Letters to the Editor

Honor

TO THE EDITOR:

At Dartmouth I did not excel at English, but I do recall that we were to call things by their proper names. Since Professor Heffernan admits both that there can be no "system" to honor and that two-thirds of the student body violates the so-called honor system, why not put an end to the verbal camouflage and properly call it the Dartmouth College Cheating System? After all, cheating, not honor, requires a specific plan of action, the preparation of crib sheets, theft of exams, etc. - all parts of a true system to defraud honorable students of the high grades they deserve.

Hardly accidental at all must have been Professor Heffernan's weird omission of a description of the pathetic role the Dean himself probably plays in any reports of cheating incidents. One can fully imagine the joyous reception the Dean will be sure to give a professor who confronts him with frequent allegations of student misconduct.

The brunt of the good professor's argument a colossal nonsequitur - could be attributed to mere wishful thinking were it an expression of hope that a future "honor system" might work. As a summation of ten years' experience, it is a pathetic expression of official policy flying in the face of concrete failure.

Since the whole concept of honor is at best a squishy one to define, why not eliminate it and the entire moral aspect from the Cheating System argument? The present system does aid the College which no longer has to proctor exams. But it also aids the dishonest students at the direct expense of the honest ones. The acquiescence of the College to such now proven turpitude is itself most dishonorable.

Leave honor where it belongs - in voluntary personal conduct between gentlemen where cheating offers no gain, and honor is the expected form. The misuse of the term honor is not merely linguistic error typifying the Madison Avenue approach to English. Its attempted insertion into the public business of the College is also a failure to come to grips with the entire concept itself. A rather grievous mistake for an institute of higher learning to make.

New York, N. Y.

(Professor Heffernan replies: I am delighted tolearn that Dartmouth taught Mr. Holzel to callthings by their proper names, but unhappily,nomenclature is not an exact science. If a student cheats once or twice during four years atDartmouth, but otherwise does honest work, dowe call him a cheater - or an imperfectlyhonorable man? If many Dartmouth studentsare occasionally dishonest, are we fatuous to goon assuming that, nevertheless, most of themare fundamentally honest?

I repeat the crucial point originally made by athoughtful freshman: since the honor principle isfounded on implicit trust, any alternative to itmust be founded on implicit distrust, and mustbecome a system of external regulation. Whenregulation is thus externalized, it provokesdefiance, and cheating becomes an amoraladventure, an irresistible way of bucking thestem "That is one reason why rigorous codesof academic behavior invariably generate antimdes of academic misbehavior

Is the honor principle a failure? If anythingless than 100 per cent success equals failure, theanswer is obviously yes. But the failure is veryfar from total. Among other things, our surveyof the principle indicated that more than a thirdof our respondents had never been dishonorablein any way, and the most of the others had beenhonorable nearly all of the time. The results ofour survey are scarcely cause for self-congratulation, but neither are they cause fordespair To paraphrase Swift's definition ofman I continue to believe that the Dartmouthstudent is a creature honoris capax.)

Expecting the Impossible

TO THE EDITOR:

I read the article on "Honor, the Vanishing Principle" by Professor James Heffernan in the February ALUMNI MAGAZINE and found it very interesting. I have been involved with teaching and honor systems for 36 years as a teacher in private and public secondary schools. Although I should have been indignant at the seeming absence of "of honor" at Dartmouth when I was in my 20s, I now with years of experience behind me have come to look upon honor systems and codes as both unrealistic and hypocritical.

It seems to me that we place an unfair burden on the Ivy League college student by expecting him alone to so control and discipline himself that he will never glance into an available notebook, copy part of a fraternity-owned paper which sounds particularly relevant, or consult a translation or "trot" when the going becomes unbearably tough. He is usually a highly motivated, ambitious, idealistic young man often working under extreme pressure. The competition seems overpowering. He has done very well in secondary school, probably with relatively little effort. Suddenly he finds himself among students who are at least as good as he and often better. If he does well on placement examinations he will be placed in advanced sec- tions where he will have to sweat to survive. Where he once easily achieved A's, he now finds himself working hard for C's.

I agree with the excerpt from the History ofDartmouth College concerning President Tucker's day. More careful watch should be kept on tests and examinations by faculty proctors. Opportunities should, if possible, never be offered the student to commit acts of "dishonor." Open book examinations to test thinking and composition and not memory should be used whenever possible. The kind of objective examination which encourages memorizing and cheating should be avoided. As one of my principals said, "Lead them not into temptation."

If, in spite of all faculty efforts, one of the students is caught in a dishonest act, he should be at once brought before the Dean or a committee formed for that purpose. If this is his first offense, he should be given a second chance. Under extraordinary circumstances he may even be given a third chance. Then he should be separated from the College but only suspended, I think. Let him come back the next year if he still cares that much for Dartmouth and can stand the expense, and try again. If he is incorrigible, exile him forever.

