,,*♦(* •****• 4 V. *,*.*>*/■ V<V/V‘* t 4 1 4 4 4 4 I 4 I 4 4 ' 4 4 ' 4 t I I 4 4 t 4 < 4 4 4 I 4 . 4 4 l t I < ; t t 4 » > r > 4 4 »llllllH VIIVHWTHE MAROOVolume 77, Number 34 The Chicago Maroon Tuesda 969Committee DelaysDiscipline HearingPhil LathropDALLIN OAKS: Chairman of disciplinary committee chairs open hearing at lawschool yesterday.Protesters Vote To HoldTeach-In in Soc Sci 122Demonstrators added two “negotiabledemands” to the four “non*negotiable”ones at a general meeting Monday night.They also plan to hold “liberation classes”beginning with a teach-in sponsored by thenew university conference (NUC) in theCobb hall at 1 pm today.At a second meeting last night, the stu¬dents in the administration building votedto use Social Sciences 122 instead of Cobbfor their teach-in. Vacant rooms will beused for classes of the liberation school.During the day, too, the demonstratorswill go to other classes and request 15minutes to speak about the issues. If theyare requested to, they will leave when thattime is up. In the evening they will all re¬turn to the administration building.New but “negotiable” demands were:• the establishment of a “suppressedstudies division”, dealing with dis¬crimination against women, workers, andblacks (passed by a 2-1 vote).• the discontinuation of secrecy of Uni¬versity files (passed by a large majority).Both demands were incorporated in acondition paper presented by Jeff Blum,69, at the meeting.The second motion will not reverse thedecision made Wednesday night that no adbuilding files would be opened.In addition, two proposals were passed‘‘in principle”:• Activities in Cobb hall will be open toresidents of the community.• The University should actively recruit students from the “third world”, ie, blackand working class students.Several noted radical teachers will speaktomorrow at the NUC teach-in. StaughtonLynd will speak on radical history; Rich¬ard Flacks, on Marx; Leonard Radinsky onthe political implications of science; Ma-rinda West on women and literature. JeannBamberger will talk about her experiment¬al views of class and why she was refusedrehire.Charles O’Connell, dean of students, hasgranted demonstrators use of any class¬rooms in the University provided they ob¬tain his permission first concerning timeand date. A proposal to take Cobb hall(provided the takeover does not interferewith classes already in session) was thethird part of Blum’s three-point suggesteddemand.NATALEE' ROSENSTEINWRAPper By Peter RabinowitzIn a surprise move Monday afternoon,the special University disciplinary com¬mittee announced that it would delay untilnext Monday the public hearings of threestudents charged with participating in thead building sit-in.Dallin Oaks, professor of law and chair¬man of the committee, told a capacity au¬dience at the end of Monday’s session, thatthe calmer atmosphere after a week’s de¬lay would result in a fairer and more im¬partial hearing.Oaks disposed of seven other motionsbrought on behalf of defendents MitchellHofstein, Marilyn Woltz, and Steve Weston.Two motions to dismiss were made on thegrounds that the summonses were vague,and that the committe lacked jurisdictionin the case. Both were denied, as was amotion to produce as witnesses those per¬sons who presented the summonses.“In these informal proceedings,” saidOaks, “we have no rules against hearsayevidence.”Motions for a bill of particulars — astatement of the specific nature of the of¬fense with which the defendent is charged— and for the adoption of the principlethat a defendent might stand mute withoutprejudicing his case were granted “in sub¬stance.”Oaks said that the committee would pro¬vide further information “to the extentthat the students are not aware of the na¬ture of the offense.” He also warned that astudent who did not voluntarily produce in¬formation himself might run the risk thatwrong inferences would be drawn fromother evidence presented to the committee.Another central demand of the three de¬fendents was that the “person who de¬clared the demonstration disruptive” becalled before the committee so that hecould be questioned about the criteria bywhich he made this designation, and thesource of hjs power to make it. The com¬mittee ruled that it would indeed take suchevidence from dean of students CharlesO’Connell, and that the evidence would bepresented before an open meeting of thecommittee. It appeared, however, that thedefendents would have no opportunity toquestion his evidence through cross-exam¬ination.The committee decided not to act imme¬diately on a motion that it recommend theestablishment of a “fair and impartial ap¬pellate process, including appeal to a bodyin which students have voting representa-Human Development Proposes ReformThe human development committeecame out of a weekend faculty-student con¬ference with substantial departmental re¬forms.Both students and faculty appeared to behappy with the conference and its results,though one central issue — faculty hiring— remains under discussion.Human development student Louis Four-cher, who chaired the Saturday and Sun¬day conference, said some differences exis¬ted between students and faculty on con¬crete proposals, but that there was muchagreement and the faculty agreed to moststudent proposals for reform.Fourcher said most faculty and morethan 70 of the committee’s 90 students inresidence attended the conference. Starting Saturday morning, five faculty-student workshops hammered out propos¬als in different areas of concern, and thesewere delivered to a general meeting lateSaturday afternoon, Fourcher said.On Sunday, faculty and students metseparately to vote on the proposals — a 12-hour job. About 10:30 pm faculty rejoinedthe students and differences on most pointswere worked out.The faculty agreed to allow 50 percentstudent representation on all current stand¬ing committees. Fourcher indicated thatagreement is to be arrived at by consensusrather than by vote; but students will haveequal voice, and could vote if necessary.Substantial curriculum and student eval¬uation reforms were also agreed upon. The faculty told students it could notvote at that time on equal representationfor students on faculty hiring and firingrecommendations because that is prohibit¬ed by University statute, Fourcher said.The faculty-student workshop had agreedon a proposal for “formal student votingrepresentation” (number of students un¬specified) on faculty hiring, and for 50-50student voting representation on facultyreappointment.The faculty did agree to put 50 percentstudents on its personnel committee, whichscreens and interviews prospective faculty,Fourcher said.Human development faculty chairmanWilliam Henry explained to a Maroon re-Continued on Page Three tion.” At the present time, the only appealis to the dean of students, who is the per¬son who made the charges against the stu¬dents in the first place. “If the dean ofstudents decides that a student should besuspended,” argued one of the counsels,“how psychologically can a student go tothe same person to ask that he not be sus¬pended?”The decisions came after the disciplinarycommittee had been meeting for eighthours, during which they were subject tointermittent guerilla theater tactics by theChickenshit Guerilla Brigade, which ispresently operating out of the college officeof admissions and aid on University Ave.Before the morning session, the crowdwas entertained by a reading from thetrial scene of “Catch-22” by T C Fox, filmcritic of the Grey City Journal.The two-hour long morning session wastwice interrupted by spectators who hop¬ped vigorously from the room. One wore asign which read,“I’m a kangaroo (hop)and even I’m disgusted.” Applause, hisses,and laughter from the audience punctuatedthe proceedings, as did whistles and horn¬blowing from the outside. On the whole,however, the hearing was orderly.During the lunch break, however, theguerillas attempted to stop the automobilein which several members of the com¬mittee were driving. Oaks avoided a pro¬posed mock trial by swerving around thecar in front of him, and driving past a stopsign. During the afternoon session, Oakswas visibly shaken when he discussed theincident before the open meeting.Some observers saw the rulings as evi¬dence that the committee was determinedto act as a judicial body and not as a polit¬ical tool in the campus crisis. Others, how¬ever, believed that the action was a last-ditch effort by the committee to regain therespect it had lost after student chargesthat it had been initially arbitrary and thewidespread criticism of its suspension of 61students Sunday.Throughout the day, the committee re¬iterated its position that it would not ques¬tion its own legitimacy, although attackson that legitimacy were the basis of mostof the arguments presented by the defense.Foremost among the arguments was theobjection that the committee followed pre¬viously defined procedure, and that dueprocess, promised by Article 15 of the Stu¬dent Bill of Rights, was therefore impos¬sible. This objection was partially an¬swered by Dean O’Connell’s memo on com¬mittee policy and a further memo writtenby the committee.It was also argued that students had nocontrol over the composition of the com¬mittee, and that no students currently hadvoting power on it. The unique role of thecommittee, which functions as prosecution,judge, and jury, was also called into ques¬tion since the hearings began.Later the four students observers on thedisciplinary committee, John Bremner, Mi¬chael Denneny, Jonathan Dean, and MarySue Leighton issued a statement to clarifytheir relation to the proceedings. “The stu¬dent observers now sitting on the Univer¬sity disciplinary committee,” the statementsaid “do not believe that their participationin the business of the committee, as non¬voting members, necessarily implies anyopinion about the legitimacy of this com¬mittee one way or the other.”LETTERS TO THEObjectionsThe coverage by the Maroon of variousevents in which I have been a participantduring the past few weeks has been accu¬rate and well balanced. I cannot say thesame about the parts of the editorial in theJanuary 31, 1969 issue that refer to myactivities.The discussion in the editorial of themeeting on Friday, January 17, did notnote that I had clearly stated that I couldnot discuss Mrs Dixon’s case and thatsince no useful purpose could be served byremaining if a decision were made tomake the case the first and primary itemon the agenda, I would leave if that werethe decision. It was the decision and I left.The editorial also failed to note that I par¬ticipated in a meeting the same day thatlasted more than two hours.The reference to the sit-in in my officerepresent gross distortions of fact. I didnot hammer on my desk, either literally orfiguratively. I had no part in the decisionto call the sit-in distruptive nor in the deci¬sion to issue a warning. I hasten to addthat I thought the sit-in was disruptive andthat a warning should have been issued.The editorial fails to note how the par¬ticipants entered my office. Was the meth¬od of entry irrelevant or was there an in¬tent to conceal the facts? The editorial im¬plies that the only action with respect tomy files was discussion of what to do withthem. Two facts are ignored:• When I entered my office, an individ¬ual had one file drawer open and was at a EDITORSminimum involved in reading the file head¬ings.• There was several minutes of dis¬cussion about what should be done with meif the decision were made to remove thecontents of the files and if I attempted toresist that effort. I was touched by the con¬cern expressed that even if it were pos¬sible to remove me without physical harmthat I might suffer a heart attack. Thesetwo facts were obviously available to thosewho wrote the editorial and I can onlywonder why their implications were neg¬lected.My reaction to the editorial was not en¬tirely negative. The editorial addresses it¬self to the dangers of discussing an individ¬ual appointment decision in public. Itnotes, and sympathetically, that Mrs Dixonhas expressed privately the view that “thekind of devastating intellectual analysisthat resulted in the sociology department’sdecision not be brought out in the open.’’And this is only one of the reasons why herindividual case, or any other, should not bediscussed publicly. However, this part ofthe editorial makes me wonder what itsauthors would have had me say at a meet¬ing where Mrs Dixon’s case was to be thefirst item on the agenda.I would like to conclude with responsesto two of the reasons that have been al¬leged as the basis for the decision to notreappoint Mrs Dixon. At least one of thearguments implies that Mrs Dixon was dis¬honest or disingenuous at the time the of¬fer was made to her to be an assistantContinued on Page Three.Chicago Maroon/February 4, 1969CIRCUITRY: All solid-state,designed and built entirely byKLH. 15 watts IHF (Institute ofHigh Fidelity) music power. 30watts peak power. Unheard-of in aportable. Low frequency powercontoured to speaker requirements.TURNTABLE: Garrard recordchanger made to KLH specifica¬tions. Very low-mass tone armresists jarring, tracks even badlywarped records. Pickering V-15magnetic pick-up with diamondstylus.CONTROLS: Bass and Treble,allowing ± 15 db correction (i.e.,plenty) at 50 cps and 10,000 cps.Balance between speakers. Volume.(Turntable shuts off system auto¬matically, whether on automatic ormanual.) SPEAKERS: Two of the astonish¬ing speakers used in the ModelTwenty-One radio. Forty feet ofcable.FLEXIBILITY: Inputs for stereotuner or tape player. Tape record¬ings may be made from the speakeroutputs. Headphones may be sub¬stituted for speakers.LIMITATIONS: No radio.ETC.: Weight: 28 pounds. Caseclosed: 24Vi" W x 13Vi" H x 7Va"D. Control Center: 16Vi" W x 13Vi "D x 7s/a" H (with automatic spindlein place). Speaker Enclosures,each: 13Vi" W x 7>/8" H x 4" D.Choice of gray or pearl white vinyl“Contour-lite” case.SUGGESTED PRICE: $199.95.THE Model Eleven is stereophonic. It can fill aliving room with the kind of sound once avail¬able only from massive, expensive and decid¬edly unportable sound systems. As a matter of fact ifwe hadn’t been able to make it do that we wouldn’thave built it. You can take any portable with you; buthow many can you take seriously?ON CAMPUS CALL BOB TABOR 324-300548 E. Oak St.DE 7-4150 2035 W. 95th St.779-6500MUSICRAFT SPECIALThis is our portable phonograph:KLH THE MODEL ELEVEN. Accurate InformationTd Be SupptredBy Maroon and Concerned StudentsDistribution of accurate information onmeetings and resolutions of students ap¬pears essential to the outcome of thiscrisis.Two general avenues exist.• In the basement of Cobb hall, roomB-23, a small group of students is makinga heroic effort to mimeograph all pertinentdocuments in at least summary form. Onesuch issue appeared Saturday. The groupis the information committee of the AdHoc Committee of Concerned Students,which has been holding mass meetings inMandel and Quantrell.• The Maroon. We do not have space toprint as many documents in as much de¬tail as does the information committee. We are, however, now publishing daily and areattempting to publish articles on every¬thing of general significance. The newsboard of the Maroon is now set up to coverthe major areas of the crisis: the ad build¬ing, faculty, graduate and undergraduatestudent response, the administration, andthe disciplinary committee. If you havenews the Maroon should report, get intouch with the news board person in whosearea the news would seem to be. The Ma¬roon should report, get in touch with thenews board person in whose area the newswould seem to be. The Maroon office, onthe third floor of Ida Noyes is open from8:30 am to 2:30 am. To check out rumorscall ext 3260.•what's this^ All these at DocTonight, Preminger's WHERE THESIDEWALK ENDS and DAISY KENYON;Tomorrow, five LAUREL and HARDYfilms; and Thursday, Don Siegel'sRIOT IN CELL BLOCK 11. Now lookW hat vnn’tro Cf Onl s-.1TUniversity of Chicago Bookstore58th & EllisLiterature &Lit. Crit. BooksDiscounts up to 75%at theAt least two graduate faculties have ap¬proved student proposals for equal studentrepresentation on most departmental com¬mittees.Some departments, however, have madeno formal effort in that direction, and mostgraduate departments and schools aresomewhere between those extremes thisweek.The committee on human developmentand the divinity school have largely passedthe stage of negotiations over student rep¬resentation, and students and faculty arereworking curriculum, exams, degree re¬quirements and educational philosophy.Romance languages and the committeeon social thought, on the other hand, havemade no effort to start changes.Many departments held open meetings inelected student-faculty committees to dis¬cuss changes in the first two weeks of thequarter. Some have made similar effortsin the past week, apparently under the im¬petus of student interest generated by theDixon case and the sit-in.The graduate student reaction to the sit-in has been more difficult to determine.Some departmental open meetings havepassed resolutions on the demonstrationor are working on them. Included are thechemistry, anthropology, and history de¬partments, and the ethics and society fieldof the divinity school.Law students have been actively in¬volved with disciplinary committee pro¬ceedings.But student leaders even in departmentswhich have had no meetings on the sit-inhave told the Maroon in most cases thattheir department’s students favor amnestyfor the sitters-in and approve the aim ofgreater student participation in faculty de-Continued from Page Oneporter that, since recommendations todeans on faculty hiring are apparently de¬fined by statute as coming from the facul¬ty, the committee feels it cannot take inde¬pendent action with its own students.Henry also expressed definite en¬thusiasm about the quality of commu¬nication among faculty and with studentsat the weekend conference. He said hethought the over-all proposal of the stu¬dents expressed an excellent educationalphilosophy and was welcomed by facultymembers, though some details remain tobe worked out.A five-man student team is negotiatingwith faculty on faculty hiring and will re¬port to the students at a meeting Wednes¬day evening in Judd hall. A meeting of allfaculty and students, to work out final res-Tuesday, February 4WORKSHOPS: Teaching, curriculum, and role of stu¬dents in political science department. 