Page two
Guilfordian, April 22, 1981
Editorial
Controversy needed
By Jim and Dale Sheasley
Co-editors
We at Guilford College need to learn to fight well.
In reflecting on this year at Guilford, it does not seem that we
have learned to do this yet. Substantial arguments are confused
with personal ones, people are afraid to "make waves", and people
acquiesce to "foregone conclusions" without stating their
objections.
Challenging the views of another person is never easy,
particularly in a large group. In some ways, the Mechanism of
concensus further compounds this problem. Consensus, which is a
highly valued process in small groups where confrontation is
easier, is achieved only by unanimity or by the abstention of
dissidents. There is no place for those who disagree in the
achievement of the final decision. The pressure is to conform or to
just "let it go". Such a system understandably produces a great
deal of frustration among the combatants. As a result, the next
battle may well be a little more tense.
Another problem is that Quaker schools seem particularly
vulnerable to filling their little world with idealistic visions while
failing to act upon them-pacifism becomes passivity. Rather than
offend anyone on their way to their goal, they sit and worry about
finding the perfect noncontroversial means to their end. As Saul
Alinsky says, "The means-and-end moralists, or non-doers, always
end up on their ends without any means . . .The most unethical use
of means if the non-use of any means." v
Being nice isn't necessarily being good. When faced with
decisions affecting the future of the college, there is little place for
sentimentaility. Attempted changes stir controversy, but contro
versy is not the largest threat to Guilford's future. Rather, the
largest threat comes from those whotalk of improving the situation,
but sit on their cans when it comes time for action. Their inertia
holds back those who are willing to strive for improvement and for
excellence. Controversy, rather than inhibiting improvement, stirs
action and calls for resolution.
Implicit in the appreciation of controversy is the assumption that
men will strive for a better world if given the chance. Controversy
provides the chance by questioning the status quo and pushing
change.
We are not satisfied with Guilford as it is, nor do we consider it
irreverent to want to change it. If Guilford is to compete for a place
in the dubious future of small liberal arts colleges the status quo is
not acceptable. If making tough decisions raises controversy, so be
it. Controversy is inevitable as the college attempts to fix priorities
and allocate resources. Guilford must decide now if it wants to be a
"nice" college or a quality institution.
The outlook for a "nice" college is bleak. It's hard to be a big
happy family out in the street.
Reusing student awareness
By David Davenport
The Southern Students Acti
vist Network (SSAN) held a two
day conference in Atlanta,
Georgia April 12 and 13.
SSAN is an orgainzation
forged from varied student
groups committed to "student
input into increased awareness
in and out of school," according
to Larry Brooks, the leader of
the conference. Mr. Brooks said
that although most of the mem
ber organizations are concerned
with different aspects of the
society, the obvious common
ability among the groups is the
realization that the system must
be changed if all Americans are
Editors Dale Easley, Jim Shields
News editors Mike Sieverts, Pete Fraunholtz
Features editor John Mottern
Photography editor Randy Rosenthal
Layout editors Steve Harvey, Susan Ide
Sports editor Mike Van Wagner
Business manager Mary Merritt
Circulation Frank Merritt, Mary Merritt
Copy editor Carolyn Welty
Notebook editor Sue Hubley
Columnist Constance Irving
The Guilfordian reserves the right to edit all articles, letters, and artwork for
taste, veracity, and length. The dead line for all copy is 3:00 p.m. on Satur
day preceding the Tuesday of publication. Material may be left on the office
door in upstoirs Founders, or mailed to Box 17717. The opinions expressed
by the staff are their own and not necessarily those of the paper or of
Guilford College.
to experience this country's
democratic ideals.
The topics of the workshops
reflected the diversity of inte
rest at the conference. The
lectures ranged from women's
rights and abortion to racism
and black education.
The consensus agreement on
the biggest obstacle to the
organization's guest was stu
dent apathy, (no stranger to
Guilford College) Repeatedly
delegates attributed to students
unexplainable ignorance about
the relevance of present issues
in Society.
Helen Chavis and David
Davenport represented BASIB
of Guilford.
Life of Staff
Handle on the scandal
By Constance Irving
A new scandal has been
unearthed on the once peaceful
Guilford campus; a scandal that
makes the nepotism issue ap
pear as nought. For years,
students have asked about the
mysterious "Dr. Staff", whose
name curiously appears at pre
registration time, although the
professor himself is never heard
from during the semester.
