First off, this would be so much less confusing if we all just signed our names or initials to these, just like the homey '00 did a few posts back. Nobody's going to shank you in
Also, let's not talk about the Yasukuni thing when it doesn't reeeeaaallly apply all the way. I realize you read your CNN or whatever, and your understanding of events seems pretty solid, but it's kind of incongruous for a bunch of reasons, most of them having to do with the general fucked-upedness of the Japanese political system. To say nothing of the disproportionate/bizarre influence of those right-wing dudes who ride around all day in big trucks with loudspeakers, flying the Imperial flag, putting Akasaka on blast from 9a to 7p ON THE DOT.
Third, it totally doesn't matter whether people are embracing the Indian symbol with racist intent or not. The issue is that the nebulous Warm+Fuzzies they get out of remembering the Dartmouth Indian don't really outweigh the hurt feelings and alienation experienced by a single actual Indian kid.
It has been mentioned by our favorite Anonymous that claims of offense don’t necessarily entitle an individual to an administration response. However, a claim of offense should entitle an individual to at least the consideration of a response, in which we weigh harms and benefits. In this case, I just don’t see the benefits as being worth very much.
There are really only two things that make Dartmouth Dartmouth; the physical place in which we are located, and us (which includes faculty, admins, alums, etc.). These traditions (the Indian, or the