Letters to the Editor

The Right Stuff

Reading Leonard Glass's "explanation" of the Dartmouth experience in terms of the ingrained platitudes of his profession ["The Dartmouth Animal and the Hypermasculine Myth," September issue] reminded me of Freud's The Future of an Illusion. Just as Freud erred in thinking that the ability to explain religion in terms of one's unconscious sex life somehow proved religion to be false, Glass's hypothesized cult of "hypermasculinity," even if partly true, is far from being a full account of even those elements of the "Dartmouth spirit" which he attributes to it.

What does Glass's theory really add to simple, common-sense notions? Sure, Dartmouth alumni are competitive. They had to be to get accepted at a place whose avowed purpose is to make them "positive contributors" and where they are then bathed in the merit-badge view of life by the likes of Professor Slesnick. But what does it add to our understanding of this trait, or even our potential for overcoming it, to call it "competitive posturing and hero worship . . . another direct outgrowth of hypermasculinity"? Why is the shallow View of women that many alumni admittedly have not fully accounted for by their lack of contact with women during their college years, without resort to some pervasive unconscious neurosis?

Aside from the disgruntled few, most male alumni take delight in hearing about winning Dartmouth women's teams. These women aren't viewed by them as either madonnas or whores but as "Dartmouth men," i.e., fellow Big Greeners. They've "got the stuff, and that's enough," too, so how could "the stuff' be hypermasculinity? In fact, it has been my observation that most of those reputedly "male" traits - outdoors robustness, close fellowship, a certain "toughness" in terms of physical health and emotional redoundability, "sporadic reckless acts of dubious wisdom," and even, unfortunately, hard drinking - still characterize the coeducational Dartmouth.

Half of my Dartmouth experience was allmale. I have no recollection of anxiety over being (or being thought) homosexual. I do recall coming from a (coed) high school where I was thought effeminate for being a violinist to Dartmouth where I Was respected for it. In fact, I would have said toleration of individual oddities was a Dartmouth hallmark. I recall consciously rejecting (for myself) drinking, roadtripping, aggressiveness, and attendance at football games but nonetheless growing to love and identify with Dartmouth deeply, and coming to believe that-there was something undefinable about the Dartmouth spirit. I still believe it - at any rate Dr. Glass has failed to define it.

Lyme, N.H.

I enjoyed reading Leonard Glass's article. It provoked a critical review of my memories of campus life, 1947-1951-1952. First of all, I must admit being a "Dartmouth man"; gungho, gung-ho, gung-ho but unfortunately, as I have learned too late, always a Dartmouth gentleman in the company of women guests.

It would seem to me that the author, alumnus Glass, is way off in two assumptions both his fault. He assumes that our highly valued education at Dartmouth does not equip us to change with our dynamic society. Further, he infers that by being employed by the Harvard Medical School, he can bring a message from Dartmouth. "Knit one, purl two, hello, Harvard, yoo-hoo!" His is obviously an uphill battle!

Our machismo has probably brought much joy to the women who captured Dartmouth graduates. Bridge games and other encounters with women less fortunate have been universally spiced with the mysteries of living with a Dartmouth man. That is, until the birth of a daughter! And suddenly this inconvertible Dartmouth man becomes pliable. His daughter (or daughters) have so much influence over him that he will change his alma mater to accommodate her wishes to "follow in Daddy's footsteps." This is hypermasculine?

On his analysis, he forgets (or has never been exposed to) an ancient technique of society. When you have 3,000 young men on a campus, an army post, a navy base, or a marine camp, leadership emphasizes the competitiveness of masculinity. A permanent relationship with a woman is automatically deferred until success has been achieved or, at least, one has his foot on the first rung of the ladder of life.

The close friendships, the camaraderie, established in our years at Dartmouth endure! They may not be active, but they are real! And the "granite of New Hampshire ..." - that's real, too. We are steadfast (as rock) to our loyalties, to the institution, and to the wonderful memories of growing up in a learning environment.

If Leonard Glass is reluctant to speak to his classmates, I will! Besides, it would be more educational to hear from a graduate of Thayer School of Engineering than from a psychiatrist!

