North Carolina Newspapers

    .iBixV'iiiY
Andrews Presbyterian ColleJ#
NOV 20 t98l
VOL. 20, NO. 5
ST. ANDRKUS PRESBYTKRIAN COLLKCiE
NOVEMBER 20, 1981
Same image
new life
By AL PERKINSON
It has come to the atten
tion of the Art Guild that
there are some misconcep
tions as to what our purpose
and function at St.Andrews
is. In Kathy Daniel’s
“Lance” article entitled
“New Image: Old
Problem,” it was stated that
the Art Guild was trying to
change our “hippy type” im
age and assume a more
dignified, square-type
posture. This is a rather
simplistic analysis and is
simply not true.
The Art Guild has been
reorganized this year in an
effort to strengthen the club
and consequently put some
new life into the visual arts at |
St. Andrews.
In recent years our visual
arts exposure has been inade
quate and the students in
terest has been minimal. We
feel that exposure to the
visual arts is an integral part
of a well-rounded liberal arts
education and as the only
club geared toward visual
arts we would like to do
something about it. In most
metropolitan cities, art open
ings and exhibits are impor
tant and exciting social
events during the year. As we
have the only art gallery in
Scotland County, we would
like to help bring some of
this same excitement into our
own community.
This year the Art Guild is
working on several projects
that will help to stimulate our
visual arts world. We are
working on a project that
will involve alumni and peo
ple in the community in the
arts at St. Andrews. When
this project gets underway it
would make a substantial
contribution toward
establishing a solid Gallery
program and bring well
known artists to our campus.
We are also sponsoring the
first annual student/faculty
art sale on December 12th in
Vardell Gallery. Ten percent
of all proceeds will go to sup
port of the arts at St. An
drews.
We feel that projects like
these will help to bring new
life to the arts at St. An
drews, and stimulate interest
among the students in realiz
ing the importance of the
arts. We hope that you will
support us this year in our
endeavors and that you will
all support the arts at our
school.
Ross Bannister
Mike Salmon
Camels head on probation
Bannister off campus
By SHARON STANLEY
and
DREW HAYES
On Thursday afternoon
November 12, Ros? Ban
nister and all members of
“Camel’s Head” Suite 2
Granville were notified by
Assistant Dean of Students
Mike Salmon of an ad
ministrative decision concer
ning their infraction of the
party policy as approved in
the Student Life Report last
April. For Bannister, this ac
tion resulted in the revoca
tion of his housing contract,
effective November 24.
Other members of the suite
were placed on immediate
probationary status, no
longer permitted to par
ticipate in the planning
and/or hosting of suite par
ties until the beginning of
Spring Term on February
8th.
The issue originated on
Tuesday, November 3rd
following Suite 2 discussions
to plan a party for Wednes
day night. Bannister, as a
representative spokesman for
the suite, met with Mike
Salmon and expressed his in
tentions to “resurrect” the
hump-night parties” which
had been discouraged by the
Student Life Office earlier in
the year. According to Ban
nister, he did “not intend to
ask permission: to hold this
party which was intended by
the suite to be a statement of
protest against ad
ministrative interpretation of
the SLC statement of party
policy.
This statement recom
mended that: “Suite or dor
mitory parties not be held in
the residence halls Sunday
through Thursday nights.
Special permission may occa
sionally be granted by the
RD or Student Life Office,
but we would urge that the
policy be standardized as
much as possible.”
Salmon said, though, that
the suite’s wish for a protest
party had not been conveyed
to him. Salmon now believes
that Bannister “was deter
mined to have a showdown,”
and stated this week that “if
he (Ross) had said he wanted
a protest party I would have
probably granted him per
mission.” Instead, Salmon
advised Bannister to transfer
the party to Farrago or hold
a closed suite party.
On Wednesday morning,
Mike Salmon again met with
Ross Bannister to clarify the
campus party policy which
had not been printed in the
latest edition of the Saltire.
At this time, Salmon
shared his understanding of
the policy with Bannister,
and again stressed that, if the f
party was held, he would
ecommend suspension of
Bannister and suite leader
Mike Ortiz.
On Wednesday afternoon,
Salmon phoned Granville
RD Eddie Dean and re
quested that he not sign the
suite’s party permit. Ban
nister communicated to
Salmon that he was offended
by this action. Although the
permit was not signed, the
party, which was advertised
as a protest event, was held
on Wednesday night. Accor
ding to Bannister, it was at
tended by approximately 40
people and “was a flop. We
lost money, it was subdued,
and it was over by midnight.
We didn’t even break visita
tion hours.”
On Thursday morning,
Mike Salmon was informed
by a security officer who had
entered the suite that the par
ty had taken place Wednes
day night. Salmon then sent
notices to Bannister and Or
tiz that afternoon which
stated that “After being
thoroughly advised of college
policy regarding week night
Residence Hall or Suite open
parties and the possible con
sequences for having said, I
recommended to the Dean of
Students that the suite
members involved in the
planning and execution of
the party be suspended from
school. The length of suspen
sion would be determined by
the Dean.”
Ortiz met with Salmon
after receiving his notice. At
this meeting, Salmon felt
that Ortiz had been “duped
into it (having the party)
because he had not been
given all the facts.” Salmon
considered this, and later
decided to reduce the penalty
for Ortiz.
On Tuesday morning
November 10, Dean Claytor
met with Bannister and in
formed him that, instead of
being suspended, his housing
contract would be ter
minated. This change was
made because Claytor viewed
the incident as a housing in
fraction rather than an
academic infraction.
That afternoon, Ross Ban
nister, Paul Dosal, Mike Or
tiz, John Kreher, Attorney
General Ike McRee, Mike
Salmon, and Dean Claytor
met in Claytor’s office to
discuss the disciplinary ac
tion against the suite and its
members. At this meeting,
Bannister observed an ap
parent “conflict of
ideologies.” He felt that
‘’they were taking drastic ac
tion. I realized I didn’t want
to be made an example of.”
No mention of the
possibility of channeling the'
case through the Judicial
system had been made before
this meeting. Although Ike
McRee suggested this action
on Tuesday, Salmon reports
that he and McRee left the
meeting with “no clear im
pression that the issue would
go to the Judicial Board.”
Dean Claytor expressed his
intention after the meeting to
reconsider the severity of his
proposed decision,
continued on page 3
    

Page Text

This is the computer-generated OCR text representation of this newspaper page. It may be empty, if no text could be automatically recognized. This data is also available in Plain Text and XML formats.

Return to page view