Letters

The Dartmouth Alumni Magazine welcomes comment about College affairs and the editorial content of this Magazine. The Editor reserves the right to determine the suitability of letters for publication, using as standards accuracy, relevance, and good taste. Letters should not exceed 400 words and may be edited at the discretion of the Editor. Letters must be signed, with address and telephone included for verification.

Regrets

The October 1984 issue has a silly something I wrote nearly 50 years ago. [See below.] nobody requested my permission to reprint it. I would have refused. But I forgive Editor Greenwood because he's improved the Magazine.

Brookings, S.D.

[ln the College section of the October 1984 issue,we quoted the following passage, which appearedin Francis Brown's A Dartmouth Reader. We regret the embarrassment this has caused Professor Martin, but we still find it nicely written,especially for a freshman:

Dartmouth, in its first splendid vagueness, came into sight this morning as the White River bus rounded the last curve . . . The simple green and white grandeur of the old Hall and its brother buildings was on our right: before us stood the wonderful new library, its tower rising above the elms; and on our left was the Administration Building whence we would push off on our College careers.

The passage, incidentally, originally appeared inthe Alumni Magazine in November 1932. Ed.]

Perplexed

In the ongoing controversy over the Indian symbol, the thing that continues to perplex me is the way that those who are against the Symbol always seem to compare the Indian situation with that of the Blacks and the Jews. This seems farfetched.

The Blacks and the Jews have been subjected to insulting, contemptible, and denigrating nicknames, stereotypes, and caricatures since the times of Judas, Fagin, Uncle Tom, and Step-N-Fetchit. Members of these minorities are rightfully sensitive and indignant at any racism real or imagined.

The Indian situation is different. The Indian has been cheated, robbed, shot, starved, massacred, and disposed but never denigrated or ridiculed. The Indian, his way of life, his bravery and self-discipline have been widely admired. This is why so many athletic teams are called Indians, Redskins, Braves, Chieftains, etc.

The Boy Scout camp I attended as a youth had an Indian flavor, as did many camps for youngsters. We advanced from braves to chiefs to sachems depending on our accomplishments.

The Indian symbol is something to be proud of, and I am sure the Native Americans at Dartmouth would not be so objecting to it were they not "mentally conditioned" to do so when they first hit Dartmouth.

Farmington, Conn.

Eleazar and the new tradition

The administration's representative to the Christmas luncheon I attended last December in Cleveland did not represent the mainstream of campus opinion. In fact, Associate Chaplain Richard Hyde has been outspoken more than once, but most of the time I respected his stands and his conviction. I wondered if he would do the time- honored thing and tell the alumni what they wanted to hear.

In my four years in Hanover, I heard almost constantly that the College's sense of tradition had evaporated and that the institution has changed for the worst in many ways. This cry comes from the old faithful, and from the new faithful who would have us return to the Indian symbol and singlesex education. But, as I discovered in December, these issues are not what Dartmouth tradition is all about. Hyde said Eleazar Wheelock had been "greatly influenced by the Great Awakening . . . that swept across the country in the 1730s." He identified three basic tenets of this great awakening: 1) the equality of all the faithful before God; 2) the notion that the Bible was an open document, open to the faithful for examination, and that all the faithful were capable with the grace of God of responding to it; and 3) the belief that the American people were placed here for the purpose of creating a more just society.

These values, Hyde said, were the values upon which the American Revolution were based, and further, they were the values upon which American higher education was founded. "The College was never intended to be an ivory tower dedicated only to free inquiry or to free enterprise, but was intended to be an institution dedicated to giving all qualified students the skills needed to read and understand the Bible and then go out and realize the vision of a more just order contained therein. In short, these ideas are the true traditions of Dartmouth."

Hyde's listeners were made to understand that the goals and traditions of the College have not disappeared, but have been modified to now stand for 1) equality; 2) freedom; and 3) duty to work for a just society. If these are the modern manifestations of Eleazar Wheelock's initiative, I wondered, then why do we concern ourselves with battles about the symbol, student body composition, and affirmative action on the grounds of upholding tradition? Have we really lost sight of the ideas of freedom, equality, and a just society? Clearly, we need to discuss such issues as drastic cuts in federal aid to education and the tying of draft registration to educational loans. Hyde's presentation allowed me to consider these important issues in a framework relating College tradition to areas I had never thought connected. The old traditions equality, freedom, and a just society surely fail if the community is unable to put aside its partisan differences and address the real issues that face the College today.

Shaker Heights, Ohio

[Peter Blum, whose article on Alzheimer's disease appeared in the May issue of the Magazine, is a reporter for the The Evansville Press andformer political and Fortnightly editor of The Dartmouth. Ed.]

