To the Editors of The Crimson:

Mr. Charles Kurzman's article of April 28th on "Rejuvenating Radcliffe" fails to recognize the important role that Radcliffe College plays for many women and men on campus, as well as its alumnae (note the plural feminine). First and foremost, I think that Mr. Kurzman misses the symbolic importance of maintaining Radcliffe the College. Demoting its status to a "Resource Center" would be to turn our backs on the history of women. True, the purpose of establishing Radcliffe was to provide women with a Harvard education, but along the way women discovered that that wasn't all they wanted or needed. The Radcliffe education is different from the Harvard education. Contrary to Mr. Kurzman's portrayal, Radcliffe is--in marked contrast to the Harvard administration--extraordinarily open and accessible. True, more women could take a greater advantage of the Radcliffe opportunities, but that is no reason to further disempower the institution.

Much of Mr. Kurzman's article reflects a simple dearth of research. Suggesting that Radcliffe's primary event for its undergraduates was the Senior Soiree, "the stereotypical women's college event," merely illustrated the lack of contact that Mr. Kurzman has had with Radcliffe. Harvard and Radcliffe are both institutions that expect a certain amount of individual responsibility. Radcliffe does an extraordinary job of publicizing its resources through such publications as the Gonfalon, mailed free of charge to any undergraduate requesting it.

The claim that Radcliffe should be more active simply fails to recognize all that Radcliffe does using its own resources, and the extent to which we, as grown-up Harvard-Radcliffe students are individually responsible for employing the available resources. The Murray Research Center, the Bunting Institute, and above all, the Schlesinger Library do exactly what Mr. Kurzman suggests they fail to do: attract faculty and scholars. It is wrong to rest the onus of blame on the victim, for it is Harvard's unwillingness to acknowledge the legitimacy of Women's studies which is holding back the full potential of this discipline. Radcliffe handed over control of the undergraduate curriculum for women to the Harvard administration and should not be condemned for not going back on this agreement. Furthermore, it should be noted that despite Harvard's failure to recognize the validity and importance of Women's Studies, Radcliffe still maintains one of the most complete Women's Studies libraries in the country. Furthermore, it is the responsibility of Harvard faculty to point students in the direction of the academic research facilities which Radcliffe offers.

Equally unrepresentative of the truth is Mr. Kurzman's claim that Radcliffe fails to support undergraduate extracurriculars. Radcliffe offers innumerable grants and invaluable information through its Office of the Dean (for research, special events, and athletics), the Josephine Murray Travelling Fellowships, Education for Action, the Office for the Arts, the Career Forums, and particularly The Radcliffe Union of Students. Perhaps Mr. Kurzman should spend a little more time reading the lists of sponsors for the happenings on campus and take into consideration the source of Radcliffe's funds. No tuition money goes into the resources which Radcliffe College makes available: Radcliffe signs it directly over to Harvard University.

Finally, I beg to differ that Radcliffe intentionally keeps a low, low profile on campus. I am not pretending that when asked where I go to school I don't generally reply Harvard. Nor am I insinuating that when in class the prevalent atmosphere isn't that of Harvard and the 10,000 men so hungry for victory. What I am insisting is that there is a sense of community on campus for the many women who are Radcliffe College--one that I am not surprised Mr. Kurzman has missed. It would be a tragedy to lose Radcliffe College because it would break the ties with our mothers--both those who went here and those who did not--in the very real stuggle for the rights of women. Jill C. Vialet '86