THE MISERABLE TURNOUT two weeks ago for the open house forum soliciting student input on the next dean of Harvard College raise, an important issue which should concern all of us. That issue is apathy at Harvard.

Apathy envelops us. Apathy about apathy envelops as too. But this apathy extends beyond the pragmatism that trendy students like to identify with. There is apathy that goes beyond the conviction that activism will have little effect on undergraduate life at Harvard.

The open house was a perfect example. Search committee chairman Sidney Verba said student input would be taken very seriously in considering the next dean of the College. He even intimated that the primary reason no student was appointed to the search committee itself was merely one of privacy and security of information about candidate.

"I don't think they would have had the forum if they were not going to take student opinions seriously," commented Dean of Admissions and Financial Aids Chair Fred Jewett '57, who has been rumored to be in the running for the dean slot.

Yet despite this opportunity to get across their opinions about who the College's top administrator should be, or what qualities the next dean should have, only four Undergraduate Council representatives and the president of the Radcliffe Union of Students showed up for the forum.

THE APATHY doesn't end there. For nearly a year, the College has been planning its renovations of the Radcliffe Quad angle, and for nearly as long, students have been confused about what will happen in that situation.

Despite publicity of want is under consideration for the Quad, visits by Dean of the College John b Fox Jr. '59, presentations by architects and repeated articles in the Crimson many students still don't know what's going on.

Fox has expressed concern that students not think the College is trying to mislead them. He knows that it's hard raising money for the Quad, even though the College has just picked up $356 million in a capital drive, but he wants students to know that.

And despite attempts to explain this to the undergraduate community, many students ignore the Harvard Gazette where much of the official business of the University is explained, as well as other publications which provide information on issues such as Quad renovations. Fox has lamented that "even if you make an entire propaganda blitz, you reach a very small audience."

BEYOND APATHY ABOUT Harvard life, there is also question of activism on national issues. The problem of apathy on Harvard's campus would not be so glaring if it were not held in contrast with new activism on other campuses.

In the past year Yale students have refused to cross picket lines of striking workers; Brown students have rallied for cyanide pills and ejected CIA recruiters from their campus; Amherst and Colby Colleges have protested to keep their fraternities on campus.

Most strikingly, demonstrators at Columbia recently sat in front of a building for three weeks protesting their university's investment in companies doing business in South Africa. On the exact same issue, Harvard students held a few rallies and then went home to their ivory towers.

Five thousand people attended Harvard's April 4 rally. A story in The Crimson followed in the next day, and as soon as Jesse Jackson left the thousands evaporated into mere hundred.

But activism should not be confused to divestment. One of the most disturbing things about divestment rallies is that, as trivial as they are in comparison with other schools rallies they are far and away the cost radica on Harvard's campus.

Last fall cries of "We're fired up, won't take it no more," were heard for about five minutes in front of John Harvard's statue during a protest against the small number of tenured minority faculty. Yet these fired-up cries seemed to lose their strength and turned to mumbles as thoughts began to turn from protest to dinner.

ACTIVISM SOMETIMES produces jail sentences. But it can also create an awareness of issues, and produce critical rethinking by all members of the community. As members of amintellectual community like Harvard, we can and must support critical analysis of issues. The ambivalence toward recent protests at Harvard advances no rethinking and contributes nothing but grandstanding to the debate.

While a policy of civil disobedience need not be pursued, it is important that Harvard undergraduates get fired-up about something they care about, and that they express this discontentment in a way which will produce results. Activism and pragmatism are not mutually exclusive entities. Every Harvard student, with or without a cause to fight for, should realize this. At many other campuses, pragmatic activism has replaced apathy. The same should happen at Harvard.