THE MICHIGAN DAILY

SUNDAY, MARCH 9, 1952



(4ihted

I
It*A-V I

AIM Revival

AMERICA has no guts. Its people are afraid.
All over they are afraid-in "liberal"
clubs and "social" groups on college cam-
puses, in labor unions at work. in legislative
and executive functions in government.
Of whom are they afraid? Of what are
they afraid? Americans are afraid of
Americans. They are afraid they won't
fit; they won't conform to the standards;
they won't be in society.
Aow are Americans afraid?
This way: a campus group springs into
being to protect and preserve the liberties
of the individual citizen. And yet members
cannot think thus-and-so for to think thus-
and-so means condemnation by the public,
by America. Let's discuss a review board,
they say, for people that get us into trouble.
Let's just, they say, kick the idea around a
little., They do not think of this as an
expedient forced by fear. We cannot allow
totalitarians in our group, they say. Yet
the totalitarian exists because of the weak-
ness of the people. Why can't they be strong
enough to beat dwn the totalitarian by
force of mind? Why can't they be the indi-
vidual group that says To Dell With The
Public, maybe we're right? Why can't they
start the change? They are afraid.
This way: a campus fraternal order de-
cides to allow a mongaloid student into its
brotherhood. The national officers decide
that they won't. "Pledge this man, and
you're out of th national." It's against. the
rules. So what happens? Does the local de-
cide that it will start the change? No, it
kicks the mongaloid student out. The local's
members are cowards.
This way: a group of Congressmen ask
a union member if he is a Communist.
He doesn't say yes, he doesn't say no; he
says he believes in the Constitution. The
Congressmen call him names and he goes
back to work. But his fellow workers are
afraid of Americans and carry him from
the plant or refuse to work with him. Af-
ter all he might believe differently than
they do. The employer and the union
officials say this is unfair. "We'll see
what we can do." But what can you do
with 2000 brave cowards?
Or this way: a Congressman represents
the people and a party. He must do what
the people want, what the party wants, or
he will not be re-elected. He cannot start
the change. At times he must even give the
people something pleasing. He smashes the
individual, draws the string tighterarounl
the group and gets more votes. It takes too
much courage to be an individual.
And this way: you are a President of the
United States and the leader of a political
party. There is a stench in your office, but
to clean up the office entirely may hurt the
party, it may help it. The chance is too big,
the party too strong. Ifyou fear, you do not
carry out the change.
Why is America afraid? That is the
hardest question. Maybe the psychologist
will say, "It is the basic with the indi-
viduals: maybe people are afraid of the
complexity of modern life." Maybe the
psychologist is right. It is comfortable to
conform, to be like the rest of society, to
move in society's channels. So society rules
and the individual is smashed. He even
smashes himself. The people that are dif-
ferent are all in books, and the left-bank-
type poets that write the books are some-
thing to be marvelled at.
Someone will say-and it has already been
said-that not to fit in is naive. It is naive,
it is said, to try to beat society because it
only brings lumps on the head. There was,
however, a time when men could, be indi-
viduals, when by daring they could change
a public opinion that termed them naive.
The time was not long ago. It was then a
complex time too. Maybe the individual was
called Ford, Gandhi, Roosevelt, Reuther.
Now there is a fear of pushing ahead ex-
cept in the group. There is a fear of being
uncivilized, unsocial, un-American. The fear
does not come from outside. It is not of Rus-
sia or some other country that we are
afraid. The fear ,comes from inside one of

few countries left where people should be
able to be people in the full sense of the
world. Instead the American people are be-
coming a snug, smug, insensible mass of
plodding society. A society that, is safe in
itself. A society that controls not only its
own actions, but its own ideas.
As to one phase of the American fear,
a newspaperman recently said, "I think
the tide is going to turn pretty quick on
this Un-American Committee thing. The
people are getting fed up." That's fine, for
a change. But it will be a change in the
public, a tiredness of one social game,
perhaps the beginning of a new one. It
is not because an individual had the guts
to start the change.
The individual surely is never perfect,
never always right. But until Americans once
again begin thinking as individuals-free
of straight-line value judgements of group
thought-the worth of the individual, his
very mental existence, will be crushed into
the form a senseless society wills.
--Vernon Emerson
New Books at the Library
Davies, Rhys-Marianne. New York, Dou-
bleday & Company, Inc., 1952.
Du Maurier, Daphne-My Cousin Ra-
chel. New York, Doubleday & Company, Inc.,
1952.
Rinehart, Mary Roberts-The Swimming
Pool. New York, Rinehart & Company, Inc.,

