(Ed. Note--The Crimson does not necessarily endorse opinions expressed in printed communications. No attention will be paid to anonymous letters and only under special conditions, at the request of the writer, will names be withheld. Only letters under 400 words can be printed because of space limitations.)

To the Editor of the Crimson:

Regrettable, I think, is the assurance with which the Crimson has decided that Professor Feild is Fine Arts' most popular teacher. Have you had a contest, or do you just know that among the "Fine Arts Six" none stands a chance?

When it is said that the "branch of the department devoted to design and actual drawing is isolated and disconnected from everything else," can it be that someone is ignorant of the function of Fine Arts 1a (of which Professor Feild was a part last year), or does he choose to disregard it for the purpose of the argument?

Supposing this state to continue, which is to say that a student is at a loss as to the meaning of one of the courses, what are we going to do? We're going "to show him the universal essentials." Is this what Professor Feild wants? He must wince when he reads some of the boundless generalities that are written in his name.

The implication that the Fine Arts department is concerned only with the past period of history is hardly more valid than a condemnation of the history department on the score that it still gives a course on the Renaissance. "Living significance," as the Crimson calls it, is something which cannot be taught; which it is incumbent upon the individual to develop within himself; and which may vary with the individual.

Finally, I should like to protest the relentless definition of Professor Feild as the most successful teacher of fine arts. Anyone familiar with the record of Harvard's department in producing capable graduates would stop to consider. This becomes difficult when people are impatient to "undertake an investigation of the complete fine arts setup," . . .

May I reveal my full distress over the departure of Robin Feild? If it were my choice, he would be at Harvard always. I am, however, conscious that it is not my choice, and should not be. If this were, we should logically end by electing our teachers. . . . Alden Clarke '39.

(Editor's note: Fine Arts 1a, a course in "practical" art, is hermetically sealed from the rest of the department's work. The student--usually incapable of doing so--is left to make the connection. "Universal essentials," far from being a generality, refers to such concrete ideas as Purpose, Image, Material, and Tools.)