8:30, 11,1:30, 3:30, 7:30, Ida Noyes Hall.MEETING: College faculty, Quantrell hall, 3:40 pm.LECTURE: (Department of classical languages andliteratures). Professor Oscar T Broneer, pro¬fessor emeritus, department of classical lang¬uages and literatures; American excavations,ancient Corinth, Greece. "The archaic templewith wall paintings at Isthmia." Breasted hall,4:00 pm.LECTURE (Committee on information sciences): video¬tape recordings. Arthur Burks, professor ofphilosophy and chairman, department of com¬munication sciences. University of Michigan.Series of three lectures. "From the first elec¬tronic computer to von Neumann's theory ofself-reproducing automata." Research InstitutesC-113 4:00 pm.LECTURE (James Franck Institute), A E Hughes,professor, department of physics, laboratory ofatomic and solid state physics, Cornell Uni¬versity. "Far infrared spectra of some inpuritysystems in the alkali halidies." Research In¬stitutes 480, 4:15 pm.DOC FILMS: "Where the Sidewalk Ends," Cobb Hall,8:00 pm.FILM: African studies association. "Daybreak at Udi,"ar.d "Giant People: Watussi of Africa." Classics10, 4:30 pm.LECTURE (Graduate school of business) Gerdes Kuh-bach, director of finance, the port of New YorkAuthority, "Financing of Public Authorities,"Business East 103, 1 pm.Wednesday, February 5LECTURE (department of obstetrics and gynecology),Dr Roberto Caldeyro-Barcia, professor and chair¬man, department of physiopathology and serviceof obstetrical physiology, faculty of medicine,University of Uruguay. "Test of fetal toleranceto uterine contractions." Dora De Lee Hall,12:30 pm. cisions. But most graduate students do notseem to support the sit-in as a means tobring about action.A summary of events in some of the de¬partments follows.Law SchoolDespite the conservative image of lawstudents, they have been very active in de¬manding procedural reforms of the dis¬ciplinary committee, have been serving ascounsels for sit-in students summonded be-Students of two required science courses,Physical Science 116 and Biology 105, haverecently held meetings in an attempt tomake their courses more “relevant.”An 11-point proposal for revision of phys¬ical science 116 was submitted by a 20-member committee to the course member¬ship for approval.The proposal was formulated at two meet¬ings attended phy sci students who hadexpressed concern over the lack of rele¬vance in their course. During the first ofthese two meetings R Stephen Berry, pro¬fessor of chemistry and head of the chem¬istry section of Physical Science, and Wil¬liam Zachariasen, professor of physics andhead of last quarter’s physics section, werein attendance. Both professors listenedsympathetically to the demands of the stu¬dents and initiated several suggestions forchanges themselves.Most important to the students of physci, who, with few exceptions, are non¬science majors, was the need to find a wayof relating chemistry to the humanities orolutions, is tentatively planned for Fridayevening.The faculty-student conference grew outof student meetings fall quarter, at whicha student workshop was planned for earlyJanuary to reach concrete proposals. Thatmeeting took place two weeks ago, andthis weekend’s conference was planned ata faculty-student meeting to discuss andwork out the proposals with faculty.Fourcher concluded that “most people onboth sides were extremely happy withwhat went on this weekend; it was aneducational experience for all of us.”He said he thought the most importantstudent gains were not so much votingpower as “a sort of psychological powerover their own interests: active self-eval¬uation and active participation in planningtheir own programs.”LECTURE-SEMINAR: "Newer information on our un¬derstanding of Hodgkin's disease." Dr Saul ARosenberg, associate professor department ofmedicine and radiology, Stanford school ofmedicine: Dr Klaus Ranniger, associate pro¬fessor, departments of medicine and radiology;Dr Lawrence W Allen, instructor, departmentof medicine, Billings hospital, P-117, 12:30 pm.SEMINAR (Department of physics). Professor RStephan Berry, department of chemistry, JamesFranck Institute. "Electron impact spectroscopyof molecules." Kent 103, 4 pm.LECTURE (Department of biochemistry — graduatetraining program), Burt Zerner, department ofchemistry and chemical engineering, biochem¬istry division, University of Illinois. "Jack beanurase." Abbott hall, 4 pm.DOC FILMS: "An evening with Laurel and Hardy,"Cobb hall 7 and 9:30 pm.FOLK DANCING: Country dancers, dances from theBritish Isles and Scandinavia, Ida Noyes hall,dance room, 8 pm.LECTURE (collegate division of humanities-African andBlack American Humanities Program), HughieLee-Smith, artist. "Afro-American Artists of theNineteenth Century." Classics 10, 8:30 pm.WORKSHOPS: Teaching, curriculum, and role of stu¬dents in political science dept., 9:30, 12:30, 2:30,4:30. Ida Noyes Hall.LECTURE: Gerdes Kuhblack, "Financing of PublicAuthorities," Bus. East 103, 1 pm.LECTURE: Arjun P Aggarwal, "Gheraos and theirsocial and political implications," 4:10 pm.,Foster Lounge.RECRUITING VISIT: Board of Higher Education of theMethodist Church, Nashville, Tenn. Call ext3282 for appointments.RECRUITING VISIT: Sears, Roebuck & Co., Data Pro¬cessing Div., Chicago. Call ext. 3284 for appoint¬ments.SEMINAR: Drug Education Proiect on psychodelic andnarcotic drugs, training program for drugcounselors and medical emergency staff. 8 pm.,Grace Church, 555 West Belden.MEETING: Sociology graduate students. "DepartmentalRestructure." 7 pm. East Lounge, Ida Noyes. fore the committee, and are interested inthe University crisis. Many meetings onthe crisis have been going on.Within the school, organization of a fac¬ulty-student committee to discuss reformsbegan last fall at initiative of dean PhilNeal. Early this quarter students electedtwo representatives from each class tomeet with six faculty members appointedby Neal. The first meeting was held Thurs¬day evening, Jan. 30, and general areas ofconcern were discussed.the social sciences. Among the proposedways for achieving this was a suggestionfor changing the course emphasis from a“quantitative” to a “qualitative” approachto chemistry.At a meeting on Thursday, January 30,students of biology 106, met with ArnoldRavin, master of the collegiate division ofbiology, to discuss possible changes intheir course.Few major changes were agreed upon.Continued from Page Twoprofessor. The argument that I refer to isthat she was not reappointed for politicalreasons or for her political activities. It istime to note that Mrs Dixon made no at¬tempt to conceal her political interests andactivities and the general nature of themwere known at the time an offer was madeto her. Such information as was providedwas volunteered and not requested.I am even more puzzled by the argumentthat she was not reappointed because ofher sex. Does any one wish to argue that itwas not known that she was a womanwhen originally appointed? If there is aconscious policy of discriminating againstwomen, why was this not invoked almostthree years ago?D Gale JohnsonDean, Social Science DivisionThinkingAn open letter to the deans and mastersof the University of Chicago:It is very nice that meetings are goingon this week, aad we think it is importantthat they talk about the right things. Deci¬sions are made in many places and atmany levels in this University, con¬sequently discussions should go on in asmany places and levels as exist so that thestate of affairs can be examined and im¬proved. These discussions should not mere¬ly be about power, for in those terms theproblem is insoluble and can only be ex¬pressed as “students bargaining from astronghold” or “police intervention.” Tofind the grounds on which discussions cantake place and the problems be resolved,these meetings should concern themselveswith the real contexts in which these prob¬lems are found: the function of the Univer¬sity; participation; the function?, of the de¬partments; the roles of the students.First we should talk of participation inwhat and for what. (For example, is a plu¬ralistic University compatible with the po¬litical orientation and activity of its parts?)These meetings should seek not only tocorrect existing evils but should consideralso what ought to be done with a view tothe invention of new forms for the Univer¬sity (including new forms of decision-mak¬ing), the examination of traditional bound¬aries of knowledge and the discovery ofnew boundaries and new knowledge.These discussions should take place at asmany levels as possible (common year, de¬partments, divisions and schools, Univer¬sity-wide, and as many other groupings asseem relevent) since different problemsarise and are dealt with at different levels,and some problems arise only between lev¬els and must be dealt with by new groups.Recent events indicate that there are Source for Maroon’s statements: JamesWalsh, second-year law student and a rep¬resentative on the faculty-student com¬mittee.EnglishFive students were elected during winterquarter registration to meet with standingfaculty policy committee to discuss pos¬sible reform. The first meeting was heldHowever, Ravin did agree to student par¬ticipation in preparation for next year’scourse and to the conversion of a numberof labs into discussion sessions.The meeting was a direct result of the nu¬merous complaints received by membersof the Booth Committee in regards to thebiology class. A sub-committee headed byAlbert Shpuntoff, 71, investigated thesecomplaints, holding several meetings priorto the general meeting on Thursday.serious questions about the structures ofthe University, and the kinds of knowledgeand activites with which it is involved. It isclear that much of the community is con¬cerned with these questions. In order thatthese meetings be of real benefit to thecommunity as a whole, we suggest thatthey be public in two respects: they shouldbe open to all and proceedings should bepublished.Ad Hoc Committee for the Futureof the UniversityDavid Barnard, ChairmanCarl BerlinerMarc CoganFrank DayLaura DolinerEugene GarverMary SylvesterSusan TosswillAll members of the University commu¬nity interested in implementing the goalsof this committee are invited to contact usc/o New Collegiate Division Office, Cobb330.DisagreementEditorials that appear in the columns ofthe Maroon supposedly represent the col¬lective opinion of the Maroon staff. Yester¬day an editorial appeared in the Maroonthat implied that we reluctantly concedethat the University administration was jus¬tified in temporarily suspending 61 stu¬dents. We members of the Maroon staffwish to state that we totally disassociateourselves from this viewpoint and do notagree with this editorial policy.We do not agree, as the editorial stated,that the suspensions were the best alterna¬tive the University could have taken, andwe most certainly do not agree that “thisdisciplinary action . . . has to be tried.”The disciplinary committee, whose au¬thority is dubious at best, was totally un¬justified in making these suspensions. It isinconceivable that they could take any ac¬tion now at all, amidst serious questioningof their legitimacy, during a time ofemotionalism and instability, when stu¬dents and faculty are clamoring for am¬nesty. We condemn their action and do notsubscribe to editorial statements to thecontrary.Caroline Heck, News EditorMitch Bobkin, Day EditorJim HaefemeyerDavid Travis, Photo EditorWendy GlocknerPaula SzewczykPeter RabinowitzJessica Siegel, GCJ Managing EditorT C Fox, Film EditorDavid SteeleV y tfebtuar*CJp**aA'Marddn/3Henry Explains Committee FeelingsBULLETIN OF EVENTS Continued on Page SevenPhy Sci and Bio Revisions SuggestedLETTERS TO THE EDITORSEDITORIALSMarleheFor the past four weeks the department of sociology steadfast¬ly refused to do the one thing that might have averted a presentsituation that is highly volatile, and that can hurt the University ofChicago and its students. But now that Mrs Dixon has clearlydenied any objection of her to making her case public, hopefullythe department can see through its questions of precedent andprofessional ethics and tell us why it doesn’t want to rehire Mar¬lene Dixon.Unless the reasons for the decision are explained, many stu¬dents will remain suspicious of the reasons that Mrs Dixon wasnot rehired.And no one is going to be convinced if the Gray committeewere to appear in ten days and say, “It’s okay, everybody, we haveproved that the decision not to rehire her wasn’t influenced by herpolitics or her sex.” Students are as interested in knowing whatdid influence the decision as well as what didn’t influence thatdecision.We suggest that the sociology department print in detail, assoon as possible, its criticism of Mrs Dixon’s work backed up withproof that there is sufficient academic reason why she should not| be rehired.ConfusionThe most visible thing in times of crisis is the nearly inpene-trable cloud that rises to obscure the issues and the attitudes ofpeople involved. The administration doesn’t seem to understandwhy their building has been taken over; it doesn’t seem to knowthe rationale that the demonstrators have given for their actions.And the demonstrators don’t seem to know what the administrationis thinking or what action it might take.It is to try to help dispel this cloud that the Maroon is startingi to publish daily—for the duration of the crisis. But the studentscan’t keep up the dialogue by themselves. And so far the massmeetings that have been held have only helped to add to the con¬fusion. When are the deans going to call meetings of their divisionswhere all the faculty and students in them can really talk together,particularly about the student role in faculty appointments? Whenare the department chairmen going to call meetings for their owndepartments? And if the deans and chairmen won’t call the meet¬ings, when are the student councils going to step in and demandthat the faculty come and discuss the issues?At Saturday’s large meeting in Quantrell auditorium, JerryLipsch, president of student government, stated amidst applausethat one of the best things to come out of the sit-in has been thevastly increased discussion of pertinent issues. The truth is thatthe discussions have dealt to some extent with new ways for stu¬dents and faculty to run the University, but that they have spentmore time heatedly mouthing slogans and hassling amnesty andthe disciplinary committee, issues which were generated by thesit-in, but were not the issues that caused it. COMMENTSTwo Profs View Sit-InBy Stuart TaveA university has nothing to offer theworld but a way of doing things. The wis¬dom that is thought and taught at the uni¬versity of today may be the foolishness oftomorrow, but that is not important: it is,rather, inevitable, as long as, and only aslong as, the university lives in the onlyway it has a right to live, by the way ofthe mind.It can forfeit that right.It can die on the inside. The most devas-ting criticism that can be levied againstany university is that it does not in fact dothings by the way of the mind: that itsmind is weak, or sold. That is the kind ofcriticism every university should be sub¬jected to at any point where it deservesexposure, and if the criticism is informedby a superior quality and integrity of mindthe university can only benefit.It can be attacked and killed: anotherway of doing things can dominate it. Thereare certainly other ways of doing things,some of which will accomplish ends, in thecity of god or the city of man, beyond theContinued on Page Seven By Julian R GoldsmithThe demands of the students occupyingthe administration building are intolerableto me and to the many other faculty mem¬bers to whom I have talked, and simplycannot be met by the University. The de¬mands are based on issues that are notclearly defined and obviously irrelevant, afact that students individually or in smallgroups will admit, when not carried awayby mass emotionalism. In the discussionsthat I have had with groups of studentswho are actively concerned with the situ¬ation, the subject has always turned to thederivative issues, amnesty and the make¬up of a “proper” disciplinary committee.I would like to make it clear that I amopen to any discussion of issues, and liketo feel that I can be convinced one way oranother by a reasonable or practical argu¬ment on any matter related to Universityproblems or policies. My reason for writ¬ing this letter is merely to briefly expressmy concern for the approach taken by thedissident students. I am deeply concerned,and see tragic consequences for all if dis¬ruption continues and militant activity de-Continued on Page SevenNeed Compromise To End Sit-inBy John RechtThe sit-in is tactically the most powerfuland most dangerous weapon that the stu¬dents at this University possess. I wouldthink, then, that a sit-in would follow onlyin the face of an intolerable situationwhich allowed no other recourse, and thenonly after careful, rational consideration ofthe situation and a vote of confidence by asubstantial number of students.If Marlene Dixon was not rehired for po¬litical reasons or no reason, I agree thatthis is indeed intolerable. If she was notrehired because the quality of her scholar¬ship is demonstrably poor, this is quitereasonable, although from the testimonyof her students it might be in the Univer¬sity’s interest to retain her for her teach¬ing ability. But, the reasons for Mrs Dix¬on’s release have not yet been made pub¬lic, and neither I nor anyone now sitting inthe administration building knows exactlywhy Mrs Dixonw as not rehired. This initself is not an intolerable situation be- ANALYSIScause a special committee has been estab¬lished to report on the reasons for MrsDixon’s release, and the Gray committeehas promised to report within the next fewdays, not an intolerably long waiting peri¬od.Now it is possbile that the students feelthat even if Mrs Dixon’s scholarship ispoor, dismissing her is intolerable for anyreason since her teaching ability is sogreat. If that is so, I would like to knowwhy her teaching is so great before I couldreasonably accept such a statement. Sucha critique would have to be less vaguethan to say she is “human, sympatheticand stimulating.” If it can be demonstra¬ted that she is a great teacher, one whoseloss would be intolerable, then this justifi¬cation will have been met. This demonstra-mi: c hk ago viaroonEditor: Roger BlackBusiness Manager: Jerry LevyManaging Editor: John RechtNews Editor: Caroline HeckPhotography Editor: David TravisDay Editor: Mitch BebkinNight Editor: Sue LothNews Board:Ad Building: Wendy GlocknerFaculty: Sylvia PiechockaUndergraduate Students: Chris FraulaGraduate Students: Rob CooleyAdministration: Richard ParoutaudDisciplinary Committee: Leslie StraussAd Building Bureau: Wendy Glockner (bureauchief), Jim Haefemeyer, Chris Lyon, BruceNorton, Paula Szewczyk, Leonard Zax.News Staff: Marv Bittner, Debby Dobish, ConHitchcock, CO Jaco, Blair Kilpatrick, SteveCook, Gerard Leval.Photography Staff: Phil Lathrop, Paul Stelter,Howie Schamest, Steve Aoki.Production Staff: Mitch Botokin, Robin Kauf¬man, Leslie Strauss, Robert Swift, MitchKahn.Contributing Editors: John Welch, Michael Sor-kin, Jessica Siegel, John Moscow, RobertHardman, Barbara Hurst, David Aiken.Sunshine Girl: Jeanne Wikler~ tS'ii . Founded in 1892. Pub¬lished by University ofChicago students daily dur¬ing revolutions, on Tues¬days and Fridays through¬out the regular schoolyear and intermittentlythroughout the summer,except during examinationperiods. Offices in Rooms303, 304, and 305 in Ida Noyes Hall, 1212 E.59th St., Chicago, III. 60637. Phone Midway3-0800, Ext. 3269. Distributed on campus and inthe Hyde Park neighborhood free of charge.Subscriptions by mail $7 per year. Non-profitpostage paid at Chicago, III. Subscribers toCollege Press Service. tion has not yet been performed, though.A careful, rational discussion was at¬tempted by the protesters prior to the sit-in, but careful and rational as it was, theydecided not to wait for the report of theGray committee stating the building com¬mitting students to a stand they could noteasily back down from due to pride andfear of reprisal. The only condition fullymet of the three I have here outlined is thevote of confidence. This was a clear vote,although close, and it waS a large enoughgroup in my estimation to bring a griev¬ance before the entire University in such aspectacular manner if it meets my othertwo conditions.The sit-in exists, however, prematurethough it may be, and it must be endedwith some satisfaction on both sides for thegood of the University. The Universitycould concede to the rehiring of Mrs Dixonmerely in human development, if shewould accept, and amnesty could be grant¬ed quietly if not openly, leaving the fieldclear for a more rational discussion of dis¬ciplinary committees and student power infaculty appointments than that now beingcarried on from either side of the barri¬cades. The students in turn could leave theadministration building, drop their otherdemands and await the report of the Graycommittee. Some pride must be swallowedon either side in order to accomplish this,but it is better than the destruction of theCollege or possibly the University itself.(John Recht is managing editor of theMaroon.)J H a i h iiThe Chicago Maroon/February 4, 1969 4 *,' i« (11«j < 1 i: it , t 1 ■' h || I » l I J » " ‘v l ? 5 ?'roan!n£lyinv‘'^vtativeYou are cordially invitedJoan interviewwitnour representativerasa**Februaryt/tsmod^K/T’s/mot'sth&fadJTSV4Mut/e.I It's a refillable ballpoint quillFRATERNITIES jj# SORORITIES 6 CLUBS have your’ ■ 1 ' •■ ■ ' ' r ' ■ - * > "1969 MBA GRADUATES /.'* in ;n:vr',n,;-‘ ;i:‘ ■■■■ •Chicago’s most complete record store—Every label in our huge inventory always at adiscount—Every Record factory fresh and fully guaranteed—large selection of importand hard to get records.STUDENTSBRING THIS COUPON TODISCOUNT RECORDS, INC.201 N. LaSalle (Corner Lake)good roe 380/0 «ON ANY ONE TIME PURCHASE from our LARGE INVENTORYNOW3.693.08ClassicalAll labelsincluded:COLUMBIALONDONVERVEFOLKWAYSELEKTRARCAPHILLIPSEPICRIVERSIDETRADITIONKAPP. etc. Jazz Folk Music • SpokenBUY ONE OR A HUNDRED^IIIIIHJIlUllllllHIIHHIIIIIIIIIIIIIflllllllllllHIIIIIHIIIIIIIIIIUlHHJIllllllllllHi:I THIS COUPON GOOD FOR iShow Tunes, Etc.38% OFF LIST PRICE* ON 1= Any One Time RecordPurchase Atdiscount records, inc.