The Daily Nebraskan
Monday, October 24, 1966
TO DREAM THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM
Page 2
r t
In the first two issuei of this column
a model has been set forth of the Univer
sity of Nebraska of the future, the Univer
sity we are creating today by our actions
and thought.
It would be a University which through
leadership assumes its responsibility to its
students and its society. It would be a Uni
versity whose three parts students, facul
ty and administration working togeth
er try to bring about a better world. It
would be University that instills in all
its inhabitants the moral sense, or insight,
needed to keep the unfolding drama of
human history going.
But now after perceiving this faint
glimmer of the University of the future,
and of- the world of the future, we have to
ask, "What will the student of this Univer
sity be' like?" and "Where does the student
of today stand in relation to this model?"
The student of the new University must
have a mature understanding of how a
University and a society operate. He must
try to understand the various power struc
tures, or lines of power, that envelop not
only tlie people he criticizes, but also en
velop him.
He. must change these power struc
tures when he sees that they help or per
petuate one particular group of people and
their Beas to the detriment of the well
being bf the University as a whole. The
time for selfish concern and advancement
is gone; the betterment of the whole must
come first.
The new student will not merely try
to destory one power arrangment for the
personal satisfaction of setting up his own
in its place. An irresponsibly-run "student
controlled" University is just as wrong
as an "irresponsibly run "administration
controlled" University. We have got to re
alize that the task of creating a better
University and world is a task that can
only be won by working together.
The Student Today
From reading the "Rag" in the last
few weeks, it seems many students have
as yet not attained the realization that
their f coneern has got to be what is
good for the University community as a
whole. They fail to see we all must work
together, or we will all surely fail.
The student of today still seems to be
lieve In the naive idea, or is it a hope, that
the world, the University, its people and
its institutions can be divided into good
and evil categories. It is this way of think
ing that enables many students to call their
opposition merely the "Administration."
The "Administration" very quickly be
comes everybody's universal bad guy. This
is done because it is easier to attack peo
ple than it is to attack and change the pow
er structures they represent This ap
proach to building a better University is
not only naive, but it is also dishonest and
an escape for those who use it, for it is
far easier to say our own inadequacies and
weaknesses are the result of the "Admin
istration" than it is to admit they are at
least in part our own fault.
granted, the Administration of this
University has made mistakes is judg
ment. Far too long this University has re
sisted the trends of higher education by
supporting policies, campus structures and
institutions that are no longer meaning
ful And the job of the responsible student
is to point out these mistakes and work
for their correction. But at the same
time, we must admit the mistakes made
by the students and the faculty.
The student body of this school has not
at any time been willing to assume adult
roles in the University and the world. The
vast majority have been content to sit
back most of the time, and let other peo
ple make decisions that affect their bves
and that should only have been made by
them. We have run away from the awe
some responsibilities of living in a com
plex world, and either intentionally or un
intentionally have merely become the raw
material our society uses and need: to
perpetuate itself.
Erich Fromm's psychological concept
of "escape from freedom" explains at
least in part this phenomenon. We lack
the courage to face life as free men who
must make decisions and accept all the
consequences that follow as a result of
those decisions.
This state of affairs is true not only
of this University, but also of our world
and nation. How else can one explain the
prevalent feeling today in our society to
ward political, economic and social issues
the feeling of "LeUoe do it!" "It's no
concern of mine."
We do not want it to be a concern of
ours, for a concern demands some sort of
a response from us as men. We would
rather live in the superficial and secure
world of unconcern than the real, chal
lenging but threatening, insecure world of
concern. We are afraid to be men acting
in time; we shirk the demands of life.
Perhaps a concise way of explaining what
is wrong with us is that we are afraid to
be wrong. We lack the moral courage to
DARE TO BE WRONG.
Making The New Student
This prevalent feeling has got to be
destroyed on this campus before we can
ever hope to work coequally with the fac
ulty and administration in creating the
University of the future. This is the real
challenge facing our campus leaders to
day. Their task is to lead the student body
to a greater understanding of what it
means to be an adult in toe University
and the world.
To be sure, the job of slow education of
an entire student body is less glamorous,
and less politically opportune, than crusad
ing for rights and other current Issues,
but it is the foundation upon which any of
these other things in the end must be
based.
