Publicly accessible
URL: http://www.nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/collections.html
copyright 2014, by the Victoria University of Wellington Library
All unambiguous end-of-line hyphens have been removed and the trailing part of a word has been joined to the preceding line, except in the case of those words that break over a page.
Some keywords in the header are a local Electronic Text Collection scheme to aid in establishing analytical groupings.
First year students who follow the simple rules below will have a great time at university, graduate with ease, get a job with an insurance company or become Lady Mayoress of Masterton, breed middle-class, middle-brow and middle-aged children, and otherwise contribute to the creation of a better Neuter Zygote:
It wasn't that Daddy had plenty of money. No, you're here because you have 'above average intelligence'. You're also physically attractive and, to be perfectly honest, fascinating. The masses in the city (suitably spread out at your feet) and provinces may from time to time suggest that you are a conceited little prig this is merely sour grapes. If you are taking an arts degree and find your patrician politics a little uncomfortable, switch to Marcusan socialism and speak of 'the ultimate conservatism of the working class'. Buy a scooter and cultivate a lisp.
To be other than promiscuous would demonstrate a degree of discrimination which might develop into judgement, taste, a critical appreciation of the arts and other irrelevancies, or worse.
If anyone starts to talk about student politics, change the subject. If pressed, you are "not interested in other people's power hang-ups". Next year, as a second year student, your role will be more interesting. You will refer to student representatives as "pretentious shits" and make inane interjections at meetings. In the meantime, however, you can play a useful part in making participatory democracy look like the farce we all know it to be. Just be yourself. Above all, do not vote in Exec elections.
Many of them, you will quickly find, are lazy, condescending and rather stupid. Few of them know how to teach. Practically none of them will concern themselves in lectures with such esoteric questions as the contribution students can make to the subject concerned or its relevance to life in
Follow these rules and, like each generation of first year students before you, you will be quickly integrated into university life. What more could you want?
The resignation early this month of the Women's Vice-President reduce our nominally eight-man Executive to a mere five souls four elected and me co-opted so that there can be a quorum and the business of the Association done.
Four resignations, out of eight, since the elections and before the work of year has even begun.
Another election at a cost of $200 to the Association (i.e., students).
So short a time ago, it seems, certain individuals were campaigning ferociously for positions which, once achieved, were quixotically cast aside. The only doubt in my mind is where the bulk of the blame lies with the unstable, gormless twits who so often get elected to control student affairs or with the average, ordinary run-of-the mill, common-or-garden rank and file who put them there.
Those who donated books to last year's appeal for the University of south Pacific may be interested to learn what became of their gift.
The books 3.000 from Victoria and 10,000 to in all were flown by the RNZAF to Fiji without charge. There the Fiji Military forces arranged their delivery to the University, again without charge.
When I was at the University last September, most cases had been unpacked and the books sorted. The Library staff told me that the books were of a surprisingly high standard. Indeed if I repeated the exact words of their thanks you would think I was exaggerating.
They told me that they expect 80" of the books to be placed in the University Library itself. In most cases duplicate copies will be used to build up class sets, duplicate copies will he used to build up class sets.
Of the remainder, a very small number, perhaps a couple of hundred, were rejected altogether because they were damaged beyond repair or were very heavily annotated. About 15 per cent of the books were more suitable for secondary schools, and a system has been established to supply these books to schools in the South Pacific region. The final 5 per cent were books of general reading value. Some of these will he used in a fiction library run by the Department of English, but most will he donated to the library systems in the various Pacific territories. The remarkable result is that almost every single hook donated has been used in a worthwhile way. In some cases, the University Library has been able to exchange multiple copies of some books with other university libraries on a very favourable basis A striking example was the exchange of eight copies of an advanced economies textbook which were superfluous to any forseeable requirements. These were exchanged with a British university for 160 new textbooks for which cash would otherwise have had to be paid.
New Zealand students have also been able to help in processing the books. The University Library at present is able to process about 10,000 new books a year, would have taken some time to process the additional books coming from the NZUSA gift. In Januare and February this year a work party of 20 New Zealand students, most of them trained in library work, will process the remaining books and other material also donated to the University. The likely result is that this year the University of the South Pacific Library will have twice as many books available to students as its plans called for.
This year's appeal for books for the University is a second opportunity to support an unusually worthwhile project. While any university books are wanted, back issues of academic magazines are especially needed. I can confidently assure your readers that every book donated will be valued and, what is more used to its full potential.
Is the annual farce of students trekking hopefully to bookshops to buy their set texts, without success, to be repeated again this year?
It is a farce only because of the near-total mismanagement by university departments of the book-ordering system. In the past, it has been fashionable to blame "monopolistic" bookshops for the problems students face in obtaining the relevant texts. This is incorrect.
Last year, one city shop was completely unaware of the existence of one of the courses being offered by a University Department. This was not the shop's fault—the Department had simply not notified them.
In another case, bookshops were advised in time to buy certain books, for an estimated number of students, for a particular course. Then, in late February, the requirements were changed. Not one book in the first list was a set text on the new list. Is it any wonder that the bookshops have to charge the high prices they do, simply in order to protect themselves from the incompetence of the academic authorities?
Signing up at the age of 16 for a post-primary teacher studentship leading to a B.Sc., I became aware during my first year at Auckland University of a far wider range of possible course and careers.
My
I was fortunate last year to obtain a teaching position at Cashmere High School in Christchurch. During the first term, until the correspondence columns of the Christchurch Press came to my aid. I was receiving through the school office Departmental demands for immediate repayment of slightly more than my annual net salary.
I wish to teach and continue teaching: I would not attempt to dissuade anyone from the profession and I acknowledge the monetary advantages that the Bond offers, But it is perfectly possible to put oneself through Varsity, choosing one's own course and leaving oneself unbounded, I wish I had realised this the easy way, rather than painfully.
I am absolutely disgusted.
(Signed letters will be given preference over pseudonymous correspondence unless valid reasons are given for the wish to remain anonymous—Editor).
Changes of editorship notwithstanding, we can again this year as in every year expect the columns of your newspaper to periodically display the levered frenzy of those who, wriggling their toes in holy esetasy, will scathe their contemporaries for lack of interest in the Cause of the Week, whatever such Cause may be.
You are happy, I know, to explode such squibs—they are in the service of Reader Involvement, they inspire, or provoke, letters to the Editor. Here, then, is such a letter. I am happy to write it; you are happy to print it; it frees me from three terms of moral galvanisation and your polemicists from an equal period of effort on my behalf.
An election to fill four vacancies on the eight-man Executive is to be held in early April. The four vacancies are in the positions of Women's Vice-President, Secretary, Publications Officer and Sports Officer. Three of the vacancies were created by resignations and one position—that of Association Secretary—was unfilled following the
Peter Zohrab, Publications Officer, and Roger Lawrence, Sports Officer, resigned towards the end of last year. The resignation of Sharyn Cederman, Women's Vice-President, was only received at the beginning of this month.
There were no nominations for the position of Secretary by the time nominations closed last year. Denis Phelps, one of the student representatives on the University Council, has since been co-opted to the position until the April election.
Colin Knox, Men's Vice-President, is to handle the Publications portfolio in the meantime. An interim appointment to the position on Sports Officer was not considered necessary.
With the Executive now comprising Margaret Bryson (President), Colin Knox, Gary Langford (Treasurer), Denis Phelps and Graeme Nesbitt (Cultural Affairs Officer), the bare constitutional quorum necessary for the continued functioning of the Executive is being maintained.
Applications for the position of Returning Officer have been called for and these will close on March 5. An appointment to the position will be made within a few days of the close of applications. At present, it seems likely that polling will be on April 1 and 2 and the result of the election may well be known in time for the Association's Annual General Meeting on or about April 2.
Auckland University's Trevor Richards has been elected NZUSA International Vice President for
Richards, who is currently Secretary of Hart (Halt All Racist Tours), replaces David Shand, a former Executive member and student representative on the University Council who was appointed a senior lecturer in the Department of Commerce and Administration towards the end of
The new International Vice President defeated the only other applicant for the position,
120 students attended University Congress at Curious Cove in January this year.
One of the most popular speakers was Robin Blackburn, a 29-year old former lecturer at the London School of Economics who was expelled from LSE for some of his activities with student militants at the School. His address to the Congress dealt principally with Marxism and the New Left.
The Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Marshall, who spoke at the first University Congress twenty-one years ago, made the National Development Conference the subject of his speech. This was followed by a lengthy question period.
In a lively and interesting address, the Ombudsman, Sir Guy Powles, analysed the need for dissent in a healthy society and suggested that today's dissenters were often too narrow in their criticisms. "The underprivileged, the mental patients, the handicapped children, the bashed babies—there are few protests on their behalf," he said. "All foreign troops could leave Vietnam tomorrow and we would still be left with a society which some people think is pretty sick."
James K. Baxter was perhaps the outstanding figure at Congress with his descriptions of endeavours to rehabilitate drug addicts in Auckland and his present life among the Maoris at Jerusalem, high up the Wanganui River. His speech entitled "Christian Action" and a later unscheduled talk on drugs were, in essence, extended poetic monologues and contrasted markedly with the styles of the addresses of other speakers.
Among the academic speakers this year were Victoria University's Dr Allan Levett, a senior lecturer in Sociology, Geophysics Professor Frank Evison, and Con Bollinger from the English Department. Mr Bollinger provided, amongst other pieces of illuminating information, a fresh interpretation of the Book of Genesis and a detailed analysis of classical allusions in the work of New Zealand author Barry Crump.
The Soviet Legation's Press Attache, Mr Evgeny Pozdnyakov, spoke about Lenin and fielded a large number of questions from the audience following his speech and Eddie Isbey, new MP for Grey Lynn and ex-President of the Watersiders' Union, spoke on the history of labour relations in New Zealand.
An interesting diversion to the speeches was provided when 50 students chartered two buses to the Woodbourne Rnzaf Station near Blenheim to demonstrare against the American military installation there. A letter was handed to the officer in Charge of 'Operation Longbank' asking what the establishment's purpose was. The officer said that most of the Americans at the Base are technicians but refused to answer other questions.
George Fyson, a member of the Socialist Club and editor of Red Spark, the Club's magazine, recently spent a month in the United States at the invitation of the Young Socialist Alliance.
The Alliance, a New York-based organisation, paid George's travel, accomodation and other expenses on the trip. George acted as New Zealand observer at the Annual Convention of the Alliance, held in Minneapolis, Minnesota from 27-30 December. He delivered a message of greetings to the Convention from Wellington's Socialist Action League and also participated in a workshop on the subject of the Fourth International.
Following the close of the Convention, George travelled to New York where he had discussions at the National Headquarters of the Socialist Workers Party and attended, as an observer, a meeting of the National Executive of the Young Socialist Alliance. He also visited the editorial offices of The International Press and The Militant while in New York.
Throughout his visit, George was accompanied by the Australian observer at the Convention.
Arthur Baysting And Roger Wilde Have Been Appointed Editors Of Arts Festival Literary Yearbook And Arts Festival Handbook Respectively. Roger Was Editor Of Salient In
At a meeting on 17 November, the Executive declined to pay doormen at the Heart Beat Ball wages which the doormen claimed were owing to them. The doormen at the Ball, all of them students, were J. G. Swan, H.M. Fay, R.A. Davies, J.C. Welch and N.C. Goldie.
The Executive was told that the doormen had apparently been drunk, were seen throwing glasses and were involved in an assault on a waitress. There was also some doubt as to whether all funds received at the door had been passed on to the organisers of the Ball.
Craccum, the Auckland University Students' Association's newspaper, is to be published weekly this year.
This was approved in principle by the Auckland Executive on 15 January. Craccum and Salient will be the only weekly student newspapers in Critic, from Otago, is unlikely to be published weekly for some time and Canta, Canterbury University's newspaper, will be a fort-nightly again this year.
The question of weekly publication of Canta in Canta in Salient also appear to have collapsed. An item in the Executive minutes of 18 September noted that "the present editor (Graham Culliford) has recommended that purchase of this be not proceeded with. Mr Ross (an Executive member) will continue to investigate the feasibility of the machine."
A constitutional amendment designed to prevent members of the Otago Students' Association Executive from absenting themselves for long periods during their terms of office is planned.
The proposed amendment followed dissatisfaction within the Association with the prolonged absence of Errol Millar, Association President. Millar is at present in the United States on a three-month Student Leader grant. He will not return to Dunedin until March 26.
Acting President Michael Anderson has expressed the intention of moving the amendment at a special meeting of the Student Council called to discuss a marijauna referendum. According to the terms of the motion. Executive members will be required to seek the Student Council's permission for an absence of more than two weeks.
Two past Presidents of the Otago Association have gone to the United States on similar grants at the beginning of their terms. "They went earlier," Anderson said, "so that they were back to handle the extremely heavy work which is usually encountered in this period. I have had to knock off my job a month earlier in order to do the work Millar should be doing."
Anderson said that he and several others had endeavoured to dissuade Millar from accepting the grant. Millar, however, argued that he would learn much that was beneficial about student administration.
"However it was quite plain, judging from the experience of the past Presidents who accepted the scholarship, that no direct benefit accrued to the Association," said Anderson.
Anderson quoted another student who accepted a Student Leader grant, Mike Volkerling of Auckland, as saying that the grant was useless. Of the seventy days Volkerling spent in the United States only fifteen were spent at universities.
"Hello Chris."
"What are they after?"
"See you in ten minutes."
"CIB raid on a suspected firebug in Wainuiomata. Want to come?"
Twenty minutes, some confusion over film, and we were on the motorway.
