Editorials
Campus beauty cows before function
As the roar of the crowd subsides and the roar of the earthmoving machines take over, the battle of Fraser Hall ends.
But, however hot the tempers and outraged the sensibilities, the furor over Fraser was just one battle—a battle in the war that has been going on on campus for years. It is a war between the functional and the beautiful in campus architecture. Unfortunately, beauty has been the loser in recent years.
FIRST, IT SHOULD be noted that practicality and beauty are not necessarily mutually exclusive—a functional building can also be beautiful. Nevertheless, in institutional architecture, the use of one seems to rule out the other.
The KU campus is endowed with an unusually beautiful natural setting. The magnificent view of the Kansas and the Wakarusa river valleys, Potter Lake in the fall and Lillac Lane in the spring are all things other schools yearn to be able to equal.
And the beauty at KU is not a random thing. There are large crews of men working the year round to maintain the campus' beauty. Trees, shrubs and flowers are pruned to present the most pleasing view of a particular site. Every area of the campus has, at one time, been carefully planned and landscaped.
BUT, DESPITE THE tremendous efforts of the ground crews, the public administration has consistently managed to do things that mar the beauty of the campus. The proponents of practicality have been having their way at the expense of natural beauty.
All the buildings erected on the campus since the 1940's have been decidedly functional structures. However, they have failed miserably to ornament Mount Oread.
Fraser was only the latest of the battles lost. There have been Malott, Summerfield, Murphy and additions to Dyche and Watson. Each building is practical but not attractive.
ALL THE NEW residence halls constructed on the "modular" plan are fine examples of functional monoliths. They are excluded from criticism, for the most part, however, because they are usually built away from the main campus and are, if 1 may, strict business ventures.
While profits are fine in the residence hall system, the University should be an institution for learning and not for making or saving money. Economy should not be allowed to desecrate the beauty of the campus.
So far it has been allowed to do so. Efforts have been made to relate new structures to the old. But just how much can a facade of native limestone add to architectural design? The farther the building is from the top of the hill, the less effort is made to relate it to the rest of the campus. The ones that stand with the buildings from earlier days of the University, such as Blake and new Fraser, are designed with all the modern ideas and covered with a red roof or limestone and voila!, they fit with their surroundings.
THE EARLIER ADMINISTRATORS of the University seemed to have some feeling for the problem and most of the buildings erected by them were designed in an effort to complement the natural setting in which they were placed. This tradition has vanished.
New the criteria for designing a university building is "Have we wasted a square foot of space anywhere?" Functionality reigns supreme.
Isn't it possible to design a building that will easily and tastefully fit into its surroundings without being a monument to waste? If we continue on our present course we soon will have one of the most practical campuses in the nation . . . and one of the ugliest.
Glen Phillips
Advisers needn't spoon feed
Editor's Note-This is the third in a series of articles discussing the problems of students and advisers in the present guidance system.
In order to make advising the personal relationship it is claimed to be, the student and adviser must understand their respective roles and responsibilities.
James K. Hitt, KU registrar, feels that if the student enrolls himself, he misses something. But, assigning an adviser does not insure a meaningful aid to curriculum planning. "I think the student comes away empty because sometimes there is no understanding of what he is supposed to get." Bitt said.
UNDER THE PRESENT system, both student and adviser are given the responsibility of familiarizing themselves with the various requirements of the University and the special programs offered. The freshman is not familiar enough with the University to gain the necessary information for accepting this responsibility. His best source is the adviser.
All such conflicting impressions could be clarified if all definitions of the adviser-student relationship were uniform throughout the numerous University handbooks.
Under such a system, the student could be required to have briefed himself on the general requirements for his field. The adviser would have to be informed on requirements for all the areas or at least know who students should contact in special cases.
The student should, then, expect his adviser's help in determining the most beneficial route by which he can achieve his desired goal. He should expect the adviser to be well-informed about the University and what it has to offer in every area.
He should not expect to find a crying towel where he can deposit all of his problems. The responsibility of the contact should be up to the student. Each adviser, like each student, has a distinct personality and distinct interests. It is unfair to expect that each adviser will be willing to be a friend and consultant for intellectual problems. This should be left to each student and adviser.
IF THESE RESPONSIBILITIES are understood, the student cannot leave his interview with an empty feeling. Both must fulfill the required roles for the system to be effective. Whatever comes after that depends on the personalities and interests of those involved.
I Spy
THE STUDENT HANDBOOK'S assertion that the adviser is the first person to whom the student should turn with study problems makes an unfair demand on the adviser. He should be available for major problems. The required duties of the adviser should be restricted to helping plan a meaningful and beneficial curriculum. He should provide information on special programs of particular value in this area.
