Seventy-Third Year
EDITED 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 2-3242
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.
rESDAY, OCTOBER 9, 1962 NIGHT EDITOR: ELLEN SILVERMAN

"How'd You Like Your Daughter Marrin'
One of Them?"

CONCERT SERIES OPENS:
Detroit Symphony
Performs Brilliantly

The Faction
And the Whole

TWO PERSONS are dead. A great number
of others are injured. A one-time general in
the United States Army who insists that he
fought on the wrong side, sat behind bars
awaiting psychiatric examination to determine
whether he is mentally fit to stand trial for
"obstructing justice."
Thousands of dollars worth of damage has
been done to the property of innocents and
much more to that intangible stuff called
human dignity, the reason for the battle in
the first place. A century of hate has boiled
Into fanaticism that knows not why. But James
Meredith is in school.
The case is packed with ironies, and it is
not difficult for partisans to turn up the many
bits of tragedy that abound, or even to provide
some for themselves. It was hardly by chance
that Meredith's first class at Ole Miss Monday
happened to be American Colonial History.
But that image-Meredith surrounded by fed-
eral troops, entering the class while crowds
jeered and fled from tear gas-perhaps best
sums up a burning question facing sthis nation,
a question frightening in its implications.
DIRECTLY AFTER President Kennedy's pro-
nouncement last Sunday night newscasters
described the proud, tradition-bound, football
powerful Ole Miss as heavy with the atmos-
phere of stunned disbelief and defeat. It was
as if, they said, Mississippi had just lost the
"Big Game." It had.
The students were largely ready to accept
the inevitable decision. Reports from campus
held that the rioting which had carried on
through the afternoon had come from lower
classmen who had little to lose by threats of
walk-out or by shut-down of the school. Most
students were bitter but resigned. The view of
the faculty would have been unpopular. It re-
mained silent.
Then the realrioting broke. It grew in vol-
ume and in violence. Outsiders streamed in
from local areas and from out-state. Gen.
Walker pledged 10,000 men and unlimited
money. The Mississippi police withdrew at the
White Elephant
JUST ABOUT everyone knows that Home-
coming is dying.
The last two years have seen it lose a little
bit of money ($1600). The Homecoming dance
ast year was poorly attended. And fewer and
fewer housing units seem willing to go to the
rouble of constructing floats.
Just about everybody knows this-everybody,
hat is, except the Homecoming chairmen,
who are putting up the bravest of fronts.
They apparently are of the opinion that the
gala event is worth saving, even in its present
owly state. So, having searched their collective
ninds, they have concocted a publicity scheme
hat is sure to attract the awe and attention
>f the student multitude: The "First Big Ten
ntra-Intercollegiate Elephant Race."
'The Homecoming planners have consented
o allow housing units the opportunity to spon-
or one of the pachyderms for "only $225, to
:over elephant cost and such." The campus
ommunity is urged to "hurry, with cash, check,
noney order!"
)NE'S FIRST reaction to this project is that
it is sort of cute, and it is really good to
ee our dedicated Homecoming leaders in there
'orking, lost cause though it may be. The aura
'f cheer is slightly pierced, however, by a few
.oubts that arise upon further reflection:
First of all is whether or not an elephant race
a something that dignified, stuffy, rich alumni
rould like to come home to.
Second of all, there may be an embarassing
esemblance between the animal contestants
nd the lumbering varsity linemen.
Thirdly, there are six elephants in the race.
'herefore, there will be five losers. People who
ay out $225 for an elephant, only to see him
ose, are going to be a bit perturbed, and in
Lie future may harbor some bitterness towards
[omecoming, wlich wouldn't be good because
[omecoming needs as many friends as it can
et.
j'INALLY, THE IDEA itself is not new, Ele-
phant races have been held before by col-

gians who feel obliged to prove that they
re clever and enthusiastic people. The most
amous was last spring at the Orange County
tate College (California) Pachy-Derby, which,
icidently, was won by a 5 V2ton elephant
amed Kinney, who afterwards bolted away to
>ok for his girlfriend.
Let's see our copy-cat Homecoming elephant
ace match that.
-GERALD STORCH
Editorial Staff
MICHAEL OLINICK, Editor
UDITH OPPEN MICHMIAEL HARRAH
Editorial Director City Editor
AROLINE DOW ................ Personnel Director

