|
||
|
More Photos of Physicists
Robert Lee Hotz’s article " At the Center of the Physics Universe" (Stanford Today, September/October) refreshed my memories of the exciting years as a graduate student in the physics department after World War II. The combination of stunning new advances in physics as well as the admirable development of the department to its present world stature were both most interesting to be close to. But I have one quibble with the article. What a strange decision to publish portraits of only the living Nobel laureates in physics! I had classes from Nobelists Felix Bloch and Robert Hofstadter. It would have given me a warm glow to see their photos along with the other (living) winners. Alvin Hudson, ’47, MS ’50, PhD ’57 The Fran Conley Saga Enough of Frances Conley and her book! Her highly publicized charges, reported in "Surgical Strike" (September/October), have seriously affected theacademic careers of two excellentneurosurgeons, including Conley’s own. The protracted saga was made possible only by the in-action of a distracted University president and the disinterest and ineptness of the medical school administration. Firm leadership from the onset would have saved the University muchembarrassment. During the uproar, the scene was viewed with disbelief by neurosurgeons nationwide. Fortunately, Stanford neurosurgery has picked up the pieces and again is moving smoothly forward; it’s time for the University to do the same. George H. Koenig, ’56, MD ’60 Although I am sure that Frances Conley is a very competent neurosurgeon who has seen her share of angiograms, I would however strongly object to her operating on any of the vessels she seems to be studying on page 61 of the September/October magazine. Those angiograms of the abdominal aorta and runoff would best be helped by a vascular surgeon, not a neurosurgeon. Michael J. Cummins Casper’s Column One has to sympathize with Fran Conley and her struggles to eliminate sexual harassment at Stanford’s medical school. It was disappointing to find that she believes little has changed, and that Stanford administrators view her as a troublemaker. But President Casper’s essay (Stanford Today, September/October) perhaps sheds some light on her problems. He expresses concern about the "preoccupations" that are consuming Washington and the news media, and criticizes the "prosecution of perjury to get at behavior that is not criminal in itself." The preoccupations that are consuming Washington would seem to be the same as those that bother Conley––sexual harassment in high places (she mentions faculty members who take revenge on students who rebuff their sexual advances, behavior that is not criminal in itself). Had President Casper condemned the immorality of President Clinton instead of attacking the "troublemakers" in the press and the law who have brought him down, one might be more hopeful about the stamping out of sexual harassment at Stanford. Monty Phister, ’49, MS ’50 In his column and in an interview inthe summer edition of Stanford Lawyer, President Casper shared with us his insights on the tribulations of those who find themselves under prosecution by U.S. attorneys and especially by special prosecutors. While his credentials are flawless, I am concerned that he (and therefore Stanford) appear to be coming down on the side of the White House and, by implication, its positions. People who commit crimes in office are hard to catch and have access to public funds that very few private individuals can muster. Special powers are badly needed therefore, to protect the commonweal from powerful, arrogant miscreants. Graham L. Sterling III, ’51, JD ’57 Idealizing the Greeks As a hard-working professional classicist, I found "Who Killed Homer?" (September/October) mistaken, misleading and misguided in so many ways that a simple letter does not allow for a sufficient response. I would, however, like to call attention to a fundamental contradiction in the article. Heath and Hanson assert that "the most important legacy of classical antiquity is this uniquely Western urge to pick apart everything––everyinstitution, tradition and individual. Only in this way do ideas change at all." Yet they react with horror to any criticism of the Greeks themselves: their main charge against the classicists oftoday is that their "dereliction . . . grew out of a deliberate desire to demonstrate that, as classicists, they knew bestjust how awful, how sexist, racist and exploitative the Greeks really were." This for them is clearly taking criticism too far, regardless of the possibility that ideas might change as a result. But if classicists should not engage in such criticism, who, to paraphrase Juvenal, will criticize the critics? The article