Newspapers / Brevard College Student Newspaper / Oct. 8, 1985, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of Brevard College Student Newspaper / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
Page Two The Clarion Tuesday, October 8, 1985 Lab Animals Do They Have Rights? by Kim Ormand For years animals have died so that humans may live. According to the January ’85 issue of Parade — “Every 24 hours in this country about 200,000 creatures die in the name of medical and scientific progress — a total of 70 million a year. The cost of the experiments performed is $7 billion a year, two-thirds of it tax money.” How necessary is this? How much good does it do? Most citizens concerned over vivisection (term used to denote all animal experimentation) will tell you that the experiments are cruel and immoral. In the name of science, conscious dogs are heated until death to deter mine the effects of heatstrokes; elephants are dosed with LSD to study aggression; newborn puppies are decapitated to study the bloodvessels in their eyes; the heads of baboons are bashed then studied to record any memory loss; the forelegs of baby mice are choppped off to see if they learn to groom themselves with the stumps; and kittens are blinded, castrated, and rendered deaf to see how their sexual preferences develop. Another procedure under criticism calls for chemical ly paralyzing monkeys and cats, then performing brain surgery without anesthetics or painkillers. The list goes on and on. Granted these are isolated cases and not all animals in labs are mistreated, yet the fact that things like this happen is (idealistically) justification for abolishment. Yet, realistically, some experimentation is needed. Because of animal experiments, progress has been made in the areas of cancer and diabetes. As long as animals and people suffer from incompletely understood diseases such as canine parvovirus or human AIDS, the studies must continue. One of the main concerns still centers on the treatment of the animals. If some experiments must be done, why can they not be done humanely? Right now in the United States the only protection the lab animal has is the poorly enforced Animal Welfare Act of 1970 which sets standards for the housing, transportation , and handling of animals. It does not cover the nature of the experiments. It does state that experiments causing pain must be justified, yet also contains a clause which disavows any intention of interfering with the research. Moreover the law is a federal one, so facilities not receiving federal funding do not have to comply with the rules. The comment by Jeremy Bentham in Animal Liberation sums it up- “the question is not Can they reason, not Can they talk, but Can they suffer?” Ob viously regulation of the experiments is the only way to improve what has become a brutal and degrading prac tice. I detest the treatment of lab animals and feel that this senseless tragedy can be acceptable only if the necessary experiments are closely watched. Unfor tunately, until alternate methods are introduced and the the Animal Welfare Act is strengthened many animals will needlessly suffer. YOU CAN HELP!!!!!! Write to the following Organizations for details- Humane Society of the U.S. Dept. P, 2100 L St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037 The Fund for Animals Dept. P, 200 W. 57th Street New York, N.Y. 10019 People for Ethical Treatment of Animals Dept. P, PX). Box 42516 Washington, D.C. 20015 Students express various attitudes toward reading literature. Photo By Kent Thompson Why Study Literature? (Good Question!) by Mr. Ken Chamlee The Clarion staff asked me to address the topic “The Value of Teaching Literature; Is There Any? The answer is yes; there are numerous rewards (and some frustrations) in teaching literature. But they probably didn’t want me to discuss this subject from my perspective, but, rather, from theirs. Student skepticism is inherent in the framing of the question. “Just what is the point,” they ask, “of playing host to such a menagerie of characters, concepts, and con structions each semsester?” X.J. Kennedy, author and an editor of literature anthologies, knows that students are suspicious of studying literature. They see it, he says, as a “waste of time, an annoying obstacle.” It appears to them a“sterile exer cise,” one not related to the world beyond college. Like Kennedy, I can guess what my students are thinking: “Old four-eyes gets so involved in stories; nothing is real about any of this.” Well, let’s examine why we should care, why a student (why anybody) should read literature. First, let me say that any defense or promotion of literature is not at the expense of other disciplines. It does not de mean the chemist or the mathematician, the artist or the musician, to talk about what hap pens in the English classroom. A liberal arts education forces our attention on a variety of subjects and deems them all worthwhile. It is, we hope, a curriculum of equals, not a hierarchy. I asked my colleagues to share their opinions in studying literature, and their replies were intriguing. Preston Woodruff said^ “Literature is not just important- it is the very basis of education.... It is the basic human response to reality- we write stories to understand the story we live in.” Sarah Barnhill phrased it this way: she said that a psychologist would give us sociological reasons for a person’s loneliness; a physician would study loneliness by offer ing medical reasons for ag gressive or hostile behavior. But, she adds, “the writer has no in- tention of telling us why (a character) is lonely- only what it means to be lonely.” These two views help identify the basic premise- literature, like life, is a story in which we participate. Literature reflects the world we live in. It gives back to us who we are, what we are like. It broadens our experiences, allows us to go places we cannot, to be people we are not. What is it like to be black? Or white? What is it like to be female? Or male? Literature can show us. Sometimes we appreciate literature because we identify with it directly. When the griev ing mother in Frost’s “Home Burial” says “Friends make pretense of following to the grave/But before one is in it, their minds are turned/And mak ing the best of their way back to life/And living people, and things they understand,” I know what she means. I’ve seen it. It doesn’t mean I agree with her, but I understand. When Hemingway describes a mortar shell exploding among soldiers eating spaghetti and cheese in A Farewell to Arms, I imagine it vividly. I know I don’t want to see the wounds, hear the screams, feel the confusion for myself. Hemingway does not judge the war; he merely shows it to us with stark reality. Ralph Ellison’s depiction of the treat ment of young blacks by white racists at the beginning of Invisi ble Manfills me with embarrass ment and anger. That these stories are “fictions” is irrele vant. Literature strums our emo tional chords to see if there is any response. It can help combat the world’s evils. Where there is ignorance, literature informs; where there is bigotry, it enlightens; where there is complacency, it can shock us; it coaxes where there is unwillingness, and where there is insensitivity, it soothes. It would be easy to say that literature is the record of human despair. But that is too narrow. There is much joy and beauty in it also. When Whitman catalogs his praise of the American land scape and people, it makes me proud. When Shakespeare writes about friendship,love, and prac tical beauty, it helps me unders tand what is really important- to be alive, to be involved in the world. To read. A skilled teacher can lead us in to a literary work and out again, showing us what to admire along the way, sort of like a cavern tour, keeping us from getting lost, stopping at what we would miss without light. But literature can also be blundered into and defaced. We have to be ready for the trip; there are too many ways to miss out. Not being prepared for class is one: it leaves with nothing to add to a discussion and nothing to reflect upon. Not car ing is worse. If we can’t muster some concern for imaginary characters when there is no per sonal risk, how will we respond to real vulnerability, the risk of real pain? It could leave us unable to relate at all. If readers were hoping for some tangible dividends, some material gain from the study of Hterature, sorry. It won’t give a bigger car, bank account, or busthne. Its rewards are, of course, intrinsic. It is, ultimate ly, the study of people, the study of ourselves. Would we find ourselves boring? The teaching and reading of literature really need no defense. Would we de fend the rain? We do.n’t want it every day, but sometimes we long to have it. To be without either is to live forever in a dry season, the desert places, the ‘‘wasteland.’’ Student Voice Opinions About Literature by Heather Klvett Is there meaning to the madness of studying literature? Recently there have been moans all over campus about the English requirements of Brevard College. Graduation requires fou^nit^fEnglish^^ver^^^ is eventually exposed to the classics in literature. What is the value of being exposed to literature, if any? The basic con sensus seems to be that English has great value among students Continued on Page 3
Brevard College Student Newspaper
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Oct. 8, 1985, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75