‘One Man’ explores fierce ignorance of human soul

‘One Man’ explores fierce ignorance of human soul

England’s Berkoff makes three appearances at the Freud

By John Mangum

Despite his success, Steven Berkoff still faces crippling
obsessions.

Sometimes they come from within, and sometimes they strike from
the outside. He wrestles with these internal and external demons in
his play "One Man," offering audiences a rare chance to encounter
him on stage.

The play marks his first solo performance in the United States.
Appearing at the Freud Playhouse Oct. 12, 14 and 16, the play comes
to Los Angeles riding the crest of a wave of good reviews of its
run last year at the Garrick Theatre in London.

Although active in Britain as a performer, writer, adapter and
director, Berkoff received most of his exposure on the West Coast
as the author of "Kvetch." The play enjoyed a long run at the
Odyssey Theatre Ensemble.

Unlike his other activities, solo performance gives Berkoff a
chance to examine himself as an actor, and human being.

"You’re exploring shapes, colors, values, the tones of your own
voice. You’re exploring your own body," says Berkoff. "It’s really
almost like a form of therapy. You’re able to take out all the
demons that are lying within."

Berkoff offers some of these demons along with much else in "One
Man." The play brings together three solo performances.

The first, an adaptation of Edgar Allen Poe’s "Tell Tale Heart,"
reveals the solo performance as a "form of psychodrama" for
Berkoff.

The psychology of the tale does not escape the actor. "It’s a
story about obsession," he says.

"It says that we’re all victims of a series of sensations that
keep us in check, that keep us civilized. Senses are the guardians
of civilized behavior."

When the senses become disturbed in "Tell Tale Heart," these
checks collapse, forcing a man to kill because he cannot handle the
sensory overload. Berkoff says, "You have a man who becomes
obsessed, sees something that haunts him, and cannot get rid of
it."

"It terrifies him," continues Berkoff. "He feels that if he
kills this thing, he will get rid of his anxiety."

"This is what we call, in modern psychiatry, compulsive
disorder, and it’s a very familiar disorder now for which people
take drugs. If he’d had prozac, Edgar Allen Poe probably wouldn’t
have written the ‘Tell Tale Heart.’ "

In terms of "One Man", Poe’s tale provides Berkoff with an
opportunity to examine his own anxieties. "I have obsessions of my
own which can be equally crippling," says the actor.

Acting itself can even be called obsessive with performances
that are repeated night after night. Berkoff likens it to the boy
who could not stop washing his hands and people who have to brush
their teeth exactly 100 times.

"That’s the nature of acting," says Berkoff. "It’s a world of
repetition."

The second segment of the play examines the main player in the
world of acting, the actor himself. Titled "Actor," the section
takes its idea from one of Berkoff’s many short stories.

"The actor never manages to cling and hold on to anything which
is fulfilling," says Berkoff. He uses physical action, in this case
continual walking, to represent the dilemma of the character.

The most recently created part of "One Man" follows "Actor,"
contrasting the commitment of the actor with what Berkoff describes
as "a man who’s enslaved to his dog."

The section titled "Dog" seems to display something that Berkoff
only touches on in the previous parts. " ‘Dog,’ " he says, "is a
symbol to me of almost the ferocious ignorance, the utter dumbness,
of the human soul."

Perhaps he encountered this "ferocious ignorance" for the first
time in what he says inspired "Dog." "I was fascinated because I
was reading in an English paper about the increasing number of
attacks on children by pit bulls and rottweilers. The Tory
government was paying no attention to it."

The originality of "Dog," "Actor" and "Tell Tale Heart" matches
the unique approach Berkoff takes to the stage itself. The absence
of any kind of set coupled with sparse lighting puts the focus on
the actor, something which Berkoff believes is very important.

"I am the set. The actor is always the set," he says. "To use a
set of any kind is always a betrayal of the actor."

Berkoff’s theatrical philosophy seems to be encapsulated in "One
Man." He explores aspects of his psyche and of the human soul in
this rare Los Angeles appearance.

