Friday, December 2, 1966
Page 2
TIIK DAILY TAR ITCEL
In Our Opinion ...
'Big Time' Word Is Only
As Dirty As Your Mind
'Now Don't Say A Typical Carolina Geil Never Came Right
Up And Spoke To You!'
Final In A Series
The Time: A fall afternoon.
The Place: A grassy, rectangu
lar field, divided into ten ten-yard
sections by a series of white lines,
with surrounding seats for specta
tors. The Game: Football.
The Object: To Win.
And nobody complains about this.
But preface the name "Football"
with the "Big-Time" and you've
opened Pandora's box.
A few days ago we suggested
that if UNC decides to become a
football power, "we might as well
adjust to what goes along with be
ing in the 'Big-Time'."
What does go along with Big -Time
collegiate athletics? Of
course, those less sympathetic with
the pennant-waving and "Give 'em
Hell Heels" cheers will be quick to
say that emphasis on athletics
weakens the academic quality of
the school. We, ourselves, have
stated our belief that outstanding
athletes are often unable to accom
plish academically what a lot of
other students can.
And those with evil minds will
hint that Big-Time athletics means
corruption, fixed games, point
shaving and gambling syndicates.
We disagree with these argu
ments and all the others we have
heard against athletic emphasis.
Look, for a moment, at some of the
advantages of a thriving athletic
program.
Think of athletics as a public re
lations medium with alumni and
other people in this state. One of
our greatest problems with both
these groups is that they seldom
hear of UNC except when there is
some kind of controversy or scan
dal that the news media can ex
plode. It wouldn't hurt to have
them hear of a successful football
or basketball team maybe a
championship or a bowl game once
in a while. Just to remind them
that we have a set of normal col
lege students here.
We compete against other col
leges and universities in the coun
try in all a r e a s of academic
achievement. Why not a little de
sire to be tops in athletics as well?
And the most important reason,
why not let the students here have
teams they can be proud of? Why,
when we go home during vacation
periods, should we have to excuse
ourselves and go powder our noses
when some kid from another school
starts talking about athletics?
Then what goes along with Big
Time athletics?
We certainly don't claim to have
all the answers, but we pass along
a few suggestions that we have
heard.
Playing the big teams and draw
ing the big crowds, we get more
money in the athletic purse. Some
of this money could be used to em
ploy tutors to help athletes who
might be having trouble keeping
up with the books.
Athletes should have the choice
of taking a reduced course load,
especially during the semester
their sport is in season. Perhaps
it could become routine for them
to take a five-year undergraduate
course to pick up the necessary
hours for a degree. (Even the draft
boards allow this.)
A professor from Florida State
has suggested that colleges and
Universities consider a special
curriculum for athletes which
would omit many of the require
ments of the undergraduate pro
gram in liberal arts.
We train students to specialize
in pharmacy, nursing, dramatic
arts, etc. And the academic com-
munity lauds these scholars for
their dedication and achievement.
But this same community too oft
en snubs students in physical edu
cation. And if they don't snub
them, they certainly don't want to
make any special exceptions for
this group.
Perhaps we are failing to see the
worth to our society of the physi
cal education major as high
school and junior high school
coaches, as directors of YMCAs
; and : community recreation : cen-:;ters;-These
are the people respond
sible for guiding the physical fit--
ness programs that everybody
from the president of the United
States down agree are so impor
tant for our people.
Why should an outstanding foot
ball player not be allowed to play
college ball and then share his
knowledge with a team of his own
just because he cannot pass French
21?
Yes, things would come along
with Big-Time football. Things
that we don't have now. But that
doesn't make them bad.
History Was Made, And You Were There
We waited anxiously for the
opening of Carmichael Auditorium
last fall. Our anxiety became im
patience as the fall wore on, and
we began to wonder if we would
get into it in time for basketball
season. As we all know, we made
it just in time.
But perhaps our impatience
would have been less apt to show
itself had we known we were await
ing the unveiling of an "historic
site."
That right! Our office received
a news release from an insurance
company this week announcing
that Carmichael has been selected
as one of the 12 historic scenes to
be portrayed on the company's
17 calendars.
