opinions
Have our cake and eat it too
The University Board of Trustees tomor
row will decide the fate of a small, hidden
garden located near Buckhout Lab.
According to University officials, the gar
den may be destroyed to make way for a
new building to house, student laboratories
and faculty offices.
Local environmental groups and some
students are outraged, and have called for
the preservation of this open space. Howev
er, administrators still maintain that the
building is necessary and the flowers must
go.
Like many conflicts between students and
the administration, the best solution is a
compromise.
First, there is little dispute that the new
lab and office space is necessary. After all,
we are here to get an education. When our
'pursuit of that education is impeded by lack
of laboratory facilities, and funds are avail
able, new labs should be constructed.
The new labs and offices are needed to
house a rapidly growing biology depart
ment one which both students and admin
istrators can be proud of and should
actively support.
On the other hand, the college experience
is much more than Woks and labs. The
appearance and character of our campus is,
an important part of University life.
Students need room to breathe, toss a
frisbee, study in the sun, or just relax in the
shade.
As some environmental groups 4ve
pointed out, space is , in short supply on
campus the problem faced by both the
student groups and the biology department.
There is not enough land in the area of
Frear and Buckhout buildings to accommo
date both the gardens and a new laboratory.
At one extreme, the environmentalists
have proposed the new lab not be built or be
placed on the periphery of campus where
space is abundant.
This would not be a realistic solution
because it would not only inconvenience
faculty members, but make it extremely
difficult for students to get to and from
classes on time.
The environmental groups claim to be
working in the interest of the students, yet
they completely ignore this practical con
sideration.
On the other hand, the administration
wants the gardens bulldozed to make way
for the new lab. This is also unfair because
students will then be deprived ' of a quiet,
beautiful spot. Again, the students are not
being served.
Relocation of Buckhout Garden is a com
promise which would serve the interests of
all involved.
Not only would the biology department be
able to construct its new lab, but the gar
dens would be preserved for the students'
and faculty's enjoyment.
A University Student Executive Council
sub-committee will propose a vote tonight
on a relocation of the gardens to the vicinity
of Birch Cottage.
If USEC votes in favor of that proposal,
which would serve the best interest' of all
parties involved, the proposal will be rec
ommended to the Board of Trustees tomor
row morning.
This option could make the gardens far
more visible than they have been in the past
and thus allow more students to use and
enjoy them. -
In their present location, it is easy to walk
right by them without noticing they are
there. It makes sense to relocate the gar
dens for that reason alone.
As the Board of Trustees ponder the fate
of Buckhout Garden, they should keep two
things firmly, in mind. First, the Trustees
have one purpose to make decisions
which best serve the students and the Uni
versity. And second, the answer to the
future of the garden doesn't have to be an
either-or situation.
Surely both a garden and a new lab can
coexist at a university the size of Penn
State.
111456 You 'Mad Ott ft,
Nat) WASTED
INK WAVED
'MOUNTS -
7N6 NOON
rAwr SUPltat
71115 NONME
MO!
lOW tow Ar
711 E DEFicir
-
AND ALL IiTA6AN
NYS'
aIST 1CU741.60
O f(
tl 9 '
CIO • Alir
reader opinion
Dark clouds over PSU
Due to certain changes that have occurred since last
spring we, as students of this University, feel compelled
to speak out at this time
Firstly, we feel that our academic well-being has been
adversely affected by Academic Information Systems.
Although we realize that the implementation of a new
computer system does produce problems, these problems
are too extensive. We think that the recent editorial by a
University employee has significant accuracy to it. As
paupers to the administration, we wonder what went on in
the smoke filled rooms of Old Main when the new system
was being planned; was this implementation premature?
We don't know.
But what we do know is that our housing requests were
disregarded, lines of four, five and even six hours were
commonplace at most drop/add departments, and some
returning students found themselves erased from Univer
sity records in this so-called better system. We hope the
administration will re-evaluate the effectiveness of this
new system
Secondly, upon returning this Fall Semester, we found
that a \ thunderstorm had passed over the social atmo
sphere here at Penn State. The Penn State tradition of
tailgating could be infringed upon due to enforcement of
new borough laws on open containers. New University
laws could bring an end to another Penn State tradition,
the money raising Phi Psi 500, which brought about $25,-
000 to the Big Brothers and Sisters of Center County last
year. Also, although the outcome has yet to be seen, the
new beer distributor policies could cast a darker shadow.
over Penn State's social atmosphere.