It was well past the Wainui bowl—about seven miles along the narrow road between the hills toward Cape Palliser. The black Vanguard with Chris and Helen turned off the road onto a dust track dotted with coils of wire, cows and potholes, we were greeted on the riverbank opposite the house by a blue police-car (DG 1111) and a bored taxi-driver who had brought out members of the legal profession to guide the suspect.
While crossing the ramshackle suspension bridge, I couldn't help thinking of the possibility of a crazed arsonist sniping from the windows of the house which I could see through the trees on the other bank. However ii wasn't East Side—West Side—the sun sunned, the sky blue, and white butterflies butter-flied.
The house had been borrowed from the set of Bonnie and Clyde: a high sloping roof, low veranda, door plumb in the middle and a window on each side. A couple of waggon-wheels had ground to a halt in the dust at the front, between the house and the river. The lawyer and the clerk were sticking strictly to the script—sitting on old chairs on the veranda reading magazines.
Helen—acting as camera-woman -went inside to take some shots of the Johns in action. The lawyer confirmed the existence of a search warrant. A Bob Dylan album thundered out in the room to the left. As we sat down by the front door, a track on the record finished and for the next sixteen minutes or so Desolation Row provided a superb musical backdrop for the half-hearted search that was going on inside.
In a few minutes we got our first look at the suspect. Short, swarthy, lank black hair, about twenty-six, He asked for a cigarette. The lawyer finished reading Newsweek and announced that he was leaving. The suspect offered him a coat that was hanging on a nail on the veranda.
"I'd better not take that," the lawyer said, "it's one of theirs."
The coat slipped from the suspect's hand and fell to the ground.
We entered to watch them searching the room on the right. There were three of them, looming large in the small room. A large unmade iron bed was receiving the attention of the boss. He bore a frightening resemblance to Maigret's sidekick. Another, a blond, was rifling through an untidy suitcase on the floor. The third was looking at some posters on the wall. One was an Evening Post billboard which asked "Attempt to burn Security Headquarters?" Another—one of Chris' efforts—exhorted us all to vote for Guy Fawkes, "the only man to enter Parliament with honest intentions."
I wandered into the bedroom on the left. Windows on two sides with a large open fire-place on one wall next to which was hung a large pair of bellows. I wondered whether they'd be produced in Court. Che blazed from between two mounted deer heads. Above the stereo was a large bookcase..... Byron, History of the French devolution, Encyclopaedia of Love, Marcuse, Longfellow ...
The police had moved to the kitchen. Suspect was urging them not to forget the attic. Maigret's man shook a soap powder packet and then rocked a large bowl of dirty water from side to side but failed to find a submerged confession. Suspect explained that a large reel of wire by the oven was to be used to rewire the house. An expensive tool-kit belonged to someone else living in the house. Suspect appeared to have forgotten his name—there were so many people coming and going. The police would have to ask the owner of the tool-kit that, wouldn't they! Maigret's man smiled patiently and explained that he would have difficulty asking the owner his name if he didn't know who he was. Suspect shrugged.
We moved to the front door. Chris was outside with the butterflies. The CIB men went on searching. Maigret's man tapped the tool-kit speculatively with the tips of his fingers and lit a cigarette. He strolled into the bedroom, selected a pair of trou, a jersey and some shoes. Suspect asked if he'd get them back when the charge was laid.
"What charge? I haven't mentioned any charge."
The suspect looked uneasy. They asked him where he'd brought the shoes—they were new. He couldn't remember. Yes, he supposed he could show them where. No, he'd give them directions instead.
"Could I speak to you alone or do you want your support?" asked MM, giving us the 'bloody student' look.
"Witnesses," said Chris, loudly.
Suspect wanted witnesses.
The blond took the clothes.
Where can I get in touch with you," said MM through his grin.
"I'll be around."
"I'll find you."
They left, city suits contrasting violently with the rustic decay. They stopped by Chris' Vanguard and took the number of our car. MM waved. Suspect kicked over a rusty bell and posed for us on the veranda.
Mr Talboys, you are a more senior member of Cabinet than Mr Kinsella was. Does your Cabinet seniority mean that the Government now attaches more importance to matters of education?
I would interpret it as suggesting that the Government attaches a very great deal of importance to education. I can't see that there's much value in trying to measure what is more than this and what is less than that...
But you are fourth in Cabinet seniority and this is quite a significant upgrading for the portfolio...
Well, this is certainly the way I would interpret it. Generally speaking, I think New Zealand—like most other communities—naturally attaches increasing importance to education.
Do you feel that this will be reflected by the diversion of more of our national resources into education?
We have been making a continually increasing contribution of the national resources into education and I have no doubt whatsoever that this process will continue. I hope it will continue at an increasing rate. Inevitably we are faced with an increasing amount of expenditure in education. What is happening here—as everywhere else—is that there is an ever-increasing demand. It's not just an increasing demand in individual fields but a demand that the changes taking place in society must be met. It must be met both for the satisfaction of the individual—so that he has a sense of personal fulfilment, which to me is the important thing—and also if you're going to get a full realisation of the potential of the economy. But to me the key is the satisfaction that the individual is enabled to enjoy—his sense of fulfilment.
Are you satisfied with the rate at which investment in education has been increasing since, say, 1960?
I am satisfied that it has been increasing at a very considerable rate but nobody is ever completely satisfied with it. I never use the word 'satisfied'. More will be done but I think you must see this in perspective. After all, we have certain resources available to us in New Zealand and though we are small in numbers the demands of our people are the same as the demands of any other highly sophisticated society. There must be a constantly reassessed order of priorities. For instance, a situation develops from time to rime where if you try to put up new buildings it is not money but whether there are men available to do the job that is the problem.
The Minister of Finance has seen himself as a man who has to arbitrate between the competing sectors of the economy and he has said about university spending that he can foresee the time when he would have to say 'Stop—I cannot finance this.'
Yes, but this is the job that Government does: it orders priorities to determine whether we are going to spend here or whether we are going to spend there.
Do you have the feeling that the time might be coming in the foreseeable future when you would have to say 'Stop, we can't finance any further development'?
I don't foresee it. What do you mean by foresee? If you are talking in terms of the next few years, I certainly don't foresee it, we will continue to make an increasing investment in education. There is no doubt about this.
The Minister of Finance has singled out the university system as a specific area where efficiencies and economics could be made. Do you agree with this assessment?
I have no doubt that there can be greater efficiencies and I've no doubt that there can be economies but don't ask me to identify them. I can't.
But do you see your role as Minister of Education as a man who will be looking for these efficiencies and economies or as a man who will be fighting for . . .
I shall be fighting for both because I've got a very real interest in the well-being of New Zealand. I've got a very real interest in the well-being of the student and the contribution that the university can make to his development and, in turn, the contribution that as an educated person he can make to the development of New Zealand. Do you mean that I must take one of two options? Either I am interested in efficiency and economy—and economy does not necessarily mean that you will reduce your expenditure—or am I interested in promoting education. I am interested in both and I don't see them as being alternatives What I am interested in doing is making sure that those who can use the opportunity to attend a university have that opportunity.
Yet at the same time we have a failure rate which, according to one estimate, costs the country ten million dollars a year. Do you regard this as inevitable waste?
I think that if you are going to have open entry—and I certainly am in favour of an open entry system—then it is inevitable that you will have some who do not make the grade. But this is not something, surely, that Government can change by some magic formula. To a very real extent this depends on the attitude of the student himself. What I see happening is that with the development of other institutions such as technical institutes, an increasing proportion of those who might today go to university will enter other institutions instead. I am sure that this will be to their benefit and to the benefit of society and the economy.
So you don't really see any departure from the open entry system but perhaps we will have institutions which are more suited to the abilities of individuals?
Yes, I think so. There will be courses more suited to the abilities of some individuals who today don't make the grade. Consider tertiary institutions in Britain, for example. They have a low failure rate but it's pretty tough to get into the university—Now, maybe this is the choice but I know which one I opt for.
Open entry?
Yes.
Would you consider increasing bursaries and other means of assistance to students so that we can get the number of graduates we are going to need?
I am always prepared to listen to a proposition on bursaries and they have been reviewed from time to time and will continue to be reviewed. But I am not convinced. I'm not talking about the immediate adequacy of the bursary but just the general argument: I don't know that the level of bursaries determines whether or not people fail. I would not promise that every request for a review of bursaries is going to be met, however.
A survey conducted by NZUSA last year showed that the average fulltime female student earned about $150 less than the average fulltime male student during the summer vacation. On the basis of this, do you think there are grounds to review the bursaries given to female students?
You say this was a new piece of information that was just discovered last year?
The survey was conducted last year.
When I was at university I imagine that exactly the same set of circumstances existed. I imagine that it has existed for many, many years.
Just because the situation has existed in the past does not necessarily mean that it is equitable today. Would you be prepared to consider raising the level of bursaries given to female students?
I have had many propositions put to me from time to time in the other portfolio I have and I can assure you of this—and I don't say it lightly either—that I have always been prepared to consider such proposals. But I add that this does not mean that I give an under-taking that every proposition will be met or that every proposition will have my full support. But I am certainly prepared to thoroughly investigate any proposition.
I would like to turn now to questions of concern to university administrators. The staff-student ratio seems to be a particular matter of concern at the moment. The ratio would be seem to be unfavourable by comparison with Australia and Britain. How do you feel this rather high priority problem should be tackled?
Well, I don't know what the exact figures are but I do know that in Britain, for instance, they are having a close look at their staff-student ratios. In fact, I think that quite recently the proposition has been put to the universities there that they won't be able to continue to afford that level. I am told that staff-student ratios are improving. They have improved and will continue to improve.
Do you think that increased salaries are the answer?
I am certain that salaries are part of the answer.
Would you say that salaries are the highest priority or would you think that there are other means of recruiting staff that could be just as important?
I think there are a whole lot of considerations in this, aren't there?—salaries, conditions, opportunities for research. Obviously money is important, there is no question of this, but I would not care to determine whether one is two points more important than the other and I don't think you would either. What we have done is to meet in full the request of the University Grants Committee. They came up with their proposal for the quinquennial grants and that was met in full. Everything that they asked for was given.
Ten years ago the Parry Commission thought that salaries were a significant factor. In fact, they appear to have rated them rather highly and I believe that a triennial review of salaries is somewhat overdue now.
Well, I don't know if it's overdue. There is to be a review and I cannot forecast at this point what the outcome of that will be. And I don't think you would expect me to.
It was also suggested in the Parry Commission's report that an opportunity to undertake research is one of the attractions to university staff. How do you fed New Zealand universities could provide more opportunities for research?
Certainly there is a greater provision for research in the new grants and of course the Grants Committee has funds for research. What I sought to do in the Science portfolio and will continue to do is try to interest industry and other sectors of the economy in making funds available to the universities for research.
Will this be tagged research?
I don't think there is much point in proposing to a company that is trying to improve its product that it should make a contribution to research just in general unless one is seeking a donation—and the Government has in fact encouraged this. The sort of thing that I am interested in is to be seen in what the Pottery and Ceramics Association did in establishing its contacts with the university—making funds available, interesting people in research. We want more of this. This will mean that there are more funds available to the universities—certainly tagged, yes. But it obviously means that they will have a wider opportunity to use the funds that they have; or at least their total research effort will be greater.
So private industry would sponsor tagged research in one particular area of university studies, releasing funds for research in social subjects.
Not necessarily in social subjects. I am not the slightest bit interested in trying to persuade anybody that all the work that is done in the university must add up in pounds, shillings and pence today, tomorrow or the next day. After all, this is not what the university is for. But I am interested in engaging, to a greater extent than we have in the past, the interest of the universities in scientific research. I am interested in promoting close association between Government laboratories and the universities and building up scientific communities at, for example, Massey, Lincoln, and at this complex in Auckland where I hope there will be close association between Auckland University and Dsir. I think this is one field in which we can certainly build up but there are increasing opportunities to be investigated.
Much of this scientific research work, however, would have a pay-off in pounds, shillings and pence. Do you not feel that there is also a need to stimulate research into social problems?
Yes, I think there is a need to do this, of course. Let me put it to you this way. The universities are autonomous bodies and they make their own decisions as to how they spend their funds on research. I don't make those decisions. They order their priorities in this field and one of the criticisms from people who are more interested in the economics, the pounds, shillings and pence of the economy, has been that they felt there has not been enough university work in this field. Now once again this is a question of the order of priorities. Everybody wants to know what my feeling is about the need for work in social fields—one of the great problems is that everybody sees this sort of question as black and white. You are cither on one side or you are on the other side. What I am seeking is a greater research effort because I believe that if we are to engage the interests of New Zealanders in problems that are real to New Zealand the time to do it is while they are at university. Another argument about them is whether they should go overseas. I think they should and it doesn't matter a damn whether I think they should or should not; they will go because they are New Zealanders and every New Zealander that I have ever come across has wanted to get overseas, simply because he is born here. They all want to go and they will both come and go, but it we can engage his interests, I believe that the challenge that the graduate has in front of him in problems relating to New Zealand is every bit as great as any challenge that would lead him off overseas.
One can see the validity of this line of argument in relation to many of the scientific research programmes but it has been a matter of some concern that research in social fields lags. Do you feel it lags?
My impression is that it probably does, but quite frankly I am not sufficiently familiar with this to give you a complete answer at this point in time. But as a general proposition I would say I am sure that more needs to be done, but you can say this about every aspect of every sphere of activity.
Education is one of these very difficult subjects to present a case for increased expenditure in the sense that a man can got to the Ministry of Works and present a case for a motorway ....
The case has been fairly effectively presented over the last few years. I have figures on buildings, land purchases, furniture and equipment—a very big item $720,000 in
In Auckland we have a situation where the university is rapidly reaching saturation point in the sense that the student enrolment is reaching the 10,000 limit. Will the building programme be speeded up in Auckland so that more students can be enrolled?
