JOHN SHOULD KNOW BETTER

As John Harvard has come plodding through the centuries, one of his most consistent pitfalls has been the use of long words, with the result that no one has had the faintest idea what he was talking about. Just whose fault this was may be debated, but John should have known better.

This unfortunate tendency was only too apparent in the recent batch of annual reports. Because Dr. Bock ventured to illustrate his point that the tempo of modern life is hard on the nervous system, it was instantly interpreted as a direct rebuke at Benito Mussolini for upsetting the equilibrium of Harvard University. This impression and the accompanying ridicule were not Dr. Bock's fault, but he should have known better.

The real furore came when it was President Conant's turn to hand in a report. Seldom have an innocent author's words been so maligned. A group of comparatively intelligent figures on the local scene called it a deliberate attempt "to plough under human brains." One or two of our contemporaries in Middle Western colleges thought it was a proposal to slay the first-born in every family. This was not just what the President meant, but he should have made himself clear.

What dreadful intimations have been read into President Conant's Atlantic City address are not yet apparent, but the speech was of the same character as the documents mentioned above. The ideas it embodied were excellent, but the wording was deplorable. President Conant seems aware that this is a democracy, but oblivious of the limitations inherent in a democracy. Until that golden Tomorrow, when "basic education is truly universal," the President will have to use words of two syllables or bear the consequences, for publicity, build-up, ballyhoo, and general "talking down" are essential to putting a point across to the general public.

There is no necessity to cheapen the cause by serialized articles on "Was Kindergarten Worth While?" but to the dignity of a rational report should be added some common denominator which will draw the sympathy and understanding of the taxpayers who ultimately must endorse any major scholarship program. The public can follow a logical argument, but it is sometimes shaky on the long words.