NewBe Chosen In ANon-Party RaceBy Con HitchcockMembers of the new Student Govern¬ment are to pick a new president Tuesdayto serve for the 1969-70 academic year.Michael Barnett, Dennis Devlin, and Da¬vid Bensman are competing for the topspot.Barnett is a graduate student in physics,Devlin is a graduate student in history, andBensman in the class of 1970. Barnett andBensman are in the Party of Change (PC)and Devlin is with the Reform Alliance(RA).The 100 representatives at today’s 7:30pm meeting in Business East 103 are alsoto choose an SG vice-president, treasurer,and chairman of the 11 SG committees.Candidates for vice-president are MichaelFowler, 71, Frank Day, 70, and CheakYee, 70. Leslie Recht, 70, and RosemarieGillespie, a graduate student in socialsciences, are competing for treasurer.Running for speaker of the graduatehouse are Paul Brinich graduate student, inhuman development and Harvey Huntley, adivinity student. David Bensman, PeterDouglass, 70, John Siefert, 71, DianaBurg, 71, and Shelly Sachs, 71, are run¬ning for speaker in the undergraduatehouse.David Bilik, a student in SSA, and PaulBrinich are running for secretary of thegraduate house. In the undergraduatehouse, David Bensman, Karl Menninger,72, and Marilyn Richmond, 71 are com¬peting.The chairmanship of CORSO (committeeof recognized student organizations) isbeing contested by Richard Gold, ’69,Sheila Schiferl, graduate student in biology,and Jeffrey Schnitzer, graduate student inhumanities. Dennis Devlin, Nathan Hawley,71, Jim Kerwin, a business student, JohnSiefert, Palmer Blakely, 71, and Rose¬marie Gillespie, are running for member¬ship on the committee.See 'SG/ Page ThreeSGOUTGOING SG PRESIDENT: Jerry Lipsch pointing at one of the many SG meetings held during the last year.Wegener Committee Views DisciplineFive Student CouncilsRefuse to NominatePeople for CommitteeThe student council of library science hasjoined the graduate councils of medicine,biological sciences, humanities, and socialsciences in refusing to send nominees to theWegener committee on student discipline.The graduate physical sciences councilhas agreed to send a nominee with the sti¬pulation that students be allowed to decidethe representatives on the committee them¬selves.Charles Wegener, professor in the huma¬ nities and NCD and chairman of the com¬mittee on student discipline indicated Mon¬day that the student nominees will decidewith faculty members upon the process ofselecting three students to serve on hiscommittee.“We have five nominees,” said Wegener,“and I don’t think that’s enough, but I’mnot getting jumpy about it.”Councils that have agreed to send nomi¬nees include collegiate social sciences,physical sciences, and collegiate huma¬nities.The humanities collegiate division stu¬dent council voted last Thursday to senda representative to the new Wegenercommittee which will study disciplineprocedures. Selection will be by lottery, as it was gen¬erally felt by the committee that there waslittle timei for an election, and that therewas “little confidence that such a proce¬dure could produce a ‘representative’ of themajority of members of the division.”According to Lynn Sweet, chairman ofthe council, any College student in thehumanities division who wishes to be anominee to the committee and who plans tobe in residence next year should submit hisname to the division office in Gates-Blake107 no later than Thursday. At 3:30 pm thatday the lottery will be held in Cobb base¬ment and a name drawn.The council emphasizes that only a nomi¬nee to the committee is being chosen andthat all the nominees will meet soonto choose the three delegates to thecommittee.m m Tuesday, May 20, 196?Will Elect New Officers ToProfile: SammyEditor's note: The following is an interview with new¬ly-elected Student Government representative SammyDawg: Mr. Dawg may be deprived of his SG seat byother campus politicians because he is different.By Sue Loth(Who can talk to animals)Now I didn’t think it was funny when my editor toldme to interview a dog.But then he explained that this dog, Sammy Dawg,has been elected to the Student Government in an hon¬est vote and may soon have his position taken away atan SG meeting tonight.So I trotted over to Pierce Tower where the caninepolitician lives. Jerry Simmons, the Tufts House resi¬dent head who likes to think he’s Sammy’s master, waswaiting for me.So was Sammy. We shook hands — and paws — andsaid hello.“Grawf”, he seemed to say.But I knew that he meant “hello”.“Mr. Dawg,” I said, “what’s the first thing you’ll doif you can beat back this attempt to throw you out ofoffice?”“Call me Sammy,” he said.“Freedom for pets is one of my pet issues,” Sammysaid. “Right now it’s illegal for a student to keep ananimal in a dormitory. And a lot of apartments havethis silly rule.“This is kind of a hang-up with me. You see, one wayI can stay on the SG is to maintain that I’m human.And since dogs aren’t allowed to live in Universitydorms, and since I do, and since I was elected from aUniversity dorm, I must not be a dog.“It may be a good argument, Sammy, but it won’t do■Mb—.Dawg—Refuesed A Seat In SGPhK Lathropmuch for your pet freedom case,” I said.“Yeah,” he growled, “but you’ve gotta use the sys¬tem, then take over and change things.”I said something about old-fashioned liberal dogs andthe necessity of tearing down the system, but he didn’tseem to be listening.He was chewing on a bone.“What about student issues, though, Mr. Dawg.”“Call me Sammy.”Gesturing with one of his brown paws, he said that hewants to look into creation of faculty-student-dog com¬mittees.“Why” I asked?“It’s only fair,” he said. “I’m sure students who eatin the C-shop and in the dormitories understand theproblems of dogs. And I understand their problems.”“Hamburgers and spiced foods are my favorites. I’lleat French fries but they usually make me sick,” hesaid.Sammy said he did most of his campaigning inPierce and the C-shop.Jerry, by this time looking neglected, said Sammyshares many student concerns. The dog (he whisperedthe word so Sammy wouldn’t hear it) was in the adbuilding during the sit-in and was at the tent-in whenthe hunger strikers broke their fast with matzoh ballsoup, he said.But Jerry didn’t seem to understand what Sammywas saying, so I started talking to the student govern¬ment official again.“How about a little on your background, Mr. Dawg.”“Call me Sammy.”“I was born in Denver in January of 1967. My motherwas a Springer spaniel and my father — well, we’reSee 'Dawg/ Page Three SAMMY DAWGOusted SG MemberNON-NEGOTIABLEA university that “negotiates" the following issues is negotiating iwsy its freedom and that ofthe community it is intended to serve:The “right" of a minority to seize a building, to bar education to the majority, to burn alibrary, wreck computers, pilfer files.The “right" to drag a college president from a microphone.The “right" to disrupt a class because a professor's views are unpopular with a minority — oreven if they are unpopular with a majority.The “right" to carry guns to settle academic issues.Freedom is non-negotiable.A university that keeps its doors open on the basis of such con¬cessions is not a university. It is a mausoleum in which the pursuitof knowledge, free inquiry, and the life of reason have been ignoblyinterred. The faculties and administrators who have accepted thedecisions of mob rule have canceled their own credentials.When less than one percent of the students at the City College ofNew York chained the gates of the South Campus and blockedall classes, the College, indeed, was in chains.When SDS students at Columbia this week pinioned and clubbed aprofessor it was—in the words of a student—“straight out of Ger¬many in the nineteen-thirties.”When white students at Cornell burned a cross at a Negro dormi¬tory they revived a base form of violence.When the leader of the Afro-American Society at Cornell de¬clared that the university had “three hcurs to live” and later an¬nounced that the university had capitulated, he was confirming thata free institution of the highest repute had suffered profound damage.When that decision was made, not because of logic or justice buton the declared ground that it had “enormously reduced the dangerof a confrontation” between armed students and police, the universityhad accepted a self-destructive method of change—a reactionary proc¬ess that will prevent all future change, once those who have theguns have also obtained the power.When Harvard—under the threat of a renewed strike and har¬assment—surrendered to students a major voice in the selection ofone department’s teachers and curriculum, the university equatedscholarship with political power. Thenceforth naked force—not rea¬son or scholarly achievement—stands behind all decisions in thatdepartment.What IS Negotiable?Change is negotiable. The purpose of a free society is to keepopen the avenues of change. That is why its basic premise must bethe freedom—through rational debate—to advocate and to dissent,to favor and to oppose, to assert and to deny.'Courses of study, admissions policies, curricular innovations, col¬lege relationships with government and local communities, the degreeof student partici|>ation in campus decision-making—are all negotia¬ble. These educational principles are not a matter of racial differ¬ence. Thoughtful black students, seeking the best possible education toprepare for full participation in our society, are opposed to undemo¬cratic tactics. Some have spoken up despite threats to their persons.Dr. Kenneth Clark, educator, psychologist, and consultant in theSupreme Court's desegregation decision of 1964, has exproeeed his"revulsion” at the display of guns on the campus. This militant ex-l>onent of basic changes in both society and the univeriity has said:Certainly, if confrontation tactic* and politic im*m the breaking off ofdiplomatic relation* and acceptance of a literal meaning of “non-nefoti-able" demand*—the campus warfare equivalent of "unconditional sur¬render"—than the** who are using this method, in these terms, do have a*their goal the destruction of the institutions aad the total rejection of therational and democratic process aa a basis for redress of grievance*.Capitulation to force leads only to further demands backed upby force. The mark of tyranny is that decisions are alwava enforcedby violence. Once change becomes the product, not of debate but ofphysical power, change thereafter cannot be negotiated. Decisions arethenceforth made by muscle instead of thought, by coercion instead ofconsent. In the "politicized university" sought by the student minoritythe principle that governs is the thought of Mao Tse-tung: “Politicall>ower grows out of the barrel of a gun.”We know that a majority of students, even a majority of thosesupporting dissent, opposes the destruction of the university. Butclearly a small and disciplined group which initiates disruptive action;has indicated frankly that its purpose is not to refoi-m the universitybut to destroy it as the first step in destroying the society.The tragedy of the moment is that this small group has ralliedsupport from some “silent center" students who reject destructive ob¬jectives, who want to see the university and society preserved and im¬proved. These “centrists” become understandably impatient with too-slow reforming of archaic policies. They resent the indecisiveness ofadministrators and the divisiveness of faculties in producing needed re¬forms. They hope by their protests to bring an even greater meaning¬fulness to the processes of education. Yet, unwittingly, they bolster thedestructionists' use of the university as the spearhead o: revolution.The role of the Academy is thereby subverted. It cannot become an in¬strument for particular political action without losing its academicbirthright as a free marketplace for all views. Lawlessness on campusobstructs the furtherance of educational goals. The centrists do notwant chaos, yet they often oppose the use of police to halt campus law¬lessness.• What is the “silent center’s” answer to totalitarian tactics—theconfrontation of non-negotiation, the physical assault, the brandish¬ ing of arms, the forcible disruption of the classroom? The majority hasnot yet spoken up. For ourselves, we offer the following guidelinesWhat Is to Be Done?1. All constituents of the campus—faculty, students and adminis¬trators—must affirm the principle that violence and anarchy are un¬acceptable in institutions of learning. Dialogue must replace' confron¬tation. Give-and-take must be the spirit of controversy—not uncondi¬tional surrender. "Amnesty” cannot oe granted students who violatecivil law or breach academic freedom. To grant it under the gun is todestroy both moral and civil law.2. Faculties and administrators, along with responsible studentsseeking change, must undertake new initiatives for reforming thestructure of the university, using as a basic principle the maintenanceof academic freedom and free speech for all.3. The tactics of disruptive minorities must be met with a firmpolicy of non-cooperation. Tnoee who seek the destruction of the uni¬versity, and not Its reform, must be isolated and barred from partici¬pation in the constructive coalition.4. The use of lawlessness as an instrument of change must becondemned for what it is—the garroting of education, which is dedi¬cated to the life of reason and persuasion. Breaches of civil order mustbe penalized; a double-standard, whether based on racial or politicalidentifications, must be repudiated.5. Students, faculty and administrators alike must reiect anytheory of campus governance that rests on rule by any political faction.Teachers must have the right to speak the truth as they see it, studentsmust have the right to learn, to hear such teaching, and to agree or dis¬agree as they see fit. This—nothing more nor lesa—is the meaning ofacademic freedom and student freedom. The educator has a moral andprofessional obligation to refuse to teach under any other conditions.Maintaining these positions will not be easy. Difficult decisionswill have to be made: At what point shall judicial procedures and thepolice power be invoked to preserve the freedom to teach and learn? Atwhat point should the university save its honor and its students' futureby shutting its gates rather than desecrating its function of free in¬quiry? These should be regarded as legitimate options wherever a“dear and present danger,rexists on the college campus.The silent must now speak. The overwhelming majorityof the students who know that education cannot be conducted underthe rule of force must give expression to their desires. If students andteachers remain silent today, then freedom will be silenced for genera¬tions to come.What YOU Can DoStudents1. Talk to your fellow students. Circulate thisstatement through all media available to you.2. Speak up on the changes you advocate, but bewilling to hear the other side.3. Take part in student affairs—do not permitstudent organizations to be taken over by smallminorities.4. Notify your faculty and college administrationthat you want reasoned debate and that, under nocircumstances, will you support any fellow-studentswho advocate violent, repressive methods of settlingdisputes. Faculty1. Let your students know that you consider aca¬demic freedom and the processes of reason to be thehighest values in the world of education.2. Take the initiative in improving the processesof education, in curricular change, in the involve¬ment of students in accordance with their capacitiesin the structure of the university.3. Strengthen your contacts with students anddemonstrate your concern with their growth as in¬dependent human beings.4. Let your administration know that you will notwork in an atmosphere that is destructive of freeinquiry, that you insist on the teacher’s prerogativeto teach and do research in the light of his own con¬science, and that you support resort to the civilauthorities when necessary to quell violence oncampus. Administrators1. Do not abandon principle for the sake of ex¬pedience. Inform faculty and students, in advanceof crises, that .moral law and civil law require penal¬ties for the use of force and violence. The universi¬ty’s power to suspend and expel, with due process,must be used promptly if the authority of law isnot to be eroded. The Academy is a fragile commu¬nity. It is not a sanctuary where civil crimes areforgiven.2. Resist the backlash pressures that would cur¬tail university funds or introduce repressivecontrols over all students in order to defeat thedisruptive minority.3. Restudy the structure and goals of your uni¬versity and its administrative and curricularprocesses, and in doing so allow for maximumparticipation by faculty and students.All Readers: Help us cover the cost of spreading thismessage by sending a tax-deductible contribution to Freedom House, 20West 40th Street, New York, N. Y. 10018.Paid. H. Douglas,ChairmanRoscoe Drummond,I’ice ChairmanHarry D. Gidionsf,PresidentLto Cherne,Chairman, Executive CemmitteeGroRCE Fieiji,SecretaryRr.x Stout,TreasurerMrs. Andrew Jackion,Assistant TreasurerGeorge B. Ford,Hanarary Chair mam Whitney North Seymour,Hanarary ChairmanAnthony B. AkeriGeorge BackerMurray BaronKari. R. BendetsenZbigniew BrzezinskiChristopher EmmetRichard N. GardnerNathaniri. L. GoldsteinDavid L. GuyerArthur L. HarckhamSidney HookMaxwell A. KriendlerAaron LevensteinFrancis Pickens Miller John A. Morseij.Edgar Ansei. MowrerDwayne OrtonWhitei.aw ReidFrancis E. RiversHowi.akd H. SargeantGerald L. Steibei.Herbert B. Swope, Jr.Philip Van SlyckWilliam L. WhiteF.ucene P. WignerRoy WilkinsJacques D. WimpfheimerLeonard R. Sussman,Executive DirectarMf v j;a Ali2/The Chicago Maroon/May 20,1969 iI.U:t-'lvlj l:!>l-ii'Vn 1£Q Continued from Pago One76 People In Race For Top PostsGerard Leval, 72, and Cheak Yee arerunning for the chairmanship of the elec¬tion and rules (E&R) committee. PeteDouglass, Juan Jewell, 72, and JonathanDean, a law student, are running for mem¬bership on the committee.The committee on community relationspositions are uncontested; candidates in¬clude Stan Becker, ’72, Jesse Turner, 71,and Karen Wishner, ’72.Thomas Super, graduate student in Eng¬lish. is the only candidate for chairman ofthe graduate academic affairs committee.Paul Antze, graduate student in socialthought, Kimbal Corson, a law student,Hans Irmer, a divinity student, and BarrySiskind, a chemistry student, are com¬peting for other positions on the committee.Running for chairmanship of the under¬graduate academic affairs committee areGerard Leval, and Marshall Seeder, 71,Nancy Lawroski, 71, are also running forcommittee.Bill Phillips, 70 is the only candidate forJarman WillJoseph Jarman and the Art Ensemblewill play a farewell concert on campus Sat¬urday evening before leaving Chicago foran indefinite stay in Europe.The jazz quartet, which includes Jarman,Roscoe Mitchell, Lester Bowie, and Ma-lachi Favors, will play in the Blue Gargoyleat 8 pm.Immediately after the concert the fourwill drive to New York and take a boat toFrance where, according to Jarman, theyexpect to stay for “at least a couple ofyears.”The quartet members are part of the the newly formed committee on studentprojects. Hollis Wagenstein, ’72, and LeslieStrauss, ’72, are running for positions onthe committee.Mike Buckner, graduate student in phi¬losophy, and Sheila Schriferl, are runningfor chairman of the special projects com¬mittee. Competing for membership on thecommittee are David Bensman, Hollis Wa¬genstein, Karen Wishner, Nancy Lawroski,and Ric Shattuc, ’72.Mike Fowler is running unopposed for theexternal affairs committee.David Bensman, and Paul Brinich arevying for leadership of the internal affairscommittee. Mike Buckner, Karen Wishner,Ric Shattuc, Jonathan Dean, Kimball Cor¬son, a law student, and Juan Jewell, arerunning for the remaining spots.Positions on a new committee to studythe constitution of the university are uncon¬tested. Candidates are Jonatnan Dean,chairman, and Nancy Lawroski, KimballCorson, and Edwin Wiley, ’72.Leave UCAACM (Association for the Advancement ofCreative Music), which has played, taughtaspiring musicians and propagandized for afreer, more creative approach to jazz andfor music as an expression of human-spiri¬tual values which relates musician and lis¬tener to those values.Jarman said the quartet is going to Eu¬rope partly to spread to AACM message,and partly for lack of support in Chicagoand Hyde Park.Admission to the concert will be $1.25,and in addition a collection will be taken tohelp the quartet meet travel expenses. ... The committee on housing chairman isbeing contested by Nathan Hawley, ConnieMaravell, graduate student in behavioralscience, and Steven Zarit, graduate student“Why not speak like Adam and Eve be¬fore the Tower of Babel?” asks Dr. W. JohnWeilgart, professor at Luther College inDecorah, Iowa. Weilgart will lecture on“The Language of Space; The HealingWord,” Thursday at International House.Weilgart will lecture on what he calls“the language of space,” which he has con¬structed. The language, represented by thesymbols “aUI,” which means “space-mind-sound,” consists of 3 mnemonic symbols ascategories of communication.According to Weilgart, who has alreadytaught the language to a primitive tribe,“aUI” symbols can be learned in as littleas two minutes.For example, the sound “a” as“mama” is represented by an open circleand symbolizes a space. The “g” sound, adot within a circle, means “inside” since itis pronounced from deep within the throat.Thus combining the two, “ga”, symbolizes“inside space,” or room.“Thus,” according to Weilgart, “eachword becomes a chemical formula, trans¬parent of meaning. ‘aUI’ heals from theslavery of slogan, and dissolves the idolatryof ideologies, which in the atomic age, canlead to a war of annihilation.”Weilgart has written a book, alfl: TheLanguage of Space, which is “dedicated tothe cosmic-conscious youth, the youngspacemen of the Atomic Age.” The book is in human development. The rest of thecommittee will consist of Barry Siskind,Jonathan Dean, Dennis Devlin, and RobertBlythe, ’72.distributed by the Cosmic CommunicationCo., Decorah, Iowa 52101.The language, received by Weilgart fromouter space as a child, is “for the first timerepresented and adapted to the needs of theplanet.”Workers Being Laid OffSeveral food service employees in thedormitories will be laid off for the summerbecause of cancellations of departmentalconferences scheduled to take place in thedorms.According to an official at the personneloffice, interviews were begun last week inorder to find summer jobs for the employ¬ees. About 50 employees were laid off.The personnel official said that there wasa “reasonably good chance” that jobs willbe found for all employees.Job possibilities are open at InternationalHouse, the hospital, and in several depart¬ments where summer relief is needed.According to Miss Lylas Kay, generalmanager of residence halls and commons,most food service employees held jobs dur¬ing the summer in the past, because their fservices were needed for several confer- 4encess held in the dorms. Employees whodid not work were usually lowest in senior¬ity and were given “leaves of absence” un¬til September,Space Language TaughtDawg Continued from Page OneTufts Sponsors Petition to Keep Sammy's SG Seatnot really sure.“But my friends say I look like a Shepherd type, soyou can use your imagination. I came to the Universitywith Jerry when I was eight months old and have beenhere ever since.”“Do you study during the day?”“Not in the usual sense,” he said. “But that doesn’tmean I’m not intellectually inclined. I’ve visited theOriental Institute, I spend some time in Soc Sci lookingfor Jerry, and I often browse through the stacks inHarper Library. I’ve got a lot of friends on the quadsso I spend a lot of time there too. “The pretzel man knows me. Just ask him.”I said his word was good enough.Jerry was playing with the bone by this time. He saidSammy has a pretty active social life. The student-canine politico lives in Tufts but he goes out a lot.One time, Jerry said, he came home about dark witha note pinned to his collar asking that he be kept in¬side. A woman in the negihborhood was concerned be¬cause her dog was in heat.Sammy grinned.He’d be let out at 9 am and wouldn’t come backhome until 10 pm around that time, Jerry said. And that’s pretty late for Sammy.The representative got serious again and said he seesno trouble in his being on the student government.“I’d treat the other reps as equals. They don’t haveto worry,” he said.“It was a nine-way tie for second in Tufts,” he said. Iwon and all the others were mixed up. But they’re allgiving me support.”Tufts residents are getting up a petition to save myseat on SG and talking up my case around campus.“I wish you luck, Mr. Dawg.”“Call me Sammy,” he growled.r PHIL OCHSis in\\|0v\ Retirement"'and only $3.19as are all $4.98 recordsat the Student Co-OpReynolds Club Basement *S\\\1458 Expert Shoe & Leather Repair1 day serviceTHE TOWN COBBLERWe carry quality leather goodsE. 53rd St. 9-6 Dailyauthorized BMC5424 s. kirn bark ave.Chicago, illinois 60615** foreign car hospital & clinic, inc.servicemi 3-3113 MUSICRAFT SPECIAL"By all means listepto this $95 speaker...This is not justanother box!" wFi/stm«i»oif» A.D.C. Modal 303A SPEAKERThe Brentwood ^77^The ADC 303A has been widely acclaimed in audio technical reportsby high fidelity authorities. For example, here’s what Julian Hirschof Hirsch-Houck Laboratories had to say in Hi Fi/Stcreo Review.“After the lab measurements had been made, and I had achance to analyze the data, I began to appreciate howunusual this speaker system really is.”“For one thing, my tests confirmed the manufacturer’s claimed frequen¬cy response of 35 to 20,000 cps — 3 db measured in an average listen¬ing room.’’"... the Brentwood has a true, effective response down to at least 33cps, with lower distortion than I have measured on many larger and morecostly speaker systems, under similar conditions.’’ON CAMPUS CALL BOB TABOR 324-300543 E. Oak St.-DE 7-4150 2035 W. 95h SI.--779-65MSi?f .K vet ’f ceuMeijii riDcpI \May 20, 1969/The Chicago Maroon/3V.' * < '* * / * ‘Spartacus DefendedBy Ethan Cummings, Charles DeHaeir, Mary Lou Finley, Barbara Greenberg,and Lucy Moore"The administration claims that the judicialmodel of due process does not apply to judicialprocedure in the University."Several weeks ago, we published in Spartacus II the results of a study ofdisciplinary procedures which showed:• That the political views of the student were taken into account by the Oakscommittee and• That politically radical students were given harsher punishment than politicallymoderate students for the same action. We want to raise here a few central issueswhich have been obscured in the discussion of Spartacus II. One major questioninvolves the definitior f “political” criteria and “political” supression. Mr.Oaks apparently feels that his committee could not have used political criteriasince it never asked the student whether he was a member of SDS.Needless to say, questions about membership in political organization are not theonly means of ascertaining political viewpoint or discriminating against radicalstudents; in fact, the Oaks committee took a much more direct route andconsistently asked students questions about their political ideas and outlook. Todocument the regularity of such questions in the hearings, we are presentingbelow some new information about the frequency of questions asked. The numbersin parentheses represent the number of students who reported being asked thesequestions based on the 32 students in our sample who were asked any questions by thecommittee.Do you believe in the tactic of the sit-in? (20) Did you participatein political meetings outside the building, and how did you vote? (20) Did youparticipate in politcal meetings inside the building? (19) Did you vote at meetingsinside the building and how did you vote? (18) How do you view the sit-in (as a powerbase, moral protest, etc.)? (16) Did you try to use other legitimate channels? (13)Did you participate in events leading up to the sit-in? (12) (This question wasrejected by Mr. Oaks in one hearing as irrelevant but managed to slip in severaltimes anyway.) What was your commitment to the demands of the sit-in? (11) Doyou still feel the same way about the sit-in as you did at the time? (11)Some of the questions that were asked less frequently were nonethelesssignificant in that the committee found it necessary to ask them at all. Questions rangedfrom the absurd: Where did you eat and sleep? (4) to more serious forms ofpolitical interrogation: “What political organizations do you belong to? (4) Otherquestions included: Do you feel you belong in the University? (6) What is yourconception of the University? (3) Would you sit-in again? (7) What is your idea ofgood and bad tactics? (5) A variety of questions were reported in individual cases:“How can collective action be civil disobedience?” “How could you conceivably thinkthe sit-in, which is after all a form of coercion, be an acceptable tactic?” “In yourfunction as SG President, did you work to end the sit-in?”All of these questions deal with political beliefs, attitudes, and involvement aboveand beyond extent of behavioral participation in a disruptive action.