Reading, Mass.

Thanks for Dr. Glass's article on the hypermasculine ethos of Dartmouth in the sixties. The article was certainly controversial, and I'm betting it will be roundly damned. Part of the reaction will stem from the article's doctrinaire tone - it's tempting to smell fish when a psychological system sounds either too comprehensive or too pat.

But that's not to say that Dr. Glass doesn't have a real point. In fact, I think that the hypermasculine ethos of mid-sixties Dartmouth had an ironic and sometimes tragic offspring. I'm talking about a strongly anti-intellectual groupethic that made it very difficult for individuals to answer basic questions about what they were doing at Dartmouth in the first place or to profit from the genuine opportunities the College provided.

One of my memories recalls a warm spring night in 1966. One of Dartmouth's periodic fits of spring fever had driven several hundred of us out of the dorms and onto the Green, many armed with water balloons. As I was crossing the Green, two burly guys loomed out of the darkness, carrying a bucket. "There's Hatch get him he's the guy who always, talks up in class!" Get him they did, first with several gallons of water, then with a couple of rapidly thrown punches. The class in question was a course in intellectual history.

What had happened? Why had it happened? I had apparently broken a behavioral norm I hadn't realized existed. It had always seemed that the point of a professor's questions was to elicit participation and discussion. Why was responding a serious social offense?

Of course, grades - decent or even very good grades - were desirable. Provided you didn't work for them, or weren't seen to be working for them. But while grades were okay, intellectual zest and participation in mental challenges were signs of weakness, of antisocial behavior, of weenie-ism, or worse. Strange, in a college with some of the toughest standards in the land.

I'm not blaming Dartmouth as a formal institution for letting this kind of superficiality and glibness succeed. The individual remains responsible for his own values and his own choices. Nonetheless, the psycho-sexual climate at Dartmouth made it hard to find out who or what one was. I know I wanted to belong - and never really did. I loathed myself for that failure, while I also loathed myself for the dishonesty, the masquerade, and the betrayal of my mind and my profs - whom I respected - that trying to belong entailed.

This letter seems to have shifted directions. Instead of suggesting an extension of Dr. Glass's theory of hypermasculinity at Dartmouth, it's become a case history for him to use, an example of how the hypermasculine myth interfered with one person's ability to mature and find himself.

And you know, despite all that, I still loved the place?

Montgomery, Ohio

Permissiveness

It is with a sense of relief that I welcome the resignation of Dr. Kemeny.

During his administration we have seen overly permissive management, complete disregard for tradition, and the College turn into just another college. He has almost deliberately rejected the advice of the alumni on several issues because a few dissident students caused a row.

I'm very surprised that the Native American Society did not raise hell and demand the William and Mary game be cancelled because they commit the "heinous crime" of calling themselves Indians.

Ralph Sanborn '17 in the March issue and Dan Cotton '35, Joseph Nason '42, Wentworth Blodgett '24, and George Collins '34, all in the September issue, have stated the position I take.

I sincerely hope Dr. Steel will be instrumental in bringing back tradition and sanity in the administration.

North Quincy, Mass.

Dr. Leonard Glass's article, "The Dartmouth Animal and the Hypermasculine Myth," is nicely timed to recent alumni letters referring to the departing administration.

As my college generation is represented among the letter-writers, I can reflect on the same Dartmouth that lingers with them. College organization having been my business, I can also fill in with opinions expressed by college observers from outside.

To the general community of collegewatchers, Dartmouth's rise in national stature is explained by its development of a quality small university which holds on to undergraduate education as its first priority. This is a rare thing to see in higher education today. It didn't happen by accident. On the broad base of liberal education laid down by Ernest Martin Hopkins, John Sloan Dickey and John Kemeny successively built programs of contemporary world concerns and introduced modern methods of inquiry in humanistic as well as scientific fields. The graduate and professional schools were helped to grow without taking over the institution.

These are outcomes of a college administration working at a high level of skill and attention.

