THOSE DAILY NIGHTS

Warm thanks to the magazine and Joannie Fischer for the story on the Stanford Daily (March/April). The scent of stale beer and the constant need to clear pizza boxes to do layouts are still quite fresh in my memory. It was a wonderful time and the perfect environment to create passion for the journalistic profession. Though I can’t remember the first time I walked into the Daily offices, I can remember leaving many, many times as the sun was beginning to rise.

As for that picture of me toting Adam Grossman, at least I only had to do it literally and on only a few occasions. Rod Searcey and Art Streiber did much more of the real heavy lifting because Grossman was, and always will be, such a freshman.

Jason Cole, ’84
Hollywood, Florida

Thank you for your very enjoyable article about the history of the Daily. As an avid Stanford sports fan, I have followed the Daily’s reportage about Stanford teams over the years. My favorite story ever was “Thanks for the Memories,” written by senior John Lis in June 1987. Recounting his cherished memories from four years as a reporter, Lis spoke of the football team’s rise to a Gator Bowl appearance, the baseball team’s road to the College World Series and the promising futures ahead for the men’s and women’s basketball teams. Your article reminded me of this outstanding piece.

Jeffrey Fenton, MA ’81, MS ’82
Menlo Park, California

“Read All About It” was well written and appeared to be well researched. I believe the Daily’s editorial independence from the University is important for its credibility and to the learning experience it offers student journalists. However, trusting in the students’ informal policy of delaying or embargoing certain news about the University may be risky for the administration. As I recall, the then-independent STANFORD magazine became troublesome for the University when it ran stories the administration didn’t like. The University took over the magazine, along with the Alumni Association, albeit with the consent of the association’s membership. (For the record, I voted against it.)

Lee Anderson, MA ’87, PhD ’97
Atherton, California

CIVIL INDEED

I loved your article on Barbara Babcock (“Winning Ways,” March/April). I only wish it were longer.

I had the great pleasure of taking civil procedure with Professor Babcock in my first year of law school at Stanford. I have since pursued a career as an entrepreneur and investor, and to be honest, I don’t remember much from my time at Stanford—but I will always have vivid memories of that civil procedure class.

Professor Babcock’s “Geraldine” story is one that I have repeated on many occasions. Even more memorable to me, however, is a comment she once made in class with particular emphasis and passion. “The best place to be,” she told us, when discussing problems and how to solve them, “is where tactics and ethics merge.” This is a simple statement, perhaps, but it really struck a chord with me, and I will never forget how clearly she expected all of us to act accordingly.

Robert Majteles, JD ’89
Piedmont, California

DISPARATE VOICES

We applaud President Hennessy’s principled defense of free speech in his account of the recent campus appearances by former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak and another speaker, Amiri Baraka, who is controversial for his anti-Israel statements (President’s Column, March/April).

Stanford is to be commended for allowing a speech by an Israeli leader. While this action would seem natural for an academic institution committed to the free exchange of ideas, other universities unfortunately have not always behaved similarly.

We agree with President Hennessy that “voices” must not be “muzzled,” and we believe the voice for peace is not articulated often enough. We support the Palestinian people’s right to a homeland that is peaceful and respectful of Israel’s security and safety. Israel wants peace and is willing to compromise for it; witness the peace treaties with former adversaries, including Egypt and Jordan, and Barak’s peace offer to the Palestinians in 2000, endorsed by President Clinton.

Israel’s drive for peace stems from the fact that it is a democracy that respects the rights of individuals and gives all its citizens the right to vote in free and fair elections. In Israel, all people—Christians, Muslims, Jews, women, gays, lesbians—enjoy freedom of religion, press and speech. These shared values help Israel continue to be America’s most reliable ally in the region.

Our hope is that the terrorism plaguing the region will end and that more voices will be heard for free speech, democracy, justice and peace, for both Palestinians and Israelis.

