was the main ideal held by those who objected to the positions on the federation, and their.

endorsement of
closing of the building for Oktoberfest. Oktoberfest in that capacity. It was soon discovered,
Telegdi has said that other buildings were considered as however, that no CC Board policy existed on conflicts of
possible sites for the event, because of the above con- interest, and, despite the moral indignation of some
siderations. For one reason and another, no other building present, a motion approving Oktoberfest in principle was
was deemed suitable. At this point there were two alter- eventually passed. [Conflict of interest was raised again in
natives short of canning the whole idea. One was to revise subsequent meetings, but became so embroiled in
the form of the festivities, such that the building would not procedural hassles that no real discussion ever took place.]
have to be closed-this would have necessitated running it Telegdi has argued that the Campus Centre Board is not
on a somewhat smaller scale. The other was to reverse the supported by student interest, most of its members having
campus centre open policy for the period of the event, in been acclaimed. He feels that, because of this lack of
which case objections from the CC Board would have to be interest, it can not truly be considered representative, and
faced. It was the latter course which was chosen. since he had solicited and obtained the support of the
University of Waferloo etting Oktoberfest through the board wasn’t as difficult societies on campus for Oktoberfest, that he was justified
Wuterloo, Onfufio G as it might have been under other circumstances. In in manipulating the board in the manner he did.
volume 74 speciul edifion the first place, Telegdi was already a board member, and, It can only be conceded that Telegdi and Ram went as far
wednesduy, October 70, 7973 by the time the issue came to debate, Art Ram and Phil as they could to determine if student support existed for
Lanouette [also on the Board of Entertainment] had also the Oktoberfest scheme. What can be argued, however, is
managed to obtain seats. Secondly, the amount of whether such support was sufficient basis for going ahead
planning and organisation required if the event was to go with the project, particularly when something less gran-
through necessitated that approval be given during the diose could easily have been organised with inconvenience
early summer, several months before it was actually to and objection from no-one.
scheduled. he Chevron feels that in bringing Oktoberfest about, too
The campus centre board has twelve members. During the 1 many innocent toes were stepped on, too many moral
summer, most of these members were off campus, and of issues were skirted; at every juncture, Ram and Telegdi
ignored criticism and ignored the negative aspects of their

the
the five remaining, the federation members had a clear
majority. When Ram introduced the motion to approve plan
Oktoberfest, therefore, it was carried immediately and Oktdberfest sets a dangerous precedent for use of the
without difficulty, with the debate focusing on three main campus centre; the spirit in which the campus centre was
points. won five years ago is threatened by its current closure.

chc
Opposition came initially from the turnkeys, who ap- The campus centre is a building-the only building-
parently disapproved of Oktoberfest in principle, but were controlled by students; as such it has the potential to serve
willing to go along with it if some of the proceeds could be as a physical focus for coordinated and positive student
appropriated for turnkey salaries, as insufficient funds had activity. When this building is closed to some students it is
been allotted for this purpose in the campus centre budget. being misused, and its purpose and usefulness are
The turnkeys were asking for a lump sum of $5,000 or 25 jeopardized, particularly when power games and
per cent of the net profit. The federation people found backroom manipulation are involved.
fter five years of commercial
A ,munity, Oktoberfest -a
success in the K-W corn-
cultural tradition whose only
these terms unacceptable.
David Assmann, a federation council member in
We hope that students will become upset enough at what
is happening to react in some way to the campus cen-
similarity with the German original consists of beer and
disagreement with the Oktoberfest idea, stressed the tre/Oktoberfest situation: by talking about it, by writing
funny clothes - has finally
- -- - come
- to the University m of
 -II--Y-I--III* 1. . . . . . . . .
Waterloo. Ine bramcnud ot tne Federation or Students --==-===aI IL-lllll 6 u~uu~~r~3/ aIm4 uy lam311m5 yuum

board of entertainment under the leadership of chairman from the turnkeyigiidl some observers prese:t UiFrtie iiincil reprYsei:iiive the serious questions tri;’ have

Art Ram, Oktoberfest has generated wholehearted support meeting* arisen.

from some segments of the campus community, and The final point of contention concerned “conflict of in- We would hate to see the Campus Centre-which serves a
vehement criticism from others. terest,” which would have appeared to be a very real issue unique function -become in any sense an imitation of, or
Its supporters - among them federation president Andy in view Of Telegdil Ram and Lanouette’s concurrent substitute for, off-campus commercial enterprises.
Telegdi -point to the several hundred students who are
whooping it up nightly to the strains of an oom-pah-pah
band and say, W’s what the students want.”
Detractors are not primarily interested in the concept of
Oktoberfest itself, though most tend to see it as a culturally
bankrupt exploitation of a German custom. Their ob-
jections focus mainly on the fact that, because of the
event, the campus centre must be closed for a period of
ten days except to those willing to put forward the two
dollar admission fee, as well as some of the political cir-
cumstances surrounding the manner in which the decision
to hold Oktoberfest in this form was made.

B efore its “liberation”

directly by the university,
ministration appointee
in 1968, the campus centre was run
under the managership
Paul Gerster, whose word was god.
of ad-

Thanks largely to Brian Her, then-president of the

federation, Gerster was physically ejected from the
building, which was then occupied by students until the
administration acquiesced to the indirect control which it
now wields. Since then-until Oktoberfest-the campus
centre, under the direction of the board which was set up
to administrate it, has maintained a policy of making the
building open to all members of the on and off-campus
communities at no charge. The campus centre has also
provided a pub area, space for the federation of students
and some services, as well as areas where various groups
can hold meetings and run events.
Admittedly, the campus centre has never been used to its
fullest potential. Too often it has been nothing more than a
place to sit and talk, and-for some-to sleep when there
was nowhere else to go, although these are important
functions. But the fact that it was there, that students
could congregate or aggregate there if they wished -this

This special issue of the

Chevron emerges from a dusty battlefield, stained with
the blood of alain pratte, don ballanger, nick savage,
Susan johnson, george kaufman, dudley Paul, john
keyes, john broeze, dale and Chris, and andy telegdi.
I