University of Virginia Library

Letters: Buchanan Clarifies Position On Department

Since I have been directly quoted
in the recently publicized economics
department affair presumably
on the basis of notes
made in conversation, I feel that
two minor inaccuracies in reported
statements attributed to me should
be corrected.

In his story that appeared in
The Cavalier Daily on 14 February
Mr. MacDonald quotes me as saying
that "after the third refusal
(of the Tullock promotion recommendation)
I tried to see Mr.
Hereford but got nowhere." This
is inaccurate; I was in London
at the time and could not have
made the attempt suggested. Mr.
MacDonald was, I think, referring
to my statement that, before the
third year's promotion recommendation
was acted upon I had tried,
through the offices of Mr. Hereford,
to forestall what I thought
would be the predictable outcome.

A more serious inaccuracy appears
in the editorial statement
attributed to Mr. Lassiter. There
it is stated that "According to
Professor Buchanan, the economics
department has not been represented
on the Promotions Committee
during his ten years at the
University." I should like to make
it crystal clear that any charges
of underrepresentation on the promotions
committee refer only to
the five years of Mr. Harris' term
as Dean and to the one-year term
of Mr. Egger as Acting Dean.
The economics faculty was fully
represented on appropriate committees
during the term of Mr.
William L. Duren as Dean. In
fact, I felt personally that the departmental
faculty was genuinely
a "part of the university" during
Mr. Duren's regime. I have not
felt so since that time.

I realize that in transcribing
notes made from short interviews,
full accuracy is not to be expected.
For purposes of the record, however,
I should like for these two
points to be clarified.

Council Is Racist

The Student Council has proven
beyond a shadow of a doubt that
they are a racist body. They have
again refused to enforce their desegregation
resolution, by callously
defeating the motion.

A bad odor has attached itself
to the Council. There are many
adjectives meaning dishonorable
and immoral (words used by Council
members themselves). All of
these adjectives apply.

Again I accuse the Council of
being racist. I defy them to defend
themselves as ingloriously as they
have doe so previously. The
Council is hypocritical in their
enforcement of their regulations.
The facts speak for themselves.
I dare the Council to admit that
the resolution was suspended so
the nurses could have their dance.
This is not justice, or is it? Look
to yourself for the answer.

The men on the Council who
voted against the motion do not
represent me- I would resent any
inference that they did.

Honor naturally follows only
those who have honor in the first
place. Thus the Council need not
worry.

Co-education Plea

These are some of the more
outstanding memories I have of
UVa: I have seen hundreds of
men, the energy of their beautiful
sexuality held in bitter, determined
restraint, sitting alone on couches
in the Newcomb Hall listening
rooms, dressed up with no one to
see. Thousands of hours of sad,
compulsive male talk about largely
nonexistent sexual adventures.
Stag parties where people go to
intensify their four-year program
of unreality leading to a degree in
castration.

A million copies of Playboy sold
(that's the magazine with the girls
to look at whose faces cannot
reflect your sadness and frustration).
Stores, dorms, TV rooms,
classes, theaters, lawns, cars,
buses, houses full of male students.
Paperback "The Man from
Orgy by Ted Mark selling out its
first day on the shelf. University
students arrested in a Charlottesville
suburb for peeping-Tomism.
Old Gym full of that good male
sweat from decades of muscle-building
and men's-club type
basketball games. Vigorous rough
handshaking in the ascendancy and
tender hand-holding rarely to be
seen.

Fraternities: knots of people, immobile,
drinking beer, wondering
what to do, growing old under
the shell of juvenile male solidarity.
People being made to forget how
to love.

But UVa is not totally devoid
of women! Someone will say. Sure,
A lot of them are married (i.e.,
jealously guarded). The rest cannot
be blamed if they hang in
frightened, rejected little groups.
And of course there is Midwinters
Vogue Weekend to look forward
to. Date 1 through Date 1,506
are shipped in on photographic
plates. They're beautiful female
women but they're used, feared,
neglected, fed noise and bluff,
scraped, pickled, and shipped
back.

The evidence is everywhere for
all to see. This is what has become
of the Gentleman ideal. The
homosexual ethic reigns supreme,
playing on and exacerbating the
passivity, loneliness, and confusion
of the student body. It has happened
to us.

One day, consciousness will be
freed and people will act for Co-Education.

Black Boycott

After reading Tuesday's article
on the proposed boycott of the
1968 Olympics by some black
athletes, I just (I ad to conclude
that your writer had better stick
to sports and stay away from
politics.

