W$t ©ufee Cfironttle Volume 64, Number 6 Duke University, Durham, N.C. Friday, September 20 Student leaders call Knight talk 'obtuse' By GARY WEIN However, Caplan also said, "It However student leaders may Most student leaders, reacting would be a tragic mistake for the disagree on some points, most yesterday to President Knight's University if Dr. Knight's speech seem to agree that now is Wednesday night convocation proves to be nothing more than definitely the time for President speech, seemed to agree with Bob meaningless rhetoric." Knight to act. Creamer's complaint that "We do YMCA President Reed Kramer Contending that Knight's not ask for dogma—we do ask for was more specific. Although he speech was "somewhat action." said that "Dr. Knight's speech encouraging," Tom Banks, Marc Caplan, chairman of the indicates a somewhat new attitude President of the Men's Student Student Board of Governors, said for him and a more exciting Government Association, also he awaits the fruition of Knight's direction for this University," revealed feelings of "commitment to be a creative Kramer is still unhappy. "I am disappointment. "Dr. Knight was disappointed that the speech had absent for such a long time, and After 3 years of preparation, ceremony nem in UUKB cuapci. leader and force in the shaping of the community and region." to be worded in such obtuse terms still we got the same, typically nurses are honored in capping without clearer statements about philosophical speech." his ideas or a more definite "After the Vigil, we were really In TRUE lounge assumption of leadership on his looking forward to results, part," he said. searching for concrete proposals from the University to grasp as 9 More optimistic achievements. But now, all we Wade Norris, President of have is the feeling of having Preiss: Duke still 'timid ASDU, seemed more optimistic at accomplished nothing at all." By ETHEL DUGGAN students this year. They are still Preiss continued, "Passivity is first. "Although unclearly Particularly critical of Knight's Dr. Jack Preiss, a member of wary and timid about voicing the deadliest possible condition worded, I do believe Dr. Knight avoiding the policy-making issue, the Duke sociology department opinions and expressing feelings in for any alive human being. Too intended an affirmation or Banks said, "Dr. Knight gave no and of theDurham City Council, public and private groups. It is not many students think of college in perhaps a real beginning of this specific proposals for changing the addressed around 30 students in that these students are terms of ways to get through, University's playing a positive role policy decision format, one which the TRUE Lounge last night. Dr. barren—they have ideas—but they ways to get by, and connections. in society and in this community. really needs reform." Preiss became infamous last spring are afraid of exposing a possible This primitive level of thinking If I am right, this is an important step forward." Sherry Meinart, Vice Presieent for labeling Duke Students "the ignorance and lack of perception means four years of wasted time." of ASDU for Hanes House, was timid generation" in a "Sports or of being disliked, Preiss disagreed with Dr. Nevertheless, Norris was impressed with Knight's "concern Illustrated" article. misunderstood, and penalized. Knight's speech by saying that he disappointed that "Dr. Knight did for national issues and the Dr. Preiss began the discussion "We have a long way to go to doesn't "see the university being not address himself to what I University's assuming its rightful by stating that he still considered get people to freely exchange beyond its environment. consider is basic to the role in society." But, Miss Meinart "the timid generation" a valid ideas. When forced to express an Something cannot intelligently question—How is the University had some misgivings about the description of Duke students this opinion, students regurgitate exist in this condition. to be committed? In what manner speech as a whole. "Everything September. He observed that the opinions they have heard without Involvement is not bad; will this commitmetn be carried was cloaked in words. It seemed profile of the faculty is not much criticizing or advocating these involvement is good. Separatism out? By whom will the that Dr. Knight had to be careful better than that of students. opinions. This situation will not would ensure an ivory tower commitment be formulated? about what he said." change over night and is a serious existence, which is not healty for These questions Dr. Knight leaves Preiss stated, "I am not sure a university. that there is any difference in the problem to be overcome." unanswered." Picket and protest policy arouses controversy Students confront Woodhall committee Students not By BOB ENTMAN Watson. No students sit on the "we have no faith