Writing in his 25th reunion classbook last year, Cross said "A college today stands uneasily between the turbulence we now take for granted in adolescence and the disarray of contemporary society. It's unreasonable to expect that most students will experience four 'bright college years.' ... Young people today find themselves in a society both more affluent, and so powerful, and less sure of itself (probably rightly so) than any previous American society. I hope our prescription for college students, college faculty, and college administrators can be not purgative so much as energizing."

In his address to the Swarthmore freshmen last week, he added, "a college campus is not a battlefield for warfare between generations, between classes, or between races... I do not regard peace and calmness as the vital marks of a healthy institution. But neither do I think the reconciliation of young and old, or the substitute warfare of the battlefield are the major undertakings for the college.

"The world is, I think we all agree, in a mess," he continued. "And I welcome you to Swarthmore as a place where all of us can learn to appreciate gardens and towers without mistaking them for the whole of the world or as a place to retreat."

Varicusly described as forthright, controversial, dynamic, God, a grandstander, and whatever other names might be applied to Kingman Brewster.

"Controversial," however, seems to apply best in this context and the chances of Dr. Knowles depend largely on whether the Corporation wants a man with high visibility or a Nixonesque low-profile. There are advantages to both. A quiet administrator, like Bok, might be able to hold a churned-up university community together. A controversial figure, who, like Knowles, often evokes a common sympathy and admiration during such times, might lead the University out of its present confusion.

An outspoken liberal who "enjoys controversy," according to one colleague, Knowles is proud of the fact that he can pick up the phone and bring all major news media to his office in less than an hour. In the last few years, his controversies have been well-chosen and he has almost always come out on the right side. Consequently, he has the same standing among younger interns in his hospital that Brewster has at Yale. His run-in with Nixon over being appointed and then dis-appointed as assistant secretary for health and scientific affairs only bolstered his reputation with liberals in the medical profession.

As an administrator, he is widely admired for running one of the most efficient hospitals in the country at a time when hospitals are notorious for bad management. As a fund-raiser, he is considered the best in the state.

A Harvard graduate, who also acquired a professorship of medicine at the Harvard Med School this year, Knowles has sufficient, but not outstanding academic credentials. He is not likely to annoy powerful Faculty members, however, because he would not come to the presidency carrying an academic reputation.

It is not commonplace to find doctors as university presidents; but then, this does happen to be an off-year for qualified applicants, and Knowles is said to be ecstatic over the idea. Much to Boston University's consternation, according to one source, he is reportedly holding their presidential search committee at bay while Harvard decides. Besides, Antioch College is running well under its doctor-president James Dickinson and another doctor, Calvin Plimpton just stepped down after a successful term at Amherst.

"The frankness of his ambition turns some people off because they think it's unseemly for a physician," said one Bostonian. Most likely, it will affect the Corporation the same way.

Still, Knowles is qualified by even the most rigid criteria. And if the Corporation is looking for a Kingman Brewster who has proven he can survive in less serene settings than New Haven, Knowles' honesty both about his opinions and his own ambitions cannot be overlooked. To his name, add "dark horse."

Should Harvard find itself stymied in its search for younger presidential candidates (which at present does not appear likely) one can expect the Pope John theory to be reactivated.

The theory has it that a distinguished older president, 55-60, might be able to exert more leadership in the University than a young dynamo-type because his esteem and judgment would be more widely respected and trusted. Although he could only serve until the mandatory retirement age of 66, by that time the University might be more stable and more qualified younger candidates would be available.

As a theory, this view has its own clique of supporters. But the problem of finding the right man remains.

Purcell, at 58, has perhaps more respect and trust than any other member of the Faculty. He has taken his share of stands on the issues and yet never become deeply embroiled in internal Faculty politics.