for a strong chater passed easily. The roll call vote on delegates at large came out 763-786. Advocates of a strong charter were joined by Wallace supporters \(for labor-led moderates. Walt Steimel, District 12’s Democratic nominee for the State Senate, is in a good position to offer a strong challenge to Republican Senator Andujar. Some Tarrant County office holders have been in and out of Austin in other years as state representatives. The absence of former Rep. George Richardson from Commissioners’ Court \(he challenged Senator Meier instead of running for. . return to the courthouse of the Brown family, as well known in Tarrant County as the Parrs in Duval County for their influence in county government until former Rep. Don Gladden helped Richardson and former Rep. Howard Green, now county judge, to restore some local power to Commissioners’ Court. Ann Marek, who led a field of eight candidates for Richardson’s seat in the first primary, will probably lose in the runoff to the Browns’ male candidate. Green has just been defeated for reelection as county judge by another former representative, Mike Moncrief. Moncrief from an ultraconservative family of oil millionaires will be comfortable with the incumbent district attorney, who was reelected, and the incumbent state senator for District 10, of whom the Observer has heard \(Euless is But Meier doesn’t look to Tarrant County subscribers the way he looks to the Observer. His record reflects the interest of his principal backer, H. B. Fuqua, in oil and banking. Hard working he may be; moderate he is not; considerate of his fellow delegates’ views he was not in the debate we heard last Tuesday on the floor of the Constitutional Convention. Margaret Carter, 2816 Sixth Ave., Fort Worth, Tex. 76110. for our protection for quite a while. And I’m afraid Boulder is more typical of the nation than, say, San Francisco. I’ve seen neither the commitment by liberal politicos that it would take to resist the reactionaries nor the cohesion among gay people at large that it would take to force them to it. How many successful politicians have so much as mentioned us in public, much less supported us? As for gay bars, aside from the fact that they wouldn’t even exist if it weren’t for the profit motive, which in itself is sufficient reason to reject them as foundations for gay community, I don’t see any essential difference between them and the closet. In both cases it’s a matter of accepting whatever conditions and limitations the rest of society chooses to impose. A member of the Austin vice squad said of gay bars that “it’s better than having them on the streets.” I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Cyr that “Gay oppression and persecution is a serious problem whether it is taken seriously or not.” In fact, that was precisely the point of my letter. I still think the Observer’s reprinting of the AURA editorial was a sanitized queer joke. P.S. I did not defame Stonewall and I never claimed to be a liberal. David Morris, 5011/2 W. 12th St., Austin, Tex. 78701. The Observer still thinks our reprinting of the AURA editorial \(see Obs., was a joke about how boosterism is not limited to Elks’ Clubs and daily-newspaper publishers, and regrets any offense taken. Ed. Definition wrong I understand from Mr. Dugger’s remarks on the ideal American university that such a university includes within its definition is is democratic in its essence. Dugger’s article will show his identification of the ideal of a university with utility of purpose: “To ask what the university should be is to ask what our ideal of it is and is to ask for our theory of it, our sense of its good usefulness and working shape.” Again, “As William James said in his talks to teachers, ‘We cannot escape our destiny, which is practical, and even our most theoretic faculties contribute to its working out.’ ” , Now let us read St. Thomas Aquinas’ definition of the liberal arts, which he gives in his commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics: “Only those arts are called liberal or free which are concerned with knowledge; those which are concerned with utilitarian ends that are attained through activity, however, are called servile.” Clearly, then, if Mr. Dugger insists upon the utility, the “good usefulness,” of university education, he must exclude at least the liberal, and probably, I believe, the fine arts from the curriculum. For when such studies are compelled to serve a useful purpose, that is, a purpose other than the pursuit of liberal knowledge as its own end, they cease to be liberal and become useful, or servile. Therefore, should Mr. Dugger retain the factor of utility of purpose within his definition, he must abandon the name “university” for his place of instruction. For any university which does not include within its faculties the liberal arts is misnamed. Dugger declare his opinion that the university’s essence is democratic: “The elitist ideal of the community has marbled the democratic ideal of the agency of the people for the higher learning . . . It is a democratic coming together for the free activity of learning . . . We are now capable of consummating the university as a community of free enlightenment that is of, by and for the people.” The ideal of the university, the “free activity of learning,” June 7, 1974 15 Morris responds Ken Cyr’s indignant reply to my letter \(see Obs., exactly what our quarrel is, but it seems to involve his optimism. Granted, of course, things have changed and the pace is increasing. \(By the way, the Texas sodomy law was changed as a result of the quiet persistent effort of at most five or six individuals working under a fortunate set of circumstances, to wit the revision in toto of the penal code by a sufficiently liberal group of legislators. While there was undoubtedly a lot of sympathy, there was no sign of pressure accelerating change comes the backlash we should have been expecting all along; after Boulder, Colorado, for instance, it’s unlikely we’ll see any new city ordinances Ronnie Dugger’s new book .. . OUR INVADED UNIVERSITIES: Form, Reform. and New Starts Sometimes funny, sometimes sad enough to make the angels weep, always interesting, OUR INVADED UNIVERSITIES is not regional literature.. .. This will be a big league book. Read it, put it down at the end, and let us, especially as Texans who understand that we are Americans, grasp the compass setting Dugger has given us, mark our course and set out for a better day. Maury Maverick in The Corpus Christi Caller, 5-19-74. Published by W. W. Norton Co. at $14.95. Observer subscribers may order Our Invaded Universities at the customary 20% discount on titles stocked by the Texas Observer Bookstore: 11.90 plus, for Texas residents, 60ft sales tax. No charge for postage if remittance accompanies your order. THE TEXAS OBSERVER BOOKSTORE 600 W 7 AUSTIN 78701
You May Also Like
The documentary in Falfurrias is sinister and spiritual.