Page 2
University Daily Kansan
Monday, Jan. 13, 1964
Conscience
Probably the greatest single barrier to East-West understanding has been failure of the Communist-bloc nations to live up to their agreements with the West. A fairly complete history of the cold war could be compiled, in fact, by documenting Communist violations of international agreements.
SO IT IS all the more incredible that the first threat to violate the three-month-old nuclear test ban treaty has come not from a Communist official, but from a candidate for President of the United States, Senator Barry Goldwater.
In a nationally televised interview Goldwater said: "If it appeared to be to our advantage to test in the atmosphere, I would renounce the (test ban) treaty." He also said the treaty "is of no advantage to us."
Admittedly, there probably never will be a treaty that we—or any other nation—will continue to abide by "if it appeared to our advantage" to no longer do so. But still it strikes us as a mite indiscreet for a prospective U.S. President to admit in effect that his foreign policy would be based entirely on expediency.
IF, BY SOME unforeseeable accident, Goldwater were to assume the Presidency, part of his duties would be to negotiate treaties—with both allies and rivals—a task which he might find considerably complicated by his implying that he respects international agreements only to the extent that they serve immediate ends.
What Goldwater intended to accomplish by his remarks is not clear—their political value is at best questionable—but it is a pretty safe bet that he has succeeded in giving the Communists a remarkably cheap propaganda victory. A man who has been in public life as long as Goldwater should have learned by now how to avoid making statements which can easily be used to promote anti-Americanism abroad.
BUT WHAT is really disturbing about the Senator's pronouncement is what it implies about his sense of political ethics. Goldwater's attitude toward the test ban treaty can't help but make us wonder if his criteria for abiding to all political covenants isn't the test of "advantage."
What does a conservative's conscience say about that, Barry?
— In The Colorado Daily
"I'll Huff And I'll Puff And I'll Blow Myself Down"
The People Say
Independents Do Care About Rock Chalk
Editor:
Editor.
The spirit of our holidays was dampened last Tuesday. Why? Because we read the University Daily Kansan! Once again, a powerful, crusading article has opened before the eyes of the KU campus, a controversy! Oh, let us quickly leap into the thick of it!
The January 7 edition of the University Daily Kansan blazed off the presses with this proud headline pulsing atop the front page: KU-Y ANNOUNCES ROCK CHALK TEAMS; INDEPENDENTS ANGRY. Shades of yellow journalism! If some "independents" weren't angry before reading that headline, they should be now.
The article named the four winning script writing teams which are this year, as in the past, all representing sororities and fraternities. Then, with the certainty of its world famous omniscience, the UDK ventured an opinion. "The dampened spirits, however, reigned highest among the independent groups." Certainly, the independents who had worked on Rock Chalk were disappointed. It always hurts to lose! Yet (and here we speak as beings slightly less than omniscient) we cannot help feeling that there are "Greeks" on campus who feel just as disappointed as we do. There were nine teams in the competition; only three were independent. What about the two Hellenic teams which lost?
According to the Kansan, the directors from both Lewis and Hashinger Halls feel: "the fault is not in the judging but in the independent group's lack of interest." The article again misrepresented the facts, for the interest at one of those halls, at least was high as was the interest of the hall it worked with on Rock Chalk. We feel that other independent teams showed interest just as did Greek teams—the worked long and hard on their scripts.
The Rock Chalk staff, whose quaint letter to the editor appeared in the January 9 edition of the Kansan, cited an independent woman as asking that "an independent script be accepted regardless of the quality of that script." Her opinion should not and must not be taken as representative of all independents who worked on Rock Chalk. What we do ask is that the UDK and the Revue staff stop abusing the facts in this "controversy."
As to what we do feel could be done to improve the Rock Chalk competition—we should like to see extensive, detailed, written
critiques of each skit be given to their respective teams at the end of the competition. This would, we feel, raise the standards of the Revue. The critiques would let the teams know exactly where their scripts were weak. The winning scripts could be improved before final production. The losing teams would have something to refer to, a basis for improving any future scripts. As it now stands, the only certainty about a losing script is that it received fewer points in the judging than did the winning scripts. How can one approach a new script not knowing how he failed on the old one? We are certain that all whose scripts were rejected would like to know a few more details about the judging.
A final word to our favorite "teacher"—Dear Professor Craft-on: You may now assume that they (the independents) care!
Carol Jenista
Caldwell junior
Charles Turpen
Omaha, Neb., sophomore
Co-directors, Hashinger-
Battenfeld script committee
On Rock Chalk
Although I did appreciate the attention which the University Daily Kansan gave to the interests of the independent groups entered in the 1964 Rock Chalk competition, I feel that certain points were misrepresented in the article.
Editor:
For the past few years, independents have been encouraged to enter the competition. We recognize past independent entries as naive attempts. But our living groups have no back files of script material or technical information to rely on as do the Greek organizations who have participated in the past.
Most unfortunate was the use of the word "angry" in the headline. Angry, no; concerned, yes. We do feel that this is the time to bring this matter to the attention of the student body.
Our problem has been lack of information rather than lack of interest.
