Right up Led Zepplin

Could you please locate the two fuckwits who criticised Led Zepplin in this week's Salient, and, placing one in each hand, proceed to ram them up the nearest camel's bum, or, failing that, lash them to a migrating albatross. Feel free to exercise some initiative in this matter as such animals may not be at hand.

Obviously the Salient staff would have gagged and blanched, as did all other students, at the comments of these so-called record reviewers, who suggested that Led Zepplin had not produced "quality material". I suggest that the two jerks in question be relocated in the Animal Kingdom to somewhere alongside maggots and slugs for their performance unless of course, they print an apology in vivid colours on the front page of next week's Salient. But they had better hurry for already I see hostile crowds of students milling in the cafe, crying for their blood and swinging ropes above their heads.

Group Vid

I have never been so shocked or surprised as when I was innocently browning through Salient last week, and to my dismay discovered a blatant advertisement for Exosss Groops. I feel it is my duly to warn citizens about this fiendish plot emanating from the diabolical Foundation of Druidic Practices.

Let me relate to you the immense damage E.G. can cause to unsuspecting lives. Fred X? was a patriotic, short haired, apple pie eating, peanut slicer, who (rather naively) tried E.G. Within a year he was reduced to a blood spattered pulp of splintered bone and crushed flesh, muttering as he died "Exosss Groops did this to me!"

Some critics have claimed that his death was entirely due to a steam roller which (coincidentally) ran over him at the exact time he died. However we have no reason to believe that he would not have undergone spontaneous implosion had the afore-mentioned steam roller had been nowhere in sight.

The same critics have also given evidence that his last words were "EEEE-YAAGH" (in falsetto). However we consider this entirely irrelevant and are sure that had he actually spoken, this is what he would have said.

So once again we give our most empassioned plea for people to avoid getting hooked on Exosss Groops.

God in the Classroom

I read with crowing remorse your article on religion in schools. Once a devout Christian, I have decided to turn Quisling and betray my ex-comrades in the name of justice. (I could have said 'turn Judas' but I've renounced that way of thinking completely). No longer can I stand idly by and watch the public being so vilely and deliberately misled.

Here's the bombshell. Religious instruction in schools is just a decoy!! The churches know damn well that it has very' little effect, but it is extremely easy for the layman to spot, and it draws the fire away from the main action. Which is where? In the classroom, of course. You know, where they teach maths, and science, and French and geography, and all that. This is where the sinister cancer is really taking hold, and no-one's doing a thing to stop it.

You see, some of these teachers, at all levels, are Christians, and they're subtly teaching their subjects from a Christian point of view. "But wait a minute", I hear you cry, "how could they possibly teach maths and science christianly, they're not religious subjects — or anti-religious. They're just non-religious." You may further declare, sir, being something of an academic yourself, that these sciences are merely systems of beliefs — I mean theories, (beliefs is such a damnably 'religious' word), which are coherent and consistent within a framework created by those theories in the first place. Well these Christian teachers seem to believe that too, (probably in an effort to appear sincere) but they carry it to some ominous conclusions which I won't repeat here for fear of propagating them.

However, sir, the most diabolically ominous point of all, is that these Christian teachers have learned to teach from their basic life philosophy in exactly the same way as ordinary secular teachers do, which makes them almost impossible to spot.

I read Jack Mulheron's letter, and although he is concerned mainly with the Religious Instruction front that the churches are keeping up, I sense he is coming dangerously (for 'them') close to discovering the truth as I have laid it out here, — if he has not already done so.

Now that the game is up, I hope I have earned myself some leniency by this last minute conversion ... I mean enlightenment ... I mean ... oh shit ...

The Waikato Experience

I was interested to read Jonathan Scott's article about renewed legal activities at Waikato University.

As an early recipient of a defamation writ from Professor John Jensen I would not like those interested to forget the equally litigious Professor Theo Roy. Where are his writs now?

And the shoddy episode you report, of the University Libraran removing some of my "Nexus" covers from an exhibition, if distinctly in the Waikato tradition: after all, the Vice-Chancellor once sent a personal letter to each student likening "Nexus" to Hitler's "Der Sturmer" and to Stalin's "Pravda".

