42
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Tuesday, September 24,1968
Careful, don't muff it
Tonight the All Student Council will present to its members the means of its self-destruction.
The Senate Code of the Report of the Student Faculty Committee on University Governance will be read for the first time in the ASC meeting. The proposed Senate Code will abolish ASC and establish a Student Senate as a part of the University Senate in its place.
The proposed Senate Code is seventeen-and-a half typewritten pages long. It covers all the structural changes in the proposed plan for increased student representation at KU.
Therefore, since the code lays down fine points as powers and privileges in language such as:
"Subject to and in accordance with the control of the Chancellor and the Board of Regents as provided by law, the Student Senate is empowered to formulate such rules and regulations as it shall deem wise and proper for the control and government of such affairs of the University as directly and primarily affect the students of the University and to take such steps as it shall deem necessary for their implementation and administration."
the code is quite complex.
According to an ASC schedule outlined by Joe Goering, ASC vice-president, the actual ASC vote on the code won't be until the Oct. 8 meeting.
An ASC member has remarked that the code was too big to be rushed through and that all students should be given ample time to consider this action.
This is true.
But let's not muff the most important measure coming before ASC for this year and possibly for years both in the past and future.
The ASC has been famed in the past for its ability to remain inactive, for its propensity to skirt the issue.
in this case, the council will have a very direct
hand in shaping the future of the proposed changes by its discussion and possible amendments to the code.
Therefore, a word of caution to all ASC members:
Listen well to the reading of the Senate Code and then read the code, the corresponding majority report of the committee and also the important dissenting minority report.
Think about it and discuss it thoroughly with fellow students.
And when the time comes to discuss the code, avoid picking the wording apart and arguing over petty points.
But, on the other hand, don't avoid discussing in detail the advantages and disadvantages of some of the significant points.
The designation of the Dean of Student Affairs as presiding officer of the Student Senate, instead of the Student Body president as in ASC, is one of the most important areas of possible disagreement with the code.
The ASC and eventually the student body will vote only upon the Senate Code, and not on either the majority or minority report.
However, for the purpose of ASC, the minority report with its proposals of 50 per cent student representation, recommendations on the election of University Senate members, student representation on the Board of Regents, the jurisdiction of some departments, the abolishing of the Associate Women Students and the offices of Deans of Men and Women, and the University's community involvement is votal discussion material.
Even if the Senate Code isn't altered by the minority report this fall, the eventual University Senate will probably be affected in the future by the minority proposals.
Alison Steimel
Editorial Editor
the black artist
'You wondered'
by John Marshall
You would have been stupid if you didn't loosen your tie, or undo a few buttons Saturday night while watching him there, on the square hunk of wood in the middle of the basketball court. It was the man there, the hunched, humble shoulders, the smile, cord in left hand, a twist . . . turn around . . . Uuuh, Thank You. He was there as the black artist himself, and he said so if you remember the words "our kind of people."
Alone on the stage, and than a curt bow, both hands clutching the mike, white or red or brown or black V-cut blouse bending slightly, sweat dripping from the straining face as he stood there, feeling.
It was like John Scheib said, "Man, he's a genius. I mean he likes perfection. He likes to be perfect about what he says, and how other people understand him. That's what he's doing up there, telling people about how he feels."
Scheib sat there during the show and looked at the dials, the plates, the sound indicators for each speaker and wondered about his job as sound director.
"You know, it's kind of like you're controlling—no, you're holding, crudling—a man's emotions, his feelings about everything. You take a man's art, his soul, his feelings, and them run them through these wires and out through the speakers, and it makes you feel like some sort of . . . of tink . . . between the artistry and the people."
You could see it in that fat lady there, in Section F near the end, fanning herself, wiping misty glasses, tapping a foot in the alce, mouthing a few words, and always watching and looking.
But Saturday night, John Scheib did his job well. They all did it well.
And in David Iskin who is a housepainter from Cleveland Heights, Ohio. Sleeps rolled up, the garbled fingers tapping a silent rhythm to "Rock Island Line," . . . and his wife Esther, sitting quietly, lips parted, barely moving, but moving to the sounds coming out into the first balcony.
And there was the gray-haired lady selling cokes near section E who said it was the first time in four years that she had run out. "Usually, we have stacks and stacks left after a show is finished.
Boy, they really must be hot out there. But then who wouldn't get a little worked up over an entertainer like that."
But the stage was there, that hunk of wood in the middle of Allen Field House with the lights, blue, red and yellow. Then the smile again, the strain in his eyes as he thinks about how he feels when that sound comes out through those speakers.
The three young black students from Kansas City were there, looking into the blue stage. "Man, what do you mean has he some soul? Sure . . . but in a different sort of way. I mean soul is feeling. And for every black man it may be something different—and the same thing goes for the black artist. The key is in being yourself. Being uninhibited—no, extremely uninhibited."
So, you might think, there was more than just a man or an entertainer up there on that wooden block. It was emotion. Emotion which for some was hard to recognize fully. A blonde coed, front row, section E said, "You know, it's like he's not really there, like you're watching him on the tube or something and it can't be real. It's really different."
A black artist was there last Saturday, giving his own, very personal testimony in his own smooth, quiet, rhythmic way. He was, through the art he gave to the 10,000 or so people in the big gymnasium, trying to say somethin' trying to bring each one of us midwesterners a little closer to the black artist. And maybe to black people.
