Letters to the Editor

Calling 'Em

TO THE EDITOR:

I read with pleasure your recent article on Professor William E. Slesnick.

I took Math 3 from him in 1962 and enjoyed it immensely. He is a marvelous teacher.

Among the many anecdotes that you tell about Professor Slesnick, you omitted a classic one that I remember quite well. After returning the first hour exam, he was trying to convey to the class that he did not want students trying to get an extra one or two points for partial credit on a missed problem. He said that if a problem is missed, then really no credit should be given, but that it was only out of the generosity of his heart that any partial credit at all was given. In order to further emphasize his point, he told the following story: It seems that three umpires were discussing baseball. The first umpire said, "Some of them are balls and some of them are strikes, and I call them as I see them." The second umpire said, "Some of them are balls and some of them are strikes, and I call them as they are." The third umpire said, "Some of them are balls and some of them are strikes, but they ain't nothin' til I call them!"

Dayton, Ohio

The Sexes

TO THE EDITOR:

We think the admissions policy set by the Board of Trustees is unfair. We assume a woman applying to Dartmouth has to spend as much, take as many tests, and write as good an essay as a male applicant does. The difference is that she has less chance than the male of being admitted.

We love the College and will not play "therefore no contribution." However, we hope the Board of Trustees will reconsider this policy so that Dartmouth can resume its role of responsible and just leadership.

SUE TAVELA

Takoma Park, Md.

TO THE EDITOR:

I strongly object to the tone of Carole Berger's argument in Vox [March issue]. In it she seems to be saying that everyone who disagrees with equal access immediately, does so on a sexist basis. Not one word is mentioned about the fact that instant equal access might be detrimental to the College. I can't prove that it would be, but neither can Ms. Berger prove that it would not. Hence, I think the solution arrived at is an entirely reasonable one.

Ms. Berger's arguments about the disadvantages of the decision are weak. I find it hard to believe that the applicant pool could drop so disastrously as to endanger the quality of students accepted when the ratio of applications to acceptances now runs eight or nine to one. Similarly, if a woman applies to Dartmouth, she does so on the basis of the quality of the school not how tough it is to get in.

The concept of equal access is, and has always been, a myth. Dartmouth has never admitted applicants solely on the basis of personal and academic qualifications. The College strives for a certain balance of applicants in each class; hence a Minnesotan may be more equal than a Westchesterite or a Bostonian.

I used to blame Dartmouth for what I considered to be the heinous crime of perverting the social attitudes of its graduates. That was a naive belief; Dartmouth is no more responsible for the social attitudes of men and for the disastrous effect of those attitudes on women than society in general. What has taken a lifetime to shape cannot be overturned in four short years. The last all-male class (mine) has long since departed Hanover and incredible sexist attitudes continue to exist. Whether the ratio is 3:1 or 1:1 (which it eventually will be) is not likely to change that fact.

Jacksonville, Fla.

TO THE EDITOR:

The lady who drew the bar graph on page 23 of the March issue, which just arrived in April, anticipates that Dartmouth at some future date will be an all-girls college. The bar graph for the year 1997-98 indicates 1,778 men and 2,222 women at the College.

Scarsdale, N. Y.

(And the caption to the graph states that this isan "unlikely potential." Ed.)

TO THE EDITOR:

I write as an unabashed and unreconstructed "anti" on the coeducation issue. In short, to me, the less coeducation at Dartmouth, the better.

I write, further, to make several observations on Carole Berger's "Vox."

First, I want to thank Ms. Berger for holding out the small hope that coeducation might one day pass from the Hanover plain. That qualified women might choose, for whatever reason, not to apply and matriculate at Dartmouth is my fond hope, and she has presented a rationale under which this might come to pass.

Second, I would disagree with Ms. Berger's contention that Dartmouth's future belongs "to us," apparently meaning those who are there now, as she wrote. It would seem to me that Dartmouth does not belong to anyone - alumnus, student, faculty, administration, or Trustee - in the sense that she suggests. Dartmouth is bigger than all and lives its life in a larger dimension than that of being "owned" by any constituency at a particular point in time.

