The Hilltopper (Austin, Tex.), Vol. 48, No. 14, Ed. 1 Friday, March 13, 1964 Page: 2 of 4
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: St. Edward’s University Newspaper Collection and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the St. Edward’s University.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
HILLTOPPER
March 13, 1964
Page 2
Letters To The Editor
Editorials
About Rejection Slips
I
For Art’s Sake, II
THE HILLTOPPER
Photo Staff
t
I
v
What this really means is that the university which pro-
fesses to be a disseminator of liberal education actually is not.
One of the goals of liberal education is the development of
practical wisdom—the ability to criticize, judge, and choose.
This development can only occur through action. An excellent
place for this action is student publications, yet when the stu-
dent is censored, thereby not allowing his full development, the
schools is defeating its professed aim of educating liberally.
Editor-in-Chief .....
Managing Editor ...
Circulation Manager
News Editor .......
Sports Editor ......
Photo Editor .......
Copy Editor .......
News Staff .........
The latest issue (February-March) of Critic magazine con-
tains an article that should be raising little furors on Catholic
campuses all over the nation, especially at Notre Dame, De Paul,
and Loyola of Chicago. The article deals with probably the
touchiest problem a Catholic student publication has to deal
with—censorship.
Since we are strong advocates of liberal education and
because we see censorship as Mr. Callahan does, that is, oppos-
ing the goals of liberal education, we think that censorship
ought to be abolished, not only at St. Edward’s but at all Cath-
. olic universities.
Sports Staff.....
Contributors ....
Fine Arts Writer
Moderator......
Mr. Callahan singles out certain censorship incidents that
occurred on these campuses and calls them, rather bluntly,
immature. He expands from this accusation to a univocal denun-
ciation of censorship, claiming that the active, inquiring, enthu-
siastic student who is censored will turn sour and will lose his
respect for his superiors. He goes on to say that censorship in
effect proves nothing because the student publication cannot
really hurt the university because, after all, its opinions should
be student opinions.
..... Daniel Riordan
....... Mark Walter
Christopher Mayzner
.... Krandall Kraus
.. Michael Zelsmann
..... William Hoppe
... William Roberts
Martin McLaughlin,
James Trunk, Lawrence Gries, Joseph Todaro,
Martin Lewis, Daniel Moore, James Sullivan
........... William Thurin, Thomas Krysinski,
Lawrence Zigmont
Gregory Ball, Gerald Gadacz, Robert Slaughter
..... Luis Luis, Francis Zuik, Timothy Scullin
................................. Michael Tracy
................. Brother William Denton, CSC
Now it seems rather inane to tell good students in class that
they are to live in this fashion with this principle and that one
as the correct ones to operate from, and then turn around and
tell them that they can’t practice and develop what they have
been taught. This seems to imply that the university feels it
has not done its job adequately, has not really disseminated a
liberal education. The answer to that problem, however, is not
censorship; rather it is a rethinking of the particular univer-
sity’s educational methods. The Hilltopper feels that far from
causing untold embarrassment and a subsequent deterioration
.. in education, the whole tone of Catholic education would rise
if student editors were given their freedom.
This suggestion, dropping censorship, puts a very large"
responsibility on the student editors. Obviously this group would
have to become much more alert, much more attuned to the
times, and much more mature in their judgments on courses
of action. These are exactly the things that a liberal arts uni-
versity should be inculcating into its students. The Catholic
university should be adding the Christocentric point of view
to all these things.
who can rationally back their
criticisms.
Aurelio Manuel Montemayor
The Hilltopper office has not exactly been flooded with
entries for the student art show. So far one man has told us
he would enter five exhibits, and that is all. Where are all the
rest of those who claimed they could paint pictures “at least
as good as those in the dining hall’s foyer?” The deadline for
entries is April 7. Any artifact made by a student is eligible
to be shown.
The Hilltopper recommends that everyone—students, faculty,
and administration—read Mr. Callahan’s article and further, we'
recommend that everyone think about it and about his duties
and obligations in the light of this article, not only as they
apply to censorship, but also as they apply to all areas of dis-
cipline.