The man there, black artist, humble, saying that he felt uninhibited, was something that is rare for most midwestern blonde coeds. And midwestern students in general.
And when it was over two hours later, you wondered whether anyone really understood what had come through John Sheib's speakers. "Sure I liked it. I thought his rhythm section was tremendous, and that guitar player was fantastic. Colored people always do the best kind of job with that sort of thing . . . The man who said that is a senior at the University of Kansas and will get a college degree in June.
You wondered
Aimed at vacuum?
'New politics'
The movement that came out of New Hampshire with Senator Eugene McCarthy as its symbol may have had to struggle for breath in Chicago; but it is doubtful that what was dubbed the "new politics" heard its death knell there.
Whether the new politics has been shelved temporarily or is being absorbed by old party networks is not yet evident; but if it still lives—it could be thriving by 1972.
lives it could be thriving by 1972.
If talk of '72 appears to be political poppycock aimed at confusing an already confused electorate, a glance at recent presidential campaigns is noteworthy. It has become obvious since 1960 that presidential nominations are not won at the national conventions, or even a few months prior to the convention. In fact, only one of the conventions since 1948 has taken more than one ballot to nominate its candidate. Nominations are shaped and structured in the "out" party at least four years prior to the national party convention.
The formula practiced by John Kennedy in 1960 and proven by Barry Goldwater in 1964 was reaffirmed this year by Richard Nixon. Nominations take shape at the grass roots level: begin at the precinct level; place key supporters in local party posts; win a few key primaries and persuade party leaders before the convention.
The ambitious young supporters of Senator Eugene McCarthy would do well to take a lesson from this formula. Should Hubert Humphrey lose, as seems increasingly probably, the advocates of the new politics would be in an advantageous position. Certainly the old guard in the Democratic party would be forced to turn a more receptive ear to the voice that struggled to be heard at the Chicago convention.
Four years of strategist work within the framework of the Democratic party could yield more of the Don Petersons of Wisconsin and Julian Bonds of Georgia. Near the end of his campaign, McCarthy hinted at such long-range developments.
True, he probably was providing a cushion for his inevitable defeat; but more importantly, he was pointing to political reality. There just may be a power vacuum waiting to be filled in the Democratic party after the November election.
Richard Lundquist Editorial Assistant
Letters to the Editor
To the Editor:
Voice complaints
I would like to congratulate the UDK on its ability to manage the news. I never realized this trait until the articles by Pam Smith and Steve Haynes Wednesday, September 18. This piece of literary excellence on the campus group known as Peoples Voice merely reinforced the biased, uninformed opinions which the majority of the paper's public already holds. My main complaint deals with the sentence, "During the one and one-half hours meeting the only area of general agreement was the need to radicalize the student body." What a statement! Not only is it wholly ambiguous, but the use of the word "radicalize" here and again later merely reinforces the general opinion of the group. Voice. By the use of this word, the paper has done a fine job reiterating the supposed objective of Voice—Burn! Overthrow! Anarchy!
What I question is why the paper does not publish the whole of the presentations Tuesday, or at least enough of each (side) so that the average, uninformed student (about Voice) can form an opinion based on all the facts. Or at least they could publish enough of each dissertation to give an idea of what was really said, and the ideas behind
them. I will admit that in one or two cases this was done, especially when referring to specific individuals. But the Kansan takes quite a responsibility when it speaks for the group as a whole, and I question the validity of a single quotation being applied to "several members." All that the paper has to do is find the lad with the tape-recorder, unless of course, he is a reporter, and then the paper is to be truly chastized.
True, Voice wants to "radicalize" the student body, but not to burn or kill. I have yet to even hear anyone even suggest a crucifixion on the chancellor. They are concerned with issues, each member in his own way, and there is not a "Voice-Policy" on any one item. Some of these issues are the military on campus, the draft, the plight of the Indian in Lawrence, and white racism -yes, there is white racism at KU.
These people are radical, but they think, and though not always right or in the best way, they act. So I implore the UDK, if they are to present this issue to the public again, which they must, and any other issue, please give a fair representation of what transpired.
Yours truly,
John A. Naramore
Kansan Telephone Numbers
Newroom-UN 4-3864 Business Office-UN 4-4358
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except holidays and examination periods. Mail subscription rates: $6 a semester, $10 a year. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kan. 89044. Accommodations, goods, services and employment advertised offered to all students without regard to color, areed or national origin. Options expressed are not necessarily those of the University of Kansas at the State Board of Regents.
Executive Staff
Executive Star
Managing Editor Monte Mace
Business Manager Jack Haney
Assistant Managing Editors, Pat Crawford, Charla Jenkins, Alan T. Jones,
Steve Morgan, Allen Winchester
City Editor Bob Butler
Assistant City Editor Kathy Hall
Editorial Editor Alison Stelmel
Editorial Editor Richard Lundquist
Sports Editor Ron Yates
Feature and Society Editor Rea Wilson
Associate Feature Editor Sharon Woodson
Copy Chiefs Judy Dague, Linda McCrerey, Don Wendell, Sally
Zahradnik Marilyn Zook
Morgan Mike Willman
Advertising Manager