Letters

The Tucker Foundation: Force for Good

Shelby Grantham's December article "Crossroads," which concerned the Tucker Foundation, was of great interest to me.

For some time I have been bothered by what I think is a failure of Dartmouth, and most liberal arts colleges, to be aware of and attempt to meet their obligation to deal with, shall we say, the spiritual side of the students' education. Great effort and I'm sure much money has been spent at Dartmouth on building an outstanding faculty, able men and women, well-versed in their respective fields, good teachers and a group which I am sure is the envy of many sister institutions. And I am sure much effort has been spent on producing athletic teams the mind and body of the well-known triangle. But what has been done for the spiritual side?

The Tucker Foundation was President Dickey's answer to the problem, and I'm sure in 1951 its sponsors had high hopes. In setting it up, the then-Trustees obviously felt there was a need in the College for some serious effort to deal with the religious and moral problems of the students. I firmly believe there is still the need, that the College has no right to think that the bright 18-year-olds that come to Hanover every year have reached moral or religious maturity.

But as Fred Berthold says, the Foundation's efforts to advance the "good" have been plagued since birth by uncertainty, and the article doesn't indicate any great success. I think it's fair to ask why.

It is hard for me to believe that many people would deny the need for some real effort, and it's equally hard for me to believe that, with the brainpower assembled on the Dartmouth campus in the persons of the administration and especially the faculty, there isn't the ability to find the answer.

I am especially bothered by the history of the relationship between the Foundation and the faculty. I have the impression, perhaps an erroneous one, that the faculty rather looked down on the efforts of the Foundation, almost as if it couldn't be bothered with an effort to deal with the moral or spiritual side of the student, that they were busy enough dealing with his or her mind.

The brief description of President Tucker was especially interesting. I had always thought of him as first a minister, an extremely capable preacher who had somehow lifted Dartmouth out of its small backwoods position and started it on the way to national prominence. I now understand him to be a rebel, a man deeply interested in ethical and moral concerns, but one not willing to be tied to the rigidly Calvinistic Dartmouth of the 1890s. It behooves the College to keep President Tucker in mind, first, his emphasis on "conscience and heart," and second, his willingness to break with tradition. This is 1984, not 1904.

I hope the administration and Fred Berthold will persist, and that the faculty will be made to come into the picture for the purpose of developing the proper machinery to carry out President Dickey's purpose of making the Foundation a real force for "good" on the campus.

Brockton, Mass.

John Rand and the DOC

It is incomprehensible that the otherwise excellent article on the 75-year history of the Dartmouth Outing Club by Will Lange (January/February '84 Magazine) totally overlooked the outstanding leadership and major contributions to the DOC provided over more than 30 years by John A. Rand '38.

J.R., as he was known to many of us, first joined the Outing Club in 1934 when he was a freshman at Dartmouth. Following graduation, he served for several years as Outing Club manager before joining the 10th Mountain Infantry Division during World War II. Returning to Dartmouth after the war, Rand was named the Outing Club's first executive director in 1946 and remained in that post until 1975, when he was appointed to the position of Outdoor Education & Safety Officer, serving in that capacity until his retirement in 1979.

Just this past October, John Rand was honored for his long career and devoted and distinguished service to the College and the Outing Club by placing his name on a newlyconstructed cabin located about one-half mile from the Moosilauke Ravine Lodge and on the east side of Baker River.

Rand was also active with the Eastern Ski Association, served on several winter Olympic ski gang committees, was a member of the board of the National Safety Council, and a special deputy warden with the New Hampshire forest fire system.

The DOC is recognized as the most outstanding college outing club in the nation today because of the day-to-day leadership which John Rand provided, and because of the patient and thoughtful manner in which he worked with undergraduate leaders of the Outing Club.

Without John Rand, the Outing Club would have far less to celebrate in this 75th anniversary year. As a longtime member of the DOC, and as one who has served on its board of directors for 9 years, I feel it is important to put into the record the great respect and sincere admiration and affection which hundreds of Outing Club members, past and present, have for J.R.

Hanover, N.H.

The January/February issue of the Magazine is a good one, and Willem Lange's article on the DOC is a good overall review. Unfortunately, in one important area, that of post World War II, he is in error. Tom Dent was at the DOC only during World War II, not during all of the 40s, and none of the 50s. There could obviously have been no phenomenal growth from 1942 to 1945. Neither was my friend, Doug Wade, the College naturalist, there in the 50s. I believe he left in late 40s.

