® EMERALD
The Parking Situation
In that amorphous world of “who is re
sponsible for what” the student parking
situation seems to be a principal character.
The student pays his money for parking
-privileges, which more often than not don’t
seem to exist. If the student has a com
plaint about the situation, there seems to be
little recourse but to suffer with it.
At the present time the student has two
avenues for recommendations. He can take
his suggestions to the ASUO Parking Com
mittee or to the Student-Faculty Traffic
Court. These two avenues will lead to frus
tration, as the student will soon discover.
The ASUO Parking Committee is about
as inert a committee as you will find on this
or any other campus. It, at present, is not
allowed to send a representative to the
Campus Planning Committee, which, it
seems, is the untouchable center of parking
activities. A letter of recommendation can
be sent by the ASUO committee to the
Planning Committee, but the course it must
travel seems to be littered with many cir
cular files.
The second recourse for recommendations
is the Student-Faculty Traffic Court. Like
•the ASUO organization it must use the im
personal letter for contact, although As
sistant Dean of Men Bruce Brenn, the ad
visor, said that the Campus Planning Com
mittee has smiled kindly upon Traffic
Court recommendations.
The ASUO Senate, aware of the above
problems, posed four questions at the last
Senate meeting.
1. Do students have an effectual say in
the policies of the Planning Committee
concerning parking?
2. Should faculty and staff pay for park
ing stickers as do students?
3. What is the possibility of a joint fac
ulty-student committee to make the
parking policy?
4. Problem of publicity—couldn’t park
ing rules and regulations be among
the packets received during registra
tion ?
To the first question the answer is a
definitive NO, as was explained above. The
onlv possible solution to this problem is
found in the answer to number three. While
the possibility of student representation to
the Planning Committee is not yet known,
there is no doubt that there should be stu
dent representation.
A letter is an impotent method of pre
senting your ideas or complaints. Only
through student representation can an ef
fective move be made to solve a problem
that is just as much the affairs of the stu
dents as the affairs of the faculty, if not
more so.
Most faculty members consider free
parking a “fringe benefit.” and for this rea
son it is unlikely that they will be required
to buy stickers as the students do.
Question four was posed as a solution to
the great number of student violations.
Yes. it is a good idea to include the parking
rtdes in the registration packet, but better
yet, wouldn’t it be wise to re-examine the
present facilities and perhaps adapt them
more to the existing problem ?
Whatever the solution may be to the
parking situation, it is hoped that the ASUO
letter to the Campus Planning Committee
concerning the four problems will not falter
and fall into one of those circular files.
Play the Congressional ‘Name Game’:
Try Picking Liberals, Conservatives
The terms "liberal” and “con
servative” have always been
thrown around in American poli
tics pretty impressionistically.
When a senator espouses more
pay for postal workers, he is
tagged “liberal." If a senator
votes against a high dam at
Hell’s Canyon, he is a “con
servative.” When a senator like
the late Walter George votes
for foreign aid but against more
government spending, persons
are confused, and so the man be
comes a “moderate.”
In this latter category have
landed Sens. John Kennedy and
Lyndon Johnson, former Secre
tary of State Dean Acheson,
President Eisenhower, and Vice
President Nixon. These persons
and many more are thought to
be inconsistent in their political
behavior, and they are a little
bothersome since one can't fit
them neatly into the liberal or
conservative slots.
Today a liberal is a person
who doesn’t bat an eye at gov
ernment spending and in general
is one who fearlessly upholds
the inherent rights of the “com
mon man.” He is intensely in
sympathy with all underdevel
oped peoples and is the arch foe
of nuclear testing.
The conservative is for indi
OREGON DAILY EMERALD
The Oregon Daily Emerald is published
four times in September and five days a
wek during the school year, except during
examination and vacation periods, by the
Student Publications Board of the Univer
sity of Oregon. Entered as second class
matter at the post office, Eugene, Ore
gon. Subscription rates: $5 per year, $2
per term.
Opinions expressed on the editorial
page are those of The Emerald and do
not pretend to represent ;he opinion of
the ASUO or the University.
PHIL HAGER, Editor
BILL BRYANT, Busin.ss Manager
vidual initiative and consequent
ly believes that big labor is bad,
that the government shouldn’t
meddle in the states’ affairs,
and that socialism is around the
corner. And it follows that those
“foreign fellows” should look
out for themselves.
The curious thing about the
“name game” is that the mod
erates have generally been
more succeasful politicians than
either the liberals or the con
servatives, and the most influ
ential politicians have been
moderates.
The moderate is one who, un
like the whole-hog liberal or con
servative,* doesn’t particularly
care to follow a set political
philosophy and realizes that if
he did, he would no longer be
successful. He instead lives his
political life more “by ear” than
by heart. William S. White, po
litical columnist, in his book
about the U.S. Senate, Citadel,
writes of the good senator:
. . One cannot forever re
fuse there to make any compro
mise at all and remain a good,
or effective, member . . . This
is no place for the man who has
ONLY principle; for every genu
ine political fanatic is simply
awash with principle as he un
derstands the term.” Other
qualities he mentions are: “A
concentration upon the coher
ent and important and an avoid
ance of the diffuse and doubt
ful. A deep skill in sensing
what may and may not be done.”
