Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (Nov. 14, 1950)
The Oregon Dm, £«.«■». Publishedl Monday^ through Friday during the colle^year ELI SS SiHHHss1 office, Eugene, Oregon. Subscription rates: $5 per school year, $2 per teim. the associate editors. Unsigned editorials are written by the editor._w We Want No Closed-Eye Policy If you violate the law, do you expect protection from the press? The question has come up several times this year, bringing the need for clarification of Emerald policy in printing stories of students who violate city, state, federal, and in some cases, University laws. We aren’t going to print names until we’re sure the student has been arrested for robbing a store or drunken driving, or whatever the charge. No American today is ignorant of the great danger done by unjustly smearing an individual. Nor are we going to overemphasize such news. It’s not worth the play it receives in many of America’s sheets. ; But because you are a University of Oregon student, you should be protected no more than the citizen outside the camp us.This institution should be no nursery to cover up for a young man or woman’s failings. * * * What if the Emerald does go to the high schools and par ents of the state as representative of the University ? We’ll put this alma mater of ours at least up to, and in most cases well above any other state school in this part of the coun try. And we realize that some of our fields of instruction are stronger than others, and some of our administrative and stu dent government problems seem insurmountable at times. But we’re confident that our students are just as smart and just as dumb and no more immoral than any other students across the country. And we think our University is education ally strong enough to bring worthwhile newcomers here with out painting out the black and showing them only the white. * * * What if the law-breaker is ridiculed by fellow students after they read in the press of his errors? That’s the risk the student or any man takes when he breaks the law. Has anyone ever considered the preventative power of knowing before a crime is committed that when caught it will be aired in the papers? This is best illustrated by the professor who has never even violated Eugene traffic regulations because his pride doesn t relish announcement of his violation in the Register-Guard. By law-breakers, we don’t mean dormitory women who commit the dastardly crime of wearing jeans to breakfast, or other such violators of petty campus rules. We mean those who break the laws recognized by our soci ety, and punished by our courts. We ask no false blanket of protection from our University. Society past graduation offers no closed eye. Neither should we find one here. Beauty in the Barnyard Elsewhere on this page the Daily Emerald does a bit of bur lesque on the selection of “America’s ten most beautiful wo men” by the Artists’ Group of America. Note: (1) Six of the elite ten are movie actresses in one form or another—present or past. A seventh is a singer. (2) The rest are carefully combed from what may be aptly termed the “Social Register.” All of which makes for so much claptrap. Who is to say that all ten of the epitomes of feminine pulchritude must come from such a small and select group. The selectors would have done better if they had peeled an eye to the college campuses. And we’ll wager that American Beauty No. 1 is just as likely to be sitting on a three-legged stool milking cows in the Iowa farmlands—or Oregon pastures—or classes in agriculture—as making with the wow poses on Sunset Boulevard.—T.K._ THE DAILY to W. V. Norris, professor of physics, who has received a citation for achievement from William Jewell College. This award is given annually to alumni of the Missouri college who have gained distinction in their fields. THE OREGON LEMON . . . to the author of this line in the good-looking new Piggers’ Guide: “When students leave the University, it is not the classrooms—not the professors—but the traditions that make them recall their days at Oregon.” Sorry sign of college life if this is true. iQuntie.'4. ^'Ju'i.tlenech &utexite/i..> America s Ten Prettiest-Read Aem and Weep Singer Margaret Phelan .. .A Brass Gaboon Writer Hits Grade Policy; Offers Plan By Sam Fidman Grades are sometimes called the necessary evil of education. There are instructors who frown upon them, as well as students who believe them to be both nee -essary and good. The greatest purpose served by the grading system, especially on the collegiate level, is to weed out that element which simply cannot hack higher education. We distinguish here between cannot and should not. Of course, grades have both a good and bad side to them. They do, to some extent, serve their purpose of “weeding out” and of differentiating or ranking the nuggets that wheedle out of the weed-killing process. In thinking about the