The director's manual provided by the KU-Y enumerated the material to be included in the final draft. But unfortunately it did not specify in what manner this material was to be presented. I would suggest that the KU-Y make a back file of winning scripts available to all entering living groups. These scripts could serve as models for presentation of material, acceptable script content and production possibilities.
We do not expect to be admitted to Rock Chalk because we are independents. We are anxious to present scripts of first-rate quality. I cannot convince myself that two-thirds of our campus population could be so infinitely less talented than the other one-third. And, we are, despite the opinions of some, interested in participating.
I would like to note that Mr. Crafton's remarks concerning the "proposed idea for judging" were made in reference to a suggestion by your reporter. This plan, as I understand it, would make provision for the presentation of four skits, two Greek and two independent. Entries, then, would be judged in two divisions, independents and non-independents. This is an interesting proposal but unnecessary.
I would suggest a change in the judging procedure. Under the present triplan, scripts are submitted in triplicate. One is examined by a KU professor; the others are sent to professors on two other campuses. While I recognize this as an ingenious device to prevent bias in the selection of the scripts, I feel it is rather a hindrance. Judging should be confined to our own campus where the nature and design of the revue are most clearly understood.
Perhaps now is the time to review the purpose of Rock Chalk. Is it (A) To entertain; (B) To represent, through entertainment, student attitudes; (C) One-third of the student attitudes; (D) All student attitudes; (E) All of these, or (F) None of these?
One final question: Has Rock Chalk become a production too great to continue as only one face of the extensive activities of a student organization such as the KUY? Much student labor is expended, often to the detriment of gpa's. Should all of this effort and the presumably large box-office receipts be channeled through one organization?
Kaye Whitaker Wichita junior
(Ed. Note: This is an open letter to Alan Stamper, editor of the Javhawker.)
It was with eager anticipation that I picked up my issue of the Fall 1964 Jayhawker today. I reasoned that if the Fall issue was coming out on Jan. 7, no doubt it would be a jewel of a work, worthy to be enshrined in the Yearbook Hall of Fame, if such there be.
However, I regret to inform you that I was abysmally, unspeakably, and irretrievably disillusioned.
Being a former member of our high school yearbook staff, I feel somewhat qualified to criticise, constructively, the product of your staff.
Opening the book, I found myself confronted by a defaced golden circle inside a black square, surrounded by amateurish copy. Next I struggled through several agonizing (or is it agonized?) pages of miscellaneous photos ostensibly pertaining to Rush and returning students. Outside of the fact that the pictures were not the best in composition, the page layouts looked as if they had been assembled by a group of the less exalted primates.
I next found myself faced by the administration section. Let us just say that I am still bewitched, bothered, and bewildered by pages twenty-four and twenty-five, one of the more salient examples in the publication of cancer of the captions.
As for the features section, the miscreant who foisted this upon the students should be eternally doomed to an inferno in which he would be obliged to gaze at his work until his eyes failed him.
Then I saw the title "sports," and thought that my search for, at the least, mediocrity would soon be over. But my expectations were thwarted. I will not say that the pictures of the athletes were bad; I will not say that the statistics were a mystery in arithmetic; I will not deplore the few action
pictures that are included; I will not even ask if the copy writer has passed the English Pro: I will merely inquire why this section, one of the more important in the yearbook, did not measure up to the magnificence of the color picture on pages sixty-two and sixty-three.
The section of student photos is adequate, and I freely admit that the nature of this sort of section is generally uninspiring. However, the pictorial Muse was certainly not remiss in her duties during the entire four months of preparation, was she?
I hope that your next three efforts will show much maturation of style and content.
In conclusion, I would like to say that never has the adage "You can't judge a book by its cover" been more forcefully brought home to me than by the 118 pages of insult to student intelligence and good taste sandwiched between two handsomely designed covers.
When I next came to the Hilltopper-Hillteacher part, my attenuated hopes began to revive—only to be greeted by the "bloodshot" pages immediately following. In my personal, Puritan, prudish opinion, I think that the subjects of "poison ivy at the Sand Bar," nudity and innuendoes thereof, modern plumbing, the stages and social ramifications of inebriation, and last (but not least) "parakeets" do not deserve light, pictorial treatment in the annual of an institution of the caliber of Kansas University.
Michael O'Brien
Michael Village freshman
Prairie Village
Daily fransan
University of Kansas student newspaper
111 Flint Hall
UNiversity 4-3646, newsroom
University 4-5044, newborn
UNiversity 4-3198, business office
Founded 1889, became biweekly 1904, triweekly 1908, daily Jan. 16, 1912.
Member Inland Daily Press Association, Associated Collegiate Press.
Represented by National Advertising Service, 18 East 50 St., New York 22,
N.Y. News service: United Press International. Mail subscription rates:
$3 a semester or $5 a year. Published in Lawrence, Kan., every afternoon during the University year except Saturdays and Sundays, University holidays, and examination periods. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas.
NEWS DEPARTMENT
NEWS DEPARTMENT Mike Miller ... Managing Editor
EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT
Blaine King ... Editorial Editor
RUSINESS DEPARTMENT
Bob Brooks ... Business Manager