The roots of the College

There is no more important issue in the minds of the great majority of alumni than the recognition and rededication of the roots of the College; until that issue is resolved by an impartial poll of the alumni, there will be a 25 to 30 percent alumni dropout and either.outright refusal to give money to the College or token giving.

Ignoring the Indian issue, playing the hypocrite in the case of the Hovey murals, and going for the high pressure promos like "Why Dartmouth?" will never bring harmony back to the student and alumni bodies. It must concern you that an undergraduate publication persists in its fight despite the roadblocks and attacks by the president, faculty, and administration.

Palm Beach, Fla.

Concerning the Indian symbolbut Indirectly

I should like to make it emphatic, I prefer a rule democratic, But some liberals construe Whatever minorities do As their right to be quite autocratic.

Centerville, Mass.

Making it happen at the Hop

Congratulations to you and to Georgia Croft for the fine article on Marion Bratesman and her contributions to the well-being of Hopkins Center and Dartmouth College. She was hard at work helping us plan the future of film programs in the Center many months before we held our auspicious John Huston premiere. At first I thought that she had a special interest in films, but I gradually came to realize she could quite easily shift her promotion talents to any of the arts. Nevertheless, whenever a problem arose which involved my own professional field, it seemed that problem was her own principal one that day.

The same "preparation and attention to detail" which gets Georgia's praise for making representatives of the news media feel that their trips to Hanover were worthwhile seemed to get applied to every factor. She always seemed to know better than any other person what was going on in the building. I usually sought her views first when I wanted some insight.

The Dartmouth Film Society's national reputation came principally because of the success of the Hopkins Center at getting undergraduates to appreciate its numerous offerings. Marion took a big part in making it happen. It was a great 25 years!

Hanover, N.H.

[Blair Watson is Director of Dartmouth CollegeFilms emeritus. Ed.]

Bryan on evolution

In your May '85 issue reference is made to a lecture by William Jennings Bryan on Evolution in the fall of 1923. As a Fundamentalist, he was opposed to the theory. I was present that night in Webster Hall. We had all heard of the oratorical skill of Bryan with his famous "Cross of Gold" speech which won him the presidential nomination at the Democratic Convention in 1896.

He did not disappoint. While saying nothing memorable, he mesmerized his audience. He made frequent references to Biblical passages. Finally he came to that part where the Whale swallowed Jonah.

This was too much for a young instructor who raced up the aisle and shouted at the Speaker,"Only an ignoramous would believe such tripe."

The old Commoner reared back and pointing an admonishing finger at this rude interrupter said, "Young man, I want you to know I have an A.B. degree, a B.S. degree, a Ph.D. degree" and reeled off several honorary degrees and finished, "I'll match those with any son of an ape." Touche, as the French would say.

A few months later, Bryan took on Clarence Darrow at the famous Scopes trial in Tennessee and while the trial was in progress, passed on from what the medical group said was a habit of overeating. This can be as deadly as overindulgence in spiritus frumenti.

Aside from all this I still think that on that October night in 1923 we listened to one of the great orators of the twentieth century.

Melrose, Mass.

Re: the return of ROTC

I was grieved to learn of President McLaughlin's decision to reinstate ROTC at Dartmouth. His argument of financial advantage seems inadequate. Is there no better way to attract scholarship funds than through military training?

It is ironic that the economic strains of recent years which have made financial aid a necessity for so many students have been caused in a significant part by the enormous growth in military spending. And while interest rates have been driven up by Pen- tagon debts, the Reagan administration has cut student loans. How clever! The burdens of militarism are thus to be thrust upon our young people, especially those from poorer families, before they can finance their college educations.

President McLaughlin says that Dartmouth's liberal education mission is protected by a nation "able to defend itself from challenge or dominance by those who do not share a respect for the rights of the individual" and therefore Dartmouth should contribute talented men and women to the "defense establishment." Unfortunately I have too frequently witnessed the power of this nation unwisely and arrogantly used to deprive individuals in other parts of the world of their rights and their lives in the name of democracy and freedom, of course. The defense establishment has not even been willing to recognize the rights of its own servicemen who were poisoned by chemical defoliants and radiation in the line of duty. Surely at this point in history, Dartmouth could better serve the cause of human rights than by training young people in the arts of killing.

In a world overstocked with weapons of mindboggling violence, living in terror from day to day, it is the arts of peace and understanding which cry out for attention. Dartmouth could have taken a wonderfully creative lead in that direction, instead of grasping for a few scholarship crumbs from the Pentagon.

Palermo, Me.