We have got to realize that, to a large
extent, things like the Bill of Rights are
in themselves neither good nor bad, but
neutral. The element that determines to
what extent they are good or bad is the
quality of men who live by them and use
them. We too often think all we have to .
do is create structures, like governing bod- -ies
and committees, and as a resnlt, life
will be better. Belief in this idea explains
why so many campus structures and insti
tutions, even ASUX, are irrelevant to the
majority of students.
Many campus leaders have been con
tent to live in their own little world and
play their "in" game of politics, a game
relevant only to fellow players of t h e
game. Instead of this, leadership demands
that one go back to the student body and
educate it, lift it up morally and intellec
tually, awaken it to its responsibilities and
duties.
Granted, this task of education in the
hopes of improving the quality of men is
difficult, but it must be done if the new
citizen of the University of Nebraska and
world is to arise.
"The Impossible Dream" of a truly
"human" world will either be realized or
lost to the extent this job of education is
done by campus leaders and others.
That's What It Says
By Ed Schwartz
"Back to school" maga
zine articles do not gener
ally produce significant in
sights into contemporary
education, but this year's
Newjweek contribution may
be something of an excep
tion. Referring to aa almost
"psychedelic" tempera
ment on college campuses
this fall, the articles cites
a new wave of introspec
tion, reminiscent of the
apathy Bf the '50s. What
began as a burst of ener
getic progressivisni la 19S3
and 1964 is ending at an
acute melancholia in I3G8.
The same spirit per
meatesthe campus itself.
To be sure, there is an
unparalleled interestin
educational reform and
spurts of life from former
coldbeds of silence. None
theless, the idea which
seems to intrigue students
the most is that of the "T-
Group" Sensitivity Train
ing Sessions which involve
exploration into the inner
most thoughts and feelings
of the participants. And the
brooding has developed its
morbid side Moderator
Magazine predicts 1,000 stu
dent suicides this year.
Campus Psychoses
The Moderator story, un
fortunately, was more des
criptive than analytical
kind of a guided tour of
campus psychoses. One
quotation from a report on
the NSA Student Siren
Conferena last year, how
ever, focuses on a central
part of the problem: "Our
solution is to inject into
the system more human
qualities, tha most obvious
of which is emotion . . ."
"We want Ideas that art
worth soma passion."
Feelings that's the.
key. The present genera
tion of students wants to
feeL Furthermore, they are
attempting to do so in a
culture which makes exer
cise of emotion extremely
difficult. Hense, the transi
tion from politics to psy
chology cannot be con
sidered a "new" trend. It
is rather a new phase in
a general pattern of
development on the campus
of the '60s.
Ed Friedenberg "Com
ing of Age In America docu
ments many reasons why
in terms of their high school
experience, college students
might seek, or avoid overt
expression of emotion. The
high school, he finds, is
"like a bad book: senti
mental, extrinsically moti
vated and intellectually dis
honest." Stifles Openness
When this is reinforced
by the good old "competi
tive spirit and an elaborate
structure of rules, they
serve to stifle openness of
any kind. "What comes
out," Friedenberg observes,
"is uniform, bland and
creamy, yet retains, in a
form difficult to detect, all
the hostile or toxic ingre
dients of the original mix
ture." The "original mixture,'
was stirred up a bit in the
early '60s. Needless to say,
Kennedy was a major fac
tor la legitimatizing the
passions of youth. The Civ
il Rights movement played
a large part demonstra
ting, as it did, the results
of our Indifference to a
large segment of the popu
lation. Students were al
lowed to feel they were
given an opportunity to
vent mot Ions through
quasi-acceptable channel.
They responded.
The important point is
that the response was as
much an expression of per
sonal emotional needs as
"new social consciousness."
Snider critics often attacked
this -revealing, perhaps,
their own fear of expres
sing themselves. Today,
Civil Rights groups have
grown suspicious white
middle class kids with
"hang-ups" don't always
make the most effective
organizers. Nonetheless, the
"Feeling Factor" was and
is a major consideration.
Feeling Factor
Today the Feeling Fac
tor has had to find new
expressions, the war in
Viet Nam; the draft; the
general aura of Johnson
ism do not provide the
clear-cut moral imperatives
which instantly command
dedication. The ineffective
ness of the anti-war move
ment has contributed to an
overall sense of frustra
tions. The new forms of ex
pression "T-Groups;"
psychedelic drugs; priva
tlsm in various forms
are, as yet, rudimentary.
While a few have been
grabbed too hastily LSD
is a little more volatile
than a march in Sdma
the willingness to explore
may yield techniques which
could be beneficial to the
entire society.