Regarding "leadership and character" (from George Collins' letter in the September issue), my thoughts go back to the thirties and a campus essentially unsupervised. We considered that Spud Bray was supervisor enough. A student death in a dormitory beating a few years later led to changes. Dean Laycock's vintage rhetoric aroused us and President Hopkins' addresses impressed us. Still, to us these were distant eminences. The present structure of interchange with College officers is such that students have an access to the College leadership, including trustees, that we would not have dreamed of or indeed sought after.

Whether or not this can be called "permissiveness," I wouldn't know. It is also an invitation to take up one's own responsibility in getting an education.

Not long ago a colleague of mine conducted two days of interviews with Dartmouth's senior administrators including the president. Among 25 campuses visited we found the Dartmouth leadership to be among the three most impressive in its sense of the college purpose and what is needed to serve it well.

If the College can once again attract the same quality of leadership that it has had over three past administrations, I doubt that we need ask for more.

Stony Brook, N. Y.

[Four times a college president. Louis Benezetnow is doing research in educational policy atthe State University of New York at StonyBrook. Ed.]

Small Steps

I rarely read the DARTMOUTH ALUMNI MAGAZINE for one prime reason; it is usually boring and predictable. The stories and format for 1978 could just as well be for 1958.

But recently, in just small steps, the magazine poked its head into the 1980s suddenly women, blacks, different levels of experience all exist and are real in our world, and at the College.

Those other alumni who can't see the "connection" between a cover and inside stories miss the point of the connectedness of all things. Those who clamor for "tradition" while rejecting an expanded view of the College are caught in the belief-system that there is in fact a dichotomy between the two. Abbie Hoffman said recently (referring to himself) that "nostalgia Is a form of degression." It just may be that he was right.

Lagunitas, Calif

As we see it, the purpose of Dartmouth is to encourage open-minded thinking. We were dismayed by the letters in September's issue of the ALUMNI MAGAZINE that display such apparently narrow minds on the part of our brothers in the Dartmouth community.

We find it hard to Understand why so many graduates from a unique liberal arts school are not only afraid of but would actually like to stifle new ideas. As does George N. Collins '34, we too, have "respect for what is valid in the traditions of Dartmouth," but we worry about what he feels needs to be reinstated: the Indian symbol? No women?

Daniel C. Cotton '35 is "troubled by what appears to be the College's pursuit of progress, approval, and contemporary values . . . " but to us learning how to progress within contemporary society is a large part of a liberal arts education. We are sorry that Mr. Cotton believes that contemporary Dartmouth is indifferent "to tradition, past values that mean a great deal to some." But 1980 is not 1492. If we sail past the Azores we will not fall over the edge. . „ .

Too many alumni expressed dissatisfaction with the cover of the May issue (Keokilwe of Botswana). They, maybe, wish "their" magazine to report only class notes and football scores. Although there are few scenes that compare to a clear October morning in Hanover, Dartmouth extends beyond the Green. The number of undergraduates who study abroad, as well as those alumni who have made their homes in countries outside of New Hampshire, prove that in keeping with the best traditions of Eleazar, Dartmouth is settling and learning from new territories.

If James R. Felter '49 feels that one hour spent looking around the Green best defines Dartmouth, perhaps we should stop educating men or women, black, white, red, yellow, gay or straight and hire one person to mow the lawn and to keep the green light burning in Baker Tower.

We, too, are proud of our association with Dartmouth. Because of the traditionally good professors, the accessibility of excellent resources, the consistently high standards, the beautiful natural surroundings as well as because of equal access, marches in front of Parkhurst, Social Alternatives, and other innovative ideas we are able to think and to approach life with a broader understanding. Thanks to "progress" and "contemporary values" we define success beyorid a three-piece suit.

Vienna, Austria

Hanover, N.H.

Physical Prowess

Driving home from the Dartmouth-William and Mary game, I fell to wondering about the future of Big Green athletics.

We alumni of the Tidewater Virginia area have in recent years seen the most hapless basketball team ever to play in Norfolk's Scope Arena; we have winced at the steady decline in the baseball team's talent during the annual spring series with Old Dominion University; and now we have witnessed a grid squad so undermanned that the four or five good players seem of ail-American caliber by comparison.

