God Save Our "Smad"!
Being A Highly Personal Attack on the Editors of that Weil-Known Literary Flop - the "Peoples Press".
How Much Longer we ask is this profligate scoundrel, this Sellers, to be permitted to despoil the fair and innocent mind of Victoria College Students (we refer in particular to Mr. Aimers) with the foul mass of Tarsusian excrement he presumably terms literature. With the body of a man and the mind of a mischievous precocious child this moron Sellers, arm in arm with the cretin Aimers, stalks through the paths of this, our fair Victoria, contaminating and revolting all he touches.
How Long we cry, how long before the punishment, so richly deserved, seizes this modern literary Borgia and forces him to submit to the ignoble degradation that for centuries past has been issued to men of his revolting type . . . . followers of Hitler's Policy will know what we mean.
Smad Has Been Weak This Year. But has Mr. Aimers done anything to prevent it? Has Mr. Aimers contributed one single article this year? Mr. Aimers was a sub-editor of the paper he so savagely attacks last year, and, we are told, was offered the editorship. Why did he refuse? Laziness? Or does he prefer to criticize?
(We leave Mr. Sellers out of this; it is, we feel, unnecessary to point out that he is notorious throughout the 'Varsity as a mere mass of incompetent destructive criticism).
Smad Has Been Weak - Again We Say it. But Smad portrays student affairs. What is the inference?
The man Sellers states in his "letter" to Smad that "We know several students possessing some talent that have been denied expression in your columns". Can this be the cry of disappointed authorship? Or do we malign the man in thinking that he would have the energy to contribute to "Smad"?
May We Say in Conclusion that it would be a great pity should Smad cease to exist. Every university should have its rag. We feel confident that with a keen editor in charge, and supported by the enthusiastic co-operation of the college as a whole, a new Smad will arise, phoenix-like, from the ashes of the old, a bigger, better and brighter Smad, even (dare we whisper it?) occasionally exalted by the contributions of those two honourable men, Messrs. Sellers and Aimers.
Mr. Mcglynn Speaks.
The reason for articles not forthcoming is not that students have not the ability to write or to think, but due to the inherent laziness of human nature. A student will swot for an exam because there is an end to gain and the means of acquiring that end are obvious to all. But if the effort is left entirely to ones own initiative most of us would, I am afraid, never settle down to work. What we want is a scheme whereby Smad indicates exactly what it wants on various topics. A list of suitable subjects should stimulate thought, and would encourage students to express themselves on those subjects. Once the craze has started it would soon become a tradition. I certainly do not think that Smad should be discontinued. To do so would be a superficial solution of the matter - cutting off your nose to please Mr. Seller's face. Have you ever heard people saying of a Wednesday "Smad is out tonight". The advent is eagerly looked forward to even though they know it is "only a rag", and its abrupt demise would have serious repercussions on 'Varsity life. There is little enough to hold the 'Varsity people together as it is, but if Smad goes there will be still less, and we should become more than ever "a glorified night school". I have spoken.
R. J. Stanford.
T. J. McGlynn.
Chief Reporters, "Smad".