Letters to the Editor

Project ABC

TO THE EDITOR:

I read with intense personal interest Dean Dey's article about Project ABC in the October issue. This was a well-warranted continuation of previous discussions of the program; the alumni should be informed periodically on the progress of this worthy and growing endeavor.

It is unfortunate, however, that Dean Dey did not elect to include a discussion of the role of another vital ABC group: the faculty. While it is in part true that "the future of ABC... is in the hands of college undergraduates," it is also true that the success or failure of any such program can depend upon the work of the public and private school teachers who spend an equally intensive six or seven weeks preparing the ABC boys (and girls) for a rigorous academic experience in their respective schools.

As a teacher in the Williams ABC Program, I found the cliches, "rewarding," "challenging," "frustrating," to be inadequate, as one would anticipate, but somehow true. Teaching eager, concerned, involved boys was an invigorating but debilitating experience and a refreshing, welcome change. It is always difficult to evaluate one's own success as a classroom teacher, but the pace and condensation of the ABC classroom work make such a determination nearly impossible. Even when these boys reach their anticipated success, how much accomplishment can any one teacher or program claim?

As ABC continues to grow in Hanover, Williamstown, and other communities, I hope that more alumni will have an opportunity to witness and participate in some aspect of this Darmouth-initiated project and to experience for themselves the exhilaration of working to provide the necessary educational opportunities for deserving youngsters.

Williamstown, Mass.

TO THE EDITOR:

When I lived in the Hanover community I always thought that the ABC project was wonderful. After reading the self-congratulatory article in the October issue I wondered what problem the ABC project is the solution to? The education of depressed and deprived children? Then the ABC solution is not in any sense commensurate with the size of the problem; it is only a pitiful, well-meaning gesture with no larger efficacy.

Lyme, N.H.

EDITOR'S COMMENT: True, the ABC Program is not commensurate with the problem (what is?) but at Dartmouth it has enabled more than 400 underprivileged boys to enroll in secondary schools qualified to send them on to college educations that would have been out of reach. And ABC programs on other campuses have greatly increased the number of such boys and girls. Present efforts to enlist more public high schools in the program hold the promise of multiplying the benefits of ABC many times over. It is also worth pointing out that Project ABC is one of eight Tucker Foundation programs having to do with underprivileged or alienated youth.

The Museum's Why

TO THE EDITOR:

In the October issue, Mr. R. O. Baumrucker '31, in writing to the editor, speaks of "the enshrinement of socialism in the College Museum." He apparently was referring to the display of the Ralph E. Becker and William W. Becker '64 Collection of American Political Campaign Materials, prepared by our Student Curator, Mr. James Day '71. In a world-wide collection documenting the peculiar variations of human behavior the Museum presents (for veneration?) such items as a shrunken head from the Amazon, beheading knives from the Congo and, upon occasion, the conch shell trumpet which drove John Ledyard to abandon Dartmouth and take off for parts unknown. So far none of our audience has felt that we intended that they should duplicate these modes of behavior.

By "enshrining" some antique socialist campaign materials along with these other curiosities we were trying to call attention to the dedicated attempts of Mr. Day to expand the Becker collection and to extend the nature of our coverage beyond just campaign buttons and bumper stickers. He has added, for example, materials from the Prohibition party, the Constitutional Party and several lesser known Presidential hopefuls and has brought us extensive materials dealing with the campaign activities of Mr. Romney and Mr. Stassen. The socialist materials, we feel, have a proper place in this attempt to document the total American scene. Mr. Day is due a great deal of thanks for his efforts to make a research source out of a fine collection of historical memorabilia.

Curator of Anthropology

Hanover, N. H.

More Newton Letters

TO THE EDITOR:

Having read the comments in the letters from the alumni in the October issue about Mr. Newton's remarks as valedictorian of his class, I have come to the conclusion, as was once expressed, that I heartily disagree with his disloyal statements but defend his right to hold them as his honest beliefs. However, he showed poor judgment in saying what he did at that time and in that place.

I think that any Dartmouth man or friend of the College takes a childish attitude in stating he will reconsider making any more contributions to the Alumni Fund on account of Mr. Newton's remarks, which were clearly the fruit of an immature mind and he should be more pitied than censured in making them. I do not think that it was his intention to be disloyal to the country but he certainly was in hoping that the U.S. would be defeated in the Vietnam war. I think he will live to regret having said what he did.

I have done what I could to help promote donations to the Alumni Fund over the past several years and shall continue to do my part for as long as I am able to. There is no finer way to show my love and appreciation of being an alumnus of Dartmouth College.

My last remark is that Dartmouth is to be congratulated for permitting Mr. Newton to speak his mind in his valedictory.

Wallingford, Conn

TO THE EDITOR:

The College has been given both praise and blame for permitting young Mr. Newton to give his controversial valedictory address; but it deserves neither. Mr. Newton has reached maturity, at least in age, and he alone is accountable for his utterances. If, however, they are the product of his four years at Dartmouth, we who have loved her, should weep.

Dallas, Texas

TO THE EDITOR:

Dartmouth College cannot avoid responsibility for the storm kicked up by James Newton's valedictory address. From C.E.W.'s commentary one gains the impression that the Administration defends itself under the cloak of academic freedom. But a Valedictorian is not an outside speaker. He is a product of the College, chosen by the College and the College bears some responsibility for what he says - at least that is so in people's minds.

The last half of Mr. Newton's speech was hard for many alumni to take. Directly or indirectly he flouted such basic democratic principles as majority rule, obedience to law and allegiance to elected leaders. Which makes one wonder just how much Mr. Newton knows about a democratic form of government. And since he was chosen Valedictorian one also wonders how much 10 blame the College for what took place at Commencement.

