OCR Text |
Show Ernest Wilkinson And Charlie Brown By DAVID BRISCOE Both intellectual transient Charlie (Brown) Artman and Brigham Young University Uni-versity President Ernest L. Wilkinson have made news this week in the area of student morality. The difference in their philosophies and their pulpits, however, is obvious. Charlie's moral code might be called, for lack of a less connotative term, "free love," while Dr. Wilkinson's is best described de-scribed as "conformity in righteousness." Charles speaks to' little circles of students stu-dents from a giant "tipi" while Dr. Wilkinson speaks to vast crowds of students stu-dents from a high seat of authority in the Brigham Young Fieldhouse. Charlie is a strange, mystic transient with unpopular ideas. Dr. Wilkinson is a respected university president with ideas quoted in Christian society. Charlie's long hair and beard tend immediately to stereotoype him as a beatnik, or as Dr. Wilkinson might say, a "dead beat." And no one doubts that Charlie will never reach Dr. Wilkinson's stature. Dr. Wilkinson's views or rather dictates on morality reflect an astonishing aston-ishing narrow-mindedness in an America where students are finally beginning to show their worth. His warnings against "go-go girls, beatniks and surfers" represent reactionary reaction-ary fear rather than insight into the motivations of American young people. Maybe it will work at BYU, but it could not work on a normal campus, where students are seeking to be individuals, where they are seriously trying to prepare pre-pare themselves for a complex society, where they are trying to find solutions to modern problems. True, it's not just the way people dress that determine their character. But, what is it that gives Dr. Wilkinson such little faith in the ability of students to dress themselves, "according to the dictates of their own consciences?" Charlie represents freedom. Dr. Wilkinson Wil-kinson represents conformity. Maybe neither represents anything worthy of guiding a generation. But Charlie's moral code is simply that a person should guide his life with "love, respect and consideration for others." Dr. Wilkinson's code is a set of rules outlining a "proper" way of life for everyone. every-one. What the rules are based on doesn't matter. They are rules. In the area of morality, Charlie is an anarchist and Dr. Wilkinson is a dictator. Maybe it is the character of students themselves which can answer the ques- ' tion of whose concept of morality we should accept. What would happen if BYU allowed its students to buy a Charlie-type freedom free-dom for the $600 Dr. Wilkinson says the LDS Church is contributing to their education? edu-cation? What would happen to a generation without a moral dictator? To a generation whose morality is based on only love? Mavbe they really wouldn't be as happy as Charles Artman. At this point it is tempting to bring in the moral code of one other person for further comparison. But no, HE had long hair and a beard. |