ON MONDAY evening the Association of
Independent Men will meet to revise its
constitution.
Mechanically, the new constitution does
not differ greatly from the old one; the
important matter is the statement of
purpose.
The reason for continuing the existence
of the group is the fact that an organization
such as AIM is needed to relate the prob-
lems and activities of independent men,
particularly those in the residence halls, to
the problems and activities of the campus as
a whole.
In this respect the individual quad coun-
cils are inadequate. They are primarly con-
cerned with their respective domains, not
the campus.
Changes in the constitution have been
proposed to eliminate apathy on the part
of many of the representatives and to in-
crease the organization's general effective-
ness,
The major changes are: removal of house
presidents from the council; elimination of

outside independent representation; and re-
visal of the council membership so that
it will be composed of a member from each
house and several representatives elected by
each quadrangle at large._
All of these changes will aid in making
AIM an effective group. House presidents are
usually too busy and uninterested to do more
than attend the formal meetings, if that.
The outside independents, given representa-
tion for the first time last year, also proved
uninterested in the group. Very few have
bothered to even inquire into the procedure
for becoming a representative.
However, a council made up of house
members and representatives-at-large
will attract only those who are actually
interested in working.
It is to be hoped that the representatives
who gather Monday night to pass judgment
on the recommendations will keep these
points in mind, and, realizing the need for
a more effective AIM, will vote to accept the
proposals.
--John Somers


i

The Cleci'

WASHINGTON - Newbold Morris, Presi-
dent Truman's clean-up man, is dis-
covering that his old enemy, the Tammany
tiger, is a housecat compared to Washington
on an election-year rampage.
Actually Mr. Morris proved to be what ac-
tors call a quick study. Assigned quarters
in the Department of Justice he realized
his first week that he was not going far in a
secondary role. His next move was a personal
interview with President Truman-alone.
He found the President in complete agree-
ment with the object of his mission and,
more important, the procedure. Mr. Truman
has carried out the Morris requests with en-
thusiasm and sent every department and
agency head personal orders to do the same.
Mr. Morris is now in separate quarters,
working independently of any federal
agency. Because he gave the President
credit for this support, he finds himself
answering complaints from even friends
among his fellow Republicans about
"building up Truman."

mnupMan"
Some Democrats meanwhile act aggrieved
because Mr. Morris said in answer to ques-
tions on a radio hook-up that he would not
have appointed former New York Mayor
William O'Dwyer as Ambassador to Mexico
or Maj. Gen. Harry Vaughan as his aide.
The former was rather obvious. Morris ran
against O'Dwyer for mayor, charging that
O'Dwyer was unfit for office. Regarding the
talkative General who passed out the deep
freezes, Morris first said he hadn't investi-
gated him yet but, when pressed, conceded
that he could do without the General too.
This is a position rather widely shared by
Democrats among others.
The embattled cleaner-upper has now
learned the hard way that it is perhaps
more desirable to wait and talk about what
one has done than to get in a spot to be
pressed about future plans. He is not the
first to be educated on these matters by the
relentless Washington spotlight.
(Copyright, 1952, by The Bell Syndicate, Inc.)