order of an uncooperative Gov. Barnett and
violence was unchecked.
THIS THEN, is the nature of conviction, the
fanatical belief in principle. This principle
finds its roots in precolonial days but is still
militantly supported by too large a portion
of our Southern population. The violence with
which it was defended and which demon-
strates the opinion of a large voting bloc, con-
firms a national problem that far outreaches
the immediate dangers of the riot, dangers!
that Meredith may face, or even the question
of injustice to racial minorities and the Con-
stitutional nature of the union, historically
solved but not yet allowed to die peacefully
in the South.'
THE PHYSICAL integration of what has been
called the stronghold of segregation in the
South, Ole Miss-ethical and moral considera-
tions aside-can only have the effect of break-
ing down psychological racial barriers. It will
take many generations to reduce color bias
to a minimum, but the overall effect can only
be A liberalization. That has been seen already
anywhere that mixing between white and
Negro is common. Where tangible barriers are
broken there is less occasion to cling to old
practices.
But while a liberalization is taking place,
reaction will inevitably set in. It is how this
nation accommodates this reaction and the re-
action that must accompany the disappoint-
ment of all such militant beliefs-whether it
spreads and divides and acts as a brake upon
the country or whether it is absorbed-that
will determine the future place of the nation
in the world community.
The composite mind of America must con-
tinue toexperience liberalization similar to
that which it has undergone for almost two
centuries. This does not refer to any one body
of doctrine but rather to the potential for con-
stant adaptation to changing world realities.
The conservative drag, inherent in the process
of growing old in an environment where new
and reborn states are constantly emerging, is
a determining factor in our relations with
these other nations. It is the same drag that
puts policy makers at a tactical disadvantage
with the Soviet.
THE MOST dissatisfied cynic must admit that
policies affirmed and actions taken by this
government do have roots in current modes of
thought. The extent to which they are prime
determining factors in the formulation of policy
and subsequent action by the government is
debatable. But it cannot be argued that these
currents of thought are without important in-
fluence.
The fact is startling to us that the system
of government under which we live is now the
oldest government among the powers of the
world community. It has existed without a
single threat of revolution or total change-
the Civil War was rebellion at best. It has
placated most malcontents and has withstood,
even satisfied, revolutionary tendencies within
its own process.
It has done this by accommodating constant
change within itself one way or another. It
has been able to generate an impression of
youth and seeks constantly to do so. The best
current example is, of course, the New Frontier.
The present administration has demonstrated
its awareness of the problems of ossification
within established governments by its very
use of the term. Despite charges of backward-
ness on the one hand and rashness on the
other, its programs have shown a concern that
all segments of this society continue to pro-
gress and to grow.
THAT THIS is at least acknowledged is im-
portant in itself. Its realization may be
something else. For it cannot happen except
at the sacrifice of some segments of that
society. There must be a consciousness that the
good of the whole is being advanced and there-
by the good of each particular section in the
long run. But human nature does not yield
so easily. The martyr instinct crumbles when
cherished values such as white supremacy must
also burn at the stake. The established order, as
it becomes more deeply entrenched, finds
it more difficult to give of itself. Consider Ole
Miss.
Still, every established order in every corner

of society must learn somehow that to guard
jealously their particular interests now may
be to destroy them later. Had England learned
that fact we might be today quite a bit more
interested in Prince Charlie's progress at riding-
to-hounds. This is to say nothing of the stag-
nation and decay that can be expected from
the inside when reaction takes over. Robert
Welch and his cohorts make a particularly
pertinent case in point.
'WHAT IS desparately needed is a new world-
consciousness. Since the sources of power
in this countryare so diffused-never forget
that Harry Truman was a farmboy, even if
he won't let you-this consciousness must be
spread to the people themselves. That is the
undeniable force of the past centuries of his-
tory.