We think it is time for the surfacing of more viable
solutions to these problems.
Scott Seifried, sophomore-pre-med
Tom Bonney, sophomore-accounting
Aug. 4
Ruthless soul
In a recent editorial opinion, "Remember the past,
don't repeat it," I was once again befuddled by the liberal
tendencies of the Collegian editorial staff. After reading
the opinion and studying its implications, I was pushed to
believe that the United States had been partially responsi
ble for the downing of the Korean airliner KAL Flight 007
The Daily Collegian
Thursday, Sept. 6, 1984
and was a major cause for its occurrence.
The author, who narrow-mindedly believes that there
are only "two alternatives" in the viewing of this dev
astating act, wants the reader to conclude that the Soviet
paranoia about the securities of its borders is a "recent"
result to "name calling and accusations" by the Reagan
administration, who openly defined the Soviet Union as an
"Evil Empire" that would stop at no end to spread its
dominating wrath over the world. Because of this recent
paranoia, the Soviets were suspicious and thus had
motives whether justifiable or not to seek and
destroy the airliner.
The author 'states our appall over these actions as
sounding "more like gradeschoolers fighting over posi
tions on a kickball team." Are we then to conclude that we
should accept the Soviets actions with a grain of salt, or
maybe we should give them a big pat on the back for their
accuracy in destroying a civilian airliner? According to
the author, it would be immature to act otherwise.
The utter ignorance of this opinion continues when the
author states "we will never be certain who was to blame
for the deaths of the 269 passengers of KAL Flight 007."
Maybe the Collegian staff does not know or would like to
make further political implications about the event, but
the facts do present a tight case as to whom is to blame.
Whether the pilot was at fault for entering Soviet airspace
carelessly or mechanical failure was to blame, the
Soviets had no justification for making such a decision.
The only possible motive to defend national security in the
name of self defense does not wash when one considers
the plane was unarmed, carrying civilians, and violated
Soviet airspace in a time of so-called peace.
The liberal media likes to paint Ronald Reagan as a
trigger-happy cowboy, while insisting that the actions of
the Soviets are the faults of you and me as Americans.
But can we take the responsibility for every action the
Soviets take? (Ex.: Is the United States responsible for
the Soviets' attempted assassination of Pope John Paul
II? Are we responsible for the Soviets' subversion and
undermining of Latin American nations?) Are they really
just pawns reacting to our policy or do they set their own
agenda and follow their own rules?
Despite what the .Collegian editorial staff wants its
readership to believe, I feel most of us know better: The
madness of this event does not lie in the minds of
Washington nor the soul of America; it belongs to the
belligerent leaders of Moscow and in the ruthless soul of
the Soviets' Communism.
Michael J. Selker, sophomore-business administration
Sept. 3 .
I 4 li I
6 ,of o f. , le
. , 7
~„
•
0
- li •• ''
~,,
. 041. , . . 1 ,
...
.. ,/,c .
'0 ' •
't /46 Ike I
I •
I* i 9. ig . •, i
•
N ._. 1 0 . •
4 .:44•114- ,:,'4'
I ....„ :lic...
.... •
..
~.*
• 4 ' ',,,ir •'',. :.
, A -
, . t,
4• • • *, ' et. •
Si I
. 11 •
' 4- •4
St , srz r—, 0.:
opinions
'THIS 1 4 31"1-1e. CAPTAIN SPEAKING.: BIG. BANKS AV4I:IIHRIFIV FIRM'S
EvErza:4o,4E ELSE viiu- Jar! IN A CHORUS oF 'NEARER,MI/60Q
The
FREE UNIVERSITY
FALL 'B4 COURSE
CATALOG
IS AVAILABLE
AT THE FOLLOWING LOCATIONS:
HUB DESK
CREAMERY
KERN DESK
WILLARD LOBBY
REGISTRATION for LIMITED & UNLIMITED SIGN-UP
COURSES IS SAT-SUN , SEPT.,IS-16, from llam-3pm. CLASSES START 9/17
::--....•:,,.. ,
.:......::::::..::::
.:.::....;.,..-......:...... •
:,.'-
.:
.. :,•.-,.-:
.i.:..-.,,•.....-...