I intend to have discussions with the Grants Committee about this. I am conscious of the problem. I will certainly look to the Grants Committee for advice, but I cannot give you the sort of satisfying answer you would like. But I am very conscious of the problem.
But has the need for an accelerated programme at Auckland been identified by the Grants Committee and presented to you or are you taking the initiative and going to the Grants Committee?
No, the Grants Committee did, of course, I don't know how many years ago, consider an area of land at Auckland as a site for further development and this was apparently unsatisfactory. I have to familiarise myself with the details of what happened, or who suggested what, but I know that moves have been made already but agreement has not been reached.
Obviously the fact that you are going to seek information on this would tend to indicate that you attach importance to it.
I hope it will indicate my interest in it.
How important do you regard it in relation to other matters of concern in the field of university education?
Why do you ask questions like this? What does it mean? How important do I regard it in relation to what?
Many say salaries are inadequate, research facilities are inadequate and the building programme is inadequate. What I am trying to get at is which need are you trying to deal with first?
Well, some of the needs you deal with in the order of possibility of dealing with them. I am sure everyone has been in the situation where you have thought to yourself, well now I would like to do this, then that and then that. But for a whole variety of reasons that crop up you can't deal with matters in that order so you deal something else. Now obviously one becomes involved here with a whole lot of problems. I regard the Auckland matter as an important problem, but if you want me to give an exact order of priorities. I'm afraid I can't do this.
On another area now; what is your attitude to Waikato University's claim for a Maori Studies centre?
Well, I am interested in it but once again this is a question of priorities. Here again, the University can set aside funds for this; it has its grant. I don't know what order of priority they give it.
The University itself represented its case to Cabinet last year so they obviously feel it is a pretty important question.
Well, it is not important enough for them to take it out of the funds that they have available.
Are funds going to be made available to them to do it?
Well, they've got a grant.
But it didn't include funds for this purpose and they feel it should.
But then the University is autonomous in what it does with these funds. Expansion is built into the grant. But where is this expansion going to be?
Waikato's coming back again this year with a further request and you'll consider it then ....
Yes.
Can you give any rough estimate as to when a third medical school will be established.?
No. That's an honest ... that's a straight forward answer—delete the word 'honest' because everybody says if you say this is honest then everything else you say is dishonest. Damn it! I hate living in this crazy situation. A man's got to try to put in an ice-case every word he utters because it'll be grabbed and turned round ... turn that damn thing off a minute, will you?
Would you see the new technical institute at Heretaunga as the basis for a technological university?
I suppose it could well come to this. I don't see that it could happen in 10, 15 or 20 years, but of course this whole field is under review and moving in one direction and then another in different parts of the world. My immediate feeling is that I'm not enthusiastic about having two degree-granting sets of institutions. This could lead to all sorts of complications.
This seems to be a grey area—the division of responsibilities between technological institutes and the universities. What sort of relationship do you think they should have?
Well, I think what we want to see as far as this can reasonably be done is that there is no great overlapping. We don't want to have a degree of overlapping. The whole idea of these institutions is to do work that is not done by the universities.
What about the degree of autonomy which the technical institutes should enjoy? Do you feel that they should be given a greater degree of autonomy than they have in their relationship with the Department of Education at the moment? Do they need something equivalent to the Grants Committee—particularly for advising government?
In the immediate future, I can see that with the very considerable capital implications which there are in this that the Education Department will continue to have a very real degree of responsibility in this area.
Then you can't sec a similar body to the UGC being set up?
Not in the immediate future, no.
Do you feel that the UGC, which has been in existence for ten years, is operating effectively today, or is there a need to overhaul or reconsider the Committee?
The immediate answer one gives to this is that as far as Government is concerned it has accepted and endorsed the recommendations of the Grants Committee. Government supports the work of the Committee. Whether there is likely to be need over the next few years for a review, this is something we shall have to see.
The reason I ask this is because there have been instances—Waikato University would be one case and the University Teachers' Association another—where educational bodies went to Cabinet with their problems and did not deal with the UGC.
They did not deal actually with the UGC. As far as I am concerned the UGC has its area of responsibility and I think they are discharging their responsibility as they should.
What is your attitude towards these groups from the universities, then, who do by-pass the Grants Committee? You will refer them back to the Grants Committee?
Yes. I certainly would refer them to the UGC.
Most of the educational interest groups in New Zealand have at sometime or another called for an Educational Development Conference. Do you think there is need for such a thing?
I am not convinced of it at this stage.
What would it take to convince you? They have obviously been trying to create the climate in which such a conference could take place.
Well, as a result of the National Development Conference there is a considerable amount of work to do. I might be better equipped to answer this question after I have digested a lot more of the work involved in the portfolio. But I don't see, at this point in time, the need for such a conference.
Why do people go to university?.....to qualify for a status occupation, for social prestige, because friends are going there, for want of something else to do to discover, to explore the mind, to learn to think, to find personal meaning, to find a suitable husband?
It is seldom any one of these reasons alone but there will usually be a dominant motive J. J. Small of Canterbury University has found that vocational attitudes are widespread among New Zealand students However. Mr Small discovered that there are many students who are hoping that the University will be able to help them find some personal meaning.
More than any other institution of learning, a university permits you in choose in fact, it forces you to do just that Universities themselves are involved in a fairly anguished process of choosing, at least in the West, because they are not quite sure about their purposes, functions and methods Dr Metcalfe of Canterbury, writing in Is the encouragment of learning with the what and the how. Much of the energy of the 'student revolt' throughout the world is related to this
In spite of ferment and criticism, there remains the overriding need to get a degree. A degree is a marketable commodity. While the pursuit of degrees and the process of learning are not mutually exclusive, it is significant that the market for degrees is buoyant and the market for knowledge is rather less so. Dr Metcalfe suggests that student clubs would be much better attended if every faculty included in us final examinations such questions as "Compare and contrast the views frequently expressed in the E U. the SCM and the Newman Society" or "Give the essentials of both sides of the argument in a recent university debate".
It is not altogether surprising that Dr Metcalfe is opposed to the present competitive feats the main purpose of a university because students tend to concentrate on ends rather than means and to pace their work to the examination rather than to the year. If a major function of a university is the encouragement of learning, the examination system ought to be that which best achieves this end As the argument continues universities sities appear to be moving towards a system of cumulative assessment which places less emphasis on a final examination and motion a variety of assessments throughout the year. One of the problems they face is those Students who have been conditioned in their earlier schooling to external examinations and who have some reluctance in accepting responsibility for their own learning. Too many students have sponge-mentalities, wanting to soak up pre-digested material and being less concerned with what they do with it and what it does to them.
Happily, many students have resisted this conditioning. Last year, the World Student Christian federation held a conference at Turku, Finland, on the purposes and means of university education. Amidst the many differing opinions and attitudes represented, the following statement won general support:
"The academic community (is) a way of organising a set of personal relationships, of contriving an equilibriam of conflicts, so as to promote an imaginative grasp on living knowledge. Within such a community, learning is a joint and continuous process, ideally embodied in the tutorial or seminar group accompanied by individual study and it presupposes the free-ranging and responsible play of intelligence, informed by passion, and moving always towards a critical comment Within such a community assessment should emerge out of self assessment and conflict should be absorbed in a process of continuous evaluation and controlled change, which may not always be instant change."
This statement was supported by all sections and most strongly by radical students and most senior academics Students who work in universities where conditions are inimical in this ideal often take direct action. Where they don't take such action both students and universities are the losers. Such student action is part of a general search for a sense of committment. This was what C. Wright Mills meant when he wrote of the need for commitment rather than objectivity in the fact of the noble but chilling ideal of the academic mind." This I take to be the significance of the "free-ranging and responsible play of intelligence informed by passion" of the Turku statement. It is also part of the most nation of the most radical European and American students who see themselves as the sole remaining revolutionary element in their societies and go to the point of using the University as a base for the transformation of society.
A further justification for radical action was stated at Turku
"Universities today throughout much of the world have become, or are becoming the agencies par excellence of Establishment ...... all present establishments are bad they can only operate to drive the world further and further into violence in the last part of this century...... Universities are the lead dogs of the new imperialism....."
Hard words But spoken in the belief that it is possible to do better. To the extent that this derives from a search for an ethical basis to public and international behaviour, it has much in common with the similar search for an ethical basis for education.
How to be commuted to academic objectivity and also to worldly affairs is a nice problem. But if universities are to avoid becoming part of the politics of destruction they must somehow shake themselves, or be shaken, out of their present "postures to Society". Universities will become either vital communities with a clear ethical purpose-or mere factories in the productive chain. Yet even at their worst, universities encourage and try to live by certain distinct values and qualities. To a greater or lesser degree, the following qualities and values infect those who spend time in a university:
Of these, the most important in my opinion are the ability to think clearly and to discriminate: in other words, the test is the degree to which a student learns to command his own mind to know himself.
Should this be your wish you will no doubt find your way and also add to the quality of university and community life, It, however, you are intent exclusively on a degree as a qualification, you must be on your guard lest the dangerous viruses carried in a university community infect you. Learn to protect yourselves from those members of the staff who treat you as sentient beings rather than as sponges; keep clear of student clubs and societies; don't go to political meetings on campus; stay away from demonstrations; avoid visiting speakers; read only the set text-books. The University is a dangerous place. You can, however, take comfort from the fact that many students have managed to graduate without becoming committed to anything but themselves, They, having avoided the "action and passion of their times", may in the words of Olliver Wendell Holmes be "judged not to have lived".
Nominations are hereby called for Chairmen of the seven committees of the Student Representative Council:
Nominations must be made on a nomination form obtainable from the Association Office and should be deposited in the nomination box on the Office counter.
Nominations close at 4.30 p.m. on Thursday 12 March.
Nominations may be withdrawn at any time up until 4.30 p.m. on Friday 13 March.
The Chairmen will be elected by secret ballot at the meeting of the Student Representative Council in the Main Common Room, S.U.B., at 1.00 p.m. on Thursday 19 March.
Note: The meeting of the Student Representative Council of
Applications are hereby called for the position of Returning Officer for the Executive by-elections to be held in early April. A remuneration of up to $30 will be paid.
Applications close with the undersigned at 4.30 p.m. on Thursday 5 March, at the Students' Association Office.
It's hard to think of current industrial dust-ups in an historical perspective, but it's sometimes helpful to try. The fact is that the latest disturbances, the months-old Wainui dispute—that flared at one point into a brief national stoppage—and the collision between the watersiders and the Union Steam Ship Co. over the pre-packing of container cargoes, have many points of contact with all the worst industrial showdowns in our nation's short history. And they have much in common with each other.
To begin with, they both concern the identical employer—a fact which has curiously escaped the attention of most press commentators. All New Zealand's really major outbursts of class warfare—
Militant unionism has been traditionally endemic in the maritime industry, and fairly obviously still is. The fact is that you can't have large numbers of men employed together without their becoming acutely aware of their identity as employees, and that awareness is really all that so-called militant trade unionism amounts to.
The Union Company thought it had done for militant unionism in
For one thing, although highly confident in their own strength, the watersiders were isolated from the bulk of the trade union movement—having been gradually manoeuvred out onto a limb by the 'moderate' leadership of the Fol under Walsh in the last years of the 'don't embarrass the Labour Government' era, and finally pushed into leaving the Fol in
For another, the Union Steam Ship Company was no longer a homegrown entity. Back in
It is hard to imagine big overseas combines being particularly interested in smashing unions in this outer fringe of civilisation, whose additions to their costs of operation must have been a very minor irritant in the context of their far-flung empires of interest. But the shipowners' truculence certainly contributed just as vitally to the manufacture of the
In their isolation from the rest of the trade union movement, the waterfront militants were sitting targets for the campaign of obliteration that was opened up on them. It was only their almost incredible obduracy—call it foolhardiness if you like, or courage, it adds up to the same thing—that made them stick it out for so long. But in the end their union was smashed once more—together with the unions of all the other militants who stood by them, with one conspicuous exception.
That exception was the Seamen's Union. Led (driven might be a better word) by Walsh, who had organised the isolation of the wharfies in the pre-Fol, the Seamen's Union had a deeply divided personality. Its traditions and the instincts of its members predetermined that it wouldn't scab on the wharfies; and yet its unchallenged strong man was the wharfies' implacable enemy. It is common knowledge now that the Holland Government omitted the Seamen's Union from its otherwise universal obliteration campaign as a quid pro quo for the help Walsh had given in crushing the wharfies. Without the Seamen's Union. Walsh would have been left without a power-base in the trade union movement.
Today, the wharfies seem to be as incurably militant as ever, and so do the seamen. Walsh is nearly seven years dead, and the men who have taken over his reins in the Seamen's Union were more enthusiastic battlers for the Union's policy in Fol is a very different affair too. Its new secretary, Knox, was an Auckland watersider in Fol has shifted noticeably to the left, especially since the return in the late 50s of the reformed unions smashed in '51. But the new leftism tends to take new forms.
One form, associated with the 'old guard' militants who claim to have learned the lessons of 19 years ago, is that of fighting selected and realistic issues at times of your own choosing, above all never being provoked into a fight when it happens to suit the employer. This policy has been followed with marked success in recent years by several unions, including watersiders, drivers, and seamen.
Another form, associated with some of the political sects of the outer left, is that of fighting anywhere, any time, on any old issue, just so long as it's a battle. This policy also involves a change of line by its principal sponsors, for in
The current disputes are, to some extent at least, on the union side of the barricades, influenced by these two new forms of industrial militancy, and the duel between them. But it takes two sides to make an industrial quarrel, and militant unionism doesn't take root without genuine grievances The maritime industry is full of them.
