opinion
I; greg wesson
I Si. ° quorum of one
Saturday’s sun had become Sunday’s rain. To
escape the relentless moisture I returned to my
journal, this time to compose some fiction.
As I entered the office to do my weekly
column, I could sense a difference in the mood.
The usual happy-go-lucky Ken Sands sat head in
hands in the editor’s cubicle. Being a former
Emerald editor myself, I went in to see what
counsel I could provide.
“I can’t take it,” lamented Ken. "I just found
out that Pat Horton has no intention of shooting
Rich Brooks as we reported April 1. I can under
stand his complaint. Accuracy is the hallmark of
fine reporting. How will we ever live this down.”
The whistling tea pot interrupted my writing
before I fashioned a response. And even the
steaming cup of Earl Grey at my side didn’t prompt
one. Stymied, I flipped to my review of the com
munity's reaction to The Immorald.
Both Horton and Eugene’s other daily con
demned the April Fool’s edition for making light of
violence and killing. They implied that killing is
foreign to civilized people and is not a fitting topic
for satire.
In a Friday editorial, the Guard wrung its
editorial hands that 20-year-olds in some “of the
most favored positions in society" could sink to
such levels. Two days later, the following para
graphs appeared in a front-page story about the
growing popularity of guns.
The story opened with a description of a
72-year-old woman buying a pistol with her social
security check.
“ ‘I'm going to get a 16-shell gun next,’ the
grey-haired woman said, pulling a shawl around
her...
1 can use it, too,’ May added with a wry smile
on her face. ‘I grew up in Virginia. I used to pick
cherries with a rifle.’
Sidner (owner of the gun shop) smiles know
ingly as the young men wheel Mae out of the
shop.”
As much as most Americans would like to
deny it, violence is an integral part of our society.
The foreign policy endorsed by our president and
secretary of state can be stated simply as "Do
what we want, or we’ll shoot you.”
My crescendoing condemnation came to an
abrupt halt when the ringing phone fell to the floor.
I retrieved the receiver only to greet an angry
Angus Dudaw.
"Where do you get off printing a lot of that
crap,” demanded Angus. "To offend simply to
offend is an irresponsible use of satire. Things like
the district attorney and university adminstration
deserve to be attacked, but the women’s
movement or efforts of the handicapped don’t.
You need to direct your attacks with more preci
sion.”
“Hold it, Angus,” I pleaded. "I agree with you.
I had nothing to do with The Immorald nor any
advance notice of what was coming. Give me a,
well you know, a break.”
va irs
Pat answers
I was appalled to see the cover of your
April 1, 1981 satire issue — the so-called
"Daily Immorald.” The story relating to
Rich Brooks and myself went far beyond
an April Fools joke and in my opinion was
in extremely poor taste.
We all can appreciate ‘‘college
humor,” as well as satire directed at
public officials — but certainly not when it
talks about killing people.
Surely the Emerald staff has the
intellectual capabilities of amusing its
readers without resorting to the tactic of
printing an abundance of four-letter
words which do not even rise to the level
of "toilet humor.”
Good satire is not measured, as you
seem to imply, by the amount of outrage
one can generate.
I think you owe both Rich Brooks and
myself an apology.
Pat Horton
District Attorney
Disdains Horton
Congratulations on your 1981 Immor
ald issue. This year's Immorald was a
well-written, well-conceived, and thor
oughly hysterical piece of satire. Anyone
who finds personal insults in this kind of
comedy is either completely devoid of a
sense of humor, or else has such a low
level of self-esteem that any attack, no
matter how ridiculous, seems devastat
ing.
As far as district attorney Pat Horton’s
complaints against the Immorald’s cover
story go, the people of Lane County
would be far better served if Mr. Horton
spent less time condemning an obviously
satirical excercise of our free press, and
more time keeping the contents of the
Lane County evidence locker safe from
the inquisitive eyes and hands of his
giggling pornography-hungry assistant
D.A.s. I mean, for Christ’s sake, Pat —
give me a fucking break!
Sincerely and without actual malice
Mark B.“Willls” Williams
2nd year, law
Lost words
I found myself at a loss for words after ,
reading today’s issue of the “Immorald.”
Isn't it a pity that you and your staff
suffered from the same malady while you
were writing it?
P S. You must think the First Amend
ment is a license, rather than a respon
sibly.
Malcolm MacEwan
Journalism, 1949
dgrrmtA! mrf
(i)t9B>W|<*MM0|bN <*>£
1
<;md
LtAP CLh?
CLAP CM M?
mk 5m» wtukb m
STATUS QUO HERE, OR, SAY
HERE, WE WOULD fQRCEfiMY
COUNTER HERE AND HERE
AND EVEN HERB...
sm thine gobs for
El SALVADOR. ■■
Immorald, IFC
Having been on this campus for three
years, I have had the opportunity to read
three of your Immorald issues. As you
stated in today’s issue (Friday 3 April),
"Wit...is in the eye of the beholder.” But
perhaps before you try again next year,
you should first give some thought to
exactly who the beholder is!
You state that the ODE operates "in
dependently” of the University, and in
your editorial, you claim that your means
of support is advertising, but perhaps
you are forgetting that the students of
this University are also your means of
support. How much did you get from the
IFC this year?
Why not try something different next
year. Print your Immorald issue a day or
two prior to the IFC funding hearings
Perhaps then the joke would be on you
Thom Strunk
Graduate, education
Brooks is obscene
As an individual who has been severely
lampooned at least twice by previous
issues of the Immorald, I wish to state
that people have obviously forgotten the
point of the Immorald — that is to be
completely absurd — to make light of
things that newspapers are not normally
allowed to in their coverage of day-by
day events.
As far as obscene or filthy language
being part of the Immorald — this is
nothing more than a lampoon at the
hypocritical norms that abound about
what people may or may not say.
One more thing — about people
demanding that the Immorald apologize
for satirizing Rich Brooks — I wish to
know — when has Rich Brooks ever
apologized for dragging this University’s
fine name though the national mud in
terms of scandals? When has the athletic
department ever apologized for
deliberately making budgets which they
knew full well students would have to
make up due to their massive deficit
spending.
The real obscenity is allowing Rich
Brooks and other members of the athle
tic department tainted by scandal to
continue working in this fine intitution.
Rich Brooks and everyone else richly
deserve what they got — perhaps more.
Mark Miller
Director, UO Drug Information Center
Horton’s obscene
Don’t look now, but this is a letter of
support for the April Fool’s Day issue
While I concur with the general sen
timent that the "Immorald” was vulgar
and utterly tasteless, I also thought it was
funny as hell. If you need any help with
your defense committee (judging by the
general response, you’re going to need
one), just let me know.
There are some genuine obscenities in
the “Emerald” of April 2, however, that I
would like to protest strongly: 1) the huge
ad on page 2 advertising career oppor
tunities in the Marines; and, 2) Pat Hor
ton's views on castration of rapists, views
shamelessly expounded in a page 11
article.
Isn’t it amazing that people will scream
bloody murder over a few nasty words
(which they’re perfectly free not to read),
but not utter a murmur of protest over the
attempted recruitment of innocent young
men to go off and maim and kill for the
benefit of the oil companies and the
multinational corporations?
Isn’t it a telling comment on our times
when folks will freak out over the satir
ization of a public official, but calmly
accept that official’s right to recommend
forms of sub-human brutality that should
have disappeared along with the opera
tors of Buchenwald and Dachau? Are our
values inverted — or simply
non-existent?
Cathi Beavers
Sophomore, anthropology