Letters to the Editor

A Dim View of Coeducation

TO THE EDITOR:

I enjoyed "The Undergraduate Chair" by John Burns '68 in the March 1968 issue, reporting on the busy and colorful mid-winter activities at the College.

The reported "less controversial matter" of coeducation at Dartmouth, vis a vis pot, as reported on page 30, is not less controversial to this writer and I'm writing both to say just that, and secondly to ask some pointed questions about the justification and implementation of this practically fait accompli, as I read it.

First let me make it clear that I have no particular interest in the benefits that the girls from Mt. Holyoke will derive from the program, as they are obvious to all; my concern is wholly with the Dartmouth student body, and the modification such a move will have on the very unique Dartmouth experience, and the Dartmouth of the future.

First, I would like to know from where the 230 Dartmouth students will come to fill Dartmouth's quota of the transaction? Certainly they will not be freshmen, who, I assume, after undergoing the anxiety of gaining a place at Dartmouth will not want to spend their* first year away from the College. Certainly they will not be sophomores, who will be able to enjoy a fuller life at Dartmouth than in their first year, which may include fraternities, varsity competition, and growing awareness of Dartmouth, the place. Certainly they will not be juniors, who will have selected majors, some too .specialized for Mt. Holyoke to fulfill; who will have learned to make their way at the College, with time for gaining stature in their interests whatever they be. And certainly they will not be seniors, who, endowed by now with sensitivity and awareness of Dartmouth, the place and ethos, will not want to spend that fleeting last year somewhere else.

Looking at it from the point of view of activities, certainily the serious athletes will not participate in the program for obvious reasons - I assume that accounts for approximately 500-700 students; nor can I see how the students pursuing medical or engineering curricula can participate, say another 200-300; certainly none of the ROTC students could participate, say 500; nor would those who want the skiing and outdoor benefits at Dartmouth, and so on.

In short, I am wondering what would motivate any more Dartmouth students than those with "vested interests" at Holyoke to consider such a move. Yet, I assume that the figure of 230 exchanges is based on a show of interest from the undergraduates. I'd be interested to know the details.

I am particularly distressed at Dean Seymour's reported statement, "The question is no longer whether Dartmouth should go coeducational, but when and how." Indeed! Does Dean Seymour make this statement as a spokesman for the Administration, the undergraduates or himself, or due to the enthusiasm of the moment? I'd like details.

After two hundred years of existence, in eras when accessibility to "les girls" was more difficult than at present, why now is there such urgency for Dartmouth to go coed?

Finally, I suspect this movement is serious, at least from the point of view of its perpetrators. I also suspect such statements as the Dean's are printed as trial balloons, and I suspect that the ultimate aim is to have girls matriculate at Dartmouth on a full four-year basis. If it should come to this, Dartmouth will have committed a grave mistake, and have compromised its identity, heritage and responsibilities. Because if the College feels it has a responsibility to expand and educate capable young women, I say that it has a greater responsibility to expand and to educate those young men who just miss acceptance to. we assume, the school of their choice for all four years.

Waccabuc, N. Y.

The Dean Explains

TO THE EDITOR:

I'm afraid that an off-hand remark, reported out of context, has increased the volume of your mail - and mine — on the question of coeducation. At a student discussion this winter I said, "The question is no longer whether Dartmouth should go coeducational but when and how."

I was trying to make the point that "coeducation" is a misleading and imprecise term. Dartmouth has been "coeducational" for years - we have women in most of our graduate programs; we have more women than men in our summer term; and we have a number of women (faculty and student wives, occasional students from other colleges) taking courses as "special students" during the year.

The question, then, is "when and how" these existing arrangements will develop in the future.

I hope your readers will be reassured that my comment was not a statement of policy, not even prophecy. I was simply trying to bring some high-flying students down to earth. Unfortunately, I seem to have sent some alumni into orbit.

Dean of the College

Editor's Note: The proposed exchange figure of 230, about which Mr. Prasch wonders, comes from no tabulated show of interestbut from the number of places in thetwo Wigwam dorms student proponents havearbitrarily chosen for coeds in Hanover.

A Memoir of Prof. Stone

TO THE EDITOR:

It was with more than a little sadness that I read in the ALUMNI MAGAZINE of Donald Lane Stone's passing. Although my classroom exposure to him was comparatively brief, I shall always remember his humanity and his dedication to scholarly traditions.

Even more vivid in my memory was a visit he made to the Casque & Gauntlet house in the spring of 1947. Early in the morning of the day that elections to senior societies had been announced in The Dartmouth, Judge Stone came over to tell us that it "was now a far brighter day" in Hanover. Charles Duncan, a truly outstanding person and a Negro, had been elected to Casque & Gauntlet.

Maybe others felt that commendations were inappropriate or unnecessary, but Judge Stone alone sensed our struggle with witless tradition and would not let our efforts go unnoticed.

Judge Stone knew he did not have to confirm to us the Tightness of our action. He simply wanted to encourage us on our way to even more meaningful acts of common humanity. Let us hope that he has successors among us.

