Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  


    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. Victoria University Student Newspaper. Volume 39, Number 14, 5 July 1976.


page 32


Occasionally in the past Salient has noted that its policy is to print all letters, subject to the laws of defamation and obsecenity. Recently we have withdrawn a few letters on these grounds. Now, and with some regret, we must announce new editorial policy. Due to the greatest outpouring of coprophiac (look it up - Ed) and bum-fetish indulgence unequalled since the dewers last broke at Parliament buildings, we now reserve the right to not print letters on the grounds of excessively nauseating bad taste or crushingly irrelevant vacuity. Contrary to some frustrated students' opinions, the Salient letters column is intended to be a Jorum for free exchange of fact and opinion. Criticism is welcomes, even urged, but try to keep the incidence of faecal references to less than one word in two, please. Shit spielers and general drivellers have taken a new sort of personal therapy. They are respectfully urged to write their hang-ups onto toilet walls, or write to NZ Truth c/o 175 Taranaki Street, Wellington.

If anyone wants to write a letter to Salient hand it in at the letterbox just inside the Salient door, or if you wish to pay 8c postage then send your letters to P.O.Box 1347 Wellington. Letters should be double spaced, tidy, and on one side of the paper only.

Harold Hedd Supporters Down on Paper

Dear Slurr!

I am deeply agreived to see that the standard of literary appreciation has sadly fallen, amongst some of the despicables, who subscribe to Salient thus putrifying the very paper they write upon.

I refer of course to the vile debasement of that magnificent epic "Harolde Hedde". It is indeed a bitter blow when the excrescence of one or two prudes, can interfere with the aesthetic pleasures, and intellectual stimulations, which the majority of cafetaria Trev's derive from a work of such obvious fluency and style. I beg of you do not let this become another "Furry Freak Brother" or a "Fat Freedy's Cat", untimely ripped from a captive and appreciative audience. It was insult enough enough that I and my fellow suffers should have to wade through untold pages of propagandist excreta, before reaching this one ray of light and hope for sanity.

Last week's Salient saw the ultimate betrayal, a paper totally void artistic merit, that left us drowning in the stinking carnage, of sanity and political paranoia. Such a paper even lacked sufficient texture to wipe our disgruntled fundaments (sic-Ed)

Please answer the prayers of the enlightened multitudes, and bring back "Harolde" - ressurect the works of past masters as well, and let us shake off the chi chains of Victorian morality, that the fore-mentioned prudes would hang around our necks. Please publish a copy of "Twat" for the secret perversions of those who treat Harolde's impecable literary taste with superficial distain concealing jealeousy

jealousy. Yours fornographically, Mac the Knife; Pat Bartlett, Trev, Trev, Trev, and Cousin Derek.

One Up for Harold Hedd

Dear Editor,

Regarding the cartoon strips Harold Hedd I thought they were great. I enjoyed reading them and was not disgusted in the slightest. Though not as good as the "Furry Freak Brothers", I still looked forward to reading them. I was, however, disgusted by their absence, in fact there was little or no satirical or humourous content at all this week.

This I expect to be corrected by the next issue. How about a warning on the page before the cartoons - "Warning: the next page may contain sexist and offending material".

Also the fish and chips in the cafe can be bloody revolting at times. It seems as though they know that there is a long line of people eaiting so they just leave the food in the oil for ½ a second and then bring it out all greasy and raw. What happened to those fantastic chips of last year. Also when you salt the chips only the ones at the top get salted.

Has the new "ticket" method been a success? It seems you still wait just as long. I would think it would be mor ehygenic however, not having to handle money,


Yours etc., Cardinal Biggies (with apologies to real Cardinals).

Monty Python for Harrdol Hedd

Dear Editor,

My God I'll say! The time has come to put perverted mindless drivel to paper with pen! (Ha Ha I can hear Ms Gates drool now!) Yes......let it be known that I engjoy seeing sex in your rag (at its most perverted whats more), God yes why it was only 9 years ago when I first saw my first copy of "Playboy... but now I'm past that.... cos I'm into Harold Hedd!

