Publicly accessible
URL: http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/collections.html
copyright 2013, by the Victoria University of Wellington Library
All unambiguous end-of-line hyphens have been removed and the trailing part of a word has been joined to the preceding line, except in the case of those words that break over a page.
Some keywords in the header are a local Electronic Text Collection scheme to aid in establishing analytical groupings.
Nine of the organisers of Drench, held on March 8 this year as part of Orientation Week, have been convicted of selling liquor without authorisation.
Drench is a university dance which is traditionally held in Orientation Week and at Tournament.
Tickets purchased at the function can be exchanged for liquor, in this case—a can of beer.
Eight of the convicted students were lined $20 and costs, while the ninth was convicted and discharged under Section 42 of the Crimes Act.
The magistrate, Mr. Birks, S.M., said he took that course of action because the ninth student had been asked to assist with the organisation of the dance only 24 hours before it actually took place.
The other eight students are appealing against the decision.
A former secretary of the Students' Association,
"He agreed as long as they hadn't entered the hall before purchasing the liquor tickets and as long as they were members of the Grand Establishment, the name of a club running the function, no prosecution could be successful," Mr Lawrence said.
The entrance fee of 50 cents and the 25 cent charge for the liquor were not collected at the same spot, a spokesman for the students said.
"But they were both being sold on the ground floor," he said.
The dance was held on the first floor.
At the trial, a policeman said he saw a can of beer being exchanged for money at the office where the entrance fee was collected.
This was denied by the students.
"There were several cans kept behind the counter for the personal use of those organising the function," one of them said.
"At no stage was beer actually exchanged for cash.
The President of the Students' Association,
"It's always been assumed that this sort of function was contrary to the Sale of Liquor Act," he said.
"But it has never been tested until now."
Mr Curry said that it was a matter which affected every other university in the country.
"Other universities have run Drenches in conjunction with Tournament, and I think many run them as part of their Orientation programmes.
"Whether they still run them is a decision for them to make."
Salient rang Dunedin yesterday to see if the proposed Drench had been cancelled.
The Vice-president of the Otago University Students' Association, Mr
"We've had general discussions with the police over the last few weeks and have got the problem fairly well sorted out.
"But we won't go ahead unless it's legal," he said.
All legal fees incurred by the students concerned will be met by the Students' Association.
But they will have to meet the cost of the fines personally.
Applications For …
Editor, Argot 1970
Editor, Student Handbook 1970 Advertising Manager, Salient 1970
are being received by the Publications Officer.
" With the growth of industry many of the potential leaders of the workers are being recruited from the managerial side," said Mr N. A. Collins, a trade unionist speaking in the Winter Term Lecture series.
"This is a good thing; I hope it's infiltration," he said.
It is also a good thing, said Mr Collins, that more children of workers have access to universities and greater oportunities even though they could otherwise have been future trade union leaders.
"But consequently, this largest group in the community, the workers in trade unions, tend to receive the least benefit from changes in society insofar as leadership is concerned.
"This makes adult education all the more necessary."
"So too does the fact that employers, more and more, are equipping industry with university-trained managerial personnel and with continuing courses to keep them up to date.
"The trade union leader must compete and hold his own at this level."
Because of the complexity of society, and Government participation and control increasing, the trade union leader finds himself increasingly involved in policy matters at "both Government and industry level, and … needs new understandings and insights into subjects which were not previously within his field," said Mr Collins.
The trade union leader needs a greater knowledge of economics, technology, the application of science in industry, and of sociology, industrial negotiation and relations, and the impact of world affairs, he said.
I Take it as axiomatic that students should always be on the lookout for ways of increasing their collective power relative to society's decision-making and opinion-forming processes, and more especially to the university administration.
I shall be brief: this aim, if thoroughly pursued, fits in with that of democratising student politics. I do not hold with the theory that Exec. members "represent" the mass of the students, for seldom do candidates oppose one another on clear-cut, opposing platforms. The issues are the personalities, who end up "representing" only themselves and a small group of friends.
The A.G.M.s, S.G.M.s, and S.R.C. provide all the direct democracy that is necessary. If the number of Executive portfolios is decreased, all that will happen is that, although the average student will have no more control over his own affairs, the university administration will have to take over more of the donkey-work and the principle I mention in my first paragraph will be contravened.
The myth one hears about Exec. members doing no work amid a continuous round of cocktail parties is a typical rumour—its source is a small fire whose smoke served to cloud the issue. The amount of work an Exec. member does depends mainly on his own intentions, for in most cases there is a fair bit he could do—
The House Committee Chairman, for example, which I have recently become, has less authority than he might have. Past holders of this office seem, for some reason, to have let their powers slide into the hands of the Hon. Secretary of the Studass, the Managing Secretary of the Student Union, the Studass Office Manager, the S.U.B. Caretakers, and the N.C.C. Chaplain to a large extent. There is at present no Quiet Room Committee, which should be a subcommittee of the House Committee, which at present has no members, although five applications have come in since the beginning of the year. Since the quorum is five, and not everyone can be expected to attend every meeting, I shall be calling for further applications.
I shall conclude by drawing together the threads of my argument, by referring to my earlier statement that the aim of increasing student power fits in with that of democratising student politics. An Exec. member, of course, with a lazy or non-existent sub-commitee cannot hope to make the most of his potential authority because of lack of time. He needs to delegate a large part of his functions to his subcommittee. So it seems to me that if a large number of students wants a democratisation of student poltics, their best pledge of good faith is to become an active member of one or more sub-committees—that is, if they don't all succeed in getting a post on Exec. or as a Student Representative to some part of the University administrative machinery—and to actually do some work towards increasing student power and using it effectively!
So many students are apathetic or disparaging in regard of student politics that it is only right that the power should go to those who are interested enough to go to meetings and, more especially, to do some of the administering.
Editor:
Layout and design:
Assistants.
Contributors:
Reviews:
Typist:
Photographers:
Secretary:
Business Manager:
Advertising:
An editorial scholarship from Rothmans is made available annually.
Mick Jagger,
And a week or two later he's found face downwards in his regulation star's private swimming pool, doped to the eyebrows with "asthma tablets', we are told discreetly, very dead. I can think of no more appropriate or ironic end for an unsure, unwilling star.
