'BRUTALLY HONEST'
I want to thank both Stanford and Joel Smith for "Falling Apart" (January/February). Joel and I arrived at Stanford just one year apart, and although I only met him on a few occasions, I have fond memories and was incredibly moved by his brutally honest article. Such writing serves as inspiration for the great numbers of us who struggle through our daily lives impaired to some degree by mental illness. As I read Joel's words, I wanted to be able to tell him that I have been where he was and to thank him for sharing a part of his journey. I just hope that if he had asked me, I would have had lunch with him and tried to understand.
Michael Thompson, MA '77
San Jose, California
What a wonderful article by Joel Smith -- honest, objective, articulate. The general public's ignorance and misperceptions of mental illness can only be addressed through education provided by those who are affected and those who treat them. It's been my impression that the former are too often unable, and the latter too often unwilling, to do so. Joel shows a rare combination of experience, talent and vision in taking advantage of this opportunity. I hope that he'll continue to do so.
John Hanson
Middlebury, Vermont
Joel Smith's provocative article has jolted me into realizing things about myself that I never knew before and has put me on the road to healing.
Jane R. Moridi, '62
Sacramento, California
REMEMBERING LAMSON
"Was It Murder?" (January/February) brought back memories of the impact the David Lamson case had on Stanford journalism students. In the spring of 1933, we were working on an assignment involving a make-believe campus crime, when suddenly the real thing happened. Reporters from the four San Francisco dailies swarmed over the campus, hanging out at the journalism department. We had our own tragic sidebar when Buford Brown, a mild-mannered journalism professor, committed suicide. He was a neighbor of the Lamsons and was apparently despondent over the case.
On a positive note, the interest in Stanford inspired the San Francisco papers to hire campus stringers. In those days, a stringer cut out the stories he or she could claim, pasted them together and earned 25 cents an inch. I was a stringer for the Call-Bulletin at Lamson's fourth and final trial. A reporter had been assigned but never showed up, so I was alone when the judge declared a mistrial and ordered Lamson's release. When I phoned my city editor, he said I must follow Lamson home and report on his reunion with his family.
I wish I could say I reported a first-class story about the emotional homecoming of a man who had been on Death Row, but I was too inexperienced to do it justice. The Call-Bulletin did have a fine story, but it was the work of a gifted rewrite editor.
Frances Ayres Moffat, '34
Albuquerque, New Mexico
When I was a student, I studied the David Lamson case, examining the photos and police report, even looking over each piece David and his wife, Allene, wrote in the Illustrated Review during their time as students. Insiders at Stanford whom I questioned at that time said it was noteworthy that the University did not give Lamson his old job at the Stanford University Press after his third trial ended with a hung jury. I also remember uncovering that several friends of Allene Lamson set up a fund for the education of her daughter, which apparently was never used. But after alL my research, I could not come to any conclusion as to Lamson's guilt or innocence.
Gregg Rathborne
Scottsdale, Arizona
What memories Bernard Butcher's article brought back! At the time of the David Lamson trial, I was a junior at Fremont Union High School in Sunnyvale. My political science teacher asked us each to interview some public figure, and I was assigned the judge who was trying Lamson. I remember arriving early in San Jose and slipping into the courtroom to watch a bit of the trial before the judge was free to talk with me.
The following year, as I recall, there was an unusual incident involving the men charged with murdering the son of the people who owned Hart's department store in San Jose. The accused had been arrested and were in the Santa Clara County jail. A mob broke into the jail, took them to St. James Park and lynched them. The authorities were able to sneak Lamson out a side door -- otherwise, he too might have been lynched.
Hortense Hanson Johnson, '39
Saratoga, California
David Lamson was a friend and classmate of mine. We were both in the Ram's Head Society -- he was an actor, and I composed music. The night before the alleged murder, I recall that he and Allene played bridge with some mutual friends. There did not seem to be any discord.
While Dave was at the San Jose jail, I went to see him and brought along my very new wife, who was also a friend of his. As I passed along the corridor lined with cells, I had to stop to talk to two other Stanford friends, who I hadn't realized were prisoners there. My new wife humorously remarked that she would have to take a second look at her marriage vows.
C.W. Carey, '25
Menlo Park, California
SINGULAR EXAMPLE
I've known Grant Baze for many years, and I dare say his "self-absorption" does not exceed that of the founders of Stanford, nor of many who have perpetuated the success of the University (Letters, January/February). Further, his intellectual integrity and search for purity of thought serve as a singular example, exceeding that of most other alums I have read about.