The Foundation
Dear Sir: I’m concerned with
the inner atmosphere of the in-
dividual. This, to me, is convic-
tion. It can’t be taught. In the
Theology and Philosophy courses
we learn a lot about Divine Re-
velation, God, a way of life,
Christ, the sacraments and crea-
tion. If it remains just words,
then we can say “that is what the
Church teaches” or “that is what
Catholics believe.” But recalling a
few of Fr. Redmond’s, OP state-
ments changes our view. You and
An Open Letter
An open letter to the students:
Ever so often, the urge to speak out comes to a man. Some-
times, of course, silence would be the more prudent course.
But we must not make the common mistake of confusing pru-
dence with inaction. For this reason, then, I’d like to make a
few comments on what I have been reading in the paper and
what I have heard around the campus. I would like you to
know some of the thinking current among the administrators
of the University.
We hear a great deal about student maturity, responsibility,
etc. There is a constant plea to be treated like adults in campus
regulations, academic requirements, and so on. The administra-
tion is not simply opposed to this. We are eager to see maturity
in the student body. We are pleased when you give evidence
of responsibility.
The problem that we have is that we hear so much talk about
responsibility and maturity among the students, but we see
so little evidence of it. I do not refer principally to the occa-
sional disciplinary action that must be taken. The major crimes
on the campus are of relatively small concern for the student
body at large.
Rather, this is my problem: responsibility requires response.
There seems to be practically no response, no concern, no adult
reaction to ANYTHING by the student body of this University.
You do not take an active, inquiring part in your academic life.
You get only what the teachers present, and often enough, little
of that. There is so little activity, so little personal response
to learning. So many of you seem to expect to be driven to your
education. This is not a mature response.
In your life on campus, there is very little evidence of adult
responsibility.. Your lack of consideration for your neighbors
in the dorms, (judging from the paper and discussions in SAC,
it is too noisy to study in your room); your pushing and shov-
ing, and the food throwing in the Student Dining Room; the
generally careless attitude toward University property; and a
common unwillingness to assume responsibility for your ac-
tions—all of this indicates that (with some exceptions among
the student population) in general the students do not demon-
strate the maturity that is so often spoken of. I question
whether oversupervision can be blamed for the situation. If
there had been more supervision, less of this would have been
allowed to happen. “Boys will be boys,” they say—but then,
of course, they must be treated as boys. But you wish to be
treated as men.
My point is simply this: the freedom given to the mature
can only work if those who are free accept their responsibilities.
If a man will do what is right because he knows it is right, if he
will cooperate with the common good of society freely for the
good of his fellow man, then this man can be free in a free
society. But if a man continues to behave without this sense
of responsibility, he cannot hope to enjoy the pleasures of
mature freedom.
As a person grows, less and less external direction should be
needed. As he becomes more independent, he is able to take
over the direction of himself. But we do a child no service by
taking away all direction when he is unable to assume control
for himself.
There is another area of concern for me: this is the lack of
student awareness of the world about them ... a lack of social
awareness and concern. When students are marching all over
the country, spending nights in jail, giving of themselves to a
tremendously important cause for every Christian and every
American, so many of you act as if nothing was going on.
If someone were to paint the signs and charter a bus, we
couldn’t raise a bus load of students to manifest their concern.
Where is your response?
Catholic college students all over the country are sending
groups of students to work in Mexico or among the poor of their
own areas in recognition of their Christian obligation to share
Christ with the world. For a second year in a row we have been
unable to form a group.
This lack of concern cannot be blamed on the administra-
tion and their failure to cooperate. There has been no student
movement here on this campus. Issues that occupy you are such
things as drinking at college dances (if only you were as con-
cerned about the rights of your fellow men as you are about
this one) and whether high school girls should go out with
“mature” college men.
Gentlemen, these things I have said, not as a universal con-
demnation. There are some notable exceptions, but I am afraid
that they are far too few and their influence is too little felt.