.:
... .
.. ,
~...: . .: . '...k : . :
.......,,-
..-i. :. :
: ::..... : ',:r : : : . : ...:.
~-
.....: : I
_:-'..-..-:....•...-. •:: •:... PC OC I#<44
and the s ki ) Ct is rigt ( M/P
neatatiny I;05T and Beroard 'Fowler
WITH VERY SPECIAL GUEST STAR
STEEL PULSE
SATURDAY
SEPT. 8, 1984
8:00 PM REC HALL
TICKETS $lO.OO
WITH
ROSOTS!
TICKETS ON
SALE NOW AT
EISENHOWER
AUDITORIUM
BOX OFFICE
PRESENTED BY
THE
UNIVERSITY
CONCERT
COMMITTEE
223 HUB
ALL DINING HALLS
UNI MARTS
125 BOUCKE
AND ALL FREE U ADVERTISERS
"AS SEEN ON THE GRAMMY AWARDS!!!"
'Bolero' is the worst film of this or any other year
I'd like to take this opportunity to cast my vote
for possibly the worst film of this or any other year
John and Bo Derek's fiasco titled "Bolero."
I simply cannot say enough terrible things about
this movie. The acting was bad, the plotline (ha! )
was bad, the directing was bad, the dialogue was
bad and the movie wasn't even as steamy as it was
billed to be.
This movie was so godawful that I left after only
one hour and I've never done that during any
movie in my life. I even had the courage to sit
through the entirety of the last Derek film, "Tar
zan." Up until now, I thought "Tarzan" was bad.
The story begins with a relatively puerile plot:
Bo Derek and a female friend play a couple of
extremely wealthy women who just received their
degrees from what appears to be Oxford Universi
ty in the early 1900's. These women are hopelessly
~.~
infatuated with Rudolph Valentino and decide to
set out to lose their virginity to a real Morroccan
sheik.
However, Morrocco does not provide them with
their worldly prince so they make way for Spain. It
is here that Bo encounters a dark eyed, dark
haired, handsome matador and the quest for
heated sex begins.
That, essentially, was the plot as I understood it.
All along the way, the movie is filled with
senseless lines that try to be serious but only
succeed in making the audience roar. For exam
ple, Bo does lose her virginity to the bullfighter
and seems perfectly content to spend a good deal
of her time in his bed. However, horror strikes
when El Gigolo is gored in the groin by the bull.
(This seemed perfectly confusing to me because
he does all his fighting from atop a horse.)
, But anyway, to Bo's chagrin, the doctors say he
can no longer have sex. What is her reaction to this
turn of events? Why, she'll marry him, of course.
After all, she doesn't believe those silly doctors.
This gripping drama set up the scene which
caused me to leave the movie theatre. The mat
ador is recuperating on a bed when Bo enters and
reclines next to him. She takes his hand and asks
him to marry her. He says he would marry her in a
second but, alas, he has no right. I . mean, hell, he
can't keep her satisfied, right?
However, don't give up hope because soothsayer
The Daily Collegian Thursday, Sept. 6, 1984-7
Bo has the answer. He can teach her everything he
knows about horses and bullfighting and then he'll
grow to love her with each passing day.
Eventually, Bo says, that thing (his penis) will
work. Great stuff, huh?
Another great line comes just before the two
make love for the first time. He leaves her in a
room for the night and says he'll be back at sunrise
to "help" her. As he enters the room the next day
and drops the sheet he had covering him, she
shrieks and says, "Oh, you're as naked as the day
you were born."
He retorts that being naked provides the most
practical way to make love.
I really don't think this film has to worry about
contending for an Academy Award, unless, of
course, the Academy creates a new category for
stinko films.
You know, it's embarrassing for me to admit
that I even spent money to see this dreck, but if
this column will prevent even one person from
seeing the movie it'll have been worth it.
I've got an idea, though, for the theaters to make
a bundle of money on this B-grade trash. Let the
audience in for free and charge them on the way
out if they want to leave early.
Michael Newnam is a senior majoring in journa
lism and a staff member of The Daily Collegian.