4 PAGE POUR THE MICHIGAN DAILY TUESDAY, MARCH 17, 1958 II Campaign Rules WITH ALL-CAMPUS elections only two weeks away, Student Legislature and residence hall councils are considering a variety of rules on campaigning. After last fall's violation of quadrangle rules by $L member Bob Perry, the question of provid- ing effective enforcement of electioneering rules was brought up. SL is expected this week to consider several plans which would bring penalties to candidates who commit infractions similar to those committed by Perry, although members narrowly voted down a measure of this type last week. Before giving enforcement to these rules, the Legislature should consider the implications of campaign restrictions on the election itself. By limiting distribu- tion of campaign posters and literature, several houses last fall shut themselves off from the rest of the campus and made it difficult for candidates to bring their campaign to parts of the residence system. In showing his defiance of the rules, Per- ry contended that he had to violate regula- tions in order to make a successful cam- paign. That Perry was one of the few win- ning candidates from the men's residence halls is evidence of some truth to his con- tention. By limiting campaigning, the quads hurt their own candidates, and, even worse, contribute to election apathy resulting in lower turnouts at the polls. Although a high percentage of the campus voted in the fal election, even more people from the quadrangles might have cast ballots had the campaign been carried to them. Lately, it has been rumored that action might be taken by the quad government to prevent any candidate living outside the dorms from carrying, on a campaign in the residence halls. Passage of such a rule would be a serious threat to the campus election system and could not have any rea- son behind it beyond pure spite. The house councils would do well not to consider fur- ther limitations on residence hall campaign- ing. In fact, it would be better for the councils to re-examine existing rules and make it easier for all candidates to carry their programs to dorm residents. With un- fair election rules in'existence, the councils are giving the appearance of withdrawing from the campus. Meanwhile, SL must consider whether house councils can be trusted to legislate intelligently before making any of their rules enforceable by SL. On the basis of last fall's example, it is doubtful if this trust would be well-founded. The Legis- lature should also remember that, in mak- ing house council rules enforceable on any candidate, it could find itself in the odd position of enforcing any discriminatory rule or petty law the quad councils cared to pass. SL would be wiser to leave enforcement of all projected quad election rules to the in- dividual houses. If the Legislature should wish to make campaigning by affiliates or other non-dorm candidates illegal in resi- dence halls, then let it make such a rule. But to be forced to uphold laws which SL members would never pass themselves would be an unfortunate precedent to establish. -Harry Lun CINEMA At the Orpheum .. . THE IMPORTANCE OF BEING EARNEST, with Michael Redgrave and Joan Greenwood OSCAR WILDE'S play of this name raised the comedy of manners to new heights. This movie version, under Anthony Asquith's able direction, captures the sparkle and wit of its original murvelously well. The plot is, of course, as thoroughly pat- terned as a minuet; two romances are in- terlaced and sprinkled with neatly bal- ancing coincidences. Wilde's brilliant writ- ing and perfect timing, however, make it seem unlike any formula one has ever seen before. Michael Redgrave, who plays the most earnest character of all, heads an excellent cast. The slightly ridiculous upper-class Vic- torians might easily have been overplayed and turned into something like a Lytton Strachey praody, but this cast handles them with the delicacy they deserve. Joan Green- wood's husky voice and lengthy eyelashes are perfect instruments of Vigtorian coquet- tishness. Her devastation of Redgrave is perfectly charming and credible. The dowager mother who comes down on the lovers like a wolf on the fold is a wonderful specimen. Imperious and emi- nently practical, she is the Wife of Bath of her era. The role of the sheltered niece, brimming over with enthusiasms lifted from novels, is equally well done. Her scenes with a diary have a delicate whim- sy to keep them from cloying. - The sets and costumes are on par with the rest of the movie. Most period-picture furnishings seem to have been dragged from' the same musty prop room, or at least from the same old designer's sketchbook. These, however, have a graceful quaintness entire- ly in the spirit of the period. Miss Green- wood's costume, an ordered profusion of sat- in and ribbon. is particularly good. The picture's wit is an exciting change from the stock lines most musicals and com- edies today rely on. Its repartee is sustained without wisecracking; a wonderfully com- plex and ornate dialogue is built up without Statehood for Alaska STATEHOOD FOR HAWAII has safely passed the House, and chances are that it will go through the Senate without too much opposition. But Alaska, which has previously been considered along with Ha- waii, is not receiving such a cordial welcome. 