What pulled the DOC together after World War II many traditions had been lost during those war years was the return to the campus after service in the mountain troops of John Rand '38 as director. Without his intimate knowledge of DOC history and activities, much would have been lost. Tom Dent, who was the golf coach (and I believe soccer coach), lacked this knowledge.

My comments are based on first hand experience. I was John's assistant for 18 months in 1946-47. One of my contributions was to help get the Mountaineering Club back on its feet.

Bethesda, Md.

Omitting the name of John Rand (who devoted over 40 years of his life to the DOC) from the January/February Alumni Magazine article on the Outing Club is like having a brief history of Dartmouth College without mentioning either Eleazar Wheelock or Daniel Webster.

The author, my good friend Will Lange, can be excused, for he is not a Dartmouth man, but the editors? For shame!

Belchertown, Mass.

[We goofed. The above tributes to JohnRand's dedication and leadership are, formany DOC alumni, echoes of their own admiration for the man who was in many wayssynonymous with its pre-eminence. Ed.]

A Broader Spectrumof Recognition

Now that you are launching the fourth quarter century of the Alumni Magazine, I thought you might be open to a suggestion. One of the contributions of your predecessor was the broadening of alumni recognition beyond business and government types who get visibility in the "Wah Hoo Wah" column. That is something which I would urge you to continue but also to include a broader spectrum of recognition within the "Wah Hoo Wah" column.

I was reminded of our sometimes narrow definition of accompishment by reading the obituary of Barry Alan Marks, a distinguished classmate of mine. Barry probably never made "Wah Hoo Wah," but he did more with his life than many (and perhaps most) of those who do. Somehow we need to emphasize to our student body, to our alumni, and to the community at large, that Dartmouth trains men and women for a. variety of careers, a goodly number of which are lacking in apparent prestige, but just as important to the worth of our society.

I hope you will not view my letter as criticism in the slightest of your initiatives, but as a regular reader of the Alumni Magazine, it occurred to me that the plurality of the Dartmouth experience could get some broader recognition, through your periodical.

Ann Arbor, Mich.

[We like your suggestion, Mr. Carroll, and tryto profile alumni/ae from many occupations.See, for example, "Hooked on Toys," in theJanuary/February issue. For the record, the"Wah Hoo Wah" column is now called "Givea Rouse for." Ed.]

The Forgotten

Dartmouth College seems to have an ambivalent attitude toward memorializing its war dead. Our official war dead seem to have begun with the Civil War. These names are on the back of the great bronze doors of Webster Hall. Webster wasn't dedicated until 1901. Dartmouth waited 36 years to get those names "memorialized." There is no mention of Dartmouth war dead of the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the War with Mexico, the Spanish-American War ... or Vietnam, on campus.

When Memorial Stadium was dedicated in the early 19205, the College "memorialized" the names of its 118 men killed in World War I very appropriately on a giant slab of granite to the right of the entrance to Memorial Stadium. An identical slab of granite, still blank, exists in the same location to the right of the entrance, balancing the one used for the World War I dead.

After the end of World War II dear old Dartmouth revealed the same Yankee caution with which it waited 36 years to memorialize her Civil War dead. Seventeen years to be exact. When the Hopkins Center was dedicated in 1962, a granite slab about 4' x 8' was engraved with the names of some 300 World War II and Korean War dead. It is mounted on the wall on the outside of the Hopkins Center near the cafeteria. Not a conspicuous place. Seems like the whole idea was an after thought. Looks like the kind of war memorial that would be conceived by the same guys who eliminated ROTC on campus. So in the strange location selected few are apt to find it, especially when the weather closes off the terrace.

By contrast, Princeton University showed a touch of class in handling this problem. In Nassau Hall, built of stone in 1756, the front hall, just before the room where the trustees meet, the names of every war dead of Princeton are displayed in gold. From the War of 1812 through the Vietnam War. In addition, every man lost in the First and Second World Wars has had his name engraved on a bronze star about 8" in diameter, and mounted outside the window of the dormitory room from which he left for that war.

I propose that the names of our World War II dead be engraved on that blank slab of marble in the Memorial Field entrance opposite the names of the dead from World War I, as should have been done in the first place. I propose that the names of our dead from the Korean War and the Vietnam War be displayed nearby. Today granite is engraved by sandblasting thrumstencils. It is much less expensive than the old method of the hammer and chisel. I propose that each class pay for the names of its classmates.

Hanover, N.H.

From the ER

I read Mr. Pumphrey's letter on gun control (October '83) and was dismayed both with his logic and with the notion that as a parish priest he holds such opinions.