TH E WEEK'S, NEWS
. . . IN RETROSPECT
J NTERESTED CITIZENS tried to " underwrite the series.
spur Ann Arbor voters to regis- * *
ter during the week as the regis- NatiodtL
tration deadline for April ballot-
ing neared. (For details, see Page HERRING BOATS AM A'-COM-
.) IN'-The House Un-American Ac-
tivities Committee will return to
Local Detroit tomorrow for another gala
week stand. Gleeful editors read-
HEAR NO EVIL-The Univer- ied their red pencils for a rollick-
sity Lecture Committee slammed ing week of journalistic license.
the campus door last week against btForbidden fruit is always the most
two members of allegedly subver- delectable-it's a happy day in
sive organizations who had been Detroit newspaper offices when
invited here to speak. libel is legal.
But, when no one was looking, * * *
one of them bounced in quietly
Thursday and delivered a talk attAround the World,.".
a private dinner in the Union. ¢ DE GAULLE OPENING?-- The
Denied officially sanctioned ros- *wFrench people appeared to be al-
trums were Abner Greene, execu- most ready to call on Charles de-
tive secretary of the American Gaulle and an end to instability,
Committee for the Protection of as another cabinet crisis shook the
Foreign Born and Arthur Mc- country. Twin spectres of financial
Phaul, who holds a similar posi- collapse and Russian aggression
tion in the Michigan Chapter of stalked the nation, as the old.
the Civil Rights Congress. They stand-bys failed to form cabinets
were to be sponsored by the Civil or fused t A conser ve
Liberties Committee and the . . independent, Antoine Pinay, fi-
Young Progressives, respectively. .. indypaaden Ato in onyfi-
Despite the University edict, naly was able to win confirma-
McPhaul spouted off for 30 peo- Don't wake him up! usual split n the customarily-so
ple at an unheralded dinner. His -._____________
appearance, sponsored by soeme CORPUSCLE CAPERS - The chairman Pete Thorpe, '53, ex- ranks of the DeGaullists. But
"mysterious u n k ii o w n s" nas Beat-Texas blood drive got off to plained that the number of pled- there was little hope that Pinay
launched a University investiga- a start Thursday when a crowd ges isn't the only sign of would enjoy any but the briefest
tion to find out if "any regula- turned out to see emcee Steve "strength." Alumni support and of tenures in the uncomfortable
tions have been violated." Filipiak, WHRV manager, and a the house budget counts too, he post.
* * * crowd of talented people, enter- said.
tain them out of some blood. Fili- * * * ON INFINITUM? - Another
NON-COMMIE CODE-In the piak gave a pint in public, jumped OFF AGAIN-ON AGAIN-- The drab week dragged by around the
wake of the controversy over Mc- back to the microphone 15 min- Marriage Lecture Series was given Korean truce tables. The Com-
Phaul and Greene, the Civil Liber- utes later to carry on with the another chance to prove its wortli munist delegates provided a little
ties Committee inserted a state- show. Tuesday when the committee of entertainment for the assembled
ment of principles into their con- * * the same name reversed a pre- clan with occasional maudlin emo-
stitution. Spurred by faculty ad- SPRING CROP - Fraternities vious decision to cast it aside and tional displays, but showed little
visor Kenneth Boulding's ultima- picked up 275 new members this voted to plan a series of four post interest in constructive compro-
tum-constitutionalize a code or spring, a hundred less than last spring vacation lectures. The OK mise. As usual, the leit-motif of
I must quit-the CLC passed an year. At least five fraternities felt came after four campus groups, the week's talks was fruitlessness,
amendment which bars, in prin- the pinch when they failed to pro- the Student Legislature, the Un- mingled with a note of futility.
ciple, any supporter of totalitarian cure a single rushee. Lest anyone ion, the Student Religious Associ- -Donna Hendleman ald
organizations from membership. fear for them, though, rushing ation and The Daily guaranteed to Crawford Young
cLjeltertoh/itor ...

