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.)