My parting words on this sordid business: that Jensen and Roy are undoubtedly the biggest (withdrawn on legal advice) in the university world, and that Waikato University ought to have remained an experimental farm.

No Talent in Radio Active

Who is the Radio Active talent scout? He or She needs his/her head read!

Another Silly Letter

My friend/collegue Pope John XX of Palmerston North has been making his impact felt around our northern neighbour by enlightening those at Massey concerning the great Weetbix heresies and Super Budgerigar. I have known Pope John XX for some time, in fact I held his job /employment/pastime for a while way back in the 1800s. I don't envy him in the slightest.

However, my good sir, we will not be taken in by his ravings. Weetbix will never become heretical at Victoria (I'll see to that), and as for the Reunification Church......

It may interest you to know that we have a man/mouse all set and ready to take over the aforementioned person's job here in my laboratory. All we need are a few more animo acids, and we will have our very own ... Pope John XXX (Mk 1).

I trust this will/won't clear up the letters appearing in the National Students' Issue on page 17.

page 19

A Young Nat Looking for an Answer

About two months ago I was walking up to the library when there in flourescent paint was the following slogan, "Toby plays Dixie on his cock". Are the Maoists at it again, if so what does it mean? And who is Toby?

A Long Hoot in the Dark

The most original letter ever sent to Salient? I must make some sort of effort. Druids I've done, Aardvarks I've done. There is, of course, the Pythagoras owl. I began a doggerel on this owl, but in the intellectual process the owl disappeared. Nevertheless, the poem is still entitled "The Pythagoras Owl". It's a ballad in sentimental style. Fortunately an allegory emerged, for the poem in itself means nothing.

Now, in the shadow of the mighty Don
The English climbed the tree
And Captain Smith, on a caravel
Sailed the Carib Sea.

Buckos! Buckos! Buckos, he cried
I see a land to claim.
Twill smash the power of the mighty Don,
And rift the Spanish Main!

The captain buckled on sabres two
and strode the fo'c's'le deck.
Steer well the ship, me bucks, he cries
Of on the reef we'll wreck!
And straight he drove the caravel
(Tho' destiny blew her there)
To shore, but hove ere they would ground,
And now the beach saw clear.

But this is strange! And wherefore here
Amid the sighing sea,
Should plants and paths, and pleasant gardens,
planned, appear to me?

Well, you can guess the rest. The captain goes ashore and finds that a party before him has just claimed the land for Spain. He meets the Don and and accuses him of unscrupulous practice regarding the annexation of inhabited lands.

"Blood for the blood! The words cut deep!"
"But, man, 'twould not be so.
Unless the words were barbed by truth.
And easily in did go."

They fight for truth, but none will win
For truth's in neither man ...

The captain forces his rival to cede the land, unconditionally to the English, and leave.
Now Captain Smith re-turned his ship
Into the warm Gulf Stream.
And how the canvas cracked and sang
As he raced to build his dream!

But King Charles thinks the land is worthless, and gives it as a present to his youngest
daughter, aged 6. When she comes of age she
leaves to 'trace the sun'. The island is barren
and deserted, although she had heard that it
was a paradise. 'Where are They gone?'

—A sailor now, turned her face to the sea,
And she looked west into the sun
And nothing saw but sea.
The spray stung hard, the cold stole strength,
The sea increased in rage,
And Sarah looked, and all she saw,
Was the sweep of the swirling sea.

Commenting on our own verse, it seems that the expected rhyme has been broken, to accentuate the feeling of disappointment and unease.

'Into the sea?! That's near enough.
Why search beyond your eyes?'

Beyond the sea lie the American Colonies. And there we end. But back to the Owl, this time, dispassionately. (PYTH 101 2/2 Mon Wed 3-4, 3 cred text: The Pythagoras Owl Story), There it is! And with this grasp of philosophy can now turn to actual consideration of rise of owl and must show that diaspora never connect. With all pops in selves but if analogy consid. in conjunct, that as philos, its distincts (ie. heterogen. forces) must be intensified, if nt perist as regards logic of reason in nat. (eg. last cent.) still signif. of order appreciated by Greeks of us? (BD 87095/H365 S) now expl. by taking int. functs. and deriving complications dealt with, yet such det. show disc leading to world excl. all mores yet relevant as hypoth and symbiotic, but productive and generated from constraints, as root of various approaches in rational functions leading to diverg, attitudes in sit. (From lecture notes).

