SOVIET STORIES
Your story on the Soviet archives at the Hoover Institution ("Cracking the Kremlin Files," May/June) brings back a memory from my freshman year at Harvard. One of my roommates, whose father worked for the Stanford Research Institute (SRI), passed along the following story:
Khrushchev made a visit to the United States in the late 1950s. One of his stops was to be at SRI. His hosts there thought they could make the experience more friendly by typing up signs in Russian and putting them up throughout SRI. There was only one wrinkle: they needed a typewriter with a Russian keyboard. As it turned out, the only Russian-language typewriter anybody knew about was at the Hoover Institution. It belonged to, of all people, Alexander Kerensky -- the Russian Social Revolutionary Party leader overthrown by the Communists in 1917.
A ruse was arranged to get Kerensky out of his office for a while. Somebody from SRI sneaked in and typed up the signs. The signs were posted, Khrushchev appreciated the gesture -- and Kerensky was none the wiser.
Steven H. Johnson, MBA '82
Annapolis, Maryland
"Cracking the Kremlin Files" was a natural for me because I teach Russian history. On a tour I once led to the Soviet Union, I had a friendly confrontation with about 300 Soviet teachers. At one point I asked them whether they had ever heard of Herbert Hoover. The answer was, "Of course. He brought about the Depression." When I told them about his relief work in their country, and the huge banner of gratitude in the library, they were quite astonished.
Nelson Norman, '39
El Cajon, California
WHAT IS TRUTH?
The reaction of many in academia to David Stoll's exposé of Rigoberta Menchú is very instructive: truth is merely a human construct ("Truth and Consequences," May/June). Although Ms. Menchú's book has been demonstrated to be rife with falsehoods, exaggerations and distortions, this in no way discredits it in the minds of the multiculturati and the apostles of diversity. "It's the message, stupid," regardless of its veracity, or so we are led to believe.
We see the results of this anti-rationalist thinking throughout our society: the notion that one's "feelings" are the only truth upon which one can rely. And as we cultivate this concept of life-with-no-moral-certainty, we reap its bitter fruit in the halls of Columbine High.
Gary Barton, '81
Ripon, California
"Truth and Consequences" was both enlightening and saddening. It appears that anthropology professor Renato Rosaldo is among Menchú's politically correct academic apologists. If this is so, I am saddened because I was privileged to study at Stanford with his now-deceased wife, Michelle Rosaldo, from 1974 to 1976, when she and Jane Collier were inventing feminist anthropology. One of Shelley's memorable class exercises was watching the "monkey movies" and the "primitive tribe movies" with their "Man the Hunter" narration on -- and then watching again with the sound turned off.
Nor did the women's movement, with its own developing mythology, escape Shelley's laser-sharp mind. What she taught us was the finest that Stanford gave me: how to discover and decode propaganda; how to think independently and analyze rigorously; and how to observe keenly and critique thoroughly. I hope this standard of excellence is still being taught at Stanford.
Ann Thryft (Ann T. Nelson), '76
San Mateo, California
'LIFT YOUR HEADS, GIRLS'
The photo of the synchronized swimmers (Farm Report, May/June) snapped me back to nose clips, slicked hair, waterproof mascara and the admonition, "Lift your heads, girls, and smile -- don't spit or gasp for air." Kudos to the championship team, but let's set the record straight: the synchronized swimming exhibition on May 23 was not Stanford's first.
Back in the '50s, when women did not have any teams, intramural or varsity, there was a gang of wannabes fired by the presence of one superstar -- singles and doubles national champion Sally Phillips. She could not train in the Roble pool, so a cadre of volunteer lifeguards rose at dawn, shivered as they changed in a dank space under some bleachers at the men's pool, and swam with her. After a while, someone left us an extension cord and a heater. Every spring, there was a show, usually with repeat performances. With little budget, we created routines, practiced, made costumes and swam our hearts out.
Susan Brady Alfaro, '57
San Francisco, California
SORORITY DAYS
Your latest issue is full of information and creativity, but I was dismayed to read "The Estrogen Shack" (Student Voice, May/June), a pathetic attempt to justify the revival of sororities on campus.
The main reason I chose Stanford some 51 years ago was that sororities had been banished, and I knew my friends and I wouldn't have to go through the cruel and hurtful process called Rush. We had sororities at my high school; I had joined one in self-defense and learned just how mean and petty the members can be.
