To provide evidence of the reaction of College readers to the material, the HRBSA solicited signatures from students. Five hundred undergraduates signed a statement that they found the examples of racial humor in the Lampoon offensive. Attempts were then made to resolve the matter between HRBSA and the Lampoon directly; and substantial progress toward an understanding was made in those discussions. This effort entered into voluntarily on both sides, would probably have succeeded if the statement tentatively accepted by both parties had not been prematurely released to the Crimson by the Lampoon and published together with a comment by a Lampoon member that the organization would not apologize. The HRBSA had asked for time to consult with its membership before the agreement was released to the College.

The statement agreed to between the two groups read as follows:

The members of the Lampoon are quite concerned about the issues raised in recent weeks by the HRBSA. We regret that students have found some material in the magazine to be 'racially offensive.' We wish to express our concern that specific articles were received in this fashion. The Lampoon is a humor magazine; we attempt to amuse our readers by ridiculing stereotypes rather than merely repeating or perpetuating them.

We are most disturbed if this material and the subsequent controversy over it has altered the Harvard-Radcliffe community's perception of the Lampoon. We hope that no student has refrained from entering our competitions as a result of this misunderstanding.

We consider the whole matter an unfortunate incident, and hope to keep the lines of communication open. In the future preparation of the magazine, we naturally intend to be sensitive to the concerns of the student body.

In a letter to the Harvard Crimson on February 28, which included the above statement, the Lampoon observed it intended the statement to announce a new policy: "The charge of racism," it concluded, "is one which all too often stigmatizes its victim regardless of the veracity of the initial accusation. We regard the statement above as a clarification of our position in this belabored affair and as an announcement of policy to the University community."

When discussions broke down between HRBSA and the Lampoon, HRBSA lodged a complaint with the office of the dean of students. Once again representatives of HRBSA and the Lampoon agreed to meet and to attempt in good will to resolve the issue on an informal basis. I now have the responsibility to report the results of three meetings between representatives of HRBSA, the Lampoon and myself. I will first indicate my own opinion of the complaint.

OPINION

It is, I believe, appropriate and indeed essential for the College on special occasions to state its views on an issue of great importance to the welfare of the students. In so doing it should seek to provide guidance from an impartial perspective and the means to draw some understanding from the issue for the future. In this instance I speak only for myself in the hope that what is said may find support and that this particular complaint will need to be taken no further. It is my hope that there may be general agreement by both parties with the views expressed.

The publication of material in the Lampoon, which was meant to satirize or parody ethnic material, goes beyond simple fun in ways that stereotype and ridicule ethnic groups. This occurs because the experiences or images stereotyped carry such powerful connotations; one (for example) from the Jim Crow South, The Tar Baby Award, and the other from Nazi Germany, the Camp Buchenwald advertisement.

The use of stereotypes has an effect on society. Ralph Ellison has said "it conditions the reader to accept the less worthy values of society. It is," to follow Ellison, "in the realm of the irrational... that the stereotype grows... The Negro stereotyped is really an image of the unorganized, irrational forces of American life, forces through which, by projecting them in forms of images of an easily dominated minority, the white individual seeks to be at home in the vast unknown world of America. Perhaps," Ellison concludes, "the object of the stereotypes is not so much to crush the Negro as to console the white man." The other material, the advertisement for Camp Buchenwald, is unbelievably offensive, especially since it is part of the most tragic event in recent human history. Its presence in the magazine suggests a serious absence of concern for others. In sum, I believe the use of this material is wrong and cannot be condoned.

This generation has the special responsibility, because so much has been accomplished to remove the color line, to seek new and improved race relationships.

It might be argued that the use of stereotypes by Archie Bunker is an ideal way to use them, especially since one may even laugh at Bunker, the buffoon. But research on All in the Family shows that its impact is to reinforce the prejudice of those who are already prejudiced. There is very little movement ideologically among those who watch it. Indeed a faculty colleague reported that while in the South observing a White Citizen's Council rally, to be held at 6 p.m., he was astounded to hear the reason for the early start. The speaker ended the rally, with a reminder, "Now let's go home and watch our favorite program, All in the Family." Then there were cheers. In my view the use of stereotypes in humor is often "loaded," in ways far removed from the author's original intent. It is reasonable to suggest, therefore, that special care be taken with such material.

REPORT and CONCLUSIONS

In discussion, the Lampoon representatives have expressed their sincere regret about the material in question. They have joined in the discussion with regard for their fellow students who have taken offense at the humor directed at ethnic groups. Most importantly, the Lampoon will take every reasonable step to discontinue the use of thoughtless racial stereotypes and material such as The Lampoon Buchenwald advertisement. Quite rightly, they take the position that they must retain editorial discretion and on this we are agreed.

AFTERWORD

It would perhaps be helpful, in conclusion, to present my personal view of the role of race in society and at the College. I have a strong personal preference for a society and College in which race does not matter, where one is color blind, and men and women are judged by the quality of their minds and strength of character. Such a view sees the individual as the most important actor in society and not the group. The College will then be successful when it helps the individual student to make wise choices and to grow in his or her own way.

When an issue such as this surfaces for inquiry, comments are directed, as in this case, at the material in question. It is important to realize, as well, that the responsibility to improve race relations in the College also rests with other students, minority and others. The last decade in higher education has placed a great deal of emphasis on improving the status of minorities within the university and society. Perhaps now is the time to consider a different but related issue, namely, the state of race relations and how they might be improved. In so doing, ways may be found to strengthen the social and learning environment and thus secure more firmly the gains made in minority affairs. Toward this end, I shall invite a group of students and faculty to join me next year to review race relations at Harvard and to make recommendations that may prove helpful to us all.

I am grateful to Professor Thomas Pettigrew and Assistant Professor Shelley E. Taylor for drawing my attention to research on All In The Family and for sharing their views on the Lampoon material with me.

I wish also to thank the representatives of the two groups who participated in the discussions. HRBSA: Sharon Jones '77, Mercedes Lang '77, Gary Martin '79, Gus Martin '78 and Charles Epps '79. Lampoon: Steven Crist '78 and George Meyer '78.