"I’m happy to be here," Berkoff says with a certain edge to his
voice betraying that, perhaps, this is only half true.

THEATRE: "One Man" with Steven Berkoff. Oct 12, 14 and 16 at the
Freud Playhouse. Tickets $25, $9. For more info, call 825-2101.

Phi Beta Kappa honor society adds student subsidiary

Phi Beta Kappa honor society adds student subsidiary

By Ben Gilmore

Undergraduate students inducted into Phi Beta Kappa will now
have a chance to mingle with each other at events designed to
challenge the intellect.

A student subsidiary was added on Oct. 10 to UCLA’s official Phi
Beta Kappa chapter, which currently includes only faculty as
members of the well-known academic honor society.

The student division was the brainchild of fourth-year economics
student June Dash, one of UCLA’s 50 undergraduate students inducted
into the honor society last spring.

"We started this group to act as a liaison between (UCLA’s)
chapter and the Phi Beta Kappa student body," Dash said. Dash added
that student members of the honor society have not been active in
the chapter, which is dominated exclusively by faculty who are Phi
Beta Kappa members.

"We wanted an opportunity to interact with the faculty and
pursue intellectual growth outside the classroom in subjects that
we normally would not be exposed to," she explained.

Dash approached Professor Richard Rouse, a former president of
UCLA’s faculty and alumni chapter. "I told him about my idea and he
was very enthusiastic. He got it approved by the rest of the
faculty on the chapter," she said.

The student group will assist Phi Beta Kappa faculty members at
upcoming group functions, including the annual initiation ceremony
which takes place during spring quarter.

Another goal of the student group is to broaden its members’
academic horizons, according to Dash.

"One main goal of our group is to provide an intellectually
challenging atmosphere in a variety of disciplines," Dash said.
Recently, the group has arranged for political science Professor
Steven Spiegel to hold a panel-style discussion on Oct. 24 about
the Middle East peace talks. Even though some of the group’s
members are studying science-related fields, they said they were
looking forward to discussing politics.

Dispelling stereotypes about its members being only rocket
scientists, Professor Jeanne Erickson, a Phi Beta Kappa faculty
member, said the honor society only admits students who have taken
courses in a wide variety of subjects.

"We want students who seek out a well-rounded liberal
education," Erickson said.

For fifth-year psychobiology student and honor society member
Kristen Lueck, the different topics the student subsidiary group
promises to explore was what drew her to the organization.

"I didn’t just want to be a member of Phi Beta Kappa and not do
anything. I wanted to talk to professors, pursue intellectual
opportunities and get personal contact with students," Lueck
said.

Fourth-year economics student and Phi Beta Kappa member Raymond
Peterson echoed Lueck’s desire to meet people and get involved in
the group’s activities.

"You can’t just be a bookworm all the time and have no real
experience. Meeting people is a big part of the college
experience," he explained.

Letters

Clarifying Coming Out Week

Editor:

I am writing to clarify the comments attributed to me in your
Monday cover story on National Coming Out Week, ("Coming out
festivities hope to dispel stigmas, Oct. 10). By saying that the
event was "a little too political" for me, I referred to the fact
that I am not involved in organizing the events and do not plan on
participating in most of them. This is not to say that I don’t
support their ultimate goal, which is to facilitate the coming-out
process for others.

Anyone who has gone through this deeply personal struggle, as I
have, can’t help but support others who are in the same process.
National Coming Out Week’s presentation of gay and lesbian
diversity and creation of a supportive environment for others to
come out to is admirable, and I applaud the effort. This is, in
fact, why I agreed to be interviewed for the article. The more of
us who are willing to be straightforward and sincere about
ourselves, the better an example we can set.

But following the aforementioned quote with my statement that
"shoving one aspect of your identity down other people’s throats is
very self-limiting" was somewhat misleading. Perhaps I did not make
it clear to the interviewer that this remark was not directed
toward National Coming Out Week or its organizers. I was referring
to militant activists (such as those of ACT UP or Queer Nation),
whose tactics I deplore and consider to be counterproductive to the
ultimate acceptance of gays by the straight mainstream. I feel that
only by becoming comfortable enough with our own identities as to
be open with our families, friends and neighbors can we effectively
overcome the us vs. them mentality that allows many straights to
view us as a separate, anonymous mass.