So I'm telling you that if you don't put Harold back in this nudespaper I'm going to do something drastic like whack you all on the pee pec's with a wet soggy towel!

So I'm in mad, well thats good because at least one bastard hasn't paid his sanity tax... no sir not me (imagine if Harold had, wat a bleeding bore!).

Anyway what female with any instincts (my god we all have them (lets hope you're a dying race - typesetter) finds Harold offensive? I mean to say he's original and he's different.

So I hereby challange Mizz Gates to draw something just as original but sexist i.e. putting men down (You know - Really Putting them Down!), with females dominating the males O.K.?

If it is not original Ms Gates wins 2 weeks in Sydney (aagh, a fate worse than death) and if it is original well I for one will fuckin lap it up!

Yours respectfully.

Vice Pope Eric.

p.s. why is Harold Hedd sexist? Just cos he's you know..... nudge...... nudge... slept with a lady. ! always thought it was a two way operation

Harold Hedd Chalks One Up

Dear Sir,

Harold was going to write himself but he's been not quite right lately, since everyone's been tripping a bit of a lot, y'know. People don't seem to understand me, but then neither could mother either. He's been awfully upset about these really nasty letters about him and his life, but Piggy won't let him into the country and they wouldn't give him a pilot's licence anyway, so here I am.

Well, everyone knows life's for living and loving and living to live, (or is it living to love?). Well, its all there all the time, so theres no use pretending it'll all go away, because trees are turtles on Friday. No one's seen him since his bike ride thru the I own Hall, streaking past Mayor Frowler, playing "Get it off" in B. Freddy says he'll turn up soon but we don't know if fish and chips tonight will help, since we're all broke.

If Tony gives Ruber three bones he'll be hungry tomorrow, cause thats when him and Harold go skiing. Sally says hell be sick today, but Trev isn't sober till three tomorrow, so nobody can Say really, what should I do about tea? Well its all on next week, they say so I suppose no-one really cares if the Russians sty or go on. Napoleon is cooking tomorrow but Jo says it not "for real.

Well what we'd all like to know is when will Harold be back please, as we're running out of gear and its getting cold in Kelburn this year, with everyone burning exam papers to keep hot. My car won't go because fish cat trees and its scared.

Please help,

J J. Holdsalot.

p.s. Marc says thanks for the scons, they look good on his car, too.

Another for Harold Hedd

Dear Editor

Let's get something perfectly clear: this rag is walking a fine line between visiting the shit house on one hand and being read by students on the other. Cut the funnies out, and it falls on its face. I can handle the moronic trivia presented each week about sociology debates, abortion, Malaysian affairs, and whos fucking who in the French Department, and I can even enjoy reading the letters, until a small-minded subspecies pops up from the toilet-bowls of the University and tries to muscle their views onto the majority and keep the funnies out. It's the same old shit, where a big-mouthed minority screams over the silent majority. Well fuck you all!! Harold head is a ripper and he'd better stay.

Yours sincerely,

"A fucking big mob of jokers"

Harold Hedd Fan Writes to Salient

Dear John,

Having eagerly awaited for yet another copy of Salient, I was bitterly dissapointed to find not a trace of that lovable character, Harold Hedd. Instead I was horrified to find letters complaining about sex and drugs. What has happened to Salient? Where are our (your loving reading public) sources of literary stimulation. The sensuous sight of marijuana the excitement of intercourse at the debutant's ball, the exhilarating hilarity of comic strip highs!

What is wrong with good ol' sex and drugs, the traditional passtimes of students. Are all the apathetic souls having their live's ruined by those most evil of evils -assessment and examinations! Let there be an end to this purge! Let us see a returned to sex and drugs, and all those other pleasurable activities in Salient soon.

Freaked Out Again, Man

God No. 24

p.s. Let's see another copy of twat

pss Salient's stil the best shithouse paper we've got.

More Fun in Salient

Dear Editor of Noble Salient,

Heed not the scorn of those unfortunates amongst us who have no sense of humour, and decry the like of Harold Hedd. Not everyone is a dope freak, but you don't have to be a tee-totalling-Pat Bartlett-type either. No wonder the world is so fucked. A paper can't depict a simple piece of sex (which after all is not the only thing in the world) in a cartoon without bourgeois perverts going bezerk and moaning as if Salient was the National Party's rag.