The release said the local attrac-
Briefly Editorial
A lot of people will tell you, and
it's true, that citizens throughout
the state keep tabs on what is go
ing on at UNC and other U. S.
campus.
However, it is not necessarily
true that the public always under
stands fully what it hears.
Take, for instance, this conver
sation overheard in a local pub
while we were horn: for Thanks
giving: "What do you think ahvit. J.b'"-
"W:J1. I rlori'f V.W.t; .'. h ;;b','it
'f:rn. hot Mjc (.. :,;;.'. ,...' ..t
'f j-ft h t n't r. .t i.r',', .'. :
tion was selected "because of its
outstanding historic value to the
people of this area and its appeal
to persons throughout the South."
Eattg ar qetl
74 Years of Editorial Freedom
Fred Thomas, Editor
Tom Clark, Business Manager
Scott Goodfellow, Managing Ed.
John Askew Ad. Mgr.
John Greenbacker Assoc. Ed.
Bill Amlong News Ed.
Kerry Sipe Feature Ed.
Sandy Treadwell .. Sports Editor
Bill Hass- Asst. Sports Ed.
Jock Lauterer Photo Editor
Chuck Benner Night Editor
STAFF WRITERS
Don Campbell Lytt Stamps, Er
nest Robl, Steve Bennett, Steve
Knowlton, Judy Sipe, Carol Won
savage, Diane Warman, Karen
Freeman, Cindy Borden, Julie
Parker, Peter Harris, Drum
mond Bell, Owen Davis, Joey
Leigh, Dennis Sanders.
CARTOONISTS
Bruce Strauch, Jeff MacNelly
The Daily Tar Heel is the official
news publication of the University of
North Carolina and is published by
students daily except Mondays, ex
amination periods and vacations.
Second class postage paid at the
Post Office in Chapel Hill, N. C.
Subscription rates: $4.50 per semes
t.-r; $8 p:r y;ar. Printed by the
ChapH Hill Publishing Co., Inc., 501
W Franklin HI , Charx-I Hill, N. C.
Professors Abandon
Students, Education
In Letters
S3S Seeks Action
Draft, Viet Nam
Editor, The Daily Tar Heel:
An open letter to elected
campus representatives:
Students for a Democratic
Society has consistently op
posed the war in Viet Nam as
unjust and immoral. It will
continue to do so.
But the issues1 to which SDS
addresses itself are of concern
to more than just SDS mem
bers. As the war expands in
Viet Nam, its influence in the
United States becomes more
and more profound. The issues
that this war raises are now
crucial to all of us, both as citi
zens and as students.
The administration and fac-
ulty of this;, university now t
' make decisions concerning the
" " ' ' fate of students and the fate ;
of the university. The use of
grades in ranking students
raises serious questions con
cerning the nature and purpose
of the university.
The use of university facul
ties for war research similarly
raises important questions con
cerning the function of the uni
versity. Unfortunately there
has been no serious public dis
cussion of the justification for
such policies.
We must now ask why, out
side of SDS, no other campus
group or organization has
openly debated the issues of
the war, the draft, and of the
University of North Carolina's
relation to the war. Most dis
heartening to us as students
has been the total failure of
Student Government to at
tempt to articulate a position
on these matters.
This lack of discussion is
particularly disturbing be
cause as the war expands,
more and more students are
being drafted. This expansion
in the draft raises anew the
question of the university us
ing grades to rank students.
We now ask that campus
wide discussions should begin
on the issues of the draft and
of the war. Discussion must
be held among Student Govern
ment officers and student leg
islators, who, as representa
tives of the student body, are
obligated to concern them
selves with matters vital to
the well-being of the students
and the university.
SDS has no simple answers
for the painful issues it urges
be discussed. But no issue can
be clarified, no problem ever
resolved, if both the issue and
the problem are avoided.
We ask you, the elected
leaders of this campus, to be
gin the discussion of such is
sues as the draft, university
war research, and the question
of the war itself. You were
elected to lead. It is now time
to exercise that leadership.
