The Megaphone (Georgetown, Tex.), Vol. 62, No. 30, Ed. 1 Friday, May 9, 1969 Page: 2 of 7
seven pages : ill. ; page 21 x 14 in. Digitized from 35 mm. microfilm.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
PAGE TWO
'Friday, May 9, 1909
TEE MEGAPHONE
THE
MEGAPHONE
ESTABLISHED 1908
It is the duty of the press to protect free expression of
ideas and promote freedom of intellect.
A Closing Word
This marks the thirtieth edition of the MEGAPHONE this
year. There must be something symbolic in the fact that
“thirty*' is the journalistic sign for the end of story. This is
the end of Volume 62.
Volume 62 has been a good volume. It has seen-an increase
in student interest m and contributions to the campus publica-
tion. Students have been more willing to share their ideas on
the editorial pages of Volume 62, and they have lent their talents
to the feature and news columns of the paper, as well.
Volume 62 has been very healthy, for it has had the benefit
of fresh ideas from new staffers and of journalistic background
from its editors. In addition to its physical well-being, it has
enjoyed good receptance from its greatest critics, its readers,
and it has received support from faculty and administration,
both great morale boosters. All of these things must be taken
into account when the total worth of the existence of Volume
62 is being measured.
Volume 62 was born Sunday, September 8, 1968, as a Fresh-
man edition of four pages. It has grown since that time with the
guidance of some very capable staffers. Foremost among
these were the two associate editors Lon Curtis and Mandy
Weaver. But staffers are not the only ones responsible for
the continuance of its publication, for newspapers gam their
contents from the people they serve. Volume 62 was blessed
with some fine readers who seved it in return. That is one
reason it can be considered a good year for Volume 62.
As we “put Volume 62 to bed'*, today, we will be closing out
another year of publication, and Volume 62 will take its place
in the newspaper “morgue." It has only one survivor: Volume 63.
But Volume 63 will be descended from Volume 62 in a two-
fold manner: Its editor will be familiar with the operation of
the publication, and three-fourths of the student body will
still be on hand to furnish the kind of readership a good news-
paper needs. Things look good for Volume 63, and for its
editor Mandy Weaver, and for the students, too.
Volume 62 may now be dead, but it is not forgotten. Thank
you for allowing me the privilege of working with it.
-Genie Hackenjos
Editor-in-Chief
A Final Plea
BY LON CURTIS
I have given much thought to a final editorial in which I could
sum-up my feelings about what has happened to Southwestern
in the two short years I have been here.
I have concluded that either I have insufficient knowledge of
the subject to be concise and to the point, or that what I have
to say is so bulky and rambling as to be completely boring to
our readers.
Hence, I shall close my “career” on the MEGAPHONE (and
probably in journalism as a whole) with one thought directed
not so much to the students as to the faculty. I hope it will be
taken as a serious view of a subject of great importance to us
all.
Several weeks ago, the faculty voted against aproposal from
the Student Congress which would have permitted the Congress
to choose the manner of selection of the student members of
the Student Life Council. This proposal had been unanimously
approved by the SLC itself, and had actually experienced very
little opposition anywhere.
The reasons for the faculty's action are apparently quite
varied. A discussion of those reasons would be out of place,
for most of what I might say would be based upon hearsay.
Rather, it seems much more relevant to look at the proposal
students who framed it.
The proposal was to give the Student Congress the right to
determine how many student members to SLC would be at-large
and how many would be determined by prior election to high
offices in campus organizations.
The final decision would have rested with the Student Con-
gress, a body just as representative as the faculty. Each con-
gressman is elected by the students in his residence hall area.
Each congressman represents about 30 students. The represen-
tation basis is such that only by planned co-operation by the
residence hall director (who determines room assignments)
could the membership of Congress be controlled by any one
group on campus.
The intent of the proposal was not to lessen the represen-
tation of any student organization, nor was it to lessen the in-
fluence of the faculty. Rather, the proposal was a sincere at-
tempt by the students to obtain a right which should be theirs
simply on the basis of the original representation granted to
the student body.