I do hope this unfortunate decision will be reconsidered. Surely in these days of political correctness, we don't need to reject our peers on the basis of race, religion or the color of their nail polish.
Merla Zellerbach, '52
San Francisco, California
I enjoyed reading "The Estrogen Shack," having hashed at the Tri Delt house in '46 and '47 and having married a Tri Delt, Lois Chapman, '47. I'll never forget Mrs. Osborne, the house mother, and Mae, the cook. We hashers had a great time.
Tom Fishel, '47
Santa Maria, California
SELLING OUT THE STANFORDS
Well, President Casper has trashed yet another Stanford tradition -- the Leland Stanford Jr. Museum. In his column in the May/June issue, he trumpets the new Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Center for Visual Arts at Stanford. The new name for the Stanford Museum is the reward for a multimillion-dollar gift from the Cantors.
Jane Stanford was the prime mover for a museum to display masterpieces she and her son collected around the world. The Board of Trustees in 1902 accepted this largesse of art treasures and bestowed the name of the founders' son on the new campus landmark. For more than a century, the Stanford name graced the museum -- until Casper's sticky fingers elicited a gift emasculating this hallowed tradition.
The National Gallery in London, the Louvre in France and the Metropolitan Museum in New York all survive nicely without name changes to appease donors. But as Casper continues his plunder of campus traditions, alumni should be prepared for the Shell Memorial Church, PG&E Stadium, Microsoft Quad, Patty Hearst Palm Drive and Rolling Stones Building 10.
That grinding sound you hear is Jane and Leland Stanford turning in their graves.
Eugene Danaher, MBA '45, PhD '46
Tallahassee, Florida
REGENT WILSON
Having read "Reagan's Man in the Vatican," your excellent article about former Vatican ambassador Bill Wilson (Spotlight, May/June), I would like to add an important contribution he made to higher education in California. Governor Reagan appointed Bill to the UC Board of Regents, where he served with distinction for more than a decade. He was most active as a member of the committee on investments, the policy-making group responsible for the investments of the regents' pension fund and all endowment funds. Bill for many years was an outstanding member of the committee, besides being a wonderful person.
Owsley B. Hammond, MBA '36
Oakland, California
NEXT BEST THING TO BEING THERE
I had noticed in a recent Class Notes column the news that Virginia Whittington Weber, '46, MA '47, was the model for Greg Brown's mural at the Stanford Shopping Center. I alerted my former colleagues at Stanford to go see it on one of their lunchtime walks -- but I didn't expect to be able to see it myself. Thanks for printing a photo of the mural ("Model Mother-in-Law," May/June) so those of us who can't get there can see it, too.
Marilyn Gildea
Incline Village, Nevada
PROVOKING THOUGHT
Your May/June issue was profoundly interesting, with outstanding articles about the Kremlin files, the quirky cartoonist, the anthropologist's exposé of an ultra-liberal who won the Nobel Peace Prize and, especially, the article on genetic geographer Luca Cavalli-Sforza and his study of DNA history. Even with my busy schedule, I found these all extremely thought-provoking. Keep up the fine work; this is truly one of your best.
Don C. Whitaker
Irvine, California
HOPE FOR DYSLEXICS
Congratulations to Theresa Johnston and Charles Schwab for "Charles Schwab's Secret Struggle" (March/April). The article accurately portrays the situation so many dyslexic students are facing today.
Sixteen years ago, Nicki McMahan, '69, and I helped found Chartwell School on the Monterey peninsula. The school gives dyslexic students the skills they need to return to mainstream education. We now have a number of former students graduating from college. The curriculum is phonetically based, multisensory and highly structured.
Dyslexic students are bright and often very creative. Frequently, in the public schools, they are placed in resource rooms that focus on a multitude of learning problems, but not on the needs of dyslexics. If left to fail, these students may develop socially unacceptable types of behavior -- in other words, they fall between the cracks. Your article, which we have distributed to our students' families, our trustees and our donors, will give hope to many dyslexics and will support them in their efforts to overcome their difficulties.
Jennefer Lloyd Santee, '53
Seaside, California
MATTER OF DEBATE
As a techie, I commend the effort to "beef up the science and math literacy of American students" by teaching "essential scientific concepts" to nontechnical students in classes that are both "rigorously scientific and generally accessible" ("A New Spin on Science," March/April). But how disappointed I was to see that the concept of evolution was deemed essential.