Do not expect the impossible of 17- and 18-year-olds (or older). They will appreciate a faculty that respects them but does not expect of them qualities more heroic and noble than even faculties always display.

Newport, R.I.

Heartfully Recommended

TO THE EDITOR:

As a youthful next-to-next-door neighbor, I enjoyed Albert Inskip Dickerson, but not nearly as much as I would have appreciated his wit and intelligence now. Even today, though, much of his wit would have been too quick for me, and perhaps this is why his reviewers, too, claim not to have known all of him. His selected writings recently published by the College are heartfully recommended to those of you who would like to spend an evening or two with this wonderful man.

Seattle, Wash.

Professor Mirsky

TO THE EDITOR:

I have recently been informed that Dartmouth has fired Professor Jonathan Mirsky, and I am sure that many of my fellow alumni will want to hear of this event.

For me, the news of Professor Mirsky's termination is extremely disappointing. During my years at Dartmouth, I found him to be one of the most intellectually challenging professors on campus. The breadth and depth of his scholarly work were surpassed by only a few of his most distinguished colleagues, and, more impor- tantly, he was an excellent and rigorous teacher. But it is too late for personal statements. The College did not see fit to solicit such comments at the appropriate time.

I could speculate that Professor Mirsky's discharge was Dartmouth's retribution against a person who challenged the College to live by its ideals. I am sure that many of my fellow alumni would find this speculation justified, since Professor Mirsky was as powerful an influence when he spoke of moral imperatives as he was when he taught us Chinese history. If there is any substance to this speculation, Professor Mirsky's termination should trouble everyone.

But let me leave speculation. Dartmouth will be hurt by the loss of Jonathan Mirsky. The ending of his work in Hanover, especially at the time when an understanding of American involvement in Southeast Asia is desperately needed by coming generations, is more than regrettable; it is a serious blow to anyone who would look to Dartmouth for an education.

New Haven, Conn.

(The question of whether Professor Mirsky wasfired or resigned - or something in between - is debated; the fact remains that a popularteacher is leaving Dartmouth. Ed.)

ROTC

TO THE EDITOR:

It makes me feel so good to know that when someone in the White House, Pentagon, or State Department decides it's time again to go to war - to preserve of course peace, prosperity, and the American way - Dartmouth men with ROTC commissions might be leading the onslaught. When they hit the beach, I presume they'll shout "Geronimo" - the Indian symbol having been restored along with ROTC.

A Wah Hoo Wah indeed for the ROTC study committee and their recommendation "that Dartmouth commence conversations with the Department of Defense with the objective of reinstating ROTC."

Did advocates of ROTC on campus learn nothing during the late 19605? Do sabres again have to rattle in Hanover over the question of ROTC?

No matter what degree of control Dartmouth exercises over ROTC, the College compromises the spirit of a liberal education by allowing ROTC on campus.

Plus, how far can control really extend? Students who accept ROTC scholarships will necessarily play by ROTC's rules. And even if those rules do no more than require students to keep their hair cropped and ears showing, the rules are repugnant.

As for students who want to participate in ROTC, let them follow the example of students who want to major in physical education or to receive athletic scholarships. They can go elsewhere.

As for alumni who want ROTC back, let them note that the Dartmouth experience seems in no way diminished by ROTC's absence. From all accounts, the business of learning is booming in Hanover.

As for the committee's recommendation, let it be rejected. Dartmouth doesn't need ROTC.

Glenview, Ill.

(In fact, a majority of the members on the studycommittee recommended against reestablishingROTC on the Dartmouth campus. TheTrustees, however, have authorized discussionson various options with the Department ofDefense.Ed.)

TO THE EDITOR:

Lest it be said that all the student radicals of yesteryear have gone and joined the ruling class in one way or another, I would like to add my small voice to the contrary to the record.

As one of hundreds of students who were active in eliminating ROTC at Dartmouth during the height of the Vietnam War (which is, of course, still going on, with massive U.S. funding), I would like to say that despite all the disappointments I've seen, despite all the ruling-class propaganda, I am still unalterably opposed to ROTC's reinstatement at Dartmouth or anywhere else. The U.S. is still a major imperialist power, and the government still threatens to use its army — and obviously its ROTC-trained officers — abroad and at home against revolutionary movements, workers' and foreign capitalist competition. The uses of ROTC are the same now as they ever were: protecting the U.S. ruling class.