Steven Lurie, ’88
San Francisco, California
(co-signed by nine others from the classes of ’88 to ’05)

As a First Amendment attorney, I was disappointed by President Hennessy’s column, “The True Test of Free Speech.” He expresses pleasure at the fact that the University invited both Ehud Barak and Amiri Baraka (a Jew-hater and conspiracy theorist of the greatest extreme) to speak on campus days apart from each other. He seems happy to report that both elicited strong reaction. He claims he is in no way equating the two—yet by discussing them as he does, he in fact places them on equal footing. The situation is acceptable, Hennessy argues, because Stanford’s philosophy is “the wind of freedom blows” and because the First Amendment is so important. After all, who’s against free speech?

But this is not about free speech. It would be if Baraka were yelling his hateful speech on White Plaza’s common grounds and the University forcibly “muzzled” him. Instead, the issue is whether Stanford acted correctly in inviting Baraka to speak in the first place, placing a big microphone in front of him and thereby giving some legitimacy to his distortions.

Universities across the nation glorify hate when they invite it to their campuses. Let’s face a reality, shall we? A university has the ability to select among a myriad of “voices” to speak on issues. In doing so, it effectively frames the issues, because some students will eventually parrot those voices. With each selection comes some degree of judgment. In inviting Baraka, Stanford engaged in bad judgment, masqueraded as free speech.

Barak Lurie, ’85
Santa Monica, California

TA MEMORIES

“What You Don’t Know About Teaching Assistants,” an interview with fourth-year psychology graduate student Julie Heiser (Farm Report, March/April), was both instructive and amusing. In retrospect, those of us who were undergraduates in large lecture classes in the “pre-TA days” might wonder how our professors managed on their own. In the dim times before the advent of modern copy machines, teachers (or their office staff) had to struggle with messy mimeograph machines to produce rare handouts.

But some things have not changed, apparently, since I was a TA in English in 1964-65 (with my own class of 1A, 1B and 1C). Many Stanford undergraduates seemed as spoiled then as today. While I drove a ’53 Chevy, one of my freshmen tooled around in a new purple Corvette Sting Ray. In an American lit class, the brilliant professor Irving Howe used to do hilarious imitations of students calling him at home to request what he called “concessions.” As usual, it was a joke with a point. Living in New York City during the early 1930s, the impoverished Howe family repeatedly had to move to lower-priced apartments. When his father asked for a “concession” on the rent, one landlord replied, “A concession I don’t give. A concession you take!”

Although Heiser does a wonderful job of setting forth the stresses placed on TAs—not just from hard work but from student pressure for grades higher than they deserve, even with today’s grade inflation—she does not mention the pay. A few years ago, before I began receiving Social Security benefits, I noted that no withholdings had been made when I was a TA. In answer to my inquiry about this, Stanford Payroll sent me a curt reply stating that no SSI had been withdrawn from my earnings because I had been paid so little. Let me hope that Heiser and her fellows are doing a bit better.

Richard Lynde, MA ’66
Aromas, California

As a Stanford senior, I had the opportunity to be a TA in general biology. I was so motivated to do well that I scared the students with my intensity, including one star football player who never did do his lab homework. The experience was rewarding enough to convince me to continue teaching biology to undergraduates for the next 32 years.

Bruce W. Belman, ’69
Flagstaff, Arizona

Teaching assistants at Stanford get more than a “little training.” In addition to the one-day seminar mentioned in your article, the Center for Teaching and Learning provides a range of workshops and consultations throughout the academic year to train and support teaching assistants as well as to help graduate students prepare for future faculty positions. In addition, a growing number of departments on campus offer their own in-house TA training to address disciplinary-specific issues in the classroom.

In my current faculty position, I continue to rely on the training I received from the Center for Teaching and Learning and from Stanford’s sociology department. I am grateful for the many opportunities and the institutional support I received for teaching development.

Carol Caronna, MA ’94, PhD ’00
Towson, Maryland

Your “What You Don’t Know About” profile of teaching assistant Julie Heiser presents a humorous portrait of one individual’s experience of TAing at Stanford, but not a broadly accurate sense of the substantive issues facing TAs or the care with which these issues are generally addressed by most of the TAs themselves or by the departments that support them in their teaching.