Finally, I really wonder if Ms. Berger would be well advised to stay at Dartmouth. Her peevish "Vox" article shows us a very unhappy person - a person who might be happier elsewhere. Further, she denigrates Dartmouth's spirit of "fraternity." Webster defines fraternity as brotherhood. I don't know what Ms. Berger's value system is, but I would suggest that brotherhood is a quality that most alumni - "pro" or "anti" on coeducation - students. faculty, administrators, and Trustees would like to see thrive and grow at Dartmouth.

Milwaukee, Wis.

Anybody Out There?

TO THE EDITOR:

Receiving the March issue with its article on alumni artists was a real pleasure. As an artist myself, I find it comforting to know that others share this malady. Are there others of us out there? At the last alumni meeting I went to (in Spokane), the only person there who wasn't a doctor happened to be a bank president.

Espanola, Wash.

(The 1976 Alumni Directory lists 318 in thecreative arts, 3,620 in medicine. Ed.)

TM

TO THE EDITOR:

Re: Transcendental Meditation [February issue]. Let's start out pragmatically:

1) Who can knock peace and moderate blood pressure? But we also need deliverance from a host of other ills, including deception or quackery. TM advocates normally don't tell you about Dr. Benson's further studies. After more tests, the learned Doctor tells us that no one needs a specially learned "mantra" to gain those physiological niceties. They can "just as well" be gained by repeating the number "one."

Thud! There goes the non-theology of the non-religion. You don't need the "meaningless but specially revealed mantra" from a special representative (priest) of the yogi.

2) Secondly, TM tells you belief makes no difference so long as you act as they tell you. The actions shut off your judgmental faculties. Believe anything you want - so long as you gain your peace by ignoring the persons, objects, or situations around you. How different to what the God who is tells us, "There is no peace to the wicked." By the way, did you hear of the new branch of TM? It's called the M.M.A. - the Mafia Meditators Association.

3) Then let's think of the situation and assumptions that stand behind TM.

TM advocates, quoting the more recent sayings of the "Divine Leader," tell us that it is no religion. Yet the Maharishi also writes TM is a "path to God" and "a most powerful form of prayer." He also writes that "whenever and wherever religion dominates the mass consciousness, transcendental deep meditation should be taught in forms of religion." Since TM well knows America's separation of church and state, however, TM is officially not a religion - "For the present ... (TM) should be made available through the agencies of government." How can they switch back and forth like this?

Oriental Monism, of which TM is a direct descendant and reflection, teaches that all real existence is one and the same. Differences, contradictions, good and evil, God and the devil, you and I, and being or non-being are all illusions. Strip away illusion (i.e., stop thinking or believing) and you, too, can be like the American Hindu, Bubba Free John, who writes of himself, "I am reality, the nature and support of all things and all Beings. I am the Being known as God, Brahamm, the Atman, the One Mind the Self." He also writes, "There is absolutely only one Condition and that is not other than your own consciousness." But scorn of morality with its requisite of distinction between subject and object is also seen in John. He writes of gurus, "He is a seducer, madman, hoax, a libertine, a fool, moralist ... child, and an old one, an ascetic, a God." A TM advocate, though not as blunt, implies the same when he writes, "TM is an effortless technique which allows the mind to experience ... the finest state of thought and transcends it ... the field of pure intelligence, not of intellectual analysis." There are no lies to Maharishi, no opportunism no belief. Just ... your wiped out mind and conscience at peace.

Detroit, Mich.

Below Decks

TO THE EDITOR:

That USS Topeka story in the April issue marking the 60th of those happy days back in 1917 was a humdinger, a veritable "Era of Good Feelings" coming just 100 years after its namesake of 1817. Never before or since have so many Dartmouth men lived together on the briny deep, and how strange it was with all those other shipmates from so many colleges that not one man identified himself with Harvard! Yale representation showed up among the officers only.

Portland, Ore.

Pancho's Uncle

TO THE EDITOR:

Regarding your March cover photo, I maybe a long way from home, down here in Mexico City, but I still remember what Vermont looks like in late March. If that's late March in Tunbridge, then I am Pancho Villa's uncle. It looks more like late afternoon on a rainy day in August.