'Many arguments have been advanced against Alaska's claim to ttehood, but the dominant, though unvoiced, reason for qpposition seems to be political. Ha- waii is traditionally Republican and con- sequently acceptable to the present GOP- dominated Congress, while Alaska has us- ually voted Democratic. This appears to be the underlying reason, because the actual objections which are raised are entirely without basis. The traditional standards for statehood are: that the territory should accept the principles of democracy and be politically mature; that the majority of the electorate wants statehood; that the proposed State has sufficient resources to support state government and its share in the cost of fed- eral government; and that it has enough of a population to warrant statehood. It can be amply demonstrated that Alaska fulfills all these requirements. Her record in political maturity stands as high, if not higher, than established states. She has had a popularly-elected legislature since 1912. Forward-looking, Alaska granted suffrage to women six years before the 20th Amend- ment. She was also the first to pass legisla- tion providing for an eight hour day, work- men's compensation and social security. The 1940 plebiscite showed that Alaska's electorate wants statehood. As to the third prerequisite, it did not need a Senate investigation to reveal that Alaska has many valuable resources-iron ore, coal, copper, lead, zinc, tin, antimony, mercury and chromite. In addition, she has a high amount of wood dissolving pulp which is currently in great demand by Am- erican industry. And Alaska's hydro-electric power is potentially vast, awaiting only, fu- ture development. Obviously, Alaska satisfies the main re- quirements. The other objections that are presented, such as population and distance from the other states, are negligible. Alaska's population of 135,000 is larger than those of 10 established states at their admittance into the Union. Her distance from the near- est state is not as great as, that of Califor- nia which when admitted was 1,500 miles of hostile territory away from American soil Alaska's inhabitants have a right to enjoy the privilege of statehood and the right of citizenship. There is no logical reason to deny them the opportunity to take part in national elections and to have their say in formulating the nation's po- licies. Nevertheless, her claims are ap- parently being disregarded because of the party affiliation which her Congressional representatives would probably have. In all fairness, Alaska, along with Hawaii, should be considered on its respective mer- its alone, and promptly admitted to state- hood. -Arlene Liss "What Do You Suppose Is Going On In Russia?" SENATE ettr4 TO T14E EDITOR The Daily welcomes communications from its readers on matters of general Interest, and will publish all letters which are signed by the writer and in good taste. Letters exceeding 300 words in length, defamatory or libelous letters, and letters which for any reason are not In good taste will be condensed, edited or withheld from publication at the discretion ofthe editors. -I EVALUATION, NOT UKASE: What a Director Expects Of a Drama Critic (EDITOR'S NOTE: Mr. Robertson is director of the local Arts Theater. The Daily has re- quested the following article regarding drama critics.) By STROWAN ROBERTSON THIS must not sound like a desperate effort to shut up the critics. The Daily drama critics are in no way apt to close down apy of the numerous theater groups which flourish in Ann Arbor; it is true, though, that the producing of plays has lost some of its pleasure in the face of these severe young men. I think the editors of the paper and the sub4cribers, too, begin to find the letters column cluttered with quar- rels engendered by drama criticism. I will not, here, defend myself, or any other member of the profession, or any person who will devote himself to the presentation of plays. We, at the Arts Theater are new to Ann Arbor; organizations such as the Civic Theater and the Speech Department have suffered the criticism of student reviewers for many years without replying.. Why should we speak out?, I have been invited to address the critics. What is the role of the critic? It is certainly not that of a back-seat direc- tor. Is it any more than that of audience privileged to air an opinion? For every audience member there is an opinion and for every opinion there is an alternate performance. They why should this one opinion be printed to be read generally? and who reads it? Actors read it; audiences read it. To these two groups the critics owe a respon- sibility: I think I have not read a review from the pages of the Michigan Daily which was not aimed solely at the actors. And let me here warn all critics that any actor who lets a review influence his per- formance is -a fool and he knows it. To the actor, the critic is and must be a single member of the audience, a voice to be heeded no more than that of a doting mother or any acquaintance in the audience. The audience, for the actor, is not made up of individuals: it is a body, and only that body as a whole will he listen to, telling him when he is doing well, when he is con- necting, when he is failing to make a scene tell. Any other voice is that of temptation. When the critic addresses and rebukes an actor, I feel he has learned his theater from Hollywood. Does he forget that the actor must step on that stage the next night, and the next, in the face of a bad review, and repeat that performance? It has taken him a long time to arrive at that performance-he is not going