Advertisement

An Interview With Pusey

Pusey's choice of words seemed strange because he gives the impression of having a gentle demeanor. To hear him talking about "self-righteous zealots" and "starry-eyed radicals" seemed like language incongruent with the man himself. His judgment that one per cent of the undergraduates are responsible for most of the student demonstrations, and that the CRR might be able to weed them out, was reminiscent of the Joe McCarthy-type thinking against which Pusey fought so hard.

At noon on April 9, 1969. SDS took over University Hall-the central administration building of the Arts and Sciences Faculty. Deans in the building were hustled out and SDS issued six demands-three dealing with the abolition of ROTC and three concerned with Harvard's housing policy. Shortly after 4 p.m. that day, Dean Ford warned those remaining in the building that they would be subject to prosecution for criminal trespass.

That evening Pusey issued a statement saying "Can anyone believe the Harvard SDS demands are made seriously?" He said that the six demands were either already under consideration or were false issues. "How can one respond to allegations which have no basis in fact?" he asked at that time.

Pusey, in consultation with the Council of Deans and House Masters, decided to call in the police. At 5 a.m. on April 10, 400 police swept into the Yard and arrested the nearly 200 occupiers of University Hall. The police were generally considered brutal and 40 people, mostly bystanders, were treated at Stillman Infirmary and Cambridge City Hospital for police injuries. Pusey's action precipitated a two-week strike which became so serious that the Corporation threatened to close the University.

Asked what he would do if he could relive the takeover of University Hall in April 1969, Pusey said, "I would do what I did." Pusey said that "people voted against going into University Hall three times or so. The idea that they can force their ideas on the University community is hateful." He seemed to feel that historians will agree with his decision to use the police. Pusey has strong ideals but weak political acumen.

Advertisement

In regard to the ROTC issue, Pusey said, "The more Harvard men who get into the service of the government and the military, the better. People are so carried away now with the specific trouble in Southeast Asia that they've lost perspective."

Pusey emphasized that in April 1969, "the great majority of the Harvard community did not buy that thing and did not participate in the strike. They saw through the phoniness of it." Out of 15,000 students, he said that "the strike at its most extreme got only 3000 students. I still have confidence that the individual Harvard person has enough intelligence to see his way through these issues."

Pusey commented on the recent wave of student disruptions with a historical perspective and said, "I think this is new. I don't think we've ever had anything as extreme as this." He said that a sound educational program is the long-term solution. "These people have failed so miserably to feel the influence of our liberal education," Pusey said. "The experience of college ought to make learning attractive through its beauty. For some it does; for others it doesn't."

In regard to his lack of personal contact with members of the University community, Pusey said, "In the 1950's I was much closer to students. There's been that tremendous change. It's a sad thing from my point of view." He said that Harvard "is just such a big thing that no one man can have as much contact with any of these groups as he likes.' During the last two years, Pusey said he has had less time for the important activities of the University because of the attention that has had to be given to these disruptions."

One wonders what the cause-effect relationship is here. Have we had disruptions at Harvard in part because of the aloofness of the President's office? Or is the President aloof because of the added time he spends planning strategies to quell student demonstrations? Pusey seems to fear that if he gives some of his time to one student group, he will badly neglect the job of starting additional University programs and raising more money.

Widening his focus from the Harvard to the national scene, Pusey said, "Troubles on the campuses now really reflect troubles on the outside. It's not confined to trouble in any one campus or in any one country." He said that student discontent reflects "a deep dissatisfaction with the kind of life and organization that has been developed in the industrial world in the last 100 years. This kind of society doesn't have charm. We're yearning for something that seems more humane and satisfying."

This statement reveals more of the private Pusey-the sensitive, gentlemanly classics scholar who got saddled with the job of University President. Pusey is apparently unwilling to apply the statement he made about our industrial society toward understanding the reasoning of radicals. It does show, however, that he is caught in a bind between empathizing with those who think our society is indeed rotten, and thwarting the extremes of the radical movement. He has tried unsuccessfully to resolve the dilemma by yielding completely to the idea that free passage for everyone in the University community cannot for a moment be superceded by other issues. This, coupled with the belief that he can make no headway in talking to hard-core radicals, has caused an increasing degree of polarization at Harvard.

Pusey concluded the interview by expressing hope that in the future "universities will continue to be citadels for scholarship and deep understanding."

The interview lasted exactly 45 minutes. Pusey had a 3 p.m. press conference, and as we left his office, he cheerfully hurried down the hall and then clapped his hands a few times, exhorting his staff to get ready.

The philosophy and competence of Pusey's successor will largely determine this University's future. Perhaps the next President will put a higher priority on personal contact with members of the University community and less emphasis on budgetary growth. He should study the history of the Pusey administration, particularly the decision to call in municipal police in April 1969. Closer relations with students, faculty, and administration should help the next President to act during a University crisis with more sensitivity. Perhaps the next President will be able to reverse the current trend of polarization between undergraduates and the administration.

Advertisement