North Carolina Newspapers

Volume 72, Number 40 Wednesday, November 6, 1963 International Affairs: fart 11 . "Hold It, Fellows There's A Slight Delay" fetiitfSittfiU' f Site- of tb? Wvefls' ' 'i - - i' Wlp iatlg (liar 70 Years of Editorial Freedom h K-: v Offices on the second floor of Graham Memorial. Telephone number: Editorial, sports, news 942-3112. Business, cir culation, advertising 942-2138. Address: Box 1080, Chapel mil, N. C. Entered as 2nd class matter at the Post " Office in Chapel Hill, N. C, pursuant to Act of March 8, 1870. Subscription rates: $4.50 per semester; 8 per year. Published daily except Mondays, examination periods and vacations, throughout the aca demic year by the Publications Board of the University of North Carolina. Printed by the Chapel Hill Publishing Company, Inc., 501 West Franklin Street, Chapel Hill, N. C. THE DAILY TAR HEEL Is a subscriber to United Press International and utilizes the services of the University News Bureau. Mistake Accepted, Responsibility Assumed On today's front page there is a statement by Delta Kappa Epsilon Fraternity President Bill Davis con cerning the incident at the DKE house Saturday night. The incident involved Doug Tilden and DKE member Tom Crudup along with several other uni dentified persons. Tilden was asked to leave the party and subsequently was hit several times, suffering a black eye and a bloody nose before being ushered out of the house. The problem comes from what started the trouble. Tilden says it started be cause he had come to the party with Kellis Parker, a Negro student, and the DKE's and Crudup say that discrimin ation played no part in it. Davis substantiates this position by saying that Parker was neither asked to leave nor insulted, and that his pre sence was not resented by the house. Parker confirmed that he was in no way mistreated while at the party. While we are sure that DKE Presi dent Bill Davis sincerely believes that the question of race was not involved, as he says in his statement, we must take exception to his analysis. Tilden reluctantly told the DTH some of the things said to him before he was hit and it seems obvious that at least one person not necessarily Crudup and not necessarily even a DKE member, ob jected to his association with Parker, since the major part of the exchange was on this point. The statement also says that the DTH did not give the house time to in vestigate what had happened so that the report could have been more accu rate. We also regret that we could not have given them more time, but the fact is that the story was held for four hours, one hour past the paper's final deadline, waiting for a statement from them. If the story were to be written today, a day late, as they suggest, it would be essentially the same story. , The facts have not changed. These points are a matter of disa greement in fact which will probably never be resolved. But it is important that the DKE house has taken the re sponsibility for Tilden's maltreatment and has apologized to him. It was pos sible for them to duck out, saying it was someone from Georgia or another guest at the party not connected with the fraternity, but they didn't. This forthrightness might be an example of why they are one of the most respected fraternities on campus.. Tilden has talked with Davis, and while maintaining his disagreement on what prompted the incident, stated that he greatly appreciated the attitude of concern shown by the DKE Presi dent. All of this is commendable, but it will be interesting to see what steps the fraternity takes to insure that this sort of trouble does not occur again, re v gardless of its motivation. The house should certainly be able to police its members. Rx For Broadcasting: More Morgans Oh, for more Ed Morgans. Lots and lots more. Present radio and television program ming "is pretty awful," he said during his visit here last Saturday. "We must realize how much wre of the (radio-TV) industry have been short changing the public," he added. "I would like to see radio and televi sion stimulate more controversy. In stead of taking Minow's criticism at face value, we became hostile." Minow, of course, is former FCC Chair man Newton Minow who made history with his phrase about modern television being "a vast wasteland." EDITORIAL STAFF Gary Blanchard, David Ethridge Co-Editors Managing Editors Wayne King Fred Seely Associate Editor Peter HarJcness Photo Editor Jim Wallace Sports Editor . Curry Kirkpatrtck John Montague Jim Wallace Bob Samsot Asst. Sports Editor Night Editor Copy Editor Reporters: Mickey Blackwell, Administration Peter Wales, Campus Affairs Hugh Stevens, Student Government Editorial Assistants: Dale Keyser Sue Simonds Linda McPherson Linda Riggs Science Editor Mat Friedman Women's Editor Diane Hile Reviews Editor Steve Dennis BUSINESS STAFF Business Manager Advertising Manager Circulation Manager Subscription Manager Asst. Advertising Mgr. Asst. Business Mgr. Sales - Art Pearce Fred McConnel John Evans Bryan Simpson Woody Sobol Sally Rawlings Frank Potter Dick Baddour Bob Vanderberry Morgan also made it clear that WRAL TV's reputation for bias is widely-known. (WRAL-TV is the Raleigh affiliate of the American Broadcasting Company, which employs Morgan as one of its crack newsman-commentators.) However he noted, the network has no control over what an