I

Art in America

WE'iE a pretty great nation-economi-
cally, politically and socially we lead
the Western world. Even culturally our con-
tributions have been vast. To the literary
world we have given our Steinbecks, Twains,
Steins, Hemingways. To the music world
we have offered a vibrantly climatic pro-
duct: jazz. And to the Art world-Grandma
Moses.
With chauvanism cast aside by a some.
what bitter note let us look at the situa-
tion. Why is it that in the United States
the man who earns his living with the
brush is inevitably the commercial artist?
Why are we a nation which has no place
in its social order for 'the professional
creative artist?
One factor is that fine art never had a
chance to form a real stronghold here. In
the early days the people were too busy
building a nation to build art schools and
museums. And by the time they did, the
advertising boom came and nobody was par-
ticularly concerned about the talent being
lured into the rolling business.
Without any great heritage of art as a
protest, calendar art flourished and it was
the fastest, slickest, most American type
job which was in demand.
Where does this leave the real artist,
the person who, regardless of everything,
has that combination of talent and crea-
tive instinct which makes him want to
pant? From the very beginning he is met
by obstacles.
First the educational facilities offered by
the few art schools which haven't gone
completely commercial are not of the high-
est calibre. This rather wild assumption is
based on a comparative trend of thought
rather than on absolute values. It concerns
the theory that before creativity and self
expression can enter the picture absolute
perfection of painting and drawing tech-
nique should be slowly attained. This
was the case in the Renaissance and was
carried over to modern European painting.
This is not the case here. The fundamentals
of drawing and painting are skimmed over
lightly and the emphasis is on a quick and
specialized self expression.
This certainly is a step from the unin-
spired academic schooling of the past
century--but not in the right direction. Of
course there are a few exceptions to this,
--schools like the Art Students League
and Cooper Union in New York, but the
case applies for the most part.
What this comes down to is that art isn't
taken seriously even in the art schools. And
perhaps that is the reason we haven't pro-
duced any Matisses or Picassos.
ASSUMING that the artist has finished
his schooling, what happens to him
then? He probably comes to New York, lives
in a dirty garret in Greenwich Village and
finds out very soon that nobody is parti-
cularly interested. The dozen or so art
dealers have a thousand other eager young
artists to choose from plus the bulk of stan-
dard art they import from Europe. And he
can't peddle his work at Macy's. Perhaps if
he's lucky and attractive he can fall in
with a group of rich, charming and sex
starved old ladies who will support his paint-

support themselves by painting alone. Not
many, I'm sure. All of which leads to the
villification of my desire to become an art
instructor at some small college, being
rich if not economically in the finer or
more cultural aspects of life . .."
A further question arises: Since there are
artists, even if few in number, why isn't
really great art being produced? Part of the
answer lies in the aforementioned schooling,
yet many American artists study in Europe.
We have our Feiningers, Dalis, Marins, Dav-
ises, Zorachs. They're good-but not great.
The rest of the answer lies in great part with
the environment of the American artist.
Quite obviously our commercialized and
materialistic society is not the most con-
dusive for art to flourish in. When nobody
is very excited about painting the painter
himself is bound to lose some of his enthu-
siasm. It would be unrealistic to hope for
a cultural tide to sweep the country as in
Italy during the Renaissance, where the
artist was a public idol comparable to our
ball player. Yet though villages in France
don't violently vie with each other as to
which has the better artist, a Parisiene will
inevitably take a tourist to the Louvre while
the New Yorker takes him to Radio City.
* * *
THE complex problem revolves around the
essential nature of the art.. Unlike
books or music paintings cannot be bound
or canned and bought for a few dollars. I
would define a painting as a stationary
intangible; it is permanently bound to its
specific frame yet its quality cannot be
measured by specific values. Yet because
of its necessary rarity there is a big price
tag on good art limiting its ownership to
the wealthy few. Thus since there are more
painting than buyers we have of necessity
evolved into a nation of amateurs.
There is no immediate solution to this
problem-there are too many thwarting
factors which cannot be changed over-
night. But some definite steps could be
taken. These steps would be directed
tow rd bringing out an awareness and
definite need for art in the United States.
This could be accomplished in part by
the government. We only have to go as far
as our neighbor Mexico to see how govern-
ment subsidation of artists has produced an
active interest in art and brought recogni-
tion to artists such as Rivera, Oroszco and
Tamayo. In France Louis the 15th set up
art schools and granted many scholarships,
Several authorities attribute the rise of
French art to this form of government sub-
sidation. Yet the argument against any sort
of government subsidation of art here is
that arbitrary standards would be set up
and the essential freedom of art would be
stifled.
It's obvious that any sort of artificial
standard is bound to limit freedom. In
this case this limitation is exactly what
is needed. There is such a thing as too
much freedom. It's the freedom which
shrewd art dealers exploit in acclaiming
Jackson Pollock or Grandma Moses as
great artists. Thus any sort of definite
standard would at least clarify what good
art is and be able to differentiate be-
tween amateur sensationalism and serious

