Page 2
University Daily Kansan
Tuesday, Oct. 13, 1964
Jayhawker Reviewed
Amid ringing cries of libel, misstatement of facts, etc., I feel it has become necessary to explain myself on one part of the editorial, "KU's Poor Jayhawker."
I did misstate one fact. This was the cost per page for the organization and living group pictures. However, in doing so I said "it costs $100 a page for organizations to get their pictures in the Jayhawker, and there are easily 100 of these pages." The implication here was that about $10,000 was collected by the Jayhawker from sales of these pages. The actual amount of money gathered at the $65 and $96.50 prices was $12,526.00. This includes organization pictures, living groups, and new students.
THE ONLY OTHER POINT on which there was any question was on the number of Jayhawkers sold. On this point I said, "about 8.000-10,000 students will buy the Jayhawker THIS YEAR." This is simply a prediction and cannot be proved or disproved until after May 1965 when sales of the new Jayhawker close.
As far as the $100,000 figure is concerned, the editorial said, "the total amount collected by the Jayhawker APPROACHES $100,000." This would come about if the figures I predicted on sales were the real figures next May. The 1964-65 Jayhawker business manager believes there will not be nearly this many sales, so it boils down to a case of wait and see.
Finally there was some misunderstanding about what I meant when I implied $70,000-80,000 was being tossed to the winds. I was attempting to ask whether or not some of the printing costs, etc. could be watched more closely and perhaps cut. I did not have any intention to imply anyone on the staff was "dipping into the till" and departing with vast sums of money. If my editorial read that way, I blame myself.
AN EXAMPLE OF THE WAY the money collected by the Jayhawker is spent, over $30,000 goes just to produce the covers and print the pages of the yearbook. All work is bid on by firms who wish to get the Jayhawker's business. As I said before, I find the costs hard to believe, but as I say now, that is the actual amount, and there are other big expenses incurred by the Jayhawker.
Outside of these financial matters, I feel the rest of my editorial needs no explanation. I think the past few Jayhawkers have been bad, I still think so, and I gave reasons why I think so. I am not impressed by ratings given the Jayhawker by the Associate Collegiate Press. The ACP is not a god and neither am I, but we are both entitled to our opinions on the Jayhawker. I think it was bad.
Bob Jones
The People Say
To my fellow students:
Last Saturday I attended the Kansas University-Iowa State game in Ames. Not only was my confidence in the squad rejuvenated but I now find myself looking forward to the next six games with the greatest of enthusiasm and interest. Regardless what the early judges and pessimists might say, I still believe that Kansas was not overrated by preseason polls.
The Kansas squad is basically unchanged. I admit the addition of new personnel (Oelschlager, Marsh, and Thompson) did much to bolster the team. However, I feel the most improved element is that of spirit and team morale. Saturday the team went to Ames to win, and there is not a single coach or player at Iowa State that will dispute this fact. If those alumni and students who attended the game did not cheer out of loyalty, surely they were inspired by the players, both on the field and on the bench.
Players and fans alike know the Oklahoma game is one of the most important games of the year. Oklahoma will come to us ready to play ball after a defeat at the hands of the Texans. On the other hand, Kansas might find themselves subdued after winning so handily over the Iowa State foe. I don't believe this will be the case. Win or lose Kansas will be out on the field trying to the best of their ability, and I'm one who thinks they have the talent to defeat Oklahoma.
From you the student they need encouragement and support. I'm just like you, I enjoy backing the winning team. But if victory is not the case Saturday, what then happens to our loyalty? Should our loyalty decrease as our hunger for a win increases? I hope not.
Alumni, sports writers, and others have at times rather severely criticized Kansas school spirit. The team is moving and ready to prove itself. I rest assured the KU students will rise to the situation and prove themselves also.
Boom the Sooner! ! !
Larry Colburn
Head Cheerleader
The Editor:
Mr. Bob Jones' criticisms of the "Jayhawker" were made as value judgments and not from any analysis of what a yearbook should do and be. It is your responsibility, as editor, to see that editors of such little merit are not given the distinction of being in "black and white." You failed your editorial responsibilities when you allowed Mr. Jones' editorial to be printed.