Mexico City, Mexico

Corrupted Language

TO THE EDITOR:

Roger Sweeney's letter in the April ALUMNI MAGAZINE points out the role of the knowledge industry in corrupting English. As many recent books and magazine articles are pointing out, the corruption extends deeply into the mass media as well. But schools are as guilty as anybody of the sins of dullness, jargon, and long and tangled sentences. What else could have produced and maintained the reputation of, say, a Henry James but schools?

A case may be made to prove that many academic departments are purely artificial creations which do not distribute real knowledge at all, but simply tell us what we already knew in words we cannot understand. I am particularly skeptical of the newly invented departments, like psychology and sociology, which are constantly inventing new terms when old ones would have done the job. When I hear a term like "cognitive dissonance" (which seems to mean one's realizing that he is B.S.ing), I get the uneasy feeling that it is a term invented to fill a vacuum, to give students something to think they have learned something so they won't go home thinking they wasted their $7,000 per year. High-class and middle-class America controls the schools and hence controls what is acceptable in language. When it tries to sooth guilty conscience and recruit minorities, their tenure depends not so much on learning White Man's English as on learning academese. These two get closer together every day.

Any industry which has as its business controlling the ways in which people think will of necessity control language. Schools, the government, and the military are all alike in this way. (It is good to read in Michael Smith's letter that he feels he may have made some progress against the Navy in this area.) The Navy currently refers to one of the (apparently) more exciting jobs it advertises in Post Office displays as "Constructionman." Air Force magazines use terms like "Rotary wing assault and personnel retrieval system." One wonders if servicemen have time or skill sufficient to get that mouthful out in battle situations.

I do not think there is any good reason to be surprised about Johnny or Jill in college or in the service not being able to write or read, since there are many forces at work in each place, upsetting the previously accepted principles of language. This is, after all, what we pay them to do, even though we may call the process by another name.

Hanover, N.H.

Stimulated

TO THE EDITOR:

A note to say how very stimulated I was by Charlie Widmayer's evocative piece on Ernest Martin Hopkins and the benefactors of the Baker Library [April issue]. What a delight it will be to read Charlie's entire book when it is published shortly!

Champaign, Ill.

Gracious Definition

TO THE EDITOR:

The essay by Robert J. Zovlonsky '58 [February issue] was a luminous piece indeed. I would hope in fact that you might forward this note to him so that I may somehow personally thank him for expressing what many, many Dartmouth men have shared with me.

Mr. Zovlonsky says that he had a quarter-slice of Dartmouth, and I know the feeling. Many of us who spent four full years in Hanover knew the richness of the College only after we had left, just as John Knowles movingly recalled his boyhood in A Separate Peace.

I have saved Robert Zovlonsky's essay, for it captures for me superbly many of my own feelings - diploma or no diploma - about the Hanover interval. I wish him well and assure him of his security within the Dartmouth fellowship as he has so graciously defined it.

Houston, Texas

Dog Story

TO THE EDITOR:

The just-arrived copy of the April issue shows - on page 35 - Edward H. Tuck "doffing his hat to a pair of Pekingese." For more than ten years we have had that breed of dog in our home and have always considered them to be JapaneseSpaniels.

New Hope, Pa.

Mr. Thayer

TO THE EDITOR:

It is a small point and too late to do anything about it in the book (Hopkins of Dartmouth, excerpted in the April issue), but as one of several descendants of H. B. Thayer, 1879, to attend Dartmouth, I must point out beyond all denial and on the evidence of his immediate family, that his name was Harry, not Henry. He was named after a Harry Bates, honored in the Thayer family, and he married Carry Ransom (not Caroline), thus compounding the situation.

New Canaan, Conn.

(Maybe in those formal days, now beyondrecall, it wasn't easy to call the chairman ofAT&T and a Dartmouth Trustee "Harry." Ed.)

The Good and the Bad

TO THE EDITOR:

This response will confine itself only to the two final paragraphs of Robert Workum's letter in the April issue. Basically, Robert objects to the fact that the ALUMNI MAGAZINE and the class notes edit out all of the "bad" news and edit in only the "good" news. He wants to hear more about the guys (and I guess gals, too), who have been fired, are in jail, are alcoholics, etc.