The story of the Rolling Stones is basically a familiar one. It started with Brian Jones' band playing hard, uncompromising, R. and B. at a time when everyone else joined him, they made a couple of singles, an L.P. and became the top British group. Just like that. The mixture of an undiluted musical style and total rebellion against authority was an unbeatable one for the displaced mods and rockers of 1964. They were more than a group, exulted producer
From the start Brian's interest was purely in his music and the cult thing was acceptable only so far as it was related to the blues. He was a curious mixture of rebel and conformist—he wouldn't be told what to do, but he wanted to be left alone to do it. He and Mick were always the most intelligent ones in the group, but while Mick's press releases were more often than not exuberant "look at me's", Brian was happier talking quietly and articulately in a low Kent accent about his music—"look at us". As well as the hectic strain of travelling and playing night after night, there were the dual pressures on pop stars—the older people insisting the Rolling Stones lead exemplary lives; the younger people insisting the Rolling Stories lead their fans.
Either way the group would be constantly in the public eye and what they did would he news, supported by one generation, decried by another. There was a paternity suit against Brian by the mother of a young "groupie" which he didn't defend, drug stories began to appear and the music became wilder and wilder. By 1965 the Stones were writing their own material more or less exclusively and harmonica was used more and more sparingly. Brian began to diversify, playing sitar on Paint It Black, marimbas on Under My Thumb, harpischord on Play With Fire and lately saxophone, but he was only average on them. The sound was becoming increasingly dominated by the other four with Brian filling in with a new sound where required, and he was beginning to feel insecure as to where the Stones' music was going.
He told the Press the Stones were moving away from
He go drunk, stayed drunk and had a three-day party. And died of the symbols of a life he chose but didn't want.
It's easy to over-sentimentalise over the classic pop tragedy, and easy to understand how he died. It's easy to sec his story in perspective now and realise that it is he, not the tough
And two weeks ago there was a memorial concert, performed by
And
All Letters Submitted For Publication Must Be Signed With The Writer's Own Name. No Pseudonyms Will Be Accepted Save In Exceptional Circumstances.
Will you through your columns graciously permit me to make just two requests of Messrs, Crofton, Cropp (& co. ...) whose obvious open-mindedness and lack of any pre-conceived ideas on religion are to be warmly commended (politely leaving aside, of course, the minor point that they wrote their letters before either meeting
First, a straight question: How many of the "Boomharangue" lectures and, seminars did they in fact have the courage to attend, in order to give a fair appraisal of their quality?
Secondly, from the lectures and seminars which they heard, could they please set forth for the benefit of Salient readers all those points (with quotes if possible) which support their theses that
My attention has been drawn to the review of the 5 Man Exhibition recently held in the New Zealand Academy of Fine Arts.
In speaking of my paintings your critic
Another point: I do not "intend satirical suggestion" in these works. The reworking of the themes of other artists is not new and one finds, for example, Picasso reworking Poussin.
• The mistake is not that of our critic but a mis-proof-reading of her writing. We apologise to Mr. Day for this error,—Ed.
While in total support of your correspondent, Miss
As editor of a student newspaper, you at least should be aware that twelve hours lecture time in a post-graduate university course means more than twelve hours work. The time spent each week in preparing the assignments required obviously far outweighs that spent in formal instruction.
Much of our work is of an "in-depth" nature, requiring considerable research. It extends beyond straight reporting, to weekly editorials, features and to the gathering of material for out major assignment of the year—a thesis to be completed by each student.
This week for example, we are doing a survey of the seven electorates, in the Christchurch area, and considerable time is involved in the interviewing of the candidates and other persons involved.
On the question of bursaries—we are not eligible for an Education Department post-graduate bursary, but if a student comes within the narrow prerequisites of a fourth year fees and allowance bursary, five of us don't, then that is available. It consists of $200, plus a boarding allowance where applicable, not "up to $450 a year, as well as fourth year boarding allowances" as stated in your article. There are also two non-government awards of $400 each for which we are all eligible.
Part-time work is undertaken by only one member of the class, and them irregularly, because as mentioned above, time is just not available. At any newspaperman knows, a good story cannot be regularised, so part-time work cannot be fitted in at all effectively.
We hope that this has cleared up the inaccuracies, and again pledge out support for the Polytechnic students in their fight for satisfactory bursaries.
On behalf of Canterbury
University journalism class 1969.
" The Masters are sweeping us the crumbs; we want some of the sugar," Bill (Pincher) Martin told a Labour Club meeting recently.
Mr Martin, President of the New Zealand Seamen's Union, and a member of the F.O.L. executive, was speaking on Industrial Relations in New Zealand.
"Industrial relations in New Zealand are changing, there is a need for a new approach with proper safeguards for both sides," he said.
Judge Blair's decision of June, 1968, had shown the trade unions the need to do away with the Arbitration Court system, and to subsitute a system of collective bargaining, "that will get us as much as the bosses can pay."
"At the moment the masters are sweeping us the crumbs, we want some of the icing."
Referring to his own industry, Mr Martin said that at the present time "the bosses are dragging the chain.
"They're not tuned in on the changing industrial relations of the present day.
"The majority of people we are dealing with are over sixty years of age and are looking forward to cosy retirement in a few years.
There are not enough young people on the employment side of the industry."
Mr Martin went on to speak of the political affiliations of the Seamen's Union.
"We are affiliated to the Labour Party because we feel that the Labour Party will do more for us in the way of legislation than any other party," he said.
But he described the present Labour Party - Trade Union relationship, as a case of the "tail wagging the dog".
"The Labour Party was formed by the Trade Unions, and they should be telling the Labour Party what to do," he said.
But now the Labour Party did not need to go beyond the Unions to "white collar" support in order to survive.
"We're all wage-slaves whether we've got blue or white collars."
He believes that the "white collar" worker does not see himself as a wage-slave due to the influence of the press in New Zealand.
"The problem is to get rid of the idea of 'blue' and 'white' collar workers.
"We've all got to get together and oppose the boss.
"The boss is the enemy," he said.
Commit yourself to Della Maria ..
Mycet (Race 2) likes tracks .. winalot on Lancelot (3) .. Puerto Rico in 2nd division .. wake up to the Gold Action (5) .. Bernly to socc'em in the 6th .. Our Grace and Royal Theme the rage in the 8th .. Claudius a noble beast in the last.
Exciseman (2), Dowry (4), Hayburner (6), Walaroo (9), Tote-Busters: Blue Winter (Tau. Cup), Kev (Rang., Race 6), Dingo (Rang. Race 8).
Continued From Page 1
The trade union leader "can no longer be concerned only with the wage rate and the local dispute because the role and responsibilities of trade unionists are changing."
"So I see three levels of trade union education which educators are and will have to increasingly play a part.
"And when I say 'have to', I mean that we, the trade unions, need you, because you have a role to play."