Larry D. Jensen, Gr. '60
San Mateo, California
Grant Baze is clearly not an academic. Indeed, he might be compared with, say, a golf or tennis professional. Why do the authors of the letters you published choose to criticize Grant but not, say, Tiger Woods or John McEnroe? Grant, at least, ought to be given credit for coming back and finishing his degree, which I do not believe Woods or McEnroe has done. As for his not following the news, how many professional athletes are in the same position?
R.L. Promboin, MA '68, PhD '71
Westlake Village, California
THE DOCTOR IS OUT
You reported that alcohol taken 10 to 20 minutes before a heart attack would minimize tissue damage (Farm Report, January/February). Knowing that 20 minutes from any given time I might have a heart attack, I began drinking Scotch every 20 minutes prophylactically. I'm writing from an alcohol treatment farm and am concerned that withdrawal might precipitate an attack. Can you advise me, please?
Sandor Burstein, MD '53
San Francisco, California
STOP AT THE TOP
By God, the prophet was right! With the millennium, the incredible occurred: Stanford football went to Pasadena, and the basketball team was No. 1. What do we do for an encore? While we're at the top, why don't we quit the semi-pro ranks? Stanford grants about 300 athletic scholarships (and spaces) to those who are academically and athletically qualified (President's Column, January/February). I would rather see those scholarships and spaces go to students who are academically -- but not financially -- qualified. Let Stanford engage in intercollegiate athletics that are truly amateur -- an extension of the intramural program, on the cheap and just for fun. Leave the big-bucks show biz to the pros. The International Olympic Committee experience in Salt Lake City suggests (again) that true amateurs and a lot of money don't mix well.
Jerry Ainsworth, '55, MS '61
Seattle, Washington
BACK TO THE AUGHTIES?
I agree with Bob Cohn: the "oh-ohs" is a bit peculiar as a name for our decade (First Impressions, January/February). Can we go back to "aughts"? At the last turn of the century, I know the individual years were called "aught-seven," although I don't know how people referred to the whole decade. Please tell me if you see a trend -- you are, after all, in California.
Nancy Fischer, '61
Tallahassee, Florida
SLICE OF REALITY
I really enjoyed your book excerpt from Lori Arviso Alvord and the article on the Pentagon's anti-gay policy (Shelf Life, January/February). Please continue to offer your readers a slice of reality and social consciousness.
A. Chavez
Stanford, California
MERGER WOES
As an example of service for students ("What He Did," November/December), Gerhard Casper's role in the ill-conceived merger of UCSF and Stanford medical centers falls far short of positive. Initiating the merger, then insisting that the merged corporation be private and shielded from public scrutiny, ensured that the consequences of decisions to expand administrative operations -- including excessive salaries and the hiring of high-priced consultants -- would be discovered too late. As a result, millions of dollars that could have been spent on direct care went instead to merger expenses.
At the urging of President Casper and other top officials, health care consultant David Hunter came up with a plan to further reduce medical services in order to try to save the merger. The centerpiece of that plan was the closing of Mount Zion Hospital in San Francisco. Even that wasn't enough to keep President Casper's "vision" of the merger alive. Rather than reorienting the merger toward patient care, he pulled the plug and withdrew Stanford from the mess he largely created.
Despite new Medicare monies on the way, Mount Zion is closing. The Jewish, African-American and Russian-immigrant communities served by these essential inpatient and emergency services are the losers, as are the elderly and low-income San Franciscans on Medicare and Medi-Cal who also depended on Mount Zion.
Michael Lighty, '82, MA '88
Oakland, California
Gerhard Casper replies: Mount Zion Hospital suffered from financial problems long before Stanford and UCSF decided to merge their hospitals. It was precisely the complexity of the issues surrounding Mount Zion that led the UCSF Stanford Health Care Board -- of which I am a member -- to defer to the University of California and ask for specific recommendations about the hospital's future. Those recommendations were made by uc officials and, in turn, accepted by the board of UCSF Stanford Health Care. While Mr. Lighty may lament the closing of the Mount Zion Hospital, the University of California has made assurances that patients receiving services there would continue to receive treatment at other UC facilities. Caring for indigent patients is but one of the public responsibilities that Stanford, the University of California and other academic medical centers will continue to uphold despite the worsening financial picture of the health care marketplace.
TROUBLE IN ARCHER CITY
Thought no one in rural Texas would read your magazine on the Internet? Seems many people did -- and cried "Foul!" when they read Ray Isle's "Three Days in McMurtryville" (November/December). Few area residents, if any, would call me an "evil woman," as Larry McMurtry reportedly did. My Dairy Queen stores, in Archer City and beyond, number 46, not 27 as you stated. We could locate no one who dined at the "poisonous" cafe and got poisoned. We know of several decent Mexican restaurants in Wichita Falls and more than "four nonpoisonous eating establishments." Well, so much for damaging and inaccurate journalism, Ray Isle.
