Letters

The Why of Selectivity

I would like to respond to Mr. Moir's failure to understand the selectivity of the student outrage over apartheid, an observation appearing in his letter in the summer issue.

I think most persons would readily concede that many African regimes, let alone more efficient tyrannies, are far more repressive than South Africa's. Parliamentary opposition and relative freedom of expression exist in South Africa, and this morning's paper notes that the Natal Supreme Court has struck down two key elements of the government's recent detention program. Furthermore, unlike the oppressed in, say, the Soviet Union, South Africans can "vote with their feet."

This said, however, I think there are sensible reasons for the selectivity in outrage to which Mr. Moir takes exception. In the first place, unlike most authoritarian rulers, those in South Africa profess to espouse twentieth century Western values. Accordingly, their actions and their defensive rhetoric are tainted with a large dose of hypocrisy. In the second place, there is at least a distinct possibility that measures such as divestment and expressions of widespread disgust can influence the South African government. In the third place, few of us have reached the stage of sophistication where a person's skin is of no consequence, so that repression of blacks by whites seems somehow more reprehensible than equal (or greater) repression within a uni-racial society.

It seems to me that these considerations at least explain why so many Dartmouth students feel they must do something, even if symbolic, to protest the endemic injustices in South Africa.

I am not at all sure that it is wise for the American government to meddle in the internal affairs of other countries and, in fact, feel that the results are likely to be more mischievous than beneficial. But expressions of private outrage over foreign repression are quite another matter and have a long and I think honorable history in American culture.

Fairfield, Conn.

True Education

Much has been said and written in recent decades about education and the financing of education, but I have seen and heard very little about the meaning of "education." To me, living in a segregated group, attending a required number of "classes" and receiving a piece of paper or parchment stating that the recipient has been awarded a specified academic degree are not really the essence of education.

To me, among the essential elements of true education are:

1. acquisition of a broad range of skills and information and a life-long desire to increase and expand such knowledge,

2. understanding of the philosophies and practices of other persons and peoples,

3. toleration for the philosophies and practices of others which differ from one's own,

4. development and practice of self-discipline.

It seems that many students and some faculty members at Dartmouth College have been sadly lacking in at least threefourths of these essentials in the past few decades. The Trustees and employees (including the faculty and administrative officers) should without delay consider the real meaning of "education" and the justification, if any, for the College to continue as an educational institution.

Okemos, Mich.

The Point Is Justice

I read with amusement the letters from alumni making such a issue of the antiapartheid demonstrations. "Getting and spending" have "laid waste" their thinking powers. To be against doing business with South Africa is neither "left" nor "right." It deals rather with one's sense of justice and fair play.

While I am proud to be a Dartmouth graduate, I do not feel that my financial support buys a "piece of the action." One thing we can be certain of and that is change. We all change - times change. Obviously my fellow alumni have become extremely conservative and narrow of mind. It is also quite obvious they adhere to the philosophy that "money talks."

Odessa, Texas

All Human

For ever so long, we've been reading about how the students think they know best how to run the affairs of the College,, and how the faculty thinks they know best, and the administration thinks it knows best, and the trustees think they know best, and the alumni think they know best - and all of the troubles which have ensued from all of these false assumptions.

Symbols, coaches, alumni, personnel, students, administration, all have reached the headlines. The quieter protests of alumni putting zippers on their pockets and locks on their wallets has been just as sad as all the rest of it.

Finally, in June I decided to put in my two cents worth with an extra special gift to the Alumni Fund. I was very pleased to learn that contributors with special needs or special gifts are not treated better than anyone else.

All in all, I am beginning to believe that we _ students, faculty, administrators, trustees, alumni _ are all human. What a comedown for Dartmouth.

Gainesville, Fla.

More Urgent Than Symbols

Debate over the Indian symbol in the letters columns contrasts with unconcern over the issues of acid rain, and the relationship between liberal arts education and citizenship responsibilities. Some thoughts on all three.

Alumni (I know of no alumnae) who want the Indian back, deserve empathy, but they need to extend it as well. Native Americans at Dartmouth may look more kindly on bringing back the Indian (purely as a symbol minus caricatures and with a veto over its use held by Indian students, a suggestion made by one thoughtful alumnus) if alumni genuinely helped Native Americans.