Mr Collins said that because of the pressure of union commitments "top level" trade unionists were often unable to pursue long continuing courses.
"I tried it at the University and couldn't keep it up because of the pressures of my job," he said.
"Short live-in courses where a full-time officer can get away from his job and give full-time study for a period."
This was being planned and under way.
Of the rank and file members, scattered throughout the country, Mr Collins said that it would seem that they are better served by the WEA Trade Union Postal Education Committee's correspondence courses," but we will have to use educators and we will need to use them far more in this role.
"This university and university men are playing a major role innovating and furthering this work with the University Extension Department in the lead."
"Already we have had substantial assistance in the courses of training and seminars which have been promoted as a joint effort, and which are leaving their mark in union circles, helping in the very necessary job of fitting union people to talk with equal understanding on social and economic subjects," he said.
For space reasons we have withheld replies to Jim Mitchell's article until next week.
Barry & Sargent Ltd.
Opticians
118 Willis St. - Tel. 45-841
Sports
The Sports Depot
(Witcombe & Caldwell)
Long-standing connection with University sport. Every one of Vic's 24 sports catered for.
H. W. Moss Ltd.
Wholesale Wine And Spirit Merchants
89 Thorndon Quay
Open Saturdays
Labo(u)r
However you speell the word, the American Library, 28 Waring-Taylor St., has a number of the best American books on the subject.
Waring-Taylor Street, has a
Victuallers
Reginald Collins Ltd.
Wholesale wine and spirit people. Vintners to the Students' Association. Carry stocks of all brands of ale, spirits, table wine (from 55c), sherry in flagons ($1.60) or quart bottles.
Free Delivery—Cellars located at No. 3 Ballance Street
(Customhouse Quay end)
Suit Hire Service
Suits For All Occasions
•
First Floor Dominion Life Arcade Willis St., Wellington
Phone 42-275
Downstage Theatre Cafe
At the Star Boating Club
Peter Shaffer's
" The White Liars"
" Black Comedy"
Directed by
Designed by
Dinner 6.45 - Show 8.15
All Reservations 559-639
Hotel St. George
The "Seven Seas Bar"
Best In New Zealand
• Nearest to University.
• Modern, comfortable surroundings.
• Cool, bright, fresh beer on tap always.
• Food available from our "Food Bar", 11.45 a.m. to 2.30 p.m.
• Mixed drinking—all facilities.
Entrees, Cold Buffet, Vegetable, Hot Pies
Daysh, Renouf & Co.
Members Wellington Stock Exchange
National Mutual Centre
Featherston Street Tel. 70-169
I have been brought up to think that theories are invented so that one can foretell what will happen. One invents them and reinvents them until they work successfully.
For example I find that when I stir a teacup or a bucket of water, and leave it, the leaves in the tea, or sand grains in the water, are left in a little heap in the middle on the bottom of the vessel.
My first theory says this is natural; it will always happen when the water rotates. So I make the situation a little different and hang the bucket on a string and make it spin. The sand grains move to the outside edge now. The same thing happens with tea leaves. This is not what my first theory predicted. The theory must be wrong.
My second theory is that the sand moves to the outside edge because it is denser than water; the bucket acts like a "centrifuge". But theories are of little use unless they predict successfully in new situations. I therefore reverse the argument and predict that if the particles were less dense than water they would move to the middle. So I sprinkle cork fragments on the water (they float of course, being less dense) and I spin the bucket. Nothing happens; the floating particles begin to go round as the water picks up the speed of the bucket but they show no inclination to move to the middle in preference to the outside.
Things are getting mysterious and I seem to be losing sight of my first question 'why did the sand gather in the middle?' But in research it does not pay, I think, to insist on answering the question one first thought of. The point of research, to my mind, is to succeed in making sense of something. It doesn't matter quite where one begins. The point is to succeed in making sense of something, then with luck the area of enlightenment will spread.
So back to the problem. The sand gathers in the middle only when the water is spinning but the bucket is not. This is a third theory. Let's invert it and predict that if the bucket is spinning and the water is not, then the sand should move to the outside. This is a good prediction because we have already seen it happen. The sand moves to the outside as soon as one rotates the bucket, long before the water has had time to pick up the spin.
So let's push the theory a little further. One should never leave a theory alone. One should always keep on pushing a theory until it breaks down (or until one gets tired of pushing); because a theory that finally breaks down points the way to an even better theory.
So think of some further twist. Perhaps if the sand were lighter than water it would move in the reverse way. But we have tried cork dust and nothing happened. Perhaps this was because the water surface became curved. When the water spins it climbs up the side of the bucket. Incidentally this might
So let's stop the water surface from becoming curved by filling the bucket to the top and putting a glass lid on it. I prefer to do this with a closed jam jar on a gramophone turntable. Now predict what will happen to the sand in the jam jar. I think one should always predict what will happen before one does an experiment. This helps one to realise whether the theory is working or not. It keeps one's mind on the job.
The last theory suggests that if the water surface is kept flat, the sand should not move. It's wrong. The sand moves to the outside when the jar starts turning, and then if one stops the jar and lets the water spin inside it, the sand gathers in the middle. The curve on the surface is not the cause of the motion.
So let's go back to the theory about the relative motion of the jar and the water. This says nothing about the density of the sand. Try cork fragments. There is a glass top to the jar now and the cork fragments float against it. Toss a coin and say perhaps that they will behave like the heavy sand. This proves true when you make the experiment. They move out at first, then gather in the middle after you have stopped the jar turning.
It seems that the relative density of the fragments and the water is unimportant. I won't go further, but merely say that I think that the relative rotation of the jar and the water inside it, sets up circulating currents that waft the fragments about in the way we see.
My point in saying all this is that I think that theories are made to allow us to predict what will happen. We alter them until they do. But if one cannot use a theory to predict a behaviour, there seems little use in the theory, and until it can be shown to give successful predictions in new situations it is not to be taken seriously.
One last point is that, in physics at least, one can usually invent a variety of theories and that these must be assessed by seeing whether or not their predictions are true. Occasionally one has different theories that are equally successful in prediction and so cannot be distinguished by experiment. In that case one always choses the one that works out most simply. I will give an illustration.
My friend and I live three miles apart and I set out one day at 9.00 by my clock at home and reach his house when his clock says 9 30. I leave when his clock says 10.30 and reach home at 12.00 by my clock. This seems wrong, since the first journey takes half an hour and the other takes one and a half hours. It might happen day after day till it occurred to me that things would make more sense if my friend put his clock forward half an hour. If he did so I should arrive at 10.00 and leave at 11.00, having taken an hour each way. This would seem better.