Yet, in the long run, the
real task will be integra
tion of finding ways to
relate the emotional needs
of students to the intellec
tual discipline which en
hances their expression and
development. This has al
ways been the task of the
artist; the rest of us must
accept it now as well.
The essence of style is
that it embodies from and
substance. In the past, we
were satisfied with form;
in the psychedelic phase,
we accept only substance.
At some point, ne have to
find both.
t CAhT
pone
I
UPPER .
LEVEL- V;
COURSE? :
iff! -X)
'As You Like It':
A Rare Experience
By Pete Clark
Department of English
General conversational comments on
college Shakespearean performances, of
which this critic is admittedly f.uilty, us
ually consists in the sad echoing of that
most frequently heard capsule criticism,
which begins,. "It's not a good production,
but . . ."
After the conjuction, the formula of
disappointment is completed in four main
ways: ' but after all, it's Shakespeare,"
"but it. has one good scene," "but one
mustn't miss X's performance," or "but
the staging is exciting."
However, this is not the case with the
Howell Memorial Theatres' production of
As You Like It which opened last Friday
evening.
And being such, the role of critic is
an unfortunate one. For, as the Immortal
Bard would readily admit, it is far easier
to p rot ray faults than to describe nobility.
And Mr. William Morgan has indeed pro
duced a fine and noble rendering of this
fanciful tale of pastoral love and romance.
In a society so deeply reconciled to
doves and hawks, as ours seemingly is,
there is but little recognition of the fanci
ful lark. And yet this is what As Yoo Like "
It affords us. And perhaps, as Mr. Mor
gan would have us believe, its rediscovery
is long overdue.
Shakespeare has here embowelled the
Vlrgilian myth of "the Golden Age" and
the Christian m y t h of "the Garden of
Eden": a primeval forest where death
and time are distorted. There are no
clocks in Arden and thus we are temporari
ly suspended in an absurd fantasy. A fan
tasy which Shakespeare in turn invests
w ith the politics of v ision.
The opening set, designed by Charles
Howard, correctly conveys the idyllic na
ture of Ardes by having it framed in the
fashion of a 16th century pastoral minia
ture. By using it as a background for the
court scenes, Howard expresses the neces
sary contrast between the two worlds.
To dramatize his vision of the nature
of true love, Shakespeare chose for his
"action" the complex and intricate inter
relationships that arise among four pairs
of ill-met lovers who reflect various con
flicting nations of love.
Love is presented primarily in the ro
mance of Rosalind and Orlando, and by
contrast, in the traditional pastoral ideal
ism of Silvius and Phebe and in appetive
and humorous urgency surrounding Touch
stone and Audrey.
Miss Bobble Klerstead Is a bewitching
Rosalind and a delightful Ganymede. She
successfully carries the well-balanced na
ture of Rosalind, who (though in love aud
in Arden) is still capable of self-interest,
self-criticism, and an awareness of time.
Bill Jamison measures his romantic
Orlando with the torrect amount of un
derplaying that is necessary to effective
ly contrast the absurdly bombastic sen
timentalism of Silvius and Phebe.
Tom Doty and Roni Meyer judicious
ly hyperbolize these repsective roles, al
though their physical accoutrements and
demeanor resembling too closely the
courtly gentry and not the rustic shepherd
folk tends to undercut the complete
spoofing intended by Shakespeare. This
is, however, the only instance of improper
costuming is an otherwise praiseworthy
job by Alieen Castellani.
A stunning Cella is presented by Miss
Jean MacLaren, who exhibited a purity of
diction, correspondant to ber noble sta
ture, that Is infrequently found in Shakes
pearean performances.
Bruce Borin's Interpretation of "vil
lainous" Olivier was quite convincing,
though too much so in light of his later
reversal.
K r i s 1 1 Rapp was an eye-catching
treat, if somewhat overdone, in her per
trayal tf Audrey as the original prototype
of ''The Farmer's Daughter" ana the Ren
aissance precursor of Auntie Mame's en
dearing secretary.
It is Touchstone and Robert Hall, how
ever, who earns the loudest plaudits from
this reviewer. His satirical wit as the
court clown is enjoyably enhanced by the
Douglas Fairbanks-Cary Grant devil-may-care
bearing he brings to the role.
The "action" of the play then consists
in the various confrontations of these character-types
with one another, which serve
both to crystallize their identification and
to clarify Shakespeare's ultimate concep
tion of love and its role in society. And
this conception can be seen in the break
ing down of Illusions throughout the play.