Back in 1969, along with others, I predicted that the College's Board of Trustees, a rulingclass organization if there ever was one, would, along with their various and sundry henchmen and lackies, inevitably attempt to restore ROTC at Dartmouth, if they felt that the anti-war and anti-imperialist student movement had weakened to the point where the Trustees could get away with it. Sure enough, they're trying. However, it is most gratifying to see that contrary to most of what the bosses' press would have us believe, not all students have become apathetic, spaced-out, or selfish, and that some are actively fighting against the restoration of ROTC.

To these students I wish strength, good luck,, courage, numbers, determination, and success. Non illegitemii carborundum!

As for myself, I would like to say something to the ruling-class members of the Board of Trustees, as a partly employed white-collar worker in the midst of the second great depression of the century: one of these days, all of us workers will get together, white-collar and bluecollar, male and female, U.S.-born and foreignborn, black, white, brown, yellow, and red, and we will smash you, your lousy corrupt government, and your stinking war machine too!

Washington, D. C.

Conservators

TO THE EDITOR:

I was delighted to read your article on energy conservation in building design being done by J. R. Cox '62, in the February issue.

Of course energy conservation is the topic of the day, and I am very excited to learn the early and positive involvement by another Dartmouth man in this area.

Your article says that he has been commissioned to design the first solar heated and cooled post office in the country. I am pleased to report that I have the honor of being the project architect for the first energy conservation federal building in the country. The building to which I refer is the Federal Office Building currently under construction in Manchester, N.H. As a partner in the firm of Isaak and Isaak, Architects, of Manchester, I have been associated with this milestone project since late 1972. The major thrust of this building is to demonstrate various ways by which effective energy conservation can be achieved through use of commonly and currently available construction materials and techniques. As a supplemental feature, we, too, are incorporating a solar energy system for heating and cooling. Based on my own experience and expertise, I concur wholeheartedly with the last two paragraphs of your article when Mr. Cox is quoted as saying that the principles of energy conservation are far from new; that the regional cultural character may be enhanced by varying response to the varying climatic conditions and that "the real issue of energy conservation design ... is a consciousness to respond."

My report would not be complete without mentioning other Dartmouth men who are involved in the Manchester project. They are: Kenneth Kimball '4l whose engineering firm, represented by George Spinney '47, is responsible for mechanical and electrical systems; and Dick Dudley '53 who, until he left the design team to form his own architectural firm in Concord, N.H., was the project architect during the first few months of this project.

Pittsfleld, N. H.

Love Affair

TO THE EDITOR:

After reading "The Great Rip-off - What To Do About It" in the February issue of the ALUMNI MAGAZINE, I am unable to resist the urge to add my reflections on this topic. While the suggestions or ways to curb inflation were admirable, the fact remains that it will not be stopped because everyone likes inflation. No one is really interested in curbing inflation, because until the real blow-off comes, they like the benefits (illusionary) that they receive.

Read all the pronouncements on the subject. The basic theme is reduce the inflation I pay, but not the inflation I receive. Not one leader offered any suggestion on what his constituents should do to hold down inflation. It was always the other guys who are causing the problem.

The individual was (I have to use the past tense) delighted with his increased stock value, higher dividends or pay, the increase in the value of his house or condominium, but distressed at the high cost of food, services and fuel.

Listen to the labor leaders clamor for an increase in the minimum wage - to catch up - better unemployment insurance, and the multitude of fringe benefits. And listen to their chagrin at corporate profits - all windfalls.

Or the industrialist, who coveted his option plan, pension plan but bemoaned labor unproductivity, pointing with pride to the increased sales of his company, the highest in its history (with inflated dollars) and the increased earnings per share.

And our political leaders who cannot delay a 5 per cent increase six months, think their salaries should be raised and by no means hold Social Security payments down - that could cost votes. They have sheared the public lamb out of billions, but are busy trying to close tax loop holes they created.

They all love, we all love inflation. Get rid of it. Ridiculous.

Woodbury, Conn.

Unretired

TO THE EDITOR:

From an excellent source, we were recently informed that your statement regarding President Emeritus Dickey leaving his post as Bicentennial Professor is not quite correct. Our excellent source was, of course, President Dickey himself who was in Toronto to appear at the Law School panel on Canadian nationalism. The night before, he was kind enough to come down to our alumni meeting and give us a preview of what he was going to say. Subsequently, I was fortunate enough to have some free time to go and hear his presentation at the panel session.

So, I hope the news which has traveled to Toronto will filter back to Hanover quickly so that more of our students could benefit from his instruction in his seminar on Canadian-U. S. relations. Incidentally, I hope that President Dickey will review more books as I really enjoyed reading his comments.

Toronto, Ontario

(In the January "Reviews" department we indicated that President Dickey had retired asBicentennial Professor of Public Affairs, whichhe obviously has not done. Ed.)

En Passant

TO THE EDITOR:

The article on Chess Master Danny Kopec '75 was long overdue.