The use of the term evolution to describe the adaptation of a single species to its environment (for example, moths in different locations) is not such a big deal in these times when we allow words to have many meanings. However, having a distinguished professor teach the notion that "we evolved from single-celled organisms that lived in water" is disturbing. The assumptions underlying the links in this theory have been discredited.
Teaching debatable theories as "essential" misleads the student. Over the years, I have been saddened by politically correct views being taught as truth, typically in nontechnical disciplines. I would hope that techies would focus on what we know to be true scientific laws and leave unsupported postulations for a different venue.
David W. Kurz, MS '85
Parker, Colorado
MISSION: ADMISSION
"Take My Sister, Please" (End Notes, March/April) echoed my own situation. It would have meant a lot to my sister, a '99 graduate, if I had received admission. I was disappointed, too, because Stanford is the school I have always wanted to go to. Your article is a reminder that I just have to work harder and hope that I can transfer in, like the older sister in the article.
Cecille Bernabe
Lancaster, California
NO APPLICATION NECESSARY
Whenever I read about the University's rigorous admission procedures ("They'll Try Anything," March/April), I don't know whether to hide or just feel lucky. I seem to have slipped in between the cracks.
I first enrolled in 1942. I was a sophomore at Monmouth College in Illinois when World War II started, and I wanted to get as many credits as possible before the military snatched me out of school, so I decided to attend a summer session at Stanford. Being rather naive, I hitchhiked out with a friend and arrived at the campus on registration day without ever having written the admission office. I didn't even bring along my transcripts. I expected a warm welcome -- and Stanford did not disappoint. My appointed adviser lined me up with the classes I wanted. I returned to Monmouth in the fall and managed to graduate that June, six days before the U.S. Navy requested my presence.
When I got out of the Navy in 1946, I returned to Stanford to get my master's degree -- again arriving unannounced. Since Stanford policy was to readmit any former student who had been in the military, I was again warmly welcomed.
Sixteen years after completing my master's in psychology, I found myself back in Palo Alto looking for a job. It was two weeks into fall quarter, but I was offered a doctoral fellowship in the Stanford International Development Education Center. There I earned a PhD -- again without completing an application.
I suspect my experience is not very common. I cannot attribute it to my superior qualifications, because they were in fact quite ordinary: I didn't make the National Honor Society in high school or Phi Beta Kappa in college. However, I did do well on the GRE -- which I took several terms into my PhD program.
Donald R. Liggett, MA '48, PhD '70
Gig Harbor, Washington
CHEAPER IN CHICAGO
As current grad students, we are sympathetic with the housing plight of Stanford's graduate students and admire the restraint they have displayed ("Gimme Shelter," January/February).
Other schools have suffered disruptive strikes over graduate issues. As we considered postgraduate training, the expense of living in Northern California influenced our decision. We decided to stay in downtown Chicago -- it's cheaper, and we don't need a car!
Kate Knepper, '93
Gavin Polhemus, '94
Chicago, Illinois
The following letters did not appear in the print edition of Stanford
TECHIES VS. FUZZIES
For many years I hardly glanced at my copy of Stanford. But lately I found myself reading more and more of it, until suddenly I realized that I had even read the ads! As a scientist-nonscientist couple, my wife Elinore, MA '69, and I enjoyed your article on teaching science courses in a new way ("A New Spin on Science," March/April). We like the way you select articles of general interest with a Stanford connection.
Norbert Herschkowitz
Bern, Switzerland
The article "A New Spin on Science" was interesting. The idea of teaching science in context is worthy. The article commented that science folks take liberal arts courses, but "fuzzies" are not involved in science. That may be true as far as it goes, but there is a curious phenomenon that occurs in the reverse direction, in particular with engineers. At the risk of stereotyping, I have worked with many engineers over the course of years, and they do have a general tendency to think in black and white. If they indeed were exposed to more artistic endeavors, they must have forgotten. Physicists seem better able to see from an artistic perspective, even within the context of science. Geologists, while often whimsical, at least on occasion encompass that wider view. Engineers, though, seem so confusingly narrow and miss so much. The black-and-white thinking and seeming inability to understand much outside of their narrow discipline makes them extremely poor managers, as they cannot fully integrate the human experience into their thinking. So, while it may be that some people are not adequately exposed to science, it may also be necessary to address science-oriented people's inability to benefit from the supposed exposure they have had to the artistic side of life.
