Newspapers / The daily Tar Heel. / Oct. 4, 1953, edition 1 / Page 2
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
PA0E TWO THE DAILY TAR HEEL SUNDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1953 Crossed Eyes . Or Do You Want Me To Do The Talking?' The storm that is currently making "Aca demic Freedom" almost a cliche in Univer sity circles, today is still lively. Since the controversy was first stirred up by the ascendancy of Congressional inquiries, particularly by the McCarthy subcommittee, readers have been subjected to a stream of rationalization. This debate, while presenting weighty contentions for both sides, has really run the gamut from intelligence to idiocy. President Benjamin F. Wright of Smith College, writing a guest editorial in a recent issue of the Saturday Review, has brought to the fore a refreshing resume of the whole sit uation. Early in the piece, he touches the impor tance of thi controversy: ' "Academic freedom is the equivalent in the schools and colleges of freedom of speech in public life. Neither is found in Communist countries." Both points are strong ones, and worthy of note. What really gives President Wright's comments a worthwhile slant is the distinc tion he makes between freedon of speech and conspiracy. This distinction should be made by anyone who gives contemplation to the whole question. But such a discernment has been, in many cases, direly neglected. Elmer Davis, in a recent Harpers . Maga zine article, "Are We Worth Saying, arid If So, Why?", bluntly laid down the fact that if we are worth saving this very freedom of speech is responsible. It is equally certain that conspiracy, if it brandishes an obvious threat, should be cut down. So what men like McCarthy will have to do is to get their eyes uncrossed, or get glasses for their myopia, so they can see this wide variation between freedom of speech and con ipiracy. Mr. Wright continues: "Teachers, like other citizens, should point out the defects in the method and in the approach of the committees. Above all they should insist that the investigations be confined to the discovery of conspiracy or treason, not to the enforcement of a sterile conformity." J" The whole trouble with confusion of the two, as The Daily Tar Heel sees it, is that the guiltless sometimes get the guillotine with the guilty. v4 a But, Mom . . . Miss Charlotte Davis, editor of the Caro lina Quarterly, spoke to a group of freshmen recently on the subject of frosh dating coeds. She opined: "You came to Carolina to learn about life. The only way to learn about life is to date a Carolina coed." We know some mothers who are going to be sorry to hear this. W&t Batty m Heel The official student publication of the Publi cations Board of the University of North Carolina, where it is puousfie 3F of -TOT -,cd h floor- daily except Monday, examination and va cation perie4s aid during the official Summer terms. En tered as second class matter at the pest office in Chapel HiB, N. C, under the At of March 3, x 1ST. Subscription rates: mailed, $4 per year, $2.50 a semester; de livered, $6 a $3.50 a semester. Editor ROLFE NTS3LL Managing Editor LOUS KBAAB Business Manager , - JIM SCHSNCX Sports Editer TOM PRA.COCX . , , News Ed. Associate Ed Feature Editor Asst. Spts. Ed. - Sub. Mgr. Circ. Mgr. Kea Santani , Hd Yedat 1 'Jennie Lyaa Vardy Backaiow Don Hafis Asst. Sub. Mgr. Asst. Bustaess- Mgr. Society Hditar Adrertisiag Manager , . Bill Veaabis Syd Shuford Eleanor Saunders L Jack Stilwell EDITORIAL STAFF BQ1 O "Sullivan. Ron Levia, Harry Saeok, John Beshara, James DuvaU. NEWS STAFF Jennie Lyna, Joyce Adams, Dan iel Vsna, Anne Huffman, Fred Powledge, J.' D. Wright, Jess Nettle. Janie Carey,' Richard Creed, John Bijur, Ted Rosenthal, Jerry Epps, Jim Walsh, Ronnie Daniels, Tom. Lambeth. BUSINESS STAFF Al Shortt, Dick Sirkin, Dave Leonard. SPORTS STAFF John Hussey, Sherwood Smith, Jack Murphy, Rooney Boone, Larry -Saunders. PHOTOGRAPHER -Cornell Wright. Passing Remark Ron Levin Someone should have warned me. !' No, it's all my fault. I should have known better, but still if only someone had told me or merely hinted of the untold hor rors lying in the realm of 3D Here I am standing in front of the Varsity and two of my bud dies come by and before I know it with Coke in one hand and popcorn, licoriee, and 3D glasses in . the other I am groping my way down the dimly lit aisle searching for a seat. We sit down and then is when all this started. Finally I bend the glasses into a reasonable facsimile of a pret zel and settle back in my seat on ly to find something