LACK OF TASTE
What has characterized The Dartmouth more than anything else during the past month has been lack of taste. There is a kind of carping criticism that is in no way constructive. It is comparable to going around pointing out what is unattractive in every one you meet, buck teeth, a large nose, ungainliness, etc. This may be extreme but it is all too similar to much of The Dartmouth's recent criticisms. A better metaphor might be going out to look at Mt. Washington and then coming back to write about the dirty, streaky colors which characterized much of it.
Such was the objective effect on the recent series of editorials on "The Liberal Arts College," or certainly of the first five or so installments in spite of many penetrating isolated points. But how could a very favorable result be expected from the evaluation of a liberal college by an Editor whose declared purpose is against liberalism? The Editor has stated very definitely to us and others that liberalism means the absence of definite opinions about anything, that it cannot exist where there is a purpose. He declares quite unreservedly that he cannot be open-minded or tolerant of the opinions of others because he has firm convictions and is working toward a definite goal. To us this is the same sort of sophistry as an editorial which TheDartmouth reprinted recently from the Williams Record. This editorial writer had used several hundred words in ingeniously proving that a boycott of Hearst News reels was in reality progress toward freedom of speech because Hearst believes in stifling opinions he doesn't agree with.