But there is much good and a great potential among you. I want
only to awaken it in you. Our purpose for being here is to help
you to find and develop the talents that you have. But such a
(Continued on Page 3)
I are the Church. It has to be as
real to us as snow, cars, birds,
spring, and people. If it isn’t we
don’t have conviction. We should -
be greedy about what is present-
ed to us. Take in everything pre-
sented like the animals before
winter, then sit down and think
about it.
What is man? Is there a God?
What am I here for? Where am
I going? Why? How? Nobody
can give us these answers. We
won’t be satisfied with big de-
cisions made for us by someone
else. Sit down and ask yourself
questions like these. The food
has been presented; we must
(Continued on Page 3)
Epistle to the Edwardians,
part the second
Dear Editor:
I would like to bring the “Art
Controversy” further out in the
open. This was brought to a point
by the newspaper’s treatment of
the present Art Show. The matter
was put on page three next to
this semester’s puny Ghost Writ-
er. (Whatever did happen to that
sharp wit? Perhaps a case of
censorious of the cerebrum?
hmmm!)
I’m pre-supposing many crude
witticisms in the dorms on the
"Holy Shapes” as being inane,
Madonnas giving the illusion of
witches, a flight into Egypt which
is redeemed only by that marvel-
ous donkey’s eye. And the laugh-
ing stock of the University, that
sacrilege, the Pieta Construction.
How many took the trouble to
read the notes on the art show?
For once, C. Michael Tracy felt
that an explanation and defense
of his works was necessary for
those wanting to gain an appre-
ciation and insight into art. How
many sharp-tongued critics have
made any motion toward Tracy’s
art or any other serious artist?
Tracy successfully began a
literary movement on campus;
heads a rather interesting poster-
making committee; can artistical-
ly work in many mediums. And
what is the general feeling?
Laugh, sneer, cut him down . . .
This recently accepted Alpha
Chi-ite has in three years created
a most striking image on campus,
and all under the sharpest critic-
ism. How many of us have had
the courage of our convictions in
spite of public opinion? Yet the
criticism has become vicious.
Now to the artist’s work. I’ll
only take the most controversial
piece, the so-called rusty tin can
construction, called Pieta. To take
this composition and relate the
twisted metal form to Christ and
the draped base to the Madonna
would seem almost sacrilegious.
There is a twofold difficulty in
this piece of art. First, in relating
it to what is one’s reality and
second, in accepting the religious
fact presented after the relation
has been made.
Few people are willing to ac-
tively bring thought to an art
object. There is a greater inclina-
tion toward being passive receiv-
ers of photographic images. Be-
cause of this passivity toward art
objects, the object is then penal-
ized and called non-art. On the
second count, if an art object
presents a facet of reality which
the viewer does not accept or
like, there is a further rejection.
The artist saw two pieces of
metal with interesting patterns
and colors. He took, cut, bent,
hammered, soldered, nailed and
clothed them till he felt that there
was a valid representation of cer-
tain aspects of the death of
Christ.
Much depends upon the indi-
vidual’s intellectual maturity and
his idea of Christianity. If one
thinks in terms of the symbolic
forms of the liturgy, this could be
a very effective means of medita-
tion, especially during this sea-
son.
I challenge anyone to rationally
criticize the artist and/or his
works in a letter to the editor as
sharply as has been done so
easily in so many innocent bull
sessions around here. Or is the
intellectual life on campus so
dead that argument on Art can-
not be carried on?
I would like to see a rational
criticism on the matter in a letter
to the editor.
Considering all the sharp criti-
cism so easily given in those
innocent bull sessions around
here, surely there are students
The Hilltopper is published weekly during the academic year
at St. Edward’s university, an institution of higher learning
conducted by the Brothers of Holy Cross (CSC). Opinions •AC
expressed herein are those of the student editors, and not YN
necessarily those of the University as a whole. The Hill- ik
topper is a member of the Associated Collegiate Press, "ned"
and Intercollegiate Press.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
The Hilltopper (Austin, Tex.), Vol. 48, No. 14, Ed. 1 Friday, March 13, 1964, newspaper, March 13, 1964; Austin, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth1491823/m1/2/?rotate=0: accessed June 25, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting St. Edward’s University.