to change it over night. He is continually creating; he is not a piece of celluloid. A director's every effort is to, give the actor security because it is the actor who must stand out on the stage and take it. I am angry, then, when a critic undermines that security. The actor needs it. His job is hard; he is "on a high wire fifty feet above the ground with- out a safety net". As to the audience, and the responsibil- ity owed them. The reviewer in this town has been made to look rather silly. Clearly he wields no influence. The worst review we have ever had at the Arts Theater was for a show which attracted the largest audience in our history. And when as a student reviewer ,I slighted the Student Players, I am sure I only manag- ed to. disappoint the group. I think there is not a theater organization in Ann Ar- bor who cares whether or not it gets a bad review from the Daily critics be- cause it obviously does not affect box- What does the audience expect from a review? This is not my field. (I presume that if you, the critics, fail in this respect your editors will dismiss you just as any theater management will dismiss the actor who fails to meet the requirements of his audience.) But surely the answer is "in- formation". A large part of your audience are students and they have or can learn as much about Shakespeare, Sophocles, or whom you will from their professors as you have or can. Their studies, then, will in- form and the actor will inform-in what way can you inform them? Perhaps they would like to be informed whether or not they would enjoy seeing the play. I cannot believe any critic is important enough to discourage a prospective audience on any grounds other than the prospective audi- ence' own taste and interest. Do you provide them with such an opportunity? Or do you presume to judge for them? I would like to speak, without their- per- mission, for all those people in this town who have been criticized in the Daily drama column, and suggest what they might ex- pect from a review. Please, first, clear your minds of the idea that they are trying to bamboozle. They are serious people, with a greater enthusiasm, a greater diligence, and a greater love for their work than you will ordinarily find: that girl who walked across the stage once as a maid gave up every evening for five weeks, and not in order to outwit the critics. As for the Arts Theater, the actors are here in Ann Arbor because they are given . . . what? The opportunity to work in theater. They are sincere. Their interpreta- tions are sincere efforts to bring a page to life. Most sincere. And, if you do not agree with that interpretation? For every member of the audience, there is an opinion and for every opinion there is an alternate performance. The actor's per- formance is not a whimsy, it is a selection, a solution. He has found a way which makes the part live for him. (He must believe what he is doing.) You don't agree with that interpretation? All right, and we hope you will have the opportunity of seeing many more interpretations for we are not Walt Disney to go around buy- ing up alternatives. We welcome com- parison. And there are others who help bring the page to life. It is clear surely that the Speech Department and the Arts Theater, in particular, make every effort to encour- age local play-wrights, translators, com- posers, choreographers . . . we do not do much for the designers, but then Student Players and Gilbert and Sullivan, Civic Theater and our Children's Theater provide opportunities. I think these people do not pretend their work is definitive, but they help lift the play off the page and rescue it from the museums, and, yes, from the classrooms. Do you review these important people with any regularity? Do you encour- age? Or do you make everyone who has ever laid hand to paintbrush regret his voluntary work. That is, are you depriving us of enthusiasm? Just because a thing doesn't come off need not mean that it is worthless. In a single generation it is remarkable to produce one talent, A Shakespeare, a Moliere; a Betterton, a Bernhard; a Craig or a Berard, but it is the enthusiasm of the amateurwhich preserves the art form..If the least of productions is discouraged by criticism the probabilities of producing another Shakespeare are to that extent lessened. MATTER OF FACT By JOSEPH and STEWART ALSOP !Contnued from Page 1) It is also Soviet practice, with a new model, to show it the second time when enough have been produced to be put in use in organized units. In the existing state of our air defense, the con- firmed and known appearance of a considerable number of squad-1 rons of these suspected Soviet turbo-prop heavy bombers, would go pretty far to consternate the Pentagon and paralyze American policy. Fortunately heavy bomber production is a pretty slow businessr at best. It is possible, moreover, that these turbo-prop heavy bombers are a mirage of the intelligence experts. One must hope that there has been no such production, or that it has been very, very slow indeed. -* * * * YET HOPES, unfortunately, will not solve the problem that now'stares President Eisenhower in the face. And the problem is complicated, not1 merely by arguable calculations of Soviet strength and American weakness, not: merely by grave economic danger, but also by a cru- cially important theoretical argument between the scientific analysts1 and the uniformed airmen. To introduce this debate, it is necessary to note