The Union Company, which has a lion's share of our coastal trade, as well as a few ships still plying further afield, is the biggest single employer of New Zealand seamen. But it's owned and ultimately controlled overseas, and its owners have a minimal interest in its survival. Over the years they have axed services to other countries, three ships off the transpacific run in
If the policy advocated by the Minister of Marine had been put into effect in
One of the ways in which the Company's attenuated interest finds expression is in a scandalously casual and outmoded industrial policy. Nobody in New Zealand is finally responsible, so nobody cares. The Company, along with other overseas shipping companies using our port facilities, solemnly promised the watersiders union a few years ago that, before any moves were made for the containerisation of cargo from our ports, there would be the "fullest preliminary consultation" with the union to ensure the protection of watersiders' employment. The whole of the wharf hold-up could have been avoided if any attempt whatever had been made by the ship owners to honour that promise.
The press managed to present the whole affair as a demarcation dispute between unions wharfies versus storemen and packers—and no doubt the inherited bureaucratic structure of the union movement contributed its mite to the trouble. But that wasn't the nub of it at all. The principal responsibility lay fair and square with the employers. They're in business shifting cargo for profit. Cargo comes in varying forms and amounts, subject to contract with business firms, and big changes (steam winches to electric, hand-carts to fork-lifts, individual cases to prepacked pallets and container units) are contracted for to increase profitability.
But the shipowners also contract with the wharf unions who represent their labour force-the guys who actually do the yacker. And they have to these guys at least as great a responsibility as they owe to their business customers. But the company in question, despite the promise to consult the unions on the container question, seems to have sprung the first shipment of containerised cargo on the wharfies working the inter-island ferry without warning—and thus provoked (almost certainly through damn stupidity rather than dark design) the whole dispute that scorched the headlines for weeks.
The Wainui trouble boils down to much the same thing, The Seamen's Union has been trying to get a roster system into operation for years, to ensure fair distribution of work for its members, Without such a system in the maritime industry, where jobs depend on the uncertain movement of ships, some men could be left jobless for long periods while others just chanced to walk straight off one ship onto another. The waterfront, after years of agitation, devised the 'bureau system' (which still operates) over thirty years ago to meet essentially the same problem for wharfies.
Smaller companies accepted a roster operated by the Seamen's Union for some time before it was apparently accepted by the Union Company. But the Company, as always shuffled on the deal. The idea of a ready-made crew virtually provided by the Union was considered to breach the traditional right of the Ship's Master to choose his own crew. After all, chaps, Sir Francis Drake did. Deck officers didn't seem to mind—possibly recalling that the Seamen's Union had come out in their support when they struck for better pay and conditions back in
If the Union Company wanted an excuse for cutting out the last two Company ships running to Asian ports, this was it. But it isn't necessary to presume that there was a Company plot behind the Marine Engineers' fatuous stand for the retention of feudalism at sea. No doubt the 'red guard' element in the Auckland Seamen's Union helped to keep the pot boiling. But the Company could have stepped in and stopped the whole ballyhoo at any point. The Company has kept its officers and engineers on pay throughout the hold-up. It's only the seamen who have been hurt—apart from the shippers of all that cargo, and the national export drive. At least, if the seamen seem to be a bit woolly on exactly where their own interests lie, one has to admire their selfless tenacity of purpose. It's been a lot easier for the engineers to stick by their principles, on full pay. If the Company had really wanted the Wainui to sail, it could have switched a few engineers between ships months ago, and the trouble-would have been over.
Moral? There isn't any really, other than the obvious one that our short-sighted ancestors missed a rare opportunity when they failed to nationalise the Union Steam Ship Company 53 years ago. Maybe it's not too late
Since its unambitious beginnings in Focus, a national magazine of high standard, and is engaged in a study of how further to add to the material benefits it can confer on students. Through its officers, it conducts research into problems of higher education, represents the student viewpoint on education and other matters to the Government, to Government Departments and to other bodies. It frequently takes up the grievances of individual students. It organises seminars, conferences and takes part in a large number of organisations which have widely varying objectives. It maintains contacts with overseas student unions and international student bodies and also provides the means by which New Zealand students can make a contribution to overseas aid of one kind or another.
However, NZUSA's continued existence has always been somewhat tenuous. Not one of the seven constituent members of the Association totally supports it and its growth, I am sad to say, has been not so much a result of solid constituent backing as of the foresight of its past officers.
NZUSA has been a pawn in many a budding student politician's attempts to gain political office, and this has constantly forestalled attempts to diversify and strengthen the Association as New Zealand's national union of students.
More than this, on many occasions constituent members of NZUSA have blamed the Association for what were basically the failings of the members themselves. Twice a year, constituents come together to form NZUSA's Council, and it is here that the Association's activities for the coming six months are discussed. Only too frequently do constituent Students' Associations promise to undertake some task which is promptly forgotten. NZUSA is too often blamed for such failures on the part of constituents.
I say this with the major reservation that NZUSA—as an organisation—does make mistakes. It does sometimes neglect to do its members' bidding. In general terms, however, it fulfils what constituents deem to be its functions. But it could do more, much more, if constituents (and some are more forward-looking than others) were willing to see the organisation as something more than a twice-yearly meeting of student politicians.
NZUSA is potentially a strong and respected group in the New Zealand community. And the stronger it is and the more respected it is, the more it can do for its members. To give an example, most constituents spend 50c to $1 per student each year on their local student newspaper. Focus cost each New Zealand student 1.9 cents last year. And constituents still complained about the cost! So money is one story. With more money (not a lot), the Association could diversify. Its staff, especially the the President, are expected to be Jacks-of-all-trades. Nobody in those circumstances could expect them to be masters of any as well.
Just as important as financial support is the moral backing the Association receives from its constituents. I could instance many examples—too lengthy to be related here—where a worthwhile project has failed because constituents have about-faced. This does not earn us friends, and it weakens rather than strengthens the organisation.
In all, I believe the students of New Zealand deserve responsible, strong representation at the national level. They need a competent, professionally-run organisation to help them to gain maximum material advantages. I don't see them getting either of these things for as long as local support for the national Association is half-hearted.
I should add in closing that while I have stressed the short-comings of some constituent members of NZUSA, I know of many instances where constituents have acted very creditably in respect of the Association. I simply feel these occasions to be too few and far between.
The Students' Association is charged with vital functions both on and off campus. In each sphere, effectiveness is crippled by the great number of students who just couldn't give two. Even one of last year's most worthwhile efforts—1% Aid—was the prerogative of the few. The $2000 collected for 1% Aid was donated by only three hundred students. The other 5100 students did not necessarily disagree with the aim of increasing New Zealand's overseas aid—it was just too much for them to stir mind and body into extracting the wall et.
Here the Association should function as an agent of social renewal. This requires the expression and promotion of progressive social and political attitudes. If such attitudes are to carry the support of the student body, it is crucial that there be an effective policy-making organ that enjoys the confidence of students. Our present policy organ is the Students Representation Council (SRC), which burst into being last year.
The open membership of the SRC (all students attending may vote) aims to induce participatory (as distinct from representative) democracy. While open membership invites dominance of meetings by the few (to the point where any confidence in the SRC could be lost), it also gives all students an opportunity to participate in decisionmaking in a way that will ensure that whatever consensus exists is represented in decisions taken. If we can make participatory democracy work, in this isolated society at least, we may reach the ideal of restoring to the individual some small sense of his dignity and power. This sense, which forms the basis of democratic theory, has long been lost in democratic practice.
Last year, the SRC never received support from the Executive until it was too late for this support to be meaningful. That mistake must not be repeated. Until such time as the SRC shows itself to be incapable of maintaining the confidence of the student body, it should be encouraged with vitality. However, if we are to be judged worthy social critics, the SRC must be thorough. It is worse than useless, for example, to pass motions urging the legalisation of pot in the absence of a detailed and balanced report. Towards the end of last year, the SRC established a sub-committee to prepare just such a report. Should we be shown merely to have scratched the surface of issues on which the SRC makes recommendations, our effectiveness will be jeopardised.
At times, social and political attitudes are best expressed through the New Zealand University Students' Association, the national student union. NZUSA, with a membership of over 30,000 students, commands greater political weight than do each of the individual Associations. NZUSA is potentially a highly effective political pressure group, particularly in matters relating to education (in which field NZUSA employs a full-time Research Officer). There is also potential in other areas—last year, NZUSA's representations on the Security Intelligence Bill were recognised in the House to have signigicantly affected the final enactment. Yet there remains the danger that NZUSA could become an old boys club of ex-student politicians. It could begin to operate on a different wavelength from the students it represents. That this may occur was evident last year when NZUSA apologised to Messrs Holyoake and Kirk for the rhubarb handed out at the Compass debate.
Either through NZUSA or independently, our Association must be involved in some international questions. A university atmosphere breeds concern for world problems such as poverty, racial discrimination and war. Some students feel that the Association should not concern itself with these matters but we must reject such moral myopia. What student is not alarmed on being reminded that the present world population, which evolved over thousands of years, is projected to double in 35 years? And why should this Association not express its alarm that the problems associated with this population growth are not being faced? Let us continue to direct the Association to be an agent of social concern, armed with youth, vitality and idealism, reaffirming the good, rejecting the bad and hoping like hell that we have the wisdom to distinguish between the two.
One pervading aspect of modern university education is its impersonal nature. Student involvement at all levels of the University's administration may be one way in which this problem can be tackled.
While the Association needs to expend much energy on student representation, we would be naive to expect too much in return. We may make some contribution, we may assault the impersonal atmosphere to some degree, but we will not appreciably alter a machine geared to mass production.
Within the Association itself, much effort is required to ensure that the budget of some $100,000 is adjusted to produce best value for students, clubs and the Association itself. This requires arduous and highly important administration. At the moment, the SRC has no control over finance but if it functions well there is little reason why it should be denied full confidence.
Publications devour a goodly proportion of the budget. Cappicade maintains a reputation for satire and subtlety which counters the woodenness of some other capping magazines. Argot was officially adopted last year as the Association's official literary magazine and should contribute well to a culturally poor society. Salient has been produced weekly over the last two years. If we are to get the quality we expect from a student newspaper, Salient production needs to be rationalised and those involved paid more adequately. If these measures fail to ensure consistent quality, the only alternative would be to revert to fortnightly production.
The Association must further ensure that services are available to cater for important non-academic requirements. Facilities such as the Student Union Building, the Association Office and suitable cafeteria catering require constant attention. Cultural, sporting and social activities are essential in bringing fullness to university life. Last year, despite a contrary recommendation from the Finance Advisory Committee, it was shown that the Cultural Council could administer its own funds—which included an increase of $200 in the cultural vote. Cultural activity, in particular, needs still more development and more funds.
No one would deny that the Association has a great diversity of activity. How successful it will be in any one area will ultimately depend on the students who make up its membership.
Dr A. J. W. Taylor, formerly Head of the Student Counselling Service and now a Professor of Clinical Psychology here, presented a report to the University Council towards the end of last year on his overseas study tour. In his report, Dr Taylor made a number of interesting observations on student demonstrations in the United Kingdom and the United States. Some extracts from Dr Taylor's report follow:
Students in many British universities complained that the staff was out of touch with them, but that could not have been the only factor behind student unrest because there were unruly demonstrations in the new universities where the staff/student contact was very good. Perhaps too great a proportion of potential demonstrators was drawn together in the new universities by the prospect of a progressive educational policy, and they felt they had to establish their identity as rebels in the eyes of students elsewhere. As an academic visitor during the 'strike' at L.S.E., I saw staff-student relationships at their best and at their worst. At their best, some of the staff tried to negotiate between the dissidents and the administration, and they engendered enthusiasm among their students by organizing makeshift classes in out-of-the-way places. At their worst, some of the staff were relatively unconcerned by the mounting tension and were in no position to help to reduce the strain when the School was closed. The revolutionaries might have been restrained had there been more concern among the staff and cohesion between them and the moderate students.
The militant students at L.S.E. were unlike the radicals of earlier years who gave the place an international reputation because they were as vigorous in their revolutionary activity as in their debate. They drew their inspiration from the writings of the 'new' left and the activities of the 'new' revolutionaries (Bourges, 1968; Robertson. 1968; Ali, 1969). They declared that society was so corrupt with capitalism that they had no alternative but to destroy it. They were not interested in education, not the politics of education, but they were simply interested in politics and power. They selected the universities for their prime targets because they were so vulnerable to physical attack, and their plan was to turn their attention towards other social institutions in due course. They were confident that new institutions would emerge from the ruins of the old, with none of the chronic maladies that had previously beset them.
There were no data on the militant students, but they seemed to me to be from the upper middle class in England, fortified by some radical post-graduate American students. They began to put their anarchistic plan into operation by trying to convert themselves from the upper and middle class into the working class much to the wry amusement of the real working class who were puzzled by this example of social nihilism. They chanted slogans such as 'Revolution is the Carnival of the Masses', and 'The use of authority perverts, and submission to authority humiliates', and they pretended to have no leaders. They selected one issue after another as in a game of chess that was calcutated to bring them into conflict until finally they could change the balance of power. They did not care whether their administrators were progressive or reactionary because they were seeking political power no matter how it had been used. Indeed, the reactionary opponents were preferred to the progressives because they were unlikely to investigate any complaints. The militants knew that any careful investigation of an apparent issue would retard their revolutionary cause and force them to seek other plausible issues for promoting anarchy.
The militant students at L.S.E. were so fanatical by
In the United States, the deans of students were key figures in difficult negotiations on matters of policy between students, faculties, and administrators, and they facilitated the appointment of counsellors from minority groups as occasions arose. A few universities also appointed ombudsmen to settle specific grievances of which the students complained, but they too could not solve widespread discontent nor could they relieve the staff of its administrative and teaching responsibilities.