AIM Revision ..
To the Editor:
RECENTLY many articles con-
cerning the AIM have appear-
ed in the Daily-some of which
were partially true; others which
were very misleading. In order for
the students to know what is what,
here are the facts.
After failing for two weeks
straight to obtain a quorum at
our meetings, I set up two com-
mittees to take a second look at
the organization to see just what
was wrong. One was to look into
AIM's purpose; the other was to
suggest changes in the Constitu-
tion.
Our sole purpose was to arrive
at a solution which would do the
most good for the independent
men of this campus.
The meetings which were held
were open to all who cared to come
and offer suggestions. The discus-
sions were frank-and varying
proposals were offered. By com-
promising here and there, the final
outcome was the plan outlined in
the Daily a few days ago.
Since that time an article has
appeared in The Daily stating that
the three Quad Presidents are op-
posed to our plan. They quoted
these men as saying that AIM had
failed and that the only solution
was the formation of an Inter-
dorm Council.
On numerous occasions we of
AIM invited the Quad Presidents
to discuss the problem with us in
order that we might arrive at a
compromise plan. The only reply

out prejudice and intolerance is
through education?
Miss Simon points to the courses
in philosophy, sociology, anthro-
pology and history, which are sup-
posed to interpret religion and sti-
mulate thought. Canon Bell pre-
sents us with a most challenging
view of these courses: how can one
objectively compare religion with
philosophy, or sociology, or history,
when one has studied each of the
latter separately, but has no idea
of just what religion is?
Certainly there are conflictinyg
views of religion and the vario;s
beliefs, but does one avoid philo-
sophy because there are so many
differing, and often contradictory
philosophies?
And, Miss Simon, your analogy
claims that the schools have no
right to tell students what political
party they should vote for. Does
that mean they should not know
the issues? Should we eliminate
Political Science 92 (National Poli-
tics), 113 (American Political Par-
ties and Electoral Problems) and
116 (Public Opinion and Pressure
Groups)? No, I'm afraid I must
fundamentally disagree with you.
We are here to learn to know, to
understand, to think. We can only
do that if we have access to the
accumulated wisdom of all fields,
by understanding "dogma." For, as
Canon Bell pointed out, dogma in
any field, whether religion or sci-
ence, is but a synthesis of experi-
ence and wisdom, a representation
of what many people believe to be
true.
-Alan Berson

that Mondrian is the purest abl.
stractionist. This is true in a limit-
ed way. But he is not the most
abstract of the abstractionists-
there is a twenty year old school
called the "Non-Objectivists" who
go even farther from realism than
the abstracts, and that is the
newest of art forms.
Besides, even admitting 4hat
this may be France's version of
Avant Garde Art, it has been not-
ed for five years that the center
of experimental art has someoiow
moved from Paris to New York.
I mention this in the hope that
those of us who are appalled by
the paintings in this exhibit will
go to some New York galleries be-
fore making up their mind that
new art is hopelessly muddled.
-Eric Heckett
S Leadership.
U LIKE Crawford Young, I do
not believe that the departure
of the experienced and long-pow-
erful SL cabinet members means a
decline in the aggregate .ability of
the legislature. The present cabi-
net has wielded power for a full
year and the average member of
the legislature has come to de-
pend on it too much. A legislature
based on powers of each individual
member will rise in place of one
based on a powerful cabinet. This
will mean greater efficiency in
planning and carrying out the
legislature's programs.
In addition, I do not feel that a
cabinet which could go back on
its promise of last spring to fight
for a bias bill with a time limit is
capable of upholding the princi-
ples and ideals for which the
cabinet of an intelligent student
body must fight.
-Sue Wladis
CLC L eeting..
To the Editor:
THOSE WHO were present at
the C.L.C. meeting which
passed the anti-Communist-
fascist amendment witnessed one
of the greatest political fiascos in
campus history. .
The group which adopted this
amendment was not the C.L.C.
To put it bluntly, they were a
group whose opinions were ob-
scured in a "packed meeting."
It was difficult for an "old"
member of the organization to
recognize anyone at the Thursday
meeting who he had seen at any
previous meetings. The atten-
dance at a normal C.L.C. meeting
is usually between 20 and 30. The
attendance Thursday was over 90!
The opinions held by these extra
60$ while important, is unknown.
For that matter so are the opin-
ions held by the regular members.
As a result the vote was valueless
in determining the true stand of

