Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Oct. 24, 1950)
Omm Daily •EMERALD The Oregon Daily Emerald, published Monday through Friday during the college year with the following exception : no papers Oct. 30, Dec..5-Jan. 3V Mar, 6-28,_ May 7,JHanks g' W iVing holidays,tncluding the following Monday, and after May 24; additional paper on jvllyg12, hy the Associated Students of the University of Oregon. Entered as sec°n^ cliJ^ matter at the postoffice, Eugene, Oregon. Subscription rates: $5 per school year, $4 for two terms; $3 per term. Opinions expressed on the editorial page are those of the writer and do not pretend to represent the opinions of the ASUO or of the University. Initialed editorials are written by the associate editors. Unsigned editorials are written by the editor.__ Anita Holmes, Editor Lorna Larson, Managing Editor Don Thompson, Business Manager Barbara Williams, Advertising Manager Tom King, Ken Mktzlek, Don Smith, Associate Editors Assistant Editor: Sam Fidman News Editor: Norman Anderson Wire Editor: John Barton Sports Editor: Pete Cornaccma Assistant Managing Editors: Bob Funk, Gret chen Grondahl, Ralph Thompson, Fred Vos per. Circulation Manager: Jean Lovell Assistant Business Manager: Shirley Hillard National Advertising Manager: Bonnie Birkemeier Layout Manager: Martel Scroggin Portland Advertising: Karla Van Loan Zone Managers: Fran Neel, Jean Hoffman, Virginia Kellogg, Don Miller, Val Schultz, Harriet Vahey. _ No Time for the Normal “Normalcy,” he said, “it’ll be good when times get back to normal.” It was an innocent statement. The speaker meant to stir no indignation. But a college student—a fourth-year-man—wanted to know what he meant by “normalcy.” Define that evasive term you use so often. Was that “normalcy” in 1929 and ’30 when we walked into the old world? The folks talked about them as “depression years” in the same tone they used for “the plague” or “death in the family.” Surely that wasn’t “normalcy.” Then Dad went to work for the WPA, and people stood in lines for dried apricots, and corn meal and lima beans. And the men used to laugh about “leaning on their shovels” and look forward to “getting back to normal.” Europe rumbled while we moved on up through grade school and junior high, but more than a mere rumble provoked that broadcast we heard in the school auditorium. President Roose velt had just declared war—and even we eighth graders were hushed at the awful words. Drafting, rationing, waiting, dying, and finally—ending the war. Ah, that V-E night was one big sigh of relief—“now America can get back to normal.” Passed a few years of uneasy peace. Unending cries of Com munism, and then a dagger cuts an imaginary line. And what happens to “normalcy?” Pardon me, Mr. Speaker. The college student didn’t mean to interrupt. Nor was he complaining—none of that “lost genera tion” stuff for him. A definition—that was all he wanted. This Time,fa Compliment Whoops! Wc almost forgot something. It’s human to complain about small irritations and to say nothing about big advantages. We re afraid that s what we ve done too much of since the opening of the Student Union. (Yes, newspaper men and women are human, too, so there.) Anyhow, to heck with the inconvenience of the soda bar. Service is better now than when it first opened and the kinks will probably iron out before long. What we really want to talk about today is the good side of the Student Union. Take the cafeteria for instance. We want to extend our sin cere congratulations to all those responsible for the excellent food—at reasonable rates—of which so many students and fac ulty members are taking advantage. Even though we still have occasional trouble with the but ter dispenser, we feel the SU has become one of the finest eat ing places in town. That is definitely not the only advantage. The traditional site of the post-class coke date has now switched to the Stu dent Union. And for those slightly more energetic, there are ping pong, pool and bowling. And we hope to see a few expert female pool players come out of the Student Union area. For, as SU Director Dick Wil liams savs, the basement recreation area is not solely for men. —K.M. The Second Cup... Do not be too moral. You may cheat yourself out of much 'life so. Aim above morality. Be not simply good; be good for something—Thoreau. He that falls into sin is a man; that grieves at it, is a saint; that boasteth of it, is a devil.—Fuller. _ A Penny for Government Amendment 300, 301 Salary rates for state legislators will be one of the questions de cided by Oregon voters November 7. Numbered 300 and 301, the mea sure proposes a constitutional amendment. The Measure Would: Give each legislator $600 per year and $1200 for his term; each pre siding officer an additional $200 per year. Allow 10 cents per mile for travel to and from meetings. Under the constitution as it now stands, the salary of an Oregon legislator is $8 per day for a limit of 50 days every other year, unless there is a special session ($8 per day, 20 day limit.) Proponents Say: By ending per diem payment, amendment would end jamming at end of sessions. Inadequate salaries may make legislators easy prey for lobbyists of special interests. Only