Suggestion: Dartmouth as an institution, students, and alumni should launch, in cooperation with Native Americans, a national campaign for Indian rights, establishing in every Congressional District an "Indian rights lobby." Other schools which had or have the Indian symbol (William and Mary, Stanford, U. Mass., etc.) might cooperate. Native Americans at Dartmouth (and elsewhere) would see more than lip service coming from alumni who claim to respect Indians.

Even if Native American students and the administration did not relent on the symbol, the Dartmouth community could take pride in making a real contribution to Indian and American life. Native Americans would gain, and Dartmouth would be esteemed nationally.

Right now, outraged alumni are talking tokenism. "First they stole - and continue to steal - the Indians' land, then Whites paternalistically expect Indians to be thankful for (and silent because of) some scholarship aid. What chutzpah." This is a sad truth, even from a female, German citizen with a Harvard degree (my wife).

Are we for or against Native Americans? How many of us are among the 10,000 Navajos threatened with forced relocation from their land in Arizona, and how many of us are stockholders, even executives, of energy companies which covet resources under that land? How many alumni even know about the problem, let alone are helping the Navajos?

Surely, there are Men and Women of Dartmouth who will start the ball rolling on a national, Dartmouth-led campaign for Indian rights. Although living in Europe, I would want to help.

Second. None of our grandchildren will want to attend Dartmouth, whatever the symbol, if acid rain is not fought quickly. Dartmouth will not survive the destruction of the White Mountains. The death of the woods here in Bavaria is simply more advanced than it is in the U.S. Yet, Dartmouth, the White Mountains, and other threatened parts of the U.S. have lost six precious years because of the stupid, shortsighted behavior of the Reagan administration.

A second proposal: a national campaign, spearheaded by. Dartmouth men and women, to save the forests (and much more) of America. Obvious allies: college communities in other similarly threatened areas of the Northeast and elsewhere. Focusing on a symbol while allowing the coming desolation of Hanover is short-sighted in the extreme.

A third point. We took all those humanities and social science courses and then, in the real world, we accept politicians who are corrupt and deceitful, a society with millions (including most Indians) mired in poverty, and the tinseling and vulgarization of public discourse and society. Why? What use then is our education? (These problems, in fairness to President Reagan, pre-date and will survive his administration.)

Whatever our views on Reagan policies, I hope Men and Women of Dartmouth will mobilize to support Native Americans and oppose acid rain and the destruction of Dartmouth.

Munich, West Germany

Best of the Year

I am pleased that you printed in the Summer issue parts of the Class Day address of Professor David Kastan. Dartmouth people delivered many public speeches in the garrulous year of 1985-86. Of those I heard dealing with the fundamental purposes of the College, Kastan's was the best.

All the more pity, then, that the excerpts printed did not include the splendid anecdote Kastan quoted from Ben Franklin. The response of the Six Nations to the Virginia government's offer to educate native youth both enabled Kastan to make some telling points about the function of education and bore trenchantly on the issue of diversity that concerns the College. I hope you will print it in a future issue.

Professor of English Hanover, N.H.

Oversight Corrected

Amid the reporting of last June's Commencement and Class Day exercises, the Alumni Magazine neglected to mention the faculty member who by plebiscite of the. graduating class was cited not only for his teaching expertise but also for his substantial influence on the class as a whole. An animated lecturer and enlightened pedagogue, Dr. Kenneth Shewmaker received the Class of 1986 Distinguished Teaching Award; as a veteran of all three of Dr. Shewmaker's upper-level U.S. foreign relations courses, I can attest that this is an award richly deserved.

The failure to mention this was surely an oversight, but one that really should be corrected, albeit if a few months late.

Washington, D.C.

Not Gentlemanly

A Virginian and an alumnus of more than 55 years standing used the Summer issue of this magazine to tell a freshman woman student of the College to love it or leave it. Her offense was to point out to Mr. McLaughlin what her heart and mind told her: The sledgehammerers (not the shanty builders) brought discredit to Dartmouth and she was ashamed at that moment to be a Dartmouth student.

The alumnus (nameless here in the hope of avoiding future controversy) deserves a respectful hearing, but he must know that his response to criticism is not in the tradition of College or Nation, nor does it appear to be chivalrous or gentlemanly.

Great Neck, N.Y.

