Attention: Messers. Mayor, Kowall, Hudson, ECCAD, 1399 Johnstone St., Granville Isld. Dear Sirs: The arrival of this letter on your desk is due in part to the persuasions of T. Baker and E. Allen — although they share no responsibility for its contents — but more importantly, it was motivated by a desire to clarify and make known my position in withdrawing from ECCAD, and with the fervent hope that some will see fit to address the problems stated herein. Although I will readily admit that the calibre of instruction in the Graphic Design Department has im- proved notably since the inaugura- tion of the new school facilites and addition of a new faculty member, yet it is blatantly evident to the objec- tive eye of everyone, that the forcible molding of a better design cur- riculum is occurring at the cost of each student’s artistic integrity. This act of forcible molding lends itself not only to hoped-for improvements, but also results in the free play of over- riding egotism on the part of certain instructors, and in a sphere of demoralization, fear and intimida- tion. The third and fourth year Graphics students are widely aware of their own sublimated individuality and self expression, of having all distinguished themselves as ‘‘semi- swiss-style clones’, and yet through the real fear of ostracism, inhibit the free exploration of their own artistic expression within the structure of given assignments. It is indisputable that a successful designer is known by the hallmark of a unique style, yet the constricted viewpoint of certain members of the Design Department disallows the development of a personal signature and insists instead on_ overall homogeneity. It is a case in point that the illustrative style of Q.Lo (till recently a fourth yer Graphics stu- dent), received acknowledgement from the acclaimed illustrator John Long, and has since resulted in several freelance assignments, and yet at the same time was discredited by the Department’s illustration in- LETTERS structor, as the work of someone “‘who can’t draw’’. It is a regrettable situation when the potentially enlightening and in- spiring interchange between students and instructors is undermined by the manipulative ploys of some of the lat- ter, resulting in the addition of severe stress and psychological handicaps to the already rigorous curriculum of the former. It is no surprise to find an appetite for the learning process quite dminished in the third and fourth year students of the Graphics Depart- ment, and the accompanying joy and excitement withered. It should also be no surprise, therefore to find that three fourth year students withdrew from the Graphics program within one week of registering for their final year, when it became blatantly ob- vious that the coercive attitudes of the Department were still heavily in ef- fect. In closing, please note, that as I understand fully the far-reaching ef- fects of a completed formal educa- tion, I do not hesitate in my convic- tion that I would have continued in my final year at ECCAD had not the intolerable situation in the Graphics Department already preconcluded my decision. Sincerely, E.B. de Vink * * * *Editor’s Note: Four graduate students, from the total of eight, have now officially resigned from the Graphic Design program in this college, a 50% dropout rate. These kind of statistics, - combined with the fact that only eight students registered for fourth year courses, definitely exhibits a need for a formal review of the situation. Let us hear your views on this subject, as there are a number of students in this institution who are seriously con- sidering entering the Graphic Design’ program and have a right to be aware of the circumstances which they will encounter. * * * Cover By: Zazu, Sara Leydon Photographed Collage. TYPESETTING: AD WORK GRAPHICS Editor, THE PAPER Dear Sir: “The Paper’’ has got off to a good start with a few brickbats aimed at the annual faculty exhibition. Since I seem to have stirred the ‘most em- phatic objections’, I would like to clarify some issues. First of all, the politics which Chris Bradshaw imputes to the exhibition are largely imagined. The faculty ex- hibition is not a contractual obliga- tion. Work is submitted on a volun- tary basis and indeed some faculty members chose not to participate. Secondly, the reviewer fails to recognise that the theme of the show as stated in the catalogue was for faculty to ‘examine, by participation, the role drawing plays in their recent work’. For myself it meant drawing for ideas, an activity where no at- tempt is made to eliminate crudities since it is not intended to be read as professionally finished art. No doubt the confusion arises since the work is placed out of context on a gallery wall. Chris has some ideas about what drawing is not, namely, Sally Michener’s piece. I would be in- terested in his definition of what drawing is. Must drawing be relegated to a flat, square or rec- tangular piece of paper set in a frame? Are the cave markings at Altamira or the petroglyphis of British Columbia drawings? Is draw- ing not an important part of Japanese Haniwa sculpture, Picasso’s ceramic jugs, or Roy Lichtenstein’s heads with shadows? Surely we live in an age where simple definitions are dif- ficult and where the categories established by recent art history dissolve into each other. I would like to point out that Chris is on dangerous ground when he dismisses Fred Peter’s piece because it includes a message. Art has always been political and far from detracting from the work can often greatly re- inforce its meaning. Are we to reject Goya’s ‘Horrors of War’, Picasso’s ‘Guernica’, or George Grosz’s ‘Republican Automata’ ‘simply because they promote an_ idea? History tells us that artists have often had axes to grind. Chris certainly stimulated my thoughts; I hope he will continue to provide us with art reviews. PRINTING: TRIUMPH PRINTING IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN CONTRIBUTING TO THE PAPER, WE ARE LOCATED IN THE STUDENT SOCIETY OFFICE. WEEKLY MEETINGS ARE HELD ON FRIDAY’S AT 12:00 NOON. OPEN TO ALL. Tam Irving Chairman, 3-D Division * * *