Opinions Summarized

Our intention was to compile and publish in this issue a symposium of representative opinion on "Salient." With this in view, we interviewed Brookie and a few others, and sent a note to four members of the staff, five students of the Arts Faculty, four of Science and seven of Law and Commerce. This note asked for a statement in not more than 100 words of (a) their opinion of this year's "Salient." and (b) any suggestions for future improvement.

There were one or two defaulters. The people selected were almost entirely subscribers of "Salient." and were representative of the different branches of College life. Actually we would have had justification for approaching some non-subscribers in whom we would expect the most hostile critics of "Salient." and our case would have been strengthened by the question of compulsory subscription.

We have before us the results of these quest ions, and at the outset we would like to congratulate the regular staff of "Salient" on the results. Most of the paper's readers who are best known in the College appear to be well satisfied with most features of it; in fact, some opinions gave no suggestions at all for future improvement. We intended to publish opinions exactly as received, even to doubtful grammar (alas, writing cannot be reproduced). However, only two kept to the 100 word limit, and we would have had to publish in all 2,700 words, requiring all the front page.

We have decided, in view of the quantity of other material worthy of publication, and in view of the lack of anything of critical value in many of the contributions, to take the drastic step of summarising them. Apart from what is on the front page, we cannot publish more than abstracts—in doing so we have realised the impossibility of thus expressing every shade of opinion. We realise that in doing this we are laying ourselves open to a charge of bias—accordingly the letters will be handed over to the permanent staff to be used as they think fit. The collection of the replies was in the hands of Mr. Ongley, and the summary has unavoidably been made without his knowledge, the editor accepting complete responsibility for the final article.