Rosalind refutes the romantic illusions
of Silvius, Phebe, and Orlando. Touch
stone, representing the world of the cour
tier, wittily rebukes the pastoral illusion
proferred by Corin, an aged shepherd.
Shakespeare in the latter scene is insist
ing that one must not be deluded about
reality, even if one is a character in the
play.
So too does Shakespeare stress the il
lusionary qualities of the audience's fan
tastical experience, thereby reconciling
the ideal with the actual. Although this is
accomplished in part through Touchstone's
wit, it springs mainly from the musings
of melancholy Jaques.
Jack McCoy plays the part with a sub
tle lightness which properly undermines
the view of Jaques as a caustic misan
thrope filled with bitterness.
He is rather a "doubter" or "ques
tioner" w ho stands on the trdges of Arden
and acts as a stabilizing force on the audi
ence, reminding us that Arden is but a
temporary limbo from which we must
shortly return (like Orlando and Rosalind)
to the actual reality of society.
What then would Shakespeare have us
bring back? It is the assurance that the
old, just society (represented in the play
by faithful Adam) will be restored and
reconstructed. This is symbolized in Hy
men, the institution of marriage, at the
end of the play.
The human community is now af
firmed by the lovers' comprehension and
acceptance of social responsibilities. And
this is coupled with Shakespeare's assur
ance that by participating in the human
community one can triumph over time
through generation.
Shakespeare is thus dealing with what
a man is and how he expresses his being,
how he can be healthy, creative, and re
ligious, how he is balked by nature (even
Arden is subject to the seasons and natur
al elements) and how he is balked by so
ciety, and how he can transcend that.
In As You Like It Shakespeare is able
to imply that the goal of total freedom
(thought to be the illuslonary Arden) for
man lies in self-imposed restriction and
responsibilities and to obey the source of
virtue through love is to know Joy.
As You Like It has a distinctive struc
ture that seems disjointed and unstruc
tured but that has a strange logic of its
own. The social reality for Shakespeare
is here presented in terms of fantasy, a
fantasy which is a man's vision. He has
employed unmotivated types rather than
characters to allow the audience to study
the vision rather than to identify with its
personnages.
Any emotion, excluding that of comic
laughter, from the viewers comes with the
final epic spectacle of people entering into
a social condition while holding a concep
tion of man and society that supports the
validity of that social condition.
Whether they try to perfect if further
is of no consequence. For as witnesses
who propound it, they are affirming the
good. And it is this affirmation of human
potentiality which Shakespeare Intends.
The cynical Jaquian theatregoer might
retort that Shakespeare is here revealing
outrageously his own self-delusion. On the
contrary, this is not self-deception. It is
a type of absurd confidence and optimism
that, strangely, exists today only among
certain twilight specimens of the Ameri
can personality.
And it is in this regard that As Yon
Like It takes on added import for the
modern American society. We have in this
country, a mythology of self-reliance and
social consciousness and yet, because of
our bourg9ois preoccupations, the practice
of such confidence has become the "green
wood" province of the "outcast", the "ig
norant", and the "paranoid".
As You Like It Is indeed a rare ex
perience: by nature of its fantastical form
and by virtue of its penetratingly percep
tive content.
Grounds For Condemnation
Dear Editor:
I find your articles on the sub-rosas rather subjective
not because I think they (sub-rosas) are bad nor do I
think that they are good.
I have been on campus since 1962 and have seen the
articles on sub-rosas. The point is you state that they
stand on sick and perverted ground.
Those that I have talked to know nothing about sub
rosas. I know nothing about them. Except, of course that
you and administration are against them. Is this sufficient
grounds for me to condone or condemn? I think not.
I believe that your "expose" of sub-rosas is aimed
at a population who is no longer on campus. A small per
centage of students knows anything about them, except
what you publish, w hich, good or bad, is slanted.
If you wish to degrade something, give the newer, less
enlightened students some basis for your condemnation.
Paul Fisher
Everyone Is Asking
Dear Editor:
I offer some questions which every conscientious stu
dent should be asking himself.
Taken from The Abridged Manual For Determining
Sub-rosa Affiliation and the chapter entitled "Some Ques
tions Which Every Conscientious Student Should Be Ask
ing Himself," these profundities should enable every stu
dent to logically re-evaluate his friends and determine
whether they are attempting to undermine the loyalty
which the student shows to his fraternity or sorority.
1. Does your girl insist on "going out" on dates rather
than sitting around the fraternity house?
2. Why does your mother offer to do your laundry
every week-end?
3. Is grandmother sending you chocolate chip cookies
in packages labeled "educational material"?
4. Does your friend carry a wallet-sized picture of
Giles Corey?
These are only a few excerptions. Enterprising students
will undoubtedly compose their own manuals to make
this the best of all possible Halloweens.
Dennis Hilger
The Growing Giant
Dear Editor:
What is this concept, known as student rights?
That spawned from grievances to futile fights.
It grew from words; of student politicians,
Of radicals, then scheming coalitions.
Against us all this growing giant strains,
Though grown from nothing yet nothing it remains,
Save fuel to fire the mouths of mindless men:
Men who save their banners high, and then , . .
Discard them for a better-sounding song,
And sign of Rights, be they right or wrong.
When protest serves as just a mental crutch,
Then, the student doth protest too much.
For like a howling dog he cannot see
That it alone's a Right enough to be
The guest of such a host, so kind and grand,
And yet he turns to bite the feeding hand,
When he has given nothing in return
And has been given most of what he's learned.
If minds be bared in learning textbook knowledge,
Some barest minds of all are found in college
Tiresias.
Return To White Towers
Dear Editor:
I see by an article in Wednesday's Daily Nebraskan
entitled "Off Campus Costs High and Leadership Suffers,"
that I am either not the average off-campus student or
that I can't add as well as I thought my avaricious
heart has been gloating (when I am not slaving over the
housework or fixing unnourishing meals) over the money
I thought I was saving but maybe I forgot to consider
the cost of light bulbs, or of vitamin pills to keep myself
from collapsing of malnutrition.
Having considered the dangers to my health, my sociV
life, and my bank balance, I have decided to rush back
to the friendly white towers (through whose windows, by
the way, a refreshing cool breeze blows all winter long)
and provide the University with the leadership of which
I have so selfishly deprived it by living off campus.
Penthouse Dweller
Auschwitz's Cook
Dear Editor:
Would you believe that Abel's food director once cooked
for the Auschwitz concentration camp? Probably not, but
who would believe rice, peas, and stewed tomatoes all
mixed together and served under the title of "vegetable"?
It's true.
And isn't it poor that students, living in the heart of
Nebraska beef country, are served beef that Is quite prob
ably Imported from Argentina? Or it is beef? It is fair to
say this if one was to grind up the best roast beef that
Abel can afford, he would have mediocre hamburger.
But, what in God's name Is the stuff they label hamburger?
Who says horses are obsolete!
The effects of a prolonged Abel Hall diet are pro
nounced. Take my rommmate. He's a scrawny, 150 pound
sophomore. This fact doesn't tell you much by itself, but
consider this one: in Sept., 1965, Wayne Meylan was afraid
of him. Finally, a memo to Coach Devaney: if Harry Wil
son is really too fat, let him eat over here for a while.
Tired of Good, Plain Food
Daily Nebraskan
Vol. W, Tio. M
Oct. M, MM
Second-cu- tUi wld at Uneoln, Neb.
Member Associated Collegiate Preta, National Advertising
Service, Incorporated, Published at Room 51 Nebraska Union.
Lincoln, Nob., 6B518.
TELEPHONE: 477-8711, Extension: 2S88, 2589 and 2590
ftubacrtptlon rate are M per Knwm or 16 tor tlx academic mar Publlahei
Monday, Wedneedej-, Thurl, and FrUU, darlna the achoni w.riept uor.ni
vacatl.na and mm period., br the atudenta of the Unlveraltr of Nobraalta under
the itirtadtolon of the Facultr Subcommittee on Student publication! publication
JJ"Z.C7'l SLI" 8ule""l r Perwn ouUlde the
be p7uU Nebraatun an roe possible lor what Ump eauae to
EDITORIAL STAFF
ZT; cJlSnW SEE IT; S32S Z S3
l. !,. v Tom Rubin, Howard KeotUifer; Copr Kdltorf, Peg
Bennett, Barb HoberUon. Jan Roe, Bruce Ollea wr
' BUSINESS STAFF
iZ, OinV M jl ?iZ CI"H Advertlaln Mraa.eri. Baa
W "u TIL ?Jr. lZttr'- Uo Bu.b Aeeleunta. Jrrrp
rr?ZZ.Li K"m' HMl" r""- trWMi. Bnaa Bala. Mike
'lf.'