The first step, of course, is for individuals to come out of the
closet. For making this easier to do, National Coming Out Week
deserves our support. But as a member of UCLA’s gay population
willing to speak publicly, I only wished to encourage those who are
coming out of the closet to do so without letting their sexuality
rule their political and social lives as well. We should be able to
be OPENLY gay without being ONLY gay.

Matthew McCarthy

Undeclared

Freshman

Students react to front page photo

Editor:

We were very disturbed and offended by the picture of two gay
men kissing on the front page of the Oct. 10 Daily Bruin. Imagine
what the public response would be if that picture was in the Los
Angeles Times or the Daily News? I think those who displayed this
picture do not respect many students at UCLA. The picture seems to
imply that all students at UCLA are homosexual. The fact of the
matter is that we can’t ignore the picture when we pick up the
newspaper.

It’s our human nature not to feel comfortable about
homosexuality, because it is not normal. What would a young child
think about this when he or she happens to be on campus and picks
up the newspaper?

Many of us, who are straight are always labeled as homophobics.
The truth is that we are not afraid of homosexuality at all. (Why
should we be afraid of it, anyway?) We neither interfere nor try to
stop homosexual practice anyhow. However, we demand respect from a
responsible paper who represents the majority of the student body
whose feelings are definitely not comfortable with the picture. I
would like to suggest the Daily Bruin take a survey of UCLA
students to find out how they feel about this very disturbing and
offensive issue of the Daily Bruin.

Huy Phan, math

Dat Pham, civil engineering

Kiem Trinh, mechanical engineering

Luan Pham, civil engineering

Vinh Bui, biochemistry

Bureaucracy and Bigotry bigotryBand

Editor:

I would like to address a point frequently made by proponents of
Proposition 187. To distance themselves from the appearance of
racism, they often point out that the focus of Proposition 187 is
only on illegal immigrants (for example, Matt Keuneke’s Oct. 7
letter to The Bruin). They harbor no resentment against those who
are here legally, but if your papers are not in order, watch out!
Bigotry, they believe, is acceptable when it is reserved for those
who have failed to comply with some arcane, bureaucratic procedure.
They wish you to believe that a person’s legal status makes all the
difference in the world.

But just because something is illegal does not make it wrong.
Unlawfully crossing the U.S. border in search of a job, like
dodging the draft, is illegal but not immoral. Our anger should be
directed not toward people who wish to come to the United States
and work, but toward immigration laws which make it so difficult
for them to do so. Immigrants, legal or otherwise, benefit the
economy by filling jobs that Americans don’t want, and at wages
that Americans won’t accept. The economy benefits immigrants by
providing them with work when they otherwise would have had none.
No one loses in the equation except racists and xenophobes. Don’t
let the pro-187 crowd fool you into believing that their
intolerance is high-minded just because it is directed at those who
fail to fill out the necessary paperwork.

Jamal Ali

Graduate student

Near Eastern Languages

and Cultures

Yes on 187, stop cycle of incentives

Editor:

By now, most of us have received some financial aid to help us
balance our college budgets for the year. And far too many of us
are intimately familiar with the process ­ forms, forms and
more forms. But before any offers of Cal grants and Stafford loans
are made, the INS checks to make sure we are citizens or legal
residents. How racist?

The opponents of Proposition 187 want you to believe that
denying government services to illegal immigrants is xenophobic.
They want you to believe that any act of verifying residency status
can only be implemented in a racist manner. They claim that Asians
and Latinos will be targeted. But our financial aid office
repudiates these claims. Among the many justifiable complaints
about Murphy Hall A129J, racial targeting is not one of them.

Opponents of 187 are so desperate that they resort to demonizing
both the measure and its supporters. Scare tactics abound about an
unworkable system that unfairly harasses anyone brown or yellow.
Ridiculous! Proposition 187 only requires other government social
programs in California to do the same thing that financial aid
offices across the nation do, unbiased and race-neutral.