-Thesequestions are political in every relevant sense of the word: they tap generalpolitical goals and values of the student, particularly in reference to his politicalconception of the University, as well as his beliefs about strategy and tactics.The Oaks committee continues to maintain that it did not consider the politicalviews of the student in assigning punishment. The obvious question then is why werethese ouestiens consistently asked to students if thev were not used in determinationof punishment.lt might be argued that responses to these questionsprovide grounds for ihe committee to mitigate the punishment of certain students.It should be clearly realized, however, that all responses to these questions arepolitical responses and that one set of political views is thus defined as constituting“mitigating evidence” while another set is not.A part of our study which has received much less attention than it merits is thecase study section. This section documents with specific details about individualcases the consequences of the irregular proedures of the committee. While theadministration claims that the judicial model of due process does not apply tojudicial procedures in the University, the case studies simply illustrate the types ofinjustices that result in the absence of legal protection. Without procedural limitationsthe way is open for the kind of considweration of political viewpoint which wedocumented in our statistical analysis.Another issue which has been clouded in discussion is the relation of delay ofresponse to the committee and political viewpoint. It is, of course, true that it isdifficult to separate the effects of delay of response and political views sinceradical students tended to respond later than moderate students. Nevertheless, at facevalue, political viewpoint of the student is the best single predictor of punishment inour data (this has never been challenged by our critics): the relation betweenpolitical viewpoint and punishment is stronger than that between delay of responseand punishment and remains strong when the appropriate controls are introduced(the relationship between delay of response and punishment, on the other hand,completely disappears when political viewpoint is held constant.)Our interpretation that the relationship between political viewpoint andpunishment is valid is supported by two factors:• The often overlooked fact that the Shireman committee explicitly acknowledgedtaking into account one dimension of the student’s political views. There is no clearreason why the two committees should have been operating on the basis ofdifferent criteria: if the Shireman committee can admit publically that it assignedmore lenient punishment to the student who no longer viewed the sit-in as politicallyjustified, it doesn’t seem very surprising that the Oaks committee also was interestedin aspects of the student’s political orientation (the administration has yet to providea justitication of this admission of the use of outrageous criteria by the Shiremancommittee).One final point. A critique of Spartacus II focusing on metnodological problemswas published by a group of graduate students in the department of statistics. Thesecriticisms were neither new nor surprising to us because they had been raisedmuch earlier in a meeting with Professor William Kruskal, chairman of thedepartment of statistics and member of the committee of the council. The criticismsNevertheless, we will be happy to debate the authors of the critique in any publicforum. Moreover, we would be particularly happy to debate either Mr. Booth orMr. O’Connell who have also raised methodological questions about the study.A final plea. We are still short $150 for the printing costs of Spartacus II. Anycontributions will be much appreciated-Iffi I 1 . ,.l 1> (n^r lY-H. i f l nh; / 9 1 C II 1 ><n I ^ > P■ 3 1 i: l b 5 E 1 i ■> »; r Ctmmmgs, Derber, Finley, Gneengtorgi an& Moore, the authord of Spartacus 11, Oreall graduate students An the social sciences. -ls>h.;( > n >13 r c (J s? j)»;el r 6m ' n4/The Chicago Maroon /May 20, 1969 LETTERS TO THE EDITORSchnitzer and CLRAs a former staff member and managingeditor of The Chicago Literary Review, Iwould like to make a few comments aboutthe letter from “John Foley” that appearedThe problems encount¬ered by CLR this yearwere the same onesthat have plagued itsince it began - lack ofstaff and money and in¬adequate cooperationfrom many memberschools.in Friday’s Maroon. Mr. “Foley”, from hismysterious perspective (being neither aMaroon nor a CLR staffer), has made alle¬gations concerning Jeff Schnitzer that amore intelligent and informed person couldeasily see had no basis in fact.Although I wasn’t here over the summerand cannot refute the charges about Sun¬day/Friday from first hand experience, Ican refute those about CLR. Far from “running it into the ground,” Jeff increased thecirculation from a dubious 100,000 to a rela¬tively firm 500,000, distributed on over 50campuses free to students. Unfortunately,due to difficulties in finding a businessmanager who had the time and interest tomaintain business contacts with advertiserswho paid the bills, we were unable to con¬tinue publishing on schedule. Before post¬poning publication, Jeff spent an incredibleamount of time during vacations as well asduring classtime trying to raise funds him¬self. There is no doubt in my mind (and Ihave been connected with CLR since I came here three years ago) that no one hasever worked harder for CLR — or wasmore upset at its temporary setback. Thecharge about saddling the Maroon with a$700 debt is based on a simplistic inter¬pretation of a mix-up on the part of theprinters and Maroon business office, aswell as CLR.The problems encountered by CLR thisyear were the same ones that have plaguedit since it began — lack of staff and money,and inadequate cooperation from manymember schools. The fact that Jeff is nolonger with CLR is the result of many con¬siderations, personal as well as organiza¬tional, and is not in any way a reflection of“mismanagement”.I hope this sets “Mr. Foley” straightabout CLR. It would be useful if someonefrom CORSO would bring to light the realfacts about the Sunday/Friday confusionMary Sue Leighton, '69A Reply(Jerry Levy, business manager of theMaroon, replies:)The incident of the $700 debt to the Ma¬roon is not based on confusion on anybody’spart. Early in the year CLR received a$15,000 grant from the office of the dean ofthe College. In January all of those fundswere cut off. At that time $700 was owedthe Maroon: the office of the dean of theCollege refused to pay it and Jeff Schnitzerstated that CLR had no money to pay itSince that time the office of the dean of theCollege has freed the CLR money and paidthe Maroon in full. But it should be pointedout that at no time did Jeff Schnitzer in¬form the Maroon of the financial situation.We learned of the nonpayment only whenour requisitions were returned to the audi¬tor of student activities.All of which may not be irresponsibilityon Schnitzer’s part, but it is a hell of a wayto run a business.)Forum and Contest HochachaThere is still time to submit entries to the exciting Grey City Journal CollegeForum Let’s Make Hyde Park a Paradise Contest.Submissions will be accepted through Thursday. The whole subject of revita¬lizing the neighborhood will be taken up in open discussion at this Friday’sCollege Forum, 3:30 pm in Quantrell.Participating will be Leo Goldschmidt, city planner, currently working on ascheme to enliven 53rd Street; Louis Natenshon, a young architect, currentlyassistant director of our own Bergman Gallery; Bennett Greenwald, vibrantyoung city planner from the University of Illinois; and Margo Jones, aspiringarchitect and student in the College who has come up with an extensive andcreative plan of her own for the woes of the community, design-wise.Michael Sorkin, even closer to being an architect than Margo Jones, willmoderate and make snide remarks about the office of physical planning. Allstudents and faculty are warmly urged to come and argue with the experts andwith each other. There might quite conceivably be a walking tour of exotic 57thStreetland for the hearty.Entries should be left at the Maroon office in Ida Noyes.THE MAROONEditor Roger BlackBusiness Manager: Jerry LevyNews Editor: Caroline Heck Photography Staff: Phil Lathrop, Paul Stelter,Steve Aoki, Ben Gilbert, Mark IsraelSenior Editor: Jeff KutaContributing Editors: Michael Sorkin, JessicaSiegel, John RechtSunshine Girl: Jeanne WiklerPhotography Editor: David TravisCopy Editor: Sue LothAssistant Editor: Mitch BobkinProduction Chief: Mitch KahnNews Board:Leslie Strauss, Wendy Glockner, Con Hitch¬cock, Rob CooleyNews Staff: Jim Haefemeyer, Sylvia Piechocka,■i-Cl l t Bruce1 Nirton, i Steve 1 Cook; Gerard Leval,‘•ixi tm asp&JW.t f 3 J 11 fr*/ Cfrif jPr<yU* onit iFfergiMon 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 Rooms04, and 305 in Ida Noyes Hall, 1212 E.5t„ Chicago, III. 60637. Phone MidwayExt. 3269. Distributed on campus , and inyud Park1 rifeighborhood free St ?harge.iOtKmfcnbyi rnail *7 per year1. aNBJt-profife paidT af Chicago, III. Subscribers toe>'Fres5taen(fde. ' ' “B ^g mmum WgSKjjM H WMSSi WKSkThe Chicago Literary ReviewVol. 6, No. 4Elevating the National Character May, 1969Chinese Religions by D. Howard Smith,Holt, Rinehart & Winston $7.95.China in Crisis: Volume 1: China'sHeritage and the Communist PoliticalSystem, (in two books). $20 the set.Volume 2: China's Policies in Asia andAmerica's Alternatives, $10, Ping-ti Hoand Tang Tsou (eds.) The University ofChicago Press.History in Communist China, AlbertFeuerwerker (ed.), The M.l.T. Press,$12.50.This is Communist China, by the staffof Yomiuri Shimbun, Robert Trumbull(ed.), David McKay co., Inc., New York,$5 95. by IAN W. M. TAYLOR“Soviet Russia is a mystery wrapped ina riddle inside an enigma.” Churchill’s fa¬mous dictum, no longer (if ever) true ofSoviet Union, probably sums up the atti¬tude of many people in the West to con¬temporary China. There are a number ofparallels with the Russia of thirty yearsago, some of which are drawn in the vol¬umes under review. China is a vast butbackward country in the throes of rapidindustrial development, imbued with an in¬tense ideological fervor tom by great in-t e r n a 1 socio-political convulsions andmaintaining an aspect of hostility and sus¬picion to the outside world. And whether ornot Churchill had anything in mind beyondalliterative effect when he coined hisphrase, there is no doubt that the studentof modern China has a triple layer of com¬plication to penetrate. First there isChina’s unique historical background,shaped by her distinctive culture and geo¬graphical isolation. Secondly, there is theChinese official secrecy engendered by theCold War, and a consequent scarcity ofsource material. Finally, there is the prob¬lem of Western academic attitudes to theCommunist world which, following de-Stalinization and the Sino-Soviet split, haveundergone an interesting evolution. Blindhatred and fear of the Red plague havebeen replaced by detached, objectiveanalysis of the bacillus through high-pow¬ered microscopes in the impersonal atmos¬phere of the laboratory. There is no doubtthat the patient (China, in this instance) issick, the only problem is noting the symp¬toms and plotting the course of the dis¬ease. This approach I call the “diagnostic”approach and is the academic equivalentof the U.S. policy of quarantining (“con¬taining”) China.All of these problems crop up in China inCrisis, an impressive compilation pre¬dominantly consisting of most of what isbest in contemporary China scholarship. Itconsists of 28 papers by leading Americanauthorities on China, presented at the in¬augural conference of the Center for Pol¬icy Study at the University of Chicago.Each paper is followed by comments fromone or more of the other participants inthe conference. Most of the authors havebeen carefully chosen. Who better, for ex¬ample, to guide us through the intricatelabyrinth of warlord and KMT politicsthan Professor C. Martin Wilbur? Amongthe other eminent contributors are suchwell-known names as Franz Schurmann,Benjamin I. Schwarz and Chalmers John¬son. The result is a combination of detailedand up-to-date information with generaldiscussion on a very high level of com¬petence.For the first three papers comprising thebulk of Volume I, the reyieiyer can onlyrecord his admiration. As introduction,there is ’kfi elegant essay V by Prolessor Ping-ti Ho on “Salient Features of China’sHeritage,” which judiciously presentsthose aspects of traditional China mosthelpful to an understanding of the present:the unique blending of quasi-religiousideology with political forms which con¬stituted the neo-Confucian-Legalist state;the varying degree of social mobility; thetradition of autocracy; and the complexand enigmatic role of military power. Afurther extensive paper on 19th centuryChina and the fall of the Ch’ing is providedby Professor Kwang-Ching Liu, 4n whichthe author takes a fresh look at the inter¬action between internal developments andWestern influence and appears to regardthe latter as decisive, but in an intellectualsense (in contrast with the Communistview which sees the material impact asdecisive). Finally, there is Professor Wil¬bur’s excellent dissection of the Republi¬can Period.Thereafter, however, we are dealingsolely with Communist China, which is thebook’s chief concern, of course. And it ishere that the trouble begins. For we arenot only passing from one period to anoth¬er — the particularly tricky transitionfrom past history to contemporary history,with the attendant problems of lack of per¬spective — but from one discipline to an¬other, that is from history to sociology. Noone can doubt that there has been an im¬mense increase of sophistication in mod¬ern Chinese studies in recent years, andthat this is largely associated with Profes¬sor Schurmann’s epoch-making book on or¬ganization and ideology. This is all to thegood and has added new dimensions to ev¬eryone’s thinking on China and Communistaffairs generally. Nor do I wish to identifythe sociological approach with the “diag¬nostic” approach I mentioned earlier.Lepst of. all do I wish to disparage Profes¬sor Schuj>#hi)^l|QiWb,colitribtdf0D to Chinain >Griate, which is as wide1 and thoughtful as one would expect it to be. It is just thatthe sociological analysis of Chinese Com¬munism as a system appears to me to besubject to certain grave drawbacks.First, there is the rather hollow, dis¬embodied character of Weberian sociolo¬gical analysis. To compensate for this, acomparative treatment at least is re¬quired. One of the strengths of Schur¬mann’s book (as of his present paper) ishis ability to make frequent comparisonswith the Soviet Union. (Not that com¬parisons need necessarily be with the So¬viet Union — comparisons with other un¬derdeveloped countries, India, for example— would be of considerable interest). Sec¬ondly, there is the need for some kind ofphysical contest. Scarcity of hard informa¬tion about China combined, I suspect, withCold War attitudes, appears to tempt theobserver into a bleak concentration on thesystem, to the exclusion of all else, and theresult is a rather wooden model. Finally,such an analysis must, in view of our igno¬rance of what goes on in the highest coun¬cils of the Party, rest on some assump¬tions which are, in the last analysis, un¬justifiable.Thus, Professor Tang Tsou’s paper,while it contains many sound judgmentsand clever insights, is in the main unsat¬isfying. He interprets the last 20 years interms of the necessity of institutionalizingcharismatic leadership. Mao, the agingguerilla warrior, is attempting, with theCultural Revolution, to impose the Yenaneconomic model on a modern, industrial¬izing nation in the teeth of resistance bypragmatic technocrats headed by LiuShao-ch’i. Two of Professor Tsou’s pointsare developed by Professors ChalmersJohnson and John Wilson Lewis. The for¬mer, comparing the Yenan period with theSocialist Education Campaign of the early‘rixtiqs, -argues that the massline workediin Yenan because the people were basical¬ ly anti-Japanese but cannot work now asthe people are not basically socialist. Thisanalysis of the Yenan period seems to meto do less than justice to Professor John¬son’s own excellent book on the subject.Professor Lewis argues that Mao and Liuhave always, since Yenan, fulfilled theroles of “charismatic leader” and “com¬missar” (i.e. practical administrator) andhas this to say of Mao’s role at Yenan:“Mao as leader played a magical or char¬ismatic role rather than one of concretedecision-making.” Surely this is, at theleast, an overstatement! If Professor Tsouteetered on the brink of the diagnostic ap¬proach, his two colleagues have plungedheadlong. For surely there is a physicalcontext which influences if it does notwholly determine policies in Peking. Ad¬mittedly our knowledge of this context isimperfect, but this should modify analysesand not be ignored in favour of model¬building. It is left to Professor Michel Ok-senberg, in his all too brief comments onLewis’s paper, to broaden the discussionby introducing more concrete factors aswell as providing some fascinating andprovocative ideas which I should haveliked to see developed. Bureaucracy doesconstitute a particular problem in China(as in European Communist countrieswhere it is recognized as such by Westernanalysts.) It is hard to see Liu Shao-ch’i,Teng Hsiao-p’ing, et al. as “moderates”.And lastly, as Oksenberg points out, “thekeys which unlock the doors to economicdevelopment have yet to be discovered”.And such is the state of economic data onChina available to us that we should bedoubly hesitant about jumping to con¬clusions about what economic policy toback in China. The Cultural Revolution is,at least in part, an attempt to deal withreal economic and social problems ofgreat complexity and an extended treat¬ment of it from this angle would have beenwelcome. As it is we have to make do withisolated fragmentary insights, including,however, a very interesting short paper byFrancis L. K. Hs’u on the persistance ofkinship patterns as a factor in regional bu¬reaucracy.On the economic side, there is one pa¬per, followed by extensive comments, byTa-Chung Liu on the analysis and inter¬pretation of available data. This undoubt¬edly performs a service, but this field ofenquiry is a quagmire where even the ex¬pert may founder —and such is the dis¬agreement among them that a good num¬ber must, alas, as more information comesto light. Thus, Alexander Eckstein’s sub¬sequent exercise in model building ap¬pears to be rather over-ambitious, underthe circumstances.As regards China’s foreign policy, exten¬sively reviewed in Volume II of China inCrisis, the central question here is to whatextent can China be regarded as dan¬gerous, aggressive or “expansionist.” Un¬til recently, Vietnam was regarded as thesupreme example of Chinese aggression. Itis now generally realized that this positionis no longer tenable and indeed was neveranything more than a political shibboleth.This emerges quite clearly from this vol¬ume, except for the paper devoted to Viet¬nam, which can quickly be disposed of.This paper, by Roger Hilsman, is followedby comments from Professor Morton A.Kaplan, both former advisors to the U.S.administration. The result is a sterile andj embittered quarrel over '«apportioning. / r 5 d >. (Continued on Poefe? 1$) c s 1 11Mots d'Heures: Gousses, Rames. Thed'Antin Manuscript, dicovered, editedand annotated by Luis d'Antin vanRooten, Grossman Publishers, $3.95.by MARTHA MOCKA friend of mine was once describing amovie he had seen about Dylan Thomas.Being a member of the cash nexus he wasparticularly struck by a scene in which avery distinguished British literateur and afriend of Dylan’s was recounting some oftheir conversations together. The subjectof one such discussion was the hypotheti¬cal question — how many white micewould it take to pull a freight train fromManchester to London in the span of oneday? I am sure my friend would be evenmore astounded by the same manner ofsuperfluous mental endeavor coming froma New York compatriot of his, Mr. Luisd’Antin van Rooten, author of Motsd’Heures: Gousses, Rames. As for me, Ican think of little more satisfying than towaste my valuable time wallowing throughthis little book. But wjiat’s sauce for thegoose is not sauce for the gander, or how¬ever that little saying goes, excusing thepun.To the unsuspecting reader, however, atfirst glance the book would hardly seemlight reading — a newly-discovered, post¬humous and fragmentary manuscript of anunpublished and undatable French poet.The title itself forbodes of undecipherableeclectics, and we must rely on Mr. vanRooten’s diligent research and insightfulcommentary for this translation and ex¬planation:“Mots d’Heures,” “Words of theHours.” A more poetic title than themore familiar ‘Book of Hours.’ A reli¬gious or philosophic background is tac¬itly indicated by the title, Gousses,Rames. A “Gousse” is a clove or sec¬tion, as in the bulb of the garlic plant.We can therefore assume that this im¬plies “Root and Branch,” or a com¬plete unity.Furthermore, the poetry itself is almostnon-sensical, requiring heavy annotation(rother in the manner of Pale Fire to rend¬er the “proper” meaning out of its crypticand involute syntax. And finally, to a na¬tive sepaker of French it would be thegreatest torture to listen to the murderous¬ly Germanicized accent of his belovedFrench. However, the fact of the matter isthat (1) the book was last of all intendedfor a Frenchman; (2) the poetry is nothingif not childish nonsense; (3) the annotationhas not only physical kinship to Mr. Nabo¬kov’s book, for underneath it, in a some¬what differing sense and spirit, is theunderstanding that the final interpretationand definitive clarification of the text isleft to the individual reader; and (4) ourreader might soon find the book as acces¬sible and familiar to him as soup de jour.This especially if he follows Mr. van Root¬en’s motherly advice:The most fascinating quality ofthese verses is found upon readingthem aloud in the sonorous, mea¬sured classic style made famousby the Comedie Francaise at theturn of the century ... ; thesepoems then assume a strangely fa¬miliar, almost nostalgic, homelyquality.In other words, the phoneme is mightierthan the lexicon. Without giving away fur¬ther the secret I want to quote one of myfavorite verses and its full translation asgiven by the author. Try it and see whatyou make of it:Reine, Reine, guex eveille.Gomme a gaine, en horreur, taie.orQueen, Queen, arouse the rabbleWho use their girdles, horrors, as pil¬low slips.Actually this sort of linguistic pre¬cociousness is not unique with Mr. vanRooten. I can immediately think of at leasttwo comparable excursions (by English¬men, however) into semantic tomfoolery.One is Anthony Burgess’s A Clockwork Or¬ange, in which he mesmerizes commonRussian words into Anglicized slang, oftenwith both comic and sinister resulte. For\ 1 ‘.,$0 \ J O .ti« v ) example, the Russian word for people,Liudi, becomes “lewdies” and the word forgood, Khorosho, becomes “horrowshow.”The second comparison I had in mind isthe song by Donovan, “Jennifer, Juniper.”Disregarding for the rhoment the coinci¬dence of the two languages involved, thissong best approximates the innocent, play¬ful spirit of van Rooten’s word games.There is in both poets a childish delight inlanguage as object, unattached to anygreater significance than its own integralbeauty and fascinating charm. As such, Ifind Mr. van Rooten’s choice of the nur¬sery rhyme genre, apart from its popu¬larity, an extremely appropriate one. Thisfeeling for language as language, ofcourse, can be labelled decadent. Yet Iwould doubt that Mr. van Rooten or Dono¬van (Mr. Nabokov would be an exceptionhere) insist on any profound truth for theirplaythings. Rather, they momentarily en¬rich and refresh us through one of themost noble and inexhaustible of ourgifts — language. And theirs is the kind oftreatment that language deserves andrarely gets in our programmatized and un-frivolous society.If you haven’t figured out the puzzle bynow, you’re a ten-o’clock scholar. Now trythis one just for fun:L’ile deja accomee ...Satinees cornees ...Y diner guerisse masse bailie . ..II se taquine costumeset ne poule d’aout des plumesEt ne ses doight des gouttes beauxemaille.Mr. van Rooten’s commentary to this, asto each, is sheer delight. His careful depthstudy of this fragment has evolved the fol¬lowing interpretation;The (lord of the) island alreadyhas horns. This would seem a re¬hash of the old Tristam and Iseultlegend; however, it is so frag¬mentary that positive identi¬fication is impossible.“Satiny corneas” for velveteyes,” obviously a partial descrip¬tion of the lady in the case.Yawns help digent a heavy din¬ner: a thumbnail sketch of thedull, lethargic husband.He was teased about his clothes.He was not only dull, but sloppyand inelegant.He looked like a moulting chick¬en in August.She wore nail polish! An inter¬esting revelation of the antiquity ofcosmetics. The Egyptians usedenamel-like paints, the Chinese,jeweled guards. The timeless uni¬versality of nail decoration, alas,gives us no clue as to the possibledate of these verses.There are some forty of these witticisms.Each holds a new enchantment and anoth¬er chuckle. I, for one, was sorry to come to“Tiens, de.”Miss Mock is a graduate student in Rus¬sian literature at New York University.AmericanTheatreIn TroublePerforming Arts: The Economic Dliem-ma: A Study of Problems Common toTheater, Opera, Music, and Dance (ATwentieth Century Fund Study), byWilliam J. Baumol and William G.Bowen, M.l.T. paperback, 582 pp.,$3.95.Theater in America: The Impact ofEconomic Forces, 1870-1967, by JackPoggi, Cornell, 328 pp., $9.50.by CLIFF MAYThe state of the Performing Arts inAmerica today is critical. It is afflictedwith a chronic economic disease that nei¬ther rest nor the occasional shot in thearm of an ecxeptional work of art can• dur^. Performing Arts:1 The( Economic* m t i i ' 'j i s > i) »i i £ t-t ■ r (■ i i ? jThe Chicago Literary Review May, 1969 ' • M* » I Mi . I » •* I t I t n * * t > I i <1 Clft » » ** V L’ IThe Chicago Literary ReviewTABLE OF CONTENTSChina P*9« 1Spring Books P*9* 2American Theater Economy P*9e 2Mots d'Heures P«9« 2Orwell's Essays P*9# 2Fiction P*9* 4Israel and the Arabs P*9# 5Harding in His Times page 8Rock P«9® 7Economy page ®Le Defi P«9« ® Guatemala: Occupied Country ... page 9Lenin's Last Struggle ... Page 9Porno page 12StaffShining Light Richard L. SnowdenEditors Richard HackOary HoustonBob GriessEdwin AndersonRick PollackDave PotterDilemma is a thorough statistical diag¬nosis of. the modern theater’s situation.The study explores in fullest depth a tragicsituation that seems to stem directly fromthe economic structure of the living artsthemselves. The facts uncovered by Bau¬mol and Bowen are clear. In recent yearsonly the Broadway theater has come any¬where close to showing a profit. Giant Artsorganizations such as the Metropolitan Op¬era run deficits of up to $1,500,000 eachseason. American dance organizations areextremely impoverished, and rely on thesupport of a few wealthy individuals andfoundations for their short performing sea¬sons. Orchestras, regional theaters andOff-Broadway offer no encouragement ei¬ther.What’s the cause of this condition? Com¬petition from mass media, the most ob¬vious reason, is certainly an importantfactor, but more surprisingly, the majorcauses of the theater’s decline seem tohave originated with the theater’s earlyeconomic development. Espousing this the¬ory (as it relates to other dramatic theateronly), is Jack Poggi’s Theater in America:The Impact of Economic Forces, 1870-1967,which traces the theater’s problems fromtheir genesis. Poggi states:What happened to the theater after1870 was not very different from whathappened in other industries. First, acentralized production system re¬placed local, isolated units. Second,there was a division of labor, as the¬ater-managing became separate fromplay-producing. Third, there was astandardization of product, as eachplay was represented by only one com¬pany or by a small number of com¬panies. Fourth, there was a growth ofcontrol by big business.Theater in America is nicely written andfor the most part reads like a novel, withthe theater as sort of a tragic hero whoseodyssey and adventures at the hands ofmercenary businessmen and occasionalangelic artists is followed to moderntimes. The story is an interesting one andwell supplemented by the much more thor¬ough and academic character study of thesame hero provided in the PerformingArts: The Economic Dilemma.The tragic flaw of the hero, we discover,is that he can’t support himself. And ac¬cording to the material provided in the twobooks, our hero’s predicament is becomingworse. Baumol and Bowen estimate thatby 1975 the difference between annual op¬erating costs and income in the Per¬forming Arts will have reached $60,000,000.This deficit will have to be made up some¬how if the theater is to survive.So far the living arts have relied mainlyon subsidies from patrons and foundations.Even Broadway has. to rely in great mea¬sure upon “angels” who invest not somuch to earn a profit, but rather for thepsychic pleasure of participation in thetheater. The frightening fact is that in thenot atypical season of 1966-67 there wereonly thirty new non-musical plays pro¬duced on Broadway compared with overtwo hundred in 1927. Of the thirty onlytwenty were American, and only threewere financial successes.In addition, ticket prices have been ris¬ing, mediocrity abounds, and actors’ sala¬ries, along with the salaries of all per¬formers, have grown smaller in relation toprice levels and the wages of workers inother occupations. Half the actors onBroadway have incomes under $2,500 ayear. Only 3% earn over $25,000. Play¬wrights areSuffering from pecunfafy prob-I :: < ff 4 ■ h ^ -! I :: ■ i 1 < t , / 3 1 ^ 1-1 . f lems that are at least as great; the medianannual income for playwrights is about$684.Then what of the “cultural boom” wehear so much about? Much of it is exag¬gerated, and much of it relates to amateurtheatrical activity, but basically audiencestoday are not much larger than they werein the past. More importantly, audiencesfor ail the major art forms are still drawnfrom a small segment of the population.Today’s average theater-goer is about thir¬ty-five years old, earns approximately$10,000 a year, holds at least one collegedegree and is very likely involved in teach¬ing or one of the other professions.Perhaps the reason that only about 2 percent of the population attend the theaterrelated to the relative expense involvedwhen compared to the variety of entertain¬ment offered by the mass media. Perhapsmost of the community has just not beengiven an opportunity to appreciate thePerforming Arts. Maybe also the Per¬forming Arts have limited mass appealand are, as Poggi suggests, “a handmadeitem in a mass-produced society.”Whatever the cause of the situation, pro¬ducers recognize their audience for what itis and although there have been somefeeble attempts to reach “the masses,” thePerforming Arts in general are directedtowards their present audience. As a resultthere is a long way to go before the Ameri¬can theater can be said to belong to thepeople.Although these books provide an ex¬cellent study of the illness afflicting thePerforming Arts today, neither suggeststhe cure. Baumol and Bowen propose gov¬ernment support as one viable means ofarresting the disease, and Poggi also con¬cludes that greater subsidies are neces¬sary, but all three authors admit theyknow of no panacea for the salvation ofAmerican theatrical culture.Mr. May, a graduate of the High Schoolof Performing Arts, is presently a firstyear student at New York University ma¬joring in English literature.SPRINGFICTIONJerome Charyn, American Scrapbook,Viking, 177p., $4.95. Concerns deten¬tion of Japanese-Americans in WW IIDanilo Dolci, The Man Who Plays Alone— The Story of One Man's Fight Againstthe Sicilian Mafia, Pantheon, 367p.,$7.95.Yury Dombrovsky, The Keeper of Anti¬quities, McGraw-Hill, 271 p., $6.95. Con¬cerns rural Russia of late '30s.Jose Maria Gironella, Peace After War,Knopf, 774p., $10. Set in Catalonia,1939 to the end of 1941.John Hawkes, Lunar Landscapes, NewDirections, 275p., $5.95. Stories andshort novels.Chester Himes, Blind Man With a Pistol,Morrow, 240p., $4.95.Doris Lessing, The Four-Gated City,Knopf, 614p., $7.50. “This is the fifthand last volume of the series Children ofViolence." — D.L.Ross Macdonald, The Goodbye Look,Knopf, 243p., $4.95.' 