John Phillips
Sandy, Oregon
IT DOESN'T ADD UP
I took a class in logic 50 years ago at Stanford, and while it didn't all make sense at the time, over the years I have learned to think with some logic. And then I read "Wanted, Female Faculty" (March/April). My understanding of affirmative action is that it gives women and minorities the opportunity to participate in programs that traditionally have been denied them. I was never aware that it also guaranteed results; that a certain number would be provisionally granted tenure or doctorates or degrees in law.
According to Gary Buff, the U.S. Labor Dept. attorney, the statement by provost Condoleezza Rice that she would not apply affirmative action at the time of tenure suggests ''that she doesn't believe in affirmative action programs." And, of course, some $500 million in annual grants to Stanford is at stake.
But back to the logic. I know some Stanford alumni will write in shooting my example all to hell -- but here goes anyway.
Let's say that:
A+B=C
X+Y=Z
A=a fully qualified candidate for admission.
B=a completion of all requirements.
C=a full graduate status.
X=a conditionally qualified candidate.
Y=a provisional completion of requirements.
Z=a conditionally provisional graduate.
Now, I would like to ask attorney Buff: if he needed a triple bypass, would he choose a heart specialist vith a diploma on his or her wall that states, "I am fully accredited," or "I am conditionally accredited?"
Kenneth F. Anderson, '50
Pine Valley, California
'FACULTY BRAT'
While reading about admissions ("How It Works at Stanford," January/February), I was pleased to find that I had been admitted from one of the "favored constituencies" - children of faculty and staff.
I'm quite sure I would never have become a Stanford grad had I not been the son of Dr. H. H. Fisher, Chairman of the Hoover Institution and Library. I had a terrible academic record in high school and a court record too. In 1951 I dropped out of Stockton Junior College and joined the U.S. Navy. Following service, including a tour of minesweeper duty in Korean waters, and marriage, I tried Menlo College and did okay. I then took the College Boards, hoping to get into Stanford. I got in.
I graduated three years later with a BA in History. I tried unsuccessfully to get into the History MA program, but was admitted to Anthropology's graduate program. The rest, as they say, is history (more accurately, anthropology). Before I completed my dissertation, I taught at UC-Santa Barbara, and later took a job in the Anthropology Department at the University of Alberta, where I remained until retirement a few years ago.
While there I was a tireless advocate of minority groups' right to a first-class education. I suggested that the university allow aboriginal languages to fulfill the "second language" requirement. I fought against discriminatory testing. I supported the Women's Studies Programme and the School of Native Studies. I fought for the admission of nonmatriculated, older students (as I had been when I was admitted to Stanford).
I'm pleased that I seem to come by my advocacy of affirmative action legitimately. I'm very grateful to Stanford for giving this "faculty brat" a second chance. I'm especially grateful to men like Bill Bark, Fee Keesing, and George Knoles for their support and encouragement. I think they gave me a good education and the right attitude. I've tried to pass this on to generations of University of Alberta anthropology students.
A.D. Fisher, '58, MA '59, PhD '66
Cobble Hill, British Columbia
SKATING ON THIN ICE
Call me old and crotchety, and many have, but I was appalled on my recent visit to the Stanford campus for Alumni Day to see all the skateboarders and the damage they have caused. They were at the entrance to the main Quad, jumping over and off the historic stone railings and steps and scarring the old walkways. I saw evidence of damage to concrete curbs, walkways and benches in many areas of the campus.
It seems counterproductive to raise millions of dollars for repair of earthquake damage and then to allow irresponsible skateboarders to create new damage.
Judith Cleaver, '54
Carmichael, California 95608
THE REAL WORLD
I think there should be a Stanford support center or counseling center for soon-to-be-graduates who are facing the dilemma of leaving the best intellectual and residential situation in the world and going out to "sell out" in the real world.
For me, this was the greatest trauma of my life. Bending my knowledge to fit into the common, sordid mass of American cultural poverty nearly killed me. It's a long way down from near-omniscience to the despair we all face, in spite of all the hopeful propaganda.
Bruce W. Ashford, '78
Kaneohe, Hawaii
Address letters to:
Letters to the Editor
Stanford magazine
Arrillaga Alumni Center
326 Galvez Street
Stanford, CA 94305-6105
Or fax to (650) 725-8676; or send us an email. You may also submit your letter online. Letters may be edited for length, clarity and civility. Please note that your letter may appear in print, online or both.