Granted, viewing three varsity teams affords us only a peek through the keyhole of the whole D.C.A.C. program, but I still have the nagging thought that what we see is symptomatic of the whole show.

Maybe rather than wasting our time fretting over whether the teams are called "Indians" or the Dartmouth "Moose," we should concentrate our concern on raising the standards at least to a competitive level.

Virginia Beach, Va.

[Dartmouth beat Harvard which beat Williamand Mary which beat Rutgers which almostbeat Alabama. . . . Ed.]

As a student at Dartmouth, as a student who has "an interest and affection" for this institution insofar as it teaches me something, I was deeply moved by a letter written by Donald Hagen '41 that appeared in your October issue. Mr. Hagen clearly has a great concern for the College. It is unfortunate that he has tried to solve all of the school's problems in eight paragraphs. 1 wonder whether I could solve even one of these problems in such a brief exposition.

I am not interested in discoursing upon his watershed as a whole, but I would like to comment on what was perhaps the kernel of his discontent that is to say, the rejection of his son, "a 235-pound defensive tackle of considerable proficiency" from the class of 1984. If Mr. Hagen truly loves his Dartmouth, then he should be delighted with his son's rejection. We have too many 235-pound football players here they take up class space.

The major consequence of this "rugged strength and courage," so important to the philosophy of physical education at this institution, is that academic situations in the classroom can be tepid, and out of the classroom virtually insular. Yet, the alumni vehemently insist upon this ideal of physical prowess. Unfortunately, they are even more vociferous in their desire that the school warm their hearts . . . and then kindle the heuristic flame within the students that are enrolled.

The $4,000 bonfire that took place on Harvard weekend was the most obvious example of this pestilence. Yet, there are subtler manifestations: I have just returned from a comparative literature class in which the professor regretfully notified that he couldn't order the film of Thomas Mann's Death inVenice because "Dartmouth has run out of money." Of course it's running out of money. We're burning it.

Mr. Hagen is concerned: "I fear that Dartmouth is no longer the school of my dreams." It's not just your school. It's my school, too - I'm a student here. And I want to see Death inVenice.

Hanover, N.H.

[According to the College treasurer, Dartmouth has not "run out of money." Ed.]

Celebrating Orozco

I was very pleased you printed Jerome Spingarn's response to Anne Frey's letter about the Orozco murals in Baker, because it reminded me how much I wanted to give a rouse for the idea of commemorating Orozco's centenary with a major celebration at Dartmouth.

Jerome may be right, Anne, that the worst thing to do would be to isolate the mural cycle from daily student life. I know I could never keep my nose in my books with the din and clamor of human history unfolding around me; down in the Reserve Room I could only study what I had to the murals.

But that's no reason not to hold a convocation of muralists, painters, historians, and students in Hanover in '83, with presentations and repercussions as worldwide as Jose Clemente Orozco would deserve.

There's a large, active, and varied mural community in the San Francisco Bay area, and I'm now working as a muralist for the San Francisco Art Commission's exemplary C.E.T.A. arts program. Perhaps without those damn fantastic attention-demanding Orozcos I'd be somewhere less exciting today.

So I look forward to the Orozco centennial celebrations! Anne, Jerome, everybody . . . how are we going to get this thing launched?

San Francisco, Calif.

[ln a letter in the June issue, Anne Freysuggested that the site of the Orozco murals bedeclared a museum "not to be shared withother activities." In a subsequent letter, JeromeSpingarn '35 opposed that idea, saying that ifyou see Orozco's statement "without the(Reserve Room) audience, you see the dramawithout the chorus." In October, ProfessorMarysa Navarro of the History Departmentorganized a symposium on the Orozco murals,which included an exhibit of the artist'spreliminary sketches and a lecture by his sonClemente, about which more in a future issue. Ed.]

Ferretti First

In "Student of the Game" in the September issue it is stated that Sue Lasko '81 is "the first woman to earn a letter in varsity football at Dartmouth." With all due respect to Sue, she is not the first woman to earn a varsity football letter. That honor belongs to my good friend and classmate Donna M. Ferretti '73, who earned her letter by being team manager during the 1972 championship season. A number of years ago this was recognized in a football program article "1000 + 1" which enumerated all Dartmouth varsity football letter recipients. Donna was the "+ 1."

