WHILE WE wholeheartedly agree that President Bok must make himself more personally accountable to his divestiture critics, we cannot, as the majority does, downplay Bok's conspicuous absence throughout the two day period of last week's pro-divestiture rally and subsequent vigil outside Massachusetts Hall. That absence bespeaks a caution and arrogance that has made Bok a first-rate lawyer-and a third-rate leader.

It is not every day that some 5000-plus students gather in the Yard to demonstrate around a political issue, or that roughly 75 sleep in the rain outside Mass. Hall in order to bring their message directly to President Bok. That activism is testimony to the deeply felt convictions of a substantial portion of the campus community that Harvard's current investment policy toward South Africa is incorrect and counterproductive. Far from disappearing with the graduation of a few individuals, this pro-divestiture sentiment has persisted for more than a decade and appears to be growing. Whether or not Bok is prepared to reverse his stated opposition to divestiture, it is imperative that, as the leader of this University, he acknowledge the dimensions of campus opposition to his policies.

The events of last Thursday and Friday presented a more than appropriate opportunity for Bok to demonstrate just such concern. Having found time earlier this month to publicize his views on a Congressional fight over sanctions against South Africa, B should have set aside some time to address the divestiture battle being played out on his own campus last week. But Bok avoided first the University- conference following the rally and, more important, the peaceful vigil outside his office from Thursday through Friday afternoon-avoiding his office entirely for those two days. Those protesters had explicitly disavowed any intent even to bar administrators from entering the building.

Given the nonmilitant character of the vigil Bok's unwillingness to come face to face with the demonstrators, much less speak to them directly, reveals a cynical indifference to such protest. Last week's events were an emotional, But reasoned call for change that deserved, at the very least, the courtesy of a reply.