As a physician, I, too, spend time in emergency rooms. The reason that one sees few gunshot wound victims compared to other victims is really quite simple. Gunshot wounds are more often fatal. The victims don't need emergency room care. The fact that automobiles kill more in this country than do guns, I do not dispute. But Mr. Pumphrey seems to confuse accidents with acts of violence. We would all do better by trying to solve problems as they are, not by ignoring them under the guise that other problems may be of greater magnitude. Automobiles kill people; we can start by a nationwide campaign to get inebriated people out from behind the wheel. Guns kill people; we can start by controlling access to guns by those who would misuse them. Tough? Of course it is. But can't we at least try to solve the problems instead of obstructing those who would try?

Tucson, Ariz.

No Rhetorical Question

It is hard to see the purpose in publishing Charles E. Osgood's high-sounding diatribe ("Psycho-Social Dynamics and the Prospects for Mankind") in the December issue. Certainly if you wanted merely to give the other side a chance to say its piece, you wouldn't pick their silliest polemicist to make the case; and that, in a manner of speaking, is what you have done. By Osgood's account, the Soviets are really nice guys if you would only get to know them, and the real problems of the world are caused by greedy businessmen. Does the Alumni Magazine really buy this garbage? Not a rhetorical question by any means. The alumni have a right to know what the thought-processes are back there in Hanover.

Santa Fe, N.M.

[We found Prof. Osgood's article provocative, though the opinions expressed in thearticle in question are his and are stated assuch. Ed.]

Where's the Beef?

Rather than wasting space on how pleasant it was to be destroyed by UNC (January/February '84 Magazine), why not devote some space to what the admissions office and the DCAC are going to do to at least give us parity in the Ivy League?

Dartmouth has the worst hockey, swimming, soccer, ad nauseam teams in the League. And to prove that a mistake is not a mistake until it's called a mistake, we read the College's solution is more new facilities. I doubt it.

Quite frankly, I've read better copy in the Op/Ed section of Pravda.

Fairfield, Ct.

Around the Girdled Earth

I enjoyed the article in the January/February issue about my esteemed decanal colleague, Carl Long. I do want to correct a possible erroneous impression regarding my travels while on sabbatical leave. The College had provided for a generous period of leave; my travel was not at College expense, however. The extended trip to Dhaka and Bangkok was on behalf of The American Association for the Advancement of Science. But it is true that one is always a representative of the College and therefore doing "College business" whenever one girdles the earth, no matter who buys the ticket.

Provost and Dean Emeritus

Hanover, N.H.

[Prof. Rieser, who is Sherman Fairchild Professor in the Natural Sciences, is also Directorof the Dickey Endowment. Ed.]

Dartmouth's Tiger

I just wanted to thank you again for the excellent piece on Dartmouth's Olympic skiers. Jim Kenyon's articles on Tiger Shaw and Leslie Thompson were excellent, and having Tiger in full color on the front cover was just fantastic!

Hanover, N.H.

The Symbol (cont.)

For those of us who were in Hanover during the duck board era, an appropriate symbol might have been the "Puddle Jumpers."

If the trend is to change the symbol to suit the whims of the day, and as it is difficult to imagine that all the seasonal mud has been eliminated from the Green, and further in view of the coeducational status of the once all-male student body, and again in continuing disregard of the alumni why not make it the "Mud Hens"?

South Easton, Mass.

In a letter in the January/February issue, Robert P. Bullock '36 notes what he believes to be "illogic in dealing with minority rights" exemplified by President McLaughlin's statement concerning the Indian symbol. That illogic is found, according to Mr. Bullock,, whenever a policy decision is based not on the rights, interests, and feelings of a majority of the community but on the rights, interests, and feelings of a minority. (In the case of the Indian symbol, he considers the alumni the majority and those who find the Indian symbol offensive the minority.) Unfortunately for Mr. Bullock, he is in the minority in believing such an approach to be illogical.

In 1938, Chief Justice Stone justified stricter scrutiny of statutes directed at "discrete and insular minorities." He believed that prejudice against minorities tended to curtail their ability to seek redress through the political process; minorities could not gain adequate representation within the legislation drawn along racial and ethnic classifications will be strictly scrutinized by the Supreme Court when challenged.

Insofar as use of the Indian symbol, I would hope that I speak for a majority of Dartmouth alumni when I say that the only way to be "tolerant" (as Mr. Bullock described the world of President Hopkins which he prefers) is to respect those who are offended by continued use of the Indian symbol, and continue the search for a symbol the entire College community can support. I also hope that respect for the rights, views, and sensitivities of others will be an ever-fashionable notion, not a once-fashionable notion of the early 1970s as Mr. Bullock contends.

New York, N. Y.