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