A private liberal arts college can thrive only in the environment created by a political and economic system such as we enjoy in this country. It is therefore just plain common sense for an institution like Dartmouth to teach its student body what democracy dents in this country really understood what democracy is all about we would surely see less in our colleges of such things as New Left confrontation politics, anti-democratic elitism, draft evasion activities and, yes, even anti-Americanism.

Manchester, N. H.

TO THE EDITOR:

I am shocked at and ashamed of my fellow Dartmouth alumni who wrote in the October issue in approval of the commencement speech of James Witten Newton '68.

I was there, as my son was '68.

To condone Newton's remarks is to condone treason, anarchy, cowardice, and sedition. All of these were highly recommended in his remarks and it is unbelievable that any Dartmouth man with even a semblance of love of his country would approve.

It is obvious that in those Dartmouth men who approved, the granite of New Hampshire (supposedly) in their muscles and their brains has turned to yellow mush.

Houston, Texas

TO THE EDITOR:

It seems as if in some way you are keeping score of the alumni who write in concerning Newton's speech last June. May I go on record as being strongly opposed to it? It is one thing to be a pacifist and it is another to be for the other side.

Kansas City, Mo.

TO THE EDITOR:

Thanks to the vagaries of international mail forwarding (Asuncioń, Paraguay to Djakarta, Indonesia) I had the dubious good fortune to receive in one pouch Mr. Newton's philippic and ten thousand angry alumni epistles - part angry at Mr. N. and the rest angry at his angry detractors. At the risk of sounding angry myself, which I'm not, I would like to wish a plague - or at least a touch of Asian flu - on both houses.

The sins of the angry detractors, I must say, are the more potent: They excoriate Mr. N. for abusing his free speech by saying despicable things - but, of course, the raison d'etre of free speech is so that despicable things can be said, heard, rolled around in the head, and, finally, judged for whether they are in fact despicable. Or reasonable.

However, Mr. Newton's sins — at least insofar as his Vietnam commentaries are concerned - are the deeper: Purporting to speak as the representative of truth and scholarship he has perverted the former and substituted raw emotionalism for the latter. To rationalize the sickening slaughter of peaceful teachers, health workers, and agronomists - the campaign of wanton butchery that was the hallmark of the Viet Cong long before we entered the war — is inhuman. To ignore the obvious parallels between the "non-monolithic" Communist dictatorships of our era and the similarly non-monolithic Fascist powers of the '30s - each aggressor power gaining strength and taking heart from the failure of the free world to resist the conquests of the others — is unscholarly. And to bear false witness to the motives of the United States in trying (however ineptly) to save South Vietnam from the Hell of Communist tyranny - Ask any Czech! Ask any Tibetan!is unconscionable.

You have spoken freely, Mr. Newton - and that is your right. But you have also spoken despicably - may that be your epitaph!

American EmbassyDjakarta, Indonesia

TO THE EDITOR:

Scott Olin's October letter infers that one appropriate way to help maintain public order and tranquility would be to make a person like 1968 Valedictorian James Newton "a candidate for a noose." It seems altogether fitting that Mr. Olin should want to employ the hangman's noose to curb free speech since this treasured symbol of Americana is already intimately associated with some of our history's most shamefully repressive moments - from the hanging of "witches" at Salem to the lynching of Negroes in the South. Scarcely two decades ago we sent a number of German war leaders to the gallows for following their orders instead of their consciences. Judging from the views of Olin and his ilk (dramatically represented in the convictions of Dr. Spock and others), only Nazis are to be held accountable to their consciences - while we Americans had damn well better follow orders.

Los Angeles, Calif.

TO THE EDITOR:

I feel a little strange commenting in mid - October on Mr. Newton's June address and to the reactions to it, but it took a while for the ALUMNI MAGAZINE to catch up to me in Con Thien. I would like to make a few comments, which I feel have been ignored so far.

I certainly did not agree with Mr. Newton's address because I seek answers to this war and not continued criticism. Refusing to serve this country (which may or may not involve fighting or serving in Vietnam at all) is not the answer. This country has had too much criticism and too much protesting and not enough answers. If this war is a mistake or a "colossal stupidity" then let's make some corrections, and not offer mere refusals and criticisms.

When I hear an American say he is glad we are losing this war, I do not call him an American, for I see more maimed, more dead, and a longer war. When Mr. Newton says "refuse to serve" I want to know who is to serve, who is to pay the price for being an American - the Negro, the poor, the urbanite, and not the intellectual?

However, I do feel that if the politicians and leaders of this country could debate and discuss this war on a level commensurate to that of Mr. Newton and his fellow alumni, the United States would be a lot closer to finding a solution to this perplexing and complicated war.

APO, San Francisco

D.O.C. Men Praised

TO THE EDITOR:

I would like to take this opportunity to recognize the Dartmouth Outing Club for their efforts following our unfortunate accident on October 25. They deserve the highest praise from everyone at Northeast Airlines. The reports I have received show, beyond any doubt, that they extended themselves above and beyond the call of duty.

I have asked Mr. Arthur E. Fairbanks - Vice President - Northern Region, to present the Dartmouth Outing Club with a plaque of appreciation.

We at Northeast Airlines are grateful and with humility say to the Dartmouth Outing Club . .. thank you for a job well done.

Boston, Mass.

H.H.H. for President

TO THE EDITOR:

Dartmouth College is now looking for a successor to President Dickey. Who would make a finer president of Dartmouth than Hubert H. Humphrey? I strongly urge his consideration.

Ithaca, N. Y.