Letters to Editor

Francis Gramlich

TO THE EDITOR:

In an era of instant communications, sad news sometimes travels slowly. I have just received the July issue of the Dartmouth AlumniMagazine noting the untimely death of Professor Francis William Gramlich. I remember with great fondness and enthusiasm his sparkling course on philosophy in the late forties. He was able to bring intellectual trends into a focus where they were both relevant and important to contemporary thought. He was always warm and energetic, and his catholic approach to academic interests was evidenced by his encouragement and approval of my own explorations in Chinese philosophy and my attendance as an exchange student to Lingnan University in Canton, China in 1948.

I saw Professor Gramlich last in 1965 on my only return to Dartmouth since graduation. We spent a great deal of time discussing East Asia studies and his counsel was, as always, sound and helpful.

Professor Gramlich exemplified Dartmouth ideals of commitment to undergraduate excellence and breadth of scholarship.

American EmbassyBangkok, Thailand

Fund Participation

TO THE EDITOR:

Alumni Fund Chairman Sandy McCulloch's disappointment in the drop in Alumni Fund percentage participation should not be taken lightly. Although this year's number of donors was slightly higher than last, his summary statement clearly shows a progressive tendency for fewer and fewer alumni to give more and more. While the monetary results of the Fund are currently gratifying, this situation does not suggest a stable future base for the Fund. A major priority for the Fund should be the development of high participation in the Fund in recent classes in order to develop a base for major gifts by these individuals in later years.

Ithaca, N. Y.

Authentic Translation

TO THE EDITOR:

In re Howie Clark's letter in the October issue, especially his remark that there have been surreptitious (why "surreptitious?") inquiries as to the meaning of Wah Hoo Wah, is it not surprising that during all the hurly-burly that resulted in half a dozen red students causing over 3,000 palefaces to abandon the famous Dartmouth cheer nobody on campus ever thought to ask the Indians-in-residence just what does the word mean? Perhaps it is not too late to poll them on the question, I recall that my classmate Tom Frost brought back from the Texas plains fifty years ago an allegedly authentic translation that is not quite the same as Dr. Clark's.

Eatontown, N.J.

(Dr. Clark implied cow dung. Our source sayssodomy. Either way spells trouble. Ed.)

Since Tanzi's Closed

TO THE EDITOR:

It was with shock and dismay that I learned that Dartmouth lost its third straight football game. I sit in the loneliness of my office and contemplate causes:

1. John Kemeny is not a native-born American.

2. Many Dartmouth publications are printed on recycled paper.

3. Nothing's been the same since Tanzi's closed.

4. The Indian is gone; how can a Big Green win anything? What is a Big Green, anyway? Besides, if anyone ever won, all he/she (see #5, below) would get would be a rouse, which is nothing like a wah hoo wah.

5. Let's face it, the football team has better things to do than think about football now that Dartmouth is co-educational.

6. Without ROTC, there aren't any real men on campus for the football team to emulate.

7. Jake Crouthamel's name isn't spelled the way it's pronounced.

I will communicate further reasons to you as soon as I can divine them ....

Canton, N. Y.

ROTC

TO THE EDITOR:

As a graduate of both Dartmouth ('51) and the U.S. Naval Academy ('55), I have viewed the continued debate relative to ROTC on the campus with more than passing interest. To have attempted to express my feelings at an earlier date would have been a futile attempt to tilt at an academic windmill the momentum behind which was provided by the iconoclastic environment existent on the campus of the day. To those of us who had the opportunity to read that famous valedictorian's address of 1968 from the tropical climate of Southeast Asia, the College was undoubtedly then at the nadir of its viability - a position only compounded by its complete abrogation of all its responsibilities when, in 1969,"the Trustees voted to phase out all ROTC.

With the threat of involvement now greatly diminished, note now the feeble stirrings that are returning to the American campus. Professor Radway's article in the October 1973 Alumni Magazine is symtomatic of the climate. "Perhaps it's a good idea to keep a hawk in the closet - perhaps we can tame him a bit by allowing him to roost in a tree at the edge of the campus." All I can say is "Dartmouth, where were you when we needed you?"

The class notes section of the same issue calls attention to two Dartmouth sons who have risen to senior positions within the military services. Some thirty years from now will we be able to turn to the Magazine and find that one-seventh of the four star officers in any service have been able to carry forward with them through their careers the broad-based academic experience of a Dartmouth education? Or will the military be forced to suffer through this period relying on the "thinner" talent of the non-Dartmouth non-Ivy League colleges or even worse, the "hard core" service academy graduate.

I note that Professor Radway addressed the Benson Committee's Report and provided his observations thereon. The obvious correlation between ROTC retention rates and service academy dominance of the higher levels of the services is hardly germane to the basic issue of whether the ROTC should exist on the campus The very complaint of service academy. dominance is virtually assured if the ROTC cadet or midshipman is regarded with disdain during his years on campus. Such dominance is incidentally, a great deal less prominent than might be inferred from the article, even within the Navy.

To say that the service academy graduate will be broadened by his exposure to the young instructors recruited from civilian universities is analogous to saying that the Medieval Church would have profited by Martin Luther having done his research in the Vatican Library.

While it may have been most stultifying for some students to be exposed to the militan members of the faculty, think of the disillusionment of the ROTC student who through perhaps not career-motivated, was willing to serve, to challenge and broaden my now severely restricted viewpoint and who carried his stigmata before the draft-secure long-term scholars resident on the campus of the late 60's

While I respect Professor Radway's opinions I feel that his stern-on approach to the situation is perhaps as biased as is my embittered view- point regarding the College's willingness to step down from its academic haven and enter the world of reality.

No, Dartmouth, I doubt whether you are ready to address the question of "reopen(ing) discussions on ROTC." I doubt whether you're sufficiently mature to bite that bullet.

Virginia Beach, Va.