This nonsense brings back fond memories to me. In the early forties, Os Skinner, our perennial Class Secretary, also wrote our newsletter, the Campaigner. One day an issue appeared in which a classmate, who was a syndicated columnist, complained that since the letter only printed good news, it was only worth a buck. If, however, it began to print some bad news, he would increase his contribution.

The whole idea seemed stupid to me - and I was further annoyed by his childish form of blackmail. So I wrote Os a reply in my finest doggerel. Now, after 35 years, the doggerel fits Robert's case so well, I think that it's worth a reprint.

Joe Fortesque* syndicates and probably vindicates

His views on most of the world's ills, And he says it's "human" to do some exhuming Of valleys as well as the hills.

He especially thinks the Campaigner stinks. When the rest of us think it is elegant Because it's his pinnacle to be very cynical Or is he just being smart-alekant?

But the sad implication for a man of his station, Who ought to know better by now, Is that it's his due to get back from you Full value for one buck - and how!

The rest of us suckers and other one-buckers (Or so he would have us believe) Are just dilatory - or blinded by glory - And don't get full value received.

Well, he's either dead right or especially tight And I'll place my bet on the latter.

That's not mincing words but it's what he prefers, And that is the truth of the matter.

*Name changed

The sequel to this story is that a few newsletters after my doggerel was printed, Os joined the Navy and asked me to take over the newsletter job temporarily. Of course, I still have it.

Morristown, N.J.

TO THE EDITOR:

Alumnus Robert Workum has written a letter appearing in the April ALUMNI MAGAZINE that cries out for comment.

Of his two main gripes about the magazine, I will deal with the lesser first. He deplores the fact that the more happy circumstances of alumni lives are duly reported, while bankruptcies, failures, philandering, psychoses, divorces, etc. are filtered out. His ostensible reason for requesting this data is that he feels that through personal experience with some of the "bad" things he has noted beneficial effects on his personal growth and happiness. He does not make a convincing case that reading about the miseries of others will help them or him in any way. He can always subscribe to the National Enquirer if he supports candor, or total disclosure, as a worthy journalistic priority.

The more serious of his misconceptions is his dismissal of some of the controversial issues being heard in the "Letters" section as "extraordinarily inconsequential" and indicative of the "narrowmindedness" of the writers.

Mr. Workum's vision of the forest is clouded by the individual trees. While none of the "issues" in itself may be of crucial importance, taken together they are concerned with a greater malaise which afflicts the College community, and indeed, the whole country. It would not be an overstatement to say that the basic concepts engendering these various challenges threaten the survival of the College and civilization as we know it. It probably won't, but could, occur within his lifetime. This, to me, is of substantial consequence.

Norwalk, Calif.

Recollections

TO THE EDITOR

It is interesting to read the letters of Ben Hardman '31 in the ALUMNI MAGAZINE. I remember him as a very attractive student in my chemistry class in the thirties. I don't remember what grade he made, but it was a pleasure to have this Yankton Sioux listening so attentively to me.

But the clearest remembrance I have of him was one day when my neighbor, Roy Porter '15, and I were skiing in the open fields east of the Lyme Road. We were near the cross-country ski route and in a gully where the ski trail came down a short but steep hill. Suddenly appeared a skier at the top of the hill. Apparently, he did not realize the steep trail before him and he took a horrendous spill to the bottom. I don't think it was a varsity race and I soon recognized the skier as Ben Hardman. I was sure he was injured, but before I could come to his aid, he picked himself up and went wearily along his way. I never saw any other skiers and wondered later if any of them would fall on the same hill. Apparently, Ben was not a good skier, but he had courage.

South Windham, Maine

(Mr. Hardman has written letters in support ofDartmouth's Indian symbol. Ed.)

The Symbol (cont.)

TO THE EDITOR:

When Dartmouth decided to become a coeducational institution, I did not personally approve, but, realizing I would be only one "voice crying in the wilderness," I refrained from comment.

Then came the now famous Indian symbol hassle for which, frankly, I have not up to present writing seen an explanation that I felt held water, so to speak.

Now, the Daily D informs me that the Dartmouth Glee Club will no longer include our beloved "Eleazar Wheelock" in its programs, nor will it appear in their new album.