Gary Waller
The Viet Nam Committee
UNC-SDS
(Editor's note Numerous or
ganizations have held debates
on subjects such as U.S. in
volvement in Viet Nam and
the draft, specifically the West
minster Fellowship and the
Di-Phi Senate, but the . atten
dance for these events did by
no means indicate that the
campus was overly interested
in the issues. However, a
teach-in on the draft has al
ready been proposed by Stu
dent Body President Hob Pow
ell, along with a .student refer
endum issue on the same sub
jeet. This ie.ieli in. which will
he ,Mii'.ored hy the 4'olin
Forum, the Carolina Political
Union and the DiPhi, will prob
ably be held before Christmas
vacation.)
Boys Cause TCCs
Editor, The Daily Tar Heel:
Every year since my ar
rival at this University, the
age-old controversy between
the TCCs and the Carolina
Gentlemen has come to the
fore, mainly through the ef
forts of The Daily Tar Heel.
Tell me, is there so. little
news on this campus as to
necessitate an item such as
the one entitled "Carolina
Gentlemen Think TCCs Real
ly Exist" which appeared on '
..the front-page of the DTH of
'"November 30. I? hardly think"'
so. Some people think this is
news; I don't.
Now I will admit that TCCs
may exist, but how can boys
say that 65 of the girls here
are TCCs when they cannot
even come up with a clear
definition of one?
Do they condemn girls for
conformity? If so, they evi
dently haven't taken a good
look at themselves.
Do girls walk around with
their noses in the air? Well,
girls, try smiling at boys as
you walk around campus all
you get in reply is a look
which implies "My Lord, are
you crazy?" at least, this is
the case nine out of ten times.
I know, I have tried.
I have heard it said that
the only people on this cam
pus who smile are freshmen;
believe me, I know why!
OK, boys of Carolina, I'd
like to know: Just what is a
TCC? Am I to understand
that those of us not from the
North or West are automati
cally TCCs? As for the basis
of your opinions, do you judge
all girls on your knowledge of
"at least one TCC"? How
would you feel if we judged
all boys on the basis of one?
One other thing puzzles me
just when was the legend of a
TCC born? If boys do n o t
want to date her, then why is
it she "rarely worries about
dateless weekends"?
Let's be frank about this
matter, boys I really would
like to know what a TCC is. Is
she any girl who is so cold
and aloof that she won't go to
bed with you?
Many girls and boys on this
campus are dateless on week
ends, and I have an idea that
the idea of a TCC has a great
deal to do with it. If TCCs ex
ist, boys, we can all thank
you!
Ann Harris
More On Hickey
Editor, The Daily Tar Heel:
After several months of
speculation it is now a fact
that Jim Hickey is the Ath
letic Director of the Univer
sity of Connecticut. I would
like to make two observations.
The first is that criticism
mounted considerably during
the last two seasons. The 1965
team was picked to win only
two games but won four and
came very close in several
others. The 1966 squad was a
bitter disiipfwintjiionl from the
first g.mie. Injuries lo key,
xM'rieiMi'l iTsomiel wore
..l.iT.,,, ,nr. :,lh' di-'iii? A rous
Football coaches are usually
evaluated on the basis of their
won-lost record. Based on this
Coach Hickey is barely aver
age in a conference that still
leaves something to be de
sired. Unfortunately, the rec
ord will not show that Jim
Hickey is a gentleman in ev
ery sense of the word. He
will make an excellent Ath
letic Director.
The second observation that
I would like to make is that
the screening committee and
the influential members of the
administration now have the
opportunity to select not only
the new football coach, but a
whole new coaching staff. I
hope that they seize this op
portunity and ! select a win
ning combination. ' :, f,.. ,
Paul J. ' McGuade
Infirmary Great
Editor, The Daily Tar Heel:
I have noticed many nega
tively directed articles in your
letters to the editor column.
That is the place for them, I
guess. I have a few opinions
on the administration and
teaching myself, but I am not
well enough informed to make
any assertions.
I would like to say some
thing positive. I am very im
pressed by the UNC Infirm
ary. I would like to defend it
against any rumors of "mad
doctors," grouchy old nurses,
or poor food.
The doctors and nurses I
have seen are competent.
Communication between all
the phases of the infirmary
and hospital that I have been
through has been excellent.
And the food is even good,
due, I suppose, to the excel
lent dietician.