Proposition 187 sends a strong message to our federal
government: An immigration policy that does not care to
differentiate between legal and illegal immigration is not only
financially bankrupt, but morally so. Let us take the first step
and end this convoluted incentive system whereby poor illegal
immigrants receive government resources, already limited, meant for
poor legal immigrants and citizens. YES on 187.

Lawrence Kam

Senior

Microbiology and

Molecular Genetics

Don’t be cynical about relationships and marriage

Don’t be cynical about relationships and marriage

By Earl Williams

In a recent Viewpoint column ("’Arc of a love affair’
encompasses ideal relationship," Oct. 10), Adena Chung outlined
some of her thoughts about relationships and marriage. Since she
candidly stated her personal slant up front ­ "It’s hard to
write about this without sounding totally … jaded," ­ I
should do the same.

I have been happily married for more than two years, and I do
not share Chung’s deeply cynical attitudes about relationships.
Such cynicism can be a powerfully negative force in our lives,
harming our personal well-being and particularly our ability to
form lasting relationships.

I also do not share Chung’s negative views about commitment and
the marriage ceremony. I would like to offer some reasons not to be
cynical about relationships and marriage, in response to individual
points in Chung’s column.

First off, Chung feels that lots of partners are bad, and lots
of relationships are unhealthy. Well, some are, but your attitude
about whether people and relationships are good or bad depends in
large part on where you look. College may not be the best
place.

While some undergraduates do form healthy, lasting
relationships, others (like myself while in college) appear to have
little clue about what makes such relationships possible.

Life doesn’t end after college, and it’s counterproductive to be
so disillusioned when still so young. There are plenty of good
single people in the world, and just because they haven’t shown up
in your recent romantic past is no reason to assume that they’re in
the minority.

Chung also believes that relationships inevitably follow the
"arc of a love affair." Love affairs may follow an arc, but deeper
relationships need not. To believe that they do is to feel doomed
to break up, or at least to come a fearfully awaited decline.

In high school and even college, people often equate
relationships with the feelings of early romance; as soon as those
feelings diminish, the relationship ends. Until we understand and
reject this short-term outlook, our prospects for a long-term
relationship are poor.

Our expectations about people and relationships can easily color
our perceptions and lead to self-fulfilling prophecies. It is true
that the giddy passion of early romance changes after a time, but
to say that it must change for the worse is totally false.

In my opinion, the ever-deepening intimacy of a lasting
relationship is an improvement. And romance only dies if you let
it.

I also disagree with Chung’s notion that the ideal relationship
involves "total freedom of thought, action, movement and growth;
total commitment; companionship without obligation; and great sex."
This 100 percent selfish attitude toward relationships is doomed to
failure.

People ideally get married because they care deeply about each
other and believe that their relationship makes both of them more
complete. Clearly a balance has to be struck between the extremes
of selfishness and selflessness; total selflessness based on fear
and insecurity often does lead to unhealthy relationships.

Chung also says that "commitment as something to strive for or
work on in order to maintain is bogus and artificial … it should
be a by-product, not a cause or motivating factor." I disagree.

Commitment is the basis for trust, and without trust,
relationships die (or perhaps should die). Committing to another
person involves risk and substantial personal investment. If you’re
looking for marriage, you should look at the early stages of a
relationship for what may be a new way.

Early romantic relationships usually reach a transition point
where they either deepen or end. As this point approaches, you need
to find out enough about the other person to make an informed
decision about whether they’re worth the risk and investment.

This may sound really cold and calculating, but when you’re
making one of the biggest decisions of your life ­ you ought
to use more than just a good feeling. An excellent book on this
subject is "Why Love is Not Enough" (Sol Gordon, 1990).

Lastly, I disagree with her belief that "the marriage ceremony
and contract is b.s." Getting married is a life cycle event, which
can connect us to our past, our family and our future (possibly
including children). Religious aspects of the marriage ceremony can
be be particularly meaningful if they emphasize this
connection.

