Letters

Seeing Red

Let's make a statement for peace which will be remembered for centuries. Instead of selfishly keeping Kurt Vonnegut for the benefit of only the Dartmouth community, let's chip in to send him to Russia all expenses paid.

Once he's within snowball-throwing distance of the Kremlin he can exercise his admitted skill to destroy the Russian army "as an effective fighting force."

Russian villainy thus emasculated, the entire free world, thoroughly sick of war, can reduce its military might to cadre level and spend defense dollars to ease the plight of the hungry, the blind, the lame ... all those who travel and are heavy laden . . . and perhaps balance their budgets in the process.

You can count on me for a contribution to this worthy cause.

Rosemont, Pa,

It would be nice if Kurt was living in Russia. So he could destroy their army. What is happening to us?

New York, N. Y.

While Kurt Vonnegut's address to the Ivy League conference "Issues of Nuclear Arms" (vide "Homely Truths," ALUMNI MAGAZINE, June 1983) may have exhibited wit and timing, the excerpts of it which you printed are not "truth" (as your comment suggests), but in large part unsubstantiated opinion. For example, his assertion that nuclear weapons have not deterred war in Europe is just as unverifiable as the contrary one that had a nuclear balance not existed, war between East and West would have been inevitable. For what it's worth, the argument that in situations of crisis between the superpowers, the fear of unleashing a nuclear catastrophe has encouraged caution and restraint seems to me to be a reasonable one.

Other excerpts not only display a breathtaking cultural arrogance, but also verge on contradiction with the rest of his argument. His condescension towards "Eastern meditation" and affirmation of the superiority of Western civilization would seem to run in the face of the fact that it was we, and not the people of the East, who developed nuclear weapons, the existence of which he is so keen to decry.

Finally, it may be that most people "prefer slavery to death." Even if I accepted that this were a dichotomy relevant to nuclear weapons, the fact that a majority prefers something is no indication of that thing's quality. The fact that most people smoke or drink does not suggest that these activities are good for your health. If there had not been people in America and elsewhere who preferred death to slavery, Britain would still be an absolute monarchy and America would still be British, unless both had fallen to the Nazis. More to the point, Kurt Vonnegut would not possess the rights which he uses so freely in speeches like the one he gave at Dartmouth last May,

There is a tendency, on both sides of the "nuclear debate," for vacuous cant to replace serious analysis and discussion. To judge from the excerpts, Vonnegut's speech was an example of the former. It is, however, the latter which should be the concern of the Dartmouth community.

Vancouver, Canada

A Grammarian's Complaint

Although I am nearly 80 years old, this is my first letter to an editor.

The lapses in grammar and style by TV and the press cannot be stopped, but is it too much for the official journal of an Ivy League college to get the titles of clergymen correct?

Rev., as in the enclosed clipping ("Dartmouth's 213 th," June '83, p. 26), is an adjective, not a noun. In this case your man should have used Mr. Reverend means the person has the quality or right to be revered. It does not equate with Rabbi or Father.

Fowler's Modern English Usage calls your usage "an illiteracy." I always told my classes in Early American History the first day we met that anyone who used Rev. as a noun would fail the course. A few did.

From President Tucker all the way back to Eleazar Wheelock, clergymen ran the College, and nobody ever called them Rev. Tucker or Rev. Wheelock.

Providence, R.I

{My edition of FOWLER'S, the Second (revised by SirErnest Gowers), calls my usage "a common vulgarism, so common indeed (especially in Scotland andIreland) that it may soon cease to deserve that description," Mea culpa. Ed.}

Affluential

After nodding approvingly over the letter from Katherine Kiernan '81 in the June issue of the MAGAZINE about the Corbin advertisement, and the Editor's response, "an idea or article's mere appearance in the MAGAZINE emphatically does not imply the Editor's support or approval," I continued to leaf through the "letters" section until I reached p. 17.

Prominently placed opposite "Reviews" was the help-wanted notice for an associate editor for the DARTMOUTH ALUMNI MAGAZINE. I noticed the description of the duties, which seem full, many and responsible, and the requirements "at least a bachelor's degree in English or journalism and 4-5 years magazine writing experience or the equivalent."

And then came the salary range: $15,000- $17,350.

