The present controversy over the censorship of a

udent production of ”The Chairs” is an unfortunate

>ncident. It involves a number of complex issues which
end themselves to hasty and dangerous handling.

In this space it is impossible to explicate and com-
ment upon all the difficulties involved. Two points, how-
ever, need to be made.

First, the complexities are immense in this situation
and involve a variety of blunders, past and. presents, on all
sides. These blunders are in some cases inexcusable but
the issues are so involved it is difficult to censure anyone
without some qualification.

The second point is that something should be done
to insure that a similar situation does not arise again.
The role of the college as a censor needs to be clarified
in order to remove both students and faculty from the

osition of trying to second guess the president. What,
Broadly speaking, are the criteria which determine
whether any artistic endeavor is suitable for public show-
ing under the auspices of the college? Who should impose
these criteria in any given area? And how and to whom
can the student appeal what he feels is a too stringent
imposition of these criteria? These questions need ans-
wcrs.

It is the position of the 5&3 that only in the most
extreme instances should the college censor artistic en-
deavor and that in this particular case such action does
not seem justified. The real point at issue is not, however,
this particular case. Rather, some very important lessons
should be learned from this case which will show us all,
students, faculty and administration, where we need to
go in the future.

* i *

As editors go, I am a notably unexciteable sort,
There is, however, one thing on this campus which makes
me very angry. So angry, in fact, that I become blatantly
irrational. That thing is not low student wages, nor is it
women’s hours, or even the archaic visitations restric»
tions, though these things do irritate me occasionally.

What really gets my hair up is that large regiment of
Grlnnellians which seems to think that Burling Library is
an entrenchment Verdun. Somehow, they have the idea
that if they take their books home at night, the Germans
will move in and take over the fort.

But rather than simply condemn, I, like my colleague
who suggested tipping our waitresses, have a construc-
tive suggestion to make. I propose to lead a battalion of
raiders to clear out the mess some evening just before
the library closes.

We can throw away all the trash, and from the looks
of it, most of the tables are at least half covered with
trash. Furthermore, to show our good intentions, We could
salvage everything valuable and sell it at the WUS auc»
tion. The proceeds could be earmarked for an expanded
physical education program for those without enough
strength to carry their books home at night.

GRINNELL cougar

Scarlet and Blue amp, to...

A weekly newspaper published Friday of the collage year by Grin-
ncli Committee on Student Publicalluns. Represented tor national ndver-
tistno by National Advetlising service, inc., cont-go Publishers Repre-
Stnlzlive, is East sotn Street, New York. 22, NY. Second class postnge
ﬂuid at Grinncll, lowa. Subscription rate $5.00 per school year. low paid
subscriptions.

EDITOR ,

eusmzss MANAGER

SCARLET AND BLACK

Animal Behaviour

Neil Fischer

Octal": 7. I?“

Accentuate the PoSItive

With all due apologies to
Grinneli’s operant conditioning
psychologists and to Johnny
Mercer fans, I would like to
note a very unscientific but
highly observable hit of be.
havioml phenomenon: Ani-
mals tend, so to speak, to “at,
centuale the positive and
eliminate the negative." That
is to say, they avoid aversive,
negative stimuli and react to
reittlot-oiog, positive stimuli.
And so, characteristically,
should people.

Now some of you have
doubtless already taken out
your stationery and are pre-
paring to write the editor
heartily asserting that “.
men are not either animals
and how dare Ihe 5&3 print
that, anyhow?" To those of
you so humanistically and
philosophically inclined, I
must say I bear you no mal-
ice; I must indeed acquiesce.

In fact — the next time you
engage 1n verbal jousting with
the behavorlsts — i suggest
you one the Gtinnell student
body as your prime example.

For they, surely, do not re-
act as do normal animals. At
Grinnell, as at no where else I
have ever seen, they accentuate
only the negative and all but
eliminate the positive. The neg-
ativism of the average Grin-
nellian pervades every element
of our daily existence, and even
follows us nightly to the dinner
table:

“The Saga food is no good,”
it begins.