4::
.D. -, r~*t
" ~I :eaa ' rClty '.; '

/ ~ w

C4 x ab.w+ r s ' ;

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
The, State of the University

To the Editor:
AN EDITORIAL like Michael Oli-
nick's Saturday, demands a re-
sponse, for it seems to us to
convey an ementially false im-
pression of the present state of
the University. No thoughtful
member of the University com-
munity is wholly pleased with the
University's state or its prospects,
and vigorous, thoughtful criticism
from within is welcome evidence
of a healthy situation. But that
criticism ought always to be re-
sponsible, accurate, and in good
taste. It is our judgment that your
editorial falls short on all of these
criteria.
In essence you seem to us to
have said that the University is
going from bad to worse and that
this is. directly attributable to the
leadership of its incumbent presi-
dent. Ypu have done so in lan-
guage that indicates an almost
pathological dislike and distrust
of Mr. Hatcher. Whatever valid
criticisms might be offered are lost
in the onrush of near-libelous in-
vective. We believe that in writ-
ing thus you have done a disserv-
ice to the University.
* * *
"THE FACULTY does not feel
any particular loyalty to the Uni-
versity" but remains for a variety
of other reasons: "inertia, lighter
class loads (this, we may remark,
conduces toward excellence in
freeing them for research, counsel-
ling, and the like), friendship in
the community, and the feeling
that all universities would be as
disillusioning as this one . . ."
Granted that this may be true of
some, it is our judgment that
among the overwhelming majority
of faculty members there is a
strong feeling of loyalty and of
optimism. Events of the past year
or two have heartened many who
were pessimistic earlier. We do not
know who your informants are but
we believe them to be unrepresen-
tative.
In his "fine-sounding state-
ment" as to the size of the Uni-
versity, you say, the President "does
not reveal who made this decision
. . ." The implication is that the
President made the decision, or the
President and his administrative
staff. The fact is-as you could
have discovered by asking-that
the decision was drawn from the
actions of the individual units
within the University. The schools
and colleges were asked to indi-
cate at what point increased en-
rollment would cause a decline in

quality of instruction. The admin-
istrative decision was based on
these responses. This is not to ar-
gue the merits of the controversy;
many faculty members disagree
with the decisions reached in their
own units, and even some who
agree to do reluctantly, realizing
that the enrollment "explosion" is
a fact of our time, which cannot be
ignored-on the quadrangle, State
Street, or Maynard Street. But it is
to say that the decision was not
dictated bY the President and his
immediate associates.
S* * *
YOU NOTE that the president
("Hatcher," you call him-see The
Daily's stylebook or any book on
good manners) asserted "the posi-
tive responsibility of the Univer-
sity in the complete intellectual
growth of students." But you say
that "he failed to inform the fac-
ulty about what has been happen-
ing with the Office of Student Af-
fairs and how this fits into the
satisfaction of the spirit and to-
tal development of University stu-
dents."
At least one of us (actually, only
one of us; but this device which
you employed-when mentioning
that "at least one" university
psychologist has "discovered" that
the bigness of the University is
responsible for the most serious
morale problem among students-
gives the impression that there
'may be more, whether there are
in fact) served on the recent stu-
dent-faculty-administration com-
mittee which drafted a broad
statement of philosophy of student
affairs. With the endorsement of
the President, the Regents adopt-
ed that statement, and it was com-
municated to the entire Univer-
community only last spring. Surely
there was no need to repeat this
in the State of the University ad-
dress. If the emphasis is on what
structural changes are being made
in the Office of Student Affairs, it
is plain to all that present ar-
rangements are tentative, un-
doubtedly subject to f u r t h e r
-change, which will be accomplish-
ed only after discussions with the
faculty Committee on Student Re-
lations and with Student Govern-
ment or some portion thereof. De-
velopments to date appear fully
consistent with the philosophical
statement proposed and adopted
last spring. Actually, growth of
freedom and development of reli-
ance on student maturity and re-
sponsibility have been phenomenal
in the past five or ten years.

