editorial
Rebellion on campus
flames still burning
It has become a vogue among newspapers in the past year or
two to run stories about "the end of student rebellion," for which
purpose a group of students is rounded up to attest to the fact that
campuses are quiet, people under 30 have regained their senses and
the revolution is over.
The mood of this campus certainly has changed in four years.
Alcohol on campus and visitation rights have, for the time
being, become dead issues. Vietnam elicits cries of "I told you so,"
rather than anti-war chants. And this year's freshmen have trouble
remembering the student strike of 1970, because-let's face
it ninth grade was a long time ago.
But, in spite of all this, it is hardly time to start creating an
epitaph for the tombstone of student rebellion. A good undertaker
never starts a funeral until he has the body in hand. And the
student body is going to be out of hand for a long time.
Student rebellion is not dead. It has been redefined, it has been
internalized. At the most, it is dormant.
All this talk about "the end of student rebellion" does two
things: it relaxes the so-called Establishment, and it makes students
feel guilty-what's wrong with us? Why don't we march on the
State Capitol? Why aren't we burning buildings?
The answer is that it has become unnecessary. The times have
changed. Street violence made street violence obsolete. The threat
of a large group of students united against something may now be
sufficient to force at least token representation.
The students of the '60s put their heads on the chopping block
for us. It is up to the students of the '70s to see that historians
don't successfully swing the ax. And despite all the worry about
apathy, today's students will rise to the occasion.
There are those who would like to think the fires of student
rebellion have been put out. There are those who know the flames
are still burning within.
Wes Albers
Dear editor:
I can only describe David Wares Omelet
(Daily Nebraskan, April 28) as repugnant.
As first a lover of baroque and classical music,
and second, a lover of electronic renditions of
same, I was shocked and appalled to hear Walter
Carlos' rendition of Bach, Vivaldi and company
called "gutted of dignity or primal drive"
(through implication though it be). This
slanderous attack is both unfair and inaccurate.
Carlos' first recording, Switched-on Bach, was z.
note-for-note transcription of some of J.S. Bach's
most Popular works voiced for synthesizer. While
not being an authority on Bach or the baroque
period, I think I am justified to say Carlos has
provided us with the best renditions of the
various pieces available. This comes both from
Carlos' brilliant selection of "voices" for the
-various instruments and from the scintillating
clarity provided by the synthesized music.
Whereas in a conventional performance of, say,
Bach's Fourth Brandenburg Concerto, the
various musical lines may be indistinct or
confused, in the synthesized version each part
comes out clearly as Bach would have wanted it.
And who can say that Bach wouldn't have
used the synthesizer had it been available in his
time, scoring each instrument to the part in
which its sound qualities would be used to best
advantage. What if J.S. Bach had been able to
tailor each instrument exactly to its part? This is
exactly what Carlos has done in his albums
Switched On Bach, Vie Well-Tempered
Synthesizer and Switched on Bach II, He has not
changed any parts. He has not enhanced the
music or added rhythm sections or what not. He
has merely transcribed Bach's own music for the
synthesizer. Maybe David Ware didn't like Carlos'
choice of voices. If not, I challenge him to do
better. Otherwise, I invite him to state exactly
his reasons for not liking the music.
If Ware brings up the second movement of the
Brandenburg Concerto No. 3 on Switched on
Bach and says, "this is not what Bach wrote at
all," I will agree with him. Bach only wrote a
small portion ot that second movement,
intending the continuo player to improvise a
cadenza to exhibit his musical talent and maybe
give the other players a rest. Carlos has done this
brilliantly, showing that he is, indeed a virtuoso
at the keyboard and demonstrating the versatility
and scope - of the synthesizer as a legitimate
musical instrument.
As an aftei thought, Carlos has not taken as
much liberty with Bach's music as Tomita has
with, say, Debussy's "Golliwog's Cakewalk."
How David Ware can appreciate and like one, but
not the other is beyond me. I like both.
Randall E. Gilmore
Libraries' fates
Dear editor:
From your coverage of the undergraduate
library issue my impression is that there is no
great student support for the continuation of this
library. If this is indeed true, there would seem
to be no real basis for its existence and in the
interest of economy it should be merged with the
main collection. " -
My concern is that your editorial implies that
-such x fate should also befall other branch
libraries for the sake of efficiency. However,
most of the other branch' libraries are
fundamentally different from the Undergraduate
Library in that their collections are rather
specialized. The science branch libraries,
architecture, dentistry and law libraries all house
special collections which are mainly used by
patrons located physically close to these libraries.
They are vigorously supported and maintained
by the involvement of their - patrons, and
coalition of these collections with the main
library would not be more economical or
efficient even if it were tolerated.
Future plans for the library include an on-line
computer system that will make rapid location of
any volume in the system very simple. Such a
system decreases the urgency of centralization
since the status of a book can be quickly checked
before having it in hand. Hopefully it will end
any futile student or faculty interlibrary
odysseys, but those branch libraries which
remain will do so for the reason they come into
existence: because they serve their particular
patrons more efficiently.
Jeanette Masek
WELL, IT-LEAST. I'M
MOT THE ONLY ONE
FEELIMG THE PRESSOR
OF FIMLS.
.s -p
Lef a cigaret fake the drag out of UNL life
The time has come for all good students to sit
down and have a smoke. Put aside your books, stop
worrying about the looming menace of final's week
and take it easy.
The end is near and there's no sense in breaking
one's back now over tests which, in many cases, mean
nothing except that you're very adept at quick
memorization.
In another week, this mess will all be over, and
then you'll have plenty to look forward to.
You can sell that biology textbjok you paid $15
for at the beginning of the semester back to the local,
friendly bookstore baron and receive 50 cents for it.
After that, you can check out of one of the best
patrolled residence halls in the country, which are
found on this campus, and head for the relative
insecurity of home, wherever home might be.
During the summer, just as you've done for the
last three summers, you can discuss with friends how
you're going to Europe in the fall.
Next fall, back in Lincoln, just as you've done for
the last three falls, you can discuss with friends how
you're going to Europe in the summer.
And in the end, after four glorious years at this
place, chances are you can leave, diploma in hand,
pags 4
without once having your mind assaulted by anything
that might cause some thinking on your part.
You come here with some vague notion about
getting an education, and you leave here with a
vaguer notion of what that education was all about.
Once in the "real world," you get the chance to
take all the knowledge behind that degree and apply
joe dreesen
miiirv
it to vorking in a restaurant or digging ditches in
McCook, Neb. And so it goes.
As you can see, there is a lot to look forward to,
which is all the more reason to sit down and have that
smoke.
It seems that the only way to seriously approach
this university is to not seriously approach it. Take it
as it comes and don't get too excited.
After all, in a state where money flows freely for
Saturday afternoon, Memorial Stadium football, but
not for your education, what good does it do to be
serious?
In a state that cannot come up with $25,000 to
bring back the highly-respected St. Louis Symphony
Orchestra, but can manage to find $550,000 a year to
maintain an athletic field house, how's one to
separate sense from nonsense?
And at a university that theoretically is supposed
to serve its students, but instead treats them like
kindergarten tots while giving them a sterile
education, what's the point in getting involved?
If you can come up with positive answers to these
and other questions concerning our university, you're
lucky. You undoubtedly know why you're here and
where you're going, which is fine.
However, if you're like the rest of us simple dolts
who find these questions perplexing, about all you
can do is serve your time, smile or possibly laugh, and
then make a fast exit.
With that in mind, I would like to wish everyone a
Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year-and
anything else which might seem appropriate.
thursday, may 1, 1975
daily nebraskan