"Yeah, and my lecture classes
are bad."

“Yeah, and North Campus
lacks camaraderie!"

“Yeah? But the dorms are too
much like fraternities,”

“An is up at hy. Apathyl
Apathy] — all around mel"

“Mediocrity ll !”

PB]

Valid Generalizat

Among the major issues on
this campus, must of which are
ignored by loudly talking and
gesturing people, is one which
comes closer than most to the
purpose of this school as a lib-
eral ans institution and as a
structure designed deliberately
with the student in mind, This
issue is based on the question:
who should be the ﬁrst to re-
spond to a seeming problem on
campus, the students or the
faculty? To put the question an-
other way: are students’ re-
sponses to be their own or are
they to follow the lead of a
“competent authority” on such
matters that occur? Or to
phrase it again dillerently: does
this school exist {or the sake of
the administration, for the sake
of the faculty, or tor the stu-
dents? Should the student he
told what the proper opinion
concerning a certain matter
should be, or is there such a
thing as a proper opinion?

Case in point: The Chairs, 1:

play by Eugene lonesco, was
presented to the Grinnell audi-
ence Tuesday to be taken as it
was. immediately alter the per-
formance, the head of the the-
ater, Mr. Richard Meyer, in-
iarmed the cast that one section
01 the play was too “gross, las-
civious, and obscene" to be
shown on the Grinneil stage.
The cast was given the alter-
native of changing their inter-
pretation of the play to con-
form to desired standards, or
the play could not be presented
again. Besides violating anis-
tic integrity and pushing to the
side every concept of theater
ethics imaginable, this action
raises several large questions:
is a student production just that
and no more; is a student pro-
duction to be considered as an
an form or not; and last, if it
is to be considered an art form,
is it liable to censorship by any
thing or anyone other than sub-
sequent student opinion? on, is
a student to be told what he is
supposed to think about a work

Eventually all at this ap‘
pears in negative editorials or
sarcastic columns or irate
letters-to-the-editor or displays
of impressive, negativlstic or-
atory. And while the editorials
and the columns and the Ietn
ters-to-the-editors and uratiuns
are often highly entertaining
and highly humorous, they are
beginning to leave a very sour
and dam- and offensive taste
in my mouth.

I'd like to change my outlook
lrom one at negativism to a
positive approach, ut 1 must
say it’s rather on ult around
here, l’d like to see the need
for negative criticism disappear
and find it supplanted by posi-
tive, constructive action.

Just as the words of Johnny
Mercer suggested a behavior-
al pattern for the 1340s, so
let Grinnell accentuate the
positive and eliminate the neg-
ative today.

ions
of art without being given a
chance to decide on his own?

Is the Grinnell audience ma-
ture enough to be embarrassed
by something but live through
it and take it for what it is, or
must the faculty members in-
volved tell the students that
what they are seeing is not
Within their realm of aesthetic
appreciation? Must Grinnell to.
Van (or remain) in a high
school attitude of "pretend
you’re smoking on stage,” or
“get a note from Mother," or
“sex doesn’t exist in the real
World”?

in my opinion, it Grinnell Col<
lege is going to live up to its
avowed philosophy, it must give
the student lree rein to create
what is in the proper spirit of
art, and also, as an audience,
freedom to judge this creation
on the basis of a subjective val-
uation alone, and not on the
basis of a posited authoritarian
pronouncement.

Put that in your hat and
smoke it, baby!

 

 

at? , , o n
m shove cartoon. wind :tlchlng u u editorial lime hm week,

, werewolf-“Madm- , _
were, with success. ole-s present himself It the SR office before
lyMMWWWﬂWmﬁnWthuk mooditorhuncobhler’sblﬂlo settle withhln.

em to» ~

1

 

