Selection from A Prophetic Minority: A Probing Study of the Origins and Development of the New Left

By Jack Newfield, pp. 88-90.

    The notion of “nonleadership” and the fear of manipulation are definitive characteristics of the New Left. So it is that in SDS there is no one leader, not even a cadre of eight or ten who make basic policy decisions. Instead, power is shared by the National Council of about 35 members and the “Chicago kernel” of about 15 who work out of the national office. Except for the gap between the sophisticated and the naïve, all the other disparities within the organization are reflected inside the leadership, from ideological and Puritanical Steve Max in New York, to archaic and sensitive Jeff Shero in Texas, to Carl Oglesby, the playwright and ex-actor who is now SDS’s president.
    The following are sketches of three of the more influential of SDS’s nonleaders.

...

    Bearded, slouched, thirty-year-old father of three, Carl Oglesby is the current president of SDS. Less political and more romantic than Hayden, he is close to being the archetypal New Leftist.
    Oglesby, who looks a little like D.H. Lawrence, was born in 1935 in Akron, Ohio, or working-class and later divorced parents. He attended Kent State University, dropped out to spend a year in Greenwich Village, and then returned to earn his degree. As with Parris and Forman of SNCC, there followed a period of intellectual searching through the desert of the 1950’s, as if waiting for a social movement to rescue him from his ennui.
    Oglesby began to write plays. One was produced by a theatre group in Dallas, and another read at the Actors Studio in New York. Two others, The Hero and The Peacemaker, were produced at the University of Michigan. There is also an unfinished novel in Oglesby’s past.
    In June of 1965 Oglesby was making twelve thousand dollars a year with the Bendix Systems Division at Ann Arbor; “a hireling in the Cold War,” he has said of himself. Then at the SDS convention he was nominated for president and elected over four rivals. In a classic Narodnik gesture, he quit his affluent job in the corporate hierarchy to become the face and voice of SDS for a token salary that often went unpaid.
    There is something very Emersonian about SDS,” Oglesby has told several interviewers, and that is true. The comment also reflects the romantic, transcendence-seeking core of Oglesby’s own radicalism, which is admittedly nonprogrammatic. This quality was sharply reflected in the Shakespearean-cadenced speech Oglesby delivered to the annual dinner of the National Guardian in November of 1965. He said in part:

    At our best, I think we (SDS) are SNCC translated to the North and trained on a somewhat different and broader set of issues. Our best concern comes from SNCC. Some find that concern a bit shocking, but I’ll name it anyway. It is to make love more possible. We work to remove from society what threatens and prevents it¾the inequity that coordinates with injustice to create plain suffering and to make custom of distrust. Poverty. Racism. The assembly line universities of this Pepsi Generation. The ulcerating drive for affluence. And the ideology of anti-communism, too, because it smothers my curiosity and bribes my compassion. This ideology decrees to me that I may not love Castro, however shining-bright his anguish...

Back to Oglesby