You state that the president
"claimed" that the press must be
free for reporting and editorial,
comment, but you aver that he
has made "no attempt to increase
the freedom of 'The Daily' and in-
deed opposes moves to remove the
restrictions on its editorial com-
ment." That your editorial could
appear as written is ample evi-
dence that there exists no very sig-
nificant restrictions. It is our un-
derstanding that there are but two
restrictions upon you, other than
the criminal and civil laws of libel:
a) editorial comment on regental.
elections is proscribed; b) editorial
comment on pending appropria-
tions measures is to be discussed
with the chairman of the Board in
Control before publication. 'We
would not oppose removal of these
restrictions if they are deemed sub-
stantial, though they appear to
us not to be onerous. But these re-
strictions were not imposed by the
President and they cannot be re-
moved by him. The Regents have
given that power to the Board in
Control of Student Publications.
Are decisions to be made auto-
cratically or democratically? Even
if one were to arguesthat the
President should at least commu-
nicate his views to the Board-
and as former Board members we
would have been less than happy
at such a turn of events-a per-
sonal attack such as the one you
have indulged in is not likely to
solicit the President's support for
your view.
* * *
WE COULD extend the list of
our dissatisfactions with your edi-
torial, but they merely would be
additional indications of our ob-
servation that upon inadequate
factual data you have made sweep-
ing generalizations about the pro-
fessional competence of the presi-
dent of the University. In our de-
mocracy, administrators are fair
game for criticism. We believe your
comment however, was largely un-
fair, largely untrue, and of little
constructive value.
The University of Michigan is a
dynamic institution; change is in-
evitable. But the nature of the
change does not depend upon the
president alone. We believe that
President Hatcher will fill his role
with distinftion; we trust that fac-
ulty members and students will'
also accept their responsibilities
for the future of the University.
-Prof. John W. Reed
-Prof. W. J. McKeachie

THE 84TH ANNUAL Choral Un-
ion Series opened in Hill Audi-
torium Sunday with a concert by
the Detroit Symphony Orchestra
directed by Paul Paray.
In recent years, it has been a
rare thing to have this orchestra
in Ann Arbor. Perhaps the enthu-
siastic reception accorded it at this
performance will prompt an early
return or else send Sunday's audi-,
tors into Detroit to hear the or-
chestra at home.
The orchestra is a brilliant en-
semble, responding to Paray's
leadership with precision and en-
thusiasm. Even in most of the
higher-rated orchestras one seldom
finds such Instant response to a
conductor's indications.
The use of the adjective bril-
liant is quite deliberate. It is the
one word which recurred to me
throughout the concert. Extreme
brilliance marked the performance
of every work and eventually it
seemed to me that brilliance had
become an end in itself.
THE SYMPHONY in D minor by
Csar Franck, which opened the
program, is a work long associated
with this orchestra and its present
conductor. Their recording of it
is ranked among the best. On Sun-
day, Paray gave the work a strong,
dramatic (except in the second
movement), and fast reading.
The conductor's Interpretation
of the Symphony was very per-
sonal and intense in the outer
movements. Some might feel that
it was exaggerated-it was, but I
don't think it was out of place
and it did work most of the time.
The tempos tended to be faster
than usual, which is not such a
bad thing. For my personal taste,
the faster one gets through this
hackneyed piece the better.
The approach was very good for
the first and third movements,
but the second; came across in a
rather perfunctory manner. I had
the impression that Paray eras
eager to get by this quiet business
in order to let the brass go again.
A SET of Variations on "The
Wayfaring Stranger" by James
Cohn opened the second part of
the program. he work, Just given
its premiere in Detroit, reveals
a thorough study of Aaron Cop-
land's popular ballet music, but
it gives Copland no cause for con-
cern. The variations were not in-
teresting and we're at times trite.
The performance was quite good.
Another more or less contem-
porary work, Samuel Barber's
Adagio for String Orchestra
(1938), came next. This brief work
is gorgeous and. it was beautifully
played
Ravel's very- popular Suite No.
2 from "Daphnis and Chloe" clos-
ed the program. It was another
brilliant performance and brought
down the house, as it was obviously
intended to do. However, to my
ears this performance was one
very big climax after another and
I soon grew weary.
I REMEMBER a wondeiul per-
formance of this work by the
Lamoureux Orchestra of Paris
conducted by Igor Markevitch
here in 1960. In my review at that
time I spoke of "transcendent
clarity and elegance." I remember,
too, the sense of, proportion i
which the earlier climaxes all led
towards the final one, which when
it came was over-powering. These
were lacking in Paray's perform-
ance. It had clarity, but not ele-
gance. The first climax was so
big that it robbed the others of
effectiveness.
Although I know the orchestra
played softly now and then, my
overall impression is that it was
a very loud concert.
I am also very concerned about
the programming involved. All of
the music on this concert came
out of the same narrow stylistic
school. Barber and Cohn are liv-
ing Americans, but their music
might very well have been written
in the France of Franck and Ravel.

