"Our Culture Grows Apace" Protests Weir House Resident

There are always some folk who judge from outward appearances and regard Weir House merely as an institution for the feeding and accommodation of a band of young Varsity louts. To them it may come as a shock to hear that great cultural and intellectual activity goes on within its walls. Lately, indeed, there has occurred in Weir a miniature Renaissance—a flowering of the mind manifested in diverse creative activities from music to literature.

Poesy, for instance, ia flourishing. Thoughts and yearnings, hitherto concealed in silence, have been expressed in verse (chiefly blank or free) and may yet reach the public in the form of an "Anthology of Weir House Poetry" which one of the poets is editing.

Music, too, has a large following, including pianists, singers, bugle and guitar players. In its specially creative aspect, musical harmony is being explored by a few residents, one of whom is producing a song hit.

And not merely the arts, but intellectual agitation also is a sport of Weir House minds. World affairs are closely followed in the common-room newspapers and on the radio. The dining-table and evening suppers provide excellent opportunities (not always taken) for the exercise of wit and dialectic.

A now established feature of Weir House life is the Sunday evening discussion which is held weekly in the common-room during the winter term. The discussion is led by an outside speaker on Borne important and relevant topic (subjects range from music to science) the brief talk being followed "by questions, discussion and argument.

The ball was set rolling on May 27, when Rev. J. M. Bates took up the subject of "Science and Religion." His brief introduction held that "Science" and "Religion" (words which needed defining) were both seeking after Truth, although in different forms, and that a rigid adherence to Truth and straight thinking should remove any causes of "conflict."

The discussion and argument which followed persisted till 10.30 p.m., when it was necessary to atop officially (although a lively argument continued afterwards in the common-room). Altogether it appeared an interesting and successful opening discussion, and all that is now needed is a wider participation among the group, as the term advances. This should be the case with our next discussion, led by Mr. R. S. Parker on "Can Planning be Democratic?"

Weir is sorry that it can't invite outsiders to its discussions, but space in the common-room is limited. At least you can be inspired by its example and get thinking too. After all, we aren't really morons.