THE SOUND AND FURY

The Newsletter of  the Glorious Class of  1958 

 Vol 50.   No. 5                                  e-mail address:  john.murphy18@comcast.net                             August September 2008

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Editor’s note:  This edition of  the Sound and Fury, the fi rst since our Glorious 50th, includes correspondence relating to the trustees’

decision.  As we are all aware (I think), the lawsuit was dismissed following the election of  the Association of  Alumni. In spite of  the

fact that so many of  these email messages, letters and post cards were addressed to an issue that can be called “moot,” I felt it important

to continue to provide a forum for the views and opinions of  our classmates.  I’ve put your comments in no particular order -  some of  the

notes were received after the reunion, some before the reunion, some before the results of  the election  were announced, and some after.

Bryant Bernard:  I’ll be there for the 50th.  I favor Larry Hampton’s idea.  I fi nd the various reports of  support

for either side troubling.  I can get no answers from Dartmouth as to their specifi c problems with the status quo.  I

suggest the college would not be happy with any open meeting about the vote.  My informal poll runs 60-70% in

favor of  status quo (Parity).

Joel Potash:  I appreciate your presentation of  your stance re: Alumni /Board of  Trustees relationships.  Personally

I am not enough involved in the day to day year to year machinations to understand (yet) what the major issues are. 

Some of  my best classes were huge ones.  I never was in favor of  fraternities.  My education at Dartmouth changed

my life.  I guess I trust the college.

Marty Griffi th:  John:  It’s simple mathematics.  If  the college doesn’t want to lose half  of  their alumni support,

they need to keep politics out of  their publications.  Best regards, Marty

Doug Pease: Dear John, I have been away from Hanover for fi fty years; the whole meaning of  “Dartmouth” is

what it means to me from my time as a student there. Since that time the College has become a co-ed university

determined to stay ahead of  world changes at least fast enough to attract new applicants every year. This is a far cry

from the Dartmouth I attended, where three of  my professors taught my dad thirty years before and where we were

virtually locked by weather and geography into a monastery-like retreat dedicated to exploring truths in the humani-

ties on our way to becoming “well-rounded” citizen-scholars. Those were the days when we wept for joy as we

listened to Mr. Hovey’s melodic assertion that we had the granite of  New Hampshire in our muscles and our brains;

truly, things have changed.

 What possible benefi t can I, or any other ‘58 for that matter, proffer to Dartmouth, beyond contributing

cold, hard cash? Anyone who has been reading the letters to the editor in Dartmouth Alumni Magazine over the

past decades must be dazed, as I am, at the huge variety of  responses, opinions, and demands from alumni to do

this or that differently to keep the Dartmouth Spirit alive. That Dartmouth Spirit will die with you and me and the

rest of  our classmates and with the other alumni who have entered the wide, wide world.  The College is now a very

different place –just look at the new construction, and it’s a business competing every year for new students, teach-

ers, and administrators. 

 It really doesn’t matter if  one side or the other wins the current litigation for control of  Dartmouth’s gov-

ernance and destiny. It does not matter because neither side has made the effort to defi ne just what it is that makes

Dartmouth special for just what kind of  applicant. Other universities do this, to great effect for both the students

and the institution. I have interviewed local high school and prep school candidates in the Dartmouth application

process for more than twenty years, and no admissions staff  person has made it clear to me just what kind of  young

man or young woman we really want to encourage to attend the campus in Hanover. This does me a disservice,

because I don’t know what I’m talking about when I say how great Dartmouth would be for this or that candidate.

This does the candidate a disservice; they all want to go to Dartmouth because it was so beautiful during their June

and July tours of  eastern campuses. This does Dartmouth a disservice, because it cannot defi ne what it is about.

So I’m not voting in this self-destruct situation… there won’t be any ‘winner’ until someone… be it the next presi-

dent, the new board of  trustees, or an angry mass of  alumni, can weld together a framework that refl ects what the

college is, what it wants to be, and whom it can best nourish on his or her way to becoming a well-rounded citizen.

When I see that, I’ll vote. The rest is the stuff  dreams are made on. 

Butch Colla:  Subject:  Late newsletter:  John:  Hope the reunion was a good one.  Sorry that we could not make it. 

And thanks for all your good work editing and publishing “The Sound and Fury.”

Thought you might want to know that your “April 2008” newsletter arrived in my mail today (June 19)  It was

correctly addressed, so I have no idea what took so long.  Since I don’t know what your mailing process is, I can’t

explain the delay….could be the good old United States Postal Service. Ed. Note:  A few other classmates have pointed out

the lateness – some have suggested the delay was part of  a “plot” by the College.  In fairness, I have to mention that, while the newslet-

ter had “April” as the caption, I forwarded the newsletter to the College on the fi rst of  May.  This fact, coupled with the fact that, when

photographs are involved, the publishing process is not only more expensive, but also causes another extension of  the turnover date.  P.S.