nebulous a group reflects nobody's
opinion.
The question arises, is it proper
for the internal policies of any or-
ganization to be formulated and
controlled, not by the actual mem-
bers of the organization, but by
"interested" outsiders? Obviously
not!
However, such responsible and
influencial campus citizens
(among others) as Leah Marks
and Chuck Elliott (both who had
never previously attended any
C.L.C. meetings) seem to think it
is all right.
Both were present and partici-
pated in the voting.
Mr. Elliott joined the organiza-
tion a half hour before it adjourn-
ed, and cast a vote which would
have been most important in de-
termining the fate of a fundamen-
tal policy amendment.
Miss Marks was present
throughout, and voted on every
major issue.
If these people (and all the
others who attended) claim that
it is a group's right to decide its
own affairs without outside inter-
ference, how do they justify their
action?
Miss Marks and Mr. Elliott are
now members of C.L.C. It will be
interesting to see if they (and
everyone 'else who joined the or-
ganization Thursday) will con-
tinue to remain so.
-Mark Reader, '55

F

we got was, "There is nothing more j
to discuss. Our position is veryI
plain." Art Review ,. ,

We have tried to work harmoni-
ously. We are still willing to do it,
but we believe that AIM cannot be
accused of failing when really it is
the failure of the Quad Preidents
in seeing that a narrow, rigid Quad
Council is not the answer which
independent men want.
At Mondays meeting of AIM we
intend to obtain approval of the
new plan of reorganization, and
we sincerely hope that all house
presidents and AIM representa-
tives will be present to hear and
discuss the committee proposals.
We hope, too, that the Quad
Presidents will attend to present
their objections to our plan which
they say will only end in failure.
-Gene Mossner
Vice President, AIM,
Canon Bell .
lT IS apparent from Helene Si-
mon's editorial, "Religious
Training," that Canon Bell's con-
cepts of the need for the study of
religion in our colleges has been
grossly misinterpreted.
First, such studies would not be
"to make sure that their students

To the Editor:
ALTHOUGH Siegfried Feller's
Review of "Advancing French
Art" is excellent in concept and
execution, he hedges purposely on
what measuring sticks to use in
judging his material. It seems to
me that, concerning modern art of
any sort, there are only three
questions the critic should ask of
the artwork: What has the painter
(author,composer) tried to do?
Has he accomplished it? Was it
worth accomplishing?
Most neophite critics land heav-
ily on the last question, but to a
great extent ignore the first two.
This is to be expected, especially
in painting-after all, 500 years
have taught us to look for certain
disciplines and conventions and
communications in art which any
child is supposed to be able to
recognize. But nowadays any-
thing's fair game, and communi-
cation has become a passive rather
than active focus. The aim of
creating art now is not so much to
clarify as to express. Therefore,
only by trying to understand ex-
actly what an artist is trying to
express in a particular, work in

I.

Sixty-Second Year
Edited and managed by students of
the University of Michigan under the
authority of the Board of Control of
Student Publications.
Editorial Staff
Chuck Elliott ........Managing Editor
Bob Keith .............City Editor
Leonard Greenbaum, Editorial Director
Vern Emerson........ .Feature Editor
Ron Watts............Associate Editor
Bob Vaughn..........Associate Editor
Ted Papes ................Sports Editor
George Flint ....Associate Sports Editor
Jim Parker...ssociate Sports Editor
Jan James ............ Women's Editor
Jo Ketelhut, Associate Women's Editor
Business Staff
Bob Miller ..........Business Manager
Gene Kuthy. Assoc. Business Manager
Charles Cuson ....Advertising Manager
Milt Goetz......Circulation Manager