1 * 1 c -^v Continued on Patfe5)i fi-il; r if it <jv .The First ManTo Cry'Pig!'The Collected Essays, Journalism andLetters of George Orwell. Edited bySonia Orwell and Ian Angus. FourVolumes. Harcourt, Brace & World.by FRANK BARBERHistory, with its baneful tendency to car¬icature, has been unkind to George Or¬well. We who were young, or unborn, inthe World War II years met Orwell, theauthor of two entertaining political novels;one with pigs, the other with a plausiblyterrific dystopia; and soon dropped him infavor of Salinger or someone closer to ournwn realities. Since 1984 and Animal Farmbelong to the popular culture of adoles¬cence — for proof, consider how oftenyoung adults refer knowingly to the titlesof these two books, and how seldom theydiscuss any of the ideas the books contain— Orwell has turned into a sort of second-class culture hero. This is a graveyardpost for any writer. It almost insures hisbecoming dated and eventually forgotten.The last generation, in its own way, hasbeen equally unfriendly to Orwell. Despitethe compliments they have paid him, evengoing so far as to call him “the conscienceof his generation,” our elders now usuallydismiss Orwell as a rather limited politicalwriter; sensitive, of course, but too full ofspleen and contraction to be worth ouradmiration today. One example is MaryMcCarthy’s piece in a recent New YorkReview (January 30) which treats Orwellas a headstrong “curmudgeon,” who, set¬ting aside a few good traits, had too smalla mind to handle coherently the socialproblems of his age and (she guesses)ours.True enough; but we go wrong when weexpect of Orwell something different fromwhat he intended to give us. Orwell wasnot, for one thing, primarily a novelist.The more Aesthetic the literary form, infact, the less apt Orwell’s talent—as aglance at his few poems will show. Norwas he a political theorist of any weight.He was a partisan journalist throughouthis writing life, and as such he should bejudged.But the judging is a delicate matter.Partisans are always subject to mis¬representation by those not of their party.While he was alive Orwell was heartilydisliked not only by the right, as one ex¬pects, but by much of the left, especiallyhis Communist countrymen. The reason,which further complicates things, is thatOrwell’s party was himself his, own beliefs,and experiences. Though it at first soundslike the height of arrogance, this fact isunderstandable if we look at Orwell’s up¬bringing. By birth and education he be¬longed to the literate middle class. Thus,while there was little chance of his becom¬ing a hack newspaper reporter, had otherthings been equal Orwell might well havefound a similarly routine vocation—t h eclergy, perhaps (as he once suggested), orschool teaching: something with morestatus but no visibility. That he hit on po¬litical writing at all was accidental. Thetwo main causes seem to be Orwell’s yearsof self-imposed poverty during the late’twenties and early ’thirties which theunderwent without much in mind beyondcuriosity and a certain nostalgie de la boue—and his unexpected tour of duty with theCatalonian POUM militia in 1936-37. Thesecourses in applied politics gave Orwell mo¬tives, and credentials as well, for years offurther inquiry and writing. Timing wasimportant, too. By the time Orwell hadseveral books out and had begun to publishregularly in magaiznes, the war was set tobegin. The pressure of events and the in¬tensified political feelings of the timecreated Orwell’s audience for him. Insteadof backsliding into literary chitchat tingedwith oldfashioned muckraking, Orwell wasdrawn into current events and obliged, ashe saw it, to interpret the headline newsby his own lights: Eton, Paris-London-North Country slums, and Barcelona.Orwell was anything but a systematizer.A partisan^£*s spur to writing was (as hesaid) a sense of outrage, rather than a more abstracted desire for utopian cleanli¬ness. Outrage developed into a habit ofmind condenses into idees fixes, and so inOrwell we find no internally consistent the¬ories, but a few ideas which he elaboratedupon, as directed by thought, experience,and the occasion for which he was writing.The present collection of Orwell’s shortpieces, most of which first appeared inEnglish or American left-wing periodicals,shows in detail how his ideas grew from1928 until his death in 1950. Together, thefour volumes supply enough careful, solidwriting to prove that Orwell was neitherjust an adequate novelist nor just the au¬thor of a few startling books of social re¬portage. What is most surprising is therange of things Orwell took interest in.Books of all kinds and the publishing in¬dustry as a whole fascinated him, not sur¬prisingly. But he also loved the things ofnature, and the names by which they werecalled. Words’ sound values, atmospheresof places, accents, and vocabulariespleased him. And closed idea-systems —Catholicism, Communism, snobbism, andthe rest — appealed to him as important takes readqpyyn a^guided tou^^fougji hisworking mind. His periodical writing illus¬trates Orwell’s well-known adage that“good prose is like a window pane.” Hiswriting is a window, tinted and flawed, tobe sure, but not scrawled upon with thedistracting marks of self-promotion andconceit that, in other authors, obscure thethought however much they build the im¬age. One has the feeling that he is con¬fident in his words. Far from hiding in am¬biguous, suggestive, or pretty language, heuses exact words for exact thinking. And ifthe result sounds offensive, it may be be¬cause hard words naturally give more of¬fense than euphemisms. This is not to ex¬cuse Orwell’s frequently quarrelsomemanner, which plainly delights in provok¬ing readers by rudely denouncing some¬thing they value. But we should rememberthat this is an occupational disease amongintellectuals, and we may wish that otherwriters would expose their bitchiness ascandidly as Orwell did:Even if when I met you I had nothappened to like you (he wrote toStephen Spender), I should stillhave been bound to change my at¬titude, because when you meetanyone in the flesh you realize im¬mediately that he is a humanbeing not a sort of caricaturefoci for human fear and intolerance. Heespecially liked to tinker with ideas repug¬nant to him. Dali’s necrophilia and Englishantisemitism, for instance, both intriguedhim; not because he was swayed by either,but because he itched to know whyirrationality, that elusive constant of socialaffairs, took on those particular forms.Orwell’s journalism and essays alsodemonstrate how involved with his life washis art. Like his thinking, his writings arenever quite finished. There are alwaysquestions, suggestions not followed up.Many of his pieces read like the notes of awriter gathering material for sometwentieth-century equivalent of a Dickensnovel — a novel that cannot be writtenbecause the social surroundings changetoo rapidly. To understand the lives of lit¬erary men we often turn to their letters.There we find the author at his ease, tell¬ing his friends the things he never told us,betraying facts about his tastes and habits,conceiving projects we ordinarily see onlyin finished form — exposing the lowernine-tenths of the iceberg. Not so with Or¬well. His letters for the most part makedull reading, and we may leave the ex¬egesis of their concealed brilliance to fu¬ture graduate students. In his essays,though, and his chat columns (“As IPlease”) Orwell reveals himself at every&BW ffepfckfjfighK-phagesif^p^ergl¬uons, debates with nimself, and generally embodying certain ideas. It ispartly for this reason that I don’tmix much in literixy circles, be¬cause I know from experience thatone I have met & spoken toanyone I shall never again be ab;eto show any intellectual brutalitytowards him, even when I feel thatI ought to.In his essay “Why I Write,” where the“window pane” idea appears, Orwell alsohands us a statement of his main ideefixe: “Every line of serious work that Ihave written since 1936 lias been written,directly or indirectly, against total¬itarianism and for democratic socialism,as I understand it.” This is a bit hard toswallow. First, the pomposity of the claimtaken by itself is indigestible. And then theseveral undefined terms leave us in therealm of bald abstraction that Orwell sohated. But, with the collection of his shortpieces at hand, we can establish the truthof his claim and, while we’re at it, betterunderstand the many meanings those ismshad for him.Included under “totalitarianism are notonly the obvious facts of Orwell’s lifetime— Fascism, Stalinism, and all they implyof lying oppression, and mass slaughter —but facts derived from Orwell’s own ideauof history., TJiis, ftstofjcal, yievy, ^tych, (Sqqnp*; ponjifnoner) ^moi^ tiwlppglish , tjianus, puts the twentieth century on a direct ^hg of development bbgitytiQg with the In¬dustrial Revolution. While America was(as it still is) at a loss to explain this cen¬tury — Haven’t we still got a frontiersomewhere? Vietnam, perhaps? — Orwellnoticed that industrialization and empire¬building, modern England’s two main oc¬cupations, imply the alienation of workerfrom work, the perversion of religious andpatriotic feeling, standardization, humanengineering, and the rest of the horrorswhich have flowered in our time. Seen thisway, totalitarianism is more than c pe¬jorative one tacks onto a government par¬ty. It is a tendency that runs through all ofsociety’s life.Thus we find Orwell disturbed by weakbeer, bread-and-margarine diets, andmass-produced literature — not simply be¬cause he was nostalgic but because to himthese were effects of a pervasive socialtrend toward low-quality standardization.We hear Orwell outraged by fashion of allsorts, not just because the fashions are nothis own but because often they stem fromthe folly of pretending to innovate whileactually re-labelling the long worn-out.There is, as many have pointed out, a gooddeal of Cobbett in all this, a yearning forthe unresurrectible, somewhat idealizedpast. But it is worth remembering that theprogress of technology breeds better ma¬chines, not necessarily better men. And,in the short run, history can lead to max¬imum social orderliness, meanwhile re¬taining the corruptions of former societies:unnecessary suffering and individual pow¬erlessness.History can lead in that direction. But itdoes not have to. For an alternative Orvellproposed his own modest sort of Socialism.This is not the utopian brand (drink mintjuleps and let the computers do the rest),which Orwell scorned as “hedonism.” Noris it the kind dear to the minds of all whosay: “People have been pushed around toolong. I’ll push them around once more —but this time for good.” Instead, Orwellhad the more practical idea of going a stepat a time toward a better society. One,give everyone enough to eat. Two, takesurplus income from the rich and give itto the poor. Three, nationalize industry andland. This is, of course, a paraphrase. InThe Lion and the Unicom, printed in thepresent collection, Orwell says it differ¬ently and more completely. The primaryconcern, in any case is unmistakable. Helppeople first. The value of an economy de¬pends on the sort of people it lets flourish:We are selfish in economic mat¬ters because we all live in terror ofpoverty. But when a commodity isnot scarce, no one tries to grabmore than his fair share ot it. Noone tries to make a corner in air,for instance. . .So also with anyother kind of goods. If they weremade plentiful, as they so easilymight be, there is no reason tothink that the supposed acquisitiveinstincts of the human being couldnot be bred out in a couple of gen¬erations.Beneath this qualified optimism, of course,runs the conviction that man (as Swiftsaid) is not a rational animal, but one ca¬pable of reason. Take away technology,recreate scarcity of vital products, andback come the acquisitive instincts with avengeance. But while we have what we do,why not use the rational capacity andspread things around more evenly?This is rank reformism, as surely Orwellwas told more than once during his life.And taken together with Orwell’s patri¬otism — his attachment to the objects andcustoms peculiar to his country — it dis¬gusts sophisticates of all types. But, as¬suming the world needs changing, whereelse do we begin? Today’s answers appearto be broadly of two kinds. “We begin atonce ... in five or ten years.” Or, “Revo¬lution!” Neither answer, though, takes ac¬count of present necessity and ultimatesuccess; and as long as we’re asked tochoose between Nixonian capitalism anddecayed Marxism-Leninism, we had bestturn down both.Very well, Exectly how do we begin, tak¬ing Orwell’s advice, to work change? Thisquestion hits Orwell’s weakest spot, for his, y^iting/yi (Eqonwiicsafifi jt^spcipl, ejects, ignpyes, thq fcli, .pr,o|oup<jjy (^uragjng(Continued on Page 11)May, 1969 The Chicago Literary ReviewTyrant Teasers C ?.!,* \ .‘X '•>The Battle Of Silence, by Vercors (JeanBruller), Translated from the French byRita Barisse, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston,286 pages, $5.95.The Ragazzi, by Pier Paolo Pasolini,translated from the Italian by EmileCapouya, Grove Press, 256 pages,$6.95.Z, by Vassilis Vassilikos, translatedfrom the Greek by Marilyn Calmann,Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 405 pages,$6.95.by LINDA KEISTER (HOWE)Each of the above, two novels and amemoir, finds its subject, more or less, inthe history of the last world war. Viewedtogether they afford the reader some sug¬gestions about the relationship betweenpolitics and imaginative fiction. Mostpeople recognize that an historical subjectcan take on political implications when itis treated in certain ways, but it is alsotrue that both the mere choice of a subjector the mere act of writing can under cer¬tain circumstances be construed as politi¬cal acts. Reading these three books in¬creases one’s awareness of the seriousnessof the proposition that the artist cancreate a real threat to the state’s powerwith his artistic productions. Z is now ban¬ned in Greece; The Ragazzi, though notovertly political, produced a storm of con¬ 15, forces himself to turn his back whileone of his friends drowns in those samerapids — “Be better to beat it out ofhere. . .1 got to look out for Riccetto.” Be¬tween these two episodes abound noise,high spirits, thievery, hunger, violence,and the subtle terrors of poverty.Perhaps the name, Pier Paolo Pasolini,sounds familiar to some: it belongs to themaker of The Bicycle Thief: In this fiction,Pasolini has with surprising, though notunqualified, success managed to transferto writing many of the techniques of film-making. As though he were using a cam¬era, the writer focuses his attention onparticular things, crowding the memorywith images in an attempt to create thesense of an over-abundance of the rawmaterials of life, of the litter and falsegaiety that accompany ten people living ina single room. The technique is objectiveand episodic. The author views bothpeople and things solely from the outside,as though, like his characters themselves,he hardly dares to trespass on the turbu¬lence lurking beneath the surface of life. Astrange silence hovers over the whole jum¬bled array, resting only momentarily be¬fore one scene fades into another: thecrumbling of a schoolhouse, a boy tiedwhimpering to a stake and set on fire, amotorcade of soldiers rumbling over thetroversy when it first appeared in Italy;and The Battle of Silence records the art¬ist’s acts of resistance in occupied France.These three books vary in political intent,and each, as art, is valuable and inter¬esting in its own right. Together they dem¬onstrate the range of possible political ac¬tion open to the artists, while at the sametime asserting the essential freedom andintegrity of an art that remains outsideany specific political doctrine.The ragazzi are the street boys, theyoung toughs, who haunt the slums ofRome. This novel-like fiction concerns Ric¬cetto and his friends and follows them asthey cavort upon the crooked sireets andterrorize shopkeepers and citizens. Thebook’s rather subtle development movesbetween the two syu.jolic scenes thatframe the action of the fiction: Riccetto,aged 9, leaps from a boat amid the jeersof his friends to save a swallow drowning rire the rapids of the AnienC; Riccetto, 'aged,.<4 FdS re6 bridge as the Americans arrive to “liber¬ate” the city. And the ragazzi fill the si¬lence with a continuous barrage of obsce¬nities: only occasionally does the realcurse break out:It is difficult to talk about this book atall, much less as it resembles a politicalact. And yet the very choice to protraypoverty in all its ugliness and brutalitymay be construed as a criticism of thesociety that has condemned these peopleto an inhuman life. Poverty stifles in theseboys any instinct towards human descen-cy, tenderness, or truth: Riccetto must“look out for Riccetto” if he means to en¬dure. So too, stealing, violence, and thegame of toughness, become for them mat¬ters of survival. It’s a disheartening book,for the ragazzi are, in the end, defeated bythe very conditions that have made themragazzi. Any positive political thought that *may aHse 'from tfifls book iS gfeheratetf by*k-' xrfi j.V-j Am i rr :> t<>\ i.rjtThe Chicago Literary Review May, 1969 the desire to loose the sublimated love, tofind a way out of the blind alley.Z too is a novel about the poor and theexploited for whom the ways of freedomare restricted, and yet, Vassilikos suggeststhat all is not gloom and defeat. Self-inter¬est has not completely deadened the hu¬man instinct towards truth, nor will menbe completely subdued by the brutal pres¬sures of circumstances: poor men, thoughweak, do fight back.The novel’s plot is based on the politi¬cal murder of Gregory Lambrakis, a so¬cialist deputy in the Greek Parliamentwho was assassinated in 1963 while speak¬ing at a pacifist rally in Salonika. Al¬though the author has carefully studiedand absorbed all accounts of the murderand of the trial proceedings afterwards,his major aim is not just to present a re¬cital of what happened, but to portray theeffect of the murder upon the people who,either by chance or by design, became itswitnesses.Labourers of the town are forced bythe circumstances of poverty to tradetheir brawn for the protection of the policedepartment, without whose license theyare unable to get work, keep a shop, orlive in a decent apartment. These are thestrong men who foment the mob violenceand perform the assassination of Z thatoccur during the police instigated counter-demonstration. It is because the policeseem to distribute the necessities for lifethat they are able to command the com¬plicity of the labourers in their right-wingplots. Yet, with the assassination of Z, theorganization misfires, arousing instead thesleeping conscience of the people.A working man happens to witness the“accident,” and not realizing that he isviolating the wishes of the very police hewants to help, he leaps onto the truck thathas just run over the deputy. The politicalimplications of his act become clear onlyas it is revealed that the “accident” wasno accident at all, but the final act in aconspiracy to undermine the power of theleft.Here, then, is the novelist’s subject:the emergence of the truth from the bar¬rage of government and right-wing propa¬ganda that muddle and distort each newfact as it is revealed. Although the con¬spiratorial chains reach to the highest lev¬els of the government, Vassilikos focuseshis attention on the lower rungs: thestrong men who carried out the violencesuddenly find themselves the scapegoatsfor their trusted protectors: the casualwitnesses move from apathy to action asthey see the officials and newspapers inwhich they once had faith, exaggerate anddistort events they themselves saw takeplace. Frustration and desperation gripthe reader, too, as he watches in horrorthe total remaking of events to suit politi¬cal interests.The novel is extremely well-plotted.Although the beginning seems fragmented,leaping from scene to scene and characterto character, as the plot proceeds, a care¬ful pattern emerges from the “accidental”structure. Relationships, events, charac¬ters are pulled together like the scatteredlimbs of Osiris, until the outlines of asingle truth appear. In the artistic tech¬nique, too, appears a pattern. Vassilikosalternates between a straight narration ofevents and the inner, almost poetic, dia¬logue of various characters as they eachattempt to determine the personal mean¬ing of the assassination. He clothes a pub¬lic political act with subjective and univer¬sal human meaning: Z was not only a so¬cialist, but a man, a leader, a hero, aswell.Vassilikos surely demonstrates thepossible power of a political novel. His fic¬tion presents an almost irrefutable argu¬ment that truth in Greece resides on theleft. It is impossible, for instance, to un¬dermine his point by declaring he has mis¬taken historical details, for he may alwaysjustly retort that such is the liberty of theartist; details, as long as they correspondto the demands of the fiction, need onlyresemble the actual occurrences of his¬tory. And thus evolves the enormous pow¬er of the novel: because its focus is notfragmented by the contingencies of theparticular moment in history, it can directreflection towards the , eternal meanings ,emtottfebVtM'mornerit *'" *!2T•!if'E • I-M’JTo f O'J j-I Ol'v-r; !< >'7g‘>!; it i In a way, this was also the discoveryof Jean BruHer when he wrote The' Silenceof the Sea. Convinced that the Nazi pres¬ence in France brought to bear politicaldemands and pressures that were stifflingthe traditional freedoms and artistic integ¬rity of the French writer, Bruller deter¬mined to break his silence of noncomplic¬ity and to reassert to the world beyondFrance that all Frenchmen had not com¬promised their art to Nazi propaganda.The Silence of the Sea is a simple storythat powerfully asserts the continuation ofhuman dignity in spite of invasion, surren¬der, and the enemy’s subtle psychologicalinveiglements. The story involves aFrenchman and his niece in whose homeis sheltered a German officer. In returnfor the officer’s affable and artistic con¬versation praising French culture, the“hosts” offer only their silence, for tospeak would be to acknowledge the just¬ness of the conqueror. Although this storycontains no overt political “message,” thevery act of writing and publishing it underthe eyes of the gestapo was to become oneof the most potent political acts of the Re¬sistance. In The Battle of Silence, Brullerrecords the events that led both to hiswriting this short novel and to the founda¬tion and operation of Les Editions de Min-uit, the publishing house that printed anddistributed The Silence of the Sea andtwenty-five other cdhiers du silence com¬posed by writers of the French Resistance.Bruller’s memoirs begin several yearsbefore the invasion of France. The point¬lessness and brutality of the First WorldWar had made him a pacifist, and theTreaty of Versailles had failed to convincehim that the Germans alone bore the guiltof war. As a result, he, like many otherEuropeans, long remained reluctant to in¬vade Germany at the first signs of risingNazism. Bruller catalogues the positionsand counter-positions of the argument, at¬tempting to recreate the moral and in¬tellectual struggles that bothered manyEuropeans who just hadn’t the heart tobegin another war. They reasoned thatpeace could not be realized without somesacrifice, combining in their ratio¬nalizations self-condemnation and martyr¬dom: Germany alone could not be blamedfor the last war; if Europe had supportedthe Weimar Republic, Hitler might nothave risen to power; now, perhaps, if leftalone for once, Hitler might stop of hisown accord and bring about the promisedrejuvenation of Europe. But once again,Bruller recollects, Europe failed to under¬stand Germany.The invasion found France unpre¬pared: although the soldiers were back inuniform, the country was unable to accus¬tom its thinking to the realities of war.Not until the tanks rolled into the villagesand the people were forced to flee, did itfully realize Hitler’s intentions. Long be¬fore this time Bruller had convinced himself of the necessity for battle, but hisfearful warnings everywhere were frus¬trated by the lackadaisical attitude of theFrenchmen, their army, and their govern¬ment. One feels with Bruller, that con¬quering France was easy; she fell asthough in a dream; Bruller’s own experi¬ences seem to prove that resistance waslargely a fiction of fallen power.Bruller was humiliated for himself andfor France. Back in Paris, he was moreamazed and even further humiliated: theFrench seemed to welcome the Nazis, andtheir marks, with open arms. They trustedthe Vichy government, seemed hardly aw¬are of the compromise to the traditionalimage of France as the home of revolu¬tion, reason, equality, and freedom. Theintellectuals, as well as the middleclasses, unable to exist without participat¬ing in the power structure, now controlledby Nazis, began to speak out in support ofthe invaders.Only slowly did a resistance move¬ment begin to form, as the true intentionsof the Nazis and the compromising posi¬tion of the Vichy government becameclear. It was led by intellectuals andswelled and supported by the workingclasses. It became an enormously effec¬tive underground, at once romantic andmundane. Both the intellectuals and theworking men who worked in the Resis¬tance were motivated by a loyalty to the; fit o: tfistm&‘ j 0 ftp*io,,iJmnuedmPag^V4 M w mil .u a ,*! vii .v.W&Vd & SPRlJfc(or perhaps thefcv Cotton *vre*de3erib<*- SPRIthem as “gang leaders” is unfair and in¬accurate. *&»v wBOORSLITERARY NON-FICTION > UIsrael and the Arabs, by Maxime Rod-inson, Pantheon Books, 239pp., $5.95.by TARIF KHALIDIWhen the State of Israel came into beingon May 15, 1948, the hagiographers of theWestern world