But if my friend were obstinate he could maintain that both clocks were perfectly good clocks and showed the right time. If I carried my own clock with me and showed him that it read 10.00 on arrival he might, if sufficiently obstinate, point out to me a new law of nature, that clocks always gain half an hour when carried from my house to his, and conversely lose half an hour when carried the other way. This might strike me as a wrong headed view, but I could live with it if he insisted, and could make all the necessary additions or subtractions to keep appointments with him. But sensible people would arrange to alter one of the clocks by half an hour. If my clock is right, then the right way to adjust his clock is the way that makes for plain simple sense. It doesn't mean (to me) that it is the Right way with a capital R but it is right in the sense that it makes for the simplest arguments. So in physics we choose the simplest way to look at things and call it "right".
We say that the earth moves round the sun because this theory allows us to invent simple universal rules in physics. A person might maintain otherwise if he did not mind his physics becoming extremely complicated. But it would be "wrong" because it was more complicated than it need be.
One way of finding out what the scientific method is might be to examine what the scientist actually does. But though this approach would work reasonably well in the case if the natural sciences it would not be suitable for the social sciences, especially political science, because it begs what is usually considered to be the vital question, i.e. to what extent is the method of political 'science' really 'scientific'? In other words, it is the natural scientist who seems to set the pace while the social scientist is then judged on how successfully he keeps up (or back?) with him. We must therefore start with some motion of what science is before we can assess the role of scientific method in political science. It would be disingenuous to try to give an account of the attitude of political scientists in general to 'science' and the 'scientific method' for the simple reason that there is no such general attitude. What follows will therefore be very much a personal view.
Scientific knowledge must first of all, I assume, be 'objective'. It must be based on evidence which can be tested according to generally accepted standards. 'Mr Holyoake is the Prime Minister of New Zealand' is an objective statement because there are generally accepted ways of proving or disproving it. 'Mr. Holyoake is a political wizard' is more suspect because there may not be clear agreed criteria for deciding the truth of this statement in which case it becomes 'unscientific'. Science obviously involves more than such propositions about isolated particulars. It aims to establish generalised knowledge about classes of event or object and, where possible, to construct scientific theories which will explain why particular phenomena occur by fitting them into a general pattern. Ideally, a scientific theory gives us a set of necessary and sufficient conditions for the occurrence of a particular type of result (if and only if What will happen (given conditions a, b, c, … then result x will follow). It is worth noting that obtaining predictions need not be the main purpose of such a theory. We may want to use a scientific theory to explain past events which we already know to have happened. The point is that if we have given such a scientific explanation of such a past occurrence, it follows that, with the aid of the knowledge we now have, we could have then predicted the result.
Not all scientific theories, however, need be of this type. There are, we are told, some areas of the natural sciences where it has proved so far impossible to construct theories which, even with the help of an 'other things being equal' clause, will fit all observed instances. The best that can be done is a statement of the probability with which a particular event is likely to occur. (Given conditions a, b, c. … there is a particular probability that x will occur.) Though such propositions may seem less satisfactory than the 'pure' form of scientific theory, if they are constructed reliably and objectively there is no reason other than sheer dogmatism, for saying that they are 'unscientific'.
The 'scientific method', then, is the method of arriving at scientific knowledge, involving such procedures as the construction of possible theories (hypotheses) and testing them objectively. What part does this method play in the study of politics?
We will begin with the question of evidence. Difficulties arise even with the initial classification of the subject matter. Categories such as Labour party member, voter, MP and so on cause no bother. They are clearly objective because there are precise ways of finding out who belongs in any of these categories. But we may want to use categories like 'Communist sympathiser' or 'authoritarian' where more caution will obviously be needed. If anyone uses such terms in the analysis of politics we will expect him to give explicit criteria which do not depend merely on the whims or intuitions of the writer so that the terms can be applied in the same way by other people and the results of the observations based upon them objectively tested. Such criteria might be membership of certain organisations or the performance of certain types of action. But often we will want to go further than this and take into account attitudes or opinions which can only be discovered by questioning the individuals concerned. Here the difficulties of being objective are greatly increased.
In fact, the political scientist in his desire to be objective and scientific is commonly faced with a dilemma. If he wishes to examine, say the extent of people's interest in politics, one way of doing this might be to stick to clearly observable characteristics such as participation in elections, subscribing membership of political parties, etc. The trouble is that he will then be accused of using crude and misleading indicators of what we really mean by 'political interest'. If, on the other hand, he starts to examine opinions and attitudes, the objectivity of his results will be questioned.
But we should not overemphasise these difficulties. Human beings are it is true, particularly complex objects to classify and describe—they are capable, for example, of deliberately misleading the observer. But this only makes scientific observation especially difficult; it does not necessarily make it impossible. Social scientists are becoming increasingly aware of the pitfalls in their subject and have evolved techniques for minimising them. Unless we adopt the implausible and philosophically dubious scepticism of those who say that it is impossible ever to know the attitudes or opinions of others, there seems to be no reason why such problems cannot be overcome. (That the difficulties are merely minimised and not removed altogether should not be taken as an objection to the claims of the social scientist to be scientific. All observation, of non-human as well as human phenomena necessarily involves a certain amount of unreliability and uncertainty.)
Scepticism is perhaps more justifiable when political scientists go beyond mere scientific classification and description and attempt to construct scientific theories about politics. Some people hold that it is in fact impossible to provide a scientific explanation of human behaviour because human being possess free will which means that their actions are outside the realm of cause and effect. What 'free will' means, whether or not we have it, and if we do have it, whether or not it is incompatible with 'determinism' are highly intricate and hotly disputed philosophical problems. At any rate, whether or not it is in principle possible to explain human action in terms of a scientific theory, there is no doubt that no-one has yet managed to do this with political action. Not that there is any lack of suggested theories. Quite the reverse. There are a large number of them but no theory has yet been found which is capable of explaining even a small segment of political life.
We should, however, be careful not to exaggerate, as some social scientists do, the accuracy of scientific explanation and prediction as found in the natural sciences, Scientific explanations cannot take into account all the different factors which may vary from one situation to another and they will always contain, explicitly or implicitly, an 'other things being equal' clause. The difference between the natural and the social sciences seems to be one of degree. In the former a considerable degree of accuracy can usually (but not always—vide meteorology) be achieved by ignoring all but a few variables, whereas in the latter 'other things' are usually so unequal, the excluded variables so significant, that the particular explanatory theory is very likely to be highly inaccurate. Similarly, when political scientists try to establish 'probability theories of political behaviour, their results are comparatively less accurate because of the complexities of the subject matter.