Missed Opportunity

By refusing to allow a certain student to graduate with his class of 1986, the College missed a golden opportunity. At one stroke this student-activist would have been converted into an "alumnus" eligible for "pacification" (see Prof. Wood's committee report) and able to intervene in campus affairs only by supplying "generous sums of money" (see letter by Page Smith '40 in your Summer issue).

Oh yes, he could view the Hovey murals too at reunion, at least.

Houston, Texas

Wrong Credit

In his "Postscript," Douglas Greenwood made reference to an article in The Dartmouth about "the Dartmouth Disease," citing Andrea Frankel '86 as the author. The Dartmouth writer, in fact, was Valerie Frankel '87, and the article was one in her weekly series of personal observations which appeared throughout the year. I am enclosing a copy of Valerie's "Our Incurable Disease" and hope you'll enjoy a delightful column.

Short Hills, N.J.

Eleazar Come Home

O Tempore O' Mores.

One must go far away these days to sing Eleazar. My classmates recently sang it in an Austrian beer hall, as I did last fall in Tonga with an Amherst alumnus. When will that great song be allowed in its home town?

Westport, Mass.

A Limit on Reich

I take one exception to your otherwise excellent article on Bob Reich. The diminutive dynamo could have played center for the Knicks only between the eras of Willis Reed and Patrick Ewing.

Shrewsbury, N.J.

Unequal Treatment

I have just read in The New York Times that students who occupied Baker Library in April' to protest the College's continued investments in companies who invest in South Africa were punished by being fined $100 each and having their campus activities restricted. Additionally three seniors will receive diplomas one year late. The same article stated that the students who destroyed shanties with sledgehammers were originally suspended, but President McLaughlin decided to lighten their sentences. Finally, the article noted that President McLaughlin condemned the punishments of the anti-apartheid protesters as too lenient and said liberal protesters should be treated similarly to conservative protesters. I find these events quite disturbing, and I fail to see how President McLaughlin can compare these two very different events. In the case of the Snti-apartheid protesters students were peacefully protesting a situation which they felt was morally wrong, namely the racial injustice in South Africa, which they feel the College is promoting by its current investment policies. On the other hand, the students who destroyed the shanties with sledgehammers acted violently and exhibited intolerance for opposing viewpoints. These two incidents should not be dealt with similarly, because they are not similar; peaceful and thoughtful protest is not similar to violent, intolerant destruction of property. President McLaughlin should stop trying to equalize the punishments for the liberal and conservative protesters and look at the nature of the protests instead, i.e., is the protest peaceful and constructive or is it violent and intolerant?

When I was at Dartmouth a few years ago, I thought the students were somewhat apathetic about world affairs and thus when I read of the events at Dartmouth this year I was encouraged. Students had decided to stand up for something they believed in, even though it did not directly affect their daily lives. This is part of the "liberal" arts education, which Dartmouth boasts about so readily. It is important for students and others to air their views and debate important issues. Unfortunately, the harsh punishments which the student protesters received will discourage them and other concerned students from airing their views. The result will be that the free flow of ideas and the open discussions so important to a liberal arts education will be stymied.

Cleveland, Ohio

Fixer Hicks

Adding to my extensive collection of Iwish-I'd-written-thats is this comment from Hal Ripley '29 on the Eleazar Wheelock Award to Ort Hicks at the recent Commencement:

There's a marvellous mentor named Hicks

Who lives way up north in the sticks, Where seldom arises A problem or crisis That Ort and his wisdom can't ficks.

Los Angeles, Calif.

Shorter Letters

The May issue of the Dartmouth AlumniMagazine is fairly typical: Under the heading "Letters" are the mental meanderings of 46 individuals, filling about 25 columns, comprising approximately 11,200 well chosen (?) words. Most of the subjects put forward remind me of the old gag about the prisoners yelling out numbers instead of reciting jokes, because all their jokes had been repeated so often.

I'm glad so many alumni(ae?) are interested in Dartmouth, but couldn't you impose a limit of 200 words? It would be good discipline for the writer to compose thoughts, rather than ramble. We could learn what concerns the alumni(ae?), yet be spared the endless drivel exemplified by, say, R.S. '75, whose effort came to 2+ full columns - about 1000+ words. (No of fense,there, R.S.)

Greensboro, N.C.