closed their depleted ranks,rehearsed their hosannas and burst intotriumphant song. Since then, their concerthas continued without interruption. WhenIsrael is at war, the trumpets and drumsrise to a shrill crescendo. In intervals ofpeace, the flutes pipe the songs of pastoralbliss. The listener is, by turns, bewildered,enraged and finally becalmed. Passion isresolved into catharsis.Professor Rodinson’s book, to use Sten-dahlian imagery, is like a pistol shot in themiddle of a concert. It jars with the music,it disturbs the trance of the audience at theconcert hall, it forces one level of reality tointrude upon another. In this kind of con¬cert, this kind of pistol shot is welcome.For unless the concert is brought to an end,our ears will recognize no music other thanthis. The hagiographers’ triumph will havebeen final.Professor Rodinson brings genuine com¬petence and urbanity to his task, qualitieshitherto conspicuously absent in books deal¬ing with the Palestine Problem. Mostwriters on the subject are armed with littlemore than enthusiasm and this is often re¬flected in the images they weave: “mir¬acles,” “deserts blooming,” “beleaguereddemocracy,” “swift sword of Zion,” “Da¬vid against Goliath,” etc., etc. ad majoremDei gloriam. To introduce an element ofsanity and realism into this imagery isclose to sacrilege. Israel is taboo: if Israelcan be assessed “like all the Nations,”then the last stronghold of hagiographyand never-never land will have fallen tothe Philistines.The awe in which Israel is held in Amer¬ica is not generally shared by the Europeanintellectual, partly because the latter is amore politicized creature, partly becauseIsrael does not court his favour as assid¬uously as it does his American counter¬part, and partly because European Ori¬entalist studies are older and more firmlyentrenched than they are in this country.When European scholars like Arnold Toyn¬bee, Is^ac Duetscher or Albert Hourani, tomention only a few, cast their nets into thetroubled waters of the region, their catch isgenerally substantial. Furthermore, theyseem to do it without the awkward pangs ofconscience which beset some Americanscholars who coo on Vietnam in the morn¬ing but screech on the Middle East in theafternoon.Rodinson begins his tale with a short ac¬count of Arab and Jewish nationalisms.About one third of the book is devoted tothe history of the Arab states and Israel upto 1956. The second third deals with the pol¬itics of the Arab states up to 1966. The lastthird deals with the prelude to the war of1967, the war itself and, finally, the inevi¬table pronouncements about the future.If force majeure compels one to find theweakest link in the very tight and logicalchain which binds this book, it would prob¬ably be the first section. There is undoubt¬edly some merit in analyzing the MiddleEast dispute in terms of a struggle of na¬tionalisms. But we would also be bluntingOccam’s razor if we inject too many hy¬pothetical entities unnecessarily. The ColdWar and the sway of nationalisms are notof the essence in a discussion of the Pales¬tine Problem, for the core of that problemremains to this day a struggle of the Jewishsettlers and the Palestinian population formastery of the land oi Palestine. Rodinsonindeed recognizes this fact but then pro¬ceeds to analyze Jewish nationalism in con¬trast and contradistinction to Arab nation¬alism. In so doing, he ties the dispute to thestrings of what Bernard Berenson calls‘‘vast, impersonal forces” and the conflictis cast in Marxist or, if you prefer, inGreek tragic terms. What Rodinson fails toemphasize is the indigenous PalestinianArab sentiment, compounded, of verystrong Christian-Muslim attachment to thesoil and a streak of political independence which first manifested itself in the eigh¬teenth century, when the Palestinian Dahiral-Umar, antedating the Greek Revolt bysome fifty years, first raised the standardof rebellion against the Ottoman Empire.Having unburdened this criticism, it is arelief and a pleasure to turn to the rest ofthe book. The section dealing with inter-Arab politics of the fifties and early sixtiesis of special value. Rodinson succeeds insynthesizing an unruly mass of facts, ru¬mors and opinions, blending and assessingeach event with a rare grasp of the essen¬tials. There are some stretches where Ro¬dinson is, by his own admission, on some¬what shaky grounds, but the difficulties insuch a survey are considerable and the au¬thor presents as accurate and intelligible asurvey of the period as is possible, giventhe difficulties which beset the study of con¬temporary history. There are two minormistakes which may be pointed out in pas¬sing. On page 87, the author asserts thatthe situation in Lebanon in 1958 “becameexplosive” when President Camille Sha-moun “announced his intention of standing The last section of the book should beread in conjunction with Rodinson’s essay“Israel, fait colonial” in the Special Issueof J. P. Sartre’s Les Temps Modernes de¬voted to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Rodinsonargues that the war of 1967 was broughtabout by the fanatics of both sides, the Ben-Gurionites in Israel versus the al-Fatah andits Syrian supporters. Both desired war be¬cause both were embroiled in a classic co¬lonial situation. Ben-Gurion and his groupwere prisoners of the colonialist hopes theyhad aroused in Israel; the al-Fatah repre¬sented undying resistance to such colonialencroachment. Gently but firmly, Rodinsonsketches the colonialist character of theState of Israel, taking into account all theconceivable arguments in the Zionist arsen¬al — and what an arsenal it is! In theprocess, he spares the myths of neither sidebut his balance sheet shows clearly that theonus of responsibility for the continuingconflict lies on the Zionist character of theState of Israel. (It is interesting to notehere that some Israeli intellectuals are nowarguing for the de-Zionization of Israel,vide Uri Avney’s recent book Israel With¬out Zionists).Armistice lines, 1949—and Cease-fire lines, June 10, 1967for re-election.” This is false. Shamounnever announced any intentions to stand forre-election. The Opposition thought that heharbored such designs. But, as often hap¬pens in history, what is in fact the case andwhat people think is the case are both ofequal importance. On the same page, Ro¬dinson portrays the rebellion of 1958 inLebanon (which brought in the Grand OldDuke of York and his ten thousand mendisguised as U.S. Marines) as lacking in“central direction, under the command oflocal gang leaders.” Many of the mostprominent and traditional Moslem andDruze leadprs of Lebanon were involved inthe rebellion. They did achieve a, substan¬tial degree of co-ordination of their actions Rodinson’s book bestrides the narrowworld of Middle East scholarship like a co¬lossus. Sharp and critical in spirit, synthet¬ic and logical, merciless to myth and with afirm moral backbone, it is an importantwork of scholarship.Mr. Khalidi is working on a Ph.D. thesisin Medieval Islamic Historiography in theDepartment of Near Eastern Languages &Civilizations at the University of Chicago.He is president of the Organization ofArab Students of the Greater ChicagoArea and says, “According to GeraldFord, we are being trained in Peking andexported to America to spread chaos onAmerican campuses. We realty must suehim for a remark like that.” Richard Burgin, Conversations withJorge Luis Borges, Holt, Rinehart & Win¬ston, 144p., $3.95. June publication.Perle Epstein, The Private Labyrinth ofMalcolm Lowry — Under the Volcanoand The Cabbala, Holt, Rinehart & Win¬ston, 216p., $6.95.Jane Kramer, Allen Ginsberg in Amer¬ica, Random House, 202p., $4.95.F. R. & Q. D. Leavis, Lectures in America,Pantheon, 152p., $4.95.Flannery O'Connor, Mystery and Man¬ners (Occasional Prose, selected andedited by Sally and Robert Fitzgerald),Farrar, Straus & Giroux, 237p., $6.95.Arthur L. Scott, Mark Twain at Large,Henry Regnery Co., 307p., $7.50. Con¬cerns Twain's travels and his writings onthese.Charles Dickens' Uncollected Writingsfrom Household Words 1850-1859, 2vols., Indiana, 667p., $25.Mark Twain's Hannibal, Huck, and Tom,ed. Walter Blair, U. California, 500p.,$12.50. Unpublished manuscript sourcesfor Twain's Hannibal. June.Mark Twain's Mysterious Stranger Manu¬scripts, ed. William M. Gibson, Califor¬nia, 606p., $12.50. June.Mark Twain's Correspondence with Hen¬ry Hutfleston Rogers, ed., Lewis Leary,California, 747p., $15. June.RELIGION AND THOUGHTNels F. S. Ferre, The Universal Word —A Theology for a Universal Faith, West¬minster Press, 271 p., $9.Donald Fleming and Bernard Bailyn,eds., The Intellectual Migration — Eu¬rope and America, 1930-1960, Harvard,720p„ $12.95.Graham Greene, Collected Essays, Vik¬ing, 463p., $7.95.Walter Krickeberg and others, Pre-Co¬lumbian American Religions, Holt, Rine¬hart & Winston, 316p., $8.95.Marcia Moore and Mark Douglas, Rein¬carnation, Key to Immortality, ArcanePublications, 346p., $5.95.F. S. Peris, Ego, Hunger and Aggression— The Gestalt therapy of sensory awak¬ening through spontaneous personal en¬counter, fantasy and contemplation, Ran¬dom House, 272p., $6.95.Albert Rosenfeld, The Sceond Genesis— The Coming Control of Life, Prentice-Hall, 295p., $6.95.Roger W. Wescott, The Divine Animal —An Exploration of Human Potentiality,Funk & Wagnalls, 340p., $6.95.PAPERBACKS:SOCIOLOGY, ECONOMICS, POLITICSCedric B. Cowing, Populists, Plungers,and Progressives — A Social History ofStock and Commodity Speculation, 1890-1936, Princeton, 273p., $2.95.C. P. Fitzgerald, The Chinese View ofTheir Place in the World, Oxford, 82p.,$1.25.Herbert J. Gans, The Levittowners —Ways of Life and Politics in a New Sub¬urban Community, Vintage, 450p.,$2.95.Gerald N. Grob, Workers and Utopia —A Study of Ideological Conflict in theAmerican Labor Movement, 1865-1900,Quadrangle Books, 195p., $2.65.David S. Landes, The Unbound Pro¬metheus — Technological Change andIndustrial Development in Western Eu¬rope from 1750 to the Present, Cam¬bridge, 555p., $2.95.Robert Jay Lifton, Death in Life — Survi¬vors of Hiroshima, Vintage, 555p.,$2.95.Stefan T. Possony, ed., The Lenin Reader,Gateway (Henry Regnery & Co.), 519p.,$3.95.Nadav Safran, From War to War — TheArab-Israeli Confrontation, 1948-1967,Pegasus, 452p., $2.95.Franz Schurmann, Ideology and Organi¬zation in Communist China, U. Califor¬nia, 492p., $4.95. iS.iJv Woolf, ed., European Fascism, Vint¬age, 368 p., $2.45.May, 1969 The Chicago Literary ReviewThe Shadow of1 Blooming Grove: War¬ren G. Harding In His Times, by FrancisRussell, McGraw-Hill, 691 pp., $10.00.By PHILIP DE VENCENTESWarren G. Harding was an ordinaryman with ordinary ideas, ordinary abili¬ties, and ordinary mistresses. And what ismore, he reveled in his own con¬ventionality. As small-town editor, Chau¬tauqua speaker, state legislator, lieuten¬ant-governor, and even United States Sen¬ator, his convivial, prosaic nature provedno handicap; in fact it was often an asset.But Harding made the one error fatal toany man who is ordinary and who knowsthe truth about himself. By allowing him¬self to become President of the UnitedStates, he thereby raised his lack of dis¬tinction to the level of a national monu¬ment, deposited it for future reference inthe records of the National Archives, andengraved it on the pages of his biograph¬ies. As Samuel Hopkins Adams wrote in1939, recalling Harding’s election to thePresidency:We, the sovereign people, had chosenfor leader by an unprecedented major¬ity .. . an amiable, well-meaning,third-rate Mr. Babbitt, with the equip¬ment of a small-town, semi-educatedjournalist, the standards of a hand¬shaking joiner and all-around goodguy, the instincts and habits of a cor¬ner sport, and the traditions of a partyhack...At least Adams’ Incredible Era was aserious attempt at biography. The booksand articles published just after Hardings’death, and during the interminable dis¬closures of the corruption of his adminis¬tration, raised all sorts of specters abouthis racial origins, his promiscuity, and hisdeath. But not even the warped imagina¬tion of the deranged Gaston B. Means —author of The Strange Death of PresidentHarding — could make Harding himselfanything but an ordinary man, the quintes¬sential Rotarian, whose lifelong motto was“Don’t knock, boost.”Why were such exposes read and be¬lieved? Partly, of course, because much ofwhat they said was true and as verifiableas the latest headline. But partly, too, onesuspects, Harding’s ordinariness itself lentcredibility to such studies. A man can beordinary or he can be President of theUnited States. But it is unacceptable forhim to be both, and downright un-Ameri¬can to be both simultaneously. If Har¬ding’s visible life was undistinguished,then certainly the “shadows” must havebeen profound.Finally, in 1965, Andrew Sinclair’s Avail¬able Man tried to treat Harding primarilyas a political man and to give him somestature as a political leader. Here was anew twist. Like William Allen White, muchearlier, who had tried to create the im¬pression that Calvin Coolidge’s silence wasa mask for his depi.li, Sinclair tried to tellus that Harding’s ineptitude was really po¬litical finesse. And, like White, Sinclairfailed to convince us. Coolidge it seemsclear, was silent because he had nothing tosay, and Harding — well, Harding wasordinary.The latest, and by far the best, treat¬ment of Harding is Francis Russell’s TheShadow of Blooming Grove. It was thisbook which received such wide publicity acouple of years ago when Harding’s heirsbrought suit to prevent its publication.During the course of his research, Russellhad discovered a body of intimate correspondence between Harding and Mrs. Car¬rie Phillips, the wife of a Marion mer¬chant. This affair with Mrs. Phillips hadbeen suspected since it was first men¬tioned in 1924 by Professor William E.Chancellor, Harding’s self-anointed Ne¬mesis. But these letters were the first sub¬stantive evidence of its existence. Thecourts, however, decided that in this case,at least, a family’s right to hide its skele¬tons was greater than the public’s right toknow. They issued a temporary injunction,still in effect, forbidding use of the letters;and Mr. Russell finally decided to publishwith blank spaces in the text where quota¬tions from the proscribed letters had been.The chief virtue of this book is that itaccepts Harding .pretty much as he was,i■ neither an evil, lustful hack, nor a politi¬cal solon, but rather a conventional man The Booster9siAtonythrust into an unconventional role. Mr.Russell gives full credit to Harding’s posi¬tive attributes: his undoubted warmth,openness, and compassion, as well as hisabiding humility. And he fully cataloguesHarding’s weaknesses: his blind loyalty tohis friends, his ignorance of public policy,his homely platitudes and alliterative styleof oratory.Mr. Russell also casts Harding’s twolove affairs — one epistolary and one real— in a sympathetic light. Far from seem¬ing sordid, they are seen as the reachingout of a lonely man for undemanding af¬fection. They are of interest not only fortheir reflections of Harding’s character,but also because they constitute the onearea of his life in which he acted boldly,without considering the opinions of others.This is important because, for the mostpart, Harding’s life was lived in the pas¬sive voice. Surrounded by people andevents over which he had little control, hewas a man more acted upon than acting.The “shadow” of Mr. Russell’s title re¬fers, of course, to the perennial rumor thatHarding was part Negro. Professor Chan¬cellor of Ohio’s Wooster University spentmost of his academic life vainly attempt¬ing to establish the truth of this rumor. Itwas revived and embellished during everyone of Harding’s campaigns. After hisnomination for the Presidency in 1920, forexample, the story circulated of two Ne¬groes who met on a street corner. “Did yoheah de big news?” asked the first. “Deydone nomernate Mistah Hahding at Chi¬cago.” “Sho.” replied his friend. “Who’dde white folks nomernate?” But while Har¬ding was never able to escape this rumor— “How do I know?” he once remarked toa friend. “One of my ancestors may havejumped the fence.” — nevertheless it hadpractically no effect on his political life, ashis overwhelming success testifies. Com¬pared to the shadows cast by his familyand friends, this “shadow” was shortindeed.Harding was married to a woman who• can fairly be described as a Harpy. Flor¬ence Kling Harding (Dutchess) was cran¬ky and ambitious, possessing all thecharm of a dyspeptic shrike. She wantedher “Wurr’-n” in the White House and shedid not care about the consequences.“There were times enough,” writes Rus¬sell, “when Harding wished that his wifewere dead.” Her father, believing Hardingto be a “Nigger,” refused to speak to hisson-in-law for many years. Harding’sfriends — and Russell is at his best in de¬scribing the strange coterie which at¬tached itself to Harding — were unhinged,rapacious, or both. There were HarryDaugherty, the crafty hanger-on, whocould not bear to sleep in an empty house;Jess Smith, Daugherty’s shadow, whoopenly sold favors and committed suicidein a Washington Hotel; Charlie Forbes, theVeterans Administrator, who had a pen¬chant for selling property that did not be¬long to him; and many others. Knowingloyalty to nothing greater than their ownwelfare, they returned Harding’s friend¬ship with grief.With such a life, it is small wonder thatHarding sought affection and loyalty in hismistresses. Against this background, it isnet difficult for us to understand Harding’sdesperate forty-page letters to Carrie Phil¬lips or Nan Britton, “or even his fleetingtrips to New York — during one of whichhe was nearly arrested on a morals charge— to see the youthful Nan.But what about the “times” in whichHarding lived? Mr. Russell’s subtitle is, af¬ter all, “Warren G. Harding in HisTimes.” There is no doubt Harding was inhis times, but was he really of them? Mrs.Russell ably demonstrates that he was not.Harding held public office during one ofthe most active periods of ferment in ourn history.,Social lecology was.,changingpidly, ana politics — sputtering, and fm%ieing t was slowly being .forced to adaptc|o ] it. Progressivism was riding high, and thehersy that — in politics — “eternal veri¬ties” are no substitute for reform was win¬ning numerous and influential converts.Unfortunately, Harding was not one ofthem. Even in that feudal demesne knownas Ohio politics, the young knights of re¬form were confronting the barons of standrpattism. The names of Tom Johnson, Sam¬uel Jones, and Newton Baker, began torival those of Joseph Foraker, Mark Han¬na, and Box Cbx of Cincinnati. But Har¬ding remained unaffected. He “bloviated”about unity and social harmony, but hesided with the old guard. essential progressivism of President Taft:Progress is not proclamation nor pala¬ver (he said). It is not pretence norplay on prejudice. It is not the per¬turbation of a people passion-wrought,nor a promise proposed. Progression iseverlastingly lifting the standards thatmarked the end of the world’s marchyesterday and planting them on nev,and advanced heights today.The times were conspiring against Har¬ding. The soothing platitudes and ringingappeals to the past, so popular with stumpspeakers and Chautaqua lecturers, werebeing drowned out by demands for socialwelfare programs and political reform.The Cleveland Plain Dealer summed it upin 1914, when it wrote that “a speech byMr. Harding knows neither time nor cir¬cumstance ... It has not the slightestrelation to current problems ... No oneneed doubt his sincerity, for he himself isa relic of the good old days . . . Time andMr. Russell traces Harding’s con¬servatism to the “shadow of his inher¬itance.” “Always in his growing up,” heWrites, “he would be haunted by this senseof alienation from the world to which hewanted with all his heart to belong — aquite different feeling from being born aNegro among Negroes and identifyinghimself with the group as such. Since henever felt secure in his group identi¬fication, he would demonstrate his right tobelong by the strictness of his con¬formity.” While this is a valuable insight,it is undoubtedly exaggerated. Surely oth¬er factors — his small-town booster back¬ground, his desire to succeed in Ohio poli¬tics, his sincere belief in the “eternal veri¬ties” — all served to reinforce Harding’snatural conservatism.But whatever the reason, Harding wasunable to see — much less sympathizewith — the changing times. It was charac¬teristic of him that after attending the Chi¬cago Columbian Exposition in 1893 hewould “bloviate” at length on the “con¬crete things marking the progress of theworld,” but would ignore the Irish village,Old Vienna, or Moorish palace set up onthe Midway. He was no more sensitive tothe strange new types — Italians, Poles,Russian Jews — who were at that verytime beginning to crowd into America’scitjies. Twenty y^ars laj^r, ^lar.d^g wasstijl/out of /step with his times. In ppe alli-,tpratiy)e toifr^qt, he trie<| |husjtf> ,argue the conditions change, but not Harding.”The Shadow of Blooming Grove, then, isthe biography of a man beset by his wife,his friends, and even his times. And thesecast shadows across his life far deeperthan any rumors about his ancestry. Inthe final analysis, the tragedy of WarrenG. Harding lay in the fact that despite hisfervent belief in the virtues of frater-nalism and social belonging, he neverreally belonged. Despite his formal clubmemberships, he failed to realize true fra-ternalism in that society of hail-fellow Ma¬sons and Rotarians to which he had dedi¬cated his life. And more seriously, becauseof his lack of vision, he could not detectthe enormous changes in the largersociety around him, changes wrought byexpanding urbanization and the massiveincrease in immigration. As a result, hefailed of membership here as well. WhileHarding consistently intoned the litany ofthe insider, he remained an outsider to theend of his days.Whle Mr. Russell’s book is an admi¬rable addition to presidential scholarship,it is not without flaws. For one thing, it istoo long. Harding himself often leaves thetext for tens of pages at a time while theauthor overwneims us in background de¬tail, much of it extraneous. When will bi¬ographers ever iearn not to be so chatty?There1 dfe“K'suspect, few hisbbiHcal figuresi }); • v j (ffoy&nued on Pag? l&)6 The Chicago Literary Review May, 1969The Po6fry of Rock, edited by RichardGoldstein; Bantam Books, 147 pp.,$1.00.Rock and Other Four Letter Words,written and designed by J. Marks,photographed by Linda Eastman; Ban¬tam Books, 256 pp., $1.25.Aladdin, Rotary Connection, Cadet Con¬cept 317, $4.95.David Ackles, David Ackles, Elektra74022, $4.95.Salloom, Sinclair and the Mother Bear,Cadet Concept 316, $4.95.by MIKE HUTCHISONWhen Chuck Berry yelled “Long liveRock & Roll,’* he wasn’t just praising acertain style of music — he was pledginghimself to a permanent state of mind, away of living. Those were religious words,and we knew it. “It’s gotta be rock & rollmusic, if you want to dance with me,” andthe old people couldn’t dance.Since 1963, the words have changed.Rock’s moralism has surfaced. Now Traf¬fic tells us that Heaven is in our mind; theIncredible String Band teaches that “Allthis world is but a play, be thou the joyfulplayer;” Dylan warns us not to mistakeparadise for that house across the road;Change is now, the Byrds advise; theGoodge Street magician’s name is Love,says Donovan; Grace Slick tells us to feedour heads. The street punks of the fifties i4fThe Groover’sPoetrycrets to conceal. How does it feel ...” hesang, and we said “Yeah, that’s what Imeant.” Dylan acted as shrink for a wholegeneration, making conscious what hadbeen subconscious, real what had seemedunreal, understandable what had seemedinexpressible.But that’s not to say you can’t discuss ita bit. And there are two books here —Rock and Other Four Letter Words, by J.Marks, and The Poetry of Rock, by Rich¬ard Goldstein — both of which are seriousattempts to illuminate that elusive Truthof rock. Both authors, realizing the im¬possibility of any “definitive” work on thesubject, have attempted to restrict theirstudies to certain clearly defined aspectsof rock.Marks has attempted to re-create therock experience by designing his bookalong the same structural principles whichrock uses: the mosaic effect, collage, mon¬tage, sensory overload, counterpoint. Bymixing together hundreds of photographshave become street corner evangelists, theGreat Pretender has become the GreatProselytizer, the rebels without a causehave discovered that they were holycrusaders all along, that the holy grail wasthat flashing Gibson in Chuck Berry’shands.This change of emphasis is, as we allknow, the result of a whole complex ofshocks (orgasms? birth pangs? deathspasms?) which have shaken our society inthe past ten years — wars, assassinations,drugs, the Movement, the communicationexplosion, the youth explosion, etc. Butperhaps it can be summed up best in theperson of Bob Dylan, the Natty Bumppo ofthe inner mind. His music has either re¬flected or effected much of what is goingon now. His greatness, however, is not asan innovator but as an articulator, or isthere a difference? He was the first manto rea^y lay down the^ord^ for what wehad been feeling in thp fnusic all along.“Yotfrt invisible now,’ Vou’ve got no se- of rock artists and rock life, statements bymusicians on whatever is meaningful tothem, fold-out pages, put-ons, challenges tothe reader, satires on schlock rock andteenie-bop mags, religious art, cut-outs,poster art, sheet music and diagrams,Marks creates an environment and as¬saults the brain from all directions.For example: after five pages of theWho doing their destruction thing, likesome fascinating statements by PeterTownshend (“The ideal, of course, wouldbe for me to get killed in an airplane crashright after a really stupendous perform¬ance”), Marks places a large photo of abuilding at the instant of destruction, asthe walls slowly explode into rubble.So rock is now consciously aware thatthere is Truth, that Truth resides some¬where inside the music; and it will not besatisfied until it has changed the world• into its own image. Crawdaddy editorChester Anderson skhteS,’ “Any artis-1 tic/ciilturhi/isoctol activity hot allied to rock is doomed to preciousness & ste¬rility.”And what is this Truth that rock serves?The only answer is the music itself.