University of Virginia Library

To The Editor

On Devlin The Person

I write to amplify the article on
Bernadette Devlin which appeared
in Monday's issue. That article
correctly stated the expected and
fairly standard "revolutionary
socialist" philosophy which she
presented in her speech. I
personally think Miss Devlin made
some rather obvious blunders in
historical analysis ("the American
corporate state began in 1882")
and was, as an Irishman, an
anachronism in this country
through no fault of her own, but I
would prefer to go beyond
substance to style.

I had the pleasure of driving
Miss Devlin to Randolph Macon
Woman's College for her speech
there and talking to her before she
spoke. She revealed a sensitivity
and breadth of outlook which is
usually lacking in an iconoclastic
radical. At the risk of providing
manna on which moderates may
feed, I feel several statements she
made are important in seeing Miss
Devlin as a person and not as a
political cartoon.

Miss Devlin has no use for
middle-class students who have the
means and leisure to be
superficially committed to her
cause, but who have never been
truly "activist" in the highest sense
of that word, or for those whose
needs are rhetoric and personal
attention. These, unfortunately, are
the ones usually too prominent in
any movement. This is reminiscent
of the Julian Bond speech, in which
we white students realized that we
were not being patted on the back
for being humanitarian, but were
being asked to work, to commit
ourselves. Hopefully both speeches
will change our attitudes and cause
us to question our motives.

Miss Devlin urges the utilization
of education for social change. She
insists that those who are in school
will be able to work more quickly
and effectively for such change,
when they complete their
education, than their peers who
insist that education is "irrelevant".
Devlin says that she desperately
needs trained and skilled workers
within the existing system.

On Women's Liberation, Miss
Devlin pointed out that when it
loses touch with social revolution in
general, and becomes trapped in its
own sexism, it is
counterproductive, leading to
red and a "splitting of the
ranks."

On violence, Miss Devlin
condemns murder, arson, and
bombing as ultimately destructive
to those who are committed to
peaceful change, and not to the
targets of the crime. Besides,
hatred, even of the enemy (whom
she calls "The Exploiters" in
Harold Robbinesque) runs counter
to the essence of the revolution
itself.

These statements by Miss Devlin
show that she is anything but "the
fiery Communist" some legislators
and members of the press would
have us believe. It is a shame the
University could not hear her
speak.

"Virtue"

In response to the recent actions
of the Honor Committee and the
Honor System in general, we would
like to submit the response of
another person on this doubtful
concept:

—Albert Camus