weapons he wishes
in his struggle for election. But he
simply cannot go on working both
sides of the street as he has been
doing, with the prayerbook in one
hand and the tar brush in the oth-
er; that will not do any more: he
must be one thing or the other, an
idealist campaigning on issues or
an unscrupulous politician cam-
paigning on personalities. It is up
to him to make the choice.
-Prof. Robert J. Niess
'E' Sticker...
To the Editor:
I WENT over to the Student Ac-
tivities Building yesterday, and
paid $7 for an "E" sticker. I have
tried to discover what I purchased,
what I received, and I have de-
cided that someone has an aw-
fully good thing going for them
and that same someone made a
fool out of me.
There are a lot of things to be
said for the University ban on
automobiles: automobiles do not

sticker is the mechanical means of
administrating this, but my $7 says
it is also a revenue raising mea-
sure.
If the University recognizes that
it, has no right to regulate after
age 21, it certainly has no right to
tax. Like the girl of high virtue
who changes her mind for $7, the
University is not consistent in
maintaining the right to regulate,
unless it is bought off. Can't we
get rid of the $7 fee for those who
meet the requirements for an E
sticker?
-John M. Rickel, '63L
Truth?
To the Editor:
AS MUCH as I dislike to com-
ment on Daily editorials, I
feel that I am obligated to carry
out The Daily's own policy of let-
ting its readers know that "Truth
Will Prevail." Thus, I am writing
this letter in answer to Messieurs
Marcus and Harrah's editorial con-
cerning George Romney. An edi-
torial which contained distortions
and untruths, as well as erroneous
and false quotations.
Marcus and Harrah say that
Romney was repudiated when
Richard Durant was elected to a
position of leadership. The fact is
that Durant was never elected to
anything.He was soundly defeat-
ed by the Republicans in his own
district when he attempted to be-
come a precinct delegate.
At the 14th District convention
he was able, through cheap poli-
tical trickery and duplication, to
put two of his stooges into posi-
tions of leadership. In fact almost
all of the precinct delegates who
voted for his stooges did not know
that these people were supporters
of Durant.
THE EDITORIAL further claims
that at the State Republican Con-
vention Romney was "audibly
booed by many delegates" when he
attacked the extremist organiza-
tions. The truth is that only about
five individuals voiced their dis-
approval. "Disapproval" which was
drowned out by the rest of the
delegates who stood and cheered
Romney's attack on the extremists
for more than ten minutes.
Messrs. Marcus and Harrah tell
us that the Republicans were re-
lugtant to go on record as repud-
iating the John Birch Society. Such
is not the case. The delegates vot-
ed unanimously to place in their
platform a clause which repudiates
the views and goals of that so-
ciety, and condemns their attempt
to influence any members of the
party.
The editorial's obvious distor-
tions were made for a specific pur-
pose. They are misrepresentations
calculated to discredit a man
whose'ethics are above question.
A man who represents to the peo-
ple of Michigan a chance for a
citizens government rather than a
special interest government. This
is something which neither David
Marcus nor Michael Harrah can
understand.
-Barry Litvin, '64, Chairman,
Students For Romney
DETROIT:
Crack'
Cracks
MONDAY NIGHT, understudy
Pauline Flanagan had a fabl-
ed show-business break when she
took over Nancy's Kelly's role in
the Broadway-bound drama,"Step
on a Crack," now at the Fisher
Theatre in Detroit.
Miss Kelly bowed out of the cast
when the show was trying out in
Cleveland because she "didn't feel
right in the part." She had pre-
viously filled the gap when Rita
Hayworth left the show during re-

hearsals due to "illness." Although
Miss Hayworth's excuse sounded
doubtful, it is completely believ-
able after seeing the play-"Step
on a Crack" would make anyone
ill.
IT IS A JUVENILE attempt at
pyschological and aesthetic thea-
trical sophistication. The uneven
script attempts unsuccessfully to
combine a teenage comic-relief
plot reminiscent of a bad week
on "Dobie Gillis," a poetic prose
style which neatly catalogues all
the Victorian metaphors about
ships at sea and treesin the sun-
light, melodrama in the toolshed
when the mad son with the Oedi-
pus complex, who also thinks
chairs talk, tries to burn his
father's secretary (predictably the
father, Gary Merrill, arrives in
the nick of time), and occasional
clever quips about the Fourth of
July, homosexuality, and doctors
-all of which have no relation to
the plot.
* * *
THE DIRECTOR did nothing to
clarify the rambling script. In-
stead of choosing one of the play's
seemingly endless moods as the
central focus, Director Herbert
Swope, Jr., plays each scene for
its full impact-whether it be slap-
stick comedy, a stylized soliloquy,
nr, hnthth hpi.~,.y e&Iriina fn Pm.,-