As an important addendum to this article, here’s what we do know about TAs.

Every quarter, the Center for Teaching and Learning has the pleasure of working with hundreds of Stanford TAs who are deeply committed to their teaching and who participate in rigorous TA training programs in departments across campus, as well as in the many teaching workshops offered by CTL throughout the year. Our general impression of Stanford TAs is that a good many of them take advantage of virtually any and every program offered to support them in this. In fact, we have experienced a marked increase in attendance at all of our teaching workshops this academic year, particularly our quarterly TA orientations. We attribute this to a growing commitment to undergraduate education at Stanford, as well as to an awareness on the part of departments and TAs that developing pedagogical skills is a vital part of a graduate student’s professional preparation. We hope your readers realize the commitment the University is making to support TAs in their teaching at Stanford and in the academic careers many of them will pursue.

Michele Marincovich, ’68
Associate vice provost, undergraduate education
Director, CTL
Stanford, California

BIG SHOT

In the Christian Science Monitor of March 27, 2003, William Dean begins an article on basketball like this: “On December 30, 1936, . . . Hank Luisetti introduced the running one-handed basketball shot at Madison Square Garden while playing for Stanford. At the time, everyone else was shooting two-handed set shots or hook shots.”

Though I never remembered the date, I have often mentioned that event in telling friends that basketball once was a very different game, long before the days of the slam-dunk. And I was glad to point out that Luisetti (Examined Life, March/April) was from Stanford.

Irwin Abrams, ’34
Yellow Springs, Ohio

MISTAKEN IDENTITY

Why, over the past several years, has every Stanford obituary involving a member of Alpha Delta Phi identified the deceased as a member of Alpha Delta Tau? The latest error involved Ben Eastman, ’33 (March/April). Please give your obit writer a slap on the wrist and extract from him or her a promise that it will never happen again, especially when that person may soon be writing my obit, and, damn, I won’t be able to check on its accuracy.

David MacKenzie, ’40
Los Altos, California

Editor’s note: We apologize. The problem, a database error, has been fixed.

BADGE OF HONOR

Bob Zeidman (Letters, March/April) criticizes Stanford for actively recruiting gay frosh in the name of diversity, rhetorically asking, “Why not [also] recruit young women who have sex with older men, or young men attracted to younger girls?” The difference is that being gay is an identity, much like being part of an ethnic minority—or, for that matter, like being straight.

Mr. Zeidman then asks, “When did sexuality change from a private activity to a badge of honor?” Many students recruited by Stanford proudly identify themselves as straight; apparently he doesn’t see that as a private matter to be kept in the closet. By making homosexuality seem like just another fetish we don’t need to know about, he demonstrates that homophobia is alive and well in society.

Amori Yee Mikami, ’98, MA ’98
Berkeley, California

‘YOU CAVED IN’

Instead of praising and supporting alumni who go out into the world and do good (as opposed to those simply satisfied to do well), you caved in and sided with the reader who complained that two Class Notes entries aired “polemical and political views . . . essentially polarizing diatribes” (Letters, March/April).

Yikes! What diatribes? I read nothing of the sort, but rather two recitations of facts and experiences, which—however unpleasant they may have been to your reader—“kick ass.”

That you, too, felt obliged to characterize these Class Notes as ones “that promote overt political or ideological messages,” when only a misreading of those accounts could yield such a conclusion, leads one to believe that either these alumni and their life experiences are irrelevant to the Stanford community or Class Notes is merely pablum.

Stop walking on eggshells. Let the chips fall where they may. We can recognize polemics and politics when we read them, and particularly polarizing diatribes—none of which, notwithstanding your trembling assent, was present.

Anthony Pedatella
Pleasantville, New York

Reading STANFORD is always interesting, but the sequence of my most recent read was particularly ironic. I started my first flip-through with President Hennessy’s column, in which he pointed out that free speech is truly put to the test only when contentious issues are involved, and gave examples including the conflict in Israel and the occupied territories. Hennessy reaffirmed the principle of open, diverse and mutually respectful dialogue and reiterated that universities should exhibit greater, not less, freedom of expression than society at large.