Cartoons and comic strips are just as good as everything else in your publication, and omitting them is like omitting your editorial. Salient is not complete without Harold Hedd and the Fabumours Freak Brothers! and the like. A bit more humour might cheer up those apathetic morons all round Victoria who never do anything except support Muldoons dictatorial policies, appose Hart, and get A-passes (if they can be stuffed moving out of the library). I hope your Noble self will rectify the humour situation as best you can.

Yours most humble reader.

I.L. Litterale.

Students Object to Attack on Education.

Dear John,

In his report of the last SRC meeting Hugh Blank quoted me as describing the education system as "unjust and inequitable". He went on to say that he did not think my "suggestion of jumping on the band waggon of protest for the opening of Parliament would much advance student interests".

My remarks at the SRC meeting were made before I moved the following resolution: "That VUWSA hold a demonstration at Parliament on 23 June to protest against the Government's rejection of NZUSA's representations on student bursaries; that the Association support the Wellington Trades Council's protest against the Government's attack on working people's wages, conditions and democratic rights; that the President and the Education Officer be directed to carry out this resolution and that the Wellington Trades Council be immediately informed of this decision."

The point I made at the meeting was that NZUSA's case for a cost of living increase and other reforms in the bursary system must be seen in the context of two wider events.

First, the trade union protests against the Government's wage freeze and other attacks on the trade union movement. Like many union members, studetns are low income earners; like the trade unionists, students' incomes have been effectively cut by the Government's refusal to increase wages or student allowances to fully take account of inflation; and like the trade union movement, the student movement has in recent times protested against Government attacks on democratic liberties. I suggest to Hugh Blank that all these things constitute a firm basis of unity between students and the trade union movement not "jumping on the band waggon".

Second, the Government's policy of cutting education spending which has affected all levels of education, especially primary and secondary teachers through the curtailment of the day relief scheme.

Some of those who have protested against these cuts have suggested that minority groups, in particular, such as children in rural areas and Maori and Polynesian children, will suffer from these cuts. This is undoubtedly correct. But the point I made at the meeting was that these groups are already suffering in our education system.

In this regard, Hugh Blank may be interested in the following comments which are taken from a speech by Mr W.L. Renwick, Director-General of Education, at a conference in Christchurch on 19th January 1976:

'The days have long since gone when a policy of equality of educational opportunity could be summed up in a commitment to increase access to education under conditions that provided a fair field and no favour. Many of the questions that now torment the social conscience arise from inequalities in the outcomes of eduation. The issue that confronts us today is no longer how to provide quality of educational opportunity; it is the educational consequences of a commitment to equality as an objective of social policy.

For we now know that educational systems are not neutral in the way they con convert educational opportunities into life chances Relative success in school is highly correlated with the educational level of a child's parents. The higher the educational level of a child's parents, the longer the children are likely to go to school, college or university. The longer the period of education, the higher the leaving qualifications, and the more interesting and remunerative the occupational opportunities. Our education system, in common with education systems the world over, has come to be seen as an agency of social selection. For various reasons, which I will not elaborate here, it performs this function less starkly than do a number of other countries that come to mind. But we can now see from our own educational experience why school systems have come to be regarded as, in the words of one radical critic, institutions for the manufacturing of underdogs. A policy of equality of educational opportunity is fine for the winners. The education system helps them to maximise their abilities and get a step up in the world. But what about the losers? What has the policy done for them except to make it clear to them and everyone else that they are losers and that they apparently had little in the way of ability that could be maximised?"

I would not claim that because Mr Renwick says something about the education system he is necessarily right. What is significant about his remarks is that he has publicly drawn attention to problems that critics of the education system have been hammering for years.

I have tried to make the above points as briefly as possible in this letter, but I feel they need to be debated fully in "Salient". Therefore I hope that Hugh Blank and others who disagree with me will take these matters up.

Yours fraternally,

Peter Franks.