Right now I'm making little lists.
I sometimes fancy as I spy,
That I excel the FBI.
Janet Hamilton
Of folks I think are Communists.
I have no proof on anyone. And yet the lists are loads of
All friends of foreign aid I think.
Must be set down as rather pink.
A little pinker not far off,
I list perforce the college prof.
And pinker yet the college crowd,
That lauds the Bill of Rights out loud.
And redder still on my red lists.
Are all the integrationists.
Just for good measure in my labors.
UN supporters as I've said,
Are also ipso facto red.
And redder still on my red lists.
Are all the integrationists.
I add a few of my good neighbors.
Thus I rejoice that loyalty,
Resides alone in you and me.
Although before my work is through,
You may, good friend, be listed too.
— The Daily Iowan
2 Daily Kansan Monday, November 1. 1965
We Were thinking...
Whatever is in any way beautiful hath its source of beauty in itself, and is complete in itself; praise forms no part of it. So it is none the worse nor the better for being praised.
— Marcus Aurelius
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
kansan
Founded 1889
EXECUTIVE STAFF
serving KU for 76 of its 100 Years
UNiversity 4-3646, newsroom
UNiversity 4-3198, business office
Represented by National Advertising Service, 18 East 50 St., New York, N.Y. 10022. Mail subscription rates: $4 a semester or $7 a year. Published and second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kan, every afternoon during the University year except Saturdays and Sundays. University holidays and examination periods. Accommodations, goods, services and employment advertised in the University Daily Kansan are offered to all students without regard to color, creed or national origin.
MANAGING EDITOR ... Judy Farrell
BUSINESS MANAGER ... Ed Vaughn
EDITORIAL EDITORS ... Janet Hamilton, Karen Lambert
NEWS AND BUSINESS STAFF
Assistant Managing Editors ... Suzy Black, Susan Hartley
                Jane Larson, Jacke Thayer
Circulation Manager ... Mike Robe
Advertising Manager ... Dale Reinecker
City Editor ... Joan McCabe
Fall concert
Goulet woos audience With vibrant voice
By Mary Dunlap
Give an entertainer a bare stage, a few stage lights, a microphone, and if he is Robert Goulet, you'll have an evening of real entertainment.
Robert Goulet proved to a capacity crowd at KU Saturday night that he is one of the most talented entertainers around today. His rich voice and vibrant personality carried each song to every corner of the Field House. The only problem was that the audience didn't get to see enough of him.
GRANTED, THE GREENWOOD County Singers are a fresh, talented young group of musicians. However, the time that was allotted to them on the program was just too much.
Some of the members of the audience were beginning to wonder if the show had been mistakenly labeled "The Robert Goulet Show," instead of the "Greenwood County Hour."
Although the group was not aware of it until the close of their first appearance, their dialogue was nearly inaudible to the crowd at the northern end of the Field House. The moment that they did realize the difficulty, the "Singers" did try to correct it. Their final song did come through, but the impression was cast—one that overshadowed the quality and originality of their performance.
RALPH MARTERIE, as he explained later in a press conference, attempted to give every member of the audience, regardless of age, an evening of enjoyment. He did accomplish this, and made the "In Crowd" as happy as a number of slightly nostalgic older adults who might long for the days of the "big band sound."
When he directed "Hang On Sloppy," he brought the house down, a true tribute to his attempt to provide all-around entertainment to the crowd.
Robert Goulet brought an extra ingredient to the stage with him, an ingredient that sparkled his too-short performance in the too-long first half, all the way to the climax and finale, "If Ever I Would Leave You." This special quality and added touch was a vibrant and forceful personality, and the same degree of humanness that Harry Belafonte demonstrated last year.
HE BROUGHT TO KU an elfin quality, as he stood and led KU fans in a cheer at the football game Saturday. Later he confided, "I was a raid I'd forget how to spell 'Kansas.'" in reference to his classically-disastrous attempt to sing "The Star-Spangled Banner" at the Clay-Liston fight.
The choice of songs was varied, but all of them revolved around the theme of love: "My Funny Valentine," "Love, Love, Love," and "My Love Forgive Me." "Sollilocuv" from "Caousel" reflected the love that he has in real life for his family and children.
The several medleys were well-received also . . . the only complaint was that some of the audience wished they could hear all of every song: an impossible feat that would have taken all night.
Despite the few technicalities of programming that did not give Goulet enough time on the stage, the final reaction to his performance was almost unanimously "marvelous."
One coed, clutching an autographed program in her hand, swore to get all of his albums as soon as possible. On such an example we can call the evening with the knight from Camelot an enormous success.