is out of fo cus. In fact I can't see very welL My' buddy, a three-time 3D vet eran nudges me and slyly whis pers in my ear that the news reel is on. I go through thirty seconds of contortions to remove them and then a big sign flashes on the screen. DON'T TOUCH THE LENSES. I look down to see both of my index fingers planted squarely on the neat little win dows. But these things can be overlooked for now the picture is finally beginning. I squirm and turn to get set tled once again only to find I have misplaced my viewer. Oh well, Til just take a sip of Coke and. . .ulp. I had dropped the viewer into my Coke. Wiping it off carefully I am ready to see the monster from outer space. All of a sudden there's this tremendous land slide in the movie, see, and the rocks look like .they're coming right at you. This was all very fine until with a high C scream a coed sitting in front ofme vaults over the seat and lands in my lap, sitting on my popcorn clutching my neck and all the while yelling, "this is even worse than rushing". Well, I am pretty broad mind ed and I figure that maybe if I just keep quiet she'll go away. She lost her viewer in the leap, so being a Carolina gen. . .aay way I lend her mine. You can imagine the fun I was having. Simply hilarious. I tried looking at the screen without the view er, but went back to my copy of The Daily Tar Heel in 2D. (Plug). The monster is just before grabbing the heroine and I'm sitting on the edge of my seat, 50 cent seat, wlien a big sign flashed on the screen again. THERE WILL BE A SLIGHT INTERMISSION WHILE, and I didn't get the rest of it. All of a sudden I have the strangest feeling that something has come between us. Me and the picture, that is. Someone wbfe didn't have his viewer on has sat down in my lap and is remerking to my buddy how soft the new seats are. I yell at him in a normal tone and he begins to get up, but finds that the li corice is going with him neatly plastered on his exford grays. THIS IS TOO MUCH. With a grunt I charge at him yelling hysterically 3D!!!, Shmee D. Well after that, oh oh, I've got to close now. The little men in the white suits are coming in to feed me. It's not so bad over here once you get used to it, but I wish I was back at Chapel Hill instead of Dix Hill. . . , . X 'ty 0. The Colonel Disagrees With Snook & Co. Editor: When the spirit moves me I act, so here's a letter, not to the editor, but to Harry Snook, whose most recent writing (Nonplus) in the Daily Tar Heel seems slightly confused to me. Our Harry tilts at the windmill of excessive governmental inva sion of private beliefs. He errs. To attempt pointing out his er rors I shall try to be strictly fact ual, and your one gets you ten if you can prove theory ever licked fact, that starry-eyed the ory ever licked the cold hard facts of life. Now to the factual, first with the business of congressional in vestigation. Congress is granted the power to investigate matters for the express purpose of de termining what legal action is necessary in the interest of the country to remedy the adverse conditions it has investigated. There is surely nothing wrang or illogical in that. It would seem to follow that a witness should be glad to testify if he can con tribute his fact in the obtaining of better laws. He contributes by testifying. If he has nothing to hide there is no reason why he should not testify freely. If he has some thing criminal to hide he can take refuge in the Filth Amend ment, and force his criminality to be proved beyond a reason aTfie doubt before a jury-of his peers. But when he chooses that form of protection he cannot pre vent inferences being drawn as to his undesirability for one thing or another. Now suppose the witness is a Communist. It seems to me that he can be one, two or three kinds of Communist. He can believe in the purely econocic theory for one. Practical application over the ages has proved how silly that theory is, but unless he tries to inject his theory into public business in opposition to his sworn or directed duty is not ne cessarily undesirable except on the ground of stupidity. He can believe that all power ful government should enforce such a theory and he can work within the bounds of law, as a free elector, to pursuade others that such a form of government is the one best bet and that such a government should be installed at the polls. If he stays within the law, and keeps his policies within bounds, he is not necessarily undesirable, at any rate not as a private citi zen. He is just another dope, and even dopes are entitled to vote and