CONCERN CAUSED

Hokitika Guardian, 24 May 1932, Page 5

CONCERN CAUSED

COARSE REMARKS

IN UNIVERSITY PUBLICATION

lßy Telegraph-*- Per Press Association ) .^-#|^fN;-May'22. The character ' tonb of, recent articles and.- corr^si^irdenceiin the Critic, ’ edited and-, published at the University by-the>stbdeiits,' liaVe given rise to concern among members of tile University Council and the Professorial Bbiihd.' ■ r %-y-fhA

■ Attacks have been ‘"made on the administration of the University and also upon the staff, with 1 reference to the recent decisions of the ; Council in respect of the" capping carnival, and at its ’last meeting the '? Council took official notice of certain v issues of the paper. After the matter .■ had been discussed in committee, it was decided that a special meeting should be held.

This took place and the question of what action should be taken was further discussed. ~At the-conclusion of the meeting, from which- the Press was excluded, it was announced by the registrar, Mr H.-.'Chapman, that lie had been authorised,-,to report merely that severe disciplinary action had f been taken by the Council; with regard j?i to certain recent issues 1 .of.:.the' mm “Critic.”

SOME EXTRCTS QUOTED. MANY REMARKS OFFENSIVE. DUNEDIN, May 23k # The greatest objection was taken to a letter in “Critic” of April 29 on the subject of capping a brief extract from which should suffice as follows:—■-

“Apparently the council considers that it is in the unutterable imbecility i of a concert that a student achieves % his higher expression. There are £ cynics who would agree with the i council. Members of that august body' squat in their free seats and roar with boorish approval at the inanities provided for their amusement. Hermaphroditic youths parade their narrow chests', and a vague sex-touch . . . .

draws down a Dodona smile from the old gentleman of the: circle. ‘This- is good, this is rich, they’ is-ay,, and wink Ibeherou sly at: each other. So long as the farce has -enough to please the public and' enough clothing to pass -the censor, it is a howl- •• ing -success. A well-known professor’s -• comment on the performance deserve® | to he engraved on tablets of brass, ‘Thank God I can go home -and read | my Bible.’ .It is. a pity that hie ,V, opinion is not shared by his col- j leagues,” .. . 1 An article on “Hospital Hogwash” on Mkrch IS gives further evidence of V the execrable taste of this university ' paper. The writer stated:—“l pointed out that without pornography the .! varsity would be dead. He pointed 3; out thaf it was. I agreed, and added that it stank. He said I was being } coarse, and again I (and you) agreed. J So being in coarse vein, I vdAit oh to say -some more about professors roughly 'j; as follows.” 3

Then follow most offensivejpriticismis 1 of professors. Though it is a University paper, “Critic” has a circulation which is not confined to the academic sphereTt is taken into homes and offices by students, and comes tinder the eyes of hundreds of citizens.