I congratulate Sue on her multiple-year involvement with Dartmouth football and the fine job she is doing, but Donna should not be deprived of recognition for her hard-earned "first."

San Mateo, Calif.

Beating the Computer

The October article on the Grid-Graph brought back grand memories. The drawing on page 48 gives a good idea of what the gadget looked like, but two additional items should be mentioned. Yards-to-go were indicated by a row of 20 lights just above the grid, ten for each team. As the ball carrier gained yardage, the lights were shut off one by one, slowly or quickly according to the operator's whim, and the spectators responded with cheers or groans depending on which side had the ball. Just above these lights were those indicating the score. On Dartmouth's side and on the opponent's side were lights labeled 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, and 32. A score of 13 was indicated by the lights 1, 4, and 8 being on continuously. This anticipated the computer's binary number system by 20 years.

Santa Fe, N.M.

Arabs, Too

The May 1980 ALUMNI MAGAZINE carried a thoughtful article about Professor Hoyt Alverson's study of how the Tswana of South Africa have coped with the "experience of colonial domination for more than a century." Ironically, the same issue featured a second article ("In Another Country," by Beth Baron '80), which reflected a blatant insensitivity to the ' experience of Palestinian Arabs under settler (Israeli) domination. Baron's article was in sharp contrast to the concern shown by the magazine for the Tswana and for Native Americans.

Baron's article is not only offensive to the Palestinian people and Dartmouth alumni of Arab heritage, but it is disturbing to many Jewish alumni such as myself who oppose Israel's Zionist policies.

Baron interviewed in Israel several Dartmouth alumni who, as Zionists, have moved to and found fulfillment in Israel. Unfortunately, the very creation of Israel and her policies since 1948 have meant misery and often exile for three million Palestinian Arabs. Baron's article is replete with quotes from the alumni which represent the very prejudiced mentality which we deplore as "racist" when voiced by whites towards blacks or Native Americans, or nonJews towards Jews. It does no good to recognize as evil the way our ancestors drove Native Americans from their lands and then - in the last quarter of the 20th century! - to show insensitivity to (and underwrite by over two billion dollars a year) Israeli policies which drive another indigenous people from its land.

Given Israel's record of destroying scores of Palestinian villages since 1948, confiscating Palestinian lands both inside Israel and in the occupied lands, and barring over one million Palestinian refugees from their homeland, such statements as"I want to help rebuild the country and redeem the land" and "I have made [by living in Israel] the most important contribution that a Jew can make to Judaism" do not reflect Jewish prophetic values or the Jewish commitment to social justice.

The double standards Americans and others hold in judging their countries' actions should hopefully be overcome by a good liberal arts education. Unfortunately, Baron's respondents refer to Palestinian "terrorists" but would hardly recognize that Israel herself commits terrorist acts which are, first, much more devastating than Palestinian terrorism and, second, the root cause of the conflict. Palestinians are defending themselves (just as did the Native American, despite the Hollywood image of the peaceful white settler) against a settler regime which is denying Palestinians "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Waltham, Mass.

Beth Baron replies: In his impatience with Zionism, Mr. Hanauer seems to have missed the point of the article, which was about the reasons political, religious, and "secular"

why a dozen or so Dartmouth alumni have chosen to live permanently in another country: Israel. In the discussion of the Palestinian problem (perhaps 300 words in a 3,000-word article), two of the alumni favored opening negotiations with the Palestinian Arabs, which is hardly an endorsement of "Zionist policies" and which does not seem to reflect "blatant insensitivity" to the Arabs.

The Symbol, etc.

My condolences to L. Carl Pedersen '73 for the pain he is experiencing as a Dartmouth alumnus [letter, September issue]. His flippant reference to what he regards as the new trustee's preoccupation, with Indian cheers betrays a shallow perception of the issue of the abandonment of the Indian symbol, and demands comment. This is only one of many of Dr. Steel's concerns about the College.