Mr. Jones commented, "Why
can't the University of Kansas produce a decent yearbook?" Contrary to Mr. Jones' judgment, the "Jayhawkwer" is a nationally acclaimed book. Its awards include: "1961 Jayhawkwer," "First Class" rating by the Associated Collegiate Press (the ACP is the national Critic for almost all yearbooks); "1962 Jayhawkwer," "All-American" (an honor reserved for less than ten schools of the 10,000 and over class); "1963 Jayhawkwer," (called unimaginative and of poor quality by Mr. Jones) "All-American", and the "1964 Jayhawkwer," "First Class."
The "Jayhawker" has been applauded by other than the ACP. The cover was complimented in a spontaneous letter from Durand Manufacturing Company (manufacturers of covers for over 200 college yearbooks) as one of the best the company had ever seen.
The staff of the "Prattonia," of Pratt Institute in Brooklyn, New York, complimented the "Jayhawk-ler" as the best designed "Large School" book they had ever seen (Pratt's yearbook has had some of their layouts featured in "Art Direction," a professional commercial art magazine, and have had their book displayed in the exhibition of the Art Director's Club of New York).
The presentation of Dr. Wesco was complimented by the manager and staff at Brady-Drake (the largest artist supply store in Kansas City) as "unbelievably imaginative."
Mr. Jones commented that he felt cheated that there was only one picture of the chancellor in the book. It was decided by the staff of the "Jayhawker" that one picture would be enough, and if someone wanted another picture they could look in the '61, '62, or '63 "Jayhawker" (a graduating senior would have at least four pictures of the chancellor). Incidentally, the chancellor's picture appears on page 419.
Mr. Jones continues, "... the 'Jayhawker' has become the laughing stock of the area because of its unimaginative layouts. . ." According to Webster "imaginative" means the combining of images, ideas or experiences to produce new experiences or relationships. Dr. Wescoe's picture produces a new experience, a new and immediate relationship between Dr. Wescoe and the person looking through the book. It is a startling picture, the size is startling, the intimate view of a person you don't usually have personal contact with is startling and new, it is, in effect, an imaginative presentation of the chancellor.
Mr. Jones comments that he finds
the copy (i.e. writing) in the book poor and trite. Perhaps some is, but our yearbook does have excellent writing in it. A few examples include the features on Kennedy's death, the Chancellor, and Vance Packard. Our book has copy that works with the visual presentation of campus events. Examples; the Minority Opinions Forum, p. 261; "The Theater," p. 262, p. 263; "The University," p. 27; "GO," p. 64; "SUA Concerts" page and Rock Chalk Revue.
The actual problem with yearbooks, their writing and their layout, is that everyone says yearbooks should reflect "college life" but no one makes any concrete suggestions as to how to present college life without copying the ineffective way everyone else does it.
Mr. Jones again, "So what do you think when someone opens the 'Jayhawker' and sees a large photograph of someone grouping around in a toilet bowl?" I suggest they would think that our yearbook is conceived for us and our sense of humor and not for a non-existant puritan audience.
Mr. Jones' approach to criticism more resembles "yellow journalism" than an actual concern for the quality of the "Jayhawker." As editor of the "Kansan," you cannot condone his approach.
Daily Hansan
Tim McGinty
Art Director
1964 Javahawk
weekly 1908, daily Jan. 16, 1912
Member Inland Daily Press Association
represented by National Advertising Service.
18 East 50 St., New York 22, N.Y.
N.Y. service: United Press Interna-
tional Magazine; Published in semester or $5 a year. Published in Lawrence, Kan. every afternoon during the University year except Saturday.
Published and examination periods. Second class postage naid at Lawrence, Kansas.
University of Kansas student newspaper
UNiversity 4-3646, newsroom
UNiversity 4-3198, business office
Founded, 1898, became bweekly. 1904
NEWS DEPARTMENT
Roy Miller ... Managing Editor
Don Black, Leta Catheart, Bob Jones, Greg Swartz, Assistant Managing Editors; Linda Ellis,
Feature-Society Editor; Russ Corbitt, Sports Editor.
EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT
Jim Langford and Rick
Mohhutt Co-Editorial
BANQUIT Co-Editorial Editors
BUSINESS DEPARTMENT
Bob Phinney ... Business Manager
John Pepper, Advertising Manager;
Dick Flood, National Advertising Manager; John Subler, Classified Advertising Manager; Tom Fisher, Promotion Manager.
A Nuclear Question
The 1964 presidential campaign probably will go down in history as the campaign of the extremism issue—an issue which may decide the election.