In an editorial last week, I warned of the dangers of student
apathy and disinterest in the affairs which make this univer-
sity “go.” Student rebellion is not likely in the near future at
SU, I said.
But this must always be remembered: student apathy and
student disinterest are not the only causes of rebellion. A fac-
ulty which refuses to approve valid, justifiable student propos-
als may very well lay the seeds of future unrest in just as sure
a manner.
Letters to
the Editor
Sneedies Rejected
Recently a most unfortunate in-
cident has occurred on our cam-
pus. The men, having staged an
impromptu panty raid on L.K.
Wednesday night, brought a wel-
come note of excitement to S.U.
There were some of us, however,
who were not included in the festiv-
ities of that night, and we have
been deeply hurt.
We feel that our contributions to
the campus have been unique and
' enduring, and to be denied parti-
cipation in a social function of the
students has been a grave blow to
us.
Realizing that at first glance we
may appear to be somewhat “over
the hill,” it is nevertheless true
that we do enjoy a little excite-
ment now and again. Therefore, we
sincerely hope that such a grave
oversight will not occur again,
and that we will not be excluded
from any such occasions that may
arise in the future.
Rejectedly yours,
The Women of Sneed
For SU Parents:
Reassurance
Dear Editors:
Having recently re-read South-
western's section in the College
Board's COLLEGE HANDBOOK, I
find it a bit misleading. It is my
opinion that the ad could stand a
major overhaul; this may be a
more appropriate entry:
“Mothers, Southwestern Univer-
sity is Georgetown's finest day
nursery. Your child will be per-
fectly safe here; all of his activ-
ities are personally supervised,
even to keeping all student living
quarters right here on our cozy lit-
tle campus. Standards of conduct
are rigidly enforced, and all man-
ner of entertaining assemblies are
presented duringfreetime.Wealso
personally supervise the education
of your child, keeping him in as-
sociation with only the finest sort
of educators. You may be relieved
to know that unlike most other
schools, Southwestern will not long
tolerate any faculty member who
either neglects his personal ap-
pearance or presents liberal ideas
to the child's delicate mind. We
also keep you well informed of your
child's progress, writing home im-
mediately should he absent himself
from one of our delightful assem-
olies. We understand that your
child, as a mere 20 - year - old,
may be incapable of making his
own decisions and we therefore
require his attendance at all class-
es. In short mothers, we willguar-
phere yotir .child will remain as
naive and uncorrupted as the very
day he enters.”
-Jack A. Phelps
Be A Good Guy!
Want to know an easy way to get
a photograph or a painting?...
Cheap? The answer is relatively
easy: just steal ,it. Why not? Be-
sides, you're really a great person
if you can steal something out of
the SUB or the FAB. Aren't you?
If you think this is just another
lecture, you’re wrong. But people
worked hard to produce these work
of art, and they were nice to even
give them to Southwestern to dis-
play for a while. If you went to
all the trouble to steal the pic-
tures, why not tell ever, body, so
we can all clap for you? Why don't
you look inside yourself and see
what's the matter? If you really
liked the pictures, you could easily
Continued on Page Three—
SU in Retrospect
(Editor's Note: This editorial was written by Charles
Neuffer, editor of the MEGAPHONE for two years, who
graduated from SU last May. Charles is now completing
his first year at U-T School of Law in Austin.
This is written with you graduating seniors-and those
students who will transfer to other universities - in mind.
With circumstances as they are, you graduating seniors
are faced with a series of questions which, while not over-
whelming, are soul-rending. Of course the most imminent
of these questions concerns the draft, but others include
longer range questions of career and job considerations.
A year ago, as I graduated, my major concern - aside
from the draft - was the quality of education I had obtained
at S.U., and whether it would be recognized by the ‘powers
that be.' A broader knowledge of the type of education of-
fered undergraduates at large Texas universities—namely
U.T. — has reinforced my belief that the type of education
rendered by a small, but good, liberal arts college is in-
deed an invaluable and unfortunately disappearing com-
modity. No doubt you, as I a year ago, are plagued by
doubts as to whether you wasted four years at a small, ip-
significant college (called a university) when you could
have gotten into a larger more ‘prestigeous' institution.