We missed you, Butch

Guy Berghoff       John, OK, I give up.  After spending most of  my life basically ignoring the Dartmouth scene, I

now feel an urge - maybe an obligation - to speak up and at least express my views on what I see as the great hypoc-

risy (? where is spellcheck when you need it?) of  2008.  The impetus was two-fold: your outstanding editorial on the

Hidden Agenda, and your decision to include Mike Wygant’s letter in Sound & Fury, which I found on target in

almost all aspects.

 First of  all, like Mike, Frank Gado and who knows how many others, I am not a contributor to either the

Alumni Fund or class dues. The hypocrisy is the assumption that by making contributions to the college you are

automatically a more loyal alumnus.  The problem is if  you disagree with the actions of  the administration, how can

you possibly support them fi nancially?  As long as the money rolls in nothing changes, and everyone accepts the sta-

tus quo.  And those who say they disagree but continue to funnel funds into the coffers of  the administration, they

are the most serious offenders.  Contributing to the college while disagreeing with its policies is not a demonstration

of  loyalty.  It’s a demonstration of  illogical action.  And so the only way for any individual to express disapproval,

besides writing commentaries or the like, is to withhold fi nancial support and hope that others do the same, for a

cumulative withholding would at least be a start to perhaps exert some minor infl uence in the direction of  the col-

lege. 

 But now comes the tougher issue.  If  one believes as I do that one of  the highest long term rewards for any

program of  giving is to attempt to improve the quality of  higher education, and one’s conscience dictates that vari-

ous actions by the Dartmouth administration preclude such contributions, then what do you do?  In my case it was

to keep my eyes and ears open to any alternative that might be doing things better, and I found one - Grove City

College, a small college in western Pennsylvania that as an attorney you might remember it being in the forefront

of  major litigation twenty years ago brought by the government concerning academic freedom and independence. 

And so in the absence of  a realistic Dartmouth alternative, my donations - sparse and intermittent as they are - go

to Grove City, at least until there is evidence of  a major turnaround in the direction of  the college.  Which I guess

makes me not only disloyal, but in the eyes of  probably a majority of  my classmates, a traitor to the cause.   

Bob Bolinger  John, the last two class newsletters have been excellent!  Not being located in Hanover, I too have

never connected with the class of  ‘58 like some of  the class politicians (not my defi nition but what I have heard

other members use to describe our leaders).  Your editorial regarding the governance issue is the best analysis of  the

issue that I have read, especially since you did not have a preconceived opinion or an “axe to grind.”  Every other

writing was biased and often slanted.  In some instances, I believe the writers were confl icted per their positions in

the class or as representatives of  the administration.  Not so in your case!  See you in Hanover soon!  The 50th will

not have the “feel” I anticipated for years that it would have!  I am returning to see my classmates - it is the thing to

do.

Bob Bolinger (again, in note to Cack):  I agree with your thoughts re Dartmouth’s Greatness and totally disagree

with Jeff  Immelt and somewhat disagree with Ralph.  The sad thing is that all of  this could have been prevented

if  there was some diplomacy on both sides, especially the Admin and Haldemann.  They have the votes to control

the Board now so what do they want?  A member of  the Development Offi ce visited with me several years ago and

stated, “ President Wright wants more board seats to sell.”  What a turnoff  !

Harv Wilson  John,  I want to pass on a well deserved “Attaboy!” for your rare personal editorial on the Alumni

Trustee dispute in the Class Newsletter.  Dartmouth is indeed a strange place where a “Vast Right Wing Conspira-

cy” employs their hated enemy the trial lawyer to defend cherished liberal principles such as the rule of  law, voting

rights, due process and sense of  community.  I for one am glad that somebody stood up for my contractual right to

participate in the election of  half  of  the Board of  Trustees.  My sixth grade civics teacher Mrs. Shaffer would have

approved - she believed in all that Teddy Roosevelt Trust Busting kind of  stuff.  Elected scoundrels can be voted

out of  offi ce; anointed scoundrels last forever.  It is therefore my high honor to bestow upon you the Mrs. Shaffer

Award for 2008.  Harv          

Thank you for trying deskUNPDF.  This free trial is limited to one page

conversions for the purpose of evaluating deskUNPDF’s capabilities.

If you wish to obtain unrestricted functionality in deskUNPDF, please visit

www.docudesk.com to purchase or learn more about our PDF software solutions.