The unsung efforts of Danny and the rest of the Chess Club over the past few years to strengthen the Dartmouth Chess Team resulted in a spectacular tie for fourth place out of 89 teams in the recent Intercollegiate Chess Championship at Louisville. This is comparable to having the Dartmouth football or basketball team ranked among the top five colleges in the country. Indeed, having Danny on our chess team is like having a Heisman trophy candidate on our football team.

I hope that in the future the ALUMNIMAGAZINE will periodically cover the activities of the Dartmouth Chess Team, especially since no other Dartmouth team has received such high national ranking in recent years.

Hanover, N. H.

Five Years Ago

TO THE EDITOR:

Five years ago, Dartmouth — as it had been for two centuries of proud existence — was a college for men. with its roots in the traditions of colonial New England. They were good roots, anchored in the crevices of the granite of New Hampshire. They were proud traditions, handed from Eleazar Wheelock to Daniel Webster to William Jewett Tucker to Ernest Martin Hopkins.

Coeducation was not one of them. Coeducation was promoted by an activist fringe of the faculty who browbeat a supine Board of Trustees into the most reckless decision in the history of the institution, at a moment when elementary common sense would have dictated caution - plus careful study of how the experiment was working at comparable institutions. No one can yet foresee the final effects of this imprudent and impetuous action, since only corners of Pandora's box have yet been opened.

"Year-round operation" which was advertised as the panacea which would allow coeducation at no extra cost to the College has already proved a disaster - it has impaired the unity of entering classes, created an uproar in housing, and disrupted an orderly faculty-student relationship. A dull permissiveness has appeared on campus, along with a growing lack of respect for fastidiousness.

Five years ago we had an ROTC program, under fire to be sure, but operating. Never in American history has there been a greater need for officers supplementing those of our service schools. Responsive to which Dartmouth alumni have been treated to a series of unintelligibly administration reports, showing a rate of progress which could scarcely be expected to return ROTC to the Dartmouth campus before the end of the century.

Five years ago we were proud to have an Indian symbol, emblematic of the remote past of the Upper Valley, and of the qualities of courage and fair play and love of the North Country, intangibles that for generations have brought boys from far afield to the privileges of attending Dartmouth. Responsive to the notion that "the whining minority is always right," the administration, through misrepresentation and worse, has attempted to tomahawk our Indian symbol. Anyone reading the last two paragraphs of the tardy Trustees' contribution to the subject (see the December ALUMNI MAGAZINE) cannot fail to wonder what kind of invertebrate is today chosen for membership in that body.

Five years ago, the President of Dartmouth College had not attempted to jettison "Men of Dartmouth," perhaps the most inspiring college anthem in America.

Five years ago an alumnus of Dartmouth was welcome' to enter Baker Library, to browse among the books, and even to borrow one. Today, the cost of that privilege has been set at $100 per alumnus per annum.

Five years ago, the target of the alumni fund was two and a half million dollars, with an apologetic reference to the fifty-three million just contributed to the Bicentennial. Today the moguls of finance and misappropriation are calling for four million dollars for 1975, in order among other things to support an arrogant, non-Dartmouth managerial team, supported by an inflated administrative staff, whose principal tool appears to be a megaphone entreating "Give, Give, Give!"

For over half a century - for fifty-three consecutive years - I have contributed to successive Alumni Funds. It is with sadness that I conclude that there will be no further contribution .from me, until the Wigwam is purged of the present management.

Wah Hoo Wah for Dartmouth.

Gainesville, Fla.

The Symbol (cont.)

TO THE EDITOR:

Perhaps some of the Dartmouth alumni feel that the furor over the use of the Indian symbol for our college is a parochial tempest-in-a-teapot. Certain styles or crazes which become endemic in college communities have a tendency to become epidemic throughout the academic world. Goldfish swallowing, long hair, and panty raids are examples which come to mind.

That the "shame of the symbol" is now aucourant, the following may be of interest.

EDITOR, NOTRE DAME ALUMNI JOURNAL:

Why are the teams of our alma mater called "The Fighting Irish"? By what right may people call the Poles, the blacks, the Swedes, the Italians and others "Irish"? It's an insult to the memory of Brian Boru! And to allow a painted clown to represent a leprechaun before the crowds at the Orange Bowl was an insult to our beloved folklore. Ireland may be a small country, but there are those who love it.

I am keeping my eyes open for the inevitable spread of this new phobia, and am particularly interested in the protests of the sensitive Cavaliers of Virginia, the touchy Crusaders of Holy Cross and the thin-skinned Cowboys of Oklahoma State. They, too, are in a minority at their schools, and must feel they are being caricatured and ridiculed - even though thousands of alumni from these schools proudly boast of their identification with their college symbol.

Sarasota, Fla.