"By His Own Tongue"

(Ed. Note--The Crimson does not necessarily endorse opinions expressed in printed communications. No attention will be paid to anonymous letters and only under special conditions, at the request of the writer, will names be with held.)

To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

I should like to reopen the criticism of your editorial "On the Tribune."

The basis for the whole argument appeared in the columns of the Chicago Tribune, which stated that Harvard's attempt to procure Wesley Fisher as basketball coach and assistant football coach was a timely gesture. It commented further that Harvard had changed its mind a few years ago about being more content to have a football team of Beacon Hill blood than one of South Boston Irish, and lauded this offer to Fisher as an extension of a slowly growing policy to recognize people other than New Englanders. It stated that this particular instance of the policy indicated perhaps that Harvard would rather lose to Notre Dame on the football field than win from Oxford on the cinder path. In conclusion, the article said that for the good of the country, it would be better if Harvard bathed more in the Mississippi River than in the English Channel.

The CRIMSON editorial next appeared, from which I quote the expressions ""breezy westerners, stucco and tin of World's Fairs, new city with insurgent time for tradition and family to prove their merits, unthinking natives, ignorance, bad taste, jealousy. Anglophobe tendencies" applied obviously to the westerners, and the expressions "dignity, traditions, demand for solid cultural food" applied to the author's beloved New Englanders. By these very words, the editor betrayed a prejudicial opinion. Not only did he unjustly criticize the middle west, but he did so with the typical New England snobbishness of which the Tribune spoke. He stood branded by his own tongue.

Just to assure readers of the CRIMSON that he was an utter ass, (as well as snob), he added an editor's note to one of the letters received criticizing his article. The letter concluded, "Boston, we agree, is the Hub of the Universe. Everything else is in motion." The editor appended, "And one might add, going around in circles." Of course, to include Germany with its scientific progress, New York, and so on, in a remark of this kind, is conclusive proof that the editor is in harmony with a page from Stephen Leacock's fun book, on which a map of the world appears according to a Bostonian. Of course, it is a map of Boston.

The whole argument boils down to the most universal dispute among boys at bearding school--that of the superiority of their home city. Of course there is no criterion for a city. It might be said, however, that Boston is proud of its still observed customs of curtseying patronesses, strictly chaperoned sub-debs, of its absurd blue laws (or else why does it not change them?), and the like. Fortunately, Chicago is young. It is systematically planned. Unbound by braking customs, it is not afraid to progress. Indeed, it has advanced in great strides. Walter J. Watson '36.

(Ed Note--After a through investigation of the whole case and after numerous stimulating dives into communications similar to that reprinted above, the CRIMSON finds no reason to retract any statement in its editorial "On the Tribune" which appeared on February 6. Characteristic of the complaints has been the childish tendency to segregate trenchant words and phrases from their context, to ignore all qualifications whatsoever. A careful reconsideration of the editorial should serve as a calming influence. As a denouncement let it be known that the writer of the editorial is a midwesterner.)