in the trustees" consulted "No one knows what is legal committee. and consider some of them and what is illegal." The new "immoral and reactionary." He By BOB ENTMAN Disatisfied student leaders took "A total of only six students pickets and protest policy the opportunity of a meeting with expressed the fear that the statement and regulations are University is ultimately run by participated in the formulation of the committee to air their the new pickets and protests "vague and ambiguous," complaints. The grievances these same men, and thus there contended Wade Norris, President could be no trust or faith. policy and regulations statement." centered on the mass student Maintaining that, despite the of ASDU. uncertainty about the specifics of A note of further uncertainity indications of Dr. Knight's August the rules. "Students feel it is so was introduced when Counsel "It is a "very good statement," vague and ambiguous that people 16 letter to all Duke students, Bryson reminded the students Wade Norris, President of ASDU insisted Professor William can be punished ex post facto," that "the legal responsibility as Cartwright, commenting on the asserted Norris. insisted that student involvement well as the legal right" to run the I was minimal and for the most part same policy. Dr. Woodhall said he "agrees University indeed lies with the m ! ;_w_\W I indirect. fully and explicitly with the right Board of Trustees. Another e :na n s snow e e These two conflicts seem to of dissent," but is "against sPfcl' '•i_\WWW ^ ^'^ * '' '° ' - l ^g committee member stated that onl y lve stu ents reflect the sentiments existing violence." He indicated his and the "trustees have nothing to do •Jh- Jflfl I - ^ ^ besides himself within the University community the committee's feeling that the with rules and regulations." L •* V-jyf^-*^W| ^B had any role at all, and that about the protest regulations regulations they had written | :; ^jg^^^g I except for himself, no one talked which were issued last August. Articulating the view that it would protect students in light of would be better to draw specific directly to the groups that made these ideals. rules which might leave some the final decisions regarding the Students leaders are on the one policy. hand largely and strongly Prof. Cartwright, in an loopholes than to open the door to possible oppression, both The first idea that any student dissatisfied with several aspects of interview, contended that it was had of the impending the new statement. Members of necessary that there be "some Creamer and Norris defended a provisional draft on a more policy—regulations statement the Woodhall Committee, which specificity but some vagueness," came in mid—July. Norris was drew up the regulations in in the regulations. He was asked specific substitute set of rules drawn up by students. then informed that "the Trustees accordance with a policy what might constitute the were considering a policy statement by the Board of disruption which the regulations Committee members, on the regarding pickets, protests, and Trustees, defended it as the best forbid. "A law simply cannot be other hand, pointed to such words demonstrations." possible under the trying so written as to be clear on what as "excessive noise" in the latter Later, he "met with a six man circumstances which existed. is disruptive," he replied. Others document and said similar phrases administrative committee on the committee agreed with Dr. are just as vague as those the University Vice President Charles (Woodhall <>rnmittee) which had The committee wps chaired by Cole when he urged the students students criticize in the Woodhall statement. Huestis addressing last years's been appointed by the Executive Dr. Barnes Woodhall, associate to have "faith" in the integrity of Dow student sit-in. Committee of the Board of provost, and consisted of the men who would be applying In order to illustrate the Trustees to suggest changes m the regulations. uncertainty felt by the student university counsel, E. C. Bryson their proposal." and of Drs. William Cartwright, R. Bob Creamer, chairman of the body concerning the "do's and don'ts" of the regulations, Norris "At that time I presented to Taylor Cole, University provost, Duke Vigil, maintained that more them a letter_ expressing my Joel F. Paschal, and Richard explicitness was necessary because (Continued on Page 8) (Continued on Page 2) Page Two The Duke Chronicle Friday, September 20 No student voice (Continued from Page 1) Black days coincide criticisms, which had been As for the trustees, "The only interview with Mr. Wade, it was composed without consultation direct contact on the part of a rather apparent that he had little with other students," Norris said, student with any of the trustees" working knowledge of the specific with Durham fair came when Norris met with Mr.