To the editor:

The column on one student's perception of the state of Southern Theatre selections made me sad, not mad.

Sad, because the opinion IS the majority opinion. Sad, because I teach two of the 12-15 sections of Theatre Appreciation each semester, and judging from the commentary, our efforts are not successful. Indeed, this student journalist does not "appreciate" the theatre.

The arts have always found validity in the periphery, not the mainstream of society. The great artists have usually questioned the common mindset, the status quo, the mundane state of man. Artists are often rebels. And by their consideration of the conflicts of humanity, they project us into progress in society. At least, that is my opinion.

This journalist objects to a play because of the actions of the characters and the language they use. The play is one person's opinion of the state of mankind. The playwright's use of language and his or her description of the actions of the characters are not fabricated to suit our sensibilities, but often to disturb those sensibilities in the effort to get us to consider possible answers to man's dilemmas. The dilemma created by a group of people standing in a line, albeit a line of nebulous and indefinite direction or purpose, tries to jar the spectator to consider the human condition of competition, inhumanity toward fellow man, and ideas of self-preservation. What the female does may by moral code be despicable, and perhaps we are asked to consider whether we would abandon our morality for self-preservation. Would we be better people if we considered this question? Language always reflects the characters depicted, and there are plenty of foul-mouthed people in this world. I still don't want my children to talk like that, but I would forever encourage them to attend the theatre, even when the characters speak with frequent obscenities.

If it is true that higher education is more a refinement than preparation for a career, then consideration of all things true, all things deep, all things sublime will exist alongside all things sinister, all things dark, all things menacing. In the contemplation of these ideas -- my culpability (and that of the journalist) in the creation and perpetuation of the criminal mind (Down the Road), our annihilation of diversity or individuality in the name of uniformity in society (The Birthday Party), and our responsibility for the murder of God and the purpose of man's existence in the resultant void (Zoo Story) - if we are to find answers to these problems, even in our own and private minds, we will be better people, and the purpose of a higher education is upheld.

The theatre will always pose questions for us to answer. The conventions of theatre require that audience members "think." And in a sad way, perhaps we would rather not think, not contemplate the human condition, not search for truth in a world filled with spiritual poverty. And we will be able to say that theatre appreciation courses "suck," that plays that examine the human condition are "trash," "crap" and "awful." Such are the words, perhaps, to define our future if we do not think beyond the literal and surface dimension of humanity.

Dr. Pat Kluthe

Honors Program Director