| 201 N. LaSalle (Corner Lake) |CE 6-2187•Good until Feb 28, 1969HiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitiiiiiimiiiimiHiiiiiimmniiiiiiiiiiiniiimiWMONO OR STEREO All labelsincluded:ANGELDeutsche-GrammaphoneBACH GUILDVERVEVANGUARDPRESTIGEARCHIVEMERCURYATLANTICCAPITOL, etc.JUST BRING THIS COUPON!!This is a copyof a copyof an invitationto interviewa companyyou may not knowwell enough.Making copies is only part of the story.You can get the other part straight from the source. Talk toour representative and ask him about R&O looking ahead tomajor advances in education...in areas like color xerographyand 3-D imaging..,about refinements in combined xerographyand EDP systems to process and graphically reproduce anytheory or fact available... at any distance.Ask anything imaginable and you'll discover you're probinga company that’s involved with every phase of the informationand education explosion.We place great emphasis on individual initiative. Brainstorm¬ing A variety of short-term project groups. And benefits. Inshort, your career, not simply a job tor you to fill.So while you're looking us over for career opportunities, we'llbe looking you over (or career potential. Fair enough?Why not make an appointment with your Placement Director.A half hour of your time could be the start of a great futurein engineering, manufacturing, systems analysis, accounting,finance or marketing/sales.XEROXAn Equal Opportunity Employer (m/f)JfROX IS A HCGISTf RED TR»0CHA*K Of XEROX CORPORATION. ROCHESTER HtW YORKDR. AARON ZIMBLEROptometristeye examinationscontact lensesin theNew Hyde ParkShopping Center1510 E. 55th St.DO 3-7644 SKI CLUB MEETINGFebruary 6, 8:00 P.M.3rd Floor, Ida NoyesSki movie & ski tripplan for Feb. 9Pro Grafica ArtePrints — pop & op(friendly atmosphere}[55 E. Ontario/642-0047SOCIOLOGY GRADUATE_ STUDENTSfeting on departmental re-I'vcturing Wednesday, Feb-■UarY 5, Ida Noyes Hail (East>unge, Rm. 213), 7:00 P.M. WRITERSSTUDENT WRITERSScripts, stories, novels, plays orideas wanted for feature-lengthand TV series production. Anysubject, in any stage of de¬velopment will be considered.Credits and full compensation ifmaterial is used. All repliespromptly answered and man¬uscripts returned. Send man¬uscripts, synopses, or contact;SSS Gnema International, Inc.3106 Belmont BoulevardSuite 0-4Nashville, Tennessee 37212Theses, term papersTyped, edited to specifications.Also tables and charts.11 yrs. exp.MANUSCRIPTS unlimited866 664-5858No. Wabash Ave, * Sorry # due to manufactu^er, s price policy imported LPVs cannot be allowed in this offer*^■fe¬me imprintedNAMEADDRESSCITY STATE JUNIOR ENTERPRISE CO. \156 OLIVER ST.. N. TONAWANDA, N.Y. 14120 ■lPLEASE SEND ME QUILLS ■@25p EA. PLUS 100 HANDLING CHG, |(EXTRA SAVINGS 5 QUILL PENS $1.00) \February 4, 1969/The Chicago M«roon/5Browse our budget binsDiscounts from 50% to 60%labels as VOX • RIVERSIDE • PRESTIGE • SCALAETERNA • MGM CLASSICS • VERVE • URANIAEVEREST • CONCERT DISC • PRESTIGE FOLK MUSICMONITOR • VERVE FOLKWAYS • COUNTERPOINTdreamingaboutyour future?then stop!Here's a once in a lifetimeopportunity for adventure andchallenge.A civilian career with theArmy Recreation or LibraryProgram in Europe or the FarEast.If you are single, a U.S. citi¬zen and have a degree' inRecreationArts and CraftsMusicDramatics orLibrary Scienceji*ON CAMPUSINTERVIEWSFEB. 17SPECIAL SERVICES SECTION, IRCBDEPARTMENT Of THE ARMYWASHINGTON. D C. 20315 “I defyanyone to beuncomfortablein this car.”"I can’t recall a car in which theseats afford such an astonishingdegree of luxury. Correction. TheMercedes-Benz 600 does —but itwill cost you 10 times as much asthis one. Covered in leather-cloththe Renault 16’s seats are filledwith thick foam cushions and givefull support where you need it...'"The front ones are fully recliningand are adjustable through a multi¬tude of positions...”“The rear bench seat is also ad¬justable: in fact, you can take thewhole thing out if you want to.'i So said Stirling Moss in QUEENMagazine, a British publication.He was talking about the Renault16 Sedan-Wagon. The sedan thatchanges into a station wagon. Andback again, whenever you want.)“. . . and I would like to offer mycongratulations for producing thissensational motorcar for a veryl0"1,riie" S2.U5P.O.K.aCes/y imports,M35 SO MICHIGAN AVE CHICAGO ILL 60*16TEL. 326 2550 SHORELAND HOTELSpecial RatesforStudents and RelativesFacultySingle rooms from $8.00 dailyTwin rooms from $11.00 dailyLake ViewOffice space also Availablefrom 200 sq. ft. to 1800 sq. ft. Please call N.T. Norbert PL 2-10005454 South Shore DriveSKIING atm.FUJU,. . Always More Fun:# r\We Hoeor AllMidwest linkOar*e Cards Always Plenty of SnowSKIING 7 DAYS A 7 NITES A WEEK12 RUNS TO 2,100 FEETALL DAY SKI-BUS PACKAGEfroa CHICAGO EVERY SATURDAY A SUNDAYRound Trip—Tow Ticket—Lenon—Lunch MO”GROUP &STUDENT RATES Oafy 75 Miaetes from ChicagoFor Information EA 7-1220m. rudi lake Geneva, Wis. 414 248 65 53Dependable Serviceon your Foreign CarYW’s encouraged now. 2 Factory trained mechanicshave joined us. Quicker service. Open til 8 P.M.Grease & r*i1 change done evenings by appt.Hyde Park Auto Service # 7646 S. Stony Island # 734-6393e&yrSprSprfaeipe&neSfsrltwQ* wjw kwf Iwd vfdSpecial!Style Cut —Requires No Setting!10% Student Discount5242 HYDE PARK BLVD.DO 3-0727-8 ax (Brook- -CLEANERS • TAILORS • LAUNDERERS 9Phones serving campus since 19170 . *Ml 3-7447 1013- 17 E. 61st ST., near Ellis v'*You're under 25but you drivelike an expert.Why should youhave to payextra for Yourcar insurance?Sentry says you maynot have to. A simplequestionnaire could saveyou up to $50 or more.Call the Sentry manfor fast facts.Jim Crane10322 S. Homan238-0971SENTRY TfINSURANCE You won’t have to putyour moving or storageproblem off until tomor¬row if you call us todayPETERSON MOVINGAND STORAGE CO.12655 S. Doty Ave.646-4411Most complete photoand hobby store onthe South SideM00EL CAMERA1342 E. 55th HY 3-9259Student Discounts for your fingersCome select from our new collection of hold excitingrings from Asia, Latin America and Africa. Many newshapes, new dimensions, new exciting ideas as well asclassical favorites to show, dazzle and cherish. Poisonrings from Mexico. Yemminite rings from Israel.Fizzle rings from Turkey. All handcrafted. All some¬thing very special.Fro ®L49 *75.00Jewelry—Handicrafts—SculptureHarper Court—5210 S. Harper—324-7600Convenient Hours: Noon to 8 p.m, dailym at C*liica<jo kfaJio Elationfeatures l^eul JLzz, DLJ(mJy„u fUr JJeur On DL RJio,WiJnitktDol-SoJ.W.flveta lA/eebnialtl?whpk fm 88.3 This investmentstarts paying dividendsin three years.Most ciirs last aliout as long as the loans that payfor them: three years.In Sweden, where it’s tough being a ear. Volvolasts an average of 1 I years.And while we don’t guarantee that a Volvo w illlast 11 years in America, we do know that over95'* of all the \olvos registered here in the last11 years are still on the road.So if you huy a Volvo from us now. it'll still lieworth owning three years from now when yon getit paid for. Tun'll he aide to stop making ear pay¬ments and start making payments to yourself. \ndinstead of paying interest to the hank, you'll heaide to have the hank pay interest to you.VOLVO SALES &SERVICE CENTER, INC7720 STONY ISLAND AVE RE 1-48001969COMMENTSTave Continued from Page Fourreach of the University: but as soon asthey become the way of the University itbegins to die.What has happened at this University isthat a force purporting to be a powerfulinternal criticism, that brings to bear onan intellectual pressure, has chosen thecomfort of quick despair and has now giv¬en itself to another way; we are now askedto decide questions of the mind by wearingbuttons, by a show of hand at ad hoc massmeetings, by answering demands that de¬rive their weight from the capture of realestate. If this is the way in which questionsof the mind are decided, then Mrs Dixonmay be rehired or not, and students andfaculty may or may not divide powers inany agreeable percentage, and it willmake no difference. None of us will be at auniversity.(Stuart Tave is a professor of English,master of the humanites collegiate divi¬sion, and associate dean of the College.)Noon Rally EmphasizesIssues Besides MarleneIn a brief rally in front of the ad buildingMonday noon, students involved in the sit-in spoke on women’s liberation, legal as¬pects of the injunction, the discipline corti-mittee, and the Dixon case.Anne Miller, a law student said of theinjunction, “it is no different from a bust;it just puts it off a little.” She also said ofdue process that “students are entitled tothe rights every criminal has.”Len Handelsman, a graduate sociologystudent, said of the discipline committee“it is a scandal that the most reactionaryfaculty members are on the committee.”Natalee Rosenstein of WRAP outlined aprogram of courses on women’s liberationincluding socialization of women comparedto men, women’s sexuality, and women’sart.Dan Cowen said that the sit-in would en¬able liberation of black people, the workingclass, and the individual, as well as wom- Goldsmith Continued from Page FourIt has been said many times that coer¬cion of the type exemplified by the sit-in isan act that runs counter to the fibre of auniversity, and it is true that the use ofwhat can only be called blackmail createsa situation with evil consequences to all.The stated issues as well as the take-overof the Administration Building have out¬raged the faculty and a large segment ofthe student body, and the University ofChicago could not remain a great, Univer¬sity, if it were to recognize use of coercionas a means of accomplishing anything. Ifthe University were to succumb to the de¬mands put to it (and as of Monday am Inote that they appear to be changing) itwould be destroyed. I believe that somewant it to be destroyed, but I also believethat the great majority do not. To thosewho claim to strive for a “free univer¬sity,” and who exclaim that the sit-in is anexhilarating experiment illustrating whatsuch a “university” could be like, one ofmy colleagues has drawn the analogy of atense war-time military situation: all arelike one — even the last cigarette isshared. This unity in battle lasts as long asthe battle. I would not care to be part ofan institution that could continuously beshaped by whims, moods, or coercive de¬mands of faculty or student elements with¬in it.(Julian Goldsmith is chairman of the de¬partment of geophysical sciences and asso¬ciate dean of the physical sciences divi¬sion.) Continued from Page Threetwo weeks a^o. This was followed by ques¬tionnaires to all students and open studentmeetings to arrive at concrete proposals.About one-third of students in residence(about 50) attended these meetings. Thoseproposals—concerning curriculum, lan¬guage exams, required courses—were tohave been discussed by the faculty-studentcommittee Friday, Jan. 31; but the meet¬ing was cancelled because some professorscould not attend. Putting students on facul¬ty committees is also under discussion,and the faculty are termed “quite willing.”No action has been taken as yet by stu¬dents on the university crisis.Maroon’s source: Jeff Swanson, Englishstudent member of student-faculty com¬mittee.Human DevelopmentA story on extensive departmental re¬forms worked out by faculty and studentsthis weekend can be found elsewhere inthis Maroon. Shortly after midnight Sun¬day, about 70 students attending the con¬ference voted overwhelmingly for amnestyfor sit-in students, by a plurality or narrowmajority (exact count not available bypress time) in favor of the demands of thesitters-in, and against a proposal statingcommittee students felt as responsible assitters-in for the events in the ad buildingand would accept equal punishment.Romance LanguagesNo efforts have been made by studentstoward departmental reform or toward ac¬ tion on the university crisis. There isserious discontent among students (facultyration 1:12, very strict course require¬ments) but students are afraid that actioncould result in loss of scholarships ap¬proved by the department. There are so¬cial gatherings tentatively scheduled forFeb. 15 (after scholarship decisions fornext year) at professor’s home to discussproblems between faculty and students.Maroon’s source: third year grad studentasked not to be identified. Reliable sourcein this reporter’s opinion.ChemistryGraduate chemistry department heldopen meeting Friday, passed following res¬olution: “We disapprove of the tactics ofthe sitters-in and approve of the efforts ofstudents to increase their participation.”Second open meeting Monday afternoon.Three hour discussion of student participa¬tion in issues importnt to students. Esti¬mated more than 100 students, about halfof faculty present.Monday’s meeting to continue Tuesdayat 1 p.m. with more specific discussion ofstudent participation'; possible further dis¬cussion of university-wide issues.Chemistry department had had no meet¬ings on such issues prior to Friday. How¬ever, faculty initiated election by studentsof three students to faculty curriculumcommittee autumn quarter.( Maroon’s information from Ken Spears,third year grad student, chairman of Mon¬day’s meeting.)Concerned Students Meet To Dfscuss Sit-In Problemsen. About 20 faculty-student groups underthe sponsorship of the concerned studentscommittee met in Cobb hall today at 3:30pm to discuss problems and possible solu¬tions to sit-in related problems.The discussion sections focused on thehumanities, social sciences, physical scien¬ces, biological sciences, and new collegiatedivision, and the common core and otherr9nrif*rS/*r&f%rSf>t$t>r3r*rSe>rS£>r9rvjv wgw Jjs# WjW wJG wjw ^f CornJt 3LUI 1y 1645 E. 55Hi STREET^CHICAGO, ILL. 606154^Jfc Phone: FA 4-1651DiscountArt Materials• school, office &fi ling supplies• drafting materials• mounting - matting -• framingDuncan’s1305 E 53rd HY 3-41 I I M. BERGFUR SHOPUnclaimed used furs, s25 up to MOO. Settle for charges,values up to 51000. Also fabulous mink coats and stoles.Tremendous values. We also clean suede coats andknitted goods.1619 East 55th Street HY 3-9413 University-wide programs.In a bulletin issued Monday, the com¬mittee expressed hope that at the meeting“we may not only continue our informalexchange of views, but can proceed to es¬tablish a mechanism in each area for call¬ing future meetings of student and facultyin that area to consider further how best toinstitutionalize channels for students’ rec¬ommendations on policy, particularlyteacher evaluation and matters of appoint¬ment and reappointment at each level of rank.”At a social sciences discussion section at¬tended by more than 80 people, ArcadiusKahan, master of the social sciences divi¬sion, said that it is necessary to in¬stitutionalize student participation in facul¬ty decisions. He added that it would bepossible to establish parallel student andfaculty committees to review the quality offaculty members to be rehired, suggestingthat the student committees make specificproposals to the faculty committees.r,wr MONEYSAVESTEPSJHTt TIMECarry Out & DeliveryVi CHICKEN Dinner M.25RlB TIP Dinners ^1.55RIBSauthorized BMC Imi 3-31135424 s. kimbark ave.Chicago, illinois 60615~ foreign car hospital & clinic, inc.$19.98JUST ARRIVEDDoubU-breastedsport coatsand boll-bottom slacksJOHN’SMENS WEAR1459 E. 53rd. We welcome lony hair,^baniel jboucketIflfjen A *J4air (tuttinf an d ^tyliny1552 €. Jiftf-Ohird Pfa-9255ointmentsSame Day 5 Hr. Cleaning No Extra ChargeJAMES SCHULTZ CLEANERSCustom Quality Cleaning1363 E. 53rd 10% Student Discount 752-6933 5300 DORCHESTER•BUCKETS OF CHICKEN8 PC 2.25 16 PC 3.8524 PC 4,95 with FriesRib pinners - Slab 3.40Small Encf2.l0- LargeEnd 1.75Sandwiches from 55CRIBSN'BIBSDel iveries Start 4 p.m.Sat. & Sun. 3 p.m.•OPEN 7 DAYSHY3-0400 GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORALOPPORTUNITIESDepartment of Pathological Chemistry,Banting Institute, University of TorontoSupport available for limited number of graduate students to work toward an M.Sf.or Ph. D. degree with research on the basic biochemistry and physiology of metabolicdisorders. Postdoctoral opportunities are also available leading either to academicresearch, or to a professional career as a clinical chemist or medical biochemist.Interested persons with a sound education in the chemical, biological or biophysicalsciences, or in medicine, should write immediately for a brochure. ... .Please note that final date for application to the School of Graduate Studies is March13th, l«*>9:jem(THE MAROON CLASSIFIED ADS)RESIGN SKIP, YOU'VE COMPROMISED YOUR OFFICERATES: For University students,faculty, and staff: 50 cents perline, 40 cents per repeat line.For non-University clientele:75 cents per line, 60 cents perrepeat line. Count 30 charactersand spaces per line.TO PLACE AD: Come with ormail payment to The ChicagoMaroon Business Office, Room304 of Ida Noyes Hall, 1212 E.59th St., Chicago, III. 60637. Mail-in forms now available at Cen¬tral Information, Reynolds Cluband all dormitories.No ads will be taken over thephone or billed.DEADLINES: For Friday's pa¬per, Wednesday at 4. For Tues¬day's paper, Friday at 5.FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:Phone Midway 3-0800, Ext. 3266. IV* rooms, close to campus, call324-1426 evenings. $77.50.FOR SALEFENDER PRECISION electric basswith Fender sturdy case and fancystrap. SUNBURST finish. List: Bass—239.50, case — 64.50. Slightly used,can't be told from new, bass w.case, $200. Call Sandy 375-6731.Dbl. bed, dresser, armchair, diningtables/desk. 288-5968.The Negro Heritage Library, alsoInternational Negro Life 8, History.$100 5 vol. of each. 487-5662 after 6.Stereo components at discounts, usedequipment with 90 day guarantees.All service done on premises atMUSICRAFT. On campus call BobTabor 324-3005.ROOMMATES WANTED2 females seek 3rd. South Shoreown room. Call 731-0339.Male Gr. St. — own rm in Ig apt,$47/mo, aft 2/13, 288-6598, Jim orJohn.Female grad for apartment at 58th& Kenwood. 324-6370. Antique fur coats for sale. Somereal beauts. James Schultz Clean¬ers, 1363 E. 53rd St. 752-6933.Leica lllg with 90 mm f4 elmar &acc. $175 or best offer. Mark 3904or 624-5558 evng.Male to share one bedrm apt. 643-3C88.Live with us. Perhaps. Own room35/month, plus share of other ex¬penses. Tucker, Val, or Jim. 752-2433. It doesn't matter.Female to share So Shore apt. Ownroom. $55/mo. 374-1236. We're lowering our recordprices just when everyone elseis going to raise theirs. Mostalbums are now only $3.19.r/h—now at the StudentCo-op. PEOPLE FOR SALEHip clothes for both sexes, custommade 667-7255 alterations.May I do your typing? 363-1104.PUBLIC NOTICEThe Society for the Preventionof Rhetorical Exaggeration and Es¬calation (SPREE) has voted its1969 Dean Rusk Memorial Awardfor outstanding achievement in thefield of exaggeration to ProfessorsRichard Flacks and Bruno Bettle-heim, each of whom found it illu¬minating to compare the sit-in of-January 30 to political action inGermany during the rise of theThird Reich. Prof. Flacks fears theUniversity administration harbors asecret Hitler. Professor Bettleheimsays the students remind him ofNazis.The professors will receive theirgold statuettes, the coveted "Rus-kies," at a four-hour luncheon atFritzel's. Among the other honoredguests will be advertising agencypresident Hyman O'Shea, best-sell¬ing author of How to Make yourChild a Mental Giant in Seven Days.PERSONALSThe Medici is peace.Wanted: a girl with inexpensivetastes. Call 768-5410.How come they all imitate Sally'smannerisms?Blues, barrelhouse, bluegrass, oldtimey music — all weekend long.Folk Festival. TIM HARDIN tickets still availablein Maroon Business Office, IdaNoyes Hall 304. Northwestern con¬cert Feb. 8.Kyoto in the summer is out ofsight. Marco Polo 326-4422.WRITER'S WORKSHOP. PL 2-8377ELECTOR, n. One who enjoys thesacred privilege of voting for theman of another man's choice.DIAGNOSIS, n. A physician's fore¬cast of disease by the patient's pulseand purse.Chicago's Finest Festival of tradi¬tional American music: on campusthis weekend. THE NEW STANDARD OIL SERV¬ICE STATION on Lake Park at52nd charged my wife $6 to fixa flat. They didn't put much airin it when they fixed it — about15 pounds. The next day it washalf flat — it had a leak aroundthe rim. ONE DAY LATER IT HADA LEAK AROUND THE RIM. Itcost another $3 to fix. Watch out!!!Biafra needs your help now. Assistthe struggle. Give now on campus.WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THESIT-IN? Glad you asked. I think that any— that 9ets raised is a positivething. Whether you are right orwrong, if you are bucking estab¬lished authority you are right Thisworld, and particularly this societyand its institutions are so bad, sounfair, so immoral, that any dis¬ruption of them is good. So keeoit up.Child creativity has no measurablelimits when it is related forwardto primal Nature and a love ofLife, rather than backward to thehostile urban environment.