I then flipped to Letters to the Editor and read the letter chiding the magazine for allowing “divisive submissions” in Class Notes. The editor responded by apologizing for failing to edit out “inappropriate material.” Wondering what this was all about, I picked up the preceding issue and flipped to the Class Note submissions in question. To my great surprise, both were merely dramatic first-person accounts of actual life experiences of these alumni in the West Bank.

The letter writer and the editor need to start by reviewing the modern-day definition of diatribe (“a bitter and abusive speech or writing, [or] ironical or satirical criticism,” according to Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary). There may be times when it is appropriate to censor actual diatribes, but it should not be taken lightly, and this was certainly not one of them. The problem here goes deeper, however. I don’t want to be told by anyone what authentic life experiences I can or cannot share with my Stanford contemporaries, whether or not political opinions can be inferred from them. If Stanford alumni aren’t qualified to freely share experiences in their Class Notes, who is?

Gus Hawkins, ’74
Las Vegas, Nevada

MAYORAL HONOR

I was surprised to read in Class Notes (March/April) that I had served as “a mayor in Hawaii.” While I would be proud to have done so, the honor really goes to Joanne Yukimura, ’71, the former mayor of Kauai.

Kai Nelson, ’71
Honolulu, Hawaii

TO TREAT OR NOT

I was delighted to see the article on E. Fuller Torrey (“Brain Storm,” January/February). He has been an inspiration to thousands of family members in the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill and has pushed for intensive research into schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

Unfortunately, there are still many mental health workers who have little background in the etiology of serious brain-chemistry disorders. Research is now extensive on the destruction of brain cells that occurs with every succeeding psychotic episode; it is likened to a firestorm in the brain. This has enormous implications in the continuing fight over involuntary treatment: we are condemning thousands of young people to a lifetime of Medicaid dependency, many of whom, if treated early on, could lead a full life in society, working, raising families and paying taxes. And, certainly, Dr. Torrey does not deny the importance of supportive therapy as part of rehabilitation. His efforts in the Treatment Advocacy Center are directed toward putting evaluation and diagnosis back into the hands of the medical profession, rather than the legal system.

Surely, when we are dealing with illnesses that so grossly distort the patient’s judgment, there must be a right to receive treatment as well as to resist it.

Mitzi Reichling Anderson, ’51
Past president, NAMI-Montana
Whitefish, Montana

LESSONS THAT LAST

It was a great pleasure to read your article on the teachers who changed students’ lives (January/February). I was particularly pleased to find that the teacher I would place in this category was among those listed. I attended a series of truly memorable classes with art professor Matt Kahn. My friends thought I was nuts when I stayed up all night creating compositions made of highly unlikely materials or whatever I was able to scrape together in time to meet a deadline. His responses to my projects were often brusque and intimidating, but I never failed to learn from them. And his slide shows, illustrating ideas in design through remarkable photography, have remained a source of inspiration to this day.

I’ve gone on to become an architect, working on public buildings in communities throughout the Bay Area. As head of the San Francisco AIA design awards program for many years, I was honored to be able to invite Professor Kahn to serve on one of our awards juries.

Over the passing years, I’ve been dismayed at what I perceive as a declining emphasis on creative studies at Stanford. It is particularly upsetting that the University hasn’t reinstated the architecture program, which was dropped the year after I graduated. But whatever their majors, I’m sure that all of the students who’ve had the opportunity to study under Professor Kahn have come away with their creative minds enlightened. I can only hope that they, too, have had opportunities to put his lessons into practice, helping to keep good design a priority in our communities.

Mark Schatz, ’76
Novato, California

Yes, the influence of those marvelous teachers endures and sustains. A few years back, when locked in heated discussion over a point of grammatical usage, my adversary cited his master’s in English from UCLA—and I unhesitatingly parried with the A grade I had received from “C-Plus Hudson” at Stanford. It carried the day.

Gale Guthrie, ’59
Cameron Park, California

Having followed Stanford University through your excellent magazine for many years, I want to tell you that I thoroughly enjoyed your article on how professors changed the lives of their students. It feels so good to be connected to Stanford.