Most political scientists take this relative lack of success simply as a spur to try harder in applying scientific method to politics. There is still much that can be done in the often boring but useful work of testing hypotheses gathering accurate and reliable information. The difficulty in achieving any adequate body of explanatory theory may, some argue, be due to trying to answer the wrong sorts of questions about politics. Questions such as 'what are the conditions of political stability?' or 'why did Hitler come to power?', which have been the traditional concern of political scientists are too complicated. Though they may one day be explicable in scientific terms, scientific progress is more likely to be made by looking at simpler and more manageable problems, For example, some political scientists are now concentrating on the politics of small groups, local communities, small towns, etc., where it is thought, one is most likely to find those conditions, a combination of a small number of significant variables and a large number of particular examples, which have proved so helpful in the advance of the natural sciences.
But not everyone who is engaged in the academic study of politics would agree that the questions should be tailored to fit the method. For them, the method must suit the questions. Because science has not yet provided answers to the traditional questions, it does not follow that new questions must be put. Rather, these questions are, it is felt, so interesting and important that they must be answered with the best means available even if this involves using other methods besides the strictly scientific. Not that this necessarily involves a complete rejection of scientific method. Scientific method is to be used as far as it will go but other methods will be employed to supplement it. For example, in the case of evidence, objective evidence is valuable when it can be acquired but where it is not available, such political scientists will not feel impeded from making an assessment of, say, the motives of politicians or the subjects discussed in an unreported meeting.
Similarly, in the case of explaining politics, the political scientist will see what 'insights' are provided by the various 'models' that have been suggested. These vogue words, 'model' and 'insight', reveal the limited use that is being made of the scientific method. A 'model' is like a scientific theory except that it is explicitly defined as an abstract construction, that is it does not pretend to make any claims about what phenomena are actually like or how they actually work. This is not to say that the social scientist does not build his models with an eye to applying them to the real world. The point is that by explicitly defining the model as abstract, he removes the possibility that it may be invalidated by the discovery of counter-examples. If it is to be a 'useful' model it will certainly accord with reality to a certain extent and the more it accords the more useful it becomes, but it is not disproved as a scientific theory proper would bo as soon as it is falsified. The cynic might say that the model is a device by which the social scientist may indulge his yearning for the trappings of science—tables, formulae, mathematical elegance—without having to worry about the truth of what he is saying. Building castles is such fun that it does not seem to matter whether they are in the air or on the ground.
But as long as the model is tested as rigorously as possible and its limitations, the points at which it does not square with the evidence, are fully recognised, it can by an invaluable aid to understanding politics by giving us certain 'insights' or clues towards understanding a particular phenomenon. But since, for example, no single model of federalism is likely to provide the whole answer to the question why the Central African Federation broke up, the political scientist will often find the most satisfactory explanation to be one which combines a number of different 'insights' drawn from different, incompatible models.
Once he does this, he stops using scientific method and starts to behave in the same way as a historian who, if asked for the explanation of a complex event, say, the causes of war, will produce a number of different factors—political, economic, social, psychological and so on. None of these factors individually provides an adequate explanation and an important part of the hostorian's craft involves assessing the different weight to be given to these different factors. The word 'craft' is important. This exercise of assessment is a matter of individual judgment and is unscientific in the sense that it is not necessarily susceptible of objective proof or disproof. Of course, some such explanations may be proved wrong if they are based on false evidence but not all disagreements will be of this type where there are agreed criteria for settling them. This does not mean, as is sometimes said, that such judgments are completely 'arbitrary' as if they involved a completely random decision such as could be made by tossing a coin or drawing lots. All of us, in our everyday lives, continually make such judgments or assessments of people or situations and we recognise that they involve skill, experience and perspicacity.
True, such intellectual virtues are not susceptible of the same rigorous tests as scientific statements are but they are not for that reason therefore worthless. In many areas of our lives they are all we have to go on. If they are the best means at present available for answering certain important and interesting questions about politics then they should be used. Many political scientist, including the present writer, would even make a virtue out of necessity and value their subject as one which combines rigour of a science with the judgment more characteristic of the arts. Meanwhile, the efforts of the political scientists proper, as they would, not unjustly, describe themselves, are watched with interest. That their researches will add to our knowledge is beyond dispute. But whether all important questions about the workings of politics will ever be able to be answered satisfactorily solely by means of the scientific method is still very much an open question.
1969 marks the centennial of the birth of
Frances Hodgkins' pictures, even her most early ones, have a grace and competence which set them far above paintings of a similar subject-matter painted in New Zealand even today. She chose particularly to work in still-life and landscape, but had she chosen abstract or some other style it is almost as certain she would have succeeded.
Her low-key colours and the intelligent subtlety of her work makes it particularly distinctive. Her colour becomes not merely part of the beauty of her pictures but their structure and their life.
The influences of the French impressionists, notably Matisse and Cezanne, added inspiration to her painting. She adopted the post-impressionist paraphernalia; eggs, gourds, figs, farms, but never lost her own distinctive tastefulness. Her later abandoning of the objects of still-life meant her landscapes were clean and alive; marvellous agglomerations of colour and shape, with no parentage, no past and no direction.
Enough has already been written and spoken elsewhere about the style and quality of Frances Hodgkins' work to evaluate her in historical perspective, She has a position in painting comparable only to
* * *
Another exhibition dealing with New Zealand history although by a contemporary artist is the Trevor Moffit exhibition being held at the Belt-Duncan Gallery. There are paintings from his "Gold Miner Series" and from his "MacKenzie Series", both of which might have, I imagine, been pretty well flogged to death in previous exhibitions.
I understand Mr Moffit is at present holding an exhibition of a new "Fisherman Series" in Dunedin and it would seem that a touch of something new might not have gone amiss in Wellington. For all that,
It is only where his figures become too much of a caricature and too little an individual that it appears Moffit is becoming almost commercially stylistic.
"MacKenzie Stealing the Sheep" and "MacKenzie with his Bullock" both have an openness and fluid simplicity which make them appear full of freedom and adventure. The ochre colours of the tussocky MacKenzie country give a camouflage nature to MacKenzie's activities. It is inevitable the pictures demand comparison with Nolan's "Ned Kelly Series", but allowing for Moffit's more limited horizons, I feel he aquits himself adequately.
The "Miner Series" has a number of well-executed pictures, notably the larger ones such as "Sergeant Herlihy" and "Miners Fighting No. 2". In these, where action is given more rein, the subject matter becomes more important and the painting more alive.
