with whoops and spontaneous cheering.nI almost quit again, but that samenprofessor telling me, in effect, that Incould love UCSC or leave it broughtnout enough obstinacy to carry menthrough to an honors degree. I’venmoved around some since then; I’ventalked to students from many collegesnand am currently doing graduate worknat the University of Iowa, and I knownthat although UCSC is well known fornbeing an ultra-leftist game preserve,ntheir brand of classroom objectivity isn’tnunusual in the university of the 80’s.nSixties radicalism seems to have gainednrespectability with age; it’s fashionablennowadays to view the US as the worstnexample of racism, sexism, imperialism,nand general nastiness that the world hadnever seen. I’ve heard of a turn tonconservatism on campus, but what I seenmostly is bland, cautious, and what wenwould have considered “square” studentsnspouting the leftist “PoliticallynCorrect” line — what was radical in then60’s has become safe status quo in then80’s.nAs to my fellow veterans of 60’snradicalism, they remind me more andnmore of what happened to JohnnLennon, one of my first heroes. Henalways denounced religion and capitalismnas slavery and hypocrisy; yet towardnthe end of his life he couldn’t get out ofnbed without consulting his astrologer,nhis Edgar Cayce Reader, and the I-nChing — not to mention his wife, businessnadvisors, and assorted political sycophants.nLike Lennon, many of my oldnfriends seemed determined to jumpnfrom the frying pan into the fire: fromnadolescent chafing at a workable-if-notperfectnsystem into a bizarre, blind-faithnalliance with the worst elements of thentotalitarianism they profess to despise.nAfter years of straining to find goodnin socialist or “progressive” programs,nsome of us are finally beginning tonseparate rhetoric from reality. For mynpart, I finally came to believe thatnthough our president may not be perfectnand our system of government maynhave its faults, in comparison to thatnwhich is forced upon most of humanitynthese days, Reagan is another Gandhinand the United States is the real “workers’nparadise” on earth.nBut of course most of my classmatesnfind that idea as absurd now as I thoughtnit was in 1969. With all the boycotts,nsit-ins, and committees-in-solidar-nity – with – everyone – against – the -nUnited – States, every day at UCSC —nand most days at UI—bring a deja vunfrom Moratorium ’69, when Prof.nSummers gave us hell. The old man isnsurely dead by now, but I still think ofnhim when I read Chronicles, NationalnReview, and Reader’s Digest. I like tonthink his spirit is floating around somewherenand smiling down at me — evennif I was a little slow.nR.A. Hill is a graduate student at thenUniversity of Iowa.nARTnWashington innDragnby Steve MarlinnAfter Harold Washington died, blacknleaders in Chicago almost immediatelynbegan the process of deification. Buttonsnstarted to appear, reading: “HinGod, How’s Harold?”nThe way I saw it, to make a god outnof Harold Washington was sacrilegious.nThen this ridiculous poster camenout. It shows the Chicago skyline withnJesus on one side and Washington onnthe other, on the same level with ]esus.nJesus looks sad, but Harold is beamingndown upon the city. The title of thenposter is: “Worry Ye Not.”nIt was all a bit much, thought DavidnNelson, graduate student at the ArtnInstitute of Chicago. Being an artistnwith a sense of the absurd. Nelson wasnable to act on his iconoclastic impulse.nWhen the Art Institute held its annualnjuried competition of student artwork.nNelson’s paintings included a depictionnof Harold Washington in women’snunderwear (which he was rumored tonbe wearing when he was taken to thenhospital). The title was “Mirth andnGirth.”nInasmuch as the exhibition was notnopen to the public during the juryingnperiod, after which the paintings wouldnbe removed. Nelson never expected ancitywide ruckus. But no sooner had henbegun to hang his paintings than anblack school secretary approached him,ndemanding: “Who gave you the rightnto hang this painting?” Nelson made anperfunctory reply, while continuing tonhang his paintings. The secretary hurriednoff.nThe private graduate student exhibitnwas about to be transformed into annationally televised event. Withinnhours, nine black aldermen chargednonto the scene, accompanied by threenpolicemen, two detectives, and an unspecifiednnumber of newspaper reportersnand television crews. Ignoring protestsnfrom students, faculty, and schoolnsecurity guards, several aldermen forciblynremoved the Washington paintingnfrom the wall and started to take it outnof the building until they were stoppednby school guards, who persuaded thenpoliticians to take the painting to thenschool president’s office.nDuring the two-hour meeting innPresident Jones’ office the aldermennraised the threat of “serious disturbancesnand demonstrations” if the paintingnwere to remain at the school. Theynfirst sought to destroy the painting,nthen urged the police to impound it asna threat to public order. Finally, thenaldermen, with a police escort, carriednthe painting away through a gauntlet ofnprotesting students and faculty.nThe next day, Marshall Field V,npresident of the Art Institute’s board ofntrustees, lawyers, and school represen-n&in^#*5Jn/./•’nnn’^**^i’-, Tt^in’•»»nOCTOBER 1388 j 49n