problem, we dug out one idea that seems to be rather well devised.. It involves a strict interpreta tion of grades and what they are worth for the freshman and soph omore years at college—and THEN, for those that survive to become upperclassmen, the sys tem of grades is abolished. Examinations under this sys tem would still be given to jun iors and seniors—but for the pur pose t>f determining what diffi culties they might be having with the material at hand. On the basis of these gradeless upperclass tests, instructors could call individual conferences with those who “missed the boat” or in the case of larger classes, the instructor could call a group of students for a seminar-type dis cussion of the material covered in the quiz. This, It seems, would put more of an intellectual flavor in the upperclass. It would eliminate pre-test butterflies and the “cheapness” of having a grade as the end point in education. The aforementioned system would meet with the disapproval of the elite under the current ar rangement. It would as well meet with re sentment from the lower strata since a strict grading system early in the college career would pinch a lot of feet. But, selfish interests and am bitions excepted, the plan seems to smack of just what most of the faculty and students want— and need. (Editor’s Note: The following news service story was printed in last Saturday’s Oregonian. Inserted comments, in parenthesis, are our very own.—S.F.) _ , . . NEW YORK, Nov. 10 (INS) Actresses Elizabeth Taylor and Ava Gardner were picked one-two Friday in a list of America’s “ten most beautiful women” announced by the Artists’ Group of America. Miss Taylor was chosen, said the group’s director, Russell Patter son, for having “the face and grace of an angel” and eyes and nose described as “masterpieces of nature. (Even we could resemble an angel—or at least turn blue trying with Hilton’s millions tinting our complexion.) The sultry Miss Gardner landed on the list with praise for her shy and retiring facial characteristics” and “temptingly curved bosom and hip lines.” (WELL, ntow! Avid Ava seems to have a body (true) that just does n’t go with her facial expression.) Swimming star Esther Williams, number three among the artists’ choices, was described as “the girl next door type, and possessor of “flawlessly formed jaws and thighs.” (This artist must live in a dandy neighborhood. There is also doubt as to whether he can be so darned sure about flawless these or those.) “Regal splendor” was given as the chief attribute of Mrs. Harrison Williams, noted hostess. (That is saying nothing in a short space.) Actress Ginger Rogers, next in order, was described unequivocally as “the most beautiful blonde in America.” (Miss Rogers was really slighted. She should have been named the most beautiful blonde in the last half century, since she has had a chance to compete with ALL the rest of them.) Colleen Townsend, also of the movies, came next. She was descriOTP as “cuddly and cute” and “a gal with divinely shaped arms and legs. (A-w-w-r, ootchie kootchikins.) Seventh was singer Margaret Phelan, credited with “come hither loveliness” and “inviting lips and shoulders.” (Inviting what! An old brass gaboon—spitoon to the elite—hits me with a come hither look, and definitely invites the aim of a sloppy shot of saliva.) Former actress and now producer Mary Pickford was chosen among the most beautiful ten for what the artists described as her “youthful maturity and vivacity,” plus eye-catching neckline.” Miss Pickford also won an accolade as “everybody’s favorite aunt type.” (Margaret O’Brien has a youthful maturity, but she lost out to Pick ford when it came down to the neckline. Also, just off-hand, we can t place an aunt of ours who has a neckline any riskier than a turtleneck sweater.) Mrs. William O’Dwyer, wife of the former New York mayor who now is the U. S. ambassador to Mexico, was honored among the top ten as a “haunting and dreamy” type woman who also shows “soul tenderness” and' is equipped with a striking, intelligent forehead.” (Maybe we could pickle her head and preserve it for future genera tions to sigh and pant at. We can think of a gal who works in a San Francisco five and dime who has tenderness, is dreamy, and is equip ped with a few items which we would rank above even the sexiest forehead.) Completing the list was socialite Mrs. Alfred G. Vanderbilt, chosen for her “sweet dignity, charm and understanding,” plus “lustrous hair and shapely ears.” (Oh, to have shapely ears.) The Second Cup... In the midst of a squabble over campus politics, one of our deeper thinkers was heard to remark, “A peanut rots away in side and the whole world is supposed to jump.” That charity which longs to publish itself, ceases to be char ity—Hutton. • It Could Be Oregon /*'/y 'S/s/ S “I wish you guys would ‘thumb through’ my medical books a little faster—I’ve got to study ’em.”