is a conservative diatribe in the truest sense, based on the assumption that we’ve already done as well as we ever can. I, however, believe that itis still possible for the field of classics, and human civilization in general, toadvance, even if that means abandoning the uncritical idealization of Greek culture that the authors advocate. James B. Rives, PhD ’90 John Heath and Victor Hanson, in their devotion to the cause of reawakening interest in Greek culture, seem to have felt the need to tell a pretty one-sided story. Certainly classical Greek culture played a critical role in the birth of modern science, but the Greek scholars held in high regard their predecessors in Egypt, whom Heath and Hanson are content to tar with a rather broad brush. Many other scholars argue convincingly that the history of "modern" Mediterranean civilization (i.e., from about 600 B.C. to the present) should be viewed as a long rivalry between the Greek and Hebraic traditions. Viewed in this light, perhaps Heath and Hanson should be regarded as sore losers, since the Bible is still widely read. Daniel M. Dobkin, MS ’79, PhD ’85 Tenure and the Arts In " Tenure on Trial," (Stanford Today, September/October), Larry Gordon stresses long-term endeavor as the principal justification for academic tenure. Equally important is the freedom to produce significant work that might beunpopular. Arts faculty in particular are liberated by the knowledge that controversial or provocative efforts won’t get them fired. The ongoing struggle over the National Endowment for the Arts has made clear how vulnerable the arts can be; an unscrupulous politician can abuse artists and rouse a rabble with negligible risk. In both politics and education, the arts are marginalized andso regarded as dispensable when budgets dwindle. Because commercial art necessarily reflects market pressures, the academy is one of the few places where an artist can light a torch to carry culture into the future––but only if we all insist on protection from censorship. Jeffrey D. Mason, ’74, MA ’75 |
Bad Boys
Thank you for publishing the article on "The Bad Boys of Encina Hall" (Septem-ber/October) by Karen Bartholomew. I entered Encina as a frosh in the fall of 1923. I cannot swear to my participation in hijinks, but they were not dull days. Enjoyable for sure. Thanks for all the memories you have revived. Norton Coleman, ’27 Your recent article on Encina Hallrecalled the great times that I had living in Encina hall in my freshman year, 1937-1938. All of the freshman "boys" got to know one another and had a lot of great times adjusting to our newfound freedoms. Both of my roommates had such a good time that they flunked out of school. I was able to survive this experience and recovered sufficiently in the following years to get a reasonably good education. But Encina Hall, too, was an important part of my education. College is not all book learning, but also learning how to get along with others and making friends with common interests that you will enjoy for a lifetime. Ray J. Diekemper Jr., ’41 The Ruins of the Band Shak The Band Shak definitely had personality found in only a few other archaeologically significant locations ("Little Shak of Horrors," September/October). Having toured the Mayan ruins of Belize, Honduras and the Yucatan extensively, I can tell you that not one reveals such a depth of creative spirit. Future generations of archaeologists will be far more interested in the remains of the Band Shak than in any other structure on campus. Russ Kleinman, ’77 Theater for Kids I think Libby Pratt’s idea to produce videos of children’s theater productions is wonderful ("Child’s Play," Leland’s Journal, September/October). I attended a school system inRedding, Calif., that sent children to the Shakespeare festival in Ashland, Ore.My first experience with live theater was a magical moment. When I was a junior in high school, there were budget cutbacks. So instead of sending us to a show, a troupe of actors came to the school to talk about theater and give an exhibition. I am sure they no longer do that; and in the elementary schools, they can no longer afford to send students to the festival. I am also sure my hometown is not the only one to suffer culturally due to fiscal constraints. If Pratt marketed her videotapesto small school systems, she could keep her company afloat financially andexpose a generation of children to a wonderful art form that would otherwise not be affordable to them. Mark Smith Through Bad Times and Good The September/October issue includes a short profile of Aaron Bunnell, ’96, (Class Notes, "The Will to Walk"). According to the article, Bunnell suffered a freak injury to his spinal cord during a vacation in the Gal | |