Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / Dec. 12, 1953, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.) / 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 DAILY TAR HEEL SATURDAY DECEMBER 12; 1953 Crossroads Three academic deans and the director of the Library announced their resignations or retirements this week, and recently a fourth dean announced his imminent departure to the Ford Foundation. Deans leaving are Clifford P. Lyons of Arts and Science, Guy B. Phillips of Educa tion, Susan Grey Akers of Library Science, and Thomas H. Carroll of Business Adminis tration. C. E. Rush will be moving out of the top post at the Library. Thus with the exception of the Law and Medical Schools, the most strategic areas of the University are to get new leaders; we don't know of a time when such a number of vital positions came vacant simultaneously." The selection and enticement of new personnel will be worth all the miseries and it is judged an apt description for in these vacancies the University has a unique oppor Xunity. With virtually every important throne empty, President Gray and Chancellor House can, if they desire, re-orient the University. Theirs is the awing responsibility of re examining the methods and the goals of schools which affect between 4,000 and 5,000 students. But if it is awing, it also is challeng ing, exciting. Fiom what Administration leaders have said they can expect much structural advice in the report the management engineers soon will make. As a starter (we shall have more to say later) we'd like to suggest two things: 1. That we stop fragmenting so much in the University. That we get away from the idea of separate, special curriculums for each major and return to a unified curriculum. That we stop adding so many courses; instead, that we reduce the number of courses. 2. Wlien we get into overhauling some of these remains of antiquity we should experi ment. Let us show a boldness, an eagerness to try new . things. Let's knock some heads together. It's time we shifted out of neutral. Children Should Be Seen . . . There are good things about the University- And there are bad things. Today we'd like to talk about an item under the lattev heading. It concerns the attitude .of various admin istrators and faculty members in matters of students' opinions. All students, it would seem, live here at the suffrance of these re sponsible adults who eons ago became inured to the bleatings of that sophomoric multitude known as the student body. Immature, hasty, ill-considered are the adjectives they use for the five thousand and six hundred. Often this callousness is justified. At times it isn't. Therein lies our quarrel. We assail those stultified individuals who grop ing for weapons try to club down the better student ideas or expressions on the ground that they are student ideas and therefore no good. It is regrettable that such elder individu alsand unfortunately they are not scarce oppose forward moves when they come cloaked in student cloth. It is regrettable that their only lease of life is longevity. UJ - -J-. -- J- ' I - I -i - L-1J. ! IfaJiatip titer Jttl The official student publication of the Publi cations Board of the University of North Carolina, where it is published t Jute xf ihe yrtverMt : North (aroluif I , which first . OfJClwti its UoofS -y:- in JLtmuiry daily except Monday, examination and vaca tion periods and dur ing the official Sum mer terms. Entered as second class matter at the post office in Chapel Hill, N. C, un der the Act of March 3, 1879." - Subscription rates: mailed, $4 per year, $2.50 a semester; delivered, $6 a year, $3,50 a semester. Experiment On Stage Ted Rosenthal The birth of a fine new play, and some excellent acting made the Playmakers experimentals production Thursday both an in teresting and for part of the time, an exciting evening. The first of three one-act . pieces, Give Us Our Bread, by Josefa Selden, must be consider ed as purely a character study; it was not much of a play the plot was cliche, and the occur rence of events too pat to have dramatic merit. The acting was good though. Betty Johnson as the mother realized all of the possibilities her part held. Janet Carter was extremely engaging as Theresa, and Hal England convincing as the son John. The plot was a rehash of the "son of a poor family faced with, con tinuing his education as his pa rents desire, or going to work because he feels he must help the household" theme. Motion Opposed by William Waddell, seemed to be rather a skit than a play. It got laughs, but they stemmed from the ludi crous aspects of its characters and situation-props rather than from humor of dialogue or action. The efforts of the womens' so ciety for the "Preservation and Propagation of Public Pigeons" to prevent the town council of Es sextown from exterminating its ubiquitous park pigeons, serves as the plot. John Taylor as Mr. Simpson the harassed city treasurer, and Carl Williams as the mayor were both very funny in their roles. O course the efforts were ex perimental, and must be treated in that light. Their function is to test, rather than to prove their merit. But judged by any standards, John Clayton's The Other Side of the Mountain is powerful theatre, and the cast's rendition as well as the techni cal treatments were as good as any professional . production could wish. The play depicts the last hours of an Army detachment trapped behind enemy lines. From its outset the action of the plot and the revelation of the lieutenant's character move it inexorably to its tragic conclusion. The writing is tight, the characters' lot piti able, and the conclusion adeptly foreshowed is inevitable. The Other Side of the Mountain definately deserves to be publish ed again. Claude Garren did a fine job as director, and the entire cast seemed to live the play. Ty Boyd as the lieutenant, Sidney Litwack as Sergeant Novak, and Donald Carmichael, who shone in the small part of PrackL all were excellent. Daniel Reid who play ed Morris, and Lloyd Skinner as Houck were very good. Mr. Clay ton's characterization of Houck was, in passing, particularly con vincing. The set must have presenteed a good deal of difficulty, but John Cauble came up with a very cre ditable solution. Betty Johnson deserves special praise for some stunning lighting effects. Stressing once again the ne cessity of considering the plays as attempts, rather than finished writing, it was a-pity the t au dience was so small. The people who stayed away missed some thing something worthwhile. 