The White Liars and Black Comedy are two one-acters now running at Downstage's Star Boating Club Hall. Five Finger Exercise in 1958 and certainly since his The Private Ear and The Public Eye in 1962 as an effective playright who uses crisp, rather intellectual dialogue and economical plots which can survive even a mediocre performance (Hurt Rep's recent attempt at Five Finger Exercise for example). Black Comedy had a good run at the Old Vic 1966-7 and his latest, Royal Hunt of the Sun (an excursion into the Spanish conquest of Peru) has had excellent reviews. Downstage may well keep up its record of presenting the latest and give us that before long.
The White Liars has dialogue of sympathetic wit and clarity, but is a kind of theme and variations on a rather lightweight piece of amateur psychology which wanes as a source of dramatic action long before the plot very predictably rounds off. The situation is dynamically developed by a series of contradictions of evidence which reveals character in the most direct way. After Tom's outburst the technique is dropped in favour of propounding theory and developing character detail. However helpful this is, it has the unfortunate effect of anti-climax and tediously reworking Familiar material.
Two customers invade this cosily occult scene to demonstrate the theory.
Sophie (and the audience) are caught in the cross glare of willing delusion and cynical revelation. Tom has a laughing fit, drops his lower class dialect and tells the truth (and somewhat like Vassi there is nobody reliable enough to qualify his evidence). But the surprises are over. Tom launches into anti middle class propaganda, Sophie rambles distractedly and Variation I is delivered by Tom: the Givers, though passive, define the roles of the active Takers. Variation II is even more dubious: Society will recognise only the fulfillment of certain preconceived images e.g. successful pop singers are working class and never sons of accountants.
From the time Tom finds his middle class voice the drama is over. The rest is just tidying up which, in contrast to the first half's dynamic revelations, is a process of taking longer to say less while waiting for the plot to catch up. Consequently, towards the end there is the sense of material being overworked. This is not to fault the production but just explains why a feeling of dissatisfaction lingers in spite of the actors' execllence and
In the Black Comedy has none to risk. The blackness is quite literal. Normal action starts on-stage in complete darkness, the "fuse blows", the lights come up and We see the characters groping about and falling over the furniture. It's a wonderful idea—a farce in the dark with almost every conceivable bit of slapstick by-play short of cream pies: mistaken identities, talking into space, mixed drinks, an attempt to exchange every stick of furniture borrowed from the next flat because the owner has returned. The possibilities are endless and most of them were realised by the cast who gave an expertly sustained performance.
One associates Feydeau with classic farce but this one is very English and pure situation comedy: almost plotless in the Feydeaun sense and there are very few jokes in the dialogue. Almost anything that looked desperate and helpless was cripplingly funny (one wonders how much the licensed first night helped here). Heather Eggleton's frilly orange knickers for the stair climbing bit was a master touch. That and David Williams's prolonged hysteria in shifting the furniture were not memorable.
Snappy action would seem to be essential to farce. But here the darkness slows everything down; the characters more as if they were treading water in a tank; the turns of fortune are seen to develop; imminent catastrophe becomes excruiating.
All this makes the play almost actor-proof but in fact the acting was exceptional too. Matt O'sullivan deserves spread mention for his effusively effeminate
Grant Tilly's set, with a kind of mezzanine bedroom, was fully exploited. Did I imagine Rex Gilfillon's lighting become stronger everytime a match was blown out? All this is ultimately praise for the directo eye for detail and sound professionalism: another success for
Those jejeunic metafizzouts, unconditionally unapproachable flabby cop-out movies; a dire stigmata worn by the jangling feeblest of souls, a pleasantly soon scalded, but resurrected in a Hollywood, a Lambert-swamped
Three honest little films, from Englishmen, are temptations of the highest order, each one of them worthy of a misplaced creator, nothing obseurantic, nothing ill-defined . … excellence par? They should be seen (or grabbed, that what) because of their hideous fintakrelian-type complexes, usually attributed to the wet and physical plutocracy of the Dizzyland industry, the tell-tale heartache of past Giants, barely shadowing their own concealment and peripotatic existence.
Catch us if you can (a great little film) then went big budgies to Point Blank, a thoroughly Resnaisish gun drama; but (One Way Pendulum).
His Robbery had the makings of a new-action school, the vehicular-heartstop, but is enforced by the presence of Bullitt (though his chase seems to be overshadowed already by Collinson's The Italian Job. It seems the only things the cars don't do is to have babies!) and very soon Yates's prestige will surely rise with his John and Mary.
Despite what I was meant to think about Bullitt (Warners 7), I still had to revert to a plot summary in a Hollywood mag to find out what it was about!
There's the famous car chase, and eventually a lengthy gundown at a large International Airport. Yates, like Lester, stays on location, inside/outside for nearly every second of the film. Very few films have been able to accommodate an environment so evocatively and beautifully as this; nor have they dealt with cops and syndicates so thoroughly. The old system gets a real work-over for once.
It is not that Yates may be a disciple of Siegel. The car chase, for instance, is far inferior to that of the Master's in The Line-up, Superb stunt-shots, (real as real) modern techniques, brilliant colour etc., are no real substitute for excitement, originality, heart-stopping terror. Siegel just knows what is best for an audience, and all his films have proved this beyond a doubt. The Line-Up recently had the audience (and me) literally screaming as they surely did 11 years ago.
Of course we react to the chase in Bullitt: telephoto shots of great black cars, lumping over rises is even something Siegel never used. The shot of the two escapees burning to death in their mashed vehicle, gloriously revolting in colour is something technique and censorship would not have allowed many years ago.
But the real climax of Bullitt is the finale. The airport chase, inside and out. Among the silver screaming bellies of the huge jets in the dark, as they prowl around before take-off. The crowded terminal hunt, superbly suspensful, defies description. The blasting of the hunted through a glass panel (yet another sickening killing, more blood is spilled in that than any other—I am still incredulous at the Censor's discretion, certificate, but then I'd moan if it was cut too!!) and the detached, horrified cowering passengers in the building: Absolutely fantastic!
If it seems (and most likely one does get sick of plot repetitions, the same films without variations, etc.) that you will miss Bullitt because of "yet another cop film!" I would suggest you change opinion; it is in another class entirely from anything else.
