Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Nov. 3, 1967)
THE DAILY NEBRASKAN
Friday, November 3, 1967
Nebraska's governor certainly made
some very frightening remarks regarding
the propriety of University professors who
cheered remarks by civil rights worker
The governor was reaorted to have
questioned the propriety of the faculty
members' actions at a Lincoln Board of
Realtors meeting Wednesday and said he
would meet with Chancellor Hardin in a
day or two on the matter.
'I'd like to have these names myself,'
Gov. Tiemann said in answer to a question
from realtor Harold Proctor on the con
duct of faculty members cheering Greg
ory," the Lincoln Journal story reported.
We do not know what the governor
would plan to do with the names of the
faculty members, but we would criticize
any attempt at chiding the faculty mem
bers for their actions.
Likewise we would criticize any pres
sure the governor might attempt to put
on Chancellor Hardin in "restraining" the
members of the University faculty.
A faculty member, just as any other
individual in our society, should be guar
anteed the right to listen to controversial
speakers and react as he may see fit. Any
such restraint on his right would certain-
The Daily Nebraskan cannot toally
: condemn the governor for his statements
as he did stand up for the right of stu
dents to have controversial speakers such
;as Gregory on campus a right which
: But the fact is still present that the
: governor apparently would have faculty
'members stifle their reactions to contro
versial speakers. This the Daily Nebraskan
: finds to be a gross violation bf the rights
ly be a most disastrous turn in the denial
of individual freedom.
The Daily Nebraskan believes that all
faculty members should have such free
dom, not only as an individual but as a
member of the academic community.
Any such encroachment upon this
freedom would set education a giant step
While there were many statements
made by Gregory which we could take
issue with, he did make a number of very
What buries the validity of these com
ments is that so often short phrases were
yanked out of context, and, naturally, they
For instance the statement that "You
can't pass a law saying you can't burn
the flag" may sound bad to some people
at first. "I first want laws and respect
for people, not objects. We must address
ourselves to people, not flags" one finds
that the statement has some very valid
reasoning in context.
Perhaps these comments pulled out of
context are those which bother the gov
ernor. But it still does not, and should not,
deny faculty members their right of expression.
many Nebraskans have questioned since
The Journal story states that "In Tie
mann's opinion, this provides an academ
ic experience so that students can make
comparisons on people and issues."
of the faculty member as an individual and
as a member of the academic community.
And it would be even more frighten
ing if Chancellor Hardin would not defend
the individual and academic rights of the
University's faculty members.
Union Society .
Fo reign Films 'Good'
By Larry Eckholt
: : It should be obvious by now, to those
who hold Nebraska Union Film Society
: tickets, that the society has once again
outdone itself in scheduling the best in
provocative motion pictures for its mem
bers. After the first three films the soci-
ety's program has had stronger start than
' ever before. These three films, as diverse
as one could ever hope for, have proven
to be excellent motion picture fare. The
only problem is keeping these high stand
ards throughout the rest of the year.
Wednesday's film. "The Cranes are
Flying," contained many flaws, often dis
tracting to the point of bringing laughter
by those easily distracted. But the film
perhaps could be the biggest surprise of
I the season. Put in the proper perspective
: (filmed by a Russian director, in Russia,
: with Russian actors and the most impor
: tant, in 1956.) this film may be the answer
: to those who were disappointed in "Doc
; tor Zhivago." This film may demonstrate
; that it took a Russian to write "Zhivago"
. and may it take a Russian to film it. As
a matter of fact, the costliest movie to
: date is a yet-unreleased 10-hour Russian
version of "War and Peace." Western
critics haven't had a chance to discuss
it but it might become a classic.
Discussing the plot of "Cranes" is not
: important. It has a simple story about
: love love of country, love of life, love be
; tween lovers. It was the winner of the 1967
Golden Palm award at the Cannes Film
: Festival and after watching this film, and
: dismissing its melodrama and its occas
ional staginess, one can well understand
why. This film was way ahead of its time.
Its surrealistic death scene will probably
be the most beautiful scene viewed by
society members this season. The acting
was so natural at points that no Western
audience could fail to grasp the emotional
quality of the Russian people.
Propaganda per se was almost non
existent in "The Cranes are Flying." This
movie's message was clearly not pro-war
although patriotism was the overall win
ner. What should remain memorable is the
quality of the human drama in "Cranes."
While Hollywood was still filming the
beach epics like "To Hell and Back" and
similar "entertainment" or focusing on
heroism in "Inn of the Sixth Happiness,"
a Russian director found the necessary in
gredients to film a warm human drama
with beauty and charm.
