University of Virginia Library

Letters To The Editor

Quality In Context

I believe that you have been
naively misled in your denunciation
of Mr. George Garrett's course,
English 56. There is always a place
for constructive criticism, but your
floccinaucinihilipilification based
on your misunderstanding of his
course exams is reprehensible.
While it is true that the learned
student could earn ten points by
naming the reigning Playmate of
the Year (Donna Michele that
year), the question is defendable.
Mr. Garrett felt that the true
scholar of current American literature
would peruse periodicals of the
calibre of Playboy. Any Playboy
Peruser would be impressed with
Miss Michele's interview. Thus, the
true scholar would know her name.
Some question has been raised
concerning the twenty-five points
awarded for naming all of the
Tarzan books. This question tested
the amount of independent, outside
reading that the student had done.

Before criticizing an exam, or
event, it may be wise to examine
the context within which it resides.
Considering the objectives of Mr.
Garrett's course, the exam given
made more sense that many that
have been given in more recent
years. Your entire editorial sounds
as if you believe the quantity of
work, not the quality of work, is
what this institution is all about.

Woody's Rescue

Once again it is Dean Woody to
the rescue. Undaunted by ethics,
age or proper regard for our elected
representatives he saved the cause
of the conservatives and snatched
the University from the jaws of the
liberal threat.

It was a conservative coup. The
"damn" liberals sent representatives
to Richmond, so he arranged for a
group of "conservative" students to
trot down and undercut by formless
complaints the concrete proposals
of our representatives.

The Student Council president
and his cohorts were asking for a
more just racial balance and a 20th
century method of appointing
members to the Board of Visitors
and rapid coeducation. Shouldn't
we then presume that by taking the
opposing position "Woody's
Raiders" were speaking for racism,
19th century methods and male
supremacy. Nay, that is too harsh.
In the true style of an honorable
(dishonorable) gentleman (the
terms seem interchangeable judging
from Dean Woody's actions) they
cloaked their requests in euphemism.
To top it all off, like a real
insurgent Dean Woody carried it all
off in (near) secrecy. Doesn't that
smack of bit of dishonor.

Radicals on the ground owe
Dean Woody a debt of gratitude for
a real demonstration of subversive
action. However, he tipped his
hand. He showed his real associates
to be those who don't want racial
equality, meaningful coeducation
and just representation. And all of
the administrative talk about proper
channels proved itself to be
nothing but a front. Dean Woody
only operates through proper Channels
(i.e. the Student Council) when
it suits his fancy.

In other words Woody, stay the
hell out of student affairs (unless of
course you go through proper
channels) and let the conservative
student cause sink or swim on its
own merits.

Turn To Die

The public is finally awakening
to the twin issues of population and
ecology, characteristically at one
minute to midnight a a civil rights
and Viet Nam. In some ways it is
already too late: "The battle to
feed all of humanity is over. In the
1970's the world will undergo
famines. Hundreds of millions of
people are going to starve to death
in spite of any crash programs
embarked upon now." (Dr. Paul
Ehrlich) - all we can do is watch
via satellite relayed color T.V. while
sipping our Metrecal. Biafra rather
than Viet-Nam is the prototype of
the decade: the removal of surplus
human material through famine,
plague, warfare. We will be too
numbed by its inevitability and
immensity to care.

Closer to home, Lake Eric
(10,000 sq. miles) is a sterile
cesspool; the Chicago and Buffalo
rivers are fire hazards (!); mass
deaths from air pollution are
expected (scheduled?) to begin at
Long Beach by 1975-76; the very
soil may be incurably poisoned by
the late 1980's (through fertilizers
and insecticides). The automobile is
not only fouling the atmosphere, it
is altering its very composition by
converting oxygen to CO2: a
process which not only endangers
all animal life but will also change
the earth's temperature by enough
to cause either a new ice age or a
catastrophic rise in the sea level
through polar melting. The DDT
already released has virtually exterminated
several species of birds
(including the American Bald
Eagle): they can no longer lay
normal eggs. Man is more resistant;
it will be several years before its
long range effects, such as cancer,
become fatally noticeable among us
en masse. The list could be
extended indefinitely...

What can we do? Aside from
nationwide activities such as the
April 22nd teach-in, pressure on
elected officials, and the obligatory
demonstrations, we can begin by
improving our local environment.
The University should immediately
stop the generating plant next to
the Hospital (!) from pouring filth
into the air; it should promote
ecological rather than military research;
and it should give woodland
preservation priority over blind
cancerous growth (conservatives
rally! here is an issue of traditional
beauty vs. "state-U-ism"). Automobiles
should be banned from
parking anywhere in the grounds
(particularly the amphitheater); car
privileges should be greatly restricted
(walking is good for you).
Nobody has an inalienable right to
destroy the environment which all
of us must share: one car driven
down one block consumes the
oxygen needed by one hundred
people for one month. Choose.

The problem is one of will not
means. There are many who,
through greed, the frontier ethic,
and a paranoiac fear/hatred of
nature agree with the defoliation
teams in Viet-Nam: "Only we can
prevent forests." Act now...or soon
it will be your turn, your turn, your
turn to die.

Serious Swope

Where was your sense of humor,
Mr. Erickson, when you saw Putney
Swope?

You're right about the fact that
most of the laughs were to be had
in the first half-hour - and wisely
so!

If the whole movie had been
that way, we might as well have
stayed home and watched Laughin.
But Putney Swope was so much
more.

As for the movie being a
cop-out, and the blacks not being
true "soul brothers" - that's what
it was all about. Robert Downey
wasn't trying to say whites are
phony - blacks are real. He was
saying people are, and can become
cop-outs! And he said it beautifully,
if heavy handed at times.

Putney Swope isn't a movie to
get uptight about. You go there to
relax, and enjoy the comedy. And
while you're doing that, its message
will probably seep into your senses.