live why is another question. But those two forms are not the Communism we are all think ing about. The Communism in the public eye and I use the capital C is a conspiracy to ov erthrow the existing government, by fair means or foul but mostly foul, in form of one similar to that of Russia, and under the domination of the rulers of the Russian system. That I state as cold fact, for the evidence, gath ered over the years, is complete so far as I am concerned and I am far alone in my conviction. This Communism has to be fought, also by fair means or foul, if we wish to live. This is no time to worry about a man, or men, who are seeking to over throw our Constitution, and yet who seek the protection of its provisions. There is one set of rules for the prize ring and an other for the struggle of life or death. Voltaire said something, and it sounded noble as hell, but was he ever put to the test of dying for the man who would enslave him? What he did say, under present conditions can be classified as balony, the inedible type. I have witnessed Congressional investigations (has Harry?). I have also read news reports and complete transcriptions. I have seen no brow beating of honest men. I have seen men subjected to pretty severe lines of question ing, but nothing they needed to fear if they had nothing to hide. Some investigations are courte ous, others rude; some whisper, others bellow; some ask clean cut questions, others are tricky. But the witness with nothing to hide can face them all. Mice get pushed around every day, all day long, but not men. Let's kill Communists, if we wish to live. If we kill ruthless ly the pious shrink in horror, but our enemies may learn to let us alone. If we kill legally, we are still accused of being ruth less, so what? If we don't kill, or jail, or eliminate some other way, we die, and not according to Marques of Queensbury rules ei ther. I do not choose to die that way, nor do I want that fate for my wife and my two boys. Nor will Harry Snook when he grows a bit older, I hope. The brainstorm is over, but I hope it will water some flowers in Harry's yard. I'm not worried about him being a pinke, but some of the pinkes disguised as liberals can exert great influence with their clever line. Col. (Ret.) John N. Hausar Col. Houser is the father of Chuck Hauser, former managing editor of The Daily Tar Heel and now a first lieutenant with the field arfulery in Korea, where he was wounded just before the armistice. Ed.) P o G O & rf THAT M&fgUK ALPSJZr, MlZ VAA'M'&eU-B,' PUT HB9PIANNIN r7 cf I li -AW 1 -JjL r 1 V WITH v i -r iT i 1 ooua&areAA&iTf i am LOVE SUrie -T&TG CM? OS? SMALL '-I AM At WAYS PUGT) M&ftiZ ALr r IS UKS ON KICH AN't-' M NOSLE WHO OHCZ Am 5S TO SUZ?Z& ' MBra, r-FUMEi, WITH MTU PSAJSL5- &J?COCM'- SO GALLANT; 1 SUCH TBNCTSe SUCH GAy THE5S UTTL6 THJN3 AS& WW, COUNT- 91 r- f a f M H0?fi VSSB KIDS Tims wt nxs &tth'H7& oat ANOJASLE t WDJ?U? Se&fS THif'U. UYBN UP THE AlltWT. LFf HELP IS .WAS! 33 uar L I L A B E WANTUM GET NOO BASV OOTA DRAIN WE. FtXr.r m m - . , if I ytX) I WERE 1 1 1 ANYTHING WE- 1 I J I UfA FRESH I I DRAPS IN IT 7"V I PIPE? 1-Kfc JOY OUICC." il I " V I THET ANVIL MEITEO UKE BUTTER. AHU DRAP THE BAGY IN. AN NATCHERLYTH' DRAJN'PIPEWIU- ) ) I I tOOr-RXKSnjM ALL. I r ( wilu jir stj- cat r e5T S TM 71 I OUTA TH DRAIN PIPEJ. I r i T l i i i Lines On Literature Palinurus- Unburied and waiting on the shore for a hundred years, a man, even unstable Palinurus, has time enough to contemplate 'the passing scene and t iee promises materialize or fade, as the case may be. Such an opportunify for observation occurred last winter. While melancholy and unhappy one very cold night I overheard a group of savants discussing modern American novelists. Which ones, they asked, will last the longest? Limiting the field to the post World War I writers, they finally agreed upon the socalled Big Three: Fitzgerald, Heming way, and Faulkner. It was an interesting speculation which promped me to investigate anew these writers. As a result, I spent the spring and summer re-reading the three "immortals" in an effort to discover which one of them could withstand constant examination. Of the three, Fitzgerald's position seems to be the most precarious. His fame seems inextricibly linked with the Roaring Twenties; as a result his literary longevity depends greatly on the frequency and the fondness with which the "Golden Era' is revived. He Is the symbol of that era, and his writ ings are so autobiographical in nature that they may be regarded as documents of that period. In deed, future historians