Cleveland, Ohio

Vietnam Weaponry

TO THE EDITOR:

The letter of Robert J. Misch '25 which was printed in the ALUMNI MAGAZINE for April was a big comfort to me. It was heartening to know that my son in Vietnam (Dartmouth '66) is being supported by sophisticated weapons, and that he and his fellow soldiers do not have to rely on ballistas, mangonells, Greek fire, crossbows or muzzle-loaders.

I can't help but wonder whether the "miniguns mounted on Huey Hog helicopters" actually can fire 6,000 rounds a minute or whether they fire at a rate of 6,000 rounds a minute, a very different proposition. I would imagine that there might be limitations due to problems of feeding cartridges and deterioration of gun barrels. In any event, such Hueys serve a most useful purpose in "sanitizing" areas so that other helicopters may safely land to evacuate our wounded and remove the bodies of our dead.

When Mr. Misch refers to "an area of 50 miles" he has me wondering. 50 miles represents a distance, and requires another dimension to denote an area. Has a typographical error crept in, or is Mr. Misch quoting from his sources of information? Whether the area intended be fifty square miles, fifty miles square, or a radius of fifty miles, it would appear that we have developed a bomb more powerful than the hydrogen bomb, which is doubtful.

I suspect that when Mr. Misch says "Charley was there" he is emphasizing that his informants had been in Vietnam. If so, I am old enough to recognize the source of the phrase - the Baron Munchausen radio program of 30 or 40 years ago. However, "Charley" has a different connotation in Vietnam today. Viet Cong equals VC equals Victor Charley equals plain Charley - and Charley is there and is a wily, tough and dirty opponent, operating in a terrain he knows and which is honeycombed with tunnels he has been constructing for years. Our forces should not be denied the use of the ordnance and equipment described by Mr. Misch.

Lexington, Mass.

Print Proposed

TO THE EDITOR:

In the April issue (page 45) there was a reproduction of the Class of 1907's gift to the College of a painting of the brig Dartmouth. I am sure that there are many in the alumni body who love ships, and I am wondering if there has been any thought of having good reproductions made of this beautiful painting, so that all of the alumni can, if they want to, share in this gift.

If no thought has been given to a reproduction sale, perhaps somebody will start the ball rolling.

Sarasota, Fla.

If other alumni are interested in the possibility of a reproduction, let us hear fromyou.

A Dartmouth Press?

TO THE EDITOR:

It was with interest that I read in the March '68 issue that Dartmouth would be guiding the new edition of the Webster Papers through compilation. But once again it forced me to recognize with regret the decision of the Trustees to straddle the issue of a university press under the Dartmouth imprint. Dartmouth Publications (the title itself implies limited aspirations compared with the possible title of Press, which must have been rejected) has more than proven its value in notable volumes under the dedicated guidance of Prof. Ray Nash, all the more remarkable considering the limited resources the Trustees have placed at his disposal and the negligent attitude the College seems to have taken toward expanding the goals of Dartmouth Publications. Perhaps the third century is the time to re-evaluate the need for a Dartmouth College Press, an additional voice crying out in the wilderness.

From reading the reviews in the ALUMNIMAGAZINE of the works of the Dartmouth faculty, it is apparent that they have a need for an academic press. Certainly if a positive attitude were taken toward establishing a press under a discerning and conscientious editor some of the faculty would publish in Hanover. The Webster Papers being published at Harvard, which I recognize as an extremely fine press (and one willing to accept this project without subsidy), merely encourages my lament. It strikes me that a handsome edition of the estimated 10-15,000 pages of Webster's Papers, published under the College seal, might well have been an indication of Dartmouth's willingness to expand its commitment to education in a new direction while confirming our dedication to tradition: a worthy symbol of the College's Third Century.

Ensign, U.S. Navy

P.S. In John Morse's article on Rugby in the February issue I was amused that he should say "Rugby was not played in the States until 1929. ..." Didn't we win the world championship at the Olympics in 1924 with a Rugby team? We also competed for that title in 1908 and 1920.

Reliable Dartmouth Men

TO THE EDITOR:

I notice, in reviewing the backgrounds of the management of Reliable Electric Company, that Dartmouth has contributed significantly to our roster of top echelon personnel. The four top men in our organization represent three graduating classes, spanning the years from 1927 to 1940.

John Brown Cook, Class of 1929, sits as Chairman of the Board of Directors. Mr. Cook is also Chairman of the Boards of Whitney Blake Company, New Haven, Conn., and Lordel Manufacturing Company, Monrovia, Calif.

E. Winston Rodormer, Class of 1927, is a Vice President and Secretary. Mr. Rodormer is also President of Edwards Department Stores of Syracuse and Rochester, N. Y.

Harold C. Ripley, Class of 1929, was recently promoted to Vice Chairman of the Board and Chairman of the Executive Committee. He is also Chairman of the Board of Com Tech Corporation, Broadview, Ill, ar.d Vice President of Whitney Blake Company in New Haven.

Robert J. Rodday, Class of 1940, and Amos Tuck School 1941, has recently joined Reliable as President. Mr. Rodday was previously Vice President of American Enka, and General Manager of their Brand-Rex Division.

Franklin Park, Ill.