But the Owl being wise may be permitted to write its own analysis. Asked for wisdom it volunteered: Dharma ksetre, kuruksetre, samaveta, yuyutsavah mamakah pandavas caiva kim akurvata, Sanjaya? En Archei en ho logus kai ho logus en pros ton theou kai Theos en ho logus. Berashith bara elohim ath ha-shamaim we'ath haerets.

"Very Good" said Oscar Wilde. "Three dead languages always inspire confidence, even in Owls. Owls are popular because they combine the maximum of temptation with the minimum of possibility."

The nymph came to me, and said
Fear not, O mighty Earth-Shaker
You have scattered the fleet, yet

There is one, a man, O Odysseus, son of Laertes, Who has wandered for ten long years, always seeking Ithaka and etc ... in very bad translation. We now meet Wotan who once hanged himself on the Ash, Yggdrasil, as a pre-requisite for terms, (ie. for knowledge, if you didn't see any connection). Beware Ragnarok, The Nordic-Final Day. Nothing else is to be compared to it. New Wave! He changed his name and wrote "Take this course and fail it". He then turned to science, but said, "The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle destroys my Faith every time." Thank God for the long summer holidays! People began to worship the Pythagoras Owl. "Unless you come to God via me" says the owl, "you cannot succeed — like trying to get to Te Anau Road, but not via Rosencath."

"But you Can get to Te Anau Road, but not via Rosencath."

"But the buses never say that" said the owl puzzled, and died of Chagrin.

G. Milbum.

Pornography and Art

Costa Botes, who wrote in defence of "Immoral Tales" sounds like a typical arty fart wanker. Sure, the film was made in style but when you're looking at the merits of a particular film, it should be the ideas which decide whether or not a film is worthwhile.

In his reply Costa Botes says that the film is explained by the maxim put at the beginning which was: "However enjovable love may be, it is enjoyed more for the ways it manifests itself than for itself alone." Well, the manifestations which are shown in the film are bloody one-sided and designed to provide fuck all enjoyment for the women present. It is the enactment of one man's private fantasies and does not even attempt to make any concessions to the women in the audience who might not be able to relate to these.

In every scene, there had to be some reminder of male superiority, from the young girl who gave her cousin a blow job while he didn't even bother to satisfy her, to the girl fucking cucumbers to the lesbian Countess who was arrested by an Army Officer, into whose arms her former lover then fell.

There were countless shots of women's bodies from every conceivable angle but as for men, we saw only one penis for two seconds and it was limp anyway.

If the film had done as it promised and shown a representative selection of sexual encounters, then it might have been interesting and worthwhile. As it was, the film merely pandered to male fantasies (and I know a lot of men who didn't get into it anyway) by exploiting women as sexual objects while failing to do anything similar in reverse. We were bored out of our minds and disgusted by the film's chauvinism towards women. As well as being a waste of time and money, that sort of thing is enough to put you off sex for life.

Costa Botes and his "Immoral Tales" groupies are welcome to it.

Grammar Pedant

I feel obliged to write to your elegant journal, in defense of certain fundamental standards of English syntax. I refer, sir, to a review in your pages, last week of the American "movie", "Mean Streets".

Perhaps I should pardon Mr Costa Botes, because as I suspect from his name, his native tongue may not be English. However in order that certain standards of our language be upheld, I must respectfully ask him, and your good self, never to use a preposition to conclude a sentence with.

Right up the left

I am writing to you about the formation of this "Progressive Students' Alliance". I find it odd that one of the professed aims of this club, is to "...fight right-wing attacks at SRCs".

Presumably by right-wing attacks this group of well-meaning young people are referring to Andrew Tees and his crowd. It is paradoxical therefore that the very same paragon of conservatism, is in fact a member. I realise that it is the association's policy to encourage a rather wide range of progressive political beliefs, however it seems like inviting the captain of a whaling ship to the Annual General Meeting of the Greenpeace Foundation.

While I admire the democratic principles upheld by the Alliance, I do think that in this case, it is a little self defeating,