Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (May 13, 1971)
Commentary Gerorg B. Wasson Pow Wow was a success-failure George B. Wasson is an assistant dean of students working with the Office of Student Services. He is a Coos Coquille Native American. The Pow Wow, sponsored by the University of Oregon Native American students, has come and gone (Friday and Saturday nights at Mac Court). It was both a success and a failure. Indians arrived from all parts of Oregon and some from neighboring states. The turnout was low, yet participation was high among all those people inside Mac Court. Both nights there were times when hardly anyone was sitting down watching; the floor was sometimes filled with both Indians and non-Indians, many trying a round dance for their first time. That’s what a Pow Wow is all about— brotherhood, friendship, participation, and “religious” tradition. There were dance competitions for both young people and adults (Competition is not a traditional Indian concept, but one which has crept into the cultures from over powering white influence.) Some visitors came to me, expressing concern that things were not starting “on time.” When people are ready In the “Indian” way of thinking—the time to start is when people are ready. Seven o’clock, as stated on posters, was the time when people should head to MfcArthur Court to start setting up, to see who else was there, for drummers and singers to gather, warm up, to put on regalia and help each other. It was not a show or program as most “Whites” would naturally expect. One could expect no more outline of events for a Pow Wow than could be expected to find a menu for a family reunion, pot-luck dinner. Several special dances were per formed spontaneously; a group of young girls did a “Butterfly dance,” while ac companied by three older women drum ming and singing. Later in the evening the same three women took “walking canes” out on the floor with them and presented an “old ladies dance,” filled with humor and cantankerous antics. Others per formed Peace-pipe ceremonies, hoop dances, and a blanket wearing demon stration. One of the great treats of both nights was the Tolowa group from Smith River, California. Their songs, dances, and “costume” are very traditional and represent an authentically “primitive” coastal culture. The essential nature of the Pow Wow is a great contrast to the gatherings, events and activities of the several nights just prior to it in downtown Eugene and around campus. Unfortunately, those other events were instigated in the name of Peace, yet the overall and final result is tragically the opposite. Several townspeople spoke to me at Mac Court and expressed their ap prehension about coming out for anything on the University of Oregon campus. They knew of many other Eugeneans with greater fears than their own. Likewise, some Indians said they were very hesitant a’>out coming to Eugene because of the • riots.” Since most Indians view Whites as a basically violent culture anyway, this past week has provided a definite reaf firmation of their views. White influence A 72-year-old man, Edward Edmo, pointed out that even some of the traditional dances have taken on the violent name of “war dance,” due to White influence. He said, originally, “war dances” had other names like “Bird dance,” in which the movements represent the rituals of birds such as Prairie Chickens, or grouse, and the feathered adornments came from the same inspirations. Most Indians have long ago forgotten the true meaning of these dances, which was mainly to give them strength and wisdom, courage and self respect. It was only natural that they should perform these dances and rituals, upon being forced into war against the white invaders. What they were lacking in military striking power, they were desperate to make up in spiritual strength. The Whites looked upon these rituals as solely intended to build aggression or work up a frenzied courage to kill and called them "war dances.” A telephone conversation with officials at the Chemawa Indian School, informed us that their students would not be allowed to come to Eugene, ‘because of the violence and riots here,’ and therefore would not participate. Officials at the Oregon State Correctional Institution had planned to bring down members of their Indian group, but changed their plans for the same reason. The lpss is not for Indians alone (the several hundred dollar deficit can be made up), but for everyone who stayed away, due to fear and apprehension, thereby losing the experience of “oneness" and the true brotherhood. My personal congratulations go to the members of the University of Oregon Native American Student Union, and thanks to all others who helped in the true Indian tradition of “making the most out of what you have.” Chopin D. Clark Committee looks at new code Chapin D. Clark is on the law school faculty and is chairman of the Student Conduct Committee. Persons who read the April 28 Emerald item, “Proposed code allows students to prosecute faculty members,” probably either threw the paper down in disgust or yelled “Right on.” Un fortunately, the report invited that sort of polarization. I am writing in an attempt to clarify what the Student Conduct Com mittee is considering. First, two specific points about the news item: (1)1 must respectfully refuse the Emerald’s generous vesting of power in me to “initiate sanctional procedures” against my faculty colleagues, (2) I do agree that it would be difficult to persuade the Faculty Senate to give students the authority to judge the “affairs” (your quote) of the faculty. Aside from the point that the Senate does not have legislative power, I am sure that the Senate would feel that those faculty members lucky enough to have “affairs” should be judged by higher authority. Faculty members are subject to the disciplinary provisions of Section L-3of the Administrative Code adopted by the