In America, as in Britain, some of the university staff was quite out of touch with students and their problems, but their remoteness was more understandable because their universities were so huge. As a matter of fact, many American academics were as remote from their colleagues as they were from their students because of the size of their departments. The planners had not given sufficient attention to the optimum sizes of a university, a university department, and of a teaching group. Some academics had lost interest in teaching because they found it difficult to establish viable groups of students. Others had succumbed to the temptation of producing research papers that had more effect on their promotion than had their teaching. Those who concentrated upon research were aware that they were contributing to the status of their institutions, as well as to their coffers, by the research grants they were attracting. Many universities looked forward to receiving an administrating bounty from research grants to supplement their normal budgets, and they paid insufficient attention to the content of the research for which the grants were made. As a result, the universities jeopardized their cherished status as independent educational institutions, and academics compromised the rights of academic freedom for which they had vigorously fought during the McCarthy era.
Academic freedom is a cherished principle that helps to safeguard the rights of university staff to take an independent stand on public issues. In the past, the principle had been confined to matters of tenure (Joughin,
From the speed with which various university research departments switched the nature of their research, it must be assumed that the students had stirred the conscience of those in authority. Had there been a U.S. Department of State to conduct the Government's research, the conflict of research interests might not have arisen. Time and again I thought that the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research in New Zealand and its counterparts in the United Kingdom and Australia had saved the Commonwealth universities from some of the troubles that beset American academia. However, academics everywhere would benefit if the principles of academic freedom and of education were made explicit and keenly examined instead of being left as a noble sentiment to be used for promoting self-interest. As an initial statement, I would say that academic freedom is both the right and obligation to study and to conduct research, the results of which may be expressed without fear, and the content of which will maintain the educational integrity and independence of a university.
A number of American scholars and research workers were aware of the major problems that beset their universities, and they were trying hard to solve them (Eurich, 1968; Linton and Nelson, 1968; Toussieng, 1968; Tyler, 1964). Many regretted that they had not heeded the early warnings of
From my observations, I would say that the manner in which some of the staff reacted was as much a function of their personalities as of their situation. In future, more attention must be given to the personal qualities of stability, enthusiasm, loyalty, and responsibility of academics as well as to the quality of their degrees. New members of staff must be encouraged to develop teaching skills, and the more experienced to undertake refresher courses. Teachers have an obligation to preserve the right relation between their duties to students, colleagues, universities, their subjects, and their careers. The right relation' will not be easy to decide but, if it is kept in mind from time to time conscientiously, it is more likely to be decided properly than if it were left in abeyance. Also, no effort should be spared to combine the academics and the
University administration was no sinecure. In America, the presidents were required to act as scholars, businessmen, judges, ombudsmen, negotiators, apologists, recruiters, and battle commanders. Little wonder that their turnover was high, and that in
'Help wanted: Mature man, must be willing to work 90 hours a week in an academic setting. Duties include dealing with conservative legislature, radical students, ambitious faculty, irate alumni, Also public relations and fund raising.'
University presidents and vice-chancellors were facing pressures that they and their predecessors had not encountered. The newly appointed presidents were offered some experience of group conflict in short courses that were organized by the American Association of University Professors, but they might also have benefited from some experience in executive positions outside universities where militant groups operate. The more weather-beaten administrators did their colleagues a service by writing about campus combat for several professional journals and publications (e.g., College Management, N.A.S.P.A.J., Education at Berkeley. 1966; Crisis at Columbia. 1968; The Student in Higher Education. 1968). Similar material was presented by student welfare personnel at national conferences to their fellows who had yet to face the force of protest. The students helped to balance the issues by presenting their own point of view
Many moderate students in America shared the complaints of the faculty. They felt alienated in universities that were enormous institutions with over twenty thousand students, rather like overcrowded supermarkets in which the vigorous might obtain their requirements but the hesitant were brushed aside. If the students were able to create a sense of belonging to small working groups, it could last only for a semester until the group members set off on other legs of their courses. The students also complained that the senior academics had long since withdrawn from the university milieu and had loll their Ph.D.-hunting juniors to carry the burden of teaching. Consequently, they wore denied the benefit of personal contact with senior members of staff, and they felt that they were unwelcome me intruders in the rooms of the already over-commit "d juniors. The students in these circumstances had of necessity to forage for themselves and, somewhat resentfully, they raised questions about 'student freedom' as distinct from 'academic freedom'. They wondered what reasonable expectations a student might have when enroling for a course of instruction at a university. The students wanted the academic staff to accept their leaching obligations, but also they wanted the content of the courses to be change They complained that too many of the academice courses were socially levant and unrelated to their humanitarian interests and some of them organized the own inter-disciplinary programmes of study as an example for their teachers.
The students were also unsettled because they were liable to be conscripted at any time between the ages of 18 and 25 if either the strategic situation required it or their marks dropped below a minimum level.
Many administrators were sympathetic the students and the went so far as to appoint official 'draft counsellers to help students to exercise their rights (Griffiths, 1968). Some students resolved their uncertainty over conscription for Vietnam by serving periodically with the National Guard for seven years, but that alternative did not appeal to them all. However, it was as well that there were students among the National Guardsmen because they were less inclined than the police to take precipitant action against their fellows when they were called out for duty. The other students, who either supported or accepted the policy of conscription, were able to undertake the unpopular Reserve Officers' training in a university corps (R.O.T.C.) as part of their undergraduate work. Personally, I thought that the R.O.T. C. plan was good in that it gave potential servicemen a 'liberal' education before they narrowed their studies down to professional courses at military academies.
The students were not all fired with the purest of motives. In the United States, as in Great Britain, there was a hard core of anarchists among the students who were determined to over throw the existing order, no matter what the pretext. The American students, too, had chosen the universities as their first target before switching to industry, commerce, and the church. They began their actual demonstrations in Berkeley in (Lipset and Wolin, op. cit.), and subsequently triggered off other demonstrations elsewhere over the next few years until Columbia, Cornell, and Harvard Universities were involved.
The more resolute of the anarchists belonged to the Students for a Democratic Society (S.D.S.) and the Black Students Union (B.S.U.), and others belonged to a more loosely organized collection of fiery irres-ponsibles of the Youth International Party (Yippies). The S.D.S. followed the intellectual lead of the philosophers Marucse ( 1964) and Debray (1967), and the strategies of Fidel Castro, Che Guevara
The American anarchists, unlike the British, were prepared to use violence against people, as well as explosives against buildings, to attain their ends. Their use of violence was not perhaps so surprizing if one accepts the fact that violence is a regular feature of American life and that it has facilitated social change (Graham and Gurr, 1969; Bienen, 1968; Walker, 1968; Report of the National Advisory Commission, 1968). Several students told me that their patience had not been rewarded but their violent behaviour had. A strident black student at Stanford University told me that white men did not act, but from his experience he knew that they did react if they were frightened. He was also so convinced of the merits of his cause that he was prepared to die for it if it were necessary. He had identified with the militant Black Panther and Black Muslim organizations of older men
As in Britain, the S.D.S. came from affluent families (Dickinson, 1969). They had good high school records, and in many ways they were an intellectual elite with a wide range of interests. They comprised between one and two per cent of the student population, but they had outstanding powers of leadership. Some of their less militant followers had begun to respond to the social problems of the underprivileged by staffing free medical clinics, legal aid centres, and social work agencies. Perhaps their professional elders might follow the altruistic example of the students and become less avaricious in their practices. Perhaps more psychologists might be inspired to address themselves to the personal and social problems of our time instead of focussing intently upon the measurement of the irrelevant—e.g., the presidential address to the Western Psychological Society from a Berkeley professor was not about student riots but the copulatory behaviour of live dogs and the chastity belt that he devised for their receptive bitch!
The black students were from underprivileged groups and they doubted the revolutionary sincerity of the affluent S.D.S. They had found a corporate identity for themselves during the course of protest, and they were determined to take their place as equal partners with the whites when they were ready. It was ironic that, having won the right for complete integration, the black students had set it aside to segregate themselves in the universities. They were setting themselves apart to train as a power group, to work out a strategy, and to establish tight group control and cohesion. When they emerged to face an apprehensive white community, they made impetuous demands for facilities, staff, and research funds, and brooked no opposition. They insisted that the proportion of black to white students be increased, and they scoured the ghettos to seek the most promising candidates—notwithstanding their low scores on the culturally biassed scholastic aptitude test (Green, 1969). They forced university courses in Afro-American history and Swahili through committees, and they introduced other courses on 'soul food' and exploitation that were less academic but emotionally significant for them. Their tactics wen successful, and were being adopted by the once even-tempered Mexican American and American Indian students.
The Yippies began as an extension of the Hippie movement, but they thrived on violent and frantic behaviour, i.e.,
There is no doubt about it. We're going to wreck this society. If we don't then society is going to wreck itself anyway, so we might as well have some fun doing it.
and
We've got to get crazy .... 'cause that's the only way we're gonna beat them.
They were as irresponsible and impulsive as hooligans. They did not seem to be students, but people in their mid-twenties who roamed freely around campuses to no good purpose.
Amid all the campus turmoil, not a few people in America looked back to the Hippie students with some regret, because the Hippies had at least been passive and considerate towards other people. The Hippies lived on the effluence of an affluent society in their attempt to drop out of the cocoon of conformity in which they felt civilization had them enwrapped. They complained of the anonymity, conformity, automation, and environmental pollution, and since their demonstrations in
During enrolment and orientation, the Student Christian Movement is operating the usual second hand bookstall, enabling students to sell last year's books and purchase books for the current year.
The bookstall will again be located in the foyer of Lecture Block and will be open between 10.15a.m. and 6p.m. Books intended for sale may be handed in from Wednesday, 18 February through to Tuesday, 3 March, and those brought in before the selling dates of the subject under which they are classified will have a better opportunity of being sold. Textbooks for the various faculties will be sold on the following dates:-
SCM claims a 10% commission on sales. This money is used for work among students both at Victoria and overseas.
As responsibility will not be taken by SCM for students buying the wrong book or an obsolete edition, consult the University Calendar or your department first if there is any doubt.
Cheques in payment for books sold, together with any unsold books, will be handed back from March 11 to March 13.
While you will again be able to sell your second-hand textbooks through the Student Christian Movement's bookstall, we would encourage you to consider donating your books to the University of the South Pacific (USP). If you feel you cannot afford to do this, please at least give any unsold books to USP. The SCM and the Student's Association office staff will accept any books donated to USP and the SCM will also send on to USP any unsold books which you may wish to donate. Make it perfectly clear that you wish the books concerned to be given to the USP.
The range of books needed by USP includes general textbooks—especially related to arts, science and social science subjects, novels and other fictional matter, non-fiction and magazines. Series of back numbers of periodicals related to subjects in the science, social science and arts fields would be particularly welcome.
Last year, the drive for textbooks at Victoria resulted in about 3000 books being donated to USP. Don't hoard your books and don't sell them. Give them to USP. They will be greatly appreciated.
There were student demonstrations in more than 50 countries during (UNESCO. 5/434), and those that I saw in Britain and America were more in the nature of political and social protests than an attack upon education per se (Brammer, 1967). The universities alone were in no position to solve political and social problems but at least the might now pay more attention to them in the future than they have done in the past. In the process they might attend to the educational problems and conflicts of interest to which students have drawn their attention An improved educational system will help students to prepare themselves for personal and professional commitment to remedy the ills of an imperfect world as well as to extend the boundaries-of knowledge. Perhaps then the moderate students will be the more willing to restrain the minority of militants with that degree of toleration and reason upon which a good university system depends.
If any lesson is to be learned from first-hand observations, impressions and interpretations of campus combat, it is that good personal relationships, good teaching, and some form of democratic organization are both the prerequisites for university education and the best safeguards against campus disruption. It is true that Victoria University has already established a lead in some of those areas (Student Participation in the Universities, 1969) but, having begun to
they could be relatively undistrubed in their search for existential and mystical truths. They were still dependent upon drugs, but they were eschewing rather than chewing L.S.D. because of its harmful consequences. They were not waiting for the drug to be scientifically evaluated!
Ali. T (ed.) New Revolutionaries: Left Opposition. London: Owen.
Avorn. J.L., et al. Up Against the lvy Wall: A History of the Columbia Crisis. New York Atheneum,
Bienen. H Violence and Social Change: A Preview of Current Literature. University of Chicago Prees,
Bourges, H. The Student Revolt: The Activists Speak. London: Panther.
Brammer. L.: Cross-cultural Perspective on Student Demonstrations the Influence of Student Organizations'. J. College Student Personnel.
Chambers. B. Chronicles of Black Protest. New York, Mentor.
Cleaver. F. Soul on Ice. New York Delta Books.
Cohen. M. and. D. Hale The New Student Left: An Anthology (revised and enlarged). Boston Beacon Press.
College Management.
Counselling in Schools: A Study of the Present Situation in Great Britain. Working Paper No. 15. London: H.M.S.O.,
Crisis at Columbia. Report of the I act-finding Commission appointed to investigate the disturbance at Columbia University in
Crisis at San Francisco State. Insight Publications. San Francisco. California,
Debray, R. Revolution in the Revolution: Armed Struggle and Political Struggle in Latin America, trans. Ortiz New York: Grove Press.
Dickinson. J.C. 'Student Activism and the Characteristics of Activists' Paper presented to A.P.G.A. Convention, Las Vegas.
Education at Berkeley: Report of the Select Committee on Education. University of California. Berkeley.
Eisenhower. M.S. et al. Interim Statement on Campus Disorder. Washington: Nat. Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence.
