(2 of 4)
¶ The facts: Domei reported the hotel management's request, and TIME disrespectfully condensed arrogant Architect Wright's adjectival reaction.—ED.
Annapolis Commentary
Sirs:
Your article on the Naval Academy [TIME, Oct. 8] was one of the better commentaries that have so far appeared, but much of vital importance was overlooked.
First, no one has yet publicized the fact that this institution utterly lacks continuity of administration from the superintendent on down through the department heads. Can you imagine any great seat of learning changing presidents and heads of departments every two years? The result is a complete breakdown in policies and in control of personnel. No chief here ever gets to know thoroughly the qualifications of the great number of men who do the real work. Each new department head, in from sea, perhaps carries on that quality of arrogance you mentioned by assuming omniscience in the new work he is undertaking: the direction of a staff of instructors in an educational effort. Although he is no longer on a ship, he generally behaves as though he were, ordering changes in methods as though he were fully conversant with the running of an academic organization. In two years, he leaves to give place to another head. As for his staff of teachers, he gets what the Bureau of Personnel orders to service at the Academy. Such personnel is often very rusty on the subject to be taught, and keeps just a jump ahead of the midshipmen. It must be stressed that this "keeping a jump ahead" is common practice and is universally condoned and approved here. . .
Let's have another Academy on the West Coast. That would put the challenge to the present Academy to justify its preeminence. . . .
(NAVAL ACADEMY PROFESSOR'S
NAME WITHHELD)
Annapolis
Sirs: After 20 years' service in the regular Navy as an enlisted man, and after having seen both regular and reserve officers perform in time of war, I am in favor of abolishing the Naval Academy entirely. Young college boys fresh out of school learned the ropes faster, appeared much better educated than the general run of Academy graduates. What is more important: they could think.
R. L. SHARPE
Minneapolis
Sirs:
TIME'S story on the Naval Academy was received with mixed emotions and varying degrees of indignation and satisfaction. . . .
The general feeling was that the writer of the article knew his stuff.
(NAVAL ACADEMY OFFICER'S NAME
WITHHELD)
Annapolis
Plato or the Fleet
Sirs:
Let's face the Annapolis-St. John's fight [TIME, Oct. 15] and call it by its proper name. I say the world has seen this fight in a million times and towns, and that we witness now the capsule battle of our age. As St. John's wins or loses, so will our age be judged.
Domestically and finally, dramatically, we are confronted with the choice: power or freedom.