It explores the aftermath of death for the first part. A hospital of death, with great close-ups of shattered bodies, feeding off great plasma bottles. Frankenheimer and his deux ex machina has never matched quite the horror Yates achieves. McQueen slumps around mumbling, unshaven, in an open cardigan, great bags under his eyes. Mr
There's Jacqueline Bissett's loffely English voice, find big
(Divorce American Style, Cool Hand Luke, In Cold Blood and soon Goodbye Columbus) who with equally young Hell In The Pacific (Cinerama Releasing Corp.) Its the best possible kind of visual movie that exposes its guts to the elements, a strong and rare film, that achieves far more that it says (a moderate pun). It is a tone poem of the seasons; an occasion when dialogue is swamped by sub/objective imagery, quaint symbolism (archaic, then), magnification of sounds orchestral (!) and natura.
The sea is cast as a player of assorted timbres, and
Flemyng's The Split (MGM) was taken for granted, its east of the highest and most exacting order, which I will not list, overpresented their images in uneasy set-pieces.
The robbery of a football stadium has the usual overtones, but people like
The villains had the convictions of old dodderers; a mistress-mind of dear
Pumping a nigra lady full of bullets, the blood seeping through a white shroud, and torturing your neighbourish
I've never really been ratty in a film before (television has the hypothesis that: extra derogatory—means sublimate the condition of catharsis long before external interference—discounting the cure for sloppy bowels, the myopia of Up The Chuff and the paedophetamimic squakings of breakwindfast MacPhersonland—can interfere with the normal occurence of sleepless dry horrors) before Interlude, that is.
I was ratty during the credits (oh! photography by Gerry How Green Was My Counterpoint then you saw Interlude; that is, musically speaking, minus muscles, Die Meistersinger and a piddler on the roof. "Do you love music?" "I Like music," chortles the hummable dialogue. "What's for your next concert?" "Oh …" dismissing it with an offish air, "Carnival Overture, Brahms 3" diddlee-dee.
And what playing! From the Albinoni Adagio (that Welles so usefully used backwards in his Kafka work) to Beethoven, and, and, Rachmaninov, and, and um Mozart. "I see you like Mahler," says Miss Ferris to no-one carefully shuffling through a meagre pile of Bruno Walter covers.
Ladies get hankies ready say the luscious ads as if the entire mulch is so absorbent-plus as those free summer days without worry.
John (spray me with cheese) Cleese, does zebra impressions in the skitey video rooms, and Donald (this passage will have to have consistent practice) Sutherland, gliding glibly around his little pupils—both are funny, like sheep.
A Socialist Childhood, with St. Muggeridge; at least that wore its heart on a sleeve that suffocated the baby. Intermezzo ('souse me
The guilty overshadowing of latent masterpieces, years old, is catching up with us. I felt this last week at the showing by the Wellington Film Society of Susumu Hani's innocently devastating She and He (1964). I can't ward off the feeling of encroaching doom every time I see a piece of Japanese cinema, whether it be the thrombastic stillness of Ozu or the epic longuers of Kurosawa, Ichikawa, Shindo etc., but in this case, for me, a near expression in cinemaverite style (no other word) encompassing some of the distilled purity of the free Czech cinema.
The film is (in contrasts) an essay in sociological indifference between the middle-classes of Tokyo's enormous apartment-blocks and a group of ragpickers, living in deplorable conditions just on the outskirts.
A young married couple, She (the divine Hiroshima Mon Amour) spend their life coercing Ikona (the raggedly delightful
The apartment children drag his dog away and stone it to death. She feels compelled to rescue Ikona, and in the final sequence she seems to find some consolation with her husband lying in bed, listening to the night sounds. It is utterly compelling story-telling, with a minimal use of dialogue, no wailing Eastern instruments, a cast of superlative nice-looking Japanese, and a hypnotic flair for visuals keeping in mind the most enchantingest series of natural incidents.
Director Hani does not exist in this film, because (to me) he has none of the personalised traits subtle-emotional directors of today seem to achieve, not that a new and honest film maker shouldn't be let loose to create an impression, and in this film he certainly has; but of the man himself there is very little.
India's Ray, and in part She and He and the opaque quietude of many of the conversations are unbelievable in their direct honesty. They are ravishingly pure, and very very sad.
It needs a fuller report to do this film justice; there should be occasions for anyone interested in films to see it, and discuss it. If we could guarantee an interest, (any light by any one to go by), it would not be impossible to secure the film from the Federation and Show it sometime at Varsity.
It is disgusting the minority that have seen it.
* * *
The Film Society's offering this week is John Frankenheimer's horror masterpiece Seconds which was first seen in Wellington last year. The film marks Frankenheimer at his best in technical horror and is guaranteed to send small shudders if you haven't seen it before. Screening 12.15 on Friday lunchtime.
" Evening Post's" effusive sports scribbler Gabe David, noted for his irrelevant but never-at-a-loss quotations, has gaffed again. Eulogising recent American Ambassador Henning, David wrote: "Perhaps this great American can best be summed up in the words that William Hazlitt described the famous explorer Scott: 'His worst is better than any other person's best' ". Scott lived from 1868-1912; Hazlitt died in 1830. Turn again Gabe.
The Establishment has been trying to tame Salient for year it seems. It's success it sporadic. Heard what the old-boy network is up to now? David Harcourt is moving in to be the fourth product of Scots College to edit Salient since 1964. Funny how these democratic elections are decided in advance isn't it.
From our leading morning newspaper. "Another policeman said, 'What are we expected to think when a policeman handling a street incident tells a 13-year-old child to go and jump in the lake?" Birch them if the truth comes out.
They tell me a man was landed on the moon the other day. An American too by God. With a carefully prepared spontaneous quotable quote tossed off the cuff where it had been placed by the speech writer-in-residence. At least Dominion's laugh-a-minute Eric Heath featured him with a Stars and Stripes in his hand. More than he did for Sir Edmund Hilary who's clutching a Union Jack.
I Don't know why Salient finds it necessary to publish racing tips, but thanks anyway. See you in Tahiti this Christmas.
Anonymous.
(for perfectly good reasons).
• $2 each way on all last week's selection returned $20 50 clear profit.—Ed.
The annual competition with Massey for the Paekakariki Cup was held recently over the club's 7½ mile course at Queen Elizabeth Park, Paekakariki.
Vic won the cup for the third year in succession, overwhelming completely the weaker Massey team. (The Vic team scored the lowest possible possible total of 21 points to beat Massey's 99 points. With the first six runners in each club counting for points, Vic had seven runners home before the first of the Massey team finished...
Victoria's team was
Massey's placings were:
Undoubtedly Massey while it still would not have won the Paekakariki Cup, would have improved on its poor showing if its two top runners had been competing. However,
The Paekakariki Cup competition began in 1950 when the cup was donated by Mr.