"Indian cheers" is only, a minor offshoot of the deep and ancient involvement of Dartmouth and the Indian. Eleazar Wheelock's charter from the king of England to set up a school for Indians is a historical fact that cannot be ignored or tossed down the memory hole. We are told that the reason the Indian symbol had to go was that it was demeaning to an entire ethnic group, although I have seen no evidence that Indians were consulted and found to be offended and some evidence to the contrary (Miami of Ohio and their Indian symbol). As an undergrad and as an alumnus, the symbol has always meant to me rugged individualism, courage, strength, resourcefulness, and oozing with machismo certainly respected if not saintly virtues (perhaps also congenial to the hypermasculine Dartmouth image discussed by Dr. Leonard Glass in his article in the September issue.)

The readiness to see any symbol or caricature of a minority group in the pejorative is a common liberal condescension toward such groups. I don't buy it, and I suspect thousands of other alumni don't buy it.

I am pleased that Dr. Steel can now represent my views on the Board of Trustees, and I hope that perhaps in the not-too-distant future the decline of old and revered traditions, and Dartmouth College itself, might be checked and turned in the right direction.

Downey, Calif.

L. Carl Pedersen '73 has written that because the newly elected trustee was "more concerned about Indian cheers ... I am ashamed to be a Dartmouth alumnus." His lack of understanding of the issues forces me to agree with him. I am ashamed he is a Dartmouth alumnus, too.

Kansas City, Mo.

Dr. Steel won. The alumni have indeed sent a message to the College trustees: It is a time to retrench, reassess, and perhaps regret the nature and form of our new directions. Perhaps But if that reassessment is thorough, I believe it will show that the Dartmouth trustees and the Kemeny administration of the last decade have an almost perfect score. Take the Indian controversy.

Many alumni are upset at what they see as a capitulation to an irresponsible minority demanding meaningless changes such as "Native American" for "Indian" and an end to the "Indian" symbol. Both changes are clearly justified on their merits, however.

The semantic change is similar to the substitution of "black" for "Negro." The vast negative connotations associated with a racial denotation by the dominant white society virtually require a challenge if efforts at racial equality in this country are to get off the ground.

A second issue is power. Who has the right to name me? The answer is simple: no one but myself. Dartmouth's Indian students are asserting that right. The College's acceptance is merely awarding them something denied since Columbus' 500-year-old misnomer.

Part of that right also includes the option to change one's priorities as conditions change. Notice that I am using the word "Indian." In Minnesota, Indian people have officially returned to a term ultimately considered simpler and less confusing. The semantic revolution here is over.

But isn't this just semantic foolery? No. Even "white folks" do it. Remember "Liberty measles" in World War I? After the war, people began catching German measles again. The Indian students didn't invent this process, and they won't be the last to use it.

As for symbols, the problem is again one of perception and power. The Indian symbol is perceived by the Indian students as a caricature of the powerless by the powerful. And it is. The symbol was never designed to be a fair representation of Indian people. It was intended to exploit our image of the tough Mohawk warrior to demonstrate our toughness to ourselves. It is.part of our macho dreams. Alumni dissatisfaction at the symbol's departure is understandable, but it should not dictate the future.

What's in a name and a symbol change? Can they change an attitude? Can Dartmouth College become a symbolic home for Indian students, and women, as well as alumni? We should support its efforts to try.

Minneapolis, Minn.

To be fair, I must point out that Paul Velleman '71 wrote his none-too-gracious criticism of my classmate Jack Herpel's FADDIS [For a Dignified Dartmouth Indian Symbol] poll before the national elections on November 4. But inasmuch as professional pollsters, almost to a man, indicated that their samplings indicated the results were too close to call, I wonder if he's still convinced that professionals know so much better than we amateurs how to go about gathering the data to enable them to predict results with a semblance of accuracy.

I wasn't one of those to whom Jack sent his questionnaire. But had he sent me one, the answer would have been a very firm "yes" regardless of how the question may have been worded.

Maybe quite a few pollsters, professional as well as amateur, could do with a bit more math.

Lacey, Wash.

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.