A local "Institute of Technology" boasted tonight on television that its graduates start at $21,000 a year. Shaking my head sadly (long ago I myself was an English major) I continued turning pages until I was stopped by the eyecatching layout on p. 25 which waged "5 cogent reasons for using the Ivy League Magazines to reach the affluentials." These Ivy League affluentials (horrible coinage) have "a $74,000 Average Household Income, $63,000 Median Household Income, 97.2% graduated college." The Mortimer Berkowitz Company, Inc. lists a number of advantages to be gained from using such outlets: for instance, "with every graduation our circulation grows and gains in vitality." Will the young graduate who joins the DARTMOUTH ALUMNI MAGAZINE staff at $15,000 (or $17,350 even) some day rather wistfully wonder how long it will take him or her to reach such household levels and thus become an "affluential"?

(Mrs. ROBERT W. TUCKER, JR. '27)

Columbus, Ohio

The Granite of New Hampshire

On attending my fiftieth reunion I had occasion, of course, to sing the song "Men of Dartmouth." Once again, the words of the last line of the first verse stuck in my throat: " the granite of New Hampshire in our muscles and our brains." This line has always seemed to me to be a clear implication that we are a bunch of muscle-bound blockheads. I hate to think that Dartmouth people will be singing it for another 50 years.

I strongly recommend that the College take official action to change that one line. There are others better qualified than I to rewrite it, but for starters I suggest the follow: " the granite of New Hampshire in our spirit and our will.

Manhattan Beach, Calif.

Gun Control (cont.)

There are a few social issues which, in my opinion, ought to remain outside the political arena because there can never be a just solution by legislation. These issues are highly emotional and evoke stereotypical responses, always based on inadequate information. Those who believe one way are so set in their beliefs that no amount of contrary argument can sway them. Their opponents are equally firm in their positions. Neither can win politically without causing the other to feel oppressed unjustly. . . .

Why is murder so prevalent today as compared to 50 years ago? It is not the availability of guns! That is a red herring argument that diverts our attention from the real problem. Perhaps the murder rate in Japan, England (not so good), Sweden, and some other countries is lower than in the U.S. because of the way their courts handle these cases. Perhaps they are not so burdened by the guilt feeling that society is to blame for those who resort to violence. Personally, I don't own guns for self-defense but I can certainly understand why many people do. We live in a society today that has neither the will nor the means to protect the law-abiding citizen from violation by criminals. Fifty years ago this was not the case. A focus on where we went astray and the correction of our past mistakes is what we really need. The gun control issue is counter-productive. It focuses on one means, not the causes of murder in our society.

San Mateo, Calif.

This letter is written in response to the antigun letters of Drs. Lefkowits and Burke, June '83 issue, pages 14 and 15.

Twenty-five years ago I changed from economics to becoming a parish priest and hospital chaplain. I have not repaired people as a physician but many a Saturday night, Memorial Day, and Labor Day weekend I have spent in the emergency room. For every gunshot victim I have seen, there was also a knife wound, three to five child- or spouse-abuse victims, and 50 car accident victims. Alcohol abuse was prevalent. 1 find alcohol much more a cause of violence than guns.

Mr. Cassidy of the NRA is correct in stating that no statistics exist linking guns to crime rate. A liberal anti-gun university, Wisconsin, I believe, made quite a study two years ago concerning guns, gun laws, crime, and violence. They reported unhappily their findings: no correlation between gun laws and violent crime, except a possibility of a negative correlation. The most highly armed societies are Norway, Switzerland, and Israel. In Switzerland every citizen must have a weapon; their homicide rate is low and [murder] is usually committed with a knife; home invasions and burglaries are almost non-existent. The British passed their gun laws in the early 19205; their homicide rate has gone up since then. Japan has a low murder rate and an even lower gun use problem; Japanese-Americans, 3rd and 4th generation ranchers, all have guns but an equally low murder rate. Northern Ireland, Columbia, and N. Y. City have gun laws that affect the victim of the mugging but not the criminal. Concerning non-existent statistics, it is estimated that there are between 60 and 90 million unregistered hand guns in the U.S. That is a lot more guns than there are registered cars. However, we have killed over a million with the gasoline engine, more than all our wars and gun murders put together. Equally there are no statistics on how many intended victims are not victimized because they had a gun and were able to use it.

Finally, I know of no gun owner who is so naive to believe that owning a gun is a guarantee of safety. The voting booths of both Nevada and California have rejected the anti-gun arguments and legal proposals.

Yerington, Nev.

Dartmouth's Ph.D.s

May I shed a tear for the NEW tradition? I don't mean the old wah-hoo-wah, or the Indian on the top of Baker Tower, my old necktie and old shirt. I mean the NEW traditions! In the spring of 1931, prodded by a Doc who said my razor was causing infection, I raised a beard. I was greeted by "Trying out for the Passion Play?" And even an occasional "Good morning, sir" from a freshman who thought I was a professor from the Mesozoic Ages. One of my instructors remarked (when I finally mowed the foliage), "Why Mr. Taylor has bathed!"