Extremism is at the very heart of the difference between Barry Goldwater, Republican candidate, and President Lyndon Johnson, Democratic nominee. At the very center of the argument is the nuclear question. The nuclear question is so fraught with fear, accusations, and half-true information that the electorate may never get the true picture.
TO THE VOTER who listens to the appeal of the Democratic party, it seems that Barry Goldwater is anxious for war—the term him "itchy-fingered." Conversely, the Republicans charge the Democrats with selling out the United States by using luke-warm foreign policy and by their attitude toward the nuclear question.
In October of 1963, Goldwater stated that he felt NATO field commanders (note the plural) should be given authority to use tactical nuclear weapons in the event they were attacked. He later claimed he had been misquoted and had meant only that the Supreme Commander of NATO should be given this authority. As matters stand now, the Democrats claim the power to order nuclear retaliation rests only in the hands of the President and should remain there.
The Democrats argue that any dilution of the President's power would enhance the possibilities of all-out nuclear war, and they are making the most of this psychological ammunition by painting Goldwater as one who would pass out nuclear weapons willy-nilly. According to the Democratic portrait of Barry, he would lead us to nuclear war—he is an extremist who shoots first and asks questions later.
ON LABOR DAY in Detroit, President Johnson stepped up the psychological warfare by telling of the effects of nuclear war. He predicted that on the first day of such a war, 100 million Americans and 100 million Russians would die. Recently his estimates have jumped to 300 million deaths on the first day, and they may go higher as the election nears.
Recent spot announcements on television have aided the Democrats in their anti-Goldwater, anti-nuclear war program. Innocent little girls are pictured as being wiped out by an atomic explosion, followed by the suggestion that Lyndon Johnson's election would avert this fate.
Goldwater's argument for allowing the NATO commander discretion in the use of nuclear weapons takes this form. NATO is committed to a defensive policy—a policy of absorbing the first blow. The only hope for NATO would be to retaliate immediately with nuclear weapons. Based upon Soviet manpower and conventional equipment, it appears the Russians could drive NATO forces out of Europe in 30 days.
THE REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE fears a breakdown in communications between NATO and the President. However, Secretary of Defense McNamara claims that communications could be established in two minutes. One wonders at this claim following the most recent communications jumble following an incident in the Gulf of Tonkin. Any delay in communications, Goldwater claims, would be catastrophic.
The present administration says that any break from using conventional weapons would bring on total nuclear war, and this thought paralyzes them.
But would allowing the NATO commander to make a nuclear decision be a radical change from present policy? The President suggests that he not only will not, but cannot give this authority to anyone else. He would have us believe he is compelled by law to shoulder this mighty responsibility alone. Two news magazines, Time and U.S. News and World Report, state that even now NATO's supreme commander probably has authority to use nuclear weapons as a retaliatory measure. Time says, "Those plans are now in operation. All are classified top secret, but they apply not only to NATO's commander, but to the commander of the North American Air Defense."
U. S. News is not quite so definite when it says, "Even now, the understanding is widespread among NATO allies that U.S. commanders in Europe already have orders, issued in advance, to use nuclear weapons in certain emergencies with no further instructions from Washington." Even if this is true, we do not expect the President to admit the fact. It is to his advantage, an advantage he knows how to exploit with skill, to remain the sole defender.
THE FORMER NATO commander, retired Gen. Lauris Norstad, adds weight to the possibility that the use of nuclear weapons is not solely in the hands of the President. "In every crisis that arose under President Eisenhower and President Kennedy, there never was any time when I felt that there was any possibility of lack of complete meeting of the minds between the President and the Supreme Commander as to what should be done in an emergency," he said.
—Robert Henry
BOOK REVIEWS
YOUNG TORLESS, by Robert Musil (Signet Classics, 75 cents).
Jonn Simon, who has written an afterword for this new volume, comments about Robert Musil that "Simplicity was not for him; in style, thought, or life. But the Musil touch, which turns everything into subtlety, complexity, ambiguity, is not, like the Midas touch, a curse. It is an honest awareness that life is difficult..."
Whether the book is a classic is a good question. Musil, an Austrian, was born in 1880, and this book appeared in 1906. A story of school life, of sexual and intellectual awakening, it is much deeper than many such novels of recent years. The story concerns the relationship among Torless and three fellow students in a military boarding school.