Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (April 13, 1972)
Commentary Joyce Mitchell An open letter to Mr. Ed Coleman An Open Letter to Mr. Ed Coleman Dear Mr. Coleman: I could hardly believe my eyes on reading—a week late unfortunately— Ed Coleman’s “ultimatum” concerning interim staffing of the proposed Af firmative Action Office. His position against any “White woman” is a slap in the face to over 95 per cent of the currently disadvantaged work force and student body of this University. Not only does this display utter ignorance of exactly what (stereotyped) group of persons have fought hard and long to wrest such an office from a very reluctant (male) administration and faculty ‘leadership,’ but it displays utter ignorance of how the fight for Affirmative Action in universities has depended on the cooperation, trust and solidarity of all disadvantaged groups in the University system—including so called “white” women—if he really is serious about such a stereotype! In all my efforts (and I should be glad to review the whole history of the movement and participants who have worked hard and at great cost to make Affirmative Action a reality—not just a pile of words on paper, or a set of verbalized slogans), I have found ab solutely no difficulty in blacks, chicanos, and women (of all origins) getting together in commitment to this cause. What is more discouraging is how Mr. Coleman is abetting a sad misin terpretation of what the interim office must do. It must set up an effective reporting, monitoring and recruitment (faculty, students, employees) system which will really work in bringing minorities and women into the system, providing encouragements, op portunities and genuine equity to them once they are hero. What is most im portant is that whoever does this must be utterly committed to the task, must have autonomous authority, explicitly delegated from those ultimately responsible, and then, quite im portantly, must know damn well that complex, cumbrous quagmire called “university governance.” At present, that means knowing very well the weak - administrator-faculty-collegial system which has to date managed by invisible, inept ways to provide only symbolic tokenism for persons like you and me, Mr. Coleman; who have managed to evade all Affirmative Action responsibility thus far (their only actions have come after direct pressure from some of us militant “White” women, Mr. Coleman); and are actually bent on saving their own roles and recruiting more male careerists like themselves, including some minority males, Mr. Coleman, and some women, “White” or other wise, who have been trained in their careerist patterns. It is not an encouraging situation, Mr. Coleman, and ‘demands’ of the sort you make are neither here nor there. I’m sure the so-called “leadership” will find a “proper” minority person to serve as token for demands of the sort you make. After your statement I’m sure many women will “take” the epithet “White” just as they’ve taken every other caricature our society and culture lays on them. The gut of the issue is their economic exploitation and constant training to such roles as your words would reinforce. While I deeply regret that many more women-of all backgrounds—do not speak out more loudly and clearly about what is being done to them, I also know that such statements as yours create the climate of intimidation and despair which keeps them down. I would like a consciousness-raising session with you, Mr. Coleman. I think you would find my “Whiteness” only skin deep. Perhaps, if your mind is still open you might also know whereof I speak, concerning the history of “our" movement, the legal-political background of this current University situation, and some of the political realities of achieving effective steps that help all of us, Mr. Coleman. Perhaps it will ultimately help our hesitant and defensive leadership around here to enjoy the feeling of doing something to bring more real justice into their fearful world wrought presumably by “forces beyond their control" Why not join us, Mr. Coleman, in stead of the typical no-win tactic of "divide and conquer” (D & C, as we call it these days)? Sincerely, Joyce Mitchell Associate Professor Political Science Department Webfoot Professional jealousy of a superior publication is, of course, understandable. However, your slight of the School of Librarianship’s student publication Webfoot Librarian in the article on student publishing in today’s Emerald cannot go unchallenged! Webfoot may not be a shiny magazine, but it is a humble newsletter par ex cellance, beloved of the School of Librarianship, internationally circulated, listed in The Standard Periodicals Directory, and worthy of mention as a campus independent student publication. Webfoot is written, edited, printed, stapled, folded and mailed entirely by students (even though its sterling quality may smack of professional assistance). Librarians are gentle, unassuming folk, and we do not want to be forced into a violent assault on the Emerald offices. I Therefore, we demand recognition in a future edition of the Emerald. A copy of a recent Webfoot Librarian is enclosed for your edification. © Virginia Elwood Editor Webfoot Librarian For Merrill-Stewart Once again it is time for sitting on the terrace, enjoying the exhilaration of spring fever lethargy, wondering when the rain will stop and ASUO Elections. If you could make the rain stop when you wanted to, would you? If you are comfortable with the ASUO, would you change it? The primary election provides the op portunity to think about the future of the collective responsibility of students. But more importantly, it provides you with the opportunity to have a voice in deciding just how this responsibility will be im plemented. The most important issue in this year’s primary and final elections will then be: which candidates are able to offer a combination of knowledge and sen sitivity to needs as well as organizational and structural concepts which will begin to move us to meet these needs. The prime needs are: environmental policy and action; minority involvement in decision making; increased student monitoring of the University; recognition of the administrative and legislative process to achieve these goals; a more flexible, accessible and responsible ASUO administrative structure. The decision as to which candidates have the combination of skills and knowledge to do this is up to you. Through the past year and a half I have been able to see these needs. I have also seen that Ben Merril and John Stewart have been working along similar lines. I endorse the above policies and urge you to 1 'THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION COMMITTEE FUND DRIVE WOULD LIKE $500,000 AND A PARACHUTE!' _ vote for the candidates who can convince you that the ASUO next year will be an effective vehicle for delivering a strong effective collective student voice. Paul Perkins Director. Survival Center Asian Studies Peggy Friedman, I think, is wrong. First, primitive doesn’t mean lesser-in the sense that you’rewild, untamed, orgiastic, or like an animal. The civilizations in Africa, Japan, China, the Near East, etc. have been even more advanced than our technic-oriented Europ-American complex, in a great many aspects, and if we can heed what is to be learned from their societies then all the better. Take the century’s leading architect— Frank Lloyd Wright. He takes much from the Japanese, his architecture a blending of form and function, where neither is compromised. It is an organic style, fitting into the landscape nicely indeed. “The times they are a'changin,” no longer isolated from each other. America can no longer be the center of world af fairs or whatever. Patterns: social, political, economic, religious, etc, are crossing boundaries; transnational ideas are being processed into reality. America was king-pin when the Great Wars were fought, but that period is over! To quote Gary Snyder: “A gas turbine or an electric motor is a finely-crafted flint knife in the hand. It is useful and full of wonder, but it is not our whole life.” Thomas Merton saw that much could be learned from the East—because her civilizations are in harmony with her surroundings, which the battle is all about, right now. Our enemy is capitalism, and not some oriental culture complex. Capitalism is certainly not the panacea for all of man's ills—in fact, she probably causes a good many of them. The orientals have learned to live in harmony with environment, but we haven’t. So why put down Chinese and Japanese studies? Randall Brock Graduate Student, creative* writing. (Editor’s note: Ms. Friedman’s article was intended to be tongue in cheek.)