A wider range of music would have
been far more interesting and
much more revealing of this or-
chestra's full capabilities.
. * * *
I BELIEVE that' our performing
groups have an obligation to pre-
sent modern works, and by that

I do not mean merely works by
living composers, but works em-
ploying the modern idioms. Other-
wise we take the chance of stag-
nating musically in the 19th cen-
tury.
We shall never appreciate new
music' until we become familiar
with it and we shall never become
familiar with it unless we hear
it regularly on our concerts and
not just at special "Contemporary
Festivals."
-Robert Jobe
AT THE STATE:
Frank
Document
'THE SKY ABOVE, The Mud
Below," currently featured at
the State Theatre, is a film docu-
mentary of a joint French-Dutch
expedition through the uncharted
regions of (then) Dutch New
Guinea. This trek, undertaken in
the early months of 1960, was
fully photographed In wide-screen
and color, although it occurred to
me at several points in the film
where they had no food or medi-
cine left that they would have
been better advised to have ditch-
ed the Kodacolor and the pan-
chromatic lenses and taken some
K-rations.
It is a fine motion picture, al-
though itrhere and there suffers
from a sort of B-picture narration.
The expedition commenced on the
south coast of Dutch New Guinea
and proceeded directly north, for
450 miles. 150 miles of this was
completely uncharted territory,
and it is with this that the film
is mainly concerned. From Cook's
Bay on, they meet tribes of stone-
age natives, "who are just hke
us except for a few thousand years
of evolution." They come upon
cannibals and head-hunters, all,
as the posters outside the theatre
announce, "unclothed." They are 
actually "adopted" by native tribes
for a time, the ceremony of adop-
tion beinge when one of the ex-
plorers sucks fromthe breast of
a native woman who is to be his
"mother."
They clop through the under-
brush and the trees, they build
bridges and construct ferries
across rivers, and often their pro-
gress is as little as two miles a
day. They witness a peace-making
rite between two warring tribes-
a symbolic rite of birth where the
tribes trade two couples who are
to be guarantors of the peace.
They see a ritual wherein the
spirits of some warriors killed in
battle are set into trees which are
then carved up into likenesses of
the warriors.
* . *
THERE ARE several particular-
ly striking scenes in the film. The
native soldiers who travel with the
explorers look upon these primi-
tive people with a kind of incred-
ulity in their eyes, as if they can-
not believe, or do not want to
believe, that only a veneer of
"white man's civilization" separ-
ates them. The puberty rites,
where the young boys sit in their
elders' huts for the night with
freshly cut heads between their
legs, are the kinds of things the
sense of which you cannot get
from just reading Margaret Mead.
Joseph E. Levine, who brought
you such classics as "Hercules"
and "Atlas,' also brings you this
one. He deserves nuch credit for
it, even though the advertising
outside the theatre would seem
to indicate that the movie Is little
more than a high-grade "Her-
cules."
.-Steven Hendel
Freedom
pHE AMERICAN economy is
.based on freedom, on the least
possible interference by the, gov-

ernment, upon open competition
within the law, and it would be
no myth but a nightmare if any-
one tried to change this most es-
sential characteristic of our na-
tion.
-Sen. John M. Butler (R-Md)
Human Events


FEIFFER

rvVT TAW S ftr
IAW15f.1 WAS A13 ip
IC6A15T W{561.F
VCFORC t J101%,V:
ART OF 'flI P0$L5LE.

v6R~
s1wao

YOUro id 6c):5 TO MAO. A 5%WI
.flT %ANV OFFM~V 16'-
S 6clAt, Wi~fCR;STSAN17
66T CtO8 P a. NaO,
'S5R, wto m ye6ll lley-f
r~S-usH&WfOf Ate A
BITaUVt2C M H /

.. 1 [

wr 'MAKC owAVR mote
A li" MIt~t'ER TRAM TH
51AMP? ICE HAWt
"Ae~, MAKE A I(
G'EAVW'TD tETI
M W 'ITHAH
lb U Y AOt 41I
$U W06 NOT~
0o1f OF COMMIT=~6

t sce
1 I 0
rp
r o A~~
fr L LIC
CoHAMM

kjo VCR4 I66T P4H
Fop. AVOt6 tO6 t

o, 1 66f (f
1 6 t1

7Mth GtVG US AVJ 150 To
CAHPA60 ON l0 t-eFR660s$R w 4v
US FROM HAYIM6 GTO tMPI,6M r ACTCS

!Z'5. CAstf 1o 8E
FPiI'CIPWe, But'
Vfkf - To 6eT- ,

r..?3 61'

i

lty;k)00-TO XA

I