that the uniformed airmen are not exactly impartial and impersonal judges of the Project Lincoln-Summer Study Group findings. In the first place, although Lincoln was an air force project, the find-1 ings, for reasons still unexplained, were directly presented to the National Security Council and the White House. Ever since, con-1 sideration of these findings has continued on this highest level, rather than centering in the Air Staff. This procedure has been characterized in the Air Force as "the big erid run." Most Air Force comments on the Project Lincoln-Sum- mer Study Group findings are at least a bit tinged, in fact, with the bitterness of a flouted bureaucracy. In addition, air defensive power has a very serious drawback in the eyes of most of our air generals, icluding the highest in rank. This drawback can be simply des- cribed: Air defensive power is not strategic air power. * * * * OUTLAYS ON AIR DEFENSE compete for the favor of Congres- sional appropriators with outlays on strategic air power. The existence of an effective air defense must suggest the possible ineffectiveness of strategic air. For these reasons, anyone who has ventured to men- tion the air defense problem in the arcana of the air staff in recent months, has generally got a firm, even belligerent answer-"Now we don't want to cut down on SAC." And this has regularly happened, even when the inquirer about air defense has never mentioned the strategic air command except to advocate strengthening it. Yet even after making due allowance for these professional deformations of the uniformed airmen, President Eisenhower will have to weigh the air Generals' more meaningful criticism of the Project Lincoln-Summer Study Group concept. In effect, unless all limits on spending are removed, most members of the air staff would like to give spending priority to the Strategic Air Force instead of to air defense. "The offense is the best defense," they say. The scientists point out in answer that the air Generals are con- siderably distorting this tried and true military maxim. "The offense is the best defense" beyond any doubt, when both sides start fair; and both can assume the offensive at will. * * * * THIS IS NOT our situation, however. Instead, in view of our po- litical system, we have to concede to the enemy the right to strike the first blow. And so long as the air Generals really mean, "Retaliation is the best deterrant" instead of "Offense is the best defense," there are several extremely grave objections to their system of priorities. In the first place, George F. Kennan and the other members of the small but generally reliable group of American experts on Russia have always disputed the claim that American air atomic power was the main deterrant to Soviet aggression. They have also argued, instead, that the main deterrent to Soviet aggression was fear of American industrial power mobilized for war. If the Soviets gain the capability of decisively knocking out American industrial power, the balance wil change greatly, even if the Kremlin still has to fear American air-atomic retaliation. Second, the Project Lincoln-Summer Study Group scientists forecast that the Soviets will be able to devastate this country within two years or a little more. In this context, devasation means achieving an ex- tent of destruction that will knock America right out of the war. Even if the airplanes of our strategic air command survive this kind of devastation, the scientists rather convincingly argue they will not be able to retaliate very effectively. Third, and most important of all, it is necessary to remember an enemy capability can sometimes produce effects almost as ter- rible as an 'enemy attack. The Project Lincoln-Summer Study Group findings do not in any -way touch upon Soviet capabilities. They do not say that the Kremlin will in fact launch a devastating air attack on this country two years from now. The findings only concern Soviet capabilities. They only say the Soviets will be able to launch such an attack. But this can be quite enough, unhappily. Consider the case of Britain and Germany in 1935-39. Remember how the menace of Hit- ler's Luftwaffe paralyzed British policy until Chamberlin at last was hopelessly cornered, and fought back in sheer despair. Consider also On Probes ... To The Editor: ELDE has given us fair warn- V ing about the trends of his in- vestigations in the future. Jenner, Velde, and McCarthy are not in, terested in investigating for the purpose of gaining information for legislation. They don't have time for legislation. Together, this team plans to investigate the "Voicde of Amer- ica, the State Department, The Defense Agencies, the Executive Department of Government, uni- versities and colleges, . public schools, Rhode Scholars, the en- tertainment field, the U. N., and others. Although other members of his committee disagree, Vede still wants the right to investi- gate the clergy. The "team" is failing to really fight Communism. It must have galled them when the Daily Work blamed 3 top ADA leaders, Walter Ruether, David Dubinsky, and Wexler, and not McCarthy, Velde, and Jenner, as the major cause for the defeat of the Progressive Party in this country. We become con- cerned about a neo-facist rise in Germany. Perhaps we ought to start worrying about itin this country, in as much as many of the same methods are being em- ployed here. Vede probablya wants to run fordSenator against Senator Paul Douglas 1/ years from now. Which would you rather have?