affiliate says or does. But Morgan wondered why the public, especially the University, hasn't made its discontent with WRAL-TV and its conscience, Jesse Helms, known. Speaking of programming in general, he said, "We must exert our individual responsibilities. It would be a very healthy situation if the public would tackle this problem. I am discouraged that since Minow's statements wre have done so little to improve this situation." Morgan also hit the practice of allow ing sponsors to censor script. "I have always felt it was ridiculous to let the manufacturer of some ladies' product become the drama critic of radio and television," he said. Morgan, in short, demonstrated that many within the radio-TV industry are concerned at the shortcomings of their own medium. This is a most healthy sign. The trouble is that most of those concerned are not in much of a position to change things in any fundamental way. We as viewers are, however, so let us rally to the standard of this general without an army and voice our dis content to the networks, individual sta tions and the FCC in the form of letters and postcards. . Equally important, let us voice con gradulations to the men and sponsors responsible for those rare good shows we run into. Most of all, let's not leave the Ed Mor gans dangling, heedless of their efforts to improve the content of our airwaves. i V-V, .... Book Review New Sense Of Discovery By NINA KING Pierre Leprohon, "Michelange lo Antonioni: An Introduction"; Ado Kyrou, "Luis Bunuel: An In troduction", the first two volumes of Simon and Schuster's series "The World Of Film," Essandess Paperback, $1.95 each. ". ..The white eye of ' the screen need only reflect the light that is properly its own to; blow up the universe." In these words of Luis Bunuel can be found all the passionate enthusiasm of those who see -in the motion pic ture the potentially greatest med ium of artistic communication known to modern man. At the core of the contemporary cult of the foreign film is a growing pub lic sharing in this excitement, this sense of aesthetic discovery long felt by the pioneers of ex perimental cinema. A work of art implies an artist; in the case of a motion picture the dominating and unifying crea tive urge is that of the director. Thus, it is only fitting that Simon and Schuster's new paperback series. "The World of Film," should approach its subject through studies of the individual directors. The first two volumes, "Michelangelo Antonioni" by Pierre Leprohon and "Luis Bun uel" by Ado Kyrou inaugurate one of the earliest attempts to seriously discuss the contempor ary masters of the newest of arts. The tone and format of the new series reflects the current transitional status of cinema it self. The directors are not yet to be subjected to the finely intell- ectualized hairsplitting with which scholars approach an es tablished novelist or poet, but the books are something more than the collection of glossy stills and striking quotes which earlier works on the contemporary film have tended to be. Each con sists of a lengthy biographical critical discussion of the director by a student of his work; excerpts from scripts, speeches and artic les by the director; photographs, reviews and interviews; a des criptive chronological listing of the director's films, and an inter national bibliography. The mater ial of these latter sections alone is enough to make the books in valuable to anyone interested in films. In addition to the above, the volume on Bunuel contains the complete script of his first film (made in 1923 in collaboration with Salvador Dali), the "chef d'oeuvre" of cinematic Surreal ism, "Un chien andalou." Equal ly fascinating are excerpts from Bunuel's articles in the journal of the Surrealistic movements, "Sur realisme au service de la revolu tion." The book suffers, however, from a serious problem which keeps it from being anything like a definitive study of Bunuel: this is the personality of its prin cipal writer, Ado Kyrou. Though it cannot be denied that movies such: as "L'age d'or" and "Viri diana" passionately attack insti tutionalized Christianity and the narrowness of the bourgeois mor ality and mentality it supports, it is not the critic's function to use his subject's predilections as a starting point for the amplifica tion of bis own even more vehe ment ones. Mr. Kyrou does not criticize, he eulogizes; he does not, interpret he uses Bunuel's images as symbols of his own personal vitriol. So entranced is the author with what he feels is the kindredness of his subject's spirit that he is unable to offer a single word of technical or artistic criticism criticism in the sense of an ob jective attempt to delineate artis tic cause and effect as opposed to mere pointing out of "good things" with which the writer happens to agree. Perhaps because of this consis tent enthusiasm for all things Bunuelian, Mr. Kyrou fares far better as a biographer. He is at his best when he is telling with ebullient irony anecdotes such as that of the filming of the crush ingly anti-clerical "Viridiana" in in that citadel of Mother Church, Franco's Spain. But Mr. Kyrou's critique is hardly a good introduc tion to the works of a director who is relatively unknown in the U.S. If film is to be considered an art, then it must, like all art, rise above the personal