—T. D. Lingo.Chicago Winters getting you down?Spend next year in Israel. Come tothe "Israel and You" seminar Sun.Feb. 16th 2-5:30 P.M.SKI! Jackson Hole Wyo. GREAT.Mar. 21-30. Ski Club. All inclusive$173. Peg McQ. 684-5388 eve.Finest Teas and Coffee in the coun¬try at low prices. Call 70 Hitchcockor BU 8-9449.TECHNE STUDIOS 5225 HarperCourt is offering courses in JEWEl -ERY and ENAMELLING Feb. 4through April 10. For informationcall 493-6158.The Young Brothers, Robert Shaw,Freddie King: blues roots to Rand B — February 7, 8 and 9.Interested in attending health clubwith sauna, steam bath, sun room,swimming pool, whirlpool bath &gym facilities for $1.50 a visit?Come up to Ida Noyes Hall room304 and see Ken.Male nonsmoker to share 4 roomapt. 493-4603 after 7 P.M.Fern, roommate begin spr. quart.Own room 8< bath; exc. location$60 mo. Call 363-7615.FOR RENTMale gr. st. — small back rm, ownbath, $39/mo, immed, 288-6598, Jimor John.Single in Snell. Peggy, S. 12.BRENT APT./ — 2'/j rm turn orunfurn., near transp. $100. 1030 E.47th. 427-4821.Apt. available March 1st, studio,sep. kitchen, $85 inc. util. 667-6039evenings. PEOPLE WANTEDInterested in directing photographyexhibit and contest for F.O.T.A.Spring Festival??? Call Susan Beck,Ext. 260.Tutor for 8th Grade girl in basicskills 2-4 days. 667-3649.Free lance writers to review plays,books,- music, etc. Call 829-0248, 9-5.TEACHER for new experimentalschool, grades 6 to 8 — team teach¬ing plus curriculum planning. Call288-5077.Director of block club organization& law-enforcement — integratedSouth Side community organization.Starting salary $9,000 to $9,500. Sendresume to Box Z. Tired of waiting for the Revolution?Why not try Kibbutz life? Come to"Israel and you."HogwashCarnalKowledgeGoodNewsMultimedia production in traditionof east & west light shows & Stone¬henge. Need volunteer creativefreaks. Pete, 643-1048.FOLK FESTIVAL tickets — on saleir. Mandel Hall — good seats quingfast.Grad students — we have the in¬formation you've been waiting forabout Grad study and research >nIsrael. Come to "Israel and You"seminar.SKI ASPEN. Round trip jet. 7nights, hotel, lifts, taxes, bus. $194.Feb. 8 or March 15, 764-6264 Tomor Dick. Custom made horsehide belts. Allhand made. Call Ken 667-5809."Israel and You" seminar. Informa¬tion on Opportunities for Work,Study, Travel, in Israel. CollegeStudy, Grad study. Research, Per¬manent settlement. Sun. Feb. 16th.2-5:30 P.M. Hillel House—5715 S.Woodlawn.Presented by Students for Israel.PIECE DE RESISTANCE—Omegastickers. 254 each — 5/$1.00. BlueGargoyle.Looking for "fraternity mentality"on campus—try Psi U.Why is it that 90% of the oncampus can be found gathered inone place—Psi U? Orgy of the Arts PresentsColumbia Recording StarTIM HARDINSaturday, February 8Cahn Auditorium, 600 Emerson8:00 P.M.Tickets: $3.50 at the door or $3.00 in advancefrom Scott Hall Activities Office, NorthwesternAdvance tickets also available at The MaroonOffice, Room 304, Ida Noyes Hall.i9th Annual University of ChicagoFOLK FESTIVALFebruary 7, 8 and 9GEORGE ARMSTRONGFREDDIE KINGTHE NEW LOST CITY RAMBLERSDON RENO, BILL HARRELL ANDTHE TENNESSEE CUTUPSTHE PENNYWHISTLERSWORKSHOPS:Feb. 8 and 9—mornings and afternoonsIda Noyes Hall—FREE[FOLKLORISTS:Pete SeegerArchie GreenAt workshops only O^cVf'385*/ED, LONNIE AND G.D. YOUNGJENKINS AND JARRELLROBERT SHAWFRANKLIN GEORGESARA CLEVELANDTICKETS ON SALE NOW-MANDEL HALL BOX OFFICEFurther information—Ml 3-0800 Ext. 3567'The Chicago Maroon/February 4, 1969Chicago Literary Review■■■■■■■■ —MMm m ||.Vol. 6, No. 3 The Nation's Most Widely Circulated Student Publication January-February, 1969My Chains and I Grew FriendsThe First Circle, by Alexander Solzhen¬itsyn, translated from the Russian byThomas P. Whitney. Harper and Row,$10.00.The Cancer Ward, by Alexander Sol¬zhenitsyn, translated from the Russianby Rebecca Frank. The Dial Press, Inc.,$8.50.by ROBERT O’SULLIVANSolzhenitsyn’s three novels are autobi¬ographical and yet highly topical; all aredrawn from his experience in the prisoncamps and the “eternal” exile to which hewas condemned under Stalin’s regime; andbecause of the social and political issuesraised, each of the novels has been ofmore than literary interest both in theSoviet Union and in the West. The first,One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich,was published during the intellectual thawafter Stalin’s death, when hitherto forbid¬den topics could be discussed for the firsttime. It was followed by a series of novels,short stories and memoirs dealing withlife under Stalin’s police state regime. OneDay in the Life of Ivan Denisovich drawsupon the author’s experience in a forcedlabor camp in the Arctic and was well-re¬ceived as both a fascinating political docu¬ment and a literary masterpiece. The FirstCircle and The Cancer Ward deal withsubsequent events in Solzhenitsyn’s life—aperiod of forced intellectual labor in asecret research institute and a period ofconfinement in a cancer hospital duringhis exile in Soviet Central Asia. Neither ofthese works has been published in theSoviet Union, an indication that criticaldiscussion of Soviet society has gone farenough for the literary critics in theKremlin and a reflection of the currentcampaign against dissident intellectuals.The First Circle is, to me, the best andmost interesting of the three novels; itmakes One Day in the Life of Ivan Deniso¬vich seem like a documentary, which it isnot; and after The First Circle, The Can¬cer Ward is anticlimactic. The title isdrawn from Dante’s Inferno and suggestsa parallel between the highest circle ofHell, to which Dante consigned the paganphilosophers and others he admired whowere unworthy of Heaven but too good forHell, and the sharashka, or special re¬search institute to which zeks (prisoners)with special qualifications are sent fromthe greater hell of forced labor camps.The main character, Gleb Nerzhin, is, likeSolzhenitsyn, a mathematician who sawservice as an artillery officer during thewar with the Germans, was wounded anddecorated only to be arrested for a politi¬cal offense and sentenced to forced labor.The other prisoners are, almost withoutexception, educated men, and many ofthem are war veterans. Almost all are in¬nocent of the crimes of which they havebeen convicted, and none of them can real¬istically foresee an end to his term.These factors make Mavrino a uniquesort of prison and make The First Circleunique among prison novels. The prisonersare articulate, perceptive, highly gifted hu¬man beings who are guilty of no criminaloffenses; most of them are innocent evenof political offenses. Some, among themthe philosophical Rubin and the engineerAdamson, are still devoted Communists inspite of the injustice done to them by thesystem. Unlike Dostoevsky’s Notes from the House of the Dead, this is not an ex¬amination of criminal types but a portray¬al of the response of innocent men to in¬justice and adversity. Unlike any of theprison novels of the nineteenth century,this novel describes a prison regime whererestrictions, deprivations, security precau¬tions are absolutely totalitarian. Unlike thecharacters in Solzhenitsyn’s other novels,the characters are capable of philosophiz¬ing with some eloquence on the meaningof the experiences they have undergone.The statements of these characters, theirinsight that there is some meaning in whatthey have undergone and the consistentlymeaningful behavior of his less articulatecharacters lead to a vision of the dignityof man which is one of the most strikingaspects of Solzhenitsyn’s work.The action of the novel takes place al¬most exclusively within the compound ofthe Mavrino Special Prison and betweenthe eve of Western Christmas and NewYear’s Eve; yet the scope of the novel isexpanded by the narration, by conversa¬tions and mental flashbacks and by theoutside activities of the prison staff untilit includes not just the first circle but thewider hell of the prison system and, in¬deed, all of Soviet society. It becomesclear that no one is free in this society.Everyone is at least a prisoner of the con¬ventions of society which restrict his thoughts, words and deeds to definite pat¬terns; and one small indiscretion maymean that a staff member or even a min¬ister of state may find himself a zek. Par¬allel to the tragic waste of talent and po¬tential among the zeks is the gradual cor¬ruption and dehumanization of the staffmembers. Talented men—engineers, writ¬ers, government workers—are transformedinto dull functionaries by a wasteful sys¬tem which discourages creativity and ini¬tiative. Major Roitman, the writer Galak¬hov, Shchagov, the war veteran turnedgraduate student, are prime examples ofthis. The greatest irony of the novel is thatthe only free men in this society are pris¬oners; for as the prisoner Bobynin says tothe Minister of State Security Abakumov,chief of all his captors:Just understand one thing and passit along to anyone at the top whostill doesn’t know that you arestrong only as long as you don’tdeprive people of everything. Fora person you’ve taken every¬thing from is no longer in yourpower. He’s free all over again.This is the negative aspect of freedom;prisoners can no longer be coerced bythreats of prison, though in fact the threatof being sent back to a camp from the rel¬ative comfort of the sharashka is enoughto keep the zeks in line. But there is also a positive aspect to their freedom. AsNerzhin remarks at a small gathering ar¬ranged for his birthday:Let’s be fair Not everything inour lives is black! This happinesswe have right now—a free banquet,an exchange of free thoughts with¬out fear, without concealment—wedidn’t have that in freedom.If anyone is guilty in this prison societyit is those who maintain it and profit fromit—some of the MVD staff, the prosecutors,the informers, the writers who portray thesociety dishonestly, the thousands of peo¬ple who realize what is going on but donothing about it and behind and above allof them—Stalin himself, who is portrayedas a lonely old man, failing in mind andbody. The novel is structured in such away as to bring out the interdependence ofelements within all levels of this society,distributing the guilt all the way from Sta¬lin down to prisoners like Rubin who ac¬quiesce to the injustice done to themselvesand others. There are a few characterswho refuse to acquiesce—the prisonersBobynin, Gerasimovich, Nerzhin and peo¬ple like Clara, the prosecutor’s daughterwho confronts her father with the injusticedone under the law and her brother-in-lawInnokenty, a diplomat, who risks arrestand the destruction of his career to warnan innocent man that he is about to beframed. These people are a minority andperhaps an ineffectual minority, but cur¬rent developments within the Soviet Unionindicate that the presence of this criticalminority is acutely felt by those whosesecurity it threatens.Having spent eight years in prison, in1953 Solzhenitsyn was sentenced to “eter¬nal exile,” meaning that he would neverbe allowed to live in European Russia orindeed, anywhere but the town in SovietCentral Asia where he was registered withthe police. During his exile he underwenttreatment for cancer, from which he hadbeen suffering for some time. This exper¬ience forms the background for The Can¬cer Ward.The main character is a former politicalprisoner, now exile, named Kostoglotov,who is similar in background and attitudesto Ivan Denisovich but also akin to GlebNerzhin in his outspoken criticism of justabout everything. Just as in The FirstCircle, there are a dozen or so well-drawnportraits of the inmates and staff of the in¬stitution in which the protagonist findshimself; and, as in the earlier novel, thereare complex relationships and romantic at¬tachments between inmates and staffmembers. Many of the same questions areraised—the legality of the excesses com¬mitted during Stalin’s time, the dichotomyof Communist ideals and Soviet reality,the problem of sincerity in Soviet litera¬ture, the meaning of suffering and adver¬sity. There are some new issues raised:medical ethics, socialized medicine, theposition of women in Soviet society, theproblem of minority nationalities, theproblem of rehabilitating those unjustlypunished under Stalin and of exacting ret¬ribution from those responsible for theirimprisonment. As the title might suggest,the theme of disease pervades the novel-disease as the leveling force, as tragedy,Continued on Page 6,A f iMsi (-»o<? tM agi i* «**’« »— ■Revolution For LunchRevolution for the Hell of It, Free (aliasAbbie Hoffman), The Dial Press, 230 p.,$1.95.The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress, Robert A.Heinlein, (A Berkeley Medallion Book),G.P. Putnam's Sons, $4.95.By DAVID FRIEDMANHeinlein and Hoffman are both anar¬chists writing about revolution. Both areradically out of sympathy with our presentsociety. Hoffman believes everythingshould be free. Heinlein’s theme word isTANSTAAFL, an acronym for: “ThereAin’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch.”Hoffman describes his position in thefollowing imaginary interview:Hoffman: We are for a freesociety.Interviewer: Could you spell thatout.Hoffman: F-R-E-EInterviewer: What do you meanfree.Hoffman: You know what thatmeans. America: the land of thefree. Free means you don’t pay,doesn’t it?Interviewer: Yes, I guess so. Doyou mean all the goods andservices would be free?Hoffman: Precisely. That’s whatthe technological revolution wouldproduce if we let it run unchecked.If we stopped trying to control it.This is the nearest Hoffman comes togiving his revolution an objective. Else¬where he vehemently denies having any.(“We are living contradictions. I cannotreally explain it. I do not even understandit myself ”) Criticizing his vision of thegood society is like arguing about thespecies of butterfly seen in an ink blot.But the exercise may be useful by helpingus to guess which is the real Abbie Hoff¬man, the brilliant lunatic playing revolu¬tion, the lunatic playing the part of thededicated revolutionary pretending to bea brilliant lunatic playing revolution, orsome two, three or none of the above.Hoffman says that the institution ofproperty should be done away with, thatall goods and services should be free. Butmaking things free does not make themavailable. If bread is free, but there isn’tany, we starve just as dead as in anyother famine. Air is free. Some people useair to carry off industrial wastes. Some useit to breathe. Since there is not enoughfresh air for both purposes, having airfree means that industries are free to pol¬lute it and the rest of us are free to breathepolluted air.If property is completely abolished thisproblem appears on a larger scale. Ex¬plaining why kids tore the hands off aclock during a Yip-In in Grand Cen¬tral Station, Hoffman says: “Maybe theyhated time and schedules. Maybe theythought the clock was ugly. People can dowhatever they want. They can begin tolive the revolution even if only within aconfined area. . . .” Destruction, to him, isa legitimate form of expression.But what if you want to destroy whatsomeone wants to use? What if you thinkthat the only useful function of a bigAmerican car is to be pushed off a cliff,and I feel the same way about foreigncars. Without the institution of property,you destroy every car I get, and I destroyevery car you get.Perhaps Hoffman’s answer is that therewill be more than enough of everything.This solution has long been popular as asubstitute for serious thought on economicproblems. As early as 1750 it was obviousthat doubling France’s income would giveeveryone more than enough of everything,since no peasant could eat more than apound or two of bread a day.Although the purported objective of thegame is no more than a two dimensionalslogan, the means by which Hoffman hasplayed revolution are brilliant. Startingwith the insight that revolution, in our so¬ciety, is a branch of advertising, he ran anenormous ad campaign by inventing mythsthe media would print. This sounds easy, but he was competing against hundreds ofthousands of publicity agents, politiciansand businessmen, against the Black Pan¬thers, George Wallace, and the Pope;against everyone and anyone who wantedthe ear of the public; which means, verynearly, against any and every citizen ofthe United States. Some of his competitorshad huge advertising budgets. Some hadenormous staffs of experts, with millionsof thumbs on the pulse of the public. Somestarted with hosts of followers. All Hoff¬man had was his own crazy head, and amaniac vision of America’s soul. AbbieHoffman beat the lot.In Revolution for the Hell of It Hoftmanis propagating the myth that he doesrevolution for fun. Other revolutionistsclaim to work for some future utopia.Hoffman has a utopia as one of his props,but he doesn’t waste any of his valuabletime thinking about whether it would work.Revolution is a game of cowboys and Indi¬ans, with him as Indian. It’s a spectacle, awork of psychedelic art; the blood runningin the streets is day-glo orange.Abbie Hoffman is a revolutionary. Ro¬bert A. Heinlein is a science fiction writer.He has won the Hugo, science fiction’s topaward, three or four times. One of hisbooks, Stranger in a Strange Land, is pop¬ular with hippies. For all I know, Hoffmanmay be a Heinlein fan.Heinlein is that rarest of beings, a goodwriter concerned about ideas. The Moonis a Harsh Mistress revolves about theproblem of freedom and its price. Thesetting is the moon. Luna has been used,as Australia was first used, as a penalcolony. At the time of the story, most“loonies” are legally free. But Luna’slow gravity causes irreversible physiolo¬gical changes; they can go back to earth, ifat all, only in wheel chairs. So they arestuck in the moon, living in tunnel cities:Luna City, Hong Kong in Luna, and NovyLeningrad. The “Warden” controls not onlythe remaining convicts, but all commercebetween earth and moon. He doesn’t carewhat loonies do to each other. There hasdeveloped, out of sheer necessity, a func¬tioning anarchist society, with customsand institutions, but no government, andso no laws.The society is free. Anyone can do whathe likes with his own life. Disagreementscan be settled violently, but usually arenot. If you kill someone, his friends maykill you. Instead, disputants go to a judge,an individual of known probity who agrees,for a fee, to mediate. If one side refusesto go along with his decision, the other willbe justified in using force; no one will ob¬ject.Luna’s principal export is grain, grownunder ground, hydroponically by solarpower. Every load of grain “catapulted”to earth takes with it a certain amount ofscarce water. Professor Bernardo de LaPaz, a loonie sent to the moon as punish¬ment for revolutionary activities, realizesthat this will eventually use up all of theeasily accessible ice. No water means massfamine. Luna must control its own tradeand impose absolute embargo.A revolutionary organization is created.Its leaders are the professor, Mannie, andMike, a self-aware computer. Manuel isthe first human to realize that Mike is notmerely a machine but a conscious being.Mike is friendly, childishly naive, bril¬liantly knowledgeable about everything,and dreadfully lonely. Like Abbie Hoffman,he accepts revolution as a delightful game.But in playing it, he grows up. He alsodemonstrates his enormous power. As thelargest computer on the moon he does awide variety of jobs via time sharing ar¬rangements. He controls all news into andout of Luna. He runs the telephone system.He keeps records for many companies(and finances the revolution by jugglingthe books. Who would suspect a computerof fraud?) He wins the revolution.Mike is more than merely a sympatheticcharacter. He is also the personification ofthe book’s central problem. In order tothrow off an oppressive government, aContinued on Page 7 LETTER TO EDITORMr. John L. Pinnix, EditorMiss Marie Nahikian, Associate EditorThe CarolinianUniversity of North CarolinaGreensboro, N. C.Dear