As newsletter editor of 1924 for almost 23 years, I can honestly say that I feel that I have my hand on the pulse of the class to some degree and know how a great number of them feel and how they believe older alumni such as we are have been neglected when many of these decisions have been made.

Incidentally, what ever became of that old phrase "Lest the old traditions fail"?

In these times of strife, it would seem only sound business sense to consider these "old codgers" and some of their perhaps weird opinions. After all, we would be in tough financial shape without many of them.

For myself, my memories and my great love for Dartmouth and all she once stood for will compel me to support her to the extent of my ability and resources. However, I do sometimes wonder where we went wrong. Maybe we haven't; let's hope for the best.

Wellesley Hills, Mass.

TO THE EDITOR:

Isn't it about time that Dartmouth dealt sensibly with the question of the Indian symbol?

Dartmouth's present treatment of that symbol continues to alienate both old and not-so-old alumni. It also makes the College appear sophomoric and naively sentimental to anthropologists and cultural historians.

Peter Farb, in his book Man's Rise toCivilisation As Shown by the Indians of NorthAmerica, after a long and detailed recital of the horrible treatment of the Indians by the white settlers, states: "In the story of the American Indian, there is much room for compassion and charity, but the Indian experience is not unique. It has been repeated endlessly wherever one people conquered another. It was already an old story in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia, among the Hebrews and the Canaanites and the Philistines. In modern times, it has been reenacted almost wherever Eurasian colonialism penetrated. Nor has the story ended, for even today the Japanese are still faced with the problem of what to do with their native people, the disappearing Ainu, the Indonesian leaders are trying to Indonesianize their Dyaks, and the Filipinos, Filipinize their Negritos."

Undoubtedly Dartmouth's treatment of Indians, dispite the goals of its founder, has not always been exemplary; and undoubtedly the Indian symbol can be construed to imply a condescending attitude to Indians, but Dartmouth has also many plusses in its treatment of Indians and other minorities. It did educate and continues to educate Indians. It continues to promote the study of Indian art and culture. It does follow in the Indian tradition of love of nature and preservation of basic ecology. J. C. Furnas, in his book The Americans, states that Dartmouth, Oberlin and Western Reserve were the first colleges in America to admit Negroes. Thus Dartmouth's concern for minorities is not merely a contemporary enthusiasm but is founded on an excellent and long track record.

If the Indian symbol is properly used and not demeaningly caricatured, no reasonable person will condemn Dartmouth for using it as a reminder of Eleazar Wheelock's missionary zeal; whereas the pine tree symbol could easily become associated with saps and pitchmen.

Troy, N.Y.

TO THE EDITOR:

Reluctant as I am to perpetuate the new "The Symbol (cont.)" tradition in the ALUMNI MAGAZINE, I thought that the enclosed clipping from the March 1977 issue of Wassaja would be of interest to those of your correspondents who take such pleasure in citing the precedents of Miami University.

The situation there ("Indian" symbol and no Indians) is all too recollective of much of Dartmouth's past and strikes me as not uncoincidental. Unlike her sister institution in Ohio, Dartmouth College seems to prefer real Indians to make-believe ones. And that's pretty "symbolic" in itself!

Hanover, N.H.

(Michael Dorris is chairman of the NativeAmerican Studies Program at Dartmouth.

The report from Oxford, Ohio: "THISUNIVERSITY IS LOOKING FOR INDIANS.

"'We've been looking for an Indian for threeyears and we're still looking,' said an official ofthe Admissions Department, Miami Universityat Oxford, Ohio.

"The statement came as a result of the university's failure to receive Indian applications foradmission.

"The University initiated a program threeyears ago, offering a full academic scholarshipto 'one or more' Indians willing to come toschool at Oxford. The program is called an'American Heritage Scholarship,' and offersstudents studies in the program of their choice.

"However, not one Indian has taken Miamiup on the scholarship offer, according to university officials' reports.

"'If you or any of your friends know of anyIndians, let us know,' was the plea." Ed.)

The ALUMNI MAGAZINE welcomes comment from its readers. For publication, letters should be signed and addressed specifically to the Magazine (not copies of communications to other organizations or individuals). Letters exceeding 400 words in length will be condensed by the editors.