All the wrong reasons

In the April issue of the Alumni Magazine, Sanford Pooler opposes the presence of the Army ROTC program at Dartmouth for what I think are the wrong reasons.

He suggests that a military establishment on the campus will have a corrupting effect on a liberal arts college and its students. A quite different argument is heard at my present institution the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee where the ROTC issue is also current. (In May the UWM Faculty Senate, by a vote of 30-7, voted to terminate the ROTC contract with the Army. The issue will be reconsidered by the entire faculty in September.)

Here the argument frequently invoked is that officer training programs at liberal arts colleges around the country have a civilizing, effect on the Army. At least a portion of the officer corps will have had some exposure to the humanities; the professional military academies will not be the sole source of young officers. President McLaughlin develops that argument, among others, in his March 12 statement on the ROTC at Dartmouth (also in the April issue).

My colleagues at UWM voted to end the ROTC program not because they rejected that argument, but for a quite different reason. I can identify that reason by quoting a line in President McLaughlin's statement, and pointing out that it is false, cruelly false.

"The financial advantages involved in the existence of ROTC accrue primarily to the student," President McLaughlin writes, "and indirectly to the College. The student has the option to enter, if he or she elects the military officer corps and, thereby, has the opportunity to enjoy significant benefits in terms of having his or her Dartmouth education financed by the U.S. government."

No, it is not in general true that "the student has the option to enter."

It was only a few years ago within the lifetime of many who read theses pages that the United States Army was the most racially segregated and discriminatory institution in the country. In the 1930s and '40s, the black students granted the option of entering an officer training program were few and far between.

Social change takes place, glory be, and racial discrimination is no longer fashionable. But the military establishments still cater to prejudice when that appears the easiest course. The prejudice still dear to the hearts of many Americans and still receiving federal protection is, of course, the prejudice against homosexuals.

The policy of barring homosexuals that the military services all enforce is not a rule of conduct; for a state of mind the particular direction of one's sexual impulses suffices to define the homosexual. It is not a rule grounded on empirical evidence that homosexuals are incapable of performing military duties; for the services acknowledge that there is no such evidence. It is a rule grounded solely on the idea that because most people despise and detest homosexuals, their presence in the military would cause problems of discipline and morale.

So it is not true that "the student has the option to enter" the ROTC program. The Army does not give all students that option, however physically and intellectually qualified they may be.

UWN has (by faculty action) a policy that forbids discrimination on the basis of sexual preference. It is for that reason that the Faculty Senate voted to terminate the ROTC contract. The conflict between UWM nondiscrimination policy and U.S. Army practice was felt to be intolerable.

Not having been a party to the faculty debates at Dartmouth, I do not know the extent to which the Army's discriminatory policy was a factor in the faculty's deliberations. It is clear that it was not a factor in President McLaughlin's mind when he penned his March 12 statement. He writes as though he were not even aware of the Army's policy. I find that not only regrettable, but disturbing.

Milwaukee, Wise.

A clarification

Just a brief note of clarification in response to the letter to the Editor entitled "The G.S.A. Responds" which appeared in the May issue.

Following the letter, written by David C. Garling '86, was a brief Editor's note stating that David "is the president of the Dartmouth Gay Students Association." David has not served as president of the organization since the 1983-84 academic year (although he has been an active member). Stephen Carter '86 served as president during the terms fall '84 and winter '85; D. Jay Berkow '85 and I served as co-presidents during the spring '85 term. I will be serving as president during summer '85.

Hanover,N.H.

A sorry spectacle

Despite many sincere pleas from various alumni groups, my contribution to the College shall remain paltry to register my great dissatisfaction. Basically this arises from the following:

A. The lowering of academic standards to accommodate minorities. This violates the whole concept of academic excellence to such an absurd extent as to render pejorative the word "elite." We had minorities when we were undergrads. And they were scarcely noticeable because they fit in perfectly.

B. The sorry spectacle of tenured academicians refusing to criticize Soviet inroads all over the world, while encouraging undergrads to protest against American retaliations of any sort. Tenured faculty are people who have remained institutionalized all their lives: from grammar school, to prep/high school, college, through universities. Most have never endured the "slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" and many would collapse if they did, I refuse to pay the salaries of people who never raised their voices against the Soviet Union when it supplied billions in weaponry to the revolutionary Viet Cong, and yet scream themselves hoarse when President Reagan wants to send a few million dollars to help the contras of Nicaragua. Why should we subsidize a faculty that supports the very power against whom many alumni took arms in Korea and Vietnam?