BERGMANN SEMINAR:
A Glimpse of the Future

SGC Elections Need Change

IN A LITTLE more than a month a slate of
candidates to fill seven Student Government
Council seats will be presented to the campus.
An election like last spring's fiasco cannot
be permitted to recur.
Fortunately, SGC's election chairman Michael
Levin is making careful plans for the No-
vember voting.
TO INSURE a valid election, candidates must
know election and petitioning regulations.
This is partially the responsibility of Council's
pre-election candidate orientation program;
however, there is absolutely no excuse for ig-
norance of procedure on the part of the candi-
dates themselves. This fall candidates must
accept, not dodge, this responsibility.
During the more than two week interval
between the petitioning deadline and the actual
election, candidates' petitions should be thor-
oughly checked. Each candidate whose petition
is deemed valid should be certified so that there
will be no question of the legality of a candi-
date's petition during the course of the election.
The polls themselves present a major ad-
ministrative problem. A two day election, re-
quiring about 500 students to man the polls,
"esiRA vnfa. ar rnfim~w~ini adft.Pt, nrPno cs citP C

By holding the SGC elections on one day,
a nucleus of trained poll workers could be
developed, minimizing the chance of stuffing
the ballot box.
A vigorous campaign,'engendering real stu-
dent interest in election issues, would result
in as big a voter-turn-out for one day as for
two. Informed, interested, intelligent candidates
are needed to create meaningful student
concern.
Another way to insure that each and every
vote is legitimate would be to require that voters
sign a registration book at the time they receive
their ballot. This would force the would-be
ballot stuffer to become a forgery expert at the
same time.
IN THE FUTURE the registration book could
be replaced by a coupon similar to the ath-
letic coupon handed out during registration.
Students would be required to turn in this vot-
ing coupon on election day. The number of
ballots handed out could be tallied with the
number of coupons received.
A stringent enforcement of election rules is
an important manifestation of responsible stu-
dent government. The validity of government
itself, rests upon the validity of the election

By JEAN TENANDER
THE PROGRAM which Tuesday
night enabled Prof. Frithjof
Bergmann to lead a discussion
group on the works of Albert Cam-
us offers the undergraduate a
glimpse of something which in the
future may be a great deal more
than one meeting in a series of
seminars.
Established originally seven
years ago with the title of the
Reading and Discussion Program,
the present series is a continuation
of this program under a slightly
different structure. Officially the
fall symposium is a result of the
reading lists sent out to all fresh-
men during the summer. This ab-
breviated plan has come about in
an attempt to whittle down the
previously unwieldly all year
around program initially establish-
ed.
If this year's sessions seem to
have favorable results, as can be
fairly accurately predicted from
last nights gathering, the sem-
inars may once again be extended
to cover the whole year. It is this
possibility for the future which
should make everyone who is
aware of the program's objectives
look forward with anticipation to
a broadening and enlarging of
these objectives.
* *
CHAIRMAN of the standing
committee, Roger Lowenstein, has
predicted that the revamping of
the program will for this year,
anyway, involve only one or more
additional seminar series but with

The idea of holding a number of
discussion groups on books of
more than routine interest first
germinated on campus quite a few
years ago. The plans were so huge
and all encompassing, however,
that very little of worth was being
accomplished and the outcome
was lack of interest and discour-
agement. In 1960 the present pro-
gram was created and although it
did not exist last year the year
before a very successful sym-
posium was held on Dostoevski.
In order to avoid the mistakes
the early series suffered from, the
standing committee will make an
attempt to choose a narrow topic
which can be explored at great
length and in depth rather than
trying to work on a number of
jumbled things at once.
ALTHOUGH this program is
sponsored by the Student Govern-
ment Council, the people on the
standing committee are respon-
sible in a large part for the suc-
cess of the venture. Those who in-
itiated the series in 1956 were
thoughtful and idealistic in their
understanding of the need a stu-
dent has to be able to express him-
self on academic subjects to aca-
demic people while renaining out-
side the classroom.
Those who are presently direct-
ing the series have inherited an
understanding of this need and
will hopefully continue to serve
the students with a view to this
understanding. The possibilities
are really quite astounding. A four

1

11

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan