0 OPINION Page 4 Saturday, March 24, 1984 The Michigan Daivi .. ..... y.., .,,..r. rmm Fashion unconsciousness on campus By Naomi Saferstein During the past several weeks I hit the streets of Ann Arbor seeking an un- derstanding of why the University student. body dresses the way it does? (i.e. why Caroline co-ed can buy a new sweat- shirt for $10, but opts for one with holes and pays $40). With this vision in mind along with pen in one hand and pad in the other, I began my quest for the deeper meaning to the art of fashion. I went to the Union, walked along the Diag, even popped into the UGLi, trudging on with my line of interrogation regardless of how weird people thought I was. And after days of unrelenting pursuit, what did I come up with? ... Nothing. You got it, dear readers, just a bunch of "I don't knows" a few "well everyone else does" and an assortment of "it's comfortable." BUT FOR ME folks, that simply doesn't cut the mustard. That's right, I don't buy it. We are not so naive as to believe that people do things without reason. Be serious, we're college students, we've all read Sartre or at least a bit of Nietzsche. Thus, I concluded, all those responses of ambiguity are a bunch of hulla-ba- loo. I mean it's not as if any of these people are Judy Jetson and just push a button to get dressed each morning. It's not even that their mothers still buy them clothes. For if that were the case, I truly doubt that Mrs. Q. would ever let Susie out of the house with holes in her clothes or her shoes untied. Which brings me to a point that I can- not comprehend; I'd like nothing .more than for someone to explain why people spend $80 to buy Timberland boots, then end up not tying them so they lok like something Li'l Abner would wear. The comfort line doesn't mean diddly-squat. You tell me that some girl who's Guess jeans are two sizes too small and so tight that she has to unbutton ter pants to speak is worried about whether or not her toes can twinkle? I fail to see the comfort of kissing the pavement simply because you stepped on your shoelaces, or on the laces of the person walking on either side of you. Seriously, tell me that Jackie O. or Princess Di would attend any sort of gala affair with the straps of her Jordan pumps unbuckled because it's comfortable. Wrong. I find nothing aesthetically pleasing about slurping like an 80 year-old camel every time you take a step. If that's aesthetics, I'm Jerry Falwell. AND WHILE we're on the subject of aesthetics and fashion quirks that don't click, it seems rather ironic that some people spend 45 minutes getting dressed each morning to attain the I-' just- threw- on- the- first- thing- I-could- find look. I don't need to be the one to point out that this defeats the definition of spontaneity. There is no art of beir a slob. It's like being sort of pregnant either you are or you're not. It's a bit af- fected when Wannita Wanna-be gets up and begins looking for argyle socks to wear with her checkered shirt (so it's slightly contrasting, but at the same time rather complementary) then chooses a vest to go with her rags to riches, $45 sweater, making sure to ad- just the collar, untuck the shirttails, slouch her socks (so the left falls one- quarter of an inch lower than the right) and finally, an hour later, heads out the door to class. During the whole process, secretly hoping that today will be the day the guy in her lit. class, the one in the paint stained, baggy-butt Levi's who has been wearing the same inside- out T-shirt all week, will finally notice her. All I can spy is girl, if clashing with confidence doesn't get you your man, there's always the athletic approach. And another thing. I don't understand why so many people at this University dislike their eyes, this being the only reason I can see for wearing those stupid "I spy" sunglasses 24 hours a day. Granted, it's one thing when it's June, 80 degrees, the preacher's preaching, the birds are singing, and the sun is blazing. But what's the point when it's February, 20 degrees, there's no preacher, the closest thing to a bird being last Friday's Colonel Sander's. and there is certainly no sun. I once asked some guy who has since taken to New York for bigger and better things, why he wears the ol' Varnesse imitation on his face inside at 9 p.m. His reponse: "I'm in character.' Character? Character for what? Listen Maurice, I felt like saying, if the world's a stage, we're all in character - you don't see me donning any shades, do you? Bottom line for today's forum is, as Barretta once said, different strokes for different folks. And all I would like to add is that the next time someone asks you why you wear what you do; try not to say "I don't know." Because if you didn't would you still be wearing it? Saferstein is a Daily staff reporter. 0I z ,IA Photo by DAVID FRANKEL used to block the sun? Daily Does function follow fashion? Are sunglasses alwaysu 1~~ ieb tdetsgat at l Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Stewart Vol. XCIV-No. 138 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Averting collision HE COLLISION of a U.S. aircraft carrier and Soviet submarine in the Sea of Japan Wednesday brought the two superpowers together for the- first time in many months. After colliding over the installation of American medium-range missiles in Western Europe last year, the Soviets walked out on arms negotiation talks. Since that time, relations between the two nations have been, in effect, nonexistent. There is movement within the two governments, however, that might lead to more constructive interraction movement that should be en- couraged and expanded. The advan- tages of improving communications with the Soviet Union are obvious. Establishing diplomatic, cultural, and scientific contact aids in a mutual un- derstanding and opens up channels through which a solution to the arms race might be sought. What is not ob- vious is just how to establish com- munications during a period of such tension and reticence. The two countries participated in a cultural and scientific exchange agreement until 1980 when President Carter discontinued it in protest over the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. A resumption of the agreement is being discussed and would be a good first step toward improved relations. But as important -as changes of this sort are, they sort of miss the point. The conflict surrounding U.S.-Soviet relations does not center around scien- ce and culture, it centers around the arms race. It is depressing to recognize that against the backdrop of chilled relations, a cultural exchange is viewed as great progress. The government is currently debating whether to ask the Senate to approve two nuclear treaties, one limiting underground weapons testing and the other monitoring nuclear ex- plosions used for peaceful purposes. Ratification of the treaties would ease the verification process in that each side would have to turn over geological data and allow for at least limited on- site inspection. Ratification should be encouraged as an immediate and con- crete step toward cooperation with the Soviets on an issue relevant to the ar- ms race. Another avenue for cooperation is opening up at the East-West security conference in Stockholm. American diplomats attending the conference are reporting an apparent willingness on the part of the Soviets to resume arms limitation talks should the United States make a non-aggression pledge. Such a pledge would limit the risk of armed confrontation in Europe by outlining'specific, binding military measures - such as a declaration of troop movements. The willingness of the Soviets is seen as a desire to save face after their walkout last year. A U.S. "nonuse of force" statement would offler the Soviets the concession they need to come back to the bargaining table. American diplomats believe that there is no reason to offer the Soviets such a face-saving gesture after the walkout last year. There is every reason, however, to offer such a gesture. k The United Nations Charter, and NATO documents already contain renunciation of force agreements and a forceful restatement is a small con- cession when viewed against the back- drop of silence on arms limitation. Talks can and should resume. It is time for the United States to play the cards in its hand and stop this silly game once and for all. I I IF IT WERENT FOR THESE DAMN POLLS, WE COULD RUN FREE., LETTERS TO THE DAILY: Increasing minority enroll To the Daily: I wish to respond to the column by Patrick Louthan entitled "'U' blacks still face hostilities." (Daily, March 8) While I heartily agree with the implied premise that successful recruitment of students by an institution rests heavily on the general climate which prevails at the institution; e.g., racial, financial, social, academic, etc., I wholeheartedly disagree with the analogy which compares the University with the KKK in terms of racism. Surely there is racism present and practiced at all institutions with populations of students, faculty, and staff, similar to that of this university but I do not per- ceive this university to be par- ticularly racist in comparison with such institutions. Racism practiced by such institutions is usually quite subtle, though often quite vicious and hostile. By comparison, racism is quite over- tly professed and practiced by the KKK. As a recruiter of minority students for the University con- tinuously since 1969, I have not perceived fear of racism as a key deterrent to attracting minority students to this institution. Ap- parently the presence .or possibility of racism is an assumed "given" in our society serving more minority students: 1) The provision of greater finan- cial aid and scholarship oppor- tunities (especially to out-of-state minority students) ; 2) improving the relationships between University faculty and minority students; e.g. more frequent and earlier exposure of minority Undergradu To the Daily; Recently, the bulletin boards in the hallway in the basement of the Legal Research Building, where law school student organizations have their offices, have been vandalized by un- dergraduate students. These attacks have been going on all year, but during the most recent of these incidents, the per- petrators were caught. When asked why they were ripping down notices, newspaper clip- pings, etc., they replied that they did not agree with the politics of the organization represented by the board they vandalized. As a member of the Jewish Law Students Union, the organization in question, I would like to respond publicly to this "explanation.'' First, our organization is not a political RLOOM CONITY students with faculty members - summer programs for high school sophomores and juniors, "etc. Many more, I .feel, would willingly risk enduring any possible racism here if adequate attention is given to the above matters which are deemed to be ate privilege is' 'organization. It is more of a social and cultural forum for Jewish students in the law school. Our members differ widely both in the conviction with which their religious views are held, and in the political perspectives they bring to the group. Second, nothing on our bulletin board, at the time, had even the remotest connection to anything political. Posted materials were notices of upcoming events and items'of general interest. Finally, even- if posted items of any sort provoke such a vehement reaction that one who disagrees with their message feels they must be coun- tered, certainly removing them from the public view is, at best, an inadequate solution (censor- ship has a history of failure) and very probably counterproduc- tive. ment so crucial to enrolling and siir- viving at The University' bf Michigan. -David Robinson March 16 Robinson is assistant diree- tor of admissions at the University. questioned Possibly what is most offensive about this whole incident (and others which preceded it), is that this is private property. There 2ig a lot of grumbling'within the law school about whether una dergraduates ought to be allowed to use the building altogether. It is precisely this sort of thing that prompts law students to summon security guards to have non-lave students evicted. We don't make a mess of our own property: Unlike LSA or engineering schools, the law school is a small community, and these types of things do not remain anonymous; Besides, for the most part, we're in the building every day, and we'd like for our surroundings to be pleasant, and to be secure in our rights. - Julie selbst March 21 DOWT ISS T4F- N1-XT C-(Sot~ - - IS AMCP'cA SE2IUSLY INVOLVED )MIR Nt YONGSRI Mrc OQ WI1LL SG -W Rkpq NE s UT4 4 -jIo z bh lovke wnmlw &