'I Don't Feel This Election Is A Repudiation' - M'ii ! vV )) , ' fj'j. ; v ; "'Ad r-' ' " ' ... ; Washington Merry-Go-Round Drew Pearson " WASINGTON It was Secretary of the Treasury Humphrey him self who leaked the story to news men that the Eisenhower Ad ministration would slash the bud get by another $6,000,000,000 next year most of it out of the arm ed services. t The identity of the news leak in this case is important. For it took only a few minutes for Humphery's identity to become known a couple of miles down Constitution Avenue and Across the Potomac River at the Penta gon, where it caused that lab yrinth of offices the largest in the world to seethe with activity. 1 A few hours later, the acti vity had its ef fect. Secretary of the Treasury Humphrey he dged just a little on his leak. He did not hedge on the $6,000,- PEARSON 000,000 cut. But he did tell newsmen two things: 1. That the military would not be cut at the expense of national safety; but 2. Since the military spend about, 75 percent of the budget, they will have to bear that proportionate share of the cut. Actually, the above jockeying between the Treasury and the Pentagon merely brings to the surface a debate that has been going on backstage for weeks. It also puts in direct opposition to each other two of the ablest and biggest businessmen in the Eisen hower Cabinet. Humphrey, who demands the military cut, was a president and directorof 30 different corpora tions comprising the Mark Hanna Co., founded by the famed GOP boss who elected President. Mc Kinley. He is the cabinet member Ike listens to most. Secretary of Defense Charles E. Wilson, who opposes him, was head of the world's largest corp oration, General Motors. He, too, is close to the President, but not as close as Humphrey. The backstage battle between these two men and their subordi nates got down to brass knuckles at a meeting of the National Se curity Council about eight weeks ago, at which the military men brpught in their "New Look" for the armed services. This "New Look," supposed to permit sizable budget cuts, in reality did no such thing, and secretary Humphrey quite right ly scoffed at it. "All you've done is put some chromium on your bumper," He chided. "YouVe got the same old model shined up a little bit, but how are we going to fight atomic wars with the same old car plus a chromium bumper?" What angered Humphrey was the fact that the military chiefs had merely split military spend ing three ways with no regard to ' military need or strategy. The Navy took its usual share, re gardless of the fact that all its ships can just about be put out of commission by a single A Bomb. The Army took its usual share, regardless of the dubious value of foot-soldiers. And the Air Force took its usual share Despite the fact that air is be coming more and more import ant to atomic warfare. As a sop, the Air Force was given seven more wings to keep it happy. ' Secretary Humphrey can be Forceful without pounding the table or losing his temper. He made it clear to the military chiefs that the United States couldn't build atomic weapons on one hand and continue con ventional weapons on the other. We couldn't afford both, Hum phrey emphasized. Since Humphrey is close to Ike, he did more than lecture the military. He also talked to the President, induced him to order the military to cut. They are now supposed to be cutting, but so far haven't come up with a single, solitary, counter-suggestion. That was why the Secretary of the Treasury decided to force the Pentagon's hand, made them tear their hair over his leak that the budget must me cut- another $6,000,000,000. Since then, not only Secretary of Defense Wilson, but some GOP politicos plus diplomatic and economic advisers are in a lath er. Theoretically they agree with Humphrey that the budget must be balanced. But here are some , of the factors they're consider ing on the other side. 1. With the domestic economy already looking a bit sour, this is a poor time to cut government orders further. With steel pro duction, automobiles and farm equipment off, and credit re stricted, economic advisers would prefer to increase defense orders rather than cut them. 2. Vice-President Nixon has Editor : ROLFE NEILL Managing Editor LOUIS KRAAR Business Manager . AL SHORTT Sports Editor TOM PEACOCK News Editor Associate Editor Feature Editor Asst. Spts. Eds. Sub. Manager Cir. Manager Asst. Sub. Manager Asst. Business Manager Society Editor Advertising Manager Ed Yoder Jennie Lynn Vardy Buckalew, John Hussey Tom Witty Don Hogg Bill Venable Syd Shuford Eleanor Saunders ; Jack Stilwell EDITORIAL STAFF Bill O'Sullivan, James Duvall, John Beshara. mtsslEoombah.l 1 p mice To P?