Eurich, A.C. et al. (ed.). Campus 1980 The Shape of the Future in American Higher Education. New York: Dell.
Free. Revolution for the Hell of it. New York: Dial Press.
Graham, H.D. & T. K. Gurr. Violence in America—Historical & Comparative Perspectives: Report to the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence. New York; New American Library.
Green, R.I.. The Black Quest for Higher Education: An Admissions Dilema. Personnel & Guidance J.,
Griffiths, J. The Draft Law: A College Outline for the Selective Service Act and Regulations (2nd ed.), Yale University,
Joughin, L. (ed). Academic Freedom and Tenure: A Handbook of the American Association of University Professors. University of Wisconsin Press,
Keniston. K. The Uncommitted: Alienated Youth in American Society. New York Delta Books.
Keniston, K. Young Radicals: Notes on Committed Youth. New York Harcourt Brace and World.
Lavan, G. Che Guevara Speaks: Selected Speeches and Writings. New York Grove Press.
Linton. T.E. and J. L. Nelson (ed.). Patterns of Power: Social Foundations of Education. New York Pitman.
Lipset, S.M. and S.S. Wolin. The Berkeley Student Revolt: Facts and Interpretations. New York: Anchor Books.
Macias, G. et al. A Chicano Speaks Out'. A serio of 12 articles reprinted from The Sacramento State Hornet,
Marcuse, H. One Dimensional Man: Studies in the Ideology of Advanced Industrial Society. Huston. Beacon Press,
Myrdal, G. et al. The American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy. New York Harper,
N.A.S.P.A. Journal of the Association of Deans and Administrators of Student Affairs., viz.,
Newton. H. Essays from the Minister of Defence. Black Panther Party Publication, U.S.A.,
Report of the National Advisors Commission on Civil Disorders. New York: Bantam Books.
Ridgeway. J. The Closed Corporation: American Universities in Crisis. New York Ballantine Books.
Riesman, D. Constraint and Variety in American Education. New York: Doubleday Anchor.
Robertson. D. (ed.).'The Student Rebellion: After Paris?" The Student Special Issue.
Sandford, N. (ed.). The American College: A Psychological and Social Interpretation of the Higher Learning London Wiley.
Student Participation in the University. Report of a Joint Committee of the Council, Professorial Board, and Students' Association. Victoria University of Wellington.
The Student in Higher Education. The Hazen Foundation. New Haven. Connecticut,
Toussieng. P.V. Hangloose Identity, or Living Death: the Agonising Choice of Growing Up Today". Adolescence,
Tyler, E. A. "The Process of Humanizing Physiological Man'. Family Process,
UNESCO. E/CN, 5/434. Preliminary Report on Long Term Policies and Programmes for Youth in National Development.'
Walker. D. et al. Rights in Conflict. New York: Signet Books,
Bells are hanging and cash registers are ringing gaily in Wellington stores.
The Christmas rush has begun and beaming sales managers state that trade has never been better.
"The present-buying public is selective and choosy, which is good to see," one merchandise manager said. "The goods are there and the price is not stopping them."
It seems that cultured pearls are back in a big way—necklaces, brooches and ear-rings are disappearing like hot cakes.
Imported perfumes are in great demand. So are gift sets of lingerie and table linen.
Many lines of glassware are already sold out and sales of swim suits are phenomenal.
Family groups are putting in together for the purchase of a lasting present to "Mum".
Refrigerators, washing machines and television sets are favourite gifts chosen by such groups.
A toy shop proprietor reported that teenagers are buying monster teddy bears and bunnies at $28 each without batting an eyelid and fluffy, flop-eared dogs were next in favouritism.
Bicycle sales are up on last year and dolls from 10 cents to $20 are in great demand.
Iced Christmas cakes have "started to move rapidly", and so have Christmas puddings.
"It's noticeable that people are going for the $7 cakes," the manageress of a home-made cake shop said.
"We'll have to make another batch this weekend."
Only person not madly busy in one store visited was Santa Claus.
"His work builds up when the schools break up," a salesman said.
"He hasn't lost his voice yet—that's a catastrophe reserved for the last shopping week."
Even bank managers agree that this Christmas will be "a boomer".
We'd like to believe that some of you at least would think we were putting you on if we told you that the crap above was printed—apparently as a news story—on the front page of The Dominion on 4 December last year. Here's a quotation for next "Christmas":
It is only by not paying one's bills that one can hope to live in the memory of the commercial classes— Oscar Wilde.
The Story of the Blues is the most important blues release yet made in New Zealand. To the serious blues enthusiast, who will probably have many of the tracks on this double-album already, there may be other milestones. But to those who are only very interested in the Blues and aren't fanatics, this is an all-but definitive cross-section of blues styles and includes some of the best-known artists.
The collection was compiled by the well-known Blues authority, Paul Oliver, whose contribution to the subject is extensive and includes several books and documentary field recordings. For an explanation of The Story of the Blues, I'll quote from Oliver's liner notes:
Now that the blues has become a major influence on the popular music of the world it is easy to overlook its importance as a twentieth century folk music of the Negro in the United States. A generation is growing up which associates the sounds of the blues with the music made by groups of young people playing amplified guitars and harmonicas in a manner substantially the same in San Francisco, London or Tokyo. This collection attempts to sketch in the background of its musical history, from its origins in the Southern states of America to its final phase as an independent music created by the members of a segregated minority.
Side One of the first album, titled Origins of the Blues, opens with an interesting, almost amusing piece recorded in Ghana by Oliver himself in
This track is followed by songster Mississippi John Hurt recorded in Stack-O-Lee Blues, a song well known at that time among the Negroes. On comparison with his recent recording of this ballad, Hurt's very distinctive finger style has altered very little, and I feel the original recording showed a distinct white influence. It is difficult to isolate the outstanding tracks on this album, but one of my favourites is Blind Willie McTell, the notable Georgia Bluesman, singing Travelin' Blues. McTell imitates both a train and a human voice, with a slide on his biting 12-string guitar. This elusive character recorded (as did many other blues singers) on many different labels, using various pseudonyms to avoid contractual problems.
Charley Patton, regarded by many as 'Father of the Blues' was an intensely powerful and influential Mississippi bluesman and his Stone Pony Blues is typical of his style.
Blind Lemon Jefferson and Leadbelly should need no introduction—both are legendary blues figures. Lemon's Black Snake Moan is sung with poetic sexual imagery, while Leadbelly, the virtual one-man compendium of all Negro music styles and a sadly unappreciated artist, tings a fine blues, Pig Meat Papa, with his usual driving guitar accompaniment.
Texas Alexander came from outside Leona, Texas, and is a rare example of a blues singer who does not play an instrument. His vocal style, based on freely rhytnmic field hollers and work songs, made accompaniment difficult. Guitarist Lonnie Johnson, who played on many of Alexander's recordings including this track, Broken Yo Yo, adopts an almost entirely melodic background with a simple rhythmic imitation of Alexander's voice.
The last track on this side is a common blues plea. Peg Leg Howell's Broke and Hungry Blues is a simple uptempo rowdy blues. His vocal and guitar is supported here by a wailing fiddle. Peg Leg, a heavy white-haired man, was well known on the streets of Atlanta where he and his 'Gang' played for many years.
Side Two of the first album is entitled Blues and Entertainment and deals with the lighthearted side of Negro life. It Won't Be Long is performed by brothers Robert and Charlie Hicks, who entertained the customers of the Drive-in Barbecue where they worked. They accompany their question-and-answer lyric routine with huge laughs and an unusually accented guitar style. Robert Hicks, by the way, was a popular artist in his own right recording under the name of Barbecue Bob.
The blues was also an important dance music—many small groups played in the bars and barrelhouses up and down the country. Henry Williams, vocal and guitar, and Eddie Anthony, vocal and fiddle, race along with Georgia Crawl. The famous Memphis Jook Band with Dangerous Woman and the Memphis Jug Band, led by Will Shade, with Gator Wobble also move along at great pace. These sounds are typical of the humorous and simple music popular during the 20's and 30's. Of the 'classic blues singers' the undoubted Empress was Bessie Smith. Her jazz-styled phrasing and down home emotional feavour are evident in In The House Blues. Although they did not match Bessie's exceptionally tough voice, Lillian Glinn with Shake It Down and Bertha (Chippie) Hill with Pratt City Blues were among the first females to reach a white audience. They toured widely on the T.O.B.A. (commonly referred to as Tough On Black Artists) vaudeville stage shows, interspersing their blues with popular songs. It is also interesting to hear on the Bertha Hill recording the young New Orleans trumpet player Louis Armstrong. The final track on this side is a vocal duct from Butterbeans and Susie—a corny vaudeville novelty song titled What It Takes To Bring You Back. It's not 100% blues, but it's interesting.
Side Three, headed The Thirties, Urban and Rural Blues, opens with pianist Leroy Carr, one of the most influential and best loved musicians of the 30's. He and his partner, guitarist Scrapper Blackwell, made popular a city blues style which was a softer, almost sweet combination. But Carr's melancholy voice on Midnight Hour Blues still retains the blues feel.
Chicago born pianist Jimmy Yancey accompanies vocalist Faber Smith on East St Louis Blues—a variation of Leroy Carr's famous How Long Blues.
Peetie Wheatstraw, vocal and piano, wholeheartedly welcomes legalised booze in Good Whiskey Blues. He is helped along by Casey Bill, who plays some beautiful slide guitar. On the next track Casey puts down his own vocal with a social comment blues, W.P.A. Blues, and once again that zinging bottleneck is in evidence. Windy City Struggler but Lake introduced me to the music of bawdy bluesman Bo Carter early last year. But in the next track, Sorry Feelin Blues, Carter expresses a sad vocal with some sensitive Mississippi guitar playing.
The Delta guitar genius Robert Johnson developed an exciting instrumental and vocal method which suited his emotional and superstitious beliefs. His Little Queen of Spades is one of the few remaining Johnson tracks not previously released.
The distinctive "Dobro" guitar of Bukka White combines well with Washboard Sam's percussion on the gutsy Parchman Farm Blues. Bukka spent a considerable time in that notorious prison and apparently, when his release was secured, he didn't want to leave because the prison governor liked his music so much.
Side Three is completed by the masculine-sounding artist Memphis Minnie McKoy, one of the greatest female blues singers outside the 'Classic' style. She ably accompanies herself on guitar in the Me and My Chauffeur Blues and was once rated by Big Bill Broonzy as equal to any male blues singer.
Side Four of this collection is entitled World War II and After and begins with Blind Boy Fuller, vocal and guitar, with Sonny Terry, harmonica, and I Want Some of Your Pie. Fuller, one of the East Coast greats, uses the standard up-tempo Georgia rag form with lyrics full of double meanings.
Brownie McGee, who began his recording career as Blind Boy Fuller No 2, recorded Million Lonesome Women, a comment on the Second World War's disruption of human relationships, with harp player Jordan Webb. It was soon after this track was recorded that Brownie and Sonny Terry first teamed up to form probably the best known and certainly the most enduring partnership in the history of the blues, and they are still performing together.
The third track on this side is by the notorious nomad Big Joe Williams, vocal and 9-string guitar, who performs Wild Cow Moan. Williams claimed that the extra three strings on his guitar were there to confuse people who kept wanting to borrow it. He is ably supported by a central figure in the Chicago Forties, Sonny Boy (John Lee). Williamson. Williamson was well known for his excellent harp playing and also plays a great solo on this track, helped along by Ransom Knowling on bass and Judge Riley on drums.
Another major blues influence was Big Bill Broonzy, He was partly responsible for the growth of the Chicago Blues and for getting several blues artists onto record, as well as recording his own large and varied repertoire. On an up-tempo track All By Myself, he is backed by pianist Memphis Slim.
Track Five on this last side is Roll Em Pete by vocalist Joe Turner and pianist Pete Johnson. Joe Turner is one of the best examples of a blues shouter. He was formerly a singing waiter in Kansas City and had great success with this song in the boogie-woogie boom that preceded Rhythm and Blues.
Otis Spann was taught by Big Maceo Merriweather, but has, through years of session work with Chess and the Muddy Waters Band, developed a distinctive sound of his own. His rather introspective voice is suited to the slower blues and on this track, Bloody Murder, recorded in
I always associate Elmore James' music with excitement. His driving 12 bar blues are loud, electric and mean. His popular Dust My Blues slide guitar riff is combined here with his high-pitched asthmatic voice on Sunnyland, a blues recorded at one of his last recording sessions.
The last track on the double-album is from Johnny Shines. Shines was born in Memphis in I Don't Know. Although a somewhat derivative artist, Shines well executed slide work makes him one of the better bluesmen still playing in the older style.
The Story Of The Blues is well packaged with excellent liner notes by Paul Oliver, and each track has details of recording locations, dates, labels, original issue numbers and background on the personalities.
Some of the thirty-two tracks are very rare and previously unreleased—the total playing time is over two hours. Outstanding tracks are Blind Willie McTell's Travelin Blues, Leroy Carr and Scrapper Blackwell's Midnight Hour Blues, Peetie Wheatstraw's Good Whiskey Blues, Casey Bill's W.P.A. Blues, Robert Johnson's Little Queen of Spades, Memphis Minnie's Me and My Chauffeur Blues, Big Bill Broonzy's All By Myself, Joe Turner's Roll Em Pete, Elmore James' Sunnyland and Johnny Shines' I Don't Know. Only one small criticism. The cover photo of Furry Lewis is accredited to Mississippi John Hurt.
This album is a must. Buy it!
Midge Marsden wishes to thank Bob Child for his assistance in the preparation of this review.