Equally as beautiful was the Fr ;ich
movie "Sundays and Cybelle." The psy
chological relationship between a twelve-year-old
girl and man 18 years older has
never been treated with such perfection
on the screen. One only has to look as
far as "Lolita" to find a comparison. The
important difference about "Cybelle" is
the adroit handling of relationships by
director Serge Bourguignon.
In this film the subliminal world of
a partial amnesiac is so real that it truly
becomes a reality and the real world can
only be blamed for the harm it has caused
between Cybelle and her "lover." One ex
cellent technique used by Bourguignon
came at the very end of the film. Her
friend killed by the police, Cybelle's la
ment could have played for audience sym
pathy. Instead the director used a Berk
told Brecht technique of shocking the au
dience out of its state of sympathy. With
a resounding choral arrangement of a
"Miserere Nobis" chant, the viewer can
not cry but he can think. And that is what
should be done in more movies today.
The first film of the season. "T h e
Magician" by Igmar Bergman, is not the
Swedish director's finest but it runs high
on his list of achievements. Bergman has
a unique quality of capturing the mood
of anything he is filming. He is a master
director and gets an ultimate perform
ance from his actors. "The Magician" con
tains many superb performances and, al
though its message is muddled, (like many
Bergman films) it was engrossing.
It is very likely that Bergman was
again presenting a religious message. The
magician can be interpreted as a Christ
symbol. With his staged "resurrection"
and his phoney "miracles" it is obvious,
then, that Bergman is shattering the
There are eleven films remaining on
this year's Film Society program. If they
are half the excellence that the ffrst
three were, this year's society has to
rank as the very best of all.
the various Vo1- N- M
Nov. 3, 1967
goings-on of the past few
weeks have aroused the
"apathetic" multitude on
Finally, they gave us our
chance: A referendum bal
lot intended no doubt to re
ward their efforts with yet
another protest of Ameri
ca's stand in Vietnam. Son-of-a-gun
if we apathetic
ones didn't come out and
put them in their place!
you can only push so far
and so fast beiore you are
reminded that it takes at
least a 'plurality to run this
Recond-claee mun paid at Lincoln, Neb.
Telephone! Business 472-2588. Newi 472-258S, Editor 472 590
Subtcrtpuoa rate art M an lemeite; or S6 for the academic rear. Pub
lished Monday, Wednesday. Thursday and Friday during the echool rear, except
dunna vacation and exam period!, by the students of tbe University of Nebraska
under the Jurisdiction of tbe r acuity Subcommittee on Student Publication.
Publication shall be free Iron censorship by tbe Subcommittee or any person
, outside the University. Member! of tbe Nebraskan era responsible tar what they
cause Is be printed.
Member Aaaociated Collegiate Praia, National Adverttltoi Service, Heer
orated. Published at Room II, Nebraska Union. Lincoln. Neb.. 6851.
Editor Bruce Giles; Managing Editor Jack Todd; Newa Editor Cheryl Trllt;
Nlghi News Editor Alan Pleaiman; Editorial Pige Assistant Julie Morrii; Sports
Editor Murk Goidon. Aisiatani Snorti Editoi Charlie Davies; Aattam Night
Newi Editor, Randy Ireyt Stall Writers. Date Bnntain, And Corngan. Gary
.Glllen. Bd Itenogle. Mick Lowh. Sherry McUmiin, Jan Parks: ei Assistant
Krnrim Ncwland; Senior Copy Edilnr, Dick Tegtmeiei ! Copy Editor, Lynn Citl
chalk. Belay Frnimorr, Jim Evmger. Jean Hcynoldr, John Schmidt; Photoara
phera Mike Hayman and Dan Ladeley.
Bui'nej! Manairr Glenn Fricndl. National Advertising Manasrr Roger Boye:
Production Manascr Charlie Baxter. Secl'etury Janet BiMinian. Bookkeeping and
Claanlfieds Allan Brandt; Subscription Manage; Jane Rmj Circulation Managers
David Knvanauih and Gary Meyer; Sales Managers Daa Cronk. Kathy Draith.
Hick Hagaixa, Ken Miikr. Wayne Uolta and Kit pyl.
Scrip One Of Best Ever
By W. G. Gaffney
Associate Professor of English
Unlike Walt Whitman, who an
nounced that he would, repeatedly, weep
with ever-returning spring, we rejoice,
with ever-returning fall, that the new
school year brings the new year's issue
let us hope, the first of a successful
series of issues of Scrip. Not that the
magazine is always at the peak of per
fection; literary magazines, especially
student magazines suffer their ups and
downs. Our basic rejoicing is at the fact
that we have a student literary maga
zine at all, after a lapse of some 30
years between our first and our second
outlet for student writing.
