Sportsmanship?

To the Editor of the CRIMSON:

Mr. Roland Fleer, in his letter defending the Harvard Glee Club (published in the Alumni Bulletin of January 28), would have it that Mr. Slocum and I do not know what we are talking about when we venture to criticise the conduct of the Glee Club in New York during the past few years. There are a good many holes in Mr. Fleer's defense, but it suffices here to remark only that Mr. Slocum at the present time is the president of the New York Harvard Club, which has nearly 3000 resident members, is serving a second term on the Board of Overseers and is, in addition, the most active and best informed graduate in this part of the country.

The discouraging part of the whole matter is that those in charge of the affairs of the Glee Club seem to be satisfied to act according to the spirit. They are blind to the high desirability of conducting the extra mural relations of the Glee Club in a spirit of courtesy and good sportsmanship. Mr. Fleer's letter provides an excellent illustration of my point where he says:

"For at least three--I think it was even four--consecutive year the Glee Club won the competition. Then suddenly the following year, although with the same directors, the same methods, the following year, although with the same directors, the same methods the same training, and many of the same singers, it dropped from first to eleventh place in the ranking. There were eleven colleges competing. Now that was rather crude and obvious, but there were no complaints, no accusations made, and the club went right on competing for two more years. Does that show bad sportsmanship?"

For Mr. Fleer to insinuate that Harvard's defeat due to "crude and obvious" unfairness on the part of the judge I unhesitatingly call bad--very bad--sportsmanship. Truly yours   Francis Rogers '91