The Food Problem III:

In response to far-flung dismay over last month's unsettling food episode, the Student Council began a campaign to investigate the University's methods of preparing undergraduate fare. To popularize the drive, the Council decided to devote its annual open meeting to a discussion of the food problem. Dean Bender was invited to answer questions and present the administration's viewpoint, and the entire affair was broadcast over WHRV. On the surface, this open meeting was an excellent idea--but as it was actually handled, it virtually smothered any organized campaign to do a thorough probing job into the University Kitchens.

Oceans of Motions

In the first place, the Council president had evidently neglected to ask his associates what they thought of the recommendations of the subcommittee on food, for during the meeting, only two Council members seemed to know what those proposals contained. Consequently, the meeting was barely under way when Councilmen began arguing among themselves, presenting motions and counter-motions, until they has bumbled away 35 minutes of radio time.

In the second place, the Council was so busy thrashing out its won position, that some of Dean Bender's statements which should have been challenged, slipped by unnoticed. And because of the confusion, those Councilmen who had specialized information were unable to put the Dean under vigorous questioning. For one thing, they failed to challenge Bender's statement that the University could not afford to spend &5,000 for a food investigation. They might have pointed out--but they didn't-- that Harvard was able to lay out &75,000 to move Dana Palmer House across Quincy Street board by board. They did mention that the University has shown a &90,000 profit on the dining halls during the first two post-war years. But they might have taken issue with the Dean's statement that every penny of this sum had to be watched--and they didn't.

The Happy Hierarchy

In another instance, the Council failed to question Bender's assertion that a food investigation would be a slap in the face of Dining Hall authorities. Is the central purpose of the Dining Hall department to keep its hierarchy happy--or to serve the best possible food to undergraduates? And no one brought up the matter of the member of the official Visiting Committee on Food who suggested that Vice-President Reynolds hire a competent outside authority to scrutinize Dining Hall operations. This gentleman recognized the fact that the Visiting Committee lacked both the time and the technical know-how to attempt a thorough investigation. His proposal that a group of non-University experts do the job was quite pertinent, but this sensible idea also failed to appear during the Council's open meeting.

When it tentatively accepted Dean Bender's recommendation of a detailed food poll, the Council unwittingly crushed the food drive. That Charles Brynteson has jumped over a Council decision, to go ahead with the original short poll plan, will have little bearing on the situation. For no matter what any poll will ultimately prove, the University can now sit tight for two months and let the present annoyance over food die down to an occasional whimper. Given this respite, the University may conceivably survive the rumbling storm of student protest this year, unless something extraordinary pops up again in the dining halls which student opinion cannot stomach.