University of Virginia Library

Letters To The Editor

Union Asks Support

The P.K.-German Dance Society
has the chance to sign the two
hottest acts in Rock today in Joe
Cocker and Ten Years After. But
Jim Doilney and John Bakhaus
fear that these groups will not sell
seats. To prove them wrong, we will
be circulating petitions stating support
of each concert. It is crucial
that people show their interest
before Thanksgiving break for what
could be the best concert we have
ever had.

Search For Truth

I am responding specifically to
the article, "Happiness is your own
gun," published in the November
14 issue of The Cavalier Daily. For
some happiness is, indeed, one's
own gun and the freedom to use it
in a responsible fashion; however,
my prime concern here is not to
criticize Mr. Eissler's feelings about
the possession of guns nor to negate
the fact that guns may be misused,
rather, my concern is the more
fundamental one of the use and
misuse of written language which is
a far more potent weapon than any
gun and much more frequently
abused than are guns.

The article states "A Smith &
Wesson is a police gun, and of little
use to a hunter or even for target
practice." and uses this statement
as support of its implied conclusion
that any person who wants or
possesses a handgun must desire it
for illegitimate or perverted purposes.
Such a view is native and in
fact most of the handgun owners I
know use their pieces for recreation,
a purpose as legitimate as any
other I can cohesive of. If anyone
doubts me, let him take an
afternoon and visit the local gun
club when its pistol range is open.
Many people, myself included, just
plain enjoy pistol shooting and the
challenge of becoming good target
or game shots.

In conclusion, let me urge that
proper use of our language demands
that we, when writing, distinguish
clearly between opinion and fact
and that failure to do so, for
whatever reason, constitutes an
egregious mistake, tantamount to
lying. If our morality is one of
truth or the search for truth,
veracity of the written word must
be preserved; what we write we
must be sure of and though our
opinions may be contested our
premises cannot afford to be. I
remind you of The Cavalier Daily's
slogan which is a quotation from
Mr. Jefferson, "For here we are not
afraid to follow truth wherever it
may lead, nor to tolerate any error
so long as any reason is left free to
combat it."

Charles Osville Finne, III
Medicine II

—ed.

Mr. Finne seems to have missed
the point of the article. Criticism
was not offered to those sportsmen
who use guns for a legitimate
purpose. It was the unrestricted,
and in fact clandestine sale of guns
that was attacked. A person buying
a gun, any gun, in the fashion
described to "kill my wife" wants it
for perverted purposes. How does
this apply to an above board sale!
Has Mr. Finne separated his opinion
from fact! If all premises are
certain, in his search for truth, why
is he ever wrong!

Sporting Bigots

Perhaps, if you could take time
out from conducting your bigotry
witch hunt, you could explain how
you permitted (assuming of course
that the editor doe know what is
printed on the sports page) the
Woodberry Forrest - Episcopal
High score receiving such prominent
placing in Monday's Cavalier
Daily. It seems that the past
represented by these exclusive
schools is even more evil than that
represented by today's bourbon
drinkers. Or perhaps bigotry only
exists where you choose to find it?

Jeremy Kahn
College 4

—ed.

Myopic Review

It is generally true of myopia
that the sufferer can determine
basic forms and colors but without
the precision and clarity that make
for full perception. This was also
true of Steve Wells' appraisal of
"Last Summer" on November 18,
1969 in The Cavalier Daily. Mr.
Wells did know the correct names
of the characters, the basic plot line,
the title and did react favorably to
the film, but his understanding of
the film left doubt as to whether he
was discussing "Last Summer" or
some other film.

"Last Summer" concerns three
Innocent teenagers that are products
of their parents world. They
are disillusioned and distressed by
what they see around them, thus
they join together in reaction to the
adult world and in a desire to
change it for the better. Their
motives are good, honest, and
wholly out of concern. They attack
adult society and its institutions
but in their virginal zeal disregard
the importance of the individual.

Sandy's efforts to save the
seagull from death are motivated by
compassion and goodwill but after
she performs her service she insists
on harnessing the gull, thus depriving
it of its individuality. When the
bird resists this unnatural desire,
Sandy mistakes this for ingratitude
and destroys it.

Thus, in making a valid attack
against computerization, Sandy,
Dan, and Peter (in that order)
disregard the possible effects on the
individual, here Animal. They fail to
see, despite Rhoda's warnings, that
while not everyone is aware of the
evil or danger in impersonalization
this does not necessarily make him
any less valuable than they as a
person. Consequently, they attack
impersonalization at the expense of
an individual personality.

Finally, Sandy, Dan, and Peter
attempt to reform Rhoda who
represents conservative, Middle
America by teaching her to swim,
but become vexed with her wary
approach. They do not comprehend
the cause of her caution or at most
do not think the cause important.
They take advantage of Rhoda's
desire to belong to prod her, but
when she does not do exactly as
they wish they impatiently and
savagely flail at Rhoda and destroy
what chance she has of becoming a
free spirit like themselves.

"Last Summer" is not an acrimonious
comment to the over
thirty set saying. "Look at what
you have done!" as Mr. Wells would
have it, but rather a distressing and
opposite warning to the younger
generation that zeal untempered by
understanding and true love can
lead to modern cannibalism.

Naval Defense

The Student Council ROTC
Affairs Committee and the Student
Council Curriculum Evaluation
Committee have submitted a report
to the Faculty Curriculum Committee
which recommends the removal
of credit for the courses offered by
the RTOC, AFROTC, and NROTC
departments.

They divide the courses offered
into two classes, the academically
oriented and the professionally
oriented courses. The NROTC
offers no academically oriented
courses, but rather requires the
prospective naval officer to take an
elective in International Relations,
Diplomatic History, and Computer
Science. If these courses are presented
dogmatically, then it is the
separate departments at fault and
not the Naval Science Department.

The courses taught in the Naval
Science Department are apolitical.
They represent factual material
about which there can be no moral
controversy. These are the professional
courses mentioned in the
report to the faculty of which
"Naval Weapons Systems" was one.
According to the Naval Science
Department this course is no longer
offered. The NROTC courses offered
are Principles of Naval Organization
and management practices),
Introduction to Naval Ships
Systems (a survey of the engineering
department, and the principles
and equipment found on large
vessels,) Navigation, and Naval
Operations (the theory, principles,
and procedures of ship movement
in unethical formations and dispositions).

The instructors of these courses
are approved by the faculty and are
chosen by the Navy to teach in a
field where they have practical
experience. The material is not
taught at a highly technical level,
but rather based on a liberal arts
background and generally tend to
be a survey of the field. It is the
knowledge that these instructors
have plus their ability to communicate
it and not necessarily their
academic degrees which determine
their competence.

I therefore submit that a more
intellectual study of the curriculum,
at least of the Naval Science
courses, rather than the more
biased one offered. At the very
least, they could verify their information.

One final thought, can these two
committees really believe that these
"faults" with the curriculum are
serious enough to require the
discontinuation of the three ROTC
programs at the University?
Shouldn't a liberal school allow all
its students to work toward the
careers they desire? How can the
University censor any students
quest for valid knowledge?