two states pay lower salaries than Oregon (Washington legis lators receive $1,200 per year plus $10 per day subsistence expense.) Present pay is not sufficient to defray actual living costs during the session, so only the financially independent can afford to govern. Opponents Say: We want economy in government. High pay will attract men for the money alone. Those legislators don’t do anything anyway—why should they be paid so much ? Emerald Says: Yes. Present salary rates are shameful. In 1949, clerks and doorkeepers at the session were paid more than the legislators. Our only objection to the proposed amendment is that it doesn’t raise the salaries high enough. For a penny, you hire a poor maid and the house she leaves is seldom clean. --—Letters-— The Campus Answers 316—X—Yes Emerald Editor: Prohibition—smohibition! Here we go again! In Thursday’s Emerald there was presented the pro and con of Initiative 316, 317 which deals with prohibition of liquor advertising in Oregon. First of all, let me say that I am in full accordance with the Emerald's policy of printing both sides of the argument. However, I can’t go along with the conclu sions drawn by the Emerald in regard to said initiative. Initiative 816, 317 is not an un derhanded and indirect approach to the return of prohibition. Advertising agencies and liquor dealers will be the ones affected by this initiative NOT the con sumer except that he may miss some of his favorite ads includ ing the Old Judge’s warped but homespun philosophy. A closing thought regardless of your opinions of the foregoing ti rade—JUST WHAT IN HELL DOES BEVERAGE LIQUOR CONTRIBUTE TO THE BENE FIT OF MAN OR SOCIETY ? ? Thus, I think it’s about time we approach the liquor problem in a common-sense manner rather than yelling false and ambiguous phrases like “Don’t be tricked in to Prohibition.” Nevertheless, if you’ll pardon the rephrasing, the way to limit the activity of the giraffe without killing it would just be by cutting of his legs. Bob Peterson 317—X—No Emerald Editor: Pro: WCTU reminded me of W. Somerset Maugham’s Rain. Use your imagination and you will see Maugham’s island in the Pacific alive again in a wet state, trying to be dry. I was also reminded of a story from the Bible, the one about Adam and Eve, and the Forbid den Fruit. Perhaps this story is more to the point, for though Miss Walton may not be familiar with Rain, surely she must know the story of the fall of our par ents in Eden. And I wonder that she, representing the WCTU, is so blind to its lesson, and to human nature, not to realize that forbidden fruit is sweetest. Further, they must realize the evils of prohibition, which may well be the secret aim of this crusade, and the ineffectiveness of telling' Americans, who pride themselves on their independ ence, what they may and what they may not do, legally or otherwise. The result of unreasonable and unintelligent discipline, therefore, is either developing the harmful but practical philo sophy of might makes right, or fostering hypocrisy. To some people, including myself, the attitude of Miss Walton and the WCTU is more harmful, more criminal, than the possibility of alcoholism. Let them tell us what they really desire, the prohibition of all alcoholic beverages, and then we will believe them, and know them for what they are. (Name Withheld by request) I I I I Hash Re: ’ By Bob Funk Sunday afternoon as we were sitting in the MacDonald Theater thinking about our English Drama test, we saw the preview to this picture “I’ll Get By.” It occurred to us at that time (clev er one that we are) that they are naming a lot of movies after songs this year. The song movies are about peo ple who sing and dance. This is convenient, if not very subtle. It is very difficult to make movies about people who don’t sing and dance into stong movies. You have to present to the audience some clever excuse for Judy Garland to have learned to be prima bal lerina While feeding the pigs. In these song movies the titlP scmg is used throughout for mood music. Example: enter villain— “Tea for Two” is taken by bas soon; enter heroine—violins take “Tea for Two;” enter crowd—ev erybody plays like mad. By the time you leave one of these mov ies you are beginning to catch onto the tune of “Tea for Two.” We are not being critical. In fact, we hope there are more shows like this. We would like to see "Put Them Little Shoes Away,” “Floatin’ Down That Old Green River” (what a plot you could dig up out of that) and pos sibly “The Battle Hymn of the Republic.” Maybe not. * * * ❖ We will be glad when they quit doing whatever they are doing to Friendly Hall. Half the people in our classes there are plasterers, electricians, and carpenters — which would be quite all right ex cept that they’re rather noisy. Also, you go to your class one day to find that the room has either been altered to a point be yond recognition, or done away with completely. We have no doubt that the fi nal result is going to be pretty fine, but we are having one devil of a time, adjusting to riding up to the second floor on a pulley with a bucket of cement. • It Could Be Oregon • “That'll take care of the writing—but what if he asks you to take an oral examination?”