This feeling is a problem of almost epidemic proportions
at S.U. with goodly numbers (far more than the adminis-
tration likes to think about) of students each year sucumb-
ing to it and transfering to other schools - mainly U.T.
and S.M.U.
Aside from career and curriculum considerations which
properly draw some students to more diverse institutions,
many students leave S.U. with more or less vague feelings
of not measuring up to students who have survived the
trial by fire of larger institutions.! felt this last year, this
vague fear that I had been pampered to the point of academic
indulgence at S.U. where at a larger, more impersonal
school I would have been quickly culled out. It has taken
time away from S.U. and at a larger university to realize
the impotency of this fear.
Believe it or not, all you pampered pseudo-malcontents
who compose the S.U. student body, you are getting one of
the finest liberal arts educations in this part of the country.
You are in this ‘exhaulted' position because you are at a
good, fairly-well recognized SMALL liberal artscollege.I
emphasize small because this is the key to the situation. At
larger institutions of great stature there is less problem of
funding and recruitment that at S.U., but there are other
problems tearing these universities apart - problems not
found at S.U. This is because they are not SMALL (which,
you pampered people, is not a dirty word anywhere but at
S.U.) These large universities, or multi-versities, can-
not communicate with their students, much less give them a
first class liberal arts education. This is because such an
education requires human interaction and a reasonably
close student-teacher relationship - which is impossible
at a school with thousands of students and hundreds of
teaching faculty. Consequently many of the finest insti-
tutions of learning today are ‘occupied' by a vengeful
army of disaffected students. For years these institu-
tions have tried diverse and clever plans to overcome
their greatest obstacle to learning - their bigness. They
have failed and they have failed in banner headlines around
the world.
One of my former professors, Dr. Frederick Gaupp (a
fascinating if at times over-winded lecturer), said recently
that it is the liberal arts students, not the science students,
who are rebelling, basing this on the inadequacy of answers
presented to the former and the deliberate predictability
of the latter's quests. However, Dr. Gaupp failed to note
specifically that the liberal arts student is revolting against
the multi-versity not because of the lack of potential
answers but because no one really has the time or ‘duty'
to listen to him. Consequently the fires and smoke of
retribution pall and billow not over ghetto-induced pockets
of ignorance but over our greatest centers of learning.
In a society that lauds individualism, that very individ-
ualism has been lost where you would expect it most.
But what of SMALL out of the wayS.U., with its ‘country
club' atmosphere and LIMIT ED facilities nestled in the hills
of the ‘mythical County of Williamson?* Southwesternpre-
sents an intellectual tradition of quiet learning and intro-
spection rapidly disappearing from the American academic
community. At S.U., without realizing it, a student is
given the time and opportunity to mold and develop
his character - while getting a first rate education.
As a good friend of mine who is now at medical school
expressed it - “When you have nothing to do much of the
time but stare at the four walls of your room, you have
to come to grips with yourself or you go crazy.” This is
the essence of S.U. It allows you the time and option to
get to know yourself - and believe me this is a rare thing
in colleges today.
Southwestern may not have the ‘Drag' or the variety
and concurrent amusements of a three ring circus, but
it has something more important that too many of her
students fail to recognize before they graduate (or migrate).
It is something that is as tangible and certain as Saturday
cold cuts but as extinct as the great auk at the modern
multi-versity. It is a quality of student-teacher intercom-
munication without which there is no such thing as a good
liberal arts education.
So as you seniors rise one by one when you name is called
at the end of the month, remember that if you were at that
‘BIG university' you could have gone to, your name prob-
ably would not even be called because it would be only one
of several thousand. Also rest assured that you come away
from S.U. with a damn fine education, something that is
so rare these days as to be quite remarkable.
Charles P. Neuffer *68
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 Megaphone (Georgetown, Tex.), Vol. 62, No. 30, Ed. 1 Friday, May 9, 1969, newspaper, May 9, 1969; Georgetown, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth634478/m1/2/: accessed July 4, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Southwestern University.