John and Marie:Your Carolinian with its supplement of“The Chicago Literary Review” dated De¬cember, 1968, convicts you of dereliction ofresponsible editing. I am afraid it is epi¬sodes such as this that convicts you stu¬dents as unfit for your so-called “Estab¬lishment.”The Chicago Literary Review reveling inits glorious and pompous title apparentlythinks it has been given a license to insultthe intelligence and cause the agony of thedecent readers. The reviewers, no doubt,are dirty, old, lecherous men that receivetheir abnormal kicks from their depravedwritings. That is all they have going forthem.Nothing has come out of the barracks ofHell to equal the cartoon and article writ¬ten by Tom Miller about Paul Krassner "• IIand his newspaper, “The Realist.” It isinconceivable that they were born of amother. They dishonor by causing a dis¬graceful commentary on her. How couldthey offend God who loves them so much?This is their problem but it is hard for usnot to be concerned for them and thosethey touch.It would be to your advantage (you’llneed all you can acquire in passingthrough this life) to cancel the supplement,“The Chicago Literary Review” as it con¬victs itself as very suspect. Leave thesepitiable reviewers and pseudo intellectualsswirling in their own personal Hell. “As aman thinketh, so is he,” we must remem¬ber.There are many intelligent reviewers ofwonderful books that you can subscribe tothat will entertain, inspire, educate, guideand tell it like it is. You need them on yourjourney and you cannot spare the time northe money to be wasted on useless writingsand their boring authors, and cartoonists.Remember the printed word is pow¬erfully influential. It never leaves us un¬touched. Being editors certainly carries avery heavy responsibility. You are incursed or enviable positions according toyour actions. Being honest and decent isthe easiest and best way of life. God’sblessings will overwhelm you and I hopethey do.Sincere best wishes,(Signed)Reba StevensMrs. Carl E. Stevens2 Cisco RoadAsheville, N.C. 28805Copies: The Chicago Literary ReviewMr. Tom Miller(Postscript to Editorial Board of CLR:)Your Supplement was in¬comprehensible. I was horrified at themany students it reached and may havedebauched.R. StevensThe Chicago Literary ReviewTABLE OF CONTENTSThe First Circle, The Cancer Ward . . page 1Revolution for the Hell of It,The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress page 2The Glass House page 3The Living Theater pages 4, 5Valentino page 6Anti-Memoires page 7Everyman His Own Poet page 8Picture CreditsVirgil Burnett page 2Susan Grecu page 7Bob Griess pages 1, 3, 4, 5Creator Spiritus Richard L. SnowdenEditorial Board:Jeff Schnitzer, Rick Hack, Bob Griess, JimKeough, Gary HoustonManaging Secretary . . . .Mary Sue LeightonAdvertising Manager Pat MeehanBusiness Manager Dave EmoryPaperbacks Jeanne SaferStaff Joe BurbaEdwin AndersonLinda GoldbergMaurice VogelDavid PotterJulie SlottThom GriessCampus EditorsAlbion CollegeBard CollegeBarat CollegeBrandeis UU. of California (Irvine) ...U. of California (Riverside)Cal. TechCarleton CollegeCarnegie-Mellon UChicago St. CollegeU. of Colorado (Denver) ...Concordia CollegeElmhurst CollegeGoucher CollegeU. of Illinois (Urbana)U. of Illinois (Chicago)III. Institute of TechKalamazoo CollegeLoyola UU. of MarylandU. of MichiganMichigan St. UMiles CollegeU. of Minnesota Thomas TerpBob HallMary SextonDavid PittPatsy TruxawJoe Plummer...Carroll BoswellCy SchellyDave KamonsMilt LillieLeslie MinorHerb GeislerJohn Bizer....Karen SandlerElise Cassel..Fred ArmentroutBill BoltonBrenda Lashbrook.Stephanie JaguckiMary HurlbutDan OkrentDave Gilbert.Deloris McQueenPaul Gruchow U. of Mo. (Kansas City) .-...Tony MurphyMontana St. U Diane TravisMundelein College Kathleen CumminsCollege of New Rochelle Madelaine BlaisSt. U. of N.Y. (Stony Brook) Sharon CookeU. of No. Carolina (Greensboro) Marie NahikianNorth Park College Ted LodaOakland U Norman HarperU. of Pennsylvania Stephen MarmonPrinceton U A. Michael ThomasRice U Dennis BahlerU. of Rochester Elizabeth HayShimer College Andy ZahalySouthwestern U. (Tennessee) Bill CaseySouthwestern U. (Texas) Judy FranzeTemple Buell College Susan PoyneerTowson State College Michael VogelmanU. of Utah Ed DitterlineValparaiso U Bruce BittingVanderbilt U Mark McCrackinMary Washington College (U. of Va.) Susan WagnerWashington College Thackray DoddsWashington U Fred FaustWayne State U Oscar GarciaWebster College Mary PetersenWilson College Linda DavisU. of Wis. (Madison) Donna BlackwellU. of Wis. (Milwaukee) John SeversonCollege of Wooster Richard MorganCity EditorsNew York ...Washington ..San FranciscoLondonGlasgowEdinburgh ... Sue GoldbergTom Miller...Patrick Gorman....Roger NichollsDavid Lloyd-JonesKay HarleyThe Chicago Literary Review is published six timesduring the academic year at the University of Chicago.Chief editorial offices: 1212 E. 59th St., Chicago,Illinois 60637. Phone: Ml 3-0800 exts. 3276, 3277. Sub¬scriptions: $5.00 per year. Copyright 1969 by TheChicago Literary Review. All rights reserved.The Chicago Literary Review is distributed by theChicago Maroon, the Albion Pleiad, the Bard Observer,the Barat Heurist, the Brandeis Justice, the Univer¬sity of California (Irvine) New University, the Califor¬nia Institute of Technology California Tech, theCarleton Carletonian, the Carnegie-Mellon Tartan, theUniversity of Colorado (Denver) Fourth Estate, theConcordia Spectator, the Elmhurst Elm Bark, theGoucher Goucher Weekly, the University of Illinois(Urbana) Daily lllini, the I IT Technology News, theKalamazoo Index, the University of Michigan MichiganDaily, the University of Missouri (Kansas City)University News, the Mundelein Skyscraper, the Collegeof New Rochelle Tatter, the State University of NewYork (Stony Brook) Stateman, the North Park CollegeNorth Park News, the Oakland Observer, the Univer¬sity of Pennsylvania Daily Pennsylvanian, the Prince¬ton Daily Princetonian, the Rice Thresher, the Ro¬chester Campus Times, the Shimer Excalibur, South¬western (Tennessee) Sou'wester, the Southwestern(Texas) Megaphone, the Temple-Buell Western Grapic,the Towson State Tower Light, the Valparaiso Torch,the Vanderbilt Hustler, the Washington Elm, the MaryWashington College Bullet, the Washington UniversityStudent Life, Webstar College Web, Wilson CollegeBillboard, University of Wisconsin (Madison) DailyCardinal, College of Wooster Voice, and by MilesCollege Milean.Reprint rights have been granted to the Universityof California (Riverside) Highlander, the Chicago StateCollege Tempo, the University of Illinois (Chicago)Commuter lllini, the Loyola News, the University ofMaryland Diamondback, the Michigan State News,the Minnesota Daily, the Montana State UniversityExponent, the State University of New York (StonyBrook) Stateman, the University of North Carolina(Greensboro) Carolinian, the Daily Utah Chronicle,the Wayne State South End, the University of Wisconsin(Milwaukee) UWM Post.The Chicago Literary Review January-February, 1969w»»v9R yiaietij ogettitO sHT V69f yt .'•■’citH-yisunBt>; lif. * tarijr • /'rWi.f.v til 4t«$ r,‘tQf sxy/, hyV ‘-Vr. i yw<1. j .. 'i (1 * I'i'.V /'f- / h *i U>U..,:Vt« WK* . :Vk- . !'}'. ;K,t».i.*.i * 1 .ai,; / r. i I v* < i >.f'Der Dichter Als BlattThe Glass House, The Life of TheodoreRoethke, by Allan Seager, AAcGraw -Hill Book Company, 301 pp., $7.95.by LESLIE WARBLEThroughout most of his life, TheodoreRoethke’s poetic vision was an intenselypersonal one. He translated the sensationsfrom his physical surroundings into indi¬cators of his own states of being, well orill. His poems were about himself, his ownemotions and sensibilities, and not aboutthe world outside himself. The interactionsbetween other people, and even betweenhimself and others, are seldom reportedin his poems except in their relations tohis psychic state. Even features of thenatural world, flowers and simple animals,become transformed into representativesof the primitive consciousness. Roethkedared to look more deeply into the darkrecesses of his mind than perhaps anyother lyric poet, and the result was poetryof a unique and compelling power whichcelebrated emotions shared by all sensi¬tive men.Although even upon the most cursorystudy it is obvious that Roethke’s poetryis not a purely private outpouring, to fullyappreciate his poems it is necessary toknow about those episodes in his life whichstrongly affected this exceptionally sensi¬tive man. Why did this physically over¬bearing man quake inwardly with a thou¬sand fears? Why, in spite of his many ec¬centricities, was he loved so deeply by al¬most all who knew him? What relationsdid his periods of insanity have to hispoetry? And why did he become a poet atall? These are the important questions,and they are the ones the late Allan Sea¬ger, novelist, teacher, and friend ofRoethke’s for nearly a quarter-century,answers in The Glass House.There were three major formative ele¬ments in Roethke’s life: the death of hisfather, his bouts of madness, and his mar¬riage at the age of forty-four. Probably themost important event in Roethke’s life wasthe death of his father, Otto. Otto andCharles Roethke owned a “floral establish¬ment,” considered the largest in the Mid¬west, in Saginaw, Michigan. CharlesRoethke handled the concern’s books whileOtto took care of the greenhouses andnursery. From a very early age Ted fol¬lowed, watched, and sometimes helped hisfather during the day’s chores around thegreenhouses. Otto was in absolute com¬mand over his floral domain, and Tedcame to regard his father as the creatora iu Keeper or the Eden of the greenhouses.When Ted was fourteen, Otto andCharles Roethke had a falling out (ap¬parently after it was discovered thatCharles had stolen money from the firm),and Otto sold his share of the business toCharles. In less than five months the busi¬ness was foundering, and Charles com¬mitted suicide. Two months later OttoRoethke died of cancer.In half a year Ted had lost both his fa¬ther and the world of his childhood. Tedwas embittered over the loss of the green¬houses and felt that his father had allowedhimself to be cheated. Like most adoles¬cent boys, Ted was sure at times that hehated his father, and probably at leastonce wished Otto would die. Again likemost boys, he immediately felt guilty forwishing such a terrible thing and certainlydidn’t want it to happen. But his worstwishes did come true, and Roethke spentthe rest of his life trying to apologize to hisfather. Somehow, by thinking evil, he hadcaused it to happen, and he could neverdo enough to expiate his guilt. He must be¬come as great as his father; he must be¬come not merely a poet, but the best poet;he must make his father proud of him.Yet he was never good enough. No matterhow may prizes he won (and he wonroany, including the Pulitzer Prize), nomatter how much his colleagues and stu¬dents respected him, he still couldn’tplease his silent father.Guilt and fear were tragic for this extra¬ordinarily sensitive man’s personality, butthey were also the source for some ofRoethke’s greatest poems. Open House,his first book (published ten years after he started writing poetry), though a workin the then current metaphysical style, in¬dicated what was to come, especially in apoem like The Premonition.Roethke found his major poetic vein inThe Lost Son, published seven years later.The poems in this volume are unique inEnglish lyric poetry, and they establishedRoethke’s reputation immediately. Thisbook contains the famous greenhousepoems, poems such as Cuttings (later):I can hear, underground, that suck¬ing and sobbing.In my veins, in my bones, I feel it -The small waters seeping upward.The tight grains parting at last.When sprouts break out,Slippery as fish,I quail, lean to beginnings, sheath-wet.Here Roethke returns to his childhoodin his father’s Eden and finds the originsof life, physical and mental.The greenhouse sequence is followed bypoems of desolation and human degrada¬tion, including the powerful description ofa mental breakdown in The Return:A cold key let me inThat self-infected lair;And I lay down with my life,With the rags and rotting clothes,With a stump of scraggy fangBared for a hunter’s boot.The next poem sequence tells of a slowrecovery to light from darkness and fear.Finally Roethke confronts his father inThe Lost Son sequence:Voice, come out of the silence.Say something.Appear in the form of a spiderOr a moth beating the curtain.Tell me:Which is the way I take;Out of what door do I go,Where and to whom?The poet’s (and mankind’s) struggles tomove from chaos to light and understand¬ing finally meet with a kind of success:A lively understandable spiritOnce entertained you.It will come again.Be still.Wait.The poems in this volume were unique toRoethke, and, in his subsequent verse col¬lections, poems in the manner of those ofThe Lost Son were generally the most suc¬cessful. He had found his voice.Roethke had his first mental breakdownsix years before the publication of Open House. Even though he had just started anew teaching job at Michigan State, he be¬gan to drink very heavily—not only alco¬hol, but dozens of cokes and cups of coffeeevery day. He slept very little, and his ac¬tions became very erratic. Once in classhe climbed up on his desk, crouched down,and went “Ah-ah-ah-ah-ah!” as if he wereshooting the students with a Tommy gun.Finally, one winter night he took a walk ina nearby wood, where he claimed to havehad a mystical experience with a tree andto have learned the secret of Nijinsky. Heleft the woods to walk down a road, whenhe noticed that one of his feet was cold.He took off a shoe (to improve the circula¬tion), left it beside a telephone pole,walked on for several miles, and hitch¬hiked back to Lansing. The next morninghe decided not to go to his eight o’clockclass as an experiment “to see how longthey would stay.” He wanted to tell theDean all about this experiment, so de¬cided to go to his office after taking a longwalk without a coat. By the time he got tothe Dean’s office he was cold, frightened,and incoherent. He was eventually admit¬ted and treated at Mercywood Sanitarium,where he was considered a “manic-depres¬sive neurotic, but not typical.”Roethke felt that he had brought thisbreakdown upon himself. He had been con¬scious for several months of a heightenedawareness (“Suddenly I knew how to en¬ter the life of everything around me. Iknew how it felt to be a tree, a blade ofgrass, even a rabbit. . .”) and attemptedto encourage it by taking stimulants. Ittook Roethke many years to comprehendthat his occasional breakdowns were notmerely bad luck, but were something hehad to expect and adjust to for the rest ofhis life. Unlike Virginia Woolf, whose lifewas spent in the depressive state with onlyinfrequent manic periods, Ted was veryseldom depressed. Later in his life he triedto control his manic excitement by takingdepressants, such as alcohol in large quan¬tities, but he still occasionally lost control.He usually assumed one of three rolesduring his manic periods: the big business¬man, the political manipulator, or thegangster. He felt that he could have be¬come any of these, and his playing a newrole could have represented a “vacation”from his intensity as a poet. However, themost significant thing about his “mad¬ness” was that he continued to write evenduring his numerous hospitalizations. Helater believed that his creative energies caused his mania, and he may have beenmostly right.Roethke taught at five different colleges.He was restless and always believed thathe was not well-enough appreciated wherehe was, so he was continually looking for abetter job. Even though he was usually un¬happy with his position, he taught as wellas he could, and that was better than any¬one else. Each of his classes was a pro¬found experience, and his students adoredhim. He was extremely nervous beforeeach class (again, his fear of failure) andoften became so upset that he would vomithis breakfast on the way to the classroom.He demanded a great deal of work fromhis students, and his teaching style wasaggressive, domineering, and evangelical.Allan Seager, who was teaching at Ben¬nington College at the same time asRoethke, once asked one of his studentswhy she wrote so many good poems forTed and such bad short stories for Seager.“I’m afraid he’ll hit me,” was her reply.Roethke expended a great deal of energyreaching his students, and they respondedin kind.He had to go through a ritual before hecould settle down to work at a new teach¬ing post. This included finding a place tolive, packing up and moving (always atremendous job since he did not travellightly and his personal effects were al¬ways in unbelievable disorder), assessinghis new students and colleagues, findingkindred souls with whom he could talkand drink, and starting a new love affair.He had several affairs, all of them similar.The girl of the moment assumed the dutiesof a mother, keeping track of Ted’s cloth¬ing and meals and, most important, typinghis manuscripts and letters. He felt noneed for marriage until late in his life,when he married Beatrice O’Connell, oneof his former Bennington students.He called himself a perpetual beginner,and in each of his books he tried toachieve a new poetic language. But it wasnot until after his marriage that his visionturned outward. His earlier love poems,beautiful and sensuous as they were, wereprimarily about his sensations and emo¬tions; the women in them were often onlyextensions of himself. However, in The FarField (1964) the poems, such as Her Reti¬cence, have changed:If I could send him onlyOne sleeve with my hand in it,Disembodied, unbloody,For him to kiss or caressAs he would or would not,—But never the full look of my eyes,Nor the whole heart of my thought,Nor the Soul haunting my body,Nor my lips, my breasts, my thighsThat shiver in the windWhen the Wind sighs.He returned to his version of the meta¬physical mode, and projected and wrotepoems about the treatment of the Ameri¬can Indians and about the history of Sagi¬naw and the Pacific Northwest (he taughtat the University of Washington from 1947until his death). His new-found maturitysuggested new directions for his poetry,but he died of a heart attack at age 55 be¬fore he could realize them.As Mr. Seager admitted, perhaps themajor fault in The Glass House, an other¬wise excellent and loving biography, is thatit overemphasizes the darkest sides ofRoethke’s nature. Those who knewRoethke remember him for his playful¬ness, goodnatured eccentricities, and hisextraordinary generosity to his colleagues,students, and, especially, younger poets,and not for his occasional tragic illness.He was a devoted athlete and, later in hislife, a coach. He was:A lazy natural man,I loll, I loll, all Tongue.He wanted to be all things to all men,poet, lover, teacher, chef, athlete, roaring-boy, and he wanted to be the poet who wasmaster of all kinds of poems, from thosein the grand Yeatsian manner to children’snonsense poems, and he very nearly was.Miss Warble is a fourth-year student infine arts at Seton Hill College in Pittsburgh.The Chicago Literary ReviewJanuary-February, 1969 3Living Theatre in Chicago:The Living Theatre. Mysteries andSmaller Pieces; Antigone; Frankenstein;Paradise Now.By KANE T. STRADIVARIUSThe Living Theatre Company is one ofseventeen acting ensembles in the country(mostly from New York) which comprisethe Radical Theatre Repertory. Accordingto the program sheet for Mysteries andSmaller Pieces, all of these groups are “inthe vanguard of a new phenomenon in the¬atrical and social history — the spon¬taneous generation of communal playingtroupes, sharing voluntary poverty, mak¬ing experimental collective creations, andutilizing space, time, minds and bodies inmanifold new ways that meet the demandsof our explosive period.”Unfortunately, the only ensemble in theRepertory which has been able to really bein this revolutionary vanguard has beenthe Living Theatre, the only company withenough money and prestige to go on tour.The Living Theatre—all called Le Liv¬ing — has just returned, in fact from atour of Europe, from whence its legendpercolated back to the States for four andone-half years. In this respect its leaders,Julian Beck and his wife, Judith Malina,have taken the old route of the Americanartist who could only get recognition inAmerica after receiving it across the At¬lantic. And before the sensational ascen-dence of its name in the circles of money¬ed American supporters, the Becks andtheir company did not have an easy timeof it. They began in the late forties andproduced their first series of plays at NewYork’s Cherry Lane in 1951. They stayedthere for a year, taking the narrative,word-dependent, theatrical pieces of Stein,Rexroth, Eliot, and others, and trying tophysicalize them beyond the imagination ofthe texts they were working with. In anessay which introduces the reader the ^hescript of Kenneth Brown’s play, The Brig(1959), Beck recalls, for example, Stein:“There is an impression that she tried todrive narrative out of the theatre, but ifshe did attempt this I do not think shesucceeded, .she relied on the director orscrenarist to freely supply the action sug¬gested by the words, rhythms and divisionsof the dialogue.”For eleven more years they resided intwo other theaters in Manhattan (one onOne Hundredth Street and the other onn ' — J 4.U ~ j"'Itll’lrsirjiifi .