The principal organizer of the
boycott, Harry Edwards, who your
reporter implies spends most of
his time raising hell and not much
teaching, is an extremely competent
sociologist and a concerned
young man. I worked on some
things with Harry at Cornell, where
he did his graduate work and I
majored in sociology.

Now Mr. Edwards' dissertation
was on the Black Muslims. Incidentally,
he had to write it twice
after all his notes were stolen
while he was sipping coffee in
Watts. And Mr. Edwards -buys
a good bit of Malcolm X's line
that the United States government
should be brought before the
United Nations because our nation's
treatment of black people
violates the UN charter.

I agree with your writer that it
would be a shame if our Olympic
team is "hamstrung by the
absence of black athletes." But
it's simply unfair to term these
intelligent young men "pawns in
a political struggle." Ain't so.
They believe in and realize what
they're doing.

If Ricardo Urbina wants to
compete-great! I hope he wins a
gold medal. But your adoption
of his statement that it's not
"proper to humiliate the country
over a matter that could be settled
internally" completely misses what
Harry's boycott is all about.

If the United States government
can prohibit U. S. sailors from
taking liberty in Johannesburg as
was done last year and as I recall
was approved of by a far more
conservative Cavalier Daily-because
of U.S. disapproval of South
African racial policies, them can't
a black athlete try to bring world
attention to the racial situation
in the United States without bringing
The Cavalier Daily down on
his head? Both boycotts constitute
attempts to bring about change and
show strong disapproval of what
all men of good faith regard as
odious racial situations.

Again, I don't dig the boycott.
But can't The Cavalier Daily understand
what it's all about? It's
been a hundred years, you know.

"4-1-4" Rebuttal

Much as I, as a student would
welcome any system by which
"something for nothing" may be
"learned" by the student and
much as I am certainly forward-looking
enough to recognize the
need for academic changes at the
U., I cannot condone the proposal
cited in the CD editorial of
February 14 ("4-1-4") for the
following reasons:

It is impractical. Such an innovation
would entail need-less
paperwork and would only, in the
tradition of true Virginia conservatism,
create a bureaucratic
mess.

It is unrealistic. Such a program
is based on the premise that this
is a University comprised overwhelmingly
of students interested
more in their academic pursuits
than their grade-points. That this
is not the case is seen by such
events as the rapid filling-up of
courses known to be easy (and the
subsequent lack of capacities in
courses known to be hard), often
with complete disregard to their
academic worth for the student.
Surely if this student body were
dedicated wholly to the pursuit
of intellectual worlds, such a
system could be praised as a valid
contribution to the furtherance of
intellectual freedom.

It is unnecessary. Any students
wishing such academic freedom as
this system would provide must
prove (for example, through the
Honors Program) that they have
the academic responsibility.

Let me suggest that The Cavalier
Daily, in recognising the need
for reform at the University, not
to be too hasty in appraising the
reality of the situation.

Gregory Krimer

Such a program as a 4-1-4 system
has been used effectively at Williams
College and at Hollins College, where
an independent study program has
operated for several years.-Ed.

Fail To See Trees

Once again The Cavalier Daily
has chosen as its film reviewer a
man fitting to the film reviewed.
In the case of "How I Won The
War," both film and critic show a
notable absence of artistic and aesthetic
insight.

Mr. Shipp, in his February 13
criticism, has failed to separate
the technical and dramatic
elements of the film from its anti-war-message.
It is not enough to
agree with a movie's theme; one
might as well become enraged at
war by a sympathetically presented
CBS newsreel. No, to be a critical
success a movie must have a clearly
defined existence as art-and
it is this aspect, the soul of the
picture, in which "How I Won
the War" is woefully lacking.

Despite the fact that many characters
in the flick are excellently
stereotyped (Goodbody's first
commander, the artistically inclined
German general), that Britain's
old imperial slogans of war
("England's wars are won on the
playing fields of Eton") are subjected
to probing satire, and that
there are occasional hilarious
moments, "How I Won the War"
does not attain the consistently
high quality and the feeling of
rapport which set all good films
apart. At times the dialogue is
not only incoherent but also unintelligible,
and there are large and
glaring swatches of boredom which
give the viewer the distinct impression
that the film is too long by
half its length.

Director Lester could see the
trees, but missed the forest; Reviewer
Shipp failed almost to see
the trees.