Orientation week has traditionally been the time when the University rolls out its big guns and tries to impress incoming freshman with the piety and the glory of Harvard.

At meetings, coffee klatches, receptions and teas, Administration and faculty luminaries monotonously remind new members of the Harvard-Radcliffe family of their privileged position in "the oldest, richest and forest" center of higher learning in America.

Many new freshmen are consequently somewhat disconcerted when they quickly discover that some of their fellow students share none of this reverence for Harvard.

Posters and picketing students label some of the famous of the Faculty as war criminals; the University's investment policy is called racist and imperialist; and, University administrators are termed insincere frauds.

The entering freshman is thrust unprepared into a world of swirling controversy where the lines of conflict have been drawn and fought over for a period of years. Activists and establishmentarians both seem hopelessly beyond the pale of understanding.

Strolling through the Yard between classes, the freshman is beset by bullhorns blaring names of "war criminals" and other "enemies of the people." Upon returning to his room, he finds an equally mindless communique from an Administration figure about some controversy that began back in 1968 and is not even fully understood by its protagonists.

The rational response to all this seemingly nonsensical noise is to ignore both sides and either follow the football team or do your Mongolian homework.

Recognizing this problem, a group of about ten activist students spent last summer planning a week of what they call "Counter-Orientation" activities.

The students, who will be joined by others from two Harvard-Radcliffe activist groups, plan to counter the Administration's presentation with small meetings, films about the antiwar and women's movements, and door-to-door canvassing of freshmen.

The biggest gun in these activists arsenal is an 80-page pamphlet entitled "Introducing Harvard," which presents the radical viewpoint of the University's alleged culpability in the Indochina War, sexism, racism and imperialism.

The students, members of the New American Movement and the Cambridge Movement, plan to circulate the pamphlet in the course of their door-to-door canvassing of freshmen.

"Harvard is a cold and lonely place to be," the pamphlet begins. "Harvard as an institution is more concerned with prestige than with education: and prestige means collecting famous names for the faculty, building impressive new buildings, and constantly increasing the endowment."

This cheery introduction is followed by an analysis of Harvard's position in the American system. "Most of you are being trained for (and many of you came from) the upper-middle-income white collar world," freshmen are told. But "traces of Harvard's traditional role as a 'ruling-class school' can be seen all around you--in the incredible opulence of much of campus life, or in the 'born-to-rule arrogance which is widespread among the students and faculty.'

The pamphlet continues with an exhaustive analysis of Harvard's position in the world and concludes "We doubt that this brief summary of our views has converted your we hope that it has interested you in further political discussions with us".

After a little ever a year of relative, Harvard activists hope that last Spring's resurgence of radical activity will continue through this year. Although actions here no longer make the front pages in Time and Life magazines, the campus has by no means returned to the apolitical days of yesteryear.