political-religious-social attitudes of the artist. Bunuel has achieved this, but Mr. Kyrou has not succeeded in indicating it. Pierre Leprohon's discussion of Michelangelo Antonioni comes far closer to fulfilling the factual and critical functions of the ser ies. Though Mr. Leprohon is an tdmirer of Antonioni, he is none theless able to recognize the lim itations of what seems to be the director's current trend. In writ ing of "L'avventura" (which he wholly admires), he credits An tonioni with the "detheatricalisa tion" of the motion picture" and sees this as the source of his "crucial position in the history of the Seventh Art." By this, Lep rohon means Antonioni's replac ing of logical dialogue and a straightforward plotline with an almost entirely visual attempt to delineate his "character and their behavior in relation to themselves and to events." Thus, in "L'av ventura," the original mystery of the disappearance of Anna is nev er solved since other facts and events have become more im portant to the other characters. The complexity of this internal "logic" is likened by Leprohon to the structure of a Proustian nov el, and he finds it to be entirely successful in L'avventura." In "La Notte," however, a similar technique is used, and here the critic is quick to point out its lim itations and dangers. Antonioni's lengthening of certain scenes to express the totality of the char acter's boredom by similarly bor ing the audience is seen by Lep rohon as "a sort of Proustian de sire to make us enter the psycho logical world of the characters." He carries this observation to a logical critical conclusion when he adds: "Is it not possible that this new approach, making use of all the techniques of the novel, may create a literary cinema which will soon prove as vain as the theatrical cinema it is meant to replace?" The excerpts from Antonioni's articles and interviews are as well chosen as those in the Bun uel volume, and their quiet, con sidered tone contrasts interest ingly with the passionate flam boyance of the Spaniard. In 1958, in answer to a questionnaire on neo-realism, Antonioni gave a statement of his goals which must move even those not impressed by the cinematic results: "I - think that we men of the cinema must always find inspiration in our own ear ... to pick up from it the echoes it produces within us so that we, men of the cinema, may be sincere and coherent within ourselves, and honest and courageous with others. This is the one and only way to be alive. Intelligence which evades its re sponsibilities at a given moment is a contradiction in terms." Though the body of film critic ism to which "The World of Film" plays an important role in the self-realization of a new art, perhaps of equal importance would be a collection of the dir ectors' own writings. These sec tions in the new series may well prove to be its most valuable contribution. Dorms In By PETER RANGE What is an international house? For an example, let us turn to the famous Fridtjof Nansen In ternational Haus in Goettingen, Germany, where UN'C's annu al Goettingen Scholars have traditionally lived. First of all, the Nansen Haus was a dormitoryT Sixly foreign ers and GO Germans lived there; every foreigner had a German roommate. There were 80 boys and 40 girls. The building was an old, Vic torian mansion with a four story, L-shaped wing added to it. While the new wing housed most of the students and bore alFthe trappings of modern architec ture and design, the "old house" was a maze of stairwells and balconies, towers and turrets. The central ballroom and the many day rooms surrounding it were paneled, floor, roof, and ceiling with dark, stained wood. Furniture was luxurious and de signed for afternoon tea gather ings or an evening with friends and a fine wine. A study room and magazine library were downstairs; the typing room and newspaper room w here all chess games took place were off the mezzanine which swept aroUnd the ballroom from 20 feet up. And there wre rooms to spare. Often a student might take over one of the rooms for an evening and invite his friends to see slides and hear a report on a trip he had recently taken. On other nights we all went down to the auditorium for a movie or a play presented by the Haus members. Other activities ranged from discussion groups of every sort imaginable to basketball and vol leyball games. The most important function of the International Haus, how ever, was to draw natives and foreigners closer together. By eating and living every day with our roommates and the other Germans in the Haus, we gained a deeper, closer, more accurate understanding of our hosts. They came to understand us better. And mutual exchange among the many groups in the Haus was continually in motion. The foreigners there represent ed 25 different countries and at least 60 different points of view! An atmosphere of friendly argu ment prevailed. Discussions of ten carried" on late into the night. The dormitory rooms were larger than those at UNC and intended not only for sleeping, but for entertaining as well. The beds became soTas in the day time, each room had a rug-(of sorts), a coffee-table, a sink, and a pleasant atmosphere. Girls and boys could visit in one an other's rooms until 11 p.m. A small kitchen for the preparation of coffee and tea was maintain ed on each floor. The