Meeting Fails To Solve Red Book Muddle

The Red Book-Register-yearbook snarl came no closer to solution last night after a four-hour conference between the major participants in the case.

At the end of the "compromise" meeting the situation was exactly the same as when it began--and the main issue of the Red Book had not even been discussed.

On one side was the Council-approved publications group, authorized to put out the Register and a four-class yearbook each year, which by the end of the evening had a full plan for next fall's Register and a newly-elected board to run it.

Independent Red Book

On the other side was still Frank B. Gilbert '52, who received permission last week from the Council to run an independent Red Book, after the subsidized Red Book had been tossed out. Pending further negotiations, Gilbert still intends to put out a Red Book next spring.

The meeting last night confined itself to discussion of preliminary plans for next fall's Register, which is planned to come out by the second Saturday of November.

Freshmen: Heelers or Editors?

The main issue was whether freshmen should hold junior executive positions on the Register. Gilbert maintained that they should--"this is a freshman book, freshmen should have a large say in running it." The publications men said that freshmen should heel the book their first year, and later rise to higher positions.

The other central arguing point was the proposed orientation section. Gilbert claimed that by the time the Register came out much of the orientation material would be dated and that freshmen could get it elsewhere anyway. The proponents of the plan felt this was a valuable and necessary extension of Register coverage from the customary names, pictures, addresses formula.

After the plans were set--along the publications group lines--Gilbert declined nomination as editor of the Register. R. Johnson Shortlidge '50 was elected to the post.