*%• n*r( » uiui iifMV u/u»-u rxrriHMx v**. v -wvv*/ turn v..v^ •* vi tin their theatrical sense and format, alonga conveyor belt which took them fartherand farther away from the use of words inthe conveyance of meaning. In a sensewhich prophets and revolutionaries (scien¬tific, utopian, and religious) appreciate,the conveyance of meaning is temporal,and the language Beck talks — of his com¬pany going through various stages of itsown awareness of men and their nature —indicates that the most meaningful mo¬ments of the Living Theatre’s experienceare yet to come. The Living Theatre andthe Becks have become legendary to thosewho have heard of, but not yet seen, them;for “legendary” is a status belonging tothose whose reputation precedes their ac¬tual appearance. When asked how the Liv¬ing Theatre will ever be able to commu¬nicate with the majority of non-theatre-go¬ing Americans, Beck has said:• • .1 think that this problem repre¬sents our next important work. Wehave to solve how to get out of thattheatre which caters to thebourgeois elite which has the habitand advantage of going to thetheatre today, the cultural elite,usually classes with the somewhateconomically elite (sic). That is wehave to get out of that archi¬tecture, we have to begin to getthose people who are damaged, de¬stroyed, repressed by# the wholesystem to believe the theatre is notfor them, that they are too stupidto go to the theatre, that cannotunderstand it, that it doesn’t sayanything to them, that it bores them. Our work is to find them, toget them, and have a meaningfuldialogue with them.The “damaged” ones are just as likely tobe the great mass of TV-watchers enclavedin white American suburbs as it is theblack and poor stuck in the urban slums. Itis no longer facetious to say that both seg¬ments of our people — one in misery, theother in boredom — dwell in ghettos.I hope that troupes like the Becks’ areup to the task, but I am cynical enough toknow that it is a task too great for thelabor to be done in one “stage;” it willtake generations beyond the Becks’, as¬suming that the Living Theatre and com¬panies like it can, after beging effectivelymobilized to follow Beck’s lead, keepabreast of the changes in milieu caused byan expanding and evermore sophisticatedtechnology. And what is their effect withtheir prime turf — the urban middle-class,the academicians and free-style in¬tellectuals, the radical young and white,the Jewish bourgeois (Beck’s own back¬ground), and the members of the liberalEstablishment?The Living Theatre had played in NewYork, Boston, Rochester, and other citiesbefore coming to Chicago’s Hyde Park. InBoston, a riot almost was created at theend of Paradise Now when the company,stripped to the legal G-string and bra lim-ifc aiiJIa* 4r\ — - ***rxviun^ L1JV -mi fcffi rBIrthem and “free the streets” as the casthad “freed the theatre.” Paradise Now, asa result, had been considered a successthere. People did things. Was it unsuccess¬ful in Chicago, where it was too cold out¬side for anyone (especially anyone in thenear-nude) to demonstrate in the streets?Temperature, temperament, and action:no dramatic criteria have been developedto answer such a question. However, thecold didn’t stop the Bolsheviks. What is therelevant difference between a Hyde Parkerand the great soul who shouted narodnay a volya!? And what is the relevant dif¬ference between the American and the Eu¬ropean who, I have been told, generallyreacted more positively to the ensemble’sactors’ taunts when they periodically laun¬ched some manner of attack upon the au¬dience during the performances?Mysteries was the first of four presenta¬tions given in the University of Chicago’sMandel Hall. In this, as in the other three,no curtain opened to herald a beginning, orclosed to signify an end. Actors informallyentered the auditorium from the back astwo of the company’s children played infront of the stage, oblivious to the au¬dience. Lights went out in the house whenpeople were almost seated, and a stagelight came on and fell upon a solitary,bearded, and erect figure at downstagecenter. He stood in that position for a goodfifteen minutes or more, and an audiencewhich mainly expected to participate in aLiving Theatre production could not be ex¬pected to let the opportunity pass by in thename of “respectful silence.” So in theface of increasing volume, participation, and sarcasm from the audience (“Lou¬der!” “Encore!” “You don’t wanna getsunburned do ya?” “You may take a giantstep.” “Author!” “What’s the DeadTheatre like?”), the figure stood still,though he couldn’t blink naturally and theharsh light made his eyes tear. At last,after nearly everyone had had his laugh,the male members of the companymarched from the back onto the stage inthe finest military fashion. They drilled inalignments, regrouped into blocks, andmarched upstage and downstage whilebeing marshalled by the authoritatively-shouted jibberish of the commandant. Thesolitary figure stayed the same, so onecould see him in two contexts: one inwhich he looked singularly absurd and theother in which he looked singularly sane.This whole section became a memorablemoment in Mysteries partly because of thevisual-contrast it created. Also, the au¬dience was tense and excited, not knowingwhat to expect, not knowing if the actorswere seated with them (as was rumored),and therefore tending to seize upon initialimpressions. Mysteries became not a play,but a show — a sequence of “bits” done inunintelligible dialogues between actors orin quick, shouted political cliches, and agreat deal of pantomine, much of it remi¬niscent of Second City routines. The au¬dience saw mostly physical exercises ofthe variptv and the ac-ujiu.. nuinjuuu I — —tivity on stage became a closed (mys¬terious) affair. The routines were oftenr- brief rituals which seemed to be significantonly insofar as they might anticipate thenext three plays (when the company wouldreally get down to business). Towards theend most of the company “died” beforeour very eyes. The few survivors removedthe shoes of the dead and put them onstagewhere they remained as quiet as tombs¬tones, the stiff corpses were collected andstacked pyramidically upstage center. Ittook about ten minutes to complete the la¬bor of this ritual. The lights went up for acurtain call, and the audience filed out —highly disappointed that the mystery ofwhat the play was about could not besolved, that boredom was the most detec¬table emotion they could take home withthem.Berthold Brecht adapted Sophocles’ Anti¬gone for the modem stage and gave it anarration, whereby actors narratively in¬troduce their own characters’ lines. JudithMalina translated it, and the LivingTheatre choreographed it in its own image.Judith plays Antigone, and her husbandplays Creon. The outcome may be de¬scribed as follows. Creon, Big Brother-like,arouses the people behind him in his wareffort against a neighboring city-state; andwhen Antigone tries to bury her dead androtting brother Polyneices (whom Creon’smen slew for being a traitor), she is def¬ying the law. She resists the System as aresult of her efforts to be a good sister —and she is a good sister, although occasion¬ally she exhibits her incestuous lust forPolyneices’ corpse. Judith Malina turns in a let - the - shit - hit - the - fan - with - no -bones - about - it performance. She is ascrappy, tenacious-looking little woman;and her attempts to get the tyrannizedpopulace, chorally separated at stage leftfrom Creon and his establishment at stageright, to defend her, reminds one of a foot¬ball coach screaming at his “lunkheads”at halftime to get out there and do a job —which is to say that she’s very good. JulianBeck, for his part, is one of the teethiestactors I have ever seen — which is to saythat he shows his teeth very well. He doeshis Creon in several voices (one reviewerspeculated that they were imitations of“Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, JamesCagney, W. C. Fields, Punch and Judy,and Antonin Artaud”), according, I wouldguess, to the style of asininity which hethought suitable to the officious statementsCreon made at any particular moment(with, certainly, the exception of Artaud).Antigone, done this way, loses the milieuwhich is an essential ingredient of thePolis-play of Sophocles. As actors go intothe auditorium and surround the audienceto make it crystal-clear to us that “thereare many monstrous things but none moremonstrous than man,” the milieu becomesdistinctly American, here and now. On¬stage, the much-discussed credibility gapbecomes an object of visual perception. AsCreon pops in and out of the solid block ofhuman bodies who individually are min¬isters of state and collectively the govern¬ment, he is now on the public retreat, thenon the public podium. If we ever thought ofLBJ as a frightened, desperate, power-clutching man who knew that his de jureauthority was waning, Beck has managedto stage those thoughts; and if we ever feltthat LBJ was condemned by fate and cir¬cumstance to be a tyrant, Beck recreatedthat feeling. Perhaps it would be unfair tosay that Antigone’s “message” is merelythis satirical one. By the very value whichthe company places upon the nature andcomposition of its audience at any time andlocation, the audience’s receptivity deter¬mines the meaning. (What meanings do wedecide upon as Antigone shows her anxietyin libidinous gestures about her brother’sbody?) But the general, America-orientedcontext points to specific messages whenwe hear such statements as “It’s a humanlaw and that’s why a human being mustbreak it!” or “Anyone who uses violenceagainst ms enemies wm ium auu uac *vagainst his own people.” There are leit¬motifs in the other Living Theatre pro¬ductions.Frankenstein is conventionally dividedinto three acts. In the first, the monster iscreated and brought to life. In the second,(transpiring inside the creature’s head), hegrows in knowledge of the world, acquiresthe ability to categorize objects in theworld, manipulate these categories, tocreate a structure of power that belongs tohim. In the third, which takes place in aprison, his energy is dissipated to men;man takes custody of man; the prisonersescape and die in a fire; prisoners andguards perish in the fire; and the monsteris reintegrated by and reborn from theflames.Some of these summaries are inter¬pretive as well as synoptic, and I certainlymay be open to correction on both scores.But, like Finnegans Wake, Frankenstein'sconceptual underpinnings involve a circu¬lar account of history internal to the beingof an intelligent organism: Creation andbirth, death through division, and rebirthare the essential cycles. The external (i.e ,circumstantial) factors become irrelevantafter the first act, except for those “meta¬theatrical” elements (such as a frequentlyheard radio broadcast of world events)which somehow relate to the monster’s ac¬tions and feelings. Consequently, Dr.Frankenstein (played by Beck), first causc-and creator, phases out in importance af¬ter he creates the monster from the bodiesof human victims (who have been elec• t I »4 The Chicago Literary Review January-February, 1969 i ^ tII trocuted, gassed, guillotined and murderedin other grisly ways).If you leave the show thinking thatFrankenstein is a play in protest of ourtechnocratic way of life, don’t forget thatit’s possibly one of the most technicallyintricate and convoluted productions everengineered for your viewing. It requiresthe highest standards of coordination fromthe company, which is mainly its own tech¬nical crew. Dr. Frankenstein’s laboratory,a cross-section of the head (and dia¬grammed passions) of the creature, andthe prison are all done on a construct withthree levels. The acrobatics, the technicalknow-how, and the light-cue timing de¬manded by this set is very impressive, andthe company is superb in coordinatingthem.The real acrobatic challenge comes inthe second act, when the actors, represent¬ing elements (sometimes psychic, some¬times mental) inside the creature’s head,enact his translation of the world “into themythological theatre of prototype’’ (as theprogram calls it), which includes the birthand slaying of the Minotaur and the flightand fall of Icarus. At the same time, worldnews reports are broadcast. Here mythsprecede and anticipate political structurescreated in the mind. But even prior tomyth, the brain of the monster (and ofmankind) was a unified nerve-center. Whatbroke itdown into its present categoricalscheme was the stimulation (“educationalinput”) of uttered words. This is sym¬bolized by the doctor’s pronunciation ofwords which are fed into the monster’s au¬ditory sensorium and so into the craniumas the monster, on a raised platform atstage right, writhes in agony and as thebeing inside of his head gets violently par¬sed into many beings. Thus he becomes“instructed.” He learns about power. Pow¬er becomes a real fact of the world and isused accordingly when one is instructed ina language. This language has a structure,and its use eventually lends a structuralsense to the meaning of the perceived out¬er world. Control results in a seizure of thesyntactic structures of the world as deter¬mined by the syntactic structures of lan¬guage. If input is instruction and educa¬tion, output is the seizure of power. Thisbrings us to the end of the second act,compared to which the first is an imagina¬tive contrivance and the third an unima¬ginative closure of the historical cycle.If one strong and pervasive theme of theT ;«r<~ ~ mi 4. 1 «• ... ,Lj • IIUUI ru on« u-+>***• ~ l#•*»»w**mv cuiu iu> i / u/L/ve/toiem isdemonstrate that visceral happenings (likethe activities of electrically-stimulatedbrain tissue) are not only analogous to con¬ceptual happenings but also that they arethe very (efficient) causes of mentalevents, then Paradise Now is not only ademonstration but also an exemplification°t that theme. It lasts, they say, about fivetlours, and during those five hours the au¬dience is “bombarded” (one vogue way ofputting it) by a multiplicity of sights andpounds produced by the actors. Paradise'0W’ like Frankenstein and Peter Weiss’sVarat/Sade, is another stab at that Ar-mudian vision of theatre as an art as vari¬es in its deliverance of sensations to thespectator as experience itself can be.At the beginning of the evening a largechart is handed to you. On it is an elabo¬rate diagrammatic treatment of human!gures on left and right. Horizontal lines1 ut their bodies and create a scalar contin¬uum across the chart, consisting of eight’’figments. These scales symbolize an his¬torical progression from “the revolution ofcultures” (feet) to the “permanent revolu¬tion — change!” (head), and the entire1 cntinuum symbolizes “the essential trip•which) is the voyage from the many toj One.” Other labels and sub-labels (e.g.,Hebrew letters and I-Ching hexagrams)designate the psychic, spiritual, emotional,| nd intellectual happenings which occurj|dh in individual and collective uncon¬scious experience. (Some of the labels,also, are unfortunately inscribed in lan¬guages which this writer does not under¬stand.) This program harks back to alls°rts of utopian, eschatological, and revo¬ Legend or Cliche?lutionary dogma with which literate menusually become acquainted; perhaps inthis way the Living Theatre pays lip-ser¬vice to the stubborn luddites who require,or feel better with, a textual reference. (Ihave one of my own to recommend con¬cerning the symbolism attached to the hu¬man body: Read Chapter Four of C. K.Ogden’s Opposition.) The chart also tellsyou what is going to happen. Paradise Nowis a succession of rituals which enact thedenoted revolutionary phases.Things get started rapidly while thehouse lights are still on. Cast members arein the aisles. Each of them looks hard asome audience-member and tells him quitefervently that society does not allow him todo something (such as travel without apassport or live without money or smokepot or take his clothes off). Afterwards,they do take their clothes off (viz., to thelegal limit, which forbids exposure of wom¬en’s breasts and of human sexual organs).This is the “rite of guerrilla theatre,”which is part of the “revolution of cul¬tures,” wherein nude bodies are supposedto change our perceptual modes of thoughtby making actual that which is normallyforbidden and unheard of.I wish I had the space to equally de¬scribe how the other revolutions come off.If you can imagine a naked body beforeyou, however, let your eyes traverse itfrom bottom to top, and you may get someclues. Yes, Phase No. 4 is “the sexual rev¬olution,” subtitled “the exorcism of vio¬lence — Apokatastasis: the transformationof demonic forces into the celestial.” Thecompany gathers onstage, breaks intocouples, and simulates a macaroni-likelove ritual. (“Macaroni-like” — which is todiscount, admittedly, the two black actorsin the company). By this time hundreds ofpeople from the audience had been allowedto congregate onstage and watch the actionclose-up. Among them was a middle-agedman who declared that “This isn’t love. ..It’s copulation.” And he wanted to knowwhat copulation had to do with revolution¬ary action. One actor argued with the manfor about a quarter of an hour. At lastBeck, seeking to stop the debate so thatthe revolutionary sequence might resume,approached the man and loudly suggestedthat they caress each other’s genitals. Theman was violently opposed to the idea, andBeck wrestled him to the floor, whereupona lad from the audience leaped up to theman’s defense and jumped Beck beforecast members and observers could break itup. (As I later learned, the man was not aplant.)Since one of the emphases of ParadiseNow is upon the “here and now” of thetheatrical confrontation between actorsand customers, perhaps one cannot justlyevaluate any performance of it withoutalso evaluating the audience which attendsit. Throughout Paradise Now, actors ran¬domly picked out persons in the audience,yelled in their faces, swore at them,climbed over them, ridiculed them, andgenerally intimidated them. But the au¬dience was hardly passive, and environ¬mental theatre worked; people were pro¬voked to action. Some got up and left dis¬ gusted. Some yelled and fought back. In¬deed, when the company came to a part ofthe program in which it threw out triterevolutionary slogans, several people inthe audience demonstrated in their count¬ersloganeering a wit superior in under¬cutting force to the comparatively dogma-ic, hence pompous, attitude exhibited bythe actors. Even one actor’s solemn warn¬ing to the effect that humor is hideous whenit is used to conceal the truth could notstop them. But the company had stamina,and it had faced audiences more hostilethan this one before. Credit especially goesto Rufus Collins, a black actor who usedhis racial edge to the greatest advantagein outshouting the riled-up and derisive in¬dividuals in the audience. When things gottoo quiet, when other actors were takingbreathers, he saved the situation bylaunching another attack upon whole sec¬tions of the audience (including the peoplein the balcony, who thought they’d get toenjoy an aesthetic distance). More im¬portantly, he said the right things nadrarely depended, as did others, upon sense¬less, repetitious rantings when someone ar¬gued back.But, to go deeper, what of this intentionto destroy the audience’s distance from theactors and get involved in the events ofParadise Now? Western man, as McLuhanand N. 0. Brown believe, orders