A glance at the course listings
for fall 'Bl reveals the almost
omnipresent influence of Dr.
Staff plans to teach over 40
courses on subjects as varied as
Design I, Accounting Theory,
and Early Childhood Education.
Upon first reflection, one is
struck by Dr. Staff's incredible
scholastic diversity, as well as
his apparently boundless capa
city for work.
Further examination, however,
reveals that Dr. Staff will be
teaching classes that meet in
different places at the same
time, including several courses
in Munich and London as well
as here. Can Guilford, in these
financially tight times, afford to
fly Dr. Staff around the globe
several times daily? We decid
ed to investigate the situation.
It was not easy. Every time
we mentioned Staff, we were
either referred to someone else,
or looked at strangely and sent
away. Fortunately, Becca New
bold, noted senior and nudnik,
gave us our first clue to the
awful truth.
"My theory is that there's
more than one of them. Every
time I ask who's teaching one of
his courses, the answer is
invariably, "We don't know
which Staff is teaching it."
This seemed highly suspicious,
and perhaps nepotistic, since
Hefterft to ttfc i&ttur
•';*'• All Letters must be submitted to theGuilfordian at Box 17717 by ".F
".F- *: • Friday night, and should be no longer than 200 words. Names may
' be withheld if requested by the author in person or in writing.
Real art world
■Bgg9PL-
there were several with the
same name. Newbold mused
further, "I think you ought to
ask a few professors, since
"Faculty and Staff are always
mentioned together."
Dr. Louis Fikeof the 'Political
Science department refused to
comment, saying he did not feel
it was safe to do so. He did,
however, allude to "K122",
apparently some kind of secret
agent of whom we heard no
more.
Since Dr. Staff seemed to
wield such control over time and
space, we determined to consult
an authority in Physics. Our
intuition paid off. Even before
we presented the details, Dr.
Sheridan Simon sensed what we
were talking about.
"I think it's an obvious case
of the administration taking
advantage of a distressed
man", Simon told us. "Tome,
it's just another sign of the
wasn't being exhibited; my
work was in a beauty contest,
my work was being prostituted.
Now, if I had known that there
was going to be a contest, a
reward, I would have felt dif
ferently.
A contest to me is submitting
my best works to be recognized,
but the unknowing contest was
a type of "contest-reward"
which meant; these works are
"the best"; these works please
the faculty the most; these
students have worked the har
dest and created something the
faculty is looking for; pat-pat.
Guilford doesn't have a contest
to judge the best English paper,
or independent study presenta
tion, or who has the best logic in
philosophy. If we are going to
have an art show with judging,
call it a contest, not a student
art exhibit. If I had known about
the competition beforehand, I
still would have submitted the
same works with this in mind.
But, many people probably
don't realize how one bares
one's soul in art work and, for
me, how delicate that is. In a
moral decline of Western civil
ization and the anomie of our
time." Dr. Simon said also that
Dr. Staff was "entirely un
salaried." He lives in fear
because he's a refugee from a
small South American country
in the middle of the Indian
Ocean. His wife teaches here,
and she's not paid either."
We confronted Dr. Simon
with the bold journalistic truth
that Dr. Staff in fact received
more money than several other
professors combined, but Simon
told us that he had never seen a
check made out to Staff. Simon
commented that the many park
ing places marked for "Faculty
and Staff only" were never used
by Dr. Staff. "They are only
there to taunt him. Further,
said Simon, "Dr. Staff does not
own the cars marked with his
last name. He has to wash
them," said the noted Physics
professor.
"Not many people know this,
but Dr. Staff once had a
contest one carries a shield or
strength in preparation for
judgement. Even if I had come
in first or honorable mention I
would have felt exactly the
same way. I would have felt
unknowingly prostituted for the
beauty of my work, not the
statement of it. I feel no
resentment towards the faculty
or winners, but the contest,
which I feel, puts the winners
on a pedestal and some how,
separates them to a higher
status than other students. I
feel this was only because it was
a contest and not an exhibit as it
was called.
I realize the "real" art world
is competitive, but Guilford is
not a microcosom of the real
world. It strives to create a
unique community and I feel, as
a few other art students do, that
in such a small department, a
contest is less beneficial than it
is stimulating or inspiring.
Sincerely,
Katie Hellawell
continued on page three