halls were t f ' decorated with art works and planters. Private parties were permissible until they disturbed anyone else trying to study. Capping social activities each semester was a formal gala ball involving about 300 guests and lasting until 3 a.m. And what about an interna tional house In Chapel Hill? Many schools in the North and West already have them. In (lie Southeast, however, this could be the first institution giving ser ious thought to the project. It is hoped that within the forseeable future such an insti tution can be secured for Chapel Hill. We have 200 foreign stu dents here this year. It is clear ly recognized that contacts among Americans and foreign students are at best weak. Very few students know these lore: lin ers. Very few programs can be made appealing to a large num ber of Carolina students. The ten international organizations on campus are without a head quarters or reasonable coordina tion in their activities. We are in poor position to hold profitable international symposia for lack of a central meeting ground. The present plan calls for a building to house 100-200 stu dents.. Hopefully, it would be a new structure, designed specifi cally as an international house. Funds for such a building will be sought shortly, probably from such sources as Ford, Rockefel ler, Kellogg, or even North Caro lina benefactors. The living plan would be simi lar to that of Goettingen, i.e., one foreigner and one American in a room. About an equal num ber of boys and girls is freseen. It would include both undergrad uate and graduate students. Ideally, the I. II. would have its own cafeteria and snack bar. Very important are the rooms which would serve as offices for the International Student Board, international clubs, etc. Meeting rooms for any gathering of in ternational import would be available. An auditorium with movie-stage facilities is also hoped for. A library-study room, including especially periodicals from abroad is desired. At present, the plan is still in the discussion stage among stu dents involved in campus inter national organizations. M a n y problems are yet to be faced: who will administer the House, the University, or students, or the YMCA, or who? What about a mixed living unit? Will its imalntainenctj be statesubsidiz ed? Will land be made av.n'l- . Itis hoped that the plan will " meet with campus-wide enthus iasm. The benefits of an Inter national House to our campus will be manifold, its addition to UNC's reputation will be felt, and yet the road to establish ment will be a rugged one. & j TC ED1T.OS him A Defense Editors, The Tar Heel, Appropriately, Mr. Henry Mc Innis chose Halloween to haunt the GMAB Committee with his article, "Free Flicks Poor." In reply, the Films Committee finds it impossible to select a movie that will suit each student's cine matic taste. Mr. Mclnnis men tions 10 films scheduled for show ing this year eight of which he likes. Yet he is disappointed and asks that the committee "cull from the gross garbage." In sel ecting the approximately 50 mov ies to be shown, the committee would be indeed happy to find that each Carolina student felt that 40 of the selections were noteworthy. The main criterion for select ing the Friday and Saturday mov ies ist he number of students they will attract to Carroll Hall. We assume that the films which in terest the most students utilize sdudent money best. However, through the Sunday Cinema we also attempt to please those stu dents who are interested in films of more exceptional cinematic and artistic quality. In his article, Mr. Mclnnis' main gripe seems to be the selec tion of "Imitation of Life" and "Midnight Lace." I will not argue POGO By Walt Kelly that this dislike for "Imitation of Life" is unfounded. Instead, 1 11 inform him that Carroll Hails 467 seats were filled for the mov ie. In contrast, Ingmar Beryman's "Sawdust and Tinsel" (which I presume falls into Mr. Mclnnis' "Let's have more strange, un orthodox movies" catergory) drew the smallest turnout of the year despite its having front-page TAR HEEL coverage. As for "Mid night Lace", Mclnnis must rem ember that Doris Day would nev er have become America's num ber one box-office attraction un less someone had liked her. Further, the article, which was first written for a journalism class in editorial writing, lauds Marilyn Monroe and in the same paragraph asks that we "have more strange, unorthodox movies in place of insipid, snjgglin'4' (sniggering, Mr. Editor?) sex comedies." I ask you, when did "Seven Year Itch" and ' How to Marry a Millionaire" become strange, unorthodox movies rath er than "sex comedies?" Mr. Mclnnis, when you are edit oi of a daily newspaper, I sug gest you consider that there are other movie-goers, besides your self, before you write an editorial asking the local theatre to sho.v only MM and other "strange, un orthodox movies." Bobby Ray, Chm. G.ALB FILMS Committee 12 Old East USACH U1QHAL AiZ, WITH ) tM6MGG iftfAf Vv W&ti?3 J 1 fi IfeiwaUlM- f L S f g Le tiers The Daily Tar m-el solicits end is happy to print any letter-to-the-editor written by a mem ber ef the University commun ity, so long as it is free of slan derous and libelous remarks. DTH offices are on the second floor of Graham Memorial. Ed.t page material should be turned in two-to-three days before pub lication is desired.