State Board of Higher Education last Sep tember. Under these provisions, if the Bob Gabriel is a junior in journalism at the University. People say the University of Oregon got a black eye last week. They’re wrong. It got its head busted. Glorious leader Eachus claimed there were communications problems. I’d agree if I didn’t know he. Freed and others had been using bullhorns earlier in the day. I wonder what happened to them Thursday night. Thursday’s trashing was done by a hate-mob. It started out (before Freed, Eachus. etc., did their disappearing act) to be an anti-war protest group, but it changed somewhere along the way. And when all the action was over, the entire campus had taken a beating. Heads got busted, cops got cut up. windows got trashed and a lot of the wrong people were arrested It could have been prevented Fachus claimed the crowd was upset institutional executive determines that there is probable cause to impose a sanc tion more severe than reprimand upon an academic staff member, he shall authorize the preparation of formal charges in ac cordance with institutional procedure. There is room, therefore, to consider on this campus both the adoption of local procedures to supplement the Ad ministrative Code and the adoption of standards and procedures under which an academic staff member might receive a formal reprimand for adequate cause without invoking the heavy machinery of the Administrative Code. The State Board has encouraged each institution to un dertake this consideration. The Student Conduct Committee is doing this within the limited context of a “Community Code” proposal. Not a new idea “Community Code” is a short hand way of expressing the idea of a faculty adopted code which extends not only to students but in a limited way to faculty. It is not a new idea. It was proposed several years ago in a report to the faculty by the ad hoc Committee to Evaluate the Student Conduct Code. In some ways, it reflects rather traditional notions of shared responsibility for governance of an educational institution and the members thereof. The recent Carnegie Commission report on a Model Bill of Rights and Responsibilities for all constituents of a university community has given added impetus on several campuses to con sideration of this approach. Translating this idea into a concrete proposal for debate and decision is not an easy task, as several conduct committees have discovered. Although the symmetry of a university code which applies to faculty and students alike is superficially appealing, it must be remembered that faculty and students perform different roles. In addition, faculty members have contracutal obligations and professional responsibilities which students do not share. Definitions of misconduct or “cause” for disciplinary sanctions cannot be identical for both groups. Sanctions cannot be uniformly defined for both groups because of the different relationship which students and faculty have to the institution. Nor are the con sequences of those sanctions which are identical on the surface necessarily the same. A reprimand imposed on a student by a student court is soon forgotten, but a Bob Gabriel A black eye or a busted head? by early use of tear and pepper gas. It’s a lousy excuse and he knows it, but that isn’t the point The point is mobs get a vicarious buzz out of harassing cops. To Thursday’s mob, breaking windows was just another kind of harassment A cheap thrill they could run away from quickly, leaving someone else to take the blame It’s stupid, but there isn’t much you can do about stupidity—except maybe take the place of cops . . Several campuses across the country have formed student groups who ac company protest marchers and keep trashing to a minimum. They stand in front of windows, take the place of cops in confrontations and generally prevent the ugliness that arises when idiots try to win their hero-buttons. In order to keep things cool the rest of this year on campus, I’d like to help form a group like that on this campus Its only purpose would be to avoid formal reprimand imposed on a faculty member may place a life-time career in jeopardy. Administrative code Faculty members are already subject to the detailed provisions of the Ad ministrative Code to which any in stitutional code must relate. This relationship is not easy to define. Further, the important concept of faculty en titlement to peer judgment in cases of alleged professional failures or defaults is put in question by a community code approach. Fundamentally, what are we trying to accomplish? If we are seeking better channels on the campus for the redress of routine grievances against individual faculty members, is the disciplinary model the most appropriate model to follow in establishing procedures and achieving corrective responses? What are the alternatives? These and other issues are receiving careful attention by the Conduct Com mittee. It remains to be seen whether the Committee can offer a “proposed code” this term Chapin I). Clark Chairman, Student Conduct Comm. trashings and '-onfrontations with police. Members would be deaf mute concerning participant identities. Their only weapon would be passive bodies They would in sure the peacefulness of “peaceful" demonstrations—something the radical leadership seems unable to do. I also am a radical. I’ve written, spoken, demonstrated, made phone calls, collected signitures, etc., till I’m wrung out. But I’ve learned a couple of things about how to protest effectively. Believe me, busting up a city needlessly doesn’t get it. Demonstrations are important They win friends. When they get ugly, they lose their purpose. If we want demonstrations to continue being useful, we’re going to have to keep them that way. If you think we need such a student group, call me at 746-5409 or write the Emerald. I’m tired of having people label me an idiot when I identify myself as an Oregon student