The Queen Elizabeth II Arts Council has called a conference—known as Arts Conference 70—for April 10-12 this year the aims of which are as follows:
To make an assessment of the arts in New Zealand as they stand today and to prepare a blueprint for the next decade.To quantify objectives and define these as falling within the scope of the Council itself, Government Departments, the NZBC, local authorities and other sectors.To provide information on the degree of public and private involvement in the arts.To provide an open forum for the exchange of ideas.To make projections into the future on the basis of the information obtained.To endeavour to reach agreement on the broad needs of the arts in general.To endeavour to set the arts within the general economic picture as part of our development as a nation.
In the following article, the Director of the National Art Gallery, Melvin Day, considers the state of visual arts in New Zealand today and discusses some of the problems which have arisen in this area of the arts. We shall publish articles on drama, literature, and music in future issues of Salient prior to Arts Conference to provide some background to the sort of problems that are likely to be raised there.
I suppose it is reasonable to say that, Polynesian art forms apart, there has been a history of art in New Zealand for about 200 years. I am, of course, taking as a starting point the time of Cook's voyages and the paintings produced by his artists. This suggests that there has been 200 years of activity in the field of the visual arts but this is not quite true. It is truer to say that before the
These introductory remarks axe, of course, dangerously generalised but are meant to serve as a reminder of the historical background rather than be a critical analysis. I intend that these remarks highlight the point that art in New Zealand has a very short history and, Polynesian art forms apart, there has been little time for work to develop which bears markedly national qualities—whatever they might be. New Zealand is not alone in this state of affairs. Australia is in a very similar situation and, as far as time goes, so is much of the United States of America. New Zealand's problems are different from both the latter cases: differences in their respective historical backgrounds, population differences and so on.
The case, broadly stated, is that New Zealand artists tended to study and live abroad, much like some famous American artists in the 18th century. This state of affairs continued till after the second World War, when massive assaults were launched on the value of academic art. This was furthered by the cultural domination of the United States. New Zealand was influenced to a great degree when these "standards" were tossed overboard, to the dismay of older artists and society in general. In the first place, we can say that among the first of the major problems facing art in New Zealand was the emergence of art standards other than academic. With the greater freedom and accent on individuality came the dealer galleries, and I believe I am correct in saying that the Helen Hitchings Gallery in Wellington was the first of its kind in the country—a blow to those who believe that nothing has ever happened in the capital city.
While it might be argued that dealer galleries have removed the reactionary control of the art societies, it is equally arguable that dealer galleries have, in turn, supplanted one form of artistic control for another—the "stable". The way in which artists have adapted to this form of control must be a very important factor to note when considering art policy in this decade.
This leads to some consideration of money and the artist. There is no denying the artist must have some money. This is not a recent phenomenon because we can read of artists and craftsman clamouring for more money far back in our history. One of the points to consider is how much we need the services of artists or, for that matter, whether we need them at all. In general discussion with New Zealanders, and on looking around our environment I come to the conclusion that this country demonstrates the thesis that man can live by bread alone, and live very well at that! Art today, as in any other time, is linked indissolubly with an educational programme. The classic case in English history occurred in the mid-19th century when a systematic programming of work was developed for art training. Today, the need is just as great. The question posed 100 years ago could be posed today—What must we teach students about art and for what reasons? I strongly disagree with the thought that art is some form of therapy only yet I have the feeling that in some peoples' minds this is the main purpose of art. If this grows to great proportions then heaven help us.
The problem of contemporary art education is very great compared with earlier ages. The English schools in the latter part of the 19th century, for instance, attempted to evolve a system of art training which would take into account the effects of the Machine Age. If the lesson of that society is followed we must be as sure as possible what it is we want of our artists. As an example of this I should like to briefly examine one of our educational problems—the training of art teachers. Since
In general, what has happened so far has not been very satisfactory from the artists' or society's viewpoint. The artist has been given enormous freedom of choice but that has often resulted in comparative lack of purpose, or, put another way, too great a freedom has meant a lack of tension existing between the artist and the client. An example of this tension would be the clash between Julius II and Michelangelo. Further consideration of this point would lead over too wide a field, but an indication of the problem facing our art educators should show us that this is a difficult question.
Summarising, then, I suggest that the whole of the art education programme in New Zealand needs re-assessing in order that it fits well within our social pattern, we must be quite sure what we want from our artists, while they, in turn, must feel that they form a vital part in our society. To train artists who in turn are let loose to train other artists for no particular reason is the quickest and surest way to debase the profession.
The first report of the Blake-Palmer Committee on drug dependence and drug abuse in New Zealand has now been published. Predictably adopting a middle-of-the-road and almost non-commital line, the report recommends no relaxation of the controls on pot.
The Committee does concede there are "strong influences working towards the establishment of a more permissive approach to the use of drugs in New Zealand." And it has obviously made a close study of the Wootton Report (
In Britain, penalties have been lowered and there is legislation under preparation to change the offense of possession from a felony to a misdemeanour. There are similar moves for relaxation of the law relating to marijuana offenses in the United States. In New Zealand however, "the committee are unanimous that the relaxing of legislative control on the use of marijuana at this stage would be irresponsible."
While stating that it is unfair to stereotype a drug abuser as "morally depraved", the Report virtually equates possession of cannabis with committing a serious assault, by moral standards! Although it notes that there is an increasing tendency to consider marijuana separately from hard drugs in the mass media, the Report itself contains no definitive conclusion or recommendation to that effect. Rather, its tone suggests that marijuana is more dangerous than the short-term surveys of it would indicate.
There are frequent comparisons between marijuana and alcohol. The Committee believes that if a community is prepared to sanction a drug with potential abuse by a minority, then that drug should be alcohol—largely on the grounds that alcohol is the evil we (the Committee?) know . . .The Report also states that whereas the strengths of alcoholic drinks can be easily standardized, this is not so with marijuana. A main objection to the drug is on this point: who knows what strength, potency or quality is going to turn up in the next reefer? The Committee doesn't, and apparently has not judged marijuana in the context of state surveillance which it did with alcohol.
Mentioning police powers of search under the
The Report is insistent on the need for psychiatric care of drug abusers "drug abuse is more a psychiatric than a pharmacological problem." The recommendations refer to this, suggesting a psychiatric assessment of every drug offender coming before the courts. The overburdened state of mental health facilities and scarcity of qualified personnel already existing render this idea, though it's laudable enough, impractical—at least as things are now. Cross your fingers that the authorities don't interpret the Report's emphasis on psychiatric care as license to put all drug abusers where they put alcoholics now—in mental hospitals.
The Report is inconclusive. It is neither harsh nor progressive. But at least it is only an interim Report. Anyone concerned about the drug situation in New Zealand now has an opportunity to see the way officialdom is thinking. The Committee will call for further submissions, and this would be the time to put forward reasoned arguments in areas that need more thought by the Blake-Palmer Ten.
Cover Design by Bob Brockie; Congress photos on page 3 by Alan Browne; photos page 4 by Helen Whiteford; photos of Brian Talboys on pages 5 & 8 by Richard Silcock, published by courtesy of the PPTA Journal; cartoon on page 7 reprinted from Punch; photo on page 9 by Bob Joiner; photo of Gerard Curry on page 10 by Peter Craven and photo of Peter Rosier by Bob Joiner; photo pages 11 & 13 by Bob Joiner; cartoon page 13 reprinted from Punch; photo page 18 by Murray Vickers; photo of Robert Redford on page 19 published by courtesy of Twentieth-Century Fox and photo of Paul Holmes by John Miller.
If Marshall MacLuhan regards television as a cool medium surely there would be many in New Zealand who would regard the local offering as frigid. Frigid in the sense of being both unresponsive and unattractive, This is hardly surprising when one considers the forced marriage of a domineering British mother to a moronic American father which brought forth a bouncing Kiwi bastard attracting attention about 20% of the time.
At the risk of laboring, the image, there seems little doubt that the child, repulsive though it may have been, was born into an environment which was in parts more than moderately hostile. Nobody of any standing praised it. Quite the reverse, It was seen as a threat by its elders who unfortunately were in a position to attack simply by ignoring its existence.
Yet today the NZBC is no more repulsive than it was and, unlike its elders, is showing some signs of growing up. Maybe it deserves constructive criticism and at the very least it deserves attention. That is what this column in future issues hopes to achieve.
Rather than merely gauge an initial reaction to a particular TV feature in isolation, it is hoped to throw the whole changing panorama into relief of a kind. At the most basic level the NZBC's sense of balance when time-slotting the imported feature in relation to the home grown product can be a study in itself. (Example—Tom Jones following the kid's programmes while Lou and Simon clog up the peak hour). More important however is the comparison of techniques with an eye to the future ( television being that sort of medium—ephemeral but ever present).
New Zealand is a fairly late starter in the television stakes. She has much leeway to make up but anyone who watched the stumblings of the BBC in the early fifties will know how quickly ground can be gained—particularly with the injection of competition. Nor can be it be overemphasised that a lethargic mass of 'viewers' who only view but never see will be the biggest stumbling block to progress. After all we have at the present time the government and press we deserve. In many ways television could prove to be the most productive outlet tor innovation. I hope that the end of the year will provide an opportunity to record that progress has been made.
Ever reviewed a play six weeks after the event? Ever reviewed a Revue six weeks after? The whole thing becomes a melange of pleasurable moments, irrelevant details (such as sitting next to the irrepressible Fred Page—where does that man get his youth from? His wicked sense of humour? His ability to make one feel enjoyment when in his company?), distorted recollection, and memory-blackouts.
And how was I to know, when writing to David Smith to thank him for the show, that the pianist named in the programme was the wrong one and that the marvellous musician was none other than David himself? Rather nice, I should think, to be asked to pass on compliments only to find that they came to rest on one's own doorstep.
The sheer good taste of the show threw me a little. Revue, by its very satirical nature, is usually so unfair. Heads topple, foibles are exploited, weaknesses exposed. All this happened, of course, but it was all grounded in simple truth. Tell it like it is, they must have decided, and so they did. Catholics seemed to be a fairly constant target. I wondered if a Catholic wrote most of the show. Catholics can often be quite trenchant about themselves. A sort of public self-flagellation, I suppose. Irish-Catholics, anyway, and if the second-to worst sketch was something of a bore, maybe Irish-Catholics are a boring lot to make sketches about. I, for one, would find it very difficult to get worked up about it if Ireland were to sink gracefully into the sea, taking its inhabitants with it. It would seem that anybody who is anybody in Ireland has already emigrated, anyway. The worst sketch was set in the papal palace, and the reason for that is all too obvious. Nothing that these talented scriptwriters could dream up could equal the fatuity that has emanated from His Eminence over the last few years. Don't get me wrong—some of my best friends.......
Loved the high-kickers. Deidre Tarrant's cheoreography was first-rate, although a tendency to exploit certain repetitive galvanic movements needs to be watched. The use of back-projection lent a sort of lyrical urgency to the dancing. (Well, I did say "a sort of", and, anyway, why should a reviewer have to explain away the occasional felicitous phrase? I hate picky readers.)
Paul Gnatt, in the Ballet Company's heyday, used to insist that his male dancers dance like men. Deidre Tarrant's men did. I got a little bored with the girls' dog-paddle movement, but I loved them for everything else. So did Fred. Fred and I both loved them. I was a little disappointed with the lack of venom when it came to parodying the Brown and White Minstrels. Some of those steps that go on and on and on! This was one occasion when the dancing was too good for the material that was being satirised.
I went on the second night and was rather surprised, comparing the size with last year, how large the audience was. Word of mouth about a good show sure travels fast. The cast was still having some trouble with their royal "Coronation Street"—a very funny number—but I expect (reviewers have to say this at least once in their column) this was ironed out as the season went on.
What a long way Bill Evans has come. Didn't think him so funny last year (and thought his review of my production earlier in the year even less funny), But he has assumed a respectable control over his material and, what is more important, his audience. Probably the best in it, (Of course I hate saying it. Wouldn't you hate being the victim of callow comment? But fair's fair, I always say. What do you always say?).
You have guessed it all right, you clever lot. I am writing this without the aid of a programme. That's why I can't put a name to all that solo stuff with the guitar, even though the name will come back to me in the dark reaches of the night, and even though I thought it all of an extraordinarily high calibre. The mood that was created! Hardly seems nice to suggest that we were treated to exactly one item too many.
Would have liked to see more of David. He is a funny chap, even though he elects to stay within a fairly narrow range of comedy. He was certainly the best thing in In View Of The Circumstances. Not being a star, I suppose he received less rehearsal than the others, and didn't have His Own Thing completely laundered out of him.
How do I know that it is the best review I have seen in some time? Because I have been in lots of reviews, that's why, and I have seen lots of them, that's why, and even if the finale was bad, it wasn't as excruciatingly bad as so many finales can be (last year's for instance).
What a refreshing change to go to a show where the cast appeared to like the people they were playing to, where the entertainment of us, not themselves, was of primary importance. If the girls this year weren't, all in all, as good as the boys, that's how it goes some years, Although the little Chinese girl could have stepped right out of the Rolf Harris chorus line. For all I know, she did. That's the way it goes—anyone else steps out of line, and they've had it. This may not be a good review, but it's a hell of a lot of fun to write. And it's making me pathologically happy (and who doesn't enjoy their manic phases?) causing all this confusion about review and revue and review.
I missed the nude scene. I blinked rapidly in preparation, getting, as it were, my blinkers out of the way, but what with some crucial mis-timing by the cast, I flunked the course. Generally, though, the timing (oh, how subtly I return to the raison d'etre for this article!) was of a high order. High caliber, Professional standard, Whatever phrase it is that reviewers use to describe something that was pretty good. Felicitous would be a good word, but I've used it higher up.