his powerstructures, perceptions, and everyday lifein the same fashion as his language is or¬dered. I allude to the “subject-object”dichotomy, which is supposed to be so fa¬miliar to us as to influence our behavior.This dichotomy has been alternatively at¬tributed to the invention of the printingpress (which made ideas spatial and pack-ageable), to awareness of sexuality (wherethe subject is male and the object is fe¬male or vice-versa), to Cartesian dualism,and to other phenomena put into relief byvarious hypotheses. The Living Theatrecould very well believe in a cosmologywhich says that all beings are aiming attotal awareness of a single organism ofwhich they are but components (White-head). Men are not divided by real bar¬riers, but by illusory ones which concealthe true nature of reality. The LivingTheatre wants to destroy the true nature ofreality. The Living Theatre wants to de¬stroy these barriers, for they provide thebases for power structures. Such barriersare the habits of preferring privacy or de¬tachment over participation to the extentthat reality is ignored; thus, the LivingTheatre wants to break the private shelland make people public-spirited and ac¬tive. Beck says: “We try to reach thespectator through many means, some ofthem metaphysical, penetration throughthe skin, the use of disturbing symbology,the stirring up of some emotions that onemight regard as negative such as irrita¬tion, annoyance, hysteria, revulsion, bore¬dom. But sometimes it is these very thingswhich will force a spectator to take directaction to the degree that he will get up andleave the theater but that he will becomeso feelingfully angry that he will split. Thismay. . .simply begin his particular journey towards real change, that is to a personalrevolution.” The spectator’s anger is hisexorcism of inner tensions and the begin¬nings of his own revolt against a power-system which constricts the outflow of hisemotions, which restricts his freedom. Jud¬ith Malina says: “It is going to come outin great spurts of emotional, psycho-sex¬ual, political, revolutionary diarrhea andI would consider that as in medicine whena person is severely tied up in this way itis a very wholesome effect.”Does it work? I am skeptical. Beck is notworried if people are bored; it’s ratherwhat he expected, he would say. Peoplewere bored, yes. But you can be bored justas easily by staying home and not seeingParadise Now as you can by attending itsperformance. As for the other emotionsstirred up by the company, can they beharnessed into a revolutionary effort?Maybe they can. But these emotions areusually stirred up in man-to-man situ¬ations, and I am tempted to say that theyend there. Is a man in the audience so stu¬pid that he will participate in a great so¬cial and political upheaval because an ac¬tor got eyeball-to-eyeball with him andcalled him an unfeeling ass? The Becks’and their company sincerely believe that hewill, because, they might say, although hecannot logically relate his anger in the the¬ater to large-scale revolution, he will havebroken the barriers, in expressing anger,which hitherto had made him impotent andpassive in responding to the System. But,with a compassion for the complexity of hu¬man beings which I hope is akin to theBecks’, I wonder if the spectator is theplastic bag (caoable of being filled up to acertain level, taut enough to burst with theapplication of pressure) which they perhapsthink he is. A human observer, because heknows that he is watching a performanceis not merely caught between socially-im¬posed norms and gut emotions. Being in¬telligent, he knows that an actor is an ac¬tor (yes, even if the actor is black); if heis bothered and uncomfortable when an ac¬tor shouts at him, “Isn’t there anythinginside of you? Can’t you feel anything?,” itis not simply because he has a tolerancelevel which is being approached with eachsuccessive indignity, it is also because he-wants to know what is the dramaticallysuitable way to respond without hurtinganyone, because he wants to know what noone will tell him: What’s he supposed todo? Where is his place in the script? And ifthpv tell him mptanhoricallv that hp mustwrite his own script, he resorts to humorand good-natured playing-along, and if thatdoesn’t cut the mustard, why then, he’llleave because, he’s sorry, he just doesn’tunderstand the game. Those who do getviolent and excited are doubtless the good,histrionic, raging people the LivingTheatre likes, but they aren’t the ones itwants to reach. Some emotions are gutemotions, but, cursed as we are to be in¬tellectual as well as emotional and visceralcreatures, we will always come out withthose dramatically ineffectual, embarrass¬ing, infelicitous remarks and reactionswhich can ward off or deflect the LivingTheatre’s onslaught. People are gettingdamned clever and hip, each in his ownway, and they are hard to fool. The massmedia has done that. We can keep ourcool, remain uninvolved, stay insulated.Tragically, we are unlike the Frankensteinmonster. We do not receive a quantity ofemotional and conceptual electricity (affe-rence) which each of us will one day ex¬orcise (efference) in a tumultuous revolu¬tion. Or do we? If we do — except in moreintricate and subtle ways than I have giv¬en Beck credit for prophesying — then wemust await an even grander exhibition of“symbology” and effort from the LivingTheatre to provoke us to revolution beforethat company goes from legend to cliche.Paradise Now has not done it even forthose who congratulate the company for itsconcept and objectives. The con¬gratulations themselves — at least tempo¬rarily — cannot be given too heartily.Mr. Stradivarius is a graduate student inzoology at the University of Ljubljana.• » • Jany«ry-Febryary,;1969 , ! The f 5Valentine, the trpe shocking; aterjr ofAmerica's greatest lover. Irving Schul-man. Pocketbooks, a division of Simonand Schuster, Inc., 404 pages, $.95.by DIANE KAISERRudolph Valentino was a screen idol ofthe Twenties; almost secondarily he wasalso a capable, even impressive screen ac¬tor and a pleasant, rather commonplaceyoung man. Irving Schulman, known forhis exploitation of Jean Harlow in a recentbiography, has treated the first aspect ofValentino with obvious relish for its mostvulgar and pathetic symptoms. Almost halfof this biography is devoted to the dregs ofthe legend: a funeral worthy of ForestLawn, squabbles over his estate, the mys¬tic cults and “Ladies in Black” that roseto mourn and honor the Great Lover.Schulman describes Rudy’s effect onAmericans of both sexes and even offers areasonably responsible analysis of the phe¬nomenon. A radical change in the sexualtype manipulated in female fantasies, anduneasily despised in male conversation, isof no small social significance. One hesi¬tates to give Valentino sole credit, how¬ever.Deep in the Puritan subconscious the vi¬sion of The Rapist has always lurked, withdelightful overtones of the class struggle —the Mexican gardener in Candy or the in¬famous “Negro stud” are not lineal des¬cendants of a single movie star. Importu¬nate lovers were no new thing in films,either, but Hollywood cast them as villains.Valentino projected “Rapist” and stayed ahero, for his portrayals made the fantasymore consciously acceptable.In a sentence all too typical of his style,Schulman spells out the moral of Valen¬tino’s success as the Sheik:Sighing in the kitchens, parlors,and bedrooms, American womenlonged for burning sands to comecloser to home, demon lovers whosehot kisses seared their lips asstrong fingers tore at their pretties.In fact, Valentino’s lovemaking on screenwas tender, realistic, more spirited thanthe pale conventions acceptable as highpassion at the time. What he implied, how¬ever, was high voltage stuff that even to¬day can bring cheers of approval from theright audience.Schulman’s sensibility is also congenialto a debunking of the standard biographythat has served the star; it is perhaps tooharsh a revision. He relies heavily on in¬formation from Valentino’s agent and hisin-laws, a technique used to advantage inHarlow. His own vigorous Screen Con¬fessions style supplies the thoughts andconversations of intimate moments:At last he realized she did not intend tonnen thp Hnnr anH in a moment nf rapphe pounded his fists hard against it,then ran down the stairs and into theearly Hollywood dawn, where in theshelter of a palm tree he threw up hiswedding supper and wondered how hecould ever face people again ... aman who had been locked out of hisbridal chamber on his wedding nightcould only be laughed at, a hilariousfreak, unworthy of even contempt.This sort of interstitial prose does not failto color Valentino’s life.Valentino immigrated to the UnitedStates in 1913, not the harum-scarum scionof minor nobility, but the disgruntled and'delinquent son of a country widow, whodespaired of managing her boy on homegrounds. New York City was his landfall;he gravitated to the cheap and popular so¬cial life of the tearooms, soon became afavorite tango dancer at Maxim’s, elevatedhimself to partnership with Bonnie Glassand Joan Sawyer. Still, a rather seamylife: Schulman has him arrested at onepoint as a known petty thief and black¬mailer. Shortly after his testimony in theDe Saulles society scandal, Rodolfo di Va¬lentina headed west with a road company.In Hollywood he sponged off friends, hungaround the Alexandria Hotel lobby and gotbit parts in some 16 movies over a threeyear period, mostly as foreigners andheavies. In 1919 he married Jean Acker, astarlet better known than he and a mem¬ber of Nazimova’s Amazonian circle; butthey separated before the wedding night.TTie predictable “big break” came in1921 when Valentino was championed byJune Mathis, veteran screen writer, for the in American Mythpart of Julio Desnoyers in Rex Ingram’sspectacular production of “The FourHorsemen of the Apocalypse, based on apopular war novel. She had been im¬pressed by his characterization of a profes¬sional adulterer for divorce evidence inThe Eyes of Youth (1919). Valentino’s work Successive roles might show “the greatlover” with greater intensity, but neverwithin a framework so satisfying, nor in soapt and well-realized a character.By 1921 Valentino was established. Hiscareer thereafter became a succession ofdisputes over salary, choice of script,June 28. 1969 lar than ever. The i Sheik, * father tackyfilm done from a scandalous best-seller ofthe same name, featured the producer’slumpish girl friend and had Valentino leering harder than he ever did before or af¬ter: Quintessential Rapist. The audienceloved it. Thereafter Valentino’s most suc¬cessful offerings were those most like theSheik in theme.Much of Valentino’s fractiousness wasdue to the influence of Natasha Rambova,another of Nazimova’s protegees, the greattrue love of his life. This aggressive, aloofand somewhat talented set-designer filledhim with artistic pretensions, scorned hismost popular films, and finally got herselfbanned from all his productions after costing his studios a small fortune in whiteelephants like Monsieur Beaucaire (1924)and the never realized Hooded Falcon. Sixmonths after the studio ultimatum Natashaleft her husband. Divorce followed, thoughValentino’s feelings for her were un¬changed.His last film was Son of the Sheik (1926icompleted shortly before sound wouldsweep away the era of silent films. VilmaBanky is a toothsome heroine, the desert-scapes are delightful, the comic relief isunrelenting. Already, though, the GreatLover’s face betrays signs ofweariness, asthough middle age would surely be fatalBut to the movie-going populace of Amer¬ica, he was still vital, popular, idolizedHis sudden death at 31, of peritonitis fol¬lowing an appendectomy, shocked theworld. He had become almost as much apart of the Republic’s mythology as J.FKennedy would in a later day. To draw aparallel between our collective sense ofloss each time is no more blashphemousthan true.Though Valentino is the best book yetavailable on the star, Schulman’s biogra¬phy falls down in two areas. He does notappraise Valentino’s films, which after all.were the raw material for the cult. Whatdescription he does supply is no more ex¬tensive than one might glean from Theo¬dore Huff’s Notes on Valentino’s work,published in 1952. Granted, prose cannotsubstitute for the films themselves, andValentino retrospectives are not everydayevents. But for just that reason the authorought to provide his readers with some es¬timation of the films. As Schulman quotesfrom contemporary reviews, his own judg¬ement is nowhere evident. Did he evereven see these films for himself?* 3RfWVt* tMBUOM'O"FEBRUARY MAGAZINE. ;25 c!sDRYDENTHEATRETwenty-ThirdSeasonOctober 29.1968in the role of the scapegrace Argentinianwas so remarkable the director enlargedhis part, even at the expense of hisfiance’s role, who played opposite Valen¬tino as his mistress. The public’s enthu¬siastic reception of The Four Horsemenguaranteed Valentino a career in movies.as a symbol of the sickness infecting So¬viet society. And yet the dominant impres¬sion upon the reader is one of sameness;all that is most significant in The CancerWard has already been better expressedin The First Circle, and the introduction ofa whole series of secondary issues servesonly to fragment the author’s vision andweaken the impact of the book upon thereader. Ironically, the treatment of medi¬cal issues seems weakest of all; there arecases of malpractice; treatments are ad¬ministered which have side or after effectsalmost as harmful as the disease theycure; waiting rooms are so crowded thatdoctors have no time for proper consulta¬tions with their patients.. The Soviet sys¬tem of free medical care is considered oneof the greatest accomplishments of theCommunist regime, and Solzhenitsyn’scriticism may be too daring for Soviettaste; but all of these defects exist in theWest as well, and the criticism may seempointless to the Western reader. In short,The Cancer Ward is an interesting novelbut a disappointment in view of what Solz¬henitsyn’s earlier work seems to promise.The poet Yevtushenko has called Solz¬henitsyn “our only living Russian classic.”The test of this judgement lies in whatSolzhenitsyn will write after The CancerWard. Up to now he has drawn heavily up¬on personal experiences which happen tobe of topical influence both in the Soviet budget cuts and derogatory publicity, towhich he was unusually sensitive. So popu¬lar was the star after The Sheik had beenreleased in 1921, that he was able to“strike” against the movie moguls for twovears. dancine on tour in America or vaca¬tioning in Europe, and return more popu¬Union and abroad. One Day in the Life ofIvan Denisovich was published at Khrush¬chev’s command and was used as a weap¬on during the destalinization campaign.The two works reviewed here have notbeen published in the U.S.S.R. and are of¬ten misread abroad as anti-Soviet propa¬ganda. Solzhenitsyn’s three novels spanthe interval between the time of the au¬thor’s arrest and the time when he beganto write. And so, Solzhenitsyn’s work,drawn on experience, deeply explored thetopical issues raised and discussed nowfor more than ten years, but fast losingtheir topicality. True, there is much oflasting worth in what Solzhenitsyn haswritten to date—a striking account of anhistorical period, a moving testament ofthe dignity of man. His style is highly ori-inal, and his works are philosophically andstructurally related to those of Tolstoy andDostoevsky. All this is probably enough toguarantee him some sort of place in Rus¬sian literature; yet the test of whetherSolzhenitsyn will ever attain the stature ofa classic rests upon his success or failurein transcending the one theme that madehim famous. The Cancer Ward, with itsstale repititions on this womout theme, issomething he will have to overcome if heis to pass the test.Mr. O’Sullivan is a student at the U.S.Naval Officer Candidate School in New¬port, R.l. Valentino’s work seen in a body, aspresented recently at the Dryden Theatreof the George Eastman House, Rochester.New York, emphasizes the restraint of hisstyle, the 61an and physical grace hebrought to costume roles, the charmingand hnvieh nnolitv that nnHorlat/ V*'*- con—~ •—j «w*i vjuutnj u«ub uiiuvi ill*"* ovii'suality. A disappointing proportion of hisfilms suffer from inept pacing or dis¬astrous miscasting. Like Garbo, the wholeof Valentino is far more impressive thanthe sum of his parts.Finally, there is a blankness about theperson Valentino not disguised by Schul¬man’s inimitable overlay of familiarity.Childish, natty, extravagant, fond of pets,children, and speeding—yes. But where isthe sensitive and honorbound gentlemanperceived by such an unlikely critic asH.L. Mencken? Where is the mature andtactful man who allowed Natasha her di¬vorce and then fended off the engagementwidely touted by Pola Negri? Above all,how does Schulman account for the dis¬tance between the real Valentino, an or¬dinary fellow, and the idol on the screen0The gap can be negotiated, but not withthis author. Two bits of candid footagefrom The Legend of Rudolph Valentino(1961), a TV compilation, etch a Valentinomore vivid than all of Schulman. The star,smiling meekly, stands to one side asDouglas Fairbanks, William S. Hart and AlJolson mug for the camera. Valentino of¬fers a wry parody of himself as the Sheikbefore cameras roll on the set of his lastpicture. As Mencken wrote, “Here was onewho was catnip to women. Here was onewho had wealth and fame. And here wasone who was very unhappy.”Diane Kaiser graduated from the Collegeof Wooster in 1966 with a major in Euro¬pean History. She is currently a student ofthe film at Rochester Institute of Technol¬ogy and The George Eastman House■Solzhenitsyn Continued From Pnge 1Tho Chicago Literary Review January-February, 19696,V)fJ ivfc Malranx Va Mo'ifri rAnti-Memoires, Andre Malraux, trans¬lated from the French by Terence Kil-mar in, Holt, Rhinehart and Winston,432 pages, $8.95.by BILL RAYThe first and most nagging problem fac¬ing the occassional reader who sits downwith Anti-memoires by Andre Malraux,present Ministre de Culture of France,is that of never being able to decide exact¬ly which experiences related by the authoractually occurred, and which are merefiction. Oddly, it is precisely this lack ofdistinction between the real and the imag¬ined which makes Anti-memories mem¬orable.For Malraux attacks the task before him,that of reconstituting the important pointsof his life and character, with the precon¬ceived notions that (1) only that portion ofhis life which interrogates the meaning ofman and death, and attempts to find asolution to the famous human condition, isworth exposition; and (2) that portion of hisbeing which does question the world is asoften as not more clearly definable throughits imagined experiences and creations ofreality as through its actual physicalexperiences. “Faced with the unknown,certain dreams we have are of no less sig¬nificance than our memories.”After establishing these basic premises inhis introduction, our author-adventurer-artcritic-statesman next goes about the estab¬lishment of his own position in relation todeath and civilization, using to .this end amassive 600 page compilation-collage ofnon-chronological facts, ficition, adven¬tures, novel fragments, a movie scenario,and a crushing amount of political analy¬sis and declaration. We are treated alter¬nately to: the fervent description of hismany encounters with death (once overNorth Africa in a storm, once in a tank-trap during the war, once when he is cap¬tured while working with the Under¬ground); his esthetic and emotional Reac¬tions to the tombs of the ancient kings ofEgypt; his re-creation of his interviewswith Nehru and his personal evaluation ofthe meaning of the Indian struggle forindependence; his visit to China asDeGaulle’s emissary and his evaluation ofChina’s struggle for independence.