Southern Appalachian Digital Collections

Western Carolina University (20) View all

Western Carolinian column "The art of recklessly causing trouble"

  • hl-westerncarolinianclipping-1986-10-09-vol52-no11-05-01.jpg
  • Billy Graham's column in the October 9, 1986 issue of the Western Carolinian discusses how last year's paper had a "spark" that this year's paper does not. He appreciates that last year's writers did not steer away from campus controversies such as Lavender Bridges. Lavender Bridges, an anonymously founded student organization open to all individuals, aimed to promote awareness of lesbian and gay lifestyle, provide lesbian and gay resources, and increase communication with all students and community members. The first organizational meeting took place October 10, 1985 and was officially recognized by the office of Student Development on December 13, 1985. The last mention of the group appeared in the October 10, 1991 issue of the Western Carolinian.
  • The Art of Recklessly Causing Trouble That Thoreau guy, the one who slept by a swamp, once wrote that metamorphosis was the law of the universe. Everything, he said, was fluid. Fine. Metamorphosis, I don't mind, simply because it's synonymous with evolution, which in turn has something to do with reproduction. Fluids, also, in a number of their variations, are nice to have around. It's change, that to which Thoreau was actually alluding, that pains me occasionally. Let's take, for example, the Carolinian. It's been a smooth transition between school years for the campus paper, particularly In comparison to the year before, when in a Woodward and Bernstein- esque play, Student Government impeached the Carolinian editor (Woodward and Bernstein had the tact, at least, to be justified). However, though the paper does look as good this year as last, there has been a loss in transition. There was - stop me if you disagree -- a spark in last year's paper that hasn't shown itself this semester. Popular controversies on campus were fanned into flame slightly more adeptly. We had bomb threats at our offices, personal threats to our perspectives staff, and queries made as to our sexual preferences. All of this, of course, was big fun, and stemmed from an atmosphere that would be difficult to duplicate. "Difficulty" is no excuse. Closed minds, those whichare most easily irked, are still around. Justified complaints that civil rights are impuned by the raising of the drinking age and by restrictions on mild pornography are trumpeted by those who in the next breath offer the Bible as backbone for their contentions that "Lavendar Bridges" should be suppressed. Apparently civil rights extend only about six inches from any given preference. 'My libido, my liver, my rights. Your libido, your...you like to put it where? Sorry, if our libidos matched maybe we could have a beer...' At any rate, those who still believe precisely what mother and father told them, need occasionally to be forced to decide between age-old beliefs and new ideas. This is what college is all about. No one should suffer through life without changing any of their beliefs - or at least strengthening them. Schrof blew into town mid-week last week, about two steps ahead of some particularly vicious hallucinations. Robb Schrof was a premiere columnist, druggist and weed-in-the-garden variety radical on the Carolinian staff last year. If you were here you no doubt remember him. If you weren't, you missed out. Noone liked him, of course, except myself, and I was awfully quiet about it, but the fact remains that he was a very effective writer. Whether gleefully illustrating his fondness of Hunter Thompson's Gonzoism with his <=>mi iiations, spitting fire at Ronnie and the boys up North, or simply going on about any number of our cherished road trips, Schrof managed to perturb just about everyone and gain, lo and behold, response. Another columnist, Carl Brickman, was similarly successful. His spectacularly conservative stance, no, evangelistically right-wing stance, no, downright Helmsian stance, elicited comments of an entirely different nature. Carl is still on ca mpus, probably off competing with something at this very moment, but his interests have turned to other than journalistic pursuits. Not to say that lastyear's staff were better writers. That probably isn't the case. It's just that they disassociated themselves from the norm - traffic and security, cafeteria -- and really annoyed some people. Perhaps, as last year's editor Randy Rosenthal suggests, we might have conceded some maturity to our aggressiveness. But then again, as he also notes, this isn't The Times or The Post, and a Herculean effort is necessary to garner any response at all. Plus, we had such a good time. What a crutch 'maturity' can be, and, in this case, change is quite a pain. 'btty Grower)