Now the new traditions are failing, alas! On page 41 of the June MAGAZINE (which arrived today with the September HARPER'S) appears a photograph of four "newly minted Dartmouth Ph.D.s." One of them appears to be bare-faced! What crazy new trend has appeared? Has King C. Gillette risen from his grave? Is Dartmouth trying to set a new trend of granting Ph.D.s to bare-faced people?

I guess having a bare-faced president has kinda started a fire. O' tempora, O' more, O' sh_!

Taylorville, Ill,

There are a large. number of Dartmouth graduates who went on to other institutions to receive doctorates in the days when Dartmouth was not granting them. And many of us were regularly involved in academic processions and other similar events sporting gowns and hoods with the colors of those doctoral-granting institutions. Not a Dartmouth brag-flag to be seen. However, p. 41 of the June issue shows a group of newly hatched Dartmouth Ph.D.s with pine tree brassards on their gowns. What a wonderful thing to authorize these for all Dartmouth graduates to wear on their doctoral gowns from other granting institutions. I would be delighted to order a set and then could proudly show my Dartmouth colors along with my doctoral colors something none of us could ever do before.

Bradenton, Fla.

{Unfortunately, Dr. Haft, here in the U.S. thecolor(s) lining your doctoral hood should correspond tothe regalia on your doctoral gown if there is any(save for the three stripes on the sleeves). If you have aPrinceton Ph.D., you get an orange escutcheon, regardless of whether you have, say, a Columbia M. A.or a Dartmouth A.B. Ed.}

"A Return to Hanover"

One sentence in the fine valedictory by President McLaughlin rang a bell in my long association with Dartmouth. "But just as this leave-taking is a natural and necessary element of the Dartmouth experience, may I stress that so is returning."

"A Return to Hanover," by Ben Ames Williams '10, was printed in the ALUMNI MAGAZINE in February 1926. He concludes the story of his visit as follows: "Until a man has been out of college ten or fifteen years and has come back to the familiar scenes, he has not begun to discover all that Dartmouth has to give him. It is a very definite evidence of this fact that no one ever leaves Hanover after such a stay without planning, perhaps in vain, but planning nevertheless, when he will come again."

The full story is included in A DARTMOUTH READER, edited by Francis Brown '25, published in 1969.

Sarasota, Fla

Raccoonteurs

In the June issue, Robert Bell, '67, who describes himself aptly as a "raccoonteur," documents a frustrating encounter with raccoons in his basement and the largely unsuccessful weaponry of Have-a-Heart traps. I would like to record my experience with a less severe problem of raccoonery and its solution.

We have at our northern Michigan hideaway a metal bird-feeder mounted on a 2' X 4' wooden pole. The feeder, about 5' off the ground, provides a nightly challenge to an aggressive raccoon family at least they have a family resemblance. The problem is not so much the cost of replenishing the feeder with sunflower seeds we have been contributing to their social welfare for years but the metallic and vocal racket accompanying their nocturnal depredations, which have been intolerable.

The solution was long in conversation but short in execution. I begged a surplus ignition coil from the local garageman, strapped it along with a copper band to the pole about 4 inches below the feeder (beyond a dog's reach), connected the positive of the coil to the metal feeder and the negative to the copper band which I also grounded, and connected the coil to a 6—12 volt transformer (which I had on hand for my microscope light). The overall cost, zero.

Then for the fun. I waited in the shadow of the patio until the bewitched hour past midnight when the raccoons arrived on schedule. The largest of the group climbed stealthily toward the top. As soon as he touched the feeder, he entered the electric age with a jolt. By the light of the moon I saw his bulky frame take off through the air and heard his unconventional landing on the ground with a thump. He must have communicated his shocking experience to the rest of the group since none of the others challenged the pole. I searched the ground to assure myself (more correctly, to assure my wife) that the shock had not been lethal. For the next few nights I left the hot-line on but I did not use it for several weeks thereafter. At no time has the feeder been molested since the eventful first night.

What conclusions can be drawn from this? First, it suggests that an old Dartmouth grad has outwitted these most intelligent animals. And secondly, Have-a-Shock is a more effective method of combat than Have-a-Heart. I recommend it to Fellow Raccoonteurs.

Chevy Chase, Md.