William and Ed, the cheer
ful orderlies, give a positive
start to a grouchy riser.
I only hope that no one read
ing this letter will have rea
. son to visit the infirmary as a
patient.
Thomas H. Glendinning
Profs Support Club
Editor, The Daily Tar Heel:
In his Nov. 18 article,
Owen Lewis gave an account
of the first formal meeting of
the newly-organized University
Art League. Careful to note
that "there wasn't a soul
from the art faculty there,"
he implied an apathy on the
part of the professors.
Apathy is not the case.
Nearly all the members of
the art faculty have personal
ly pledged their support, offer
ing their assistance any time
it might be needed. (The head
of the Art Department, Dr.
Joseph C. Sloane, has even
made a monetary contribution
to our treasury).
The University Art League
was organized to meet the
needs of students majoring in
studio art. The functions of
this organization are primar
ily the concern of its student
members.
The absence of art profes
sors at our Nov. 16 meeting
simply indicated their under
standing of this fact.
Frank M. Faulkner
Viet President
University Art
1 eKiie
(Editor's note This is an
excerpt from a speech deli
vered before the American
Council on Education by Dr.
Arrowsmith. a professor of
classics at the University of
Texas )
By WILLIAM ARROWSMITH
Let me say immediately
that I am concerned here with
only one kind of teaching, and
I am eager to talk about it
because it seems to me the
kind of teaching with which
this meeting is apparently
least concerned. I mean the
ancient, crucial, high art of
teaching, the kind of teaching
which alone can claim to be
called educational, an essen
tial element in all noble hu
man culture, and hence a task
of infinitely more importance
than research scholarship.
With the teacher as trans
mitter, as servant or partner
of research, I have no con
cern. He is useful and ne
cessary and, because he does
the bulk of university teach
ing, it is important that his
job be effectively performed
and intelligently evaluated.
But so long as the teacher
is viewed as merely a diffus
er of knowledge or a higher
popularizer, his position will
necessarily be a modest and
even menial one.
And precisely this, I think,
is the prevalent view of the
teacher's function, the view
overwhelmingly assumed ev
en among those who want to
redress the balance in favor
of the teacher. Is it any won
der then that the teacher en
joys no honor?
For if we assume that the
teacher stands to the scholar
as the pianist to the compos
er, there can be no question
of parity; teaching of this
kind is necessary but secon
dary. So toe is the compara
tively subtler and more diffi
cult kind of teaching that is
concerned with scholarly me
thodology and the crucial "ske
letal" skills of creative re
search. Only when large demands
are made of the teacher, when
we ask him to assume a pri
mary role as educator in his
own right, will it be possible
to restore dignity to teaching.
Teaching, I repeat, is n o t
honored among us either be
cause its function is grossly
misconceived or its cultural
value not understood. The rea
son for this is the overwhelm
ing positivism of our techno
cratic society and the techni
cal arrogance of academic
scholarship. Behind the con
tempt for the teacher lies the
transparent sickness of the hu
manities in the university and
in American life generally.
Indeed, nothing more viv
idly illustrates the myopia of
academic humanism than its
failure to realize that the fate
of any true culture is reveal
ed in the value it sets upon
the teacher and the way it de
fines him.
"The advancement of learn
ing at the expense of man,"
writes Nietzche, "is the most
pernicious thing in the world.
The stunted man is a back
ward step for humanity; he
casts his shadow over all
time to come. It debases con
viction, the natural purpose of
the particular field of learn
ing; learning itself is finally
destroyed. It is advanced,
true, but its effect on life is
nil or immoral."
What matters then is the
kind of context that we can
create for teaching and the
largeness of the demand
made upon the teacher. Cer
tainly he will have no func
tion or honor worthy of the
name until we are prepared to
make the purpose of educa
tion what it always was the
molding of men rather than
the production of knowledge.
It is my hope that educa
tion in this sense will not be
driven from the university by
the knowlege technicians. But
this higher form of teaching
does not die merely because
the university will not practice
it. Its future is always assured
since human beings and hu
man culture cannot do with
out it.