Yes, dear hearts, those of you who stayed at home missed a good show. Fred and I both thought it a good show. And I would take his opinion before I took my own. Come to think of it, why wasn't he asked to write this review? He's a writty duck.
I hope the show was well received when it went down South, and that everyone had a good time. They deserved it. So let's all stand on our seats and cheer David Smith and his writers and his actors and his dancers and his musicians and that clever Bill Turner in the lighting box, but, most of all, let's cheer David Smith.
Christmas Revue was one of the best student productions we have seen at this University in a number of years. Even more startling than the outstanding quality of the production, however, was the fact that the show even appeared at all. When we heard, a week before the first performance that relations between the Producer of Revue, Dave Smith, and the President and Committee members of the Drama Society were such that the Committee had not even made booking arrangements for the show, we asked Bill Evans, a member of the cast of Revue and a former Drama Club Committee member, to comment:
That Dave Smith, who produced the Drama Society's successful Christmas Revue last year, should have been interested in calling a Special General Meeting of the Society in an attempt to unseat the Executive Committee would be an unusual occurrence, one might think. It may not seem so extraordinary when one is familiar with the Committee.
When the Drama Society was the Drama Club, I was a Committee member for about four or five weeks. That Committee was elected to office during rehearsals for All's Well That Ends Well, the first major production last year. After the show finished, Dick Johnstone, the play's producer, told the Committee that he was dissatisfied with the kind of help it had given and that he wanted to discuss these feelings in public before a meeting of members. I was keen and pushed this idea, because his criticisms were largely just and should have been heard. There was an informal meeting at the old Downstage, and following this an SGM was called, during which a new Committee came into office and the Drama Club became the Drama Society.
Useful criticisms were made to start with and, as some old committee members were reluctant to admit them, the proponents of reform became more determined and less reasonable. Sides seemed to be drawn up, the old Committee was asked to resign (or perhaps directed, I forget now), and new elections were held. The more 'progressive' members of the meeting became the leaders, as the majority there wished. Greater activity and more efficiency were expected to result from a new system of portfolio memberships of the Committee. A member of the University staff was to be invited to join the committee, play-readings and poetry-readings were to be held, the Theatre used more often and Committee members were to be committed and responsible.
I was glad to get off the Committee, as I'd found it too time-consuming, but I didn't agree with everything the new Committee proposed but still, it was only fair to let them prove themselves. After all, by their fruits etc.
Now, it is true that few on the Committee had had previous experience, and true that the last two terms are not fruitful times for student activity, and it does indeed take a while for any group to find their feet; but this Committee had so much enthusiasm going for it and so much confidence in itself (they had declared their intention of devoting all the time necessary to accomplish things properly) that it was not unfair to expect some activity to justify this, even if on a modest scale to start with.
To my mind, the Committee has failed to justify its existence. The first play they decided to present was After The Rain. I really don't know how most aspects of the production went. The publicity for the play, however, was so bad that even the
Elric Hooper, a New Zealander who is now a successful actor overseas, was back in New Zealand in the latter part of the year. He was invited to Victoria by the Drama Society (which was prompted by the English Department to invite him), and while here he gave lectures on World Theatre and classes in acting. You probably didn't hear about the acting classes, no matter how interested you might have been. Tim Groser, the Committee member responsible for the Members' Newsletter, wasn't able to send one out in time as he was busy working on a play for Downstage A note was sent round to Stage 1 and 2 English classes, however, and people who could attend the course put up their hands Fewer actually came to the course than those who had earlier indicated they would attend and, of those who did attend, some dropped out during it. Mr Hooper's work was of a high standard, end he deserved better treatment than this.
The Committee seems naturally to measure success in terms of money. The first Newsletter they issued was crammed with information on their losses and profits. Yet I think that the fact that they paid out $160 (after a threat of court action) merely to duplicate scripts for their production After the Rain shows that this concern with money was less the sign of an assured handling of accounts, than of an effort to
Now I don't, and never did, think that the Drama Club Committee I was on was perfect. I do think that it was better than the present one, and would have handled the year better in every way. It was planning, and had actually held, activities for the whole membership such as discussion evenings, classes and play readings. As far as I am aware, the present Committee has never had a discussion evening, and has mounted only one play reading, involving three members of the committee. Some members of the Committee have been absorbed in activity at Downstage. Six productions there at least have been graced by the presence of committee members like Tim Groser, Felicity Day, Alick Shaw and John Banas and Society President Paul Holmes.
When Dick Johnstone worked with the Club he was discontented with the old Committee. As I understand it he often found it disorganised, inefficient, even irresponsible. When Dave Smith produced Christmas Revue at the end of last year, he found the new Committee to be disorganized, inefficient and irresponsible—and apathetic and hostile as well.
There were many irritating little things—such as the Committee's failure to arrange bookings with the DIC, leaving the Producer to find a band, and lousing up the bookings in Nelson, where the show went on tour after the Wellington performances. But before the show, Society President Paul Holmes told Dave Smith that he believed Dave was only connected with Christmas Revue "for what he could get out of it", and that he (Holmes) didn't give a damn if the show never opened. Aside from the offensiveness of Holmes' attitude, this is a ridiculously irresponsible attitude toward a show with a budget of $500-600.
The Drama Society Committee need not have made such a mess of everything. If they had co-opted a member of the University staff onto the Committee (which is what they agreed to at the SGM. and what the members directed them to do) their enthusiasm could have been channelled more constructively, they may not have been so over-confident, even arrogant. In a year when Victoria is to be the host University for Arts Festival, and considering the importance of drama at Arts Festival, the Drama Society and the student body as a whole should not wish to see an incompetent committee remain in office. Let me make it clear that I think well of most of the Committee members, some of whom have valuable contributions to make. Under a strong President and working with a University Staff member (if one can be found who is willing to do the job) the Drama Society could have a highly successful year.
There is a new breed of western in town Bonnie and Clyde (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (set about The Wild Hunch (set Butch is a charming talc about a couple of hapless hoodlums, but with The Wild Bunch Sam Peckinpah has made the most violent and gory gun-fighting film you will ever want to sec.
It opens and closes on a couple of magnificently filmed bloodbaths and in between there are enough scenes of torture, callous passion (never complete without popping bubs) and mutilated ambushers to turn off the most dedicated violence voyeur. The tension in watching this madness should not be underestimated. When the smoke cleared alter the final gun fight, the audience were laughing out of pure relief and not at the bloody bodies strewn over the square. Despite this deliberate anti-romanticism—rather like using a Gatling to kill a gnat—the film has a curious sentimentality all its own. There is a grim pride and a certain golden wash of nostalgia for "them good old days", (shown in flashback and just as bloody ). The Bunch, led by William Molden and Ernest Borgnine, have a kind of freedom from ideological commitment which means they are independent marauders with an eye for the main chance), they have camaraderie of a sort ("if you can't stick with a man then you're some kind of animal"), and they carry with them their own sense of imminent extinction. Molden realises that the age for their kind of violence is passing: "We gotta think beyond guns, Them days is going last ..." But he knows equally well that his habits have become inflexible and that he must die as he has lived. Me admits with gritty pride: "I wouldn't have it any other way."
There is an important contrasting midsection set in a Mexican village which is gently and lyrically photographed, The change to greens and golds in the colouring, the languor of the cutting and the plaintive Mexican love song on the soundtrack (remarkably like the Maori) are background to another Peckinpah thesis about the deceptive innocence of children. Earlier we were shown the town children as innocent murderers of animal and insect life who can watch, imitate and do cruelty without relating to the reality of the suffering. At the fiesta, the two meanest members of the Hunch become playful and childlike. An old Mexican watches and mumbles something to the effect that all men want to be children at heart, perhaps too much so. Thus making excuses for "the innocence of babes" and "they know not what they do" is a dangerous and apathetic misreading of reality. But the Bunch must live through their cycle of pain and pride like on extinct breed of animal. At the end Robert Ryan, the lone leftover, joins another more wretched local gang drawling resignedly. "It ain't what it used to be but it'll do". Brutality and cold-eyed sentimentality are inseparable.
The certainty of death for the main characters also underlies the wryly comic tragedy Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid (George Roy Hill. Bonnie and Clyde is an obvious godfather to this film for we again have a pair of innocents, short of alternatives to their way of life, being nudged by circumstances into following an inevitably fatal course. They are only dimly aware of this, even less aware of their reputation as vicious outlaws (after all, they are such nice guys), and seem to live in perpetual wonderment at the skill and persistence of their pursuers.
Violence is relatively low key, after the Wild Bunch, except for one scene where the two shoot down a small band of Bolivian bandits. They fall in slow motion amid huge clouds of dust with a single scream on the soundtrack. Ironically, this happens on their first attempt at going straight and is the first time Butch has shot anyone. They were payroll guards to the loot the bandits were sharing. "We've tried going straight. What do we do now?". Good question. The answer is to keep running from those guardians of the good society who intend to kill off the two wisecracking outlaws we have come to like so much. But the goodnatured springtime of this charming trio, (not to forget a fine performance by Katherine Ross as Etta Place. Sundance's girlfriend), is pointedly evanescent. The hard truth is spoken by an old but sympathy sheriff: "You're gonna die bloody and the only thing you can do is pick when, "But that nasty inevitability is sweetened by such
Editors note: Nevil Gibson and Catherine de la Roche placed The Wild Bunch among the best films of The Dominion and The Listener. Does anyone, like me, feel that The Wild Bunch was utter rubbish? In terms of script, photography, the performances of the leading actors, and theme music. Butch Cassidy the Sundance Kid and the Leone movies (A Fistful of Dollars, A Few Dollars More. The Good, the Bad & the Ugly etc) were infinitely superior. The Wild Bunch, like Belle da Jour, was one of those films that everyone 'just has to sec". Once you've seen it, an Emperor's clothes neurosis sets in: 'everyone else is raving about it so maybe it's just me'. If you find you disagree with what Salient's reviewers have to say, please don't hesitate to write to me to express your opinion.
Mrs Mary McDermott of Johnsonville was "sickened and disgusted" when she "glanced at a current issue of Masskerade 69 which accidentally came into my hands". She considered that the magazine was obscene, blasphemous and sacriligeous, "Its depraved contents", Mrs McDermott said, "would make Satan blush with shame".
Mrs McDermott was just one of the many people who wrote to a local newspaper about Masskerade 69. Eventually, the magazine was referred to the Indecent Publications Tribunal—by, of all bodies, the Professorial Board of Massey University. This action—which must have damaged student-staff relations at Massey—is not wholly inexplicable. Whereas reactionaries such as K.B. O'Brien and I.D. Campbell are sufficiently rare at Victoria for some progressive action to be taken here from time to time, the Massey academic staff is almost completely without sympathy for the student point of view.
Which is not to suggest that the behaviour of student officials at Massey is in any way calculated to further the interests of students through other than trilling "incremental reforms', Massey student politicians have adopted a posture of obeisance vis-a-vis the administration and academic stall to the point that one wonders how any of them manage to communicate their existence to the Council and the Professorial Board, let alone an) "demands'. The Masskerade debacle was, therefore, interesting as much for the light it threw on staff-student relations at Massey as for any insights it gave into the workings of the Indecent Publications Tribunal.
Massey students were represented at the Tribunal hearing by Greg Taylor, immediate past-President of the Students' Association, and Robert Anderson, President since July. Taylor told the Tribunal that while three censors—a clergyman, a housewife and a lawyer—had considered material for Masskerade, their power of veto was 'unfortunately not conveyed to them' 'On many occasions their opinions were listened to but not followed, but in some instances they were followed." said Taylor. While sellers of the magazine were instructed not to sell copies to school pupils, Taylor said he "wouldn't be surprised if a considerable number of copies were found in the hands of secondary school students". Taylor also said that, in his opinion, the 3,000 unsold copies of Masskerade held by the Massey Students" Association should not be sold even if the Tribunal did not declare the magazine to be indecent.
It is difficult to see how Taylor's evidence could have done other than prejudice the case of the Students" Association. Robert Anderson was a little more positive when he came to give evidence, but neither he nor Taylor could be said to have provided a justification—however superficial—for the publication of a capping magazine in any form. Anderson told the Tribunal that "steps are being taken to ensure adequate censorship of the magazine in the future." Such statements were a tacit concession of the Prosecution's contention that some of the material in Masskerade should not have been published.
In its decision, the Tribunal 'declared that Masskerade 69 was "indecent in the hands of people under the age of 17 years." The Tribunal's impression of the magazine was one of "barely relieved vulgarity." "In word and in picture, its content is coarse in conception and crude in expression. Its frequent resort to the subject of sex as a prop for its humor, the tactless attacks on religious form and attitudes, and a series of jokes involving disease, bestiality and racial prejudice undoubtedly make this a magazine which offends against the normal standard of propriety and good taste."
All of which was fair enough. Masskerade 69 was as worthless a publication as the magazine had been in any previous year. While it is the best-selling capping magazine in New Zealand. Masskerade is that in which one can most reliably expect to find a complete dearth of humour—let alone satirical content of any merit whatsoever. Students here have been fortunate in that the satirical and humorous content of Victoria's Cappicade has, in recent years at least, attained quite a high standard. Cappicade profits, from Masskerade profits, suitably enough, have been used to pay for a sports centre.
The 'Prosecution sought in its case to establish "some standards to which capping magazines must conform," The Tribunal admitted that, while its judgement would "provide a guide to acceptable standards", any decision it might make "cannot forestall massive distribution of another magazine and no decision, subsequent to distribution, can recall the copies sold." So the capping magazines are safe. Robert Anderson is still President at Massey. There is not the slightest suggestion that Masskerade 70 will be any more worthwhile a publication than any of its predecessors. There's got to be a message in this somewhere.