“Sometimes I think there are no words butthese to tell what’s true: and there are notruths outside the gates of Eden.”Goldstein, on the other hand, shows him¬self for the true typehead he is. His book iscompletely word-oriented, consisting of anintroduction (in which he gives a short,rather misinformed history of rock), thelyrics of 70 “great Rock lyrics” set up inverse form, and a short explication ofeach. It is his professed purpose to presentthese lyrics as poetry, no more. They suf¬fer, he admits, by being separated fromthe music; yet, he contends, “there is animmense reservoir of power here, an im¬pressive awareness of language, and aprofound sense of rhythm.”But we soon see that there is a wide gapbetween intention and reality. Goldstein’sexplications deal not so much with the in-dividual song poems as with their“place” in rock; not with versification andtechnique, but with how the songs reflectthe inner workings of the general rockpsyche. Speaking of Paul Simon, for ex¬ample, Goldstein discusses not his verse,but his concern with freedom, with havinga “free head,” concluding: “That kind ofinner liberty is one of rock’s deepest con¬cerns.”First, the authors say, rock is an asser¬tion (and simultaneous demonstration) ofAbsolute Freedom. “Rock swings free,embracing chaos, and laughing at the no¬tion that there could be anything moreworth celebrating than the present,” saysGoldstein. Marks affirms this in the free¬wheeling design of his book. Rock, is not,as some critics would have it, the musicthe international youth movement. It is thethe Movement. Rock is revolutionary. Itcannot be otherwise. Establishment rockis a contradiction of terms. When rock be¬comes immoral, it ceases to be rock (wehave all seen it happen).Secondly, rock is characterized by a con¬stant sense of discover, of newness — by anever ending ability to be amazed. Dis¬covery — of the world, of yourself, of mu¬sic, and of the fantastic things that happenwhen those three things open themselvesto each other. “If there is a miracle to befound in the New Youth it is their dis¬regard for the apathy and skepticism ofthe old generation, and their unself¬conscious grasp of a neo-romantic spiritwhich reverses all the casual signs of lifeand all the forgotten subjects of love,amazement and jubilation. For the NewYouth, anything is possible and thereforemost things are probable,” says Marks.Freedom and wonder; actually they’rejust different sides of the same coin, eachimpossible without the other. And the coin?That’s whatever it is that happens insideyour body when you experience rock; it iswhat happens when the Who sing “I cansee for miles and miles and miles andmiles and miles,” and Townshend’s guitar,whining and metallic, sends you out overthe miles, past the horizon, until you canno only see but actually are for miles andmiles, and it’s amazing, and you’re free.To be that way as much as possible —that’s the morality of rock.Thou shalt.Dylan says “he not busy being born isbusy dying.” And in that statement we cansee the reason David Ackles is such a badrecord. Nothing is discovered! Naturally,nothing is revealed. Mr. Ackles, who wroteall the songs on the record, plays the pianoand sings in a voice which combines someof the worst qualities of Lou Rawls, EricBurdon and Andy Williams. It must havebeen a great effort, but he has succeededin exorcising from them musical traces ofanything which might remotely resemble vemotidn!1-’-To- { i h .» b« '! >■t ^ Acklfes’ melodies are tiresome and unori¬ ginal; his lyrics are little more than RodMcKuenisms. The only time the music hasany real power is when Ackles lets hissidemen cut loose, as on “The Road toCairo” (the guitar accompaniment on thistrack is a masterpiece, tasteful, controlledand pure) and towards the end of “DownRiver.”Ackles, we must conclude, is a relic ofthe fifties, the original discriminatingalienated man, that creature we allthought became extinct with Camus andgray flannel suits. Too busy putting up agood front in his lonely losing fight againstthe universe, Ackles never has time to re¬member that life and other good thingsare going on all about him.Salloom, Sinclair and the Mother Bear,on the other hand, are very much people ofthe late sixties. Youth, life, joy, paranoia,astrology, revolution, dope, pigs, RiceKrispies — it’s all there. “It’s on thestreets! they shout, and “Burn, baby,burn.” And yet they’re never able to breakfree. They’re tied down not by society ortheir heads, but by the conventions of rockmusic itself. “Writing music with BobbyDylan around is such a drag,” Salloomsings; “I wish he’d go off and try some¬thing else, so I’d get in my own little bag.”But it’s not only Dylan. In the music ofSalloom/Sinclair we find huge chunks ofthe Byrds, Cream, the Lovin’ Spoonful,Country Joe & the Fish, Jefferson Air¬plane, and Freddie Cannon, among others,Influences are fine, but Salloom/Sinclairseem able only to emulate rather thancreate. Creation demands a clear sense ofidentity — rock is an extension of person¬ality. As Sebastian puts it, “The magic’s inthe music and the music’s in me.” But it isdifficult to find a real “me” on this record,so there is little magic.The band is an excellent example of oneof the most unshakable traditions of rock— the bar band. You don’t have to play ina bar to be a bar band; you do have to beready at all times to substitute noise forexcitement, raunch for power, and clichesfor imagination. At this the Mother Bear issuperb. The lead guitar is insufferable,rarely straying from his Johnny One-Chord strategy (when he does get off somenice sounds, towards the end of “Griffin,”it is almost a duplicate of Clapton’s wah-wah solo on “White Room”). The organistand bass are competent and loud. Thedrummer strikes the drums with regu¬larity.When I first heard the Rotary Con¬nection’s second album, Aladdin, I thoughtthe Mothers of Invention were at workagain. Oh wow, I said to myself, what abeautiful satire of the over orchestratedcliche-ridden Motown slop. But it’s nosatire. Imagine an album by Marvin Gayeand Tammie Terrell, except instead of justa few background strings, imagine the en¬tire population of Red China playing vio¬lins as loud as possible, backed up byIndia playing trumpets, oboes and trom¬bones, with slush flowing in rivers fromthe bells. Constant crescendoes, super-ex¬tended cadences ... and it’s much worsethan that. A real bummer. But then, wemust remember that this record comesfrom Cadet Concept and is produced byMarshall Chess and Charles Stepney. Re¬member? The same folks who completelydestroyed the music of Muddy WatersElectric Mud, Howlin’ Wolf (new release),and scores of Chicago bluesmen. May thedemons haunt them.Anyway, as for the books: Goldstein’s isa must for anyone who is serious aboutrock and its history. It’s a groove as areference book, for just plain reading (letyour head supply the music), or as some¬thing to bitch about (like, why no Countryloe? no Kinks? no Zombies? no Traffic? noFrank Zappa ... etc.). Marks’ book isfun, beautiful, and just good to havearound. However, if you’re already intorock in a big way, don’t expect to learn toomuch from it. If you’re not into rock, well... you’re not going to learn much any¬way.Mike Hutchison, a graduate of the Collegeof Wooster, has done graduate work inEnglish at Duke University. A C.O., he ispresently doing his alternate service atJudson Memorial Church in New YorkCity, tm v e •< n • i l n ■ I ;•May, 1969 The Chicago Literary Review 7' vTA'v 'V<! VOPrti'i. I tx Mi- ,tW^* Iw M.vvnTi: ■APPETITEi*# .‘iVTiji’ 'Le Defi Americain, by Jean-JacquesServan-Schreiber, Editions Denoel, Paris:1967, 342 pp., 18,50 F. (Published inthis country as The American Challengeby Atheneum.)by ROGER KAPLANPublished in September 1967, translatedinto English the following summer, TheAmerican Challenge has attracted far lessnotice in the United States than in France,where it was in full demand for ninemonths. This is singular inconspicuousnessfor a book which is at least as much aboutthe U.S. as the countries the latter is chal¬lenging. But the neglect, which may betemporary, could signify that the findingsof Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber are sowell-known here as to have becometedious. Even if they are, it is amusingand alarming to see how excited a mem¬ber of the French elite can get over them.Alarming, because in the eyes of the restof the world, the Americans are apparent¬ly the guinea-piggish freaks of the labora¬tory of the super-duper post-industrialtechno-structured society. Amusing, be¬cause one senses, at another’s bewilder¬ment over achievements which have be¬come one’s daily habits, the superiority ofone’s consciousness.There is always something mis¬chievously funny in the Europeans’ incred¬ulous consternation at the successful des¬tiny of the barbaric upstarts across theocean. They little know how cruelly thatdestiny is being forged, but one hesitatesto enlighten them, and in any case mostwould not believe it, so many Americansdo they see crossing the Atlantic as if itwere a lake.It is difficult to tell a Mexican in Tia-juana that all is not blessed in California.It is easy enough to convince him, how¬ever, that in some way he is getting had oris in danger. The Europeans have beenconvinced since 1945, when behind thetanks of Eisenhower and Grant came thefirst scouts and salesmen of IBM, Stan-The Figures Spell Doom, by George T.Altman, Greenleaf Classics, Inc., $1.25.Perspectives on Economic Growth, ed¬ited by Walter H. Heller, VintageBooks, $1.95.by LAWRENCE MARSHCan a capitalist, private enterprise econ¬omy survive without war? Essentially thisis the Marxian question with which Mr.Altman confronts us.Mr. Altman bases his answer on his owntheory of the business cycle. He maintainsthat the lag between the demand for andthe supply of new investment causes over¬investment in some periods and sub¬sequent underinvestment in others.The great depression, we are told, was aresult of just this sort of erratic economicbehavior. After trying numerous alphebet-ical solutions from the AAA to the WPAand getting shot down by the businesscommunity and the Supreme Court for itstrouble, the Roosevelt Administration fi¬nally in 1939 discovered World War II.Ever since, the United States governmenthas been using war or the threat of war tojustify the vast government expendituresneeded to stabilize the economy.Other means of adjustment are in¬adequate. Small doses of government ex¬penditures are not enough, for the multi¬plier is weak and subject to diminishingreturns. Tax cuts won’t work, for only thepoorest citizens can be counted on to spendthe money. Increasing the money supplyvia open market operations only adds tothe “frozen money lake” whenever prom¬ising investment opportunities are scarce.Wage and price guidelines are as uselessand foolish as Cooiidge’s attempt to re¬verse the stock market crash of 1929 withthe invocation, “Don’t Sell AmericaShort.”Thus, Mr. Altman presents us with twoalternatives: either continue the presentpermanent war economy using “brink¬manship” to periodically arouse an enemy #>.*, -fcjW'v> «> ijC' htomnSrr- w•-.»• ♦<*.»"* > i v> .*•.» f.i,«■,»>.<•. .U. S.dard Oil, Ford, Union Carbide, and theRand Corporation (entirely spies); andtheir minds are saturated to the point ofnausea, apathy, terror, and in some casesjoy, when they see that fixed Americaninvestments total over 14 billion dollars;when the U.S. controls in France alone40% of the distribution of oil, 65% of theagricultural machinery, 65% of the tele¬communications equipment; when theCommon Market, that glorious break¬through to European unity, is essentiallyunder U.S. organization; when in short thethird industrial power of the world, afterthe U.S. and the U.S.S.R., is soon going tobe American industry in Europe.Jean-Jacques Servan-Schreiber is onewhose conviction is tinged with hysteria,though he is admirable in presenting anultra-cool front —the better to argue thatthe remedies he offers to the challenge arethe most scientific. He has taken seriouslythe predictions of the Hudson Institute(Herman Kahn), which place the U.S. of ageneration hence in a fundamentally neworder of civilization, along with no coun¬tries besides Sweden, Canada, and Japan.He has understood that the superiority ofand thereby justify the expense, or give upour so-called free, private enterprise econ¬omy and convert it into a somewhat so¬cialistic economy with the partial nation¬alization of major industries.Mr. Altman warns us against the firstalternative: “Technological advances aremaking it far too risky to play ‘brinkman¬ship’ with even a small war in efforts tobolster the economy.” Moreover, the sec¬ond alternative is not as undesirable as itmay at first appear. Mr. Altman arguesthat freedom could be preserved and eco¬nomic progress enhanced by the con¬version to socialism.Mr. Altman is an attorney, a tax ad¬viser, and a certified public accountant.But his insufficient background in econom¬ics gives him away, for although he at¬tempts to support his argument with factsand figures, his analysis generally lacksrigor. His casual observations about casu¬al relationships only invite the post hocergo propter hoc type of fallacy.For example, he, notes the increase infederal expenditures and gross private in¬vestment in 1940 and attributes the in- the Americans is no longer due to wealth,geographical position, historical role, andmilitary might, but that it is intrinsicallybound to the march of universal progress.Consequently, he knows that the U.S. can¬not be caught up with, or matched, or op¬posed by traditional political means, andthat the Gaullist concept of independence,for example, is one of the most deftly-mas¬queraded surrenders in the history of colo¬nialism. He has seen that the experts fromHarvard have become so indispensable tothe welfare of European economics that toremove them would precipitate in¬sufferable crises. At the same time he hasseen that the U.S. has infiltrated Europeanindustry and reaps greater profits from itthan the Europeans themselves, becauseof the Europeans’ own economic con¬servatism, their technological backward¬ness, and of course their political disunity.Believing that the nucleus of Americansuperiority lies in its technostructure andorganizational methods, Servan-Schreiberdevotes a whole section of his book to lesbases arrieres, the rear bases, of U.S. in¬dustry. He includes in this section a chap¬ter on modern management methods bycrease in gross national product for thatyear solely to those two items. He thenproceeds to calculate the multiplier —which is the amount by which gross na¬tional product increases for each one dol¬lar increase in autonomous expenditures,which include federal expenditures andgross private investment. From this oneobservation Mr. Altman concludes that themultiplier is quite small, about 1.37.Had Mr. Altman been an economist, hewould have used data covering manyyears in a multiple regression equationwith various independent variables thattook account of possible lags in the rela¬tionships, not to mention a strong theo¬retical backing for the empirical results.The crux of all this is that if the multiplieris in fact lagre, then modest changes ingovernment expenditures can stabilize theeconomy, and neither war nor socialism isnecessary.Mr. Altman admits that “brinkmanship”is becoming replaced by “growthmanship”which is the theory that the rate of growthof the economy is largely determined bypolitical decisions and that the economy the foremost thinker in the field, Robert S.McNamara. The author submerges thereader under a barrage of facts whichshould eliminate any doubt as to the identi¬ty of the modern Rome. The U.S. producesone-third of everything in the world; theU.S. renders twice as many goods and ser¬vices to its inhabitants than Europe; theU.S. has one-third of the world’s students(7% of its population), one-third of itsenergy (electricity, etc.), one-third of itsroads, and so on. Servan-Schreiber sug¬gests that the secret is in the intelligentmanagement of resources and talents.And he offers more facts, such as thepower of productivity of the individualAmerican worker, 70% greater than hisFrench counterpart, and GM’s profit in¬dex, which is higher than the sum of theprofits of the thirty leading European en¬terprises, though it uses five times fewerworkers.The factors of expansion are studied in asystematic and cooperative way in theU.S. It is known that education, technicalinnovation, and the increment of produc¬tivity are more important than investmentcapital and labor force. (Thus capital canbe sent to the underdeveloped countries, tohelp them.) Of today’s U.S. youth, 40% isin the universities, against 16% in France.The U.S., it seems, has mastered- themethod of permanent expansion, and thegovernment is doing all it can to help theimmense enterprises. Their size rendersresearch more efficient, more easily appli¬cable; the self-financing of the expansionof corporations is nearly total. In a gener¬ation the powers of U.S. capitalism will beso formidable that the average Americanwill need to work not more than two hun¬dred days in the year.To clinch the picture of the wonderfulB a s k i n-Robbins, Servan-Schreiber con¬denses a report by one William Knox,(Continued on Page 10)can be stabilized and its growth rate in¬creased by merely manipulating the ap¬propriate economic policy variables.The nine authors of Perspectives on Eco¬nomic Growth are particularly well quali¬fied to discuss the theoretical, technical,and practical problems involved. All thecontributors are prominent professionaleconomists, highly respected within aswell as outside the economics profession,and all have had a hand in governmenteconomic policy at one time or another.Furthermore, each author analyzes thataspect of economic growth for which he ismost qualified: James Tobin on “Govern¬ment Policy,” Warren Smith on “Mone¬tary and Fiscal Policies,” Arthur Okun on“Measuring the Impact of the 1964 Tax Re¬duction,” etc. Robert Solow and RichardNelson are specialists on the technicalproblems of fixed capital investments andtechnological change, respectively.The book has one major limitation. Itpresents only one side of the issue, for vir¬tually all of the authors are liberal, fiscalpolicy oriented neo-Keynesians. The con¬servative Milton Friedman monetaristsare not represented.Thus, when Arthur Okun predicates hisanalysis of the 1964 tax cut on the assump¬tion that “tax-cut dollars are treated likeother dollars of additional income,” hedoes so in defiance of Mr. Friedman’s per¬manent income hypothesis which suggeststhat all transitory income is saved andthat only increases in permanent incomecan generate additional consumption. Theimplication of Mr. Friedman’s hypothesisis that tax rate changes are ineffective inthe short-run and are therefore useless forstabilization purposes.Nevertheless, Perspectives on EconomicGrowth is well worth reading. It bringsinto focus the causes of economic growth,what can be done to increase our rate ofeconomic growth, and why we should wantmore economic gTdwth in the first place.Mr. Marsh i% a graduate student tfh Eco¬nomics at Michigan State University.8 The Chicago Literary Review May, 1969LENIN'SSTATIONLenin's Last Struggle, by Moshe Lewin,Pantheon, $4.95.Civil War in France: The Paris Commune,by Karl Marx and V. I. Lenin, Inter¬national Publishers (New World Paper¬backs), $1.45.by CHRISTOPHER Z. HOBSONIn the last year of his political life, Leninstruggled to reverse the trend to dictator¬ship and to remove Stalin from power.This struggle was hampered by Lenin’sconstant illness and finally stopped by aparalytic stroke. Ten months later Lenindied.These are the bones of Moshe Lewin’sLenin’s Last Struggle. In Lewin’s accountLenin emerges as the hero — not a hero ofdemocracy, but one of humane dictator¬ship. Lewin is a Polish-French Trotskyiteof uncertain factional pedigree; his broadpolitical analysis follows closely that ofIsaac Deutscher (see Deutscher’s Stalinand Trotsky biographies and his recentThe Unfinished Revolution: Russia 1917-1967). Like Deutscher’s, Lewin’s accountof the events has the strengths and weak¬nesses of a political and biographical,rather than social, history.Lenin’s struggle focused on two issues.The first was an issue of policy — the rela¬tion between Moscow and the non-Russianrepublics. In 1922 these republics were stillindependent, affiliated to Moscow throughthe bond of Socialist politics. The forces ofrevolution, counter-revolution and stabili¬zation, which could not be localized,created a powerful tendency to integratethese republics constitutionally, and bringthem in line politically, with the centralregime. Stalin as Commissar of Nation¬alities spearheaded this drive, maneuver¬ing for the success of the pro-integrationfaction in the Georgian Party. We maygauge the strength of the Bolshevik tradi¬tion of free discussion and opposition to“great-power chauvinism” by the degreeof Lenin’s shock on learning that Stalin’semissary had slapped a Georgian Commu¬nist in an argument. A new policy towardthe republics, he stated in notes dictatedfrom sick-bed a month before the paralyticstroke, must have “three elements: (1) itis not permitted to strike someone; (2)concessions (to small states) are in¬dispensable; (3) one cannot compare asmall state with a large one.”At the same time, Lenin’s uneasinessat jt Stalin’s policy toward the nation¬alities brought him to oppose Stalin’sgrowing power as such. This merged withuneasiness about the growing role of per¬manent party officials — the bureaucracy— as against workers in running the state.The parallel to the Georgian slap in theface was Stalin’s rude treatment, duringLenin’s illness, of Lenin’s wife Krupskaya.Not before but after making plans to at¬tempt to remove Stalin as General Secre¬tary of the Party, Lenin dictated a person¬al note: “What was done against my wife Ialso consider to have been directed againstmyself. Consequently, I must ask you toconsider whether you would be inclined towithdraw what you said and to apologize,or whether you prefer to break off rela¬tions between us.” The note should not beconsidered as purely personal. It is truethat Lenin turned to it only after makinghis political plans; but the crux was theconviction — in the Socialist tradition —that rudeness and a dictatorial manner be¬tween Communists was impermissible.Stalin’s personality seemed to Lenin asymptom of w'hat was wrong with theParty.Lewin’s account of these months, par¬ticularly of Lenin’s constant struggle to ac¬quire information behind the backs of hisdoctors — who did not want him to be ex¬cited — is an exciting story. As scholar¬ship, it suffers from the sin of exagger¬ation: Lewin treats the scattered dicta¬tions, the single Pravda article, the frag¬mentary conversations of the months ofLenin>’§i illness as coi^^qg, “a coherent)viewi qf the intematiowj jsUuateon 'both.v?><" dIZ o 2-) j v> present and future, important elements ofa program and line of action, and an at¬tempt to elucidate the probable course ofinternal development.” In order to bearthis out, Lewin must himself harmonizeand orchestrate what is actually only asketch. All that is actually clear is thatLenin meant to seek Stalin’s removal fromthe post of General Secretary and to re¬verse the actions Stalin had taken inGeorgia.Analytically, Lewin’s account, while lu¬cidly presenting the factors behind thedegeneration of proletarian democracy —the Civil War and famines, the decimationof the working class in battle, the drawingof the most conscious and active workersinto the state and party bureaucracy —fails to apply a Marxian analysis to Le¬nin’s own actions. What stares out at thereader is that Lenin’s proposals werelargely legalisic. “It must absolutely beinsisted that the (Soviet) Union CentralExecutive Committee should be presidedover in turn by a Russian, Ukrainian,Georgian, etc. Absolutely!” But so what?This ceremonial regulation would not pre¬vent the concentration of actual power inthe hands of the Party executive in Mos¬cow. Thus, Lewin notes, Stalin “saw noreason why he should not give in to Lenincompletely, on paper.” He did and it madeno difference. Similarly, Lenin saw theproblem of bureaucracy as one of culture— the uncultured former workers and pea¬sants acting more coarsely than theymust. Of course they did. But his program,then, was merely to make the bureaucracymore sensitive in what Maoists call its“handling of contradictions among thepeople.” He had no plan to alter the socialrole of the bureaucracy — that is, sig¬nificantly to democratize the state. Thereason is plain: the rank and file mood,expressed most recently in the two-monthsailors’ insurrection at Kronstadt in 1921,called not for a more sensitive dictatorshipbut for new elections to the Soviets. Elec¬tions would have removed the Bolsheviksfrom power, or at least from sole power.Thus the struggle against Stalin was car¬ried on in the innermost circles of the Par¬ty because first Lenin, then Trotsky,feared going to the public In turn, thisincapacitated the Opposition, for Stalin’spower, based on and promoting the powerof the bureaucracy, had the support of theParty machine. Lewin faces neither thisweakness of Lenin and Trotsky, nor thecontradiction contained in his own obser¬vation that “while advocating prudence,circumspection and flexibility,. . .Lenin di¬rected a dictatorship that could only sur¬vive if it were implacable.” Second-guess¬ing is unprofitable and one cannot knowexactly what Lenin would have achievedhad he lived, but Lewin’s own summary isindicative. “One can hardly describe Le¬nin’s great objectives as utopian,” hewrites. The “grand design. . .of creating adictatorial machine capable of controllingitself to a large degree seems closer to¬day.” This is a liberal assessment, not arevolutionary one — it is one which seesthe essence of Socialism in a beneficentelitism and not in the direct government ofa workers’ state by the workers.This was not Lenin’s view in 1917, northat of Marx and Engels in the nineteenthcentury, nor that of revolutionary workersever. The second volume here reviewed,Civil War in France, is a compilation ofwritings of Marx and Engels on the ParisCommune of 1871, and of Lenin’s dis¬cussion of the Commune in State and Rev¬olution, written just before the seizure ofpower in 1917. Other accounts of the Com¬mune are more detailed — notably Jelli-nek’s The Paris Commune (1937) and theaccount by Lissagaray, a veteran of theCommune, recently republished by Month¬ly Review Press. Civil War in France isvaluable partly as a quick survey, butmuch more as revealing what Marx andEngels, and Lenin in 1917, meant by the“dictatorship of the proletariat.” In es¬sence, they referred to the commune be¬cause the 71 day seizure of Paris by itspeople, particularly the workers, seemedto them to provide a workable model ofhow society could be directly governed bythe producers.This account could be read simply toshow, the. total, discrepancy between whatMarx,)Engels tand Leirim advocated >indYi no nope ;r:t tril bn>i ;-r.oiebsb ISMliloq what occurred. This would be crude anti¬communism of the University of Chicagovariety. The other half of the story is thatthese writers were convinced that only his¬torical circumstances, and not the inherentincapacity of the masses to govern, nor an“iron law of oligarchy,” prevented societyfrom being governed as the Commune wasgoverned. When the people are not in revo¬lutionary movement it is almost impos¬sible to believe this, and socialists of everystripe, as well as liberals and con¬servatives, have in ordinary times shrunkfrom believing it. Marx and Engels, andthen Lenin, referred to the Commune tokeep socialists’ minds on the vision towhich the workers themselves have re¬turned time and time again in their revolu¬tionary — as opposed to their simply mili¬tant — struggles. “Of late,” Engels wrotein his 1891 preface to Marx’s account ofthe Commune, “the Social-Democratic phi¬listine has once more been filled withwholesome terror at the words: Dictator¬ship of the Proletariat. Well and good, gen¬tlemen, do you want to know what this dic¬tatorship looks like? Look at the ParisCommune. That was the Dictatorship ofthe Proletariat.”The failures of 1917-1930 are the end ofliberal analysis. They must be the begin¬ning of any Marxist analysis.Mr. Hobson, formerly a graduate studentin Political Science, was recently expelledfrom the University of Chicago forDeviationism.TERROR plateau, the latifundios, cannot support theIndians during the whole year. Often whilea male is working on the plain, he is in¬ducted by any of various means. Some¬times he becomes a policeman back in hishighland home; it’s regular work.The government can do nothing withoutthe army’s support, the biggest antipopu-lar techniques being confinement, torture,and assassination; and the victims aregovernment officials, labor and studentleaders, and anyone who talks too much(e.g., journalists). Says Galeano,It is not hard to extend the hoursof a soldier or have him changeinto civil garb for an “extra job.”The professional army believes itssurvival is at stake, it is ready totoss a coin, winner take all, for itsright to live — for its giant slice ofthe budget. As in Vietnam, it iseasy enough to claim “self-de¬fense.”The 22 governors of Guatemala’s depart¬ments are all colonels.The leaders of the guerrillero groups,Cesar Montes and Yon Sosa, are young buthave been at their work for about half adozen years. They have not been elimi¬nated by the army, the right-wing groups,or the landlords, and claim strong popularsupport. They are in their twenties, well-trained by experience, and confident of fu¬ture success. In the villages they helpcreate opposition political groups andsources of supplies for themselves. Theirinstruments in the overall struggle are theword and the gun. “Our chief demand,”says Cesar Montes, “is land, under asingle slogan which embraces all forms ofland tenancy and all possible solutions:Land to him who works it, in one form oranother.”Guatemala: Occupied Country, by Ed¬uardo Galeano, Monthly Review Press,159 p., $5.95.by J. T. MONZAPHALEduardo Galeano is a writer-journalistand former newspaper editor of Monte¬video, where he is now director of publica¬tions for the University of MontevideoPress. In the well-written book now underconsideration, he depicts a horrific Guate¬mala which I doubt many North Ameri¬cans know about in great detail. His narra¬tive consists of reworked journalistic arti¬cles covering the two great guerrillero or¬ganizations and their union; the conditionof the highland Indians who possess farmsaveraging 2Vi acres each; the UnitedFruit-oil cartel-CIA exploitation of theeconomy; the aborted bourgeois revolutionof 1944-54; and the activities of army andright-wing terrorists groups who haverecently been washing the country in abloodbath.Guatemala is bounded by Mexico on thenorth, San Salvador and Honduras on thesouth, and has ports on both the Caribbeanand the Pacific. It is also near the CanalZone and as such is carefully watched bythe U.S. State Department and the Penta¬gon. North American flyers from a Pan¬ama base dropped napalm in 1966 on a hillwhich they believed held guerrillas; andGreen Berets advise anti-guerrilla forceson how to make patrols and what to dowith prisoners.But most of all the foreign interventionin Guatemala is economic. In 1954 whenthe bourgeois revolutionary president, Ar-benz, had redistributed land to 100,000 peas¬ants, it was known that the United FruitCo. was cultivating only 8% of its holdings.(What were they doing with the rest, build¬ing fences around it?) But in that sameyear the CIA engineered an invasion by aU.S.-trained Guatemalan and his U.S.