This advice holds true for
more than just U.S. Senators.
The political idealist, the lead
er of movements is only occas
ionally successful and although
he may become a famous man,
he never rises very high in real
influence.
A moderate defies neat de
scription because he has what
(Continued on page 3)
Letter to
the Editor
Emerald Editor:
Aside from the fact that we
lost the game last Saturday,
there was much else to make the
day a miserable one.
The first was the fact that
there were so many students of
the University who had to sit in
thii’d rate seats out in the rain,
while the “general admission’’
people sat in the cover of the
grandstands. We were of the
impression that the University
of Oregon opposed the kind of
“big business’’ in athletics that
goes on in the Southern Cali
fornia schools. This impression
has been changed. It seems that
Oregon too now has more regard
for the dollar than for the stu
dent when it comes to athletic
events. Maybe this is one of the
pitfalls of a winning team. Be
cause there is no way to waive
athletic event charges in the
tuition price, the athletic depart
ment feels that we do not have
to be treated like “paying
guests.” For the hundreds of
students who had to sit in a cold
rain while the "paying crowd”
sat in comfort, the University
should be truly ashamed.
Seconds, we are appalled by
the tactics and the manners dis
(Continued on page 3)
Suspicion Confirmed
in.—____
Trr
"MasT^RIU-V WRITTEN 5NARF—IT'6 56U*>W/V\Y
PLEASURE TO 5FP A TEST WITH SOAAANV fiMHOOUS QUtSUO**
'Politeness at Oregon Varies;
It Can Even Replace Learning
(Editor'* Note: Stanley R.
Maveety hat been a memlier
of the University'* English
Department since 195.5. He
teaches classes in both Eng
lish composition and liie
erature, and his educational
background includes under
graduate work at Northwest
ern and graduate study at Co
lumbia and Stanford, where he
received hi* I*h.I). in 195(1.
After three years of eontact
with Oregon'* student*. Mr.
Maveety has some definite—
and interesting — impression*
of them.) .
By Stanley R. Maveety
Three years ago, after a very
short exposure to Oregon stu
dents, I answered a question
from an older faculty member
with the observation that Ore
gon students seemed quite po
lite. I believed it then and meant
it as a favorable comment; I
still believe it, but I don’t mean
it now as an unqualified compli
ment.
When I think of the politeness
of Oregon students something
that really sets them off a bit
from others I’ve encounteded —
I think first of some slightly
baffled comp, student leaving
the office after a wrestle with
the complexity of dangling verb
als, or an earnest but confused
attempt to see just what it is
that’s wrong with the passive
voice.
At the door he turn* and says
wearily, but a* If he meant It,
"Thank*.” He says It a* If the
struggle had taken a bit of my
time and energy too. Now this i*
good, partly for the simple rea
son that it happen* to 1m: true.
And this much of the Duck
spirit of politeness I wouldn't
change.
But I can think of another
side. Let me conjure up the
image of a sweet young thing
who answers some comment of
mine with, "Oh yes! I certainly
think that Shakespeare has a
lot to offer.” I agree, but I’m
bothered by the sneaky suspicion
that although she’s edging to
ward the door, it’s not for a
quick dash to the library.
Now I don’t mean that she’s
an apple-polisher; we've all met
him (and her). An apple pol
isher is trying to confuse the
teacher, and he’s not confused
himself. But this young lady
(let me have my way about thin
for the nuke of the point) wan
not being hypocritical; she wan
herself a bit confused. Just at
that moment, and for the dear
sweat sake of Oregonian polite
ness, she really half-believed
that she did favor the good old
Hard.
She recovered, I'm sure, its
soon as she got out into the
fresh uir, but she’s likely to
have a relapse If she falls into
conversation with anyone from
the Knglish Department. I niler
the anesthetic s|sdl of good
manners she may even imagine
for the moment that she's be
come fond of Chaucer!
This young lady Duck couldn’t
possibly have said, "I really
don't like what we've been read
ing in Lit.” That would have
been rude, and it might have
jarred the poor old teacher; but
(and this is my point) I believe
that it would have been worth
being rude (on these terms) in
order to have been talking hon
est good sense.
It might even have led to »n
honest discussion of what, in her
opinion and In mine, was good
and what was bad a taint a cer
tain assignment or series of
assignments. Who knows (a
shocking thought), the Instruc
tor might even have learned
something from the student.
I recall being jarred once, by
a very different sort of stu
dent, who obviously was not
typically polite; he told me
straight that he studied part of
the quarter’s work thoroughly
because he liked it and that after
a small taste he Ignored an
other part. He even went on
with this heresy of honesty to
say that he was aware that his
attitude would not be good for
his grade.
Don’t misunderstand me. I
wouldn’t hold him up as a per
fect model any more than I’d
turn the classroom into a scene
of argument for the sake of
argument. I’m convinced that
what he tasted and left alone
was worth his trouble. But there
was something in his attitude
worth noticing, for its novelty
if nothing else: he seemed to
have the idaa that it was his
course, in fact his education,
simply becauffc he was paying
for it a rather curious way of
looking at it, don’t you think?