All Letters Submitted For Publication Must Be Signed With The Writer's Own Name. No Pseudonyms Will Be Accepted Save In Exceptional Circumstances.

Pretty's ring

Sir,—In publishing a second article by Mr. Ron Pretty on Wagner's opera-cycle The Ring, Salient 23 is perpetuating an error begun by his first article—aborgation of the critic's function. Any would-be reviewer should regard his task as the arousal of critical perception. He may theorize, question, rant, shatter social norms and indulge in iconociasm, provided the dullard perusing it comes away with some intellectual stimulus How is this achieved? By scintillating prose and lucid argument. Mr. Pretty's myopic vision includes no such objectives. His prose is muddled and laborious, rumbling along like an elderly bassoon stuck on A flat, and with as much grace as a tuba. One prize example occurs in his first review—the heroine's "state of expectancy". After wondering whether public transport was unusually erratic in those days, one realises that in fact the woman was pregnant. Critical remarks and argument? Mr. Pretty is unaware of their existence. The whole review reads very much like the work of a rather below-average third-former.

Appalling as these defects are, Mr. Pretty goes on to commit a erine unpardonable in circles concerned with a high standard of criticism. Two-thirds of his review (the plot synopsis) is cribbed without acknowledgment from the comprehensive booklet supplied with every record-set. This booklet is amazingly detailed. It contains the original German with an excellent translation in English printed above. Every act, every scene has the setting described, along with detailed stage directions for all the characters. Mr. Pretty must revise his opinion of himself. Far from being a second-rate reviewer, he is the unashamed plagiarist.

parking

Sir,—It's 11.30 a.m. on Wednesday morning and I've just spent 30 fruitless minutes driving around looking for a parking space on or near (within ¼ mile) of the campus—Sir, not a proverbial sausage of space to be had—excepting of course for the academic stall car park where there are no less than 66 clear spaces—which one is refused permission to park in: short of

(1)	illegally parking on public roads
(2)	walking ½ mile to the campus
(3)	disregarding the traffic wardens instructions and parking in staff spaces.

It seems impossible to obtain adequate room to park: It's fine if you are able to arrive at 8 a.m., but for many (part-timers outer-suburbs residents. etc.) it is not practical. With the advent of finals and the consequent practices of time saving—bringing parents' cars instead of using the slower public transport, etc., I can see this situation rapidly deteriorating and think that it's high time the administration did something about facing up to the situation in a practical manner such as re-allocating staff parking areas to students until finals are over. Too often, do we hear excuses of "campus growing pains" and "what's wrong with their legs?" from the administration.

Today the fact that most students have cars, or access to them does not seem to have got through to the administration. Let's have some realistic action.

M.S.A — Eade

Sir,—With reference to John Eade's statement in Salient Issue No. 32. Sept. 24. 1969. I wish to make the following reply.

• I was informed by the past President of the M.S.A., Mr. J. T. Nuek. that he and the Secretary attended the meetings of th International Affairs Sub-Committee on two occasions. On both these occasions they found that

(a)	they were present on their own accord and they did not attend these meeting as representatives of MS A. In addition to that they found that discussion concerning M.S.A. was not on the agenda although probably they could have brought the matter up themselves.
(b)	My point about "consultation" can be best expressed by the following example. This was an interview between some committee members of M.S.A. and "Salient" Editor, Roger Wilde.

The interview was an attempt on his part, to hear the opinion of the M.S.A on on its aims and its relations with the M.S.S.A. This interview provided the M.S.A. with the opportunity to put forward its case, and to eradicate some of the false impressions which had been gained, as a result of misrepresentation.

• It is a wonder that John Eade in his capacity as International Affairs Officer failed to provide the M.S.A. with a similar opportunity when there was a crying need for it. Further, he has failed to consult the M.S.A. on important matters concerning it. Was he unaware of its existence? Or did he wilfully choose to ignore if.

• The "clubhouse" was not given for the exclusive use of the M.S.A.

The clubhouse at No. 3 McKcnxie Terrace does not belong to M.S.A. In fact, it is called "The Malaysia House" to distinguish it from "Clubhouse" as the latter can be misleading. The M.S.A. acts in the capacity of a caretaker. It should be remembered that All Malaysians and their friends, whether members of the M.S.A. or not are entitled to use the Malaysia House.

Gazette

Sir,—Has anyone noticed the amusing bit of double-think in the latest Administration handout? "Concerned about placating the public, universities attempt to present themselves as an ally to all special interest bodies, they help insurance agents pass examinations to become licensed underwriters ..." runs the article on the back page in praise of "pure research". On page five of the "Gazette" you find the proud announcement that "twelve members of the faculty gave papers at a recent insurance executives' course at the University from August 18-20". More Socialist Club burnings, I suppose?

Watch out

A student at this University was recently fined a total of $200 on a charge of possession of the narcotic cannabis, commonly known as pot. There was no suggestion that the student concerned had been smoking the substance recently In fact he said that at the insistence of friends he had tried pot three or four times in the past. It had absolutely no effect on any of these occasions and so he had announced periodically since then that "It wasn't worth It", and had not attempted to procure any. The circumstances leading up to the charge were outlined by the student as follows The student had accepted a small quantity of the drug from a friend for safe keeping—there was no intention of his consuming the drug, or any portion of it himself—and had left a jacket containing microscopic traces of the drug in the possession of a friend. The police came into possession of the jacket, the traces were discovered and the student was charged with possession of the drug. It should be stressed that the cannabis was never owned by the student charged, nor did he intend to use it, nor was it in his possession when traces of it were discovered.

However, Mr. B. Scully. SM., saw fit to impose a fine of $200. Cannabis possessors and their friends, watch out

(Name witheld by request.—Ed.)