With this issue, Scrip begins another
year, and honorably. We have been read
ing the magazine regularly for all those
years, and we say, unequivocally, that
this issue is one of the best issues ever
published. (Readers who know, either di
rectly or by hearsay, the present captious
and querulous reviewer will recognize at
once that either (A) he has undergone
an overnight reversal of personality, or
(B) the contents of this present issue
have impressed him. As (A) is unlikely,
the reader must accept the other horn
of the dilemma.)
This year's editor of Scrip is Susan
Diffenderfer, who last spring won the
coveted poetry award of the Academy
of American Poets. Modesty customar
ily forbids an editor to include his own
works; but, like Andrew Carnegie (cf.
Finley Peter Dunne, "Mr. Dooley in
Peace and War"), she refused to be bull
dozed, and includes one sample of her
own work, and a good one.
The current issue contains, in t h e
special and deliberate hope of encourag
ing other contributors, the work of sev
eral past winners of literary prizes Bill
Coyle's short story, "Lint Money," which
won the Mari Sandoz fiction award last
spring, is one of the best student-written
stories I have seen in some years. Its
subject, that of a pubescent boy sudden
ly coming face to face with the facts
of Life, is of course old, indeed peren
nial; but that very recurrence makes it
always new. Ted Kooser, winner of the
1964 Vreeland Award, is represented by
four poems. "Here In Nebraska ..."
catches perhaps more of the latent spir
it of Nebraska than any other recent
poem about Nebraska as such, except
perhaps San Jaffe's book-length poem
about Daniel Freeman, the first home
steader. Tom Seymour, who won the 1967
Vreeland Award, is represented by three
poems, one of which seems to this re
viewer (who has seen much of Mr. Sey
mour's work elsewhere) to be one of his
Cater Chamblee, a graduate student,
who won the 1967 Vreeland Award with
a group of poems, presents free verse,
sonnets, and a short story, "The Way
It Was," which catches some of the off
beat nostalgia that characterizes the
opening of James Joyce's "Ulysses"
(this quality was apparent even in the
recently shown film). The fact that one's
"Rare Old, Fair Old, College Days" were
not all that rare and fair in cold fact
is beside the point; the nostalgia is real
enough, and will be recognized at once
by the perceptive reader.
It is not possible to list all the con
tributors, but they will be found in the
Table of Contents. Incidentally the typo
graphy this year makes for increased
readabability. Editor and the staff de
serve congratulations on all counts.
Our Man Hoppe
Private Drab And
The Yellow Peril
"Welcome to your weekly indoctrina
tion lecture, men," said Captain Buck
Ace, as the soldiers of B Company leaned
back in their chairs preparatory to dozing
off. "Now I assume we all know what
we're fighting for."
"Oh, yes, sir," Private Oliver Drab,
378-18-4454, said brightly. "We're fighting
the Yellow Peril."
"Damn it, Drab," said the Captain,
"that was last week. The President him
self says any talk about a Yellow Peril is
"Oh," said the Private with disappoint
ment. "When I was a kid I read about
Dr. Fu Man Chuand. . . "
"The President," said Captain Ace
sternly, "says we are fighting for the free
dom of these people, 'whatever the pigmen
tation of their skins' and 'race has no
place in our purpose.' "
"Gosh, now I see, sir," said Private
Drab, his enthusiasm restored. "We're
fighting for civil rights."
"Thank you, sir. But it's sure causing
me problems. I mean I get one of those
Charlies in my sights and I start worrying
about depriving him of his civil right to
stay alive, that being what I'm fighting
"I can relieve your mind on that
"I'd sure appreciate that, sir."
"Staying alive," said the Captain, eye
ing the Private balefully, "is a civil right
the Army doesn't recognize."
Captain Ace permitted himself a fath
erly smile. "I guess you could put it that
way, soldier," he said. "Does that meet
with your approval?"
f "You bet, sir," said Private Drab.
"To tell the truth, I never was much of a
civil rights fighter back home. But the
Army sure changed me. I hardly think
about anything else now but civil rights,
particularly (he basic one."
"You mean the right to vote?" asked
the Captain, his curiosity getting the bet
ter of him.
"Oh, no, sir. I'm too young to vote. I
mean the civil right to stay alive."
"What kind of a crazy civil right is
"To me, it's awfully important, sir,"
said the Private apologetically. "The way
I look at it, if somebody deprives me of
that one, I'll never get old enough to en
joy the others."
"Oh, shut up, Drab," said the Captain
with exasperation. "As far as I'm con
cerned, you can fight for any civil right
you want to."
You have a special allegiance, a special function, a
special obligation. You sacrifice sleep for meetings and
studies for projects and functions and, perhaps, self for
a greater whole. You who prize self-sufficiency and free
dom of thought, prize this too the caring that comes
from responsibility to something more than yourself. You
can never care too much.