Other "trappings" of marriage can be similarly meaningful
(rings, contract), and need not be just an artificial impediment to
a half-expected future divorce.

So don’t give up on relationships so early, and don’t believe
that cynicism is just being "realistic." Though some people have
bad relationships, lots of us have good ones.

Don’t be surprised that you don’t see relationships where the
partners are "totally, completely free beings, together because of
true love of each other," because that’s not what successful
marriages are based on.

And don’t knock commitment; it’s a tough call to make, but you
can do it.

Williams is a fifth-year graduate student in developmental
psychology.

‘B’ in ‘LGB’ stands for bisexuality, proudly

‘B’ in ‘LGB’ stands for bisexuality, proudly

By Melissa Vogel

I don’t know about you, but I’ve found all the coming out
stories being shared this week to be incredibly inspiring. Rather
than go through all the details of my life history, though, I’d
rather share some of the thoughts I have of my first year as an out
member of the lesbian, gay and BISEXUAL community. Yes, I
capitalized BISEXUAL for a reason. As happy as I am to see greater
recognition of what the "B" in "LGB" stands for, I can’t help but
be a little frustrated that my fellow bisexuals and I still need to
work on being seen and heard even within the gay community.

Bisexuals often face three major problems in both the straight
and gay communities: being forgotten, misunderstood or downright
hated. My experience has primarily been that people simply forget
we exist. I can’t count how many times I’ve spoken up to add
"bisexual" to the end of someone’s statement about the gay and
lesbian community.

But that is a simple problem, easily solved by outspoken people
like myself. The misunderstandings arise not only from stereotypes
about bisexuals, but from sheer ignorance as well. Although I
normally welcome questions like, "So, what does that mean?" or
"Aren’t you just confused?" it can also be offensive after awhile.
But the worst encounters I’ve had come from people who despise
bisexuals. It doesn’t matter if you’re gay or straight; most people
who dislike us do so out of fear. To them, bisexuals represent that
part of themselves they have not yet come to terms with.

Bisexuals stand up in our bipolar,
everything-has-to-be-black-and-white culture and say, "I joyfully
accept and embrace the ambiguity and complexity within myself."
That’s quite a scary proposition for the average American of any
race, culture, gender or sexual orientation. Those who come out and
confront that fear deserve to be admired for their courage and
strength. And it is those courageous people that have helped me
open the door to a new dimension in my life.

By coming out this past year, I have not only made some
wonderfully loving, intelligent friends; I have discovered a
missing piece of myself. I feel it every time I am surrounded by
members of the LGB community (or Allies) who accept and welcome me
for who I am. I feel it every time I come out to yet another
unsuspecting acquaintance. And I feel it as I write this. Happy
National Coming Out Week, UCLA!

Vogel is a senior anthropology student specializing in women’s
studies.

Front-page image provokes emotional student response

Front-page image provokes emotional student response

Donald Carpenter-Rios

Perhaps you can imagine my surprise on Monday. Having casually
followed the same thoroughly routinized route to campus through a
slight and lifting fog, stopping at the same old leaf ­ and
newspaper-strewn kiosk for my morning dose of the Daily Bruin, I
saw the paper and gasped until my complexion shaded blue.

Two men were kissing on the cover of my favorite college
tabloid. I was staring at taboo instead of browsing my normally
tame and boring bit of campus news. Two men were kissing! Right on
cue, I recoiled. "Yuck!," I thought, realizing immediately that I
had indeed let the word slip out.

The thought of my reflex rejection left me in a state of
quandary. Was I actually homophobic? Was there something inherently
wrong with that particular expression of love and affection, or was
there something wrong with me? After all, I rationalized, I’m a
graduate student; I’m supposed to be analytical, unemotional and
objective. But there I was betraying my professional training with
a picture of a kiss. There I was grappling with a visceral reaction
that embarrassed and confused me. I’m not homophobic, I demanded of
myself, but still, since my social training had gotten the better
of me, I wasn’t quite sure.