Doris Richeson
Graham, Texas
I read Ray Isle's article with interest and amusement. I've lived in Wichita Falls all my life, and I didn't realize we had four nonpoisonous eating establishments. Isle failed to divulge that we also have both kinds of music, country and western. Not to mention the Deuce Drive-In, where a man can have ice-cold "red draws" (beer with a splash of tomato juice) delivered to his car window. Heck, he forgot the annual rattlesnake hunt in Archer City and (remove your hat now, please) the official site of the Dallas Cowboys training camp. Actually, Wichita Falls ain't such a bad place to live and raise a family. We're over 100,000 strong and growing. My comment about music was even a bit tainted: we recently had one band (Bowling for Soup) signed to a major record label, and we have another (Bigloo) on the verge of breaking out.
David Little
Wichita Falls, Texas
ARCHIVAL FOOTNOTES
Your article about Harvard's purchase of the Communist Party archives made interesting reading here (Farm Report, November/December). Now that we have our set of documents, we do appreciate the Hoover Institution's efforts in gaining initial access to them. There is one note, however, that you should add for your readers. It's true that Stanford did get a $90,000 royalty from our purchase, but we were delighted to pay that, since we purchased for $600,000 the same materials that cost Hoover $2.5 million. We may not have been first, but we appreciate the bargain.
Marshall I. Goldman
Associate Director,
Davis Center for Russian Studies
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Your brief item on last October's controversy at Harvard needs to be clarified. The press release issued in the name of Harvard's Davis Center for Russian Studies was drafted and sent out by three administrators at the center who have never worked in the Russian archives and who were unaware of what had been covered by the Hoover Institution's microfilm project. Scholars at the center, including myself, were never consulted. I was dismayed when I learned about the press release the day after it was issued. I was also deeply irritated -- and baffled -- by the comments of a representative of the center who had been contacted by the press.
That said, I want to correct the misimpression that a Boston Globe reporter "alerted" Harvard to the existence of the microfilms at Stanford. The Globe reporter, John Donnelly, knew nothing about the Hoover microfilm project. After initially speaking with one of the center's three administrators, Marshall Goldman, he was ready to publish a story that essentially echoed the press release. But then, at Goldman's recommendation, Donnelly called me. I was not aware of what prompted his call, but I gave him some detailed comments and corrected a lot of what he had been told. As the conversation was ending, I said: "This means Harvard will join Stanford as the only places outside Moscow where scholars can gain access to these documents." Donnelly seemed startled and asked: "You mean Stanford has a copy of these microfilms?" Puzzled, I said: "Yes, of course. Who do you think funded and coordinated the whole project?" Instead of writing a straightforward report, Donnelly then seized on Goldman's confusion and presented it as some great scandal, giving the impression that only the most sedulous research by the Globe had brought it to light.
Mark Kramer, '82
Director, Harvard Project on Cold War Studies
Sr. Associate, Davis Center for Russian Studies
Cambridge, Massachusetts
The following letters did not appear in the print edition of Stanford
ROSE BOWL WOES
After 28 years of frustration, you would think the Rose Bowl team deserves more recognition than a two-page article (Farm Report, January/February), especially in an issue that devoted six pages to Stanford's "new and improved" Dining Service. I mean, how good can beef stroganoff cooked for thousands really get?
Rod Turner, '85
Corona del Mar, California
Editor's note: We would have loved to include substantial coverage of the Rose Bowl game in the January issue, but the timing made it impossible. By the time Stanford faced off against Wisconsin, the magazines had already left the post office. The March issue includes a player's five-page Rose Bowl diary.
LEARNING FROM ZEBRAS
I really enjoyed Joel Smith's "Falling Apart" (January/February), having had not-quite-so-severe problems myself.
I have been well-stabilized the past few years, thanks in part to reading Stanford biological sciences professor Robert Sapolsky's Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers, which explains why the panic-feed forward mechanism is a more helpful response on the savanna, where animals may face immediate danger, than in modern human society. I think this book is underappreciated.
Paul Golovin, Gr. '76
Tempe, Arizona
GREETINGS FROM TEXASVILLE
I love the article on Larry McMurtry ("Three Days in McMurtryville," November/December). I live in a small Texas town about 35 miles from McMurtryville.
Cheryl Carter
Electra, Texas
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.