Club Championship
Also run in conjunction with the Paekakariki Cup was the club champs.
The club course, covering 7½ miles (3 laps of a 2½ mile circuit) including as it does, sand dunes, swamp, beach, creeks, rolling hill country and the famous "bull paddock" is reputed to be one of the most testing cross country courses in New Zealand.
Taking the lead right from the start, the 1969 club championship was convincingly won by
This win by Stockwell was a continuation of the do dominance of old boys of Hawera High School who have now won the club championship 4 times in the past five years.
Peter, who is the son of the Vice Chancellor, has been improving in every competitive run.
On his present form he should easily make the Wellington Junior team for the National Cross Country Champs which are to be held at Gisborne on August 9.
The third to finish was another junior,
Eric should also make the Wellington junior team.
Fourth to finish and the second senior home was
The tentative cross country team for winter tournament is:
Future runs for the Club are:
July 26.—Wellington Centre Championships at Blenheim.
August 2.—Invitation
August 9.—Invitation
August 16.—Invitation
August 23.—Invitation
August 30.—Wellington-Masterton Relay.
University beat Brooklyn United 5-0 in atrocious conditions at Kelburn Park.
University then fought back and once again were on top when the half-time whistle sounded with no further additions to the score.
In the second half both teams missed chances; however, 15 minutes from the end
The Brooklyn United defence then collapsed, and further goals were scored by
University once again showed that on occasions it can play first class football. The defence was magnificent, with
The second team beat Northern 4-0 in the early game at Kelburn Park. University was on top for most of the first half, and was leading 2-0 at half-time with goals from
In the second half the territorial superiority of the Varsity side was even more marked, the Varsity goalkeeper only touching the ball twice, and Varsity scored two further goals.
The fourth division team reported its first victory for a few weeks when it massacred C.Y.F.C. 9-3 at Crawford Green.
C.Y.F.C. seemed unable to handle the tricky conditions. University was 5-0 up at half-time and had the easiest of wins.
Goalscorers for University were
Down in the lower grades the fifth division side, playing one short, lost 4-1 to Upper Hutt United.
The sixth division team missed many chances in its 3-0 victory over Onslow.
In the Eighth Division, the "A" team was hammered 9-0 by Hungaria, the "C" team defaulted to Marist, and the "D" team maintained its challenge for league championship honours with a narrow 3-2 victory over the "B" team.
The second team drew 2-2 with third placed Hungaria at Macalister Lower.
Hungaria had the assistance of the wind in the first half, and were 2-0 up at half-time. University fought back in the second half and gained control of the midfield. Varsity reduced the arrears midway through the second half when
Best players for Varsity, on the day, were
University lost 2-0 to Seatoun at Memorial Park.
After its fine display last week, the performance of the University side was disappointing.
Seatoun opened the scoring in the 75th minute when it scored from the penalty spot, after being awarded a doubtful penalty. In the 85th minute Seatoun put the result beyond doubt, when a long shot floated into the Varsity net after goalkeeper
University had its chances, but frittered them away. Seatoun wasn't much better, but deserved its win.
The fourth division team drew 2-2 with Stop Out at Kilbirnie Park.
University could have won this game but missed too many chances.
The fifth division team scored both goals in its 1-1 draw with Stop Out. The University goal was scored by
The sixth division team beat Brooklyn United 4-3, the win being far more convincing than the score would suggest.
In the eighth division, the "D" team thrashed the league co-leaders, Stop Out, 7-1.
The "'A" and "B" teams fought out a 3-3 drawn at Kelburn Park, in a game which though lacking in football skills was good entertainment value.
Tomorrow and Friday there will be a basketball 'free throw" competition in the Gym.
Anyone may enter and compete for the chocolate fish prizes between 9.00 a.m. and 12.00 noon and 2.00 p.m. and 4.00 p.m. on Thursday; 9.00 a.m. and 11.00 a.m. and 2.00 p.m. and 4.00 p.m. on Friday.
Chocolate fish will be awarded at 4.00 p.m. Friday.
It costs nothing to enter the various grades for men and women. The winner will be the person who scores the most goals out of 30 attempts.
Intramural Badminton
Result of games played on 14 and 15 July:
E.L.I. II beat English, 2 and 2 beat Australia, Hutt beat Geography, Maths beat Staff, History beat E.L.L. I.
Geology will play Bay at 12 noon on Monday 21 July for first place.
Ladder position already decided: Chemistry 3, Maths 4, Staff 5, Biochem 6, Glenmore 7, History 8, E.L.I. I 9, E.L.I. II 10, English 11, Philosophy 12, 2 and 2 13, Australia 14, Hutt 15, Geography 16.
Intramural Basketball
Results or games played on Thursday, 17 July:
Hargtaugh beat Economies 30-26, Hutt High beat E.L.I. 18-16,
Though University was beaten 11-8 by St. George on Saturday, the team is still leading the competition, sharing top place with Sr. George.
It could be fairly said that Varsity were a little unlucky to lose.
St. George capitalised on all its scoring opportunities while Varsity did not.
Slippery conditions and a greasy ball greatly reduced the effectiveness of the fast Varsity backline, thus robbing the team of its main strength.
On the previous Saturday University gained a satisfying 12-7 win over Korodale.
This game was not only satisfying in that Varsity won, but also in that it made amends for a 48-7 thrashing given to Varsity by Korodale in the preliminary round.
This match had been the first game of the season, and for more than half of the players it was their first game of league ever, and thus Varsity was easily beaten.
The Ruapehu Ski Championship was cancelled last weekend because of an abysmal lack of snow.
Though the weather was fine and the T-Bar and chairlifts were operating, there was not enough room in the rock fields to hold a giant-slalom or even a slalom course.
The Victoria team intends to compete next weekend in the Maensil Cup and the following weekend in the Christie Derby Giant Slalom.
The Vic. club championships are planned for this weekend, but if there is not a substantial snow fall, this will have to be cancelled.
The problem of contaminated water in the drinking tanks on the mountain still exists and it is necessary for members to take their own flagon each weekend.
Other huts in the area do not seem to be in quite such a difficult situation as they were able to cut-off their drain pipes almost immediately after the eruption, preventing the sulphur and arsenic contamination.
Operating last weekend: Happy Valley, Rock garden Poma and Chair, T-Bar, Waterfall Chairlift, National Chairlift and Ropetow.
The T-Bar was rocky with only the liftline and Brokenleg Gully skiable.
Best skiing was on the downhill Ropetow.
Unless more snow falls before next weekend conditions will be very difficult, almost impossible.