C. The hypocrisy of claiming "academic freedom" for left-wing causes while steadfastly blocking conservative and traditional views: Our open-minded faculty, so-called, encourage a great variety of "alternative" courses and "lifestyles" to accommodate any vocal minority; but cannot bring itself to extend that same freedom to the military sciences in general, and ROTC in particular. Need I explain to anyone inhabiting the "real world" that our faculty's cherished academic freedom was preserved through two world wars by none other than the mil- itary sciences ― plus a few million brave soldiers?

For these reasons my contributions to the Alumni Fund shall remain negligible until the administration mends its ways. But I do not wish to deprive my alma mater of much needed cash. Therefore, I shall make repeated donations to the only "alternative" purse on campus-The Dartmouth Review.

Los Angeles, Calif

The Review: a different slant

After an intermission of ten years, I am teaching again at the the College for a term, with great happiness. Alumni need not fear that the place is going to the dogs.

The Dartmouth Review, however, should worry any thinking graduate. Recently I wrote it a letter [printed below] which the editor tells me he declines to publish. Alumni might be interested in the criticism The Review found unworthy of print.

To the Editor of The Review:

During this term, while I am visiting from the United Kingdom, I have read each issue of your paper. The Review is occasionally mentioned in the British press and since Dartmouth is virtually unknown in the UK, for some people, your paper's opinions are all they know of the College.

You should be aware, therefore, that TheReview brings Dartmouth into disrepute. Educated British subjects are not unusually sexist, racist, nor hysterically anti-left; the bits of news about Dartmouth, filtered through The Review and then into our news-papers, makes Dartmouth appear at best absurd, at worst malicious.

The editors of the journals for which I write, The Observer, The Times, and The Economist, none of them remotely left, would instantly "spike," that is refuse to print, the articles in which you refer to those whom you disdain, as "scrawny feminists," "communist apologists," or "abnormal" gays.

I am wholly in favor of an unfettered press. Your paper is a stern test indeed of such a conviction.

Hanover, N.H.

[Professor Mirsky taught at the College from1967 to 1975. Ed.]

There's more to sportsthan winning

In running through the Detroit Free Press sports section last fall, I read "If you can't beat 'em, quit?" The body of the small article stated, in part,

Dartmouth College, citing a lack of competitiveness, is considering withdrawing seven varsity teams from Ivy League competition. Sportsunder consideration are men's soccer, men's andwomen's tennis, men's and women's swimming,and men's and women's squash. These Dartmouth teams consistently have had losing leaguerecords.

I ask, is it competitiveness that is lacking or is it inspiration? I was at Dartmouth slightly more than twenty years ago and have no distinct memories of championship seasons. What I do recall, however, was the wonderful leadership and example set for the young men involved in sports by their respective coaches. In fact, all of the sports mentioned above were led by gentlemen coaches of the highest caliber who taught much more than the need to be number one. Beginning with Thomas Dent, who coached both soccer and squash, and who taught me to play squash as an intramural freshman. I can only say that this short exposure to the man stands out through my four-year stay in Hanover. Sportsmanship, philosophy, leadership, humanity, all were transmitted from this quiet gentleman to all who knew him. Tennis and swimming had equally dedicated, beloved mentors, and I dare say had Dartmouth never won a division title in any of those sports, the rosters would be overflowing with willing participants simply because of the joy of the whole experience.

Southfield, Mich.

The gift of life

Recently my father, Thomas S. Nichols Jr.'4O, suffered a prolonged illness and eventually died at Mary Hitchcock Memorial Hospital in Hanover. During his illness the doctors prescribed fresh, whole blood. Among the many who responded to the call for volunteers were the Peterborough [N.H.] alumni group [the Dartmouth Club of Southwest New Hampshire], from Dad's home town and the Dartmouth Club of the Upper Valley.

My mother, my sister, and I were deeply touched by the immediate and generous response. We wish to thank everyone involved with the effort to spread the word, especially Robert H. Cormack '48, as well as those who volunteered.

In these days of advanced technology, the need for freshly transfused blood is rare. When the need does exist, the donor must be available to the blood bank on short notice. We understand that the Hanover area group, recognizing its distinct geographic advantage, is developing an ongoing contact with the hospital so they may be accessed directly if any future need develops. My father would be proud of such a legacy.

Coming from a Dartmouth family (including my late uncle, four graduated cousins, one attending cousin and one cousin about to matriculate) and marrying a Dartmouth man, James Kasameyer '69, I have had many opportunities to experience the love of and loyalty to the College which is so remarkable among Dartmouth people. But this willingness to share the gift of life, one's own blood, is one of the most noble expressions of the very real Dartmouth family.

Portland, Ore.