And if the university does
not educate, others will. Edu
cation will pass, as it is pass
ing now, to the artist, to the
intellectual, to the gurus of
theTmass media, the charis
matic charlatans and sages,
and the whole immense range
of secular and religious street
corner fakes and saints. The
context counts. Socrates took
to the streets, but so does ev
ery demagogue or fraud in
search of converts and dis
ciples. By virtue of its traditions
and pretensions the university
is I believe, a not inappropri
ate place for education to oc
cur. But we will not trans
form the university milieu nor
create teachers by. the mere
tricous d e v i c e of offering
prizes or bribes or "teaching
sabbatieals" or building a fav
orable "image " As present 1
constituted, the v!!e:;es a:'
universities are as uncongeni
al to teaching as the Mojave
Desert to a clutch of Druid
priests.
I am suggesting what will
doubtless seem paradox or
treason that there is no nec
essary link between scholar
ship and education, and that
in actual practice scholarship
is no longer a significant edu
cational force. Scholars to be
sure are unprecedentedly pow
erful, but their power is pro
fessional and therefore tech
nocratic; as educators they
have been eagerly disqualify
ing themselves for .more than
a century, and their disquali
fication is now nearly total.
The scholar has disowned
the student that is, the stu
dent who is not a potential
scholar and the student has
reasonably retaliated by aban
doning the scholar. This, I be
lieve, is the only natural read
ing of what I take to be a
momentous event the seces
sion of the "student from the
institutions of higher learning
on the grounds that they no
longer educate and are there
fore, in his word, irrelevant.
By making education the
slave of scholarship, the uni
versity has renounced its re
sponsibility to human culture
and its old, proud claim to
possess, as educator and
molder of men, an ecumenical
function. It has disowned in
short what teaching has al
ways meant; a care and con
cern for the future of man, a
Platonic love of the species,
not for what it is, but what it
. might be.
It is a momentous refusal.
Perhaps in the end teach
ing will be better off campus
than on, but in either place it
is now faring very badly. I do
not exaggerate. When the
president of Cornell seriously
proposes that the university
should abandon liberal educa
tion so that specialization can
begin with matriculation
and when he advocates this in
order to reconcile the con
flicting claims of research and
scholarship! it should be ob
vious even to the skeptical
that education is being stran
gled in its citadel, and stran
gled furthermore on behalf of
the crassest technocracy. I
find it very difficult to imag
ine the rationalization of these
salaried wardens of a great
ecumenical tradition, who ap
parently view themselves and
the institutions they adminis
ter as mere servants of na
tional and professional inter
ests. We lack educators by
which I mean Socratic teach
ers, visible embodiments of
the realized humanity of our
aspirations, intelligence, skill,
scholarship; men ripened or
ripening into realization, as
Socrates at the close of the
Symposium comes to be and
therefore embodies, personally
guarantees, his own definition
of love.
Our universities and our so
ciety need this compelling em
bodiment, this exemplification
of what we are all presumably
at, as they have never need
ed it before. It is men we
need, not programs. It is pos
sible for a student to go from
kindergarten to graduate
school without ever encoun
tering a man a man who
might for the first time give
him the only profound motiva
tion for learning, the hope of
becoming a better man.
Learning matters of course;
but it is the means, not the
end, and the end must always
be either radiantly visible or
profoundly implied in the
means. It is only in the teach
er that the end is apparent;
he can humanize because he
possesses the human skills
which give him the power to
humanize others.
If that power is not felt,
nothing of any educational sig
nificance can occur. This is
why the humanities stand or
fall according to the human
worth of the man who pro
fesses them.
If undergraduates ever met
teachers of this kind, the ab
stract, inhuman professiona
lism of the graduate schools
might have some plausibility;
there would be an educational
base.
But nothing whatsoever can
be expected of a system in
which men who have not
themselves been educated
presume to educate others.
Our whole educational inter
prise is in fact founded upon
the wholly false premise that
at some prior stage the essen
tial educational work has been
done.
The whole structure is built
on rotten foundations, and the
routines of education have be
gun to threaten and destroy
what they were intended to
save. There is a verv real
sense in which scholarship has
become pernicious to the un
derstanding and the love of
literature: the humanities as
they .ire presently taiht an'
aes:w.e:-.e of the ;v,s: a:l
'v:.'te:v ei the -.s.-!