I suspended final judgment and trudged off to class. It was on
the way that I found I wasn’t alone in my initial revulsion.
Eavesdropping being my favorite vocation, I turned my ear to The
Bruin browsing crowd. "Did you see the cover of The Bruin this
morning?" one masculine voice queried, hardly able to hide his
disdain. "God, it’s gross!" another masculine voice rejoined. "I
can’t believe it," a woman remarked. "I was so shocked," she
continued. Her female friend offered a consoling, "Well, the paper
is just doing this for shock value."

Everyone on campus, from the Medical Center to Lot 3, was
talking about the image of two men kissing. Rounding the corner to
Campbell Hall, I saw a man grab the paper from a woman standing
nearby. "Let me see that," he demanded. Staring at the picture, his
chin falling to his lap, he boasted his rejection and asserted his
masculinity. "I’m homophobic! I hate faggots!" There was no
ambivalence in his sexuality. His orientation was clearly
delineated. His sexuality gave him someone to hate. Embarrassed,
the woman took back the paper and attempted to defend the image
against his tirade. "Well, to each his or her own," she said.

Was this my solution too? Was I shallowly masking in my own
disgust and inherent hatred for something clearly unfamiliar and
unwanted? These are the questions that plagued me most. What would
be more acceptable to me and the other homophobes whose company I
keep at UCLA ­ we who were so severely disturbed by this
window on campus life? It appeared, after all, to be at least an
expression of affection.

I’m surprised that I winced so thoroughly at this foreign image
of love. I would probably be far more comfortable with an image of
dead Haitian soldiers, dead Iraqi soldiers, dead teen-agers in
Bosnia, dead teen-agers on the East side ­ give me anybody
dead, but do not give me two men kissing. Give me something I know,
something I see everyday on TV. Give me some blood or some guts.
Give me some raunchy, tortuous or violent image of death, give me
misogyny, give me racism, give me a nuclear holocaust, but don’t,
please don’t give me two men loving.

And especially don’t give me two men kissing. Two men killing,
please, please, please, something familiar, something I can
tolerate ­ anything but two men kissing.

Donald Francis Carpenter-Rios is a graduate student in Near
Eastern Languages and Cultures.

W. soccer demolishes USC again

W. soccer demolishes USC again

Bruins win fourth in a row from ‘SC in 3-1 overtime win

By Hye Kwon

The UCLA women’s soccer team has never lost to USC in its short
history. The Bruins went into Wednesday afternoon’s match against
the Women of Troy with a 3-0 record.

It wasn’t easy, but the Bruins got their fourth win by beating
the Women of Troy, 3-1, in overtime on the North Soccer Field.

Forward Traci Arkenberg came out of her brief scoring slump and
scored two goals. Her first goal came in the 15th minute of the
match off of forward Michelle Lieberman’s centering pass.

"(Arkenberg) was asleep for a while but she came on strong,"
UCLA head coach Joy Fawcett said. "You can always count on her to
make something happen, whether an assist or a goal."

The Bruins (8-3-2 overall) thoroughly dominated the match in the
first half, outshooting the Trojans, 11-3, but the momentum was
shifting toward USC (8-4-2 overall) at the end of the second half.
USC’s Maggie Merritt got off three shots on goal in just seven
minutes, and on her third shot, which came at 73:20, Merritt scored
her sixth goal of the season.

"We were losing the 50-50 balls," Fawcett said. "I told the team
during halftime that if we win those balls, we would get
control."

At the beginning of the first overtime, the Bruins were indeed
winning the 50-50 balls, and they were getting great chances.

"I really liked the way we came out in the overtime," Fawcett
said. "We came out ready to play."

Arkenberg’s second goal came three minutes into the first
overtime when she kicked the ball into the empty net after
midfielder Melanie Hom’s shot bounced off of the left goalpost.
Arkenberg’s goal was her fifth game-winning goal of the season.

The insurance goal came with just two minutes to go in the
second overtime when Kelly Robson scored her first goal of the
season. The goal came when the fate of the match was pretty much
decided, but to Robson, the goal meant big things.

"I think it helped boost my confidence," Robson said. "This
helped me realize that I can still do it."