-trained troops, backed up by B-47s. Thelands expropriated by agrarian reformwere returned to United Fruit and morethan 11.3 million acres (almost half thecountry, says Galeano) were delivered upto the “international oil cartel.”Guatemala grows much bananas, cotton,coffee, and sugar. The plantations on thePacific plain are worked by highland In¬dians and their families. Such a workeronly makes enough; in three days to buy apounds of meat.1 The liitie1 farms in the-ai srit fcsJudntm baa 0KM ni Guatemala’s revolutionary actions showboth imitation and innovation, but they arevery self-consciously Guatemalan. Ga-leano’s book provides much material forrevolutionary thinkers and scholars. And itis immediate, compelling writing. Galeanowrites in his introduction:The guerrilla’s persistence ob¬liges the “constitutional” govern¬ment to reveal how precarious andpurely decorative it is. As violencesharpens race and class con¬tradictions, the social, political,and military expression of thosecontradictions merges with moreterrible clarity. The right wingtakes off its mask. This is its trueface, the monstrous reality.Mr. Monzaphal, a visting doctoral candi¬date from Tunisia, is studying counter¬brainwashing techniques at the FrumiousInstitute.Z(Continued from Page 4)traditions of France that never confusedpatriotism with fawning loyalty to the in¬cumbent powers.Any politics contained in this book arethere, as it were, by accident, as are allpolitics in any piece of art that maintainsits integrity. Bruller’s political positiongrows naturally from the combination ofhis principles and his situation, and it isthese he means to describe rather than thepolitics per se. He does not (and did not)feel his actions particularly courageous,nor his writing particularly strenuous, norhis resistance heroic, nor his politics radi¬cal; his memoirs attempt to prove, rather,that “these things, you see, come aboutquite naturally.” And so, in the end, do allthe politics of artists. To speak of the poli¬tics of Pasolini or Vassilikos too is prob¬ably to miss the point. None of these au¬thors, though all tend towards the left,writes a novel to satisfy the demands ofagit-prop, for none has as his major aimproving the correctness of a certain politi¬cal position. These books rise above merepropaganda; any politics contained inthem grows, as one of many effects, out ofthe true artist’s wider and lonely searchfor his personal truth.Mrs. Howe is* a fourth-year student inEnglish at Bryn Mawr College.virions MB •>’ uoui /■.[>••. tbor*-q < J i < 31May, 1969W! The Chicago Literary Review.. iS i .i. . vt;> 9onShirMi(Continued from Page 1)►y V 'blame and is chiefly interesting as an illus¬tration of the corrupting influence of poli¬tics on the academic mind. Thus, Hilsmandeclares that Mao gave the “signal” forguerilla warfare to start in Vietnam in1957. And he defines guerilla warfare onthe Chinese Communist model as “a newand more subtle way of using force fornational purposes than orthodox warfare.”This has been political orthodoxy in theWest for years, of course, but has beenunder sustained assault from the facts andis appearing less and less plausible toWestern public opinion in general, letalone to informed opinion. Even Hilsman atthe end of his tortured essay, bursts outmomentarily from his political straitjacketand confesses thatThe suspicion arises, in a word,that “revolutionary” warfare isnot the wave of the future and thatVietnam may be unique in South- -qo b(nteftt»liagg»esbion! arid at tW taftVffdr '"fiiVre' is ‘ undergbirtg Teblslllibtf'’at*home.It is left to Professor Harold C. Hinton todevelop the case for viewing China as oneof the prime actors in Vietnam, which hehas wisely chosen to do by means of in¬nuendo rather than by arguments based onthe facts. However, he is politely but firm¬ly corrected on all points by ProfessorsMozingo and Kahin in their comments.Although I have lingered over the Viet¬nam issue because of its controversial na¬ture, it is only fair to point out that most ofthe other papers in the volume on foreignpolicy are on a much higher level thanthose discussed above. There are dis¬cussions of Chinese policy with regard toJapan, Indonesia (which is allotted tw<5 pa¬pers, one of which, by Ruth T. McVey, isthe best in the book and a model of howthis sort of thing should be done), andSouth Asia (India, Pakistan and the Him¬alayan states). The extraordinarily diffi¬cult problem of Taiwan is gamely tackledby Professor Scalapino. But the hub of theEast Asia, and perhaps even in Af¬rica and Latin American — that itmay be the last country in whichCommunism will succeed in cap¬turing the deep though inchoateforces of nationalism.And Professor Kaplan, who regrets the eli¬mination of Diem and the fact that it wasnot combined with “major military escala¬tion,” and who now wants to occupy NorthVietnam up to the 18th Parallel, admitsthatAt the risk (sic) of appearing mod-1 etetb, therefore,' lebfttei say that' volume is contained in two papers by Pro¬fessors Uri Ra’anan and Donald Zagoriaon the foreign policy and strategic debatesin Peking, which exemplify all that is bestin what used to be called, rather dis¬paragingly, the “Pekinological” approach,i.e. the analysis of policy statements asrevealing disagreements among the Com¬munist leaders.From the broad area of agreement be¬tween these analyses, the following con¬clusions may be drawn: (1) China is pri¬marily concerned to put her own house inoMef; (2) in order to do‘&bSHe mbsf beindependent, and any concession to the So-South Vietnam is subjected!©' etf-The Chicago literary HdvteW May, 1969 - would diminish -thaty incktpehdence '*nd tneology, af wh5m it appears To be chieflybring a corresponding unwelcome in- aimed, the book does not convince thefluence to bear on China’s affairs; (3) as reader of its mam thesis, to wit, that thefor Vietnam, China appears to considerthat the U.S. is engaged in a self-defeatingdownward spiral and active support is un¬necessary, even undesirable, as it wouldresult either in increased dependence onthe U.S.S.R. or in direct confrontation withthe U.S., or both, which would only makethings worse for the Vietnamese; (4) hersheer size allows her virtually to shelvethe defence problem (as long as she is po¬litically pure, which is anyway her princi¬pal concern). China can afford to take thisattitude, of course, (although nothing ofthe kind is ever admitted) because of thebalance of power between the U£. and theU.S.S.R. It follows from all this that thecall for wars of national liberation is a pe¬ripheral gesture from which little is ex¬pected, and it is absurd to describe thisbitterly as a “low-risk” form of nationalaggression. Quite apart from the obviouslimitation on Peking’s capacities in this di-recton (exhaustvely catalogued n FrankArmbruster’s paper), the Chinese simplydo not have sufficient interest in the under¬developed world to make it a cornerstoneof their policy. Instructive in this con¬nection is Professor Norton Ginsburg’s pa¬per on the Chinese view of the world.To sum up, I would say that China inCrisis is a unique symposium and wellworth buying for the student of Chineseaffairs. But the reference to “America’salternatives” in the title of Volume II sug¬gests a wider validity: that such academiclabours can serve as a guide to policy. Ofthis I must confess to being sceptical, asthe failure of governments to take the bestadvice available to them is notorious.A central theme in History in Commu¬nist China is the subservience of scholar¬ship to politics. This is an extremely valu¬able little anthology of articles by Westernscholars on the chief problem areas of Chi¬nese Communist historiography; the placeof Confucius in Chinese history, the ex¬planation of the peasant wars, the twothousand year gap between the inceptionof feudalism and the beginnings of capital¬ism and the nature of the Imperialist im¬pact on the Chinese economy. Also includ¬ed are a polemical article from the Sovietjournal Voprosy Istorii on Chinese histo¬riography and a sample of the latter byLiu Ta-nien.A very interesting compilation — orrather collage — of impressions and inter¬pretations of the Great Proletarian Cultur¬al Revolution is provided by This is Com¬munist China, which is based on the re¬ports of a group of Japanese journalistsand academics who travelled widely inChina during the recent upheaval. To thespecialist it will be chiefly interesting asan addition to the corpus of firsthand, eye-witness impressions. My only dis¬appointment was the failure to recordmore of what one of the authors describesas “the dark side” of the Revolution, e.g.,the coercive activities of the Red Guards.Still, the comparison made by one of thereporters between 1955 when all was goingwell for the regime but an atmosphere ofbleak repression reigned in the country,and the present day (1966-67) when the re¬gime is on the brink of chaos but the Japa¬nese reporter is impressed by “the freeand confident manner in which the peopletalked to him, as different from their reti¬cence on his earlier visit,” is an inter¬esting one. As for interpretation, most ofthe positions adopted resemble those de¬veloped in the West and are generally sen¬sible, although they are not all consistentwth one another. However, at the presenttentative stage this is all to the good, andthe final comment by the doyen of thegroup (“I cannot draw a conclusion by anymeans”) must remain the last word on theCultural Revolution for some time tocome. The book is a very good journalisticsurvey for the general reader.In Chinese Religions, Mr. Smith has pro¬duced a handy account of the main ele¬ments of Chinese religion: ancestor wor¬ship, Taoism, Buddhism, Islam as well asthe various assaults of Christianity on theChinese mind. Useful as a short work ofWferdtibe and as a'guide to sburdds^there^>WbHdgfe^,q^ h* in- Chinese people are deeply religious in atranscendental sense. Mr. Smith tries toargue the case for Confucius as a primar-ly religious thinker, but he does this mere¬ly by a shift of emphasis rather than by anew interpretation. The result strikes meas perfunctory and unconvincing. Whatone really wants from a new book on Chi¬nese religion is some fresh light on thepopular eclectic religion and its role inChinese life. This Mr. Smith does not giveus, although it is the basis of his case forthe essential spirituality of the Chinesepeople. In his chapter on the religious situ¬ation in modern China, he merely lists thechief popular deities and concludes withthis rather damning comment on religiouspractices in the free Chinese communitiesof Asia: “Chinese temples are everywherein evidence served by priests who do alucrative trade in the sale of charms andmagical prescriptions for the care of sick¬ness, and engage in communication withthe dead, fortune-telling, and such likepractices.”•Mr. Taylor, who graduated in History fromEdinburgh University in 1967, is at pres¬ent working for a B.L.H. in Chinese pol¬itics at Glasgow University.American Challenge '(Continued from Page 8)Standard Oil technocrat and White Houseconsultant, on the invention that is at thebase of the post-industrial civilization: thecomputer. In 1960 a handful of computerswill be able to replace the entire writtendocumentation in existence in the world.To make sure that no one rejoices inFrance (a country so inhumanly bureau¬cratic that such news might be welcome),he adds that those not having made thesame progress as the Americans in thisfield simply will not be able to commu¬nicate with them.This is a brilliant portrait which nodoubt will make many blush with prideand others stamp their feet in protest anddispute, but it is most of all a sensationalpreface for comparison with Europe,which is, as Servan-Schreiber puts it, im¬mediately taking up the theme of organiza¬tion, “without strategy.” He gives a fewexamples to show that the Europeans haveoften had the ideas, but have not knownhow to exploit them. Such is the case ofthe computers, which Servan-Schreiberreally wants the Europeans, like goodGreeks, to catch up on, and which hethinks they can, if they take up the chal¬lenge of the integral-circuit systems.And there- is the case of the supersoniccommercial planes, where a lukewarmFranco-British project produced a pro¬totype called the Concorde which will bean anachronism when the next Boeing ap¬pears. Then the farcical case of space ex¬ploration: the European space agency as¬signs a different stage to each country so arocket, may be put together. In 1971,(.send *e two) >. 1 vi' oj(Cdritihuifk on next pagefin*'10American Challenge ;(Continued from Page 10)hundred pounds into geostationary orbit.NASA can already sand up two tons.Servan-Schreiber is quite rightly wor¬ried, for if the Europeans continue at theirpresent rate, the Americans will have amonopoly of the most advanced sciencesand technology in 1980. In such a case, allthe initiatives and all the options will bedecided in the U.S.; there will be no bal¬ancing powers, no freedom of action.There will be industrial annexation, whichmeans that no matter how much freedomof thought exists, Europe will be a depend¬ent province. At best Europe will be givencertain specialties, subjected, of course, toAmerican needs.There is, however, a third possibility,which Servan-Schreiber passionately es¬pouses: competition with the giant. But forthat no more time can be lost, for in amatter of years it will be too late. Europemust Find its unity immediately; and fromhere on, the reporter becomes the preach¬er, the advocate of federalism.The plea for a "federal minimum" fol¬lows a detailed, but not specific, plan forEuropean economic resurgence; that is,continued prosperity, but without depend¬ence. First, Europe must learn the lessonswhich the U.S. offers. It must learn how tomanage efficiently, plan democratically, • the task of leadership toward the glorioushorizon. It should be noted that inf Europethe Right is against the human being, andthe Left thinks that eventually he may beworth something. Servan-Schreiber urgesthe Left to place all its confidence in theindividual, because, as Tocqueville wrote ofthe amazing optimism and growth he sawin the young U.S., "the individual is bestjudge of his own interest."It was the young professional class ofFrance which brought The American Chal¬lenge its immense success. They are thefrustrated elite of a large class for whomthe Left means an intelligently brewedmixture of planning and individual in¬itiative; who see in the Left the conditionof security for all without the abolition ofthe unexpected. In many respects in theMarxist tradition, in every respect in theanti-Communist one, this is a class gener¬ally eclectic, usually inconsistent, and suf¬ficiently patient, which considers itself thebest exponent of socialist humanism. Forthese people, the U.S. is far closer to theideal than any avowedly socialist country.Servan-Schreiber fears that the Left willbe too slow in forsaking its myths and dog¬mas. The elections of June, 1968 demon¬strated that half the population still doesnot trust the Left to lead the country out ofcrisis, but even more disappointing, itseemed in May, 1968 that the generationServan-Schreiber termed chosen for thechallenge chose a different vision. toward the pople most lied about and op¬pressed. He must also have a real love forlife’s comforting ordinariness, the smallamenity in so many of our daily habits.This may sound odd, but it could not bemore obvious: while working for a moretruthful, humane life on others’ behalf, oneought to remember all the time that theseoppressed, much as they need somethingbetter, already have cultures that on thewhole allow them to function like peoplerather than animals. The good in these cul¬tures must not be lost when the bad isswept away. Lack of this basic view iswhat frightens us most about 1984. Thatsociety, apart from its more esoteric in¬justices, bans privacy, love affairs, anddecent gin — the essentials, in otherwords. Intellectuals easily get preoccupiedwith things that concern only themselves.Naturally they should not ignore thosethings, but in addition they ought to savesome part of their brainpower for thinkingabout men’s common (in both senses) pos¬sessions and problems. Cultivating aworm’s-eye view may lead to a kind ofignoble romanticism. But to the extentone’s sympathy is tempered, as was Or¬well’s, by a scrupulous regard for histori¬cal accuracy and an exact, self-question¬ing writing style, one can remain wideawake, curious, and (most important) hon¬est. Writers with these talents won’t re¬make the world in the near future, but Harding(Continued from Page 6)who cannot be adequately delineated insomething less than five hundred pages.Furthermore, Mr. Russell need not haveprinted all those dashes where quotationsfrom the Phillips letters had been. We canunderstand his pique, but besides manglingthe narrative, these overly-dramatic la¬cunae tend to have the same effect as thecensor’s "bleep” on a taped televisionshow: we imagine phrases more purplethan reason tells us Harding was capableof.Mr. Russell’s claim that he is writingfor the general public may excuse his lackof direct citation in the text, but it cannotexcuse the mere skeleton of a bibliographywith which he provides us. It is quite pos¬sible that Russell missed a good deal innot availing himself more fully of the richdocumentary collections of this period.While they would more than likely haveconfirmed his chief conclusions, they mayhave enlarged the perspective and refinedthe analysis. For the more intimate areasof Harding’s life, Russell was, of course,limited in his evidence. His chief sourcefor Harding’s relationship with Nan Brit¬ton, for example, is Nan’s own book, ThePresident’s Daughter, corroborated bysuch circumstantial evidence as the check¬ing of handwritings in the registers of Neweducate for the future, and coordinate theenergies and resources of the states, in¬dustries, and universities, in order to getthe maximum from its human potential.Then it must choose a number of vitalareas where it can, or should, compete.Servan-Schreiber stresses space, nuclearenergy, aeronautics, and electronics, withemphasis on computers. Specially adeptsectors must take the lead to encouragethe rest of the economy. But for all this tosucceed, the old closed systems of the Eu¬ropean nations must open themselves to ageneral mobilization of resources, and ac¬cept, as the various American states did,the decisions of the majority. Servan-Schreiber knows perfectly well that a Ger¬man policeman will not, for many years tocome, be suffered to patrol the streets ofParis, and the author has no such unity inmind. What he does envisage is a workingeconomic entity, which is realistic enough;he believes the rest will come with prac¬tice.Servan-Schreiber knows that the Eu¬ropeans are already very aware of thesubtle threat to their cultures which is ac¬companying the erosion of their economicautonomy, and he knows how divided andconfused they are in seeking the ways ofcounter-attack. He nevertheless allows hisown proposals to be relatively simplistic,perhaps because he seeks a broad accept¬ance of his general ideas. Taught by hislarge journalistic knowledge that con¬servatism cannot create order, but only in¬security, suffering, and crisis, and beingconvinced that mobility is not disliked byworkers if gains are attached to it, andfinally certain that “social justice, in anexpanding economy, is Hie condition of in¬dustrial dynamism,” to the Left Will Europe compete? One thing thatServan-Schreiber tries to make very clearis that if the Americans are kicked out ofEurope, it will be many years before anyof the material they leave behind will beusable, so great is the difference in tech¬nological knowledge. That is why, finally,The American Challenge is really a bookfor Americans. They must decide if this,the promise of an ultra-technocorporatesociety is indeed the hope and the chal¬lenge they want to offer to the earth.Mr. Kaplan, a fourth-year student inFrench Literature at the University of Chi¬cago, has lived many years in Europe andhas studied briefly at the SorbonneOrwell(Continued from Page 3)reality of how men now conceive of thosesubjects. Owing to his education and tem¬perament, Orwell steered away from polit¬ical speculation and writing (in its narrowsense, "the art of the possible"). This goesfar toward explaining his present unfash¬ionableness as a political thinker. Ourworld at present is so full of trained socialscientists, experts, organizers, and so forththat Orwell looks by contrast like a dab¬bler, an unprofessional secondary source.Worse yet, his great visions are alreadyshopworn. While in Spain he saw brieflywhat he considered a truly classless socie¬ty, a revolutionary’s dream which, even ifOrwell had kept faith in its eventual reali¬zation, is more remote than ever today.Later he argued for Socialist reform inwartime England. For England to get fullbenefit from the changes, he realized, amass democratic Socialist movementwould be needed. How to get such a thingup was a problem he never seriously at¬tacked. And without tactical underpin¬nings, such a vision has no practical value.Orwell’s last vision—the one now wronglygiven exclusive hold on the term "Orwel¬lian”—was the totalitarian nightmare ofBig Brother. This still diverts contempora¬rily; but it means just one among manydiagnoses of the illness we’re all learningto live with.As a political activist and seer Orwellhas little to offer us. But something of him,in fact most, remains. His big visions havegone stale, but his smaller perceptions arestill fresh. Look, for instance, at the thingshe values — indeed, at the fact that heinsists upon values at all. Camus couldhave been describing Orwell when he saidthat a writer’s dignity is rooted in two(X>mmitments: a refusal to lie about whatone knows, and resistance to oppression.9 jTpj keep, these commitments the writer; jie*ds to Keep his W* qpen, .especially \> -V . \ VV\\I ~i1 *y*\they — would that they were more numer¬ous — will keep the remakers mindful ofhard human facts which we all overlook atour peril.Mr. Barber is a fourth-year graduatepseudonym at the University of Valladolid.mm m*m \Picture CreditsEdwin Anderson . . .pages 6, 7, 8, 10, 11Bob Griess page 3Virgil Burnett page 4Shanghai Times page 1Reprinted from From War to War: The Arab-Israeli Confrontation, 1948-1967, by Nadavi}Safr#n, )0 rmr r.nS« VPW 5 /York hotels. While Nan’s story has beensomewhat substantiated by the Phillipsletters, we must still be extremelycautious — more so than Mr. Russellseems to have been — about the accept¬ance of such evidence.Despite these flaws — and the occasion¬al misplacement of a date or a minor fact— Mr. Russell has written a balanced, in¬sightful, and often entertaining book. Hisdescription of the 1920 Republican Con¬vention is the best I have ever seen, easilythe equal of Arthur Schlesinger’s lively ac¬count of the 1932 Democratic Conventionin The Crisis of the Old Order. We hearthat other biographies of Harding areforthcoming. I think The Shadow ofBlooming Grove can take the competition.Mr. deVencentes is a Ph.D. candidate inthe Department of History at.ythe Uni¬versity of Chicago. ;j > i Vi <PMay, 1949 The Chicago Literary Review 11WHUtM fWM »* ^gWMUl ■Mlfc&MrtWaftbVh * t <v¥*v»VrtV»fth1IVtM.VMM»\\The Female Menagerie by Jay G. Bren-terDillecunlby ROBERT SALASINWe were all sitting around a table in thatquiet, intimate little bar near campusgaily chattering of things literary and ar¬tistic when the nice young Assistant Editorof the Review (you know the type: tall andslender with that oh so gentle look abouthis brown eyes so modestly lowered be¬neath his long thick lashes) suggestedthat, in terms of the most exciting branchof literature today, namely pornography,the Review was sadly lacking. He laughedthat almost musical, rich throaty laughterof his, and glanced toward me, our eyesmeeting for only a split second, but Iknew. Well, girls, you can imagine I justjumped at the chance and soon found my¬self sitting in my neat and tastefully deco¬rated apartment flipping page after de¬licious page of the most delightful mate¬rial.Pornography has always held a ratherspecial place in my life; like poetry, it is aform strictly limited by a severe classicalcriticism, forms regulated by a rhythmand rule established so many years ago.The expensive leather bound volumes, richand warm of de Sade and Trocchi; theslick modernisms of Barney Rosset’s pri¬vate perversions faultlessly displayed withthat cute little sprig of Evergreen at thebase (always my favorite tree, it neverseems to grow old in the autumn); and thelewd greasiness of down and dirty hardcore smut; all have their places in myheart. Can you guess which is my veryown and ever so personal favorite? Ah,young men setting at ease; safe from thepredatory mewings and screechings ofpredatory sex hungry females, real all¬men, either at their languid leisure or outon the firing range where the men are sep¬arated from, you must excuse me, theboys.You can imagine my surprise when thissweet young undergraduate presented mewith Quite a Stack of the most beautifulpaperbacks, all but one from BrandonHouse, and all with the most delightfullytitillating covers. I shook his hand withspecial warmth, one of those delightfullylong handshakes, you know?Enough! Here is the result of my labors!Make Me a Lesbian by Polly ShermanWell, I'm sorry, dears, but Mr. Shermancan't fool me! Certainly this little volumefalls into the last category of my favoritereading, but suffers under the assumptionthat lam At All interested in the doings ofseveral female castrati. Bad enough thatthey don’t have a thrilling thing, but thatthey should actually prefer to do withoutthat tower of pulsing flesh is beyond mylimited comprehension. Good that they areout of the race, though: Female Genes areBad Genes! Nevertheless there is a finebalance between plot and action (too muchplot is always distracting in such matters;you can read War and Peace if you wantplot, dear), and sufficient quanities of ac¬tion to arouse even the most jaded review¬er. The book is rather simple: a slit dis¬covers she really digs girls; all those in¬cidents in college (oh how she wished themover and out of her life!) really weren’tflukes after all. There is Susan, sort of aYoung Lady, who eventually tries to black¬mail our hero, sexually and otherwise(take it from me, they’re all whores) buteventually falls in love with our dear Janet(“I just couldn’t do it; I love you, Janet,”etc.). Janet loses Susan to a man (no hon¬or among them, the beasts) but eventuallyfinds true love in the shape of her shapelysecretary, Rainey (I presume a signifi¬cance to that name). The flagellationscenes are of interest. The dildo incidentsare only fair. All the men in Janet’s lifeare real losers. On the basis of expert tes¬timony (I admit my prejudice) the book iseffective, and probably quite entertaining,even if the prose is weak often to the pointof ted|ouSness. Did you lejojiv that women courtship of theall sorts of horrible diseases? Three 'thfer well-writtecarry . “Lute could take one nymphomaniac ona case, but two ... Then Three?” Lies,Lies, Lies! There is only one in the book,and she never touches him. I don’t blameher; Lute isn’t my type either.Mr. Benter violates the first ruleof real¬ly good porn in his attempt to disguise thisbook as a detective story, a genre that isas tightly formalized as the ritual seduc¬tion of a young boy. Pornography is sup¬posed to be about sex, nay, it is supposedto Be sex; all these little intrusions mayhelp get it through the mails, but they failto arouse the male irr Me. The detectiveportions of the book are astoundingly weakanyway; none of the action or the outcomeof the search can be determined from theclues; everyone is a red herring.We have beneath one ever so delightfullysleazy cover; two faggots, one incestuoussister (n love with her brother who is % ofthe abovementioned), one whore (sister ofthe aforementioned group), their nympho¬maniac step-mother, two more sisters (les¬bian), and a cocktail (?) waitress who doesit for free on a, dig this now, cross, for oneLuther “Lute” Morgan. I would tell youwho done it, but neither of us is interested,lien entendu. Faulted for too much, andrather inane plot (though the cross stillintrigues me). Three stars.Sex, Jealousy, and Conflict by RussellTrainer (I hope you all caught the name.)I suspect that Mr. Trainer also wroteone other book in this melange, namelyFour Way Triangle. This book was foundin the little boys room on the second floorof the Administration building, and we allknow who was reading it there. While pos¬ing as nonfiction, the series of case his¬tories is markedly directed toward theS&M set. I was not impressed (or un¬dressed for that matter); the device isused when you can’t figure out enough plotto kill the 125 page minimum. The coversaves the book from total disaster, beingthe sleaziest of the lot; for the cover, onestar.The Man They Called My Wife by Stark(?) ColeIn spite of the fact that this one has aninvolved and complex plot, it is saved bythe abnormally high quality of its prose;often more psychological than phsiologi-cal.Don Lancer marries what must be (if weare to believe the navel-down photographon the cover), the most effective piece inthe world. Unfortunately (for him, dears)when the time comes to identify her bodyat the morgue, the attendant pulls downthe sheet to reveal, ah me, a man. Well, hehad had some doubts about his wife, butthis was rather unexpected. Also verycomplicated, not to say embarrassing.Oddly enough, the book is rather good.The sexual passages reflect the skill andsubtlety that one finds in the rest of theprose; often well turned, rarely garish,and rather tasty, if never very deep. Itwarmed many a cold winter night. Fourstars for Mr. Cole.Go Down in the Valley by John MaggieOr anywhere else, for that matter. Hasthe most delightful picture of two boys,apparently naked, looking off into the dis¬tance; one points and displays the most-enticing little curl of blond hair under hisarm. A med student informs me that theyboth have some sort of rash all over theirchests (sweet infection!), but I put it downto a bad printing job. The subtitle is “Itwas often said that the valley made men... more often the men made each other.”You can imagine my disappointment atdiscovering this book to be neither as deli¬cate as such fascinating subject mattermight call for, or as low down dirty as Ihad hoped. Alas, girls, this is a loser.Butch works for some sort of cotton firm(perhaps he feels an identification withJockey Shorts) and has the good fortune tobe sent into the field to live with Dave,Greek God with an enormously well-hungframe. Unfortunately, Dave is married (toone of those sex-starved, whining little...) Well, the courtship is difficult. Aftertrial, tribulation, two truckdrivers and araunchy bar, they make it with each other,once, twice, thrice ad infinitum. Butch’s skillful and cunning tongue of Butch, “CubScout stuff.” However, true love wins out,and while Dave goes back to his wife,there are always those three months in thehot and deserted valley next year. TwoStars of excellence in choice of subjectmatter.Four Way Triangle by Marcia MarcoukHas as its outstanding (and upstanding)contribution: No Plot! This unnecessaryaccessory is discarded for a mathemati¬cally precise series of all possible com¬binations and permutations, not to speakof positions. We have: Laura, wife ofBarney; Laurette, daughter of Laura andstep-child of Barney, and Wayne, Lau-rette’s young husband, plus the added at¬traction of Lenny, former high school foot¬ball hero who has never done it becausehe’s too big (“I’ve tried, Laurette, and Ican’t”) Guess what Laura and Lauretteare! Guess what that makes Barney andWayne! There is also the delightfullydrawn characterization of that sweet oldshoe fetishist. Well, the deepest character¬ization provided is a supreme and appar¬ently universal hunger, but the mathemat¬ical intricacies are interesting. Threestars. - .Two Beds for Liz by Peter KantoIs so bad it gets points for sheer raunchi¬ness. The prose is primitive, barelyenough to carry meaning let alone image,while the plot is just complex enough toget in the way of all those golden deli¬cacies of prose we all hunger for. Ratherunsatisfying. So, incidentally is Liz. Liz,suffice it to say, tries harder and harderand harder. I got limper and limper. Onestar for effort. Incidentally, what you cando with characters named Liz, Grace Ce¬lia, Fish, Cappy, and get this, Do Do?Strictly for the middle-class moms anddads of America. The cover is a waste too.The Secret Diary of Ho Chi Minh'sDaughter by Lanh Ba, Lancer Books,New York“She made love, not war.” This is by farthe best book of the lot, even though itmay not be pornography at all. It is: toowell written, has a plot, has character- political (or has a soft political under¬belly), is not about sex so much as aboutone who trades in same (she’s a whore, allthe way down). Lanh Ba manages to com¬bine Fanny Hill’s innocence with DeanRusk’s politics to produce the female Viet¬namese version of the United States Ma¬rines. She hates sex. She hate Buddhists,she hates Communists, she hates Negroes.She loves money, comfort, and immunity.She discovers: Men don’t need women;Women don’t need men. Girls, I could tellyou what I think She needs, but it would betoo too messy. She is a delight to behold.On Black G.I.’s “I feel they are pre¬tending to be with us in this holy crusadeof Catholics against Communists.” On truelove: “Some people, especially girls, mayenvy me; to have had a thousand men,well, I never felt pleasure. Never. Thosetwo Buddhist rapers (Note: Priests) prob¬ably ... I was happy when Father Ray¬mond. . .Am I A Weirdie?” On Sex “Ev¬ery penetration is an insult to me. It’s likea stranger putting his muddy foot throughthe door of your house.” On the U. S.: “Toomuch freedom of the press. Too many‘psychological errors.’ And the good newsis very little. The best was that NguyenCao Ky had become the Premier of Viet¬nam. He is a wonderful leader .. . and headores the great European leaders: Hitler,Mussolini, Franco . . . Last November theAmerican televisions said that the guy whospat in the face of Secretary of State Ruskin Montevideo (a certain Jesus — what aname for a Red!) had been beaten todeath by the Uruguay police . .. The pa¬pers had not written a word about thebeating. . .Bravo! That’s the way to begood intelligent journalists.”What can I say about this charmingdream? “Venceremos! Creamos uno dostres Vietnames!”Mr. Salasin is a sociologist associated withthe University of California and has justpublished his first book, Sexual Aberra¬tions among Church Musicians on theAmerican University: The Charming Bells,on which he worked and researched somethree years.This novel lays iton the line:black militancy andblack compromise!Archie Washington beats his wife, sets fire tothe cat, chases coeds, deals from the bottomof the deck, and occasionally attemptsmurder. He is also the president of BundyUniversity (Colored Agricultural andNormal) in Texas, because The Man likes itthat way. When Archie’s nephew Beaunorusbrings his white wife to Bundy for thesummer, things start happening. The ManSays Yes is a wild mixture-comedy, drama*and hard realism-with some importantthings to say about the violent contradictionsof race, self, and community in Americatoday.The ManSays Yesby DAN McCALL$5.95 at all bookstoresTHE VIKING PRESSITU)iaT : *_|HMUSIC I to tn'mf-’sqsh ,-.: 0.1618 ' . 0‘.rj, i ii t-bJ12 The Chicago Literary Review 4JU-May, 1969around and about the midwayLessons of RenewalFifth ward alderman Leon Despres, an¬thropology professor Sol Tax, Mrs. JuneDolnick, a member of the Citizens HousingCommittee, Henderson Smith of the Ken-wood-Oakland Community Organization,and Mrs. Barbara Birthright, a member ofthe Hyde Park-Kenwood Community Con¬ference tenants union will discuss Sundaythe effects of urban renewal in Hyde Park.The program, built around the question,“Urban Renewal 20 Years Later: WhatHomes Have We Built,” sponsored by Vot¬ers Committed to Change will be at St.Paul’s Church, 50th and Dorchester, at 3pm Sunday.Paul Booth, head of the VCC, says themeeting “should help us learn how we canprevent a repetition of the wrongs of pastrenewal programs.” ning, Psi U scored five runs on one hit andfive errors. Bear Kruley, the captain ofTufts, blamed the defeat on the ratherspectacular errors in those two innings.In the fourth inning, Star Hansen, playingcenterfield for Tufts, misjudged a fly ball.The Psi U runner had gone back to first totag up and somehow decided not to go tosecond after all. Hansen, not realizing therunner had failed to advance to second,overthrew third, scoring two runs.The inning also ended in a blaze of glorywith the second double play of the game forTufts. With one out and bases loaded,Bruce Heldt hit a blooper into short right.Johnny McGuire, driving hard, made a sen¬sational catch, sliding under the ball, andcatching it on his stomach. He flipped theball over to Mark Kimbrell on first todouble off Dave Caro.The other Tufts double play came in thefirst inning, with men on second and third. when Steve Kawa, playing shortstop, field¬ed a hot ground ball and threw to Kimbrell.Science AwardsSeven students have been awarded theSigma Xi certificate of merit for demon¬strating outstanding achievement in sci¬ence. All are fourth year college students.Keith Backman. Michael Kramer, andRibert Silver have been awarded the cer¬tificate along with $50 for work inbiochemistry, biology, and statisticsrespectively.Four other winners of the award are PaulBrown, Harold Burger, and David Caro inbiology, and James Heasley in astronomy.PeopleGustavus F. Swift, the Chicago archae¬ologist, has been named curator of the Ori¬ental Institute. The appointment, effective July 1, wasannounced by George R. Hughes, Professorand Director of the Oriental Institute andProfessor of Near Eastern Languages andCivilizations at the University.Swift has been associated with the Ori¬ental Institute since 1959 as a research as¬sociate. His special field of academic inter¬est is Near Eastern archaeology.He received a Ph.D. degree from Chicagoin 1958, and has been a member of severalarchaeological expeditions to the NearEast.Martha Burgleman, payroll clerk inhousekeeping and general service at thehospitals and clinics has been named theiremployee of the year. . .George Stigler, Walgreen distinguishedservice professor of American institutionsin the business school, is “Most Dis¬tinguished Alumnus for 1969” of the Univer¬sity of Washington. ..RepressionTheodore Low!, associate professor of po¬litical science, analyzes the growing moodof repression in an article in the May 19issue of the Nation. He says it may be the“worse domestic crisis of the century.He refers to the Chicago convention, thelocal model cities program, the Red Squad,and a UC law graduate who had written anessay on the legal right of revolution andwho for ten years tried unsuccessfully to beaccepted by the Illinois Bar, gave up and isnow a law professor.Lowi concludes: “The antidote to reac¬tion is reaffirmation of the American socialideal. That ideal is not the Great Societybut the Loose Society. The definition ofwhat we recognize as a good society can beput in a single phrase: Law and disorder.”Softball Champs ■The sweet taste of victory has twiceeluded Tufts.Last year it lost the college softballchampionship in a tear-jerker to AlphaDelt, 11-9. Yesterday, they lost the cham¬pionship in a heart-stopper to Psi U, 9-8.Chicago’s Psi U got all their runs in thesecond and the fourth innings. In the sec¬ond inning, the four runs scored were ontwo hits and four errors. In the fourth In-Editorial NoteThe theft of two of Maroon pho¬tographer David Travis’s camerasleaves us without a picture of theincredible extravaganza held byFOTA last Friday. The Friday eventwas the best thing that has hap¬pened to this place in some time.We promise to do it justice in Fri¬day’s paper. In the meantime con¬gratulations to Peter Ratner, SearsRoebuck, Mr. Moog, and everyoneelse involved. Student Demonstrations Sweep NationBy Con HitchcockSeven George Washington University stu¬dents have been expelled for the occupationof the Sino-Soviet Studies Institute lastApril 23.Two others have been suspended until thequarter beginning in spring 1978, one hasbeen given a letter of reprimand, threeawait private hearings, and two hadcharges dropped against them.About 30 to 40 students, mostly membersof the Students for a Democratic Society(SDS), seized a building on the D.C.campus after forcing a cleaning woman tohand over the keys. Barricading the doorswith furniture, they occupied the buildingfor five hours until university officials per¬suaded them to leave.Demonstrators at Berkeley attemptedSunday to create a second “people’s park”on vacant land, but were driven away bynational guardsmen with little violence.The demonstration occured about tenblocks north of the university-owned lotwhere 50 persons were arrested and 60 in¬jured in a confrontation with authoritieslast week. Twelve people were arrestedSunday on charges ranging from battery toviolating an anti-loitering ordinance.The University of Illinois at CircleCampus is sponsoring a pancake eatingcontest May 29. Circle is inviting teams oftwo men and two women from all of thecity colleges to compete in this gala fete.Applications can be made through the Ma¬roon no later than May 26.The Big Muddy Gazette, an undergroundnewspaper at Southern Illinois University,has had its license revoked following publi-Tuesday, May 20LECTURE: John N. Rowell, Bell Telephone Labora¬tories, Murray Hill, New Jersey, "Excitation and Self-Energy Effects in Tunneling between Normal Metals,"Research Institutes 480, 4:15 pm.LECTURE: Ismail Poonwala, professor, McGill Univer¬sity, "al-Qadi al-Numan and the Inamate," Cobb 101, 4pmLECTURE: Moshe Schwartz, graduate student, sociologydepartment, "Socialism in Israel Today," Hillel House,8 pm.folk ft SQUARE DANCING: International House, As¬sembly Hall, 8 pm.FOLK SONG WORKSHOP: Hillel House, 8 pm.LECTURE-DEMONSTRATION: Festival Music of Japan,William P. Malm, professor, University of Michigan,Breasted Hall, 8 pm.BRIDGE: Ida Noyes Library, 8 pm. LECTURE: Professor Fahir Iz, NATO visiting professorin Canada, "Four Phases in Modern Turkish Liter¬ature, Cobb 201, 4:15 pm.LECTURE: P. Howard-Flanders, Professor, Yale Medic¬al School, "Cellular Recovery Processes Before andAfter DNA Replication," Ricketts 1, 4:15 pm.LECTURE: Michael Polanyi. Schaffner lecturer, OxfordUniversity, "The Structure of Art: Art in General,"Kent 107, 8 pm ^ _FOLK DANCE: British and Scandinavian Country Danc¬ers, Ida Noyes, 8 pm.CONCERT: Contemporary Music Society, iazz concertby John Gilmore Sextet, Ida Noyes Library, 8 pm.admission $1.50 ♦ 'Wednesday, May 21LECTURE: Dr. P. Heller, Chief of Medical Services andHematology Section, West Side Veterans' Adminis¬tration Hospital, "Management of Sickle Cell Diseaseand Prevention of Complications," Billings M-137, 12:30pm. i «L^fTUREJ Zach Hall, professor, department of neuro¬biology, JjUryard Medical School, "Metabolism andReleas*j^BiinjML.aminabutyri^i£cid in single Lob- Thursday, May 22LECTURE: Fazlur Rahman, Visiting Professor, NearEastern Center at UCLA, "The Idea of Self-Con¬sciousness in Avicenna and Later Muslim Philoso¬phers," Swift Common Room, 4 pm.LECTURE:r George Schulz, professor, Department ofEngineering and Applied Science, Yale University,"Compound States in Molecules and Their Role in Vi¬brational Excitation, Negative Ion Formation and La¬ser Action," Eckhart 133, 4:30 pm.ISRAELI FOLK DANCING: Teaching and requests, Hill¬el HOuse, 7:30 pm.PLAY: Duchess of Malfi, Reynolds Club, 8:30, adf(UT).FILM: The Kinetic Art, 7:15 & 9:15, Quantrell.FORUM: The Gri ON OTHERCAMPUSEScation of an issue highly critical of the Uni¬versity administration.The seven editors of the newspaper havefiled a complaint against the universitycharging that they have uncontrolled dis¬cretion in giving solicitation permits andthat the plaintiffs have been denied theirconstitutional right to free speech and freepress. ...The Gazette was published once, but hadits permit revoked when a second issuecontaining satirical and critical commentsabout president Delyte Morris was pub¬lished.Chancellor Robert MacVicar, speakingfor the administration, said that the issuecontained “unfounded accusations” againstMorris and that the “content is such that itwould reflect discredit on the University ifwe would permit it to be distributed.”According to the complaint, the Univer¬sity has agreed to allow further issues ofthe Gazette to be published only if eachpaper is submitted to the administration for approval prior to publication.James E. Allen, U.S. Commissioner ofEducation, disagreed with the statementsof the Nixon administration labellingcampus demonstrators as “tyrants,”“criminals,” and “barbarians.”Allen disagreed specifically with state¬ments of Attorney General John Mitchell,and Assistant Attorney Generals RichardG. Kleindienst and William H. Rehnquist.Said Allen, “This is the finest generationwe’ve ever had. The students. . .the youngpeople are capable, they’re bright, they’reknowledgeable, they know more than anygeneration.He added that “there is no serious divi¬sion (with the past statements of the Jus¬tice department ... There are people wholook at these problems from differentpoints of view of enforcing the law and(they) look at it solely from that point ofview.” ’Allen stated that he felt unrest on campuswould increase for “some time to come,”ruled out cut-off of federal funds to schoolsfailing to discipline demonstrators, but sup¬ported cut-off of funds to demonstratorsthemselves. He also said that there are suf¬ficient laws on state and local levels tohandle campus violence and that punitivemeasures play into the hands of more mili¬tant students.Same Day 5 Hr. Cleaning No Extra ChargeJAMES SCHULTZ CLEANERSCustom Quality Cleaning1363 E. 53rd 10% Student Discount 752-6933You won't have to putyour moving or storageproblem off until to¬morrow if you cali ustoday.PETERSON MOVINGAND STORAGE CO.12655 S. Doty Ave.646-4411 Theses, term papersTyped, edited to specifications.Also tables and charts.11 yrs. exp.MANUSCRIPTS UNLIMITED664-5358866 No. Wabash Ave.IMSpecial!Style Cut—Requires No Setting!10% Student Discount5242 HYDE PARK BLVD... r, May 20, 1969/THo Chicago Maroon/5You're under 25but you drivelike an expert.Why should yonhave 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 Crane238-0971SENTRY IfINSURANCEjo f'uTTnodTo i^ ’o: iti yyii«Mi»ShdrniaMW*vw*Mi Vii * « • ^vts,^iww» inKiUMMg. vift xjiio^ frbftf' w* tmiwmw^mI'' \,The Female Menagerie by Jay G. Bren-terDillecuntby ROBERT SALASINWe were all sitting around a table in thatquiet, intimate little bar near campusgaily chattering of things literary and ar¬tistic when the nice young Assistant Editorof the Review (you know the type: tall andslender with that oh so gentle look abouthis brown eyes so modestly lowered be¬neath his long thick lashes) suggestedthat, in terms of the most exciting branchof literature today, namely pornography,the Review was sadly lacking. He laughedthat almost musical, rich throaty laughterof his, and glanced toward me, our eyesmeeting for only a split second, but Iknew. Well, girls, you can imagine I justjumped at the chance and soon found my¬self sitting in my neat and tastefully deco¬rated apartment flipping page after de¬licious page of the most delightful mate¬rial.Pornography has always held a ratherspecial place in my life; like poetry, it is aform strictly limited by a severe classicalcriticism, forms regulated by a rhythmand rule established so many years ago.The expensive leather bound volumes, richand warm of de Sade and Trocchi; theslick modernisms of Barney Rosset’s pri¬vate perversions faultlessly displayed withthat cute little sprig of Evergreen at thebase (always my favorite tree, it neverseems to grow old in the autumn); and thelewd greasiness of down and dirty hardcore smut; all have their places in myheart. Can you guess which is my veryown and ever so personal favorite? Ah,young men setting at ease; safe from thepredatory mewings and screechings ofpredatory sex hungry females, real all¬men, either at their languid leisure or outon the firing range where the men are sep¬arated from, you must excuse me, theboys.You can imagine my surprise when thissweet young undergraduate presented mewith Quite a Stack of the most beautifulpaperbacks, all but one from BrandonHouse, and all with the most delightfullytitillating covers. I shook his hand withspecial warmth, one of those delightfullylong handshakes, you know?Enough! Here is the result of my labors!Make Me a Lesbian by Polly ShermanWell, I’m sorry, dears, but Mr. Shermancaift fool me! Certainly this little volumefalls into the last category of my favoritereading, but suffers under the assumptionthat I am At All interested in the doings ofseveral female castrati. Bad enough thatthey don’t have a thrilling thing, but thatthey should actually prefer to do withoutthat tower of pulsing flesh is beyond mylimited comprehension. Good that they areout of the race, though: Female Genes areBad Genes! Nevertheless there is a finebalance between plot and action (too muchplot is always distracting in such matters;you can read War and Peace if you wantplot, dear), and sufficient quanities of ac¬tion to arouse even the most jaded review¬er. The book is rather simple: a slit dis¬covers she really digs girls; all those in¬cidents in college (oh how she wished themover and out of her life!) really weren’tflukes after all. There is Susan, sort of aYoung Lady, who eventually tries to black¬mail our hero, sexually and otherwise(take it from me, they’re all whores) buteventually falls in love with our dear Janet(“I just couldn’t do it; I love you, Janet,”etc.). Janet loses Susan to a man (no hon¬or among them, the beasts) but eventuallyfinds true love in the shape of her shapelysecretary, Rainey (I presume a signifi¬cance to that name). The flagellationscenes are of interest. The dildo incidentsare only fair. All the men in Janet’s lifeare real losers. On the basis of expert tes¬timony (I admit my prejudice) the book iseffective, and probably quite entertaining,even if the prose is weak often to the pointof tedfc)u£ness. ;Ij>id you kijofw that womencarry all sorts of horrible diseases? ThreeThe Chicago Literary Review. “Lute could take one nymphomaniac ona case, but two ... Then Three?” Lies,Lies, Lies! There is only one in the book,and she never touches him. I don’t blameher; Lute isn’t my type either.Mr. Benter violates the first rule of real¬ly good porn in his attempt to disguise thisbook as a detective story, a genre that isas tightly formalized as the ritual seduc¬tion of a young boy. Pornography is sup¬posed to be about sex, nay, it is supposedto Be sex; all these little intrusions mayhelp get it through the mails, but they failto arouse the male irr Me. The detectiveportions of the book are astoundingly weakanyway; none of the action or the outcomeof the search can be determined from theclues; everyone is a red herring.We have beneath one ever so delightfullysleazy cover; two faggots, one incestuoussister (n love with her brother who is xk ofthe abovementioned), one whore (sister ofthe aforementioned group), their nympho¬maniac step-mother, two more sisters (les¬bian), and a cocktail (?) waitress who doesit for free on a, dig this now, cross, for oneLuther “Lute” Morgan. I would tell youwho done it, but neither of us is interested,bien entendu. Faulted for too much, andrather inane plot (though the cross stillintrigues me). Three stars.Sex, Jealousy, and Conflict by RussellTrainer (I hope you all caught the name.)I suspect that Mr. Trainer also wroteone other book in this melange, namelyFour Way Triangle. This book was foundin the little boys room on the second floorof the Administration building, and we allknow who was reading it there. While pos¬ing as nonfiction, the series of case his¬tories is markedly directed toward theS&M set. I was not impressed (or un¬dressed for that matter); the device isused when you can’t figure out enough plotto kill the 125 page minimum. The coversaves the book from total disaster, beingthe sleaziest of the lot; for the cover, onestar.The Man They Called My Wife by Stark(?) ColeIn spite of the fact that this one has aninvolved and complex plot, it is saved bythe abnormally high quality of its prose;often more psychological than phsiologi-cal.Don Lancer marries what must be (if weare to believe the navel-down photographon the cover), the most effective piece inthe world. Unfortunately (for him, dears)when the time comes to identify her bodyat the morgue, the attendant pulls downthe sheet to reveal, ah me, a man. Well, hehad had some doubts about his wife, butthis was rather unexpected. Also verycomplicated, not to say embarrassing.Oddly enough, the book is rather good.The sexual passages reflect the skill andsubtlety that one finds in the rest of theprose; often well turned, rarely garish,and rather tasty, if never very deep. Itwarmed many a cold winter night. Fourstars for Mr. Cole.Go Down in the Valley by John MaggieOr anywhere else, for that matter. Hasthe most delightful picture of two boys,apparently naked, looking off into the dis¬tance; one points and displays the most-enticing little curl of blond hair under hisarm. A med student informs me that theyboth have some sort of rash all over theirchests (sweet infection!), but I put it downto a bad printing job. The subtitle is “Itwas often said that the valley made men... more often the men made each other.”You can imagine my disappointment atdiscovering this book to be neither as deli¬cate as such fascinating subject mattermight call for, or as low down dirty as Ihad hoped. Alas, girls, this is a loser.Butch works for some sort of cotton firm(perhaps he feels an identification withJockey Shorts) and has the good fortune tobe sent into the field to live with Dave,Greek God with an enormously well-hungframe. Unfortunately, Dave is married (toone of those sex-starved, whining little. ..) Well, the courtship is difficult. Aftertrial, tribulation, two truckdrivers and araunchy bar, they make it with each other,once, twice, thrice ad infinitum. Butch’scourtship of the fcf er-so-male .Daye is aei> ither well-writte^ hMtta fAninr &*! 1Ij skillful and cunning tongue of Butch, “CubScout stuff.” However, true love wins out,and while Dave goes back to his wife,there are always those three months in thehot and deserted valley next year. TwoStars of excellence in choice of subjectmatter.Four Way Triangle by Marcia MarcoukHas as its outstanding (and upstanding)contribution: No Plot! This unnecessaryaccessory is discarded for a mathemati¬cally precise series of all possible com¬binations and permutations, not to speakof positions. We have: Laura, wife ofBarney; Laurette, daughter of Laura andstep-child of Barney, and Wayne, Lau-rette’s young husband, plus the added at¬traction of Lenny, former high school foot¬ball hero who has never done it becausehe’s too big (“I’ve tried, Laurette, and Ican’t”) Guess what Laura and Lauretteare! Guess what that makes Barney andWayne! There is also the delightfullydrawn characterization of that sweet oldshoe fetishist. Well, the deepest character¬ization provided is a supreme and appar¬ently universal hunger, but the mathemat¬ical intricacies are interesting. Threestars. - .Two Beds for Liz by Peter KantoIs so bad it gets points for sheer raunchi¬ness. The prose is primitive, barelyenough to carry meaning let alone image,while the plot is just complex enough toget in the way of all those golden deli¬cacies of prose we all hunger for. Ratherunsatisfying. So, incidentally is Liz. Liz,suffice it to say, tries harder and harderand harder. I got limper and limper. Onestar for effort. Incidentally, what you cando with characters named Liz, Grace Ce¬lia, Fish, Cappy, and get this, Do Do?Strictly for the middle-class moms anddads of America. The cover is a waste too.The Secret Diary of Ho Chi Minh'sDaughter by Lanh Ba, Lancer Books,New York“She made love, not war.” This is by farthe best book of the lot, even though itmay not be pornography at all. It is: toowell written, has a plot, has character- political (or has a soft political under¬belly), is not about sex so much as aboutone who trades in same (she’s a whore, allthe way down). Lanh Ba manages to com¬bine Fanny Hill’s innocence with DeanRusk’s politics to produce the female Viet¬namese version of the United States Ma¬rines. She hates sex. She hate Buddhists,she hates Communists, she hates Negroes.She loves money, comfort, and immunity.She discovers: Men don’t need women;Women don’t need men. Girls, I could tellyou what I think She needs, but it would betoo too messy. She is a delight to behold.On Black G.I.’s “I feel they are pre¬tending to be with us in this holy crusadeof Catholics against Communists.” On truelove: “Some people, especially girls, mayenvy me; to have had a thousand men,well, I never felt pleasure. Never. Thosetwo Buddhist rapers (Note: Priests) prob¬ably ... I was happy when Father Ray¬mond. . .Am I A Weirdie?” On Sex “Ev¬ery penetration is an insult to me. It’s likea stranger putting his muddy foot throughthe door of your house.” On the U. S.: “Toomuch freedom of the press. Too many‘psychological errors.’ And the good newsis very little. The best was that NguyenCao Ky had become the Premier of Viet¬nam. He is a wonderful leader .. . and headores the great European leaders: Hitler,Mussolini, Franco . . . Last November theAmerican televisions said that the guy whospat in the face of Secretary of State Ruskin Montevideo (a certain Jesus — what aname for a Red!) had been beaten todeath by the Uruguay police .. . The pa¬pers had not written a word about thebeating. . .Bravo! That’s the way to begood intelligent journalists.”What can I say about this charmingdream? “Venceremos! Creamos uno dostres Vietnames!”Mr. Salasin is a sociologist associated withthe University of California and has justpublished his first book, Sexual Aberra¬tions among Church Musicians on theAmerican University: The Charming Bells,on which he worked and researched somethree years.This novel lays iton the line:black militancy andblack compromise!Archie Washington beats his wife, sets fire tothe cat, chases coeds, deals from the bottomof the deck, and occasionally attemptsmurder. He is also the president of BundyUniversity (Colored Agricultural andNormal) in Texas, because The Man likes itthat way. When Archie’s nephew Beaunorusbrings his white wife to Bundy for thesummer, things start happening. The ManSays Yes is a wild mixture-comedy, drama*and hard realism—with some importantthings to say about the violent contradictionsof race, self, and community in Americatoday.The MbqSays Yesby DAN McCALL$5.95 at all bookstoresTHE VIKING PRESS(TU)>nT ::/AUJiC 1 r.: o e s V* * . o< ru . i.A_JMay, 1969Lessons of RenewalFifth ward alderman Leon Despres, an¬thropology professor Sol Tax, Mrs. JuneDolnick, a member of the Citizens HousingCommittee, Henderson Smith of the Ken-wood-Oakland Community Organization,and Mrs. Barbara Birthright, a member ofthe Hyde Park-Kenwood Community Con¬ference tenants union will discuss Sundaythe effects of urban renewal in Hyde Park.The program, built around the question,“Urban Renewal 20 Years Later: WhatHomes Have We Built,” sponsored by Vot¬ers Committed to Change will be at St.Paul’s Church, 50th and Dorchester, at 3pm Sunday.Paul Booth, head of the VCC, says themeeting “should help us learn how we canprevent a repetition of the wrongs of pastrenewal programs.”RepressionTheodore Lowi, associate professor of po¬litical science, analyzes the growing moodof repression in an article in the May 19issue of the Nation. He says it may be the“worse domestic crisis of the century.He refers to the Chicago convention, thelocal model cities program, the Red Squad,and a UC law graduate who had written anessay on the legal right of revolution andwho for ten years tried unsuccessfully to beaccepted by the Illinois Bar, gave up and isnow a law professor.Lowi concludes: “The antidote to reac¬tion is reaffirmation of the American socialideal. That ideal is not the Great Societybut the Loose Society. The definition ofwhat we recognize as a good society can beput in a single phrase: Law and disorder.”Softball Champs ■The sweet taste of victory has twiceeluded Tufts.Last year it lost the college softballchampionship in a tear-jerker to AlphaDelt, 11-9. Yesterday, they lost the cham¬pionship in a heart-stopper to Psi U, 9-8.Chicago’s Psi U got all their runs in thesecond and the fourth innings. In the sec¬ond inning, the four runs scored were ontwo hits and four errors. In the fourth In¬ ning, Psi U scored five runs on one hit andfive errors. Bear Kruley, the captain ofTufts, blamed the defeat on the ratherspectacular errors in those two innings.In the fourth inning, Star Hansen, playingcenterfield for Tufts, misjudged a fly ball.The Psi U runner had gone back to first totag up and somehow decided not to go tosecond after all. Hansen, not realizing therunner had failed to advance to second,overthrew third, scoring two runs.The inning also ended in a blaze of glorywith the second double play of the game forTufts. With one out and bases loaded,Bruce Heldt hit a blooper into short right.Johnny McGuire, driving hard, made a sen¬sational catch, sliding under the ball, andcatching it on his stomach. He flipped theball over to Mark Kimbrell on first todouble off Dave Caro.The other Tufts double play came in thefirst inning, with men on second and third, when Steve Kawa, playing shortstop, field¬ed a hot ground ball and threw to Kimbrell.Science AwardsSeven students have been awarded theSigma Xi certificate of merit for demon¬strating outstanding achievement in sci¬ence. All are fourth year college students.Keith Backman. Michael Kramer, andRibert Silver have been awarded the cer¬tificate along with $50 for work inbiochemistry, biology, and statisticsrespectively.Four other winners of the award are PaulBrown, Harold Burger, and David Caro inbiology, and James Heasley in astronomy.PeopleGustavus F. Swift, the Chicago archae¬ologist, has been named curator of the Ori¬ental Institute. The appointment, effective July 1, wasannounced by George R. Hughes, Professorand Director of the Oriental Institute andProfessor of Near Eastern Languages andCivilizations at the University.Swift has been associated with the Ori¬ental Institute since 1959 as a research as¬sociate. His special field of academic inter¬est is Near Eastern archaeology.He received a Ph.D. degree from Chicagoin 1958, and has been a member of severalarchaeological expeditions to the NearEast.Martha Burgleman, payroll clerk inhousekeeping and general service at thehospitals and clinics has been named theiremployee of the year. ..George Stigler, Walgreen distinguishedservice professor of American institutionsin the business school, is “Most Dis¬tinguished Alumnus for 1969” of the Univer¬sity of Washington. ..Student Demonstrations Sweep NationEditorial NoteThe theft of two of Maroon pho¬tographer David Travis’s camerasleaves us without a picture of theincredible extravaganza held byFOTA last Friday. The Friday eventwas the best thing that has hap¬pened to this place in some time.We promise to do it justice in Fri¬day’s paper. In the meantime con¬gratulations to Peter Ratner, SearsRoebuck, Mr. Moog, and everyoneelse involved. By Con HitchcockSeven George Washington University stu¬dents have been expelled for the occupationof the Sino-Soviet Studies Institute lastApril 23.Two others have been suspended until thequarter beginning in spring 1978, one hasbeen given a letter of reprimand, threeawait private hearings, and two hadcharges dropped against them.About 30 to 40 students, mostly membersof the Students for a Democratic Society(SDS), seized a building on the D.C.campus after forcing a cleaning woman tohand over the keys. Barricading the doorswith furniture, they occupied the buildingfor five hours until university officials per¬suaded them to leave.Demonstrators at Berkeley attemptedSunday to create a second “people’s park”on vacant land, but were driven away bynational guardsmen with little violence.The demonstration occured about tenblocks north of the university-owned lotwhere 50 persons were arrested and 60 in¬jured in a confrontation with authoritieslast week. Twelve people were arrestedSunday on charges ranging from battery toviolating an anti-loitering ordinance.The University of Illinois at CircleCampus is sponsoring a pancake eatingcontest May 29. Circle is inviting teams oftwo men and two women from all of thecity colleges to compete in this gala fete.Applications can be made through the Ma¬roon no later than May 26.The Big Muddy Gazette, an undergroundnewspaper at Southern Illinois University,has had its license revoked following publi- ON OTHERCAMPUSEScation of an issue highly critical of the Uni¬versity administration.The seven editors of the newspaper havefiled a complaint against the universitycharging that they have uncontrolled dis¬cretion in giving solicitation permits andthat the plaintiffs have been denied theirconstitutional right to free speech and freepr2ss. T. . , • ' .The Gazette was published once, but hadits permit revoked when a second issuecontaining satirical and critical commentsabout president Delyte Morris was pub¬lished.Chancellor Robert MacVicar, speakingfor the administration, said that the issuecontained “unfounded accusations” againstMorris and that the “content is such that itwould reflect discredit on the University ifwe would permit it to be distributed.”According to the complaint, the Univer¬sity has agreed to allow further issues ofthe Gazette to be published only if eachpaper is submitted to the administration for approval prior to publication.James E. Allen, U.S. Commissioner ofEducation, disagreed with the statementsof the Nixon administration labellingcampus demonstrators as “tyrants,”“criminals,” and “barbarians.”Allen disagreed specifically with state¬ments of Attorney General John Mitchell,and Assistant Attorney Generals RichardG. Kleindienst and William H. Rehnquist.Said Allen, “This is the finest generationwe’ve ever had. The students. . .the youngpeople are capable, they’re bright, they’reknowledgeable, they know more than anygeneration.He added that “there is no serious divi¬sion (with the past statements of the Jus¬tice department .. . There are people wholook at these problems from differentpoints of view of enforcing the law and(they) look at it solely from that point ofview.”Allen stated that he felt unrest on campuswould increase for “some time to come,”ruled out cut-off of federal funds to schoolsfailing to discipline demonstrators, but sup¬ported cut-off of funds to demonstratorsthemselves. He also said that there are suf¬ficient laws on state and local levels tohandle campus violence and that punitivemeasures play into the hands of more mili¬tant students.Same Day 5 Hr. Cleaning No Extra ChargeJAMES SCHULTZ CLEANERSCustom Quality Cleaning1363 E. 53rd 10% Student Discount 752-6933BULLETIN OF EVENTSTuesday, May 20LECTURE: John N. Rowell, Bell Telephone Labora¬tories, Murray Hill, New Jersey, "Excitation and Self-Energy Effects in Tunneling between Normal Metals,"Research Institutes 480, 4:15 pm.LECTURE: Ismail F>oonwala, professor, McGill Univer¬sity, "al-Qadi al-Numan and the inamate," Cobb 101, 4pmLECTURE: Moshe Schwartz, graduate student, sociologydepartment, "Socialism in Israel Today," Hillel House,8 pm.FOLK & SQUARE DANCING: International House, As¬sembly Hall, 8 pm.FOLK SONG WORKSHOP: Hillel House, 8 pm.LECTURE-DEMONSTRATION: Festival Music of Japan,William P. Malm, professor. University of Michigan,Breasted Hall, 8 pm.BRIDGE: Ida Noyes Library, 8 pm. LECTURE: Professor Fahir Iz, NATO visiting professorin Canada, "Four Phases in Modern Turkish Liter¬ature, Cobb 201, 4:15 pm.LECTURE: P. Howard-Flanders, Professor, Yale Medic¬al School, "Cellular Recovery Processes Before andAfter DNA Replication," Ricketts 1, 4:15 pm.LECTURE: Michael Polanyi, Schaffner lecturer, OxfordUniversity, "The Structure of Art: Art in General,"Kent 107, 8 pm A ^FOLK DANCE: British and Scandinavian Country Danc¬ers, Ida Noyes, 8 pm.CONCERT: Contemporary Music Society, jazz concertby John Gilmore Sextet, Ida Noyes Library, 8 pm.admission $1.50 You won't have to putyour moving or storageproblem off until to¬morrow if you call ustoday.PETERSON MOVINGAND STORAGE CO.12655 S. Doty Ave.646-4411 Theses, term papersTyped, edited to specifications.Also tables and charts.11 yrs. exp.MANUSCRIPTS UNLIMITED664-5858866 No. Wabash Ave.4^*Thursday, May 22Wednesday, May 21L^CTURE: Dr. P. Heller, Chief of Medical Services andHematology Section, West Side Veterans' Adminis¬tration Hospital, "Management of Sickle Cell Diseaseand Prevention of Complications," Billings M-137, 12:30pm. y .i-ECTURE| Zach Hall, professor, department of neuro¬biology, Ikjryard Medical School, "Metabolism andRelease »j>wmna-aminobutvric Acid in single Lob¬ster Axflfl Abbott Hall, 31 LECTURE: Fazlur Rahman, Visiting Professor, NearEastern Center at UCLA, "The Idea of Self-Gon-sciousness in Avicenna and Later Muslim Philoso¬phers," Swift Common Room, 4 pm.LECTURE:r George Schulz, professor. Department ofEngineering and Applied Science, Yale University,"Compound States in Molecules and Their Role in Vi¬brational Excitation, Negative Ion Formation and La¬ser Action," Eckhart 133, 4:30 pm.ISRAELI FOLK DANCING: Teaching and requests, Hill¬el Hduse, 7:30 pm.PLAY: Duchess of Malfi, Reynolds Club, 8:30, adf<UT).FILM: The Kinetic Art, 7:15 & 9:15, Quantrell.FORUM: The Grj 19MSpecial!Style Cut—Requires No Setting!10% Student Discount5242 HYDE PARK BLVD.1; lo (iirl4JTU( i_j’4riu v tutinA'-i:wOAlP7^7T#' - 8*tdYou'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 Crane238-0971SENTRYINSURANCEjo ‘AaTvrod u> * o ; is yntMay 20, 1960/The Chicago Maroon/5I————(The Maroon Classified Ads)FREEDOM FOR JUAN SANDERS!RATES: For University students,faculty, and staff: 50 cents perline, 40 cents per repeat tine.For non-University clientele:75 cents per line, 60 cents perrepeat line. Count 30 charactersand spaces per line.TO PLACE AO: 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 thephono 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.SUMMER SUBLETRoom in 1400 E. 57th Apr. subletnow until Sept. 752-2707.Nice, 4 bdrm 54th & Greenwood —call AI 324-9390.Smr. rooms for male students$12 wk, 5747 Univ., kitchen, lounge,TV, pvt parking — PL 2-9718. 1 male, 6/1-10/1, large apt 53 &Wood lawn $55, 955-4682.Share large 4Vi rm apt. 53 & Harpermid-June-Sept. Call David 324-0360.Need male roommate for summer Inkosher apartment—own room. $45.Call 752-5207,Female (grad student) to Jharelarge 5-room apt. 54th & Kimbark.$60 mo. summer and/or fall. Jan493-8685.Own room in aij--cond apt, June-Sept, 57th 8, Dorch, $65/m tel 684-6883.Two male grad students want 2 oth¬ers to share large South Shoreapartment. Summer and/or nextyear. 48.75 mo. 324-2671.Fern, roomate(s) wanted. June-Oct.Own rm. 752-7669 after 6.For aut. 1 or 2 fern, for apt. 1400 E.57th St.—Sept, starts lease—grad,preferred 667-5124.Rm avail. mid-June in 6 rm aptw 2 girls $46 mo. 667-6130.Male roomate for summer—ownlarge room. 53 & Kenwood, $55 mo.Available June 7. 684-3744.Fern., own rm. AIR COND., TV,sewing mach. 52 & Dorch. 6/8-9/20. Rent negot. 684-5388.Harper Court 1 per 2'/j rm 6/15-9/30 OR 8/30 with opt will barqainDan 288-8956 til 9:30 P.MLarge liv rm bdrm kitch furnishedHyde Pk $105 mo. 538-1027.Summer sublet (June 15-Sept. 15)5-room furnished apt w. air con, TV,kitchen-barbecue equip., 2 double¬beds. 56th & Drexel. $95 mo. 667-0050evenings.Sublet July 1—Sept. 1 beautiful 4room apartment, 1 bedroom, frontporch, $125 mth, 5407 S. University,1st fir.Summer sublet: large 2 bdrm aptnear co-op, furnished, $130. Call 288-4639 or ext. 3978.Ellis—54th 6 rm turn, darkroom.June 15-Aug. 20. 955-5542.1 very Ig rm. in Ig. 6 rm. 2 bathapt. in S. Shore to share w 2 malestuds, abt. June 15 to Sept. 15. Fur¬nished; 1 blk. from 1C and bus lines.$50 mo. Call Ralph at 684-7319.June—Oct. 2 bedrms., 2 baths. Pre¬fer couple or fern grad students.752-7669 after 6.June-Sept, 6 rm, furn apt, 3 bedrm.,terr, TV, stereo, 643-7473.Two large, furnished bedroomsavailable for summer occupancy inclose-to-campus apartment. $43.33per month per room. Call 643-9834.55th & University. Good for 3 or 4.Backyard. Call 288-3576.Share commodious 4-rm apt. with 1other person. 54th PI. & Ellis,$50 mo Call 752-1456 morn or eves.4 rms-newly decorated, furn. safebldg, 5330 Greenwood $135 May orJune occupancy 955-3865.Rm for 2 girls air cond apt poss ofstaying next yr 684-6883.Large furn. 6 rm apt June-Sept. 60th& Kimbark $150 667-4054.Luxury for one, comfort for two inlarge apt. in East Hyde Park, twoblocks from lake, much parking andfurnished, from around June 10 toas late as Sept. 15. Sunporch, onebedroom plus huge study (or twobedrooms). $145. per month. 288-4314.One bdrm apt. fully furnished —dishes — linens — etc. near Kim¬bark Shop Plaza and campus Call643-2420 aft 6 PM.Lovely apt. for summer. Air-cond.,furn., 4 bedrms., T.V. 57th & Dorch.643-3348.ROOMMATES WANTEDLarge BR in shared apt. 54th Dor¬chester. $46 mo. 643-4821. Share spacious 5 room furnishedapt. 1 block from camp. July-Octw one other 50 mo. 752-8256.3 male students desire 4th room¬mate for summer only(June 15-Sept.15). 8 room house. Own spaciousroom. $40 month 5422 Dorchester.Call 288-4192 after 6 P.M.2 need male grad for 3 bdrm apt. 1block west of campus for sum &next yr. $55 mo Hum-Soc. Sci. stupref. 684-7466.FOR RENTFall sublet. 2Vi rms w terrace andyard modern apt. in Hyde Prk. 955-3595.5 rm apt to sublet and/or rent $115.53rd and Univ. 684-1187.2 bdrm apt., comp, turn., June 15thru next year, $112.50. 684-4775.Appealing bsmt appt for 1 pers orcouple, furn 54th & Wdlwn Summeror longer $105. 324-9444.June 1. IVj rm 5728 Blackstone $96955-9142.1 bdrm apt., $132.50 mo. 72ndColes. Avail. June July. Call evens.721-7823.6900 South Crandon Ave Deluxehighrise 1 bdrm apts. From $125;parquet floor. See Mrs. Haley MU4-7964.Furnished Rm. 493-3328.Can you dig a co-op house? (NCD?)phone Train 324-1632.3 bdrm apt, avail June 15 thru nextyear 752-1224.WANTED TO RENT1 Vi rooms, near lake, $75-$95, June15th—Aug 31st In Chicago call 734-5243 eves Or write D. Fuchs 171 W.79th St., NYC 10024.Storage space for summer—smallamt furn and books 643-3594Sublet apt. for 2, 6/1-9/1. WriteDave, 1505 Meadowlane, Ames, la.50010.Wanted—4-4>/a room apt. Close tocampus. $20 reward Call Mark 536-1069.CAMPING EQUIPMENTCamping equipment for RENT:tents, sleeping bags, stoves, lan¬terns, etc. Contact HICKORY atExt. 2381 or 324-1499.THE DUCHESS OF MALFIMay 22 23 24 25 Reynolds ClubTheatre.Simca - SunbeamAuthorized Soles & ServiceNew & Used CarsExpert Body & Fender WorkComplete ForeignCar ServiceHyde Park Auto ImportsMM S. Cette* Grave 6434100 University OrchestrawithUniversity ChorusGene Narmour, ConductorKEEPK001IN JOHN SSPRING WEARSandalshortshirtsSALEBell-Bottom SpecialJOHN'S 3 pieces from "Damnation ofFaust" BerliozJan Herlinger, Guest ConductorConcerto in d minor MozartSandra Acker, PianistBrandenburg Concerto 06.... BachGloria for Soprano, Chorus, &Orchestra PoulencBarbara Pearson, Soprano, withUniversity ChorusMay 24, 1969, MandelHall, 8:30 P.M.Admission FreeI Rl t WfcDDING CATALOGi orthf: bridi: to beEverything for the wedding and re¬ception Wedding invitations, gifts forthe bridal party, novel decorations,ersonalizea bnae’s cake knife, toast-glasses, napkins, matches and:r unusual, exciting personalizeditems.Creations by Elaine Dept. 7Chicago, III. 606296/The Chicago Maroon/May 20, 1969 PEOPLE WANTEDWoman student with two childrenneeds someone to live in for sum¬mer. Own room & board in ex¬change for babysitting. Children are4'/j & 2 Call 667-1719 if interested.Typist wanted, French manuscript,careful work expected. Call 643-5835,10-12 A.M.Sec'y, now until Sept. 1; 10-15hrs wk; Call X4725 Mon, Tues, Fri10:00-12:00.PEOPLE FOR SALE"House-sitting" position desired fora week or two during June by a re¬liable former Hyde Park family withlocal references. Call extension 3237for further Information.Minnette's Custom Salon. Dressmak¬ing, alterations, sleeve shortening.493-9713. 1711% E. 55»h St.May I do your typing? 363-1104.CONVOCATION TICKETSExtra tickets for June 14 con¬vocation needed Please call PL2-3543. Reward.Senior would like extra tickets forJune 14 convocation. Please call Jer¬ry at 268-7682.Senior needs extra tickets for June14 convocation. Will pay. Please callJerry 268-7682.6/14 convocation; will pay. KenSimonson 955-3790.AND MORE NEW MUSICJohn Gilmore, Leo Smith, AnthonyBraxton, Maurice McIntyre, MalachiFavors, Thurman Barker at IdaNoyes, Wed. 21, 8:00 P.M., admis¬sion $1.50 This one won't be can¬celled.LOST AND FOUNDLost: small female calico cat. 54th& Univ. $5 reward. 684-7927.Found: large silver ring, blue stone.Identify. Ken, 955-8387.Dynamite—of all the good stuff, thatis the stuff.—Albert Parsons, 1885. car? FA 4-8200. rm 1102.PUBLIC APOLOGYReceived this letter last Friday inmy office. The bearer was the au¬thor."TO THE EDITOR OF THE CLAS¬SIFIED SECTION OF THECAMPUS MAROON PAPER'We as readers of the Chicago Uni¬versity campus news paper, findyour article concerning 'The BlackHumorous Comics' in the May 13,1969 addition of the Maroon a verydistasteful article, a uncalled for ar¬ticle and a very provocative articleIn respond to this article we asreaders fee!, this article carried nomessage, non other than an ex¬pression of over-tone racial feeling.AsajustifiablejTjeasurejw^jjjjjjijdUncle Meat - by the Mothers ofInvention - now on sale at the Stu¬dent Co-op, only S5.49.that you (Editor of the ClassifiedSection) make a public apology tothe Black People of Chicago Univer¬sity. In the form of legible print¬ed letter, stating your apology forthe unnecessary mockery aboutBlack People. This public apology isto run in the following edition ofthe Maroon Campus News Paper.Signed: Mr. Ronald EwingWE ASK FOR NO MORE! WE EX¬CEPT NO LESS!"I apologize to anyone who inferredany anti-black sentiment in the car¬toon published in the Maroon onMay 13. No such sentiment was in¬tended. — ksFOR SALESTEREO amp-preamp, changerw/cartridge, 2 speakers. $100 or of¬fer FA 4-9895 days; 667-1644 eves.1966 Yamaha Twin Jet 100 cc exccond. Call 684-5722.'61 Falcon, exc. cond., availableJune 1, $200. Call 684-4775.62 VW, '69 rebuilt eng. exc. cond.best offer 734-6364 eves.Suzuki 1967 250 cc $250 or best FA4-9226.Stereo set—Garrard LAB 80 turn¬table, Two Leonhardt speakers, Ken¬wood tuner—cost $600 2% yrs ago$375 or best offer. Call John Hull Ml3-0800 X 4195. If no answer call 667-2041WRANGLER JEANS $4.98, bell-bot¬toms, tennis sneakers, sandals andsummer wear all reduced. “JohnsMens Wear 1459 E. 53rd.Good used TVs reconditioned. $24.95& up. American Radio, 1300 E. 53rd,53 Kimbark Plaza.1961 Merc. 6 cyl. clean new tires,call BU 8-9106 after 7:00.Sony 4 track stereo tape deck, 2Roberts Microphones, headphonesCall 324-1426 evenings.Great buy Womans leather jacket$35. Never worn. Retail price $70.Call 288-3576.Webcor tape recorder $35 used tapes$1.50 reel 624-4190.WANTED TO BUYVacuum cleaner, good cond. Calleves 734-5243.Volvo, Valiant, 3-5 yrs. old. Prof's PERSONALSDANCE! LODESTONE! May 31.Why pay 69 cents per pound forSouth African Grapes when Califor¬nia grapes are only 29 cents? Learnwhy at forum on GRAPE BOY¬COTT, Thurs., 7:30 at Socsci 122.OTIS RUSH WILL RETURN SOON.Folksinging at Hillel meets onWednesday this week.1969-1984-15John Gilmore Sextet, Wed., 8:00, IdaNoyes"Ambition, madam, is a greatman's madness. That is not kept inchains and close-pent rooms. But infair lodgings, and is girt with thewild noise of prattling visitations.Which makes it lunatic beyond allcure."THE DUCHESS OF MALFI.Did you ever make a mistake?Large data banks will remember.Students fop Israel presents Mr.Moshe Schwartz speaking on "So¬cialism in Israel Today" Tues. May20th 8:00 Hillel.CLASSIFIED AD SPECIAL: only 4more papers in which to immorta-I i z e your most (in)significantthoughts. Amaze your friends! Pro¬voke your enemies! Only 30c perline for personal personals.Going to EUROPE? Been to Eu¬rope? You're invited to chat andgossip about it Thursday May 22,7:30 in Ida Noyes. Prices, Places.Chat?and gossip?SHAPIRO'S DUE JUNE 6.SH0RELAND HOTELSpecial Rates forStudents and RelativesSingle rooms from $9.00 dailyDouble bed rooms from $12.00 dailyTwin rooms from $14.00 dailyLake ViewOffice space also j Rlease call N.T. NorbertAvailable from^200 | PL 2-1000sq. ft. to 1800 sq. ft. 5454 South ^hore Drive Earn more with DATA BANKING!Interest compounded daily.Lodes toneLodestoneLodestoneWoman is made the slave of a slaveand is reckoned fit only for compan¬ionship in lust. The hands andbreasts that nursed all men into lifeare scorned as the forgetful bruteproclaims his superior strengthMan's superiority will be shown, notin the fact that he has enslaved hiswife, but in that he has made herfree. — Eugene DebsAnthony Braxton, Leo Smith, andMalachai Favors are leaving forParis at the end of this month, soWednesday will be one of the verylast chances to hear them for a longtime.Want to play tennis? Sure you do!Call Bob 288-7164. Group of students have organized »horsajback riding group. We need afaculty advisor. If interested pleas*contact Madeline Muetze 643-6524Pay 69 cents a pound for South Afri¬can grapes of 29 cents a lb. for Cali-fornia grapes? Thurs., Socsci iw7:30 P.M. IZ2'Need photographs from conventionto be included in magazine of photo¬journalism to be published at end ofJune by SF Camera Publishing CoSend inquiries to Death Magazine2436 Jones St., San Francisco, 94133SOME SOUND ADVICEHave you heard the new klh 26’Probably the finest stereo phonocompact available. Price? Only$249.95 at MUSICRAFT campus repBob Tabor 324-3005.Mattachine Midwest presents attnyPearl Hart, 5/20, Urban TrainingCent 40 N. Ashland 7:30.Israeli Folk Dancing will meet atIda Noyes this week. Thursday."Whether we fall by ambition,blood, or lust, like diamonds we arecut with our own dust." THEDUCHESS OF MALFI.Chat about EUROPE 5/22 IdaNoyes 7:30.CLASSIFIED AD SPECIAL - don'tmiss your chance. Make rude re¬marks, rude noises, you name it, weprint it. 30c per line while the spacelasts.Socialism lives in Israel!Hear representatives of both sideson the GRAPE BOYCOTTDance! May 31st Ida Noyes Lodes-tone Blues Band!OTIS RUSH IS COMING AGAINJoin the NSA Record Club.WRITERS' WORKSHOP PL 2-8377.BIG BROTHER APPROACHESComputer DATA BANKS are coming"The lord of fhe first house beingcombust in the ascendant, signifiesshot life; and Mars being in a hu¬man sign, joined to the tail of thedragon, in the eighth house, doththreaten a violent death." THEDUCHESS OF MALFI.Trip out with Marco Polo, 326-4422.There will be an all night Torahstudy session, a TIKKUN LEL SHA-VOUT, at Hillel Thursday night, be¬ginning at 10:00 P.M.Gossip about EUROPE 5/22 IdaNoyes 7:30.Last U.S. Concert by Joseph Jar¬man, Roscoe Mitchel, Malachi Fa¬vors, Lester Bowie. May 24, 8 P.M.at the Blue GargoyleComputersDATA BANKSPrivacyConfidentialityHEALTH OR HAZARD?Round Table DiscussionRoom 480 Research InstitutesWed. May 28 1 P.M. tome to a Symposium: "The Pales¬tine Revolution" Ida Noyes, FridayMay 23 at 7:00 P.M. (see dispace adin this issue).Urban Renewal — pro & con 7 p mWed. Ida Noyes. SCAF.SCHEDULELancing a superficial abscessRemoval of Brain TumorRemoval of Tonsils and AdenoidsRemoval of AppendixAnesthesia for Removal of AppendixAnesthesia for Congenital Heart Op¬erationRemoval of Hemorrhoids (internal)Removal of UterusHernia, inguinalFracture of Neck of FemurRemoval of GallbladderRemoval of ProstateRemoval of Goiter (complete)Removal of Breast (simple)Removal of Breast (radical)Removal of CataractRemoval of Sebaceous CystAmputation of Arm through Hu¬merusRemoval of lungRemoval of KidneySpinal FusionIf thare's anything left, they'll remove that, too.That's earl, brother.SOCIAL THOUGHT 443: MichaelePolarty's seminar — Supplement#4 is available from 9 to 5 dailyin the social thought office, Soc Scibldg rm 512.Furnished apartment with runningwater, plumbing. Gothic window,wall-to-wall carpeting, modernkitchen with a real refrigerator. . . alt this and close to campustoo. 2 and a half rooms at 5532Kenwood for $135 or reasonableoffer — will negotiate. Call 643-3088and ask for Mitch or call 955-9687and ask for David or Paul.STILL LIFE is here. If you'relucky, maybe you can catch someof it.STILL LIFE is a joy to have.Even if it is quiet and intense.Very Intense.Present, past. Future?CLASSIFIED ADSPECIAL!* vilify your friends* evaluate your profs* send an ungratefulmessage to Mom* vent your spleen* eat your liverONLY 30c PER UNE!CONDITIONS: This offer applies only to Per¬sonals, not to announcements of events. Offergood only until end of quarter. Subject to Ma¬roon Business Office monster discretion._J I.THE DEPARTMENT Of MUSIC THE FROMM MUSIC FOUNDATIONTHE CONTEMPORARY CHAMBER PLAYERSRALPH SHAPEY • ConductorErnst Krenek * Guest Conductor* ■ * ?■. l.fi NthjNeva Pilgrim * SopranoWorks by Krenek • Shapey • Levine • SchaferFRIDAY • MAY 23, 1969* 8:30 P.M.MANDEL HALLAdmission free with ticket.Free tickets at Music Dept.Concert Office, 5835 University Ave.\mmDeliveries Start 4 p.m.Sat. & Sun. 3 p.m.OPEN 7 DAYSHY3-0400DR. AARON ZIMBLIROptometristeye examinationscontact lensesin theNew Hyde ParkShopping Center1510 E. 55th St.DO 3-7644 Renault’s 65mphscreeching-halt testwith no hands. Dependable Serviceon your Foreign CarVW s encouraged now. 2 Factory trained mechanics havejoined us. Quicker service. Open til 8 P.M.Grease & oil change done evenings by appt.Hyde Park Auto Service • 7646 S. Stony Island • 734-6393 O Q< M tft< — mi s S'> m o° ^ =5sis£f§44The PalestineRevolution*’A SYMPOSIUMParticipants:Prof. Ibrahim Abu Lughod, African StudiesProgram, Northwestern IJ.Mrs. Randa Fallal, Editor, THE ARAB WORLD,New YorkProf. Igbal Ahmad, Fellow of the Adlai StevensonInstitutePeter Buch, Socialist Workers PartyMrs. Rita Freed, Committee to Aid Middle EastLiberation, New YorkProf. Ilyas Shoufani, Georgetown UniversityModerator:Harold Rogers. Black Students Organization U of CSponsors:Black Students OrganizationPan-African Students UnionOrganization of Arab StudentsPakistani Students OrganizationMuslim Students AssociationIda Noyes HallFriday, May 23 at 7:00 P.M.ALL ARE WELCOMEMALE STUDENTS$ 1200.00 for 13 Weeks of Summer WorkAlso Some Full - Time OpeningsCall 637-5515Car Necessary nxm<70O$25REWARDFORA NameFOR A SNAZZYNEW MONTHLYMAGAZINEPublished in Chicago By and ForFolks Who Don’t Live on The GoldCoast and Wouldn’t If They Could.ApplyThe Name is the GameThe Maroon1212 East 59th StreetChicago, Illinois 60637 -o < o§ § ?Jg 3 2<6 «; <L ?For Information Call MI 3-0800Extension 3269. The Winner WillBe Announced in the June 6th Issueof the Maroon.>4—vi . T1 ’ " Y tI - 7 SO 9>dr i r.w—r £4 n • i gull 13/ ii I7XU1 r. II iVV.KSt' III May 20, 1969/17fM[T£KS>(usu/u fuiL o#e GtfM'fcs)ULI vt rri -ofltoeis_ . . SM£ factsSIVO/O *Yy-/t'US/i&fi<T0MLOZtyerri * 3/- fau. tut P*«nrei£, ^H-^SL£rf£W * l2:&i#r *c/**r Pt*7mt<£ C<?•/£/trrrr+fl *3-3-Z/i#7've/t*r&*XM*e 764£Po44 3 /~£i*+r *o**r hcrmTU.Y^S~ (5n>/(srt'\&£Mj ±£?Q± PIZZAPLATTERPizza, Fried ChickenItalian FoodsCompare the Price!1460 E. 53rd Ml 3-2800WE DEUVERCANOE TRIPSInto the Quetico-Superior Wil¬derness. America's Greatest Ad¬venture by America's largest out¬fitter. Free folder and mop - write:BILL ROM, DEPT C, CANOE COUN¬TRY OUTFITTERS, ELY, MIN¬NESOTA,STUDENTSSUMMER JOBHIRING THIS WEEK ONLYRequirements:Must have neat appearance,18 years of age or older. PublicrelationsCall: 892-6961 Aurora Why pay 69 cents per pound forSOUTH AFRICAN GRAPES whenCalifornia's are 29 cents?REVITALIZATION presentsA Forum on theGRAPE BOYCOTTTHE PROS & CONS OF THE ISSUEFeaturing:Mr. E. Medina,Mexican-American immigrantMembers of the oppositionFilm: "Decision at Delano"THURS., MAY 22, 7:30 P.M.Social Science 122FREE ADMISSIONZC909 111 oSvoi^OoSijo jo Aiufl ceAiqoav 19 &/M'Rjqn viodjeH Non - Profit Org.U. S. POSTAGEPAIDChicago, IllinoisPermit No. 7931\