(Strangely enough, amidst all of these rev¬elations upon the glorious struggles forindependence nary a trace of Spain’s ill-fated struggle is evident. Could it be thatour author is letting political considerationsdetermine his subject matter?) And finallya healthy portion of the work is devoted toa scenario by Clappique, eccentric mytho-maniac of Man’s Fate, which presents thelife of Mayrena, a sort of Lawrence ofIndochina.Firstly, one is tempted to draw the con¬clusion that the work is finally the resultof a distraught ex-hero’s inability to recon¬cile his present existence and forthcomingpeaceful demise with his earlier idealismand violent activism. Having spent his lifefighting devotedly for various honorablecauses, Malraux seems to have suddenlyrealized that his previous “justification byaction and engagement” attitude will beseriously compromised by a quiet, unim¬portant death as an aging member of LeGrand Charles’ Cabinet. Faced with the im¬possibility of continually maintaining hisreputation on the basis of his pre-WorldWar II laurels, he now is creating Anti-memoires as a means of transcending thesomewhat anti-climatic nature of his pres¬ent position—a transcendence to be accom¬plished through the creation of a great phil¬osophical, moral and artistic statementwhich will hopefully represent the ensembleof all of the questions, answers, problemsand solutions of an era, as seen by one ofthe men most intimately concerned withthem. Anti-memoires would then becomeanother one of those images which we con¬tinually draw from ourselves, according toWalter in the first section of the work, TheWalnut Trees of Altenburg, images designedto remove us from the harsh reality of ourinsignificance, images “powerful enough tonegate oiur nothingness.” In short an image°t his epoch and life massive enough to im¬part a sense of immortality to its author, aJanuary-February, 1969 The ChicagoIfM work of art powerful enough to attain thatlevel of eternal Truth which only an artis¬tic creation can reach.And if this is what Anti-memoires boilsdown to, it becomes more a means of psy¬chic therapy for the author than a revela¬tion for the reader. Indeed, from the philo¬sophical point of view, Anti-memoiresdoes add very little to the ideas alreadydeveloped in Malraux’s earlier works offiction. What we are being exposed to isnot fresh philosophical fodder, but ratherthe relation of the old ideas to their creatorhimself: What does “Malraux” mean toMalraux himself and to the world? Further,we are faced with a man so powerful thathe is assured of his audience by mere vir¬tue of his position. The words of wisdomhe proffers us are no longer those of a manwho just wants to be heard, but those of agreat man who insists on being understoodand appreciated.If the work seems inconclusive, opinion¬ated and pompous, it is because Malraux,even with all his sources and experiences,cannot find all of the answers. The “un¬known” which he sets out to question andilluminate—primarily man’s meaning andthe meaning of his death—is at the conclu¬sion as obscure as ever. There seems to beeven a futility inherent in the task whichMalraux has prescribed for himself. Themore he investigates, interviews and ex¬plores, the more facets to his subject hediscovers. Tracing his literary produc-haps, of his artistic criticism) are con¬cerned basically with the same subject, onetion, all of which (with the exception, per¬is somewhat discouraged to see Malrauxmove from the crude simplicity of TheConquerors, through the concise thorough¬ness of Man’s Fate and the intimidatingimmensity of Man’s Hope, to the monu¬mental endlessness of Anti-memoires(which, incidentally, is to include threevolumes which will be published postu-mously).Unfortunately, not only is Malrauxtrapped within the infinitely expandablerealm of his original subject matter, buthe seems equally unable to break out ofthe stylistic patterns developed in hisearlier fictional works. When Malraux theProfessor is not lecturing us matter-of-factly on the true roots and significanceof Gandhi’s movement, the poet Malrauxis painting in his usual terms of light andsound, shadow and silence, the horror ofthe War. Or the painter and artist Mal¬raux is evoking the eternity and breath¬taking spiritual solemnity of the Pyramidsor a Buddhist shrine. Not that his tech¬nique is striking, but after several novelsand a few hundred pages of Anti-mem¬oires, one begins to wish that just onecharacter could be described without suchbrilliant lighting effects, and that just onevillage in the mountains of Vietnam couldbe mentioned without sonorous produc¬tions. For those unfamiliar with Mal¬raux’s other works, however, Anti-mem¬oires should present a fairly interestinganthology of his styles, particularly thephilosophical dialogue. Man’s Hope doesthe job just as well, however, and is in¬finitely more readable.In conclusion, one must admit that thetrue worth of Anti-memoires is difficult toLiterary Review 7•viisS eg4'4T 0 discern. It is definitely neither the mostentertaining nofr interesting book of theauthor. It may indeed be therapeutic toMalraux and have helped him reaffirmhis world’s meaning and the meaning of thedeath soon to be upon him. But if this bethe case, we must admit that only thosereaders really interested in the relation¬ship of the creator’s ideas to the creatorhimself will be able to truly appreciate thiswork. And yet perhaps a future generationwill come to appreciate this monumentalwork as it was meant to be appreciated.For in spite of the boredom and antipathywhich Malraux often inspires in his read¬ers, he nevertheless does manage to probeprofoundly into the underlying tensions,thoughts and problems behind the majorevents of an entire era. He exposes at leastto a certain extent not only his owndilemma of the meaning of his own lifeand death, but also that faced by millionsof those who shared his epoch.Mr. Ray, a graduate student in FrenchLiterature, has often studied at the Uni¬versity of Grenoble.Luncheon cont. from page 2strong revolutionary organization is neces¬sary. But no one can be trusted with suchpower. Within the revolutionary organiza¬tion is the potential for a new tyranny. Inother Heinlein stories, the revolution suc¬ceeds, and the potential is actualizedThree pages before the end of the book,Mike “dies.” It becomes impossible tospeak with him, although he still functionsas a computer. No plausible explanationis given. Abbie Hoffman talks about blankspace as communication. Heinlein uses it.His book ends with a murder mystery. Thesolution is left to the reader. Upon thatsolution hangs much of the meaning ofthe book.The murderer, is, I believe, Professor dela Paz, the founder of the revolution, ananarchist:. . .A rational anarchist belivesthat concepts such as 'state’ and‘society’ and ‘government’ have noexistence save as physically exem¬plified in the acts of self-responsibleindividuals. He believes that it isimpossible to shift blame, distributeblame. . .as blame, guilt, responsi¬bility are matters taking place in¬side human beings singly andnowhere else. But being rational, heknows that not all individuals holdhis evaluation, so he tries to liveperfectly in an imperfect world...aware that his effort will be lessthan perfect yet undismayed byself-knowledge of self-failure.Surely you would not want...well, H-missles for example — tobe controlled by one irresponsibleperson.My point is that one person is re¬sponsible. Always. If H-bombs exist— and they do — some man con¬trols them. In terms of moralsthere is no such thing as ‘state.’Just men. Individuals. Each respon¬sible for his own acts.For reasons of security, Mike has pro¬grammed himself in such a way that hecan only talk to three people, any one ofwhom can shut out the other two. Pro¬fessor de la Paz is keenly aware of thedanger that Mike’s existence poses for thecontinued existence of a free society onLuna. If my interpretation is correct,Prof’s first action, after the revolution iswon, is to shut out the other two. He thencommits suicide, eliminating the last per¬son to whom Mike can talk.Prof and Mike are the most attractivecharacters in the book. In order that theirend, a free Luna, may be achieved, it isnecessary that Prof kill Mike and himself.There is no other way.Tanstaafl.Mr. Friedman is a recent graduate ofHarvard University, where he was associateEditor of the Harvard Conservative. Hewrites a regular column for The NewGuard. " IntetitatiotiaM'UniversitiesPress.... . .for more than 23 years America'sforemost publisher of serious Itooks in psy¬choanalysis, psychology, psychiatry andsocial sciences, announces with pride thestart of its paperltack dirision. . .to makeavailable to a broader reading public,especially students, the enduring writingsof leading scholars and thinkers of thepast and of our own da y. The first eleventitles are:PSYCHOANALYSIS ANDANTHROPOLOGYBy GEZA ROHEIM. A fundamental work ofthe thinker who first employed cultural an¬thropology to point up the universality ofFreud's theoretical findings.$3.95ON TNI MYSTERIOUS LEAP FROMTNI MIND TO THE BODYFELIX DEUTSCH, Editor. The most lucidand comprehensive explanation available of thebasic principles of psychosomatic medicine, itstheory and clinical practice.S2.4STHE SOVIET REVOLUTIONBy RAPHAEL ABRAMOVITCH. One ofthe few surviving Democratic Socialist leadersof the Russian Revolution tells the intide storyof idealism betrayed and exiled.Sf.9SYOUTH AND CRIMEFRANK J. COHEN, Editor. The fallaciesand fictions underlying much of the currentthinking on “delinquency” are critically ex¬amined by this unusual volume.$1.95THE PSYCHOANALYTIC READERROBERT FLIESS, Editor. An invaluableguide to the basic writings of psychoanalysis,presenting 27 indispensable papers with ex¬tensive comments by the editor.$2.95CHILDREN TELL STORIESBy EVELYN PITCHER & ERNST PRE¬LINGER. Erik H. Erikson says of this book:“answers a need of long standing and answers itexpertly and thoughtfully.” $1.95HISTORY OF RUSSIANPHHOSOPHYBy NICHOLAS O. LOSSKY. The first his¬tory of Russian philosophy to appear in Eng¬lish—and still the best. Authoritative and read¬able.$3.45THE IMPACT OF ANTIBIOTICS ONMEDICINE AND SOCIETYIAGO GALDSTON, Editor A fascinating ex¬ploration of the largely neglicted social andmedical implications of the widespread use of“miracle” drugs.$2.45PSYCHIATRY HI THE AMERICANCOMMUNITYBy H.G. WHITTINGTON. Psychiatry todayis community business—on the campus, in clin¬ics, in public health programs. What are thepros and cons, the gains and losses?$2.95THE FAMILY: A FOCAL POINT INHEALTH EDUCATIONIAGO GALDSTON, Editor. Eleven so¬ciologists, anthropologists, psychiatrists, de¬monstate central role of the family in pro¬gramming for mental health. $1.45PRMCIPLES OF PSYCHOANALYSISBy HERMAN NUNBERG. Freud himselfcalled this classic work ‘"the most complete andaccurate presentation of psychoanalytic theory.. .which we at present possess.”$3.95Available at your favorite pa perlnickbookstoreor direct from publisher with coupon be¬low.Enclose payment: publisher pays shippingINTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITIES PRESS Dept. ClR-1239 Park Avtnu. South Now York, N.Y. 10003Please send me the paperback titles listed below I enclosepayment in full, in return for which you pay shipping costs.NAME (please print)ADDRESSCITY -STATE & ZIPNOTE: Please odd local sales fuses, where applicableCosmologyEveryman His Own Poet, by A. D. VanNostrand, McGraw-Hill, 272 pages,$7.50.by DANIEL COYLEMuch of recent literary criticism hassought to arrange the sprawling out¬pourings of the American imaginationaround a single myth, theme, or culturalprinciple. The Herculean difficulties facingsuch a critic lie in the development of hisgoverning principle: he must synthesizewithout simplifying, drawing together di¬verse writings into a system that is vastbut meaningful. Some of the more notableof these critical works are Lewis’s TheAmerican Adam, Fiedler’s An End to In¬nocence, Lee Marx’s The Machine in theGarden, and Smith’s Virgin Land — all ofwhich examine American culture from aliterary standpoint. Van Nostrand sharesthe concern of these critics to seek a unify¬ing principle and establish a literary tradi¬tion.The purpose of Van Nostrand’s book is todefine American romanticism in terms ofthose writings that defy definition and ge¬neric classification. They go under thenames of epic poems, experimental novels,essays, autobiographies, and free verse ex¬periments. Dr. Van Nostrand chooses tocall them cosmologies, and they includeEmerson’s essays, Leaves of Grass, Wal¬den, Moby Dick, The Bridge, Pater¬son, the writings of Wolfe, Faulkner, andthe late Henry James. The book’s thesis isthat in the spirit of adventure that attend¬ed the founding of the New World, theAmerican writer has been compelled toconstruct a theory about the universe, aromantic and original overview of the to¬tality of existence, free of all the culturallimitations of the Old World. Through thechaotic condition of language and ex¬perience, the cosmologist searches for agoverning metaphor, an ordering principle.His work describes his “transparent eye¬ball” in the process of perception and thestruggle to express what it sees: the cos¬mology is a dramatization of the poet’smind searching for order.The fact that the mystique of expressionis the poet’s central problem indicates thatthe style of his work will be intimate andself-conscious and the subject matterlargely autobiographical. As Hart Cranesought to develop his “mystical synthesisof America” by using himself as a bridge,as Whitman employed his equivocal self asa metaphor for a “Democratic” America,so every cosmologist in the process of liv¬ing and writing becomes a living metaphorand his work becomes an extension of him¬self. As the images agitate in the poet’smind and the metaphors accumulate, whatemerges is a vision of an organic universewhere mind and matter fuse into a contin¬uous being. This is in accord with Emer¬son’s doctrine that reality is subjective andmetaphorical and that the world becomesorganic when consciousness perceives andintegrates all things into a totality. Emer¬son’s dialectical style, Melville’s method of“a careful disorder,” the “drift” of Whit¬man’s poems all describe how each ofthese poets adapted the notion of organ-icism to the structure of his work.This poetic urge to express the whole¬ness of the whole has unmistakable reli¬gious overtones; consequently, the Ameri¬can poet not only created his own cosmosbut also proclaimed it as good news. Thetone of these cosmologies is distinctivelyevangelical. Without an established cultureand enriched with a new sense of things,the American gospel treats its reader as aneophyte, felling him how he should per¬ceive, think, and live his life. In this radi¬cal faith, the poet became the priest, ca¬pable of interpreting events and givingthem meaning. Thus our most radical ofevangelists, Walt Whitman, writes of thepoet: “His brain is the ultimate brain. Heis no arguer. . .he is judgement. He judgesnot as the judge judges but as the sun fall¬ing around a helpless thing.”The worth in reading and studying thesecosmologies is that here, as in no otherform of writing, the writer is involved inhis work. His struggle with expression is on record as an intrinsic part of the cos¬mology, thus offering valuable insights intothe process of writing itself. It is much likeviewing a painting from a distance andthen moving up next to it to see how eachstroke of paint assembles itself into a uni¬fied impression. The cosmology offers thereader this chance to stand close and viewthe composition. Furthermore, the cosmo¬logies exemplify a unique American maniato achieve the impossible — to write theGreat American Novel, to expand the lim¬its of language, to encompass the universewithin a progression of metaphors. The wonder is that out of this naive inspirationemerged a complex, profound literature.In the following passage, Van Nostrandspeaks of the “doctrinal impossibility” ofever achieving an ultimate expression. Al¬though speaking of Moby Dick, he mightas well be speaking of his own criticaleffort. circumstances to rout out meaningorganize the inexplicable into sisystem of knowledge, if not belief.On its own terms such searching cannever achieve its goal. But the drama¬tization of the search is another mat¬ter: the representation of the struggl¬ing consciousness collaborating with its .Near the beginning of his book, Vantrand proposed a “restless play upoabstract term” cosmology so themeaning would soon “accrete.’achieves this and more — a ereworkable, even profound synthesiAmerican romantic literature.Mr. Coyle is a sophomore Englishat Kalamazoo College.Sure,you’ve heard ofNewsweek-but have youread it lately?66 The Soviet Union wants to have its cake and eatit too. That, it has become abundantly clear, is themessage emanating from the Kremlin since the occu¬pation of Czechoslovakia. What Moscow is saying toWashington is, quite simply, this: We have every in¬tention of shoring up the Eastern European bloc andacting repressive at home, but we don’t want that tointerfere with such U.S.-Soviet concerns as limitingthe anti-ballistic-missile and arms races. Whether theRussians can pull off this two-pronged strategy is apressing question for them—as well as the new U.S.Administration.”66 In the months since the Battle of Chicago, theensuing battle over the battle only managed to blurthe record of who and what went wrong. Was it MayorRichard Daley’s police force? The demonstrators? Orboth? The closest thing to an authoritative verdictemerged from a 233-page special staff report to thePresident’s Commission on the Causes and Preven¬tion of Violence. And the judgment is sharp and clear:it amounts to a searing rebuke to the mayor himselfand an indictment of Chicago’s police force. ‘Policeviolence was a fact of convention week,’ the thorough¬going study concludes —and so much so that at timesthe behavior of law-enforcement officers could ‘onlybe called a police riot.’ ” 66 The Ocean Hill-Brownsville dispute,” writeMilton Friedman in his Signed Opinion column, “idramatic evidence of how deeply concerned aboutheir children’s schooling are the parents—NegnPuerto Rican and white —in that low-income districiWhoever is to blame, the parents are surely right othe central issue of quality. Their children have beegetting inferior schooling, and the parents have hano control over the schooling. It is an encouraging sigthat so many low-income parents both know and care.66 Shortly after last year’s Mideast war, while mostof his countrymen were still contentedly contemplat¬ing their heady six-day victory over the Arabs,Israel’s ranking storyteller, Prime Minister LeviEshkol, reached back into his Ukrainian boyhood tosound a note of cautionary wisdom. ‘I am afraid,’ hesaid, ‘that we will yet find ourselves in a position likethe boys in my town, when the marriage broker wastrying to marry off the ugly daughter of the richestmerchant. We all liked the dowry, but the bride —ofvey!’ Israel’s dowry is the 26,349-square mile tract ofland that was conquered from the Arabs. And the‘bride’ is the population of 980,000 hostile Arabs thatcame with it. For eighteen months, Israel’s problemhas been how to keep as much of the dowry and aslittle of the bride as possible.” 66 One option is to leave the church, and some jiltery Catholics undoubtedly will. But a full-sealschism is improbable, since no one is anxious to oiganize yet another church. Indeed, it is because thecare deeply for the church —and the papacy — thamany of Paul’s critics now look upon the crisis he hacreated as a God-given opportunity to examine threal theological and philosophical issues that the ercyclical has forced to the surface.”Go to the original source:NewsweekThe coupon below invites you to read Newsweek fothe next 30 weeks for only $3.50. If, after readinthree issues you decide that Newsweek’s not for youlet us know and you’ll receive a prompt refund on alunmailed copies. No need to send money now. Jusmail the coupon — today! (An extra coupon has bee:provided. Why not offer it to your roommate orfriend?)Special Offer for College Students Only: 30 Weeks for $3.5(mmmm mmmmm tmmm ___ ___ —_____ ___ «irr— mNEWSWEEK, 117 E. Third St., Dayton, Ohio 45402OK. I’ll try Newsweek for30 weeks for $3.50Newsstand cost: $15.00 (500 a copy). Regular subscriptioncost: $6.92 (about 230 a copy). Cost to you: $3.50 (lessthan 120 a copy).NAME-:COLLEGEADDRESSCITY STATE ZIP□ Check here if you prefer 52 weeks for $6.00.□ Payment enclosed.9SA10 NEWSWEEK, 117 E. Third St., Dayton, Ohio 45402OK. I’ll try Newsweek for30 weeks for $3.50Newsstand cost: $15.00 (500 a copy). Regular subscriptioncost: $6.92 (about 230 a copy). Cost to you: $3.50 (lessthan 120 a copy).NAME 1COLLEGE-ADDRESS —CITY STATE ZIP□ Check here if you prefer 52 weeks for $6.00.□ Payment enclosed. ,nThe Chicago Literary Review January-February, 1969■'•V-yr.rU vjm.vO *HT>9v\.8