To the Editor:
In the article, "Publications face COSO politics," [The Dartmouth, January 19], there are two statements made which require a response. The first is the statement by an Uncommon Threads member that "there needed to be a case for that kind of creative writing" in regards to the controversial piece "awakening." This high-sounding statement needs clarification. There already is a place for that kind of creative writing. I feel certain that Penthouse or any other self-respecting pornographic magazine would be happy to have published "awakening."
The second statement was made by Linda Kennedy, the Associate Director of Student Activities, who said that, "COSO (the Committee on Student Organizations) does not censor." This is simply inaccurate. Whether it was a good or bad thing, COSO's threat to cut off the Jack-O-Lantern's funding if a more "sensitive" advisor was not found was de facto censorship. It may well be beneficial to Dartmouth to censor publications that print offensive material, but those responsible should at least admit what it is that they are doing.