-Blue Carstenson. * * * 'Turning Inward' . . To the Editors: THE LETTER of Leonard Sand- weiss certainly was a well- written and thoughtful work which deserves much attention and thought. Many of his points, al- though a bit nebulous at times, are extremely well taken, and it is not my purpose to either de- nounce or otherwise criticize them, butperhaps to suggest a variant viewpoint. Mr. Sandweiss hints hi the first' sentence that he is going to talk about apathy toward activities. He then enlarges his scope to what finally turns out to be a cry in the wilderness against our whole social order. He decries the lack of spontaneous rebellion; this comes after asking us why we don't join organizations Per- chance, it seems to me, the two are complementary; the "apathy" is a rebellion to both organized futility and University paternalism over the student body, which, sup- posedly, is represented by some of the multifarious organizations. More basic and significant, how- ever, is the allegation of the sub- stitution of The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock for the Holy Bible. This is a serious charge. I earnest- ly believe that there are those reading the Michigan Daily who will agree that Mr. Sandweiss has either lost his perspective or is in great danger of being grossly misunderstood when he assigns the lack of student interest in activities as the sign of a complete decadence of society, a loss of any ability to make decisions. To decry the "withdrawing" with a few friends necessarily denies the living of a peaceful (or at least an only partially chaotic) existence free from artificial or- ganizational ties; as the same Eliot says, albeit satirically, "Without these friendships, life, what cauch- mar!" True it is, that to some religion has lost its flavor. Perhaps this lack of palatablility is derived from the crowded days of "activity-ism" during which time to devote to the contemplation of things more basic than those offered by most activities, is lacking. -Robert W. Carr.I Academic Freedom .. To the Editor: IN THE opening remarks of Rea- der William Halby's reply to my letter concerning Academic Freedom, Mr. Halby asserts that "We do not want to supress free- dom of thought in America." This is indeed a noble-sounding state- ment. Yet, the rest of his letter is directly contradictory to the prin- ciples of Academic Freedom. My notion of Academic Freedom is an independence of educators from the political, economic, and social pressures of the times. Mr. Halby seems to feel that our edu- cators, because of the position they occupy, should waive not on- ly their traditional independence, but some of their Constitutional Rights as private citizens as well. I'm afraid I can't agree! Educa- tors must be free from external influences in order to objectively seek and teach the Truth. The current Congressional Investiga- tion is stifling freedom of expres- sion and lowering faculty morale at Universities throughout the Na- tion. Reader Halby further asserts that, "When a Congressional Com- mittee asks our cooperation in measures designed for the com- mon good," we should cooperate with them. I have very strong doubts that the "measures" pre- scribed by Messrs. McCarthy, Vel- de and Jenner were designed for the "common good." I believe that these Congressmen saw in the People's legitimate fear of sub- version in educational institutions a vehicle for the gain of personal power. If the inquisitors were re- ally concerned about the common good, they would realize that the, irreparable damage done to our educational system far outweighs any benefits that might possibly be derived from rooting out a handful of Reds. Furthermore, the irresponsible and reckless manner in which Senator McCarthy and Associates have conducted the hearings has proven that they have complete disregard for the consequences of their ruthless actions. We must not allow the fear that characterizes our age to perman- ently govern us. The only way to meet this challenge to Academic Freedom is withi popular resent- ment and defiance. -Arthur Cornfeld Sixty-Third Year Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan- under the authority of the Board in Control of Student Publications. Editorial Staff Crawford Young. ...... Managing Editor Barnes Connable............City Editor Cal Samrn......... Editorial Director Zander Holander-----..Feature Editor Sid Mlaus.....Associate City Editor Harland Britz.......Associate Editor Donna Hendeman.....Associate Editor Ed Whipple.............Sports Editor John Jenks....e.Associate Sports Editor Dick Sewell..Associate Sports Editor Lorraine Butler.....Women's Editor Mary Jane Mills, Assoc. Women's Editor Don Campbell .... Chief Photographer Business Staff Al Green. ...........Business Manager Milt-Goetz.....Advertising Manager Diane Johnston.... .Asoc. Buinss Uv. Judy Loehnberg......EPinance Manager Harlean Rankin....Crculation Manager Telephone 23-24-1 Member of The Associated Press The Associated Press Is exclusively entitled to the use for republication of all news dispatches creditedto it or otherwise credited to this newpper. All rights of republication of all other matters herein are also reserved. Entered at the Post OMC at Ann Arbor, Michigan, as second-class mll matter. SSubscriptien during regular school 1year: by carrier, $6.00: by mall iTO. I l t I. A ,r Little Man On Campus by Bibler " ,44/,~VUIo it ~ ~/ / is 4