may well look upon This Side of Paradise as a journal rather than as a noveL Some of his other writings may not fare so welL The Beautiful and Damned is as" bad as the critics first thought and consequently has been duly for gotten. In Tender is the Night Fitzgerald recorded at length his own escapades and it is probably the most interesting novel, although it is obviously filled with Fitzgerald's own childish self-pity. A reading of Arthur Mizener's biography of Fitz gerald, The Far Side of Paradise, wilF reveal just how closely Fitzgerald identified himself with the protagonist, Dick Diver. This self-identification undoubtedly accounts for the major flaw in the work: the realization of the character ,-of Diver. His change and ultimate de terioration are wholly unconvincing after the des cription of the brilliant doctor that is given at the beginning of the book. Moreover, Fitzgerald him self realized the faultiness of the structure and revised order of the story greatly. This revision is now in print for the first time. In the last analysis, his literary merit must rest with The Great Gatsby arid two of the multitude of short stories that he wrote,, "Babylon Revisited" 'and "Diamond Big as the Ritz." This group ap pears to be a small one for the immortality of a writer. And yet, Gatsby is one of the finest novel of this century, having no major flaws. It reflects the great talent that Fitzgerald possessed and, yes, misdirected and squandered in the effort to over come a social inferiority complex. With Hemingway the story is different. He has been able to overcome the "Lost Generation" label, and his works are now considered upon their awn merits. Although he, too, has had his share of failures, such as To Have and Have Not and Across the River and Into the Trees, he has produced several very good works indeed. In these, one thing is readily apparent Hemingway is above all a first rate story teller. And it is as a master of a story that he will be read. Although Gertrude Stein claims that she taught Hemingway how to write, one can easily believe Hemingway when he says that he taught Gerti how to tell a story. With three nevels such as A Farewell to Arms, For Whom the Bell Tolls, and The Old Man and the Sea as well as some of the best short stories in the English Language, Hemingway seems assured of a prominent position for many years to come. He has the talent for writing works than can be enjoyed apart from their symbolic and universal overtones. If at times his dialogue is a bit too bare and too highly selective, Hemingway nevertheless gives the illusion of reality as in The Old Man and the Sea, his latest and perhaps his best novel. Faulkner represents a decided contrast to the other two writers in that he was not immediately popular, but from the beginning he has had an ever growing group of critical supporters. He is very difficult to read, and not always clear. He has produced some exceedingly bad books such as Mosquitoes, Soldier's Pay, and The Wild Palms. Moreover, he has been a most voluminous writer. Yet, of the three writers, Faulkner withstands close scrutiny the best. There is so much packed into his works that one reading does not suffice. Jn each reading the picture is clearer, the whole scheme more coherent and vast and fascinating. The characters are deep, complex, and vitally real. It is as if he had created a myth that suddenly be came a reality. And once one has discovered the myth of Yoknapatawpha one becomes a part of that myth. The spell is fascinating, and the writing ex citing., In Light in August, As I Lay Dying, The Sound and the Fury, The Unvanquished, and The Hamlet Faulkner has produced a bedy of literature that constitutes a - phenomenal achievement He has matched the novels with equally brilliant short stories. "Spotted Horses5' is one of the funniest stories to be found anywhere, as is "Old Man." "The Bear" could easily contend for the title of the best American short story. If Faulkner has been prolific, he has been so in quality. It is rather ironic that the man whose books the general puhlic would never buy has suddenly be come, since the Nobel Prize presentation, one of the most widely read writers in America. He has been "discovered" by the reading public and even by that paragon of "taste", Life magazine. In a hundred years when Charon brings the boat for Palinurus, which one of the three writers will go to that land ef. Immortality? I think it will Nigkt Editer for this issue: Ken Sanford .Faulkner. .
Oct. 4, 1953, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75