Cayetano Paderanga Jr., PhD ’79
Quezon City, Philippines

PAYBACK TIME?

President Hennessy’s January/February column, “These Games Are Getting Out of Hand,” was point-perfect. If possible, perhaps the universities or the NCAA could require an individual on a basketball, football or baseball scholarship to repay the school for scholarship funds if the athlete opts to go pro before graduating. Assuredly, it’s a two-way street—but heavily in favor of professional athletics.

Richard Henigan, ’51
Woodland, California

SHOCK IN THE CITY

Frank Marx (Letters, January/February) notes that 1982 was the last year the Stanford Band rallied in San Francisco on the night before the Big Game, but he doesn’t mention why the longtime tradition was canceled. For those in the Band that year, the reason won’t be forgotten.

The Band’s annual pregame rally, taking to the streets of San Francisco without a permit, was a motley affair. As hundreds of students marched alongside the Band, the noisy crowd shut down traffic thoroughfares. That Saturday night, less than 20 hours before the infamous Play, the Band turned a corner and marched down a narrow street. I was playing acoustic string bass that year and had even borrowed an aluminum bass for the weekend, knowing that Berkeley students would rain trash on us at the game. As we marched, playing music all the way, a silver car came out of a parking garage and turned uphill, but was paralyzed by the Band marching downhill and the crowd of Stanford students behind. Shockingly, the driver stepped on the gas and plowed into a group of us, missing me by inches but breaking the arm of a student to my right and causing mayhem and sadness among us all. He left the scene as a hit-and-run driver, but I believe was apprehended a block or two away.

As a result, the University prohibited the pregame rallies in the City. For those marching that night, the hit-and-run was as great a shock as the Play the next day. One-upped by events later that weekend, the rally faded from collective memory. But for many of us, the emotional scars are real.

Ben Austin, ’85, MS ’86
Brooklyn, New York

MUSIC TO HER EARS

I enjoyed your article on the Play (November/December), having played with the Band that day. Twenty years later, a friend here in Germany who reads the military newspaper Stars and Stripes told me I was pictured in the paper’s sports section in an article on the Play. It’s nice to know that I am still recognizable.

I must take issue with a comment in your “Campus Notebook” in the same issue. In announcing that Giancarlo Aquilanti accepted the post of director of the Band, you stated that “he is attempting to teach members how to read music.” While the majority of Band members are not music majors, they are musicians. They have been members of their high school bands and are talented people who join the Band for a fun social outlet to offset the tough academic schedules they often pursue. The Band consistently puts out quality recordings. We can joke about the antics, the political halftime shows and the fun, but do not belittle the musicians.

Ann Remley Scheder-Bieschin, ’85
Koenigstein, Germany

WELL-DESERVED TRIBUTE

The obituary for Robert Carver North (November/December) brought back memories of my graduate school days on the Farm. I only had one course with Dr. North, but I still have the books from the course.

He was a notably gentle person, as Ole Holsti observed. I would add only three comments. First, from the memorial message, some might infer that North invented content analysis. He did not, but he and his colleagues, mainly PhD students, applied and expanded that research approach. Second, before he became a Stanford fixture, he wrote a popular political novel, Revolt in San Marcos (Houghton Mifflin, 1949). Third, among my doctoral-candidate cohort it was said that when North completed his PhD oral exams, his committee rose and applauded his performance. Whether or not that’s true, anyone who spent time with Bob North was aware that he was a remarkable person.

Thomas P. Wolf, MA ’61, PhD ’67
New Albany, New York

CORRECTIONS

A caption on page 43 of “Read All About It” (March/April) misidentified Daily staffer Nancy Raff, ’85.

The caption on page 49 of “Winning Ways” (March/April) misspelled the names of Law School instructors Alexandra Lahav and Michelle Friedland.

The first and last names of student researcher Tzvetie Erohina were reversed in “Frozen Assets” (March/April).

Major Smith’s Box was written by Klaus Brauer (Shelf Life, March/April).