- mu colleagues SCMT WIAfl mkCA e Vtff 1VMlV2 BOOM8AH of ths U Khodefeland TRAM'- disaracefKi! WHAT'2 WtfONG W(TH -ifu- - i'eni fern lovV 'em k 1 ...Jly fo'Xt& curt:. jj The Editor Cornered English Club NEWS STAFF Charles Kuralt, Dick Creed, Joyce Adams, Fred Powledge, Ann Pooley, Tom Lambeth, Jerry Reece, Babbie Dilorio, Beverly Blemker, J. D. Wright, Jess Nettles, Peter Coo per, Daniel Vann, Richard Thiele. BUSINESS STAFF Dick Sirkin, Dave Leonard, Don Thornton. SPORTS STAFF Larry Saunders, Jack Murphy, Dick Barkley. t Night Editor For This Issue: Ken Sanford L I 1 A B N E R I 1 f' PACE IT LI'L -CSiVBUT THEN HE'LL. 1 I HE. GOTTA LARN HE KIN BE ) A TS MAH DOOTV TO N f f OH MAH sfwssiEf6 a?ANa2KSS issss xkSi Jm&i Being somewhat bewildered by the poems in the recent Carolina Quarterly, I hoped that the "poetry editor's note" on the last page of that publication would give me some help in appreciating them, l discovered, however, that what appears to be some sort of poetic credo leaves me more confused than ever. The "note" reads: Accompanying poetry and criticism today, two schools of thought seem to be at work, the expe rimental and the traditional. No one editor could be expected to appreciate fully both schools, and the published poems will show a definite tenden cy toward the experimental or even iconoclastic school. Poetry, in my mind, is not a toy or laniap pe for casual reading, but rather a development emotive and intellectual medium. With this in mind, the published poems, have been selected in an attempt to formulate, to-an extent, the con sistent ideas and truths that influence the think ing of various individuals. The selections have been made with the hope that we may understand and appreciate those who live and write with the language of today. We learn from the first sentence that two schools of thought, the experimental and the tra ditional, "seem to be at work" and that these two schools are "accompanying" poetry and criticism. "Accompanying" seems to be the crux word here. Does the use of this word signify that the schools are going along with poetry and criticism on some sort of metaphorical journey? Does it mean that the two schools are engaged in the same work as that in which poetry and criticism are engaged? Both formulations are possible. I think I know what the poetry editor means here. But it's a guess, and I've arrived at the probable meaning through a process of eliminating all the other possible meanings which appear to me too absurd even for a person to whom I here will allow considerable latitude in this regard. I think he meant to write: There are two schools of thought in regard to- modern poetry and criticism: The tradi tional and the experimental. In the third sentence, the poetry editor offers us his definition of poetry. First rejecting the notion that poetry is a "toy" or a "lagniappe" (which I've discovered is a Louisiana Creole word which means "a trifling present given by tradesmen to cus tomers"), he defines poetry as "a developing emo tive and intellectual medium." To say that poetry is a medium which appeals both to the emotions and the intellect is to make some sense, but the sense is so broad as to be insignificant. Such a platitude need not be argued or even presented. Perhaps the editor's inconoclasm lies in the fact that his ideal of emotional and intellectual poetry is "developing." This may make him anti-traditional but it doesn't make his understandable. . Does he .mean that his kind of poetry develops the character or the sensibilities of the reader? Does he mean that the traditions and the conventions di poetry develop- from age to age and progress toward perfection? Does he mean that his poetry develops a progression of meaning and of feeling from the first line to the last? I don't know. In the last two sentences, the poetry editor, I think, tells his reader of two criteria by which he selects poems submitted to him. The first of these sentences is very difficult to understand. Does it mean that his selection has been determined by his desire to formulate truth and ideas? This is, as far as I know, a unique concept of the function of an editor the formulation of truth and ideas by a se lection of poetry. It would be uncharitable, however, to pin him down to this meaning. Does the sen tence mean that he has selected poems which form ulate truth and ideas? This is more likely, but again . we discover that the editor's ideas about poetry, in stead of being unTraditional, are very platitudinous. Some more difficulties remain in this sentence. Why does he perform his editorial task or select poetry which conforms to his poetics just "to an extent?" Does he mean that he doesn't have very good poetry submitted to him? Does it not go with out saying that he is interested in ideas which in fluence the thought of "various people?" Who are these mysterious "various people?" What does the editor mean by "consistent" ideas? From the gram mar we can assume that he is not talking about the internal consistency of ideas in a poem, but about the consistency of ideas in the lives of men. What does this mean? His second criterion of selection is that poetry must make lis "understand and appreciate those who live and write with the language of today. Is the value of reading the poetry in the Quarterly, then, that by such a reading we will "understand and appreciate" the poets who write for it anu other poets them? This seems to be a very vulgar and ingnoble concept' of the function of poetry. I am personally less interested in the poets than I am in the poems. But I don't know that this is what the poetry editor wished to say. I think that the poetry editor of the Carolina Quarterly is struggling to say that he doesn't like old fashioned poetry. I assume that he also doesn't like old fashioned prose. The purpose of old fash ioned prose is to communicate ideas. In this, our poetry editor has miserably failed. Yr Mst Obd & Hmbl Srvt Clio been barnstorming through the Far East urging Japan, the Philippines, and French Indo-China to arms, which makes it diplomatically difficult for us to do just the opposite here at home. 3. The Democrats have already made poltical capital of the heavy defense cuts "and are eager to more make. In fact, endangering the national security is a tailor-made issue for them right now. All of which puts. the Eisenhower Cabinet in about the toughest predicament it's faced so far. The resultant debate is a lot more important than spy headlines, for on its outcome will depend the security of the nation and to some extent the re cession or prosperity of the coming year.
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Dec. 12, 1953, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75