Activities jocks are always fair game for columnists.
Afterall, they're all sellouts and if they're not sellouts
they must either be suffering from a vaunted image of
themselves or from a distinct lack of intelligence.
Or could it be that there are a few individuals who
actually aren't gunning for the sake of gunning?
Are there perhaps a few among the masses of apathe
tic wonders and activities queens who realize that this
University is more than several square blocks?
Cynic that I am I must answer "yes."
The question now arises: why are the few who do care
called sellouts? Are they compromising? Are they beat
ing their heads against a wall? Does anybody really care?
I call them sellouts because they're sacrificing them
selves, beating their heads against walls, etc., and for
what? For a University population that doesn't know they're
alive but could not survive without them? Is it worth it?
Is it worth the slaps in the face by people who are lacking
the fundamentals of intelligence but present themselves
to the world as really being in the groove? Is it worth
the scoffs of the people who they are working for?
Obviously the few who do care think it is worth it.
For what reasons I cannot fathom maybe just an innate
sense of responsibility maybe because they know that if
they don't do the job nobody else will.
I'm not trying to paint them as martyrs and I am
sure they have no such image of themselves but the fact
still remains that they are doing a thankless task.
I have often wondered what would happen if they
stopped functioning and told the University to do it for
themselves. It's an interesting thought can you imagine
having no type of governments to upbraid, no people to
condemn, absolutely nothing to scream about?
To repeat it's an interesting thought.
You know the fulfillment of involvement, the thrill
of accomplishment. But activity may become a frantic
clutching at a million little things and a vision lost. Re
member then, to take the time to listen, to laugh, to
find a friend, to hear the whisper above the cacophany
of the crowd.
The recent referendum on the Vietnam war was a
farce as demonstrated by the poor turnout. The voters
were offered only a limited choice of actions and no choice
of principles behind these actions.
The principles involved are individual rights and self
interest. Force can be justified only in retaliation against
the initiation of force. Our military assistance is at the
request of the South Vietnamese whose individual rights
are being violated by the Viet Cong and North Vietna
meses initiation of force.
Ground support in South Vietnam is not in our self
interest. The limited success is not wprth either the tragic
human price or the tremendous economic price. Even
worse, most of the dead and wounded were serving in
voluntarily and this tragedy was financed involuntarily.
The pacification program encouraging support of a
government, preferably patterned after our unlimited ma
jority rule, making involuntary servitude possible, is not
in our self-interest. Economic assistance, involuntarily fi
nanced and ineffective due to widespread corruption and
industrial stagnation, is not in our self-interest. For the
South Vietnamese to achieve a lasting freedom, they must
have the capacity and the will to repel aggression and
establish capitalism themselves.
Since the only tactic in South Vietnam possibly in our
self-interest is the selective bombing of guerrilla concen
trations and their material spoils of victory we must con
centrate on efforts on North Vietnam.
Invading North Vietnam is not worth the price. The
only possible answer is selective bombing of military and
industrial targets. Thus victorious guerrilla warfare would
be at the price of losing not only the spoils of victory but
the industrial capacity at home. The Chinese pose no threat
to our air force. They would have little to gain and a lot
to lose if we retaliated with selective bombing resulting
'n industrial losses and possibly a further incentive for
revolt. The success of similar Israeli tactics against the
Arab nations clearly demonstrated the effectiveness of
this deterrent principle.
What choice of actions' are we left with?
First we must affirm our own- individual rights, in
cluding the individual choice of actions, by abolishing all
forms of involuntary servitude. Then we must individu
ally decide if the human and economic price of selective -bombing
in our self-interest. If not we should get out.
David P. Demarest
To get anywhere in life you must become a pusher
Let me relate an incident to support my assertion.
Several days after turning 21 I decided to partake of some
of the privileges accruing from my new found status I
went to register for the vote.
Arriving at the Election Commissioner's office, I no
ticed the closing time posted on the door was 4:30 p m But
when I pulled on the door it wouldn't open. I gave it another
tug as 1 glanced through the glass door at the office clock
It was 4:27 by the clock and I could see secretaries scurry
ing around. '
I was heated by now. I rapped on the door soundly,
indicating that there was still time and that I wanted in
The secretaries, in reply, began motioning back at me'
Aha, trying to intimidate me I thought. But I was not to
be denied my rights. I prepared to crash through the glass
door ( As for me, give me liberty or give me death )
v. wUSt b,eure 1 startfd t0 '1url my steel-hard body against
the door. I began o decipher the secretaries' signal code.
I turned the door latch and pushed. The door swung open
and I was in. I could vote. '
It was then that I realized you can't be a puller. You
have to be a pusher. ict.
Glenn Friendt, Jr.
Powered by Open ONI