Letters to the Editor

Let's Keep Some Men

TO THE EDITOR:

In times when I so rarely find I can agree with my classmates on much of anything—(Nixon-McGovern, war in Vietnam, coeds, the Indian symbol)—it is refreshing to find views expressed from a fellow '44 with which I can agree, at least in part. Al Hormel's discovery of girls (December 1972 issue) is encouraging. Those of us who have helped in spawning a few discovered their superiority some years ago and we welcome any latecomers to the cause of women's equality.

But, alas, I can't accept the thesis of casting all males into Stygian darkness and turning Dartmouth into a totally female institution. We still need the boys, AL. How about admission of male-female on a quota based on the percentage of male-female population? I'll vote for that!

Falls Church. Va.

Alas, No Cane

TO THE EDITOR:

William R. Page '06 (Dartmouth Changes, December 1972) has me wondering and worrying.

I feel cheated. I graduated in June 1971 but, alas, I did not receive my senior cane with an Indian head.

Perhaps such canes are no longer part of the Dartmouth experience because students who are spared the implicit barbarism of ROTC, the ugliness of bigotry and discrimination, and general narrow-mindedness do not graduate as intellectual and spiritual cripples.

Still I would like such a cane. With it I could rap the knuckles of every alumnus who laments the death of Dartmouth institutions and traditions that deserve to die.

Pittsburgh, Pa.

Clayt Clafling

TO THE EDITOR:

Dartmouth is, of course, many things to many alumni. In addition to all of the "standard memories—the Winter Carnivals, the bonfires, etc.-we all have our own personal memories. Among mine is Clayt Claflin.

Thanks to John Talbot '67 for his' accurate "tribute" to Clayt in the December issue of the Alumni Magazine, and thanks to you for publishing it.

Chappaqua, N. Y.

The Indian Symbol (Cont.)

TO THE EDITOR:

I am the seventh American Indian graduate of Dartmouth. Like the first Indian graduate, Dr. Eastman, I am a Sioux (Yankton Sioux). I still proudly wear Dartmouth Indian head cufflinks. I still have the Indian head sweater I wore as Dartmouth band leader in 1930-1931 when Roland Sundown '32, an Iroquois, and I were privileged to be in the forefront at Dartmouth athletic events. We were proud to be genuine Indians at an Indian school. I still and shall always refer to the Dartmouth Indians.

St. Paul, Minn.

TO THE EDITOR:

Today's paper contained a story from Cheney, Wash., stating that despite some protests the teams of Eastern Washington State College will continue to be called the "Savages." The nickname was supported overwhelmingly in a vote of alumni, students, and faculty, and even an effort to substitute "Braves" for the old nickname was defeated 950 to 52.

These boys have a little more on the ball than our College has. I for one think tradition is still important—or let's scrap the Fourth of July, etc. Perhaps we should change the name of the College—it might remind us too much of Eleazar Wheelock and his founding activities.

Short Hills. N. J.

TO THE EDITOR:

Three cheers to Professor Wiencke, Page '06 and Phillips '23 (and all others) for supporting the return of the Indian symbol. The surrender to the hypersensitive demands of the Native Americans and their cohorts was as lacking in perspective as the hypersensitivity itself.

Specifically with respect to the charge of irresponsible caricaturism, I would like to suggest that for all students who identified with the symbol, any caricature worn by a Dartmouth student reflected his ability to laugh at himself and yet to have pride in himself. Any identification is made stronger if accompanied by a sense of humor. I don't recall any feeling of an attempt to scorn or to historically misrepresent the Indian; only pride.

If students left Dartmouth with an inaccurate image of the Indian, it was because the image was idealized. Yet one isn't told that his affection for a sister, brother, mother or father is inaccurate. So, too, with the Indian who has been a strong member of Dartmouth men's families for a long time. The Indian had character traits toward which we strove—wrongly?

Brookline, Mass.

TO THE EDITOR:

The Indian Symbol advertisement in the November issue produced an avalanche of mail in the WAH HOO WAH post box in Hanover. The writers of those many letters, as well as graduates generally, may be interested in the following observations about them.

(1) Throughout runs the theme of outrage over what many regard as precipitate efforts to break with the past, to sever the Dartmouth College of the 1970s from our roots in New England and our traditions in the colonial history of our country.

(2) Alumni are overwhelmingly in favor of retaining our Indian Symbol. Classes from 1906 to 1971 testified to resentment over the way in which the Indian Symbol matter was handled.

(3) Although ROTC was not mentioned in the advertisement, many letters called on the Trustees to get on with the promised study of returning ROTC to the campus.

(4) Many of the letters mentioned alumni giving—or withholding—as the recourse of the individual who is dissatisfied with the way things are going.

(5) Again and again writers asked: What can I do to help?

An answer to the last question is inherent in Eleazar Wheelock's motto for the Indian School he founded: Vox Clamantis in Deserto. Make yourselves heard!

Hanover. N. H.

TO THE EDITOR:

Wah Hoo Wah for Messrs. Briggs and Loeb for their courage and concern in placing the ad on page 7 of the November issue.

I believe that the "silent majority" of the Dartmouth community shares their attachment to the Indian traditions and symbols. Inevitably it views the Wah Hoo Wah affair as a childish manifestation of the currentl fashionable "social consciousness," one of cowardly appeasement of minorities in trifle matters, and a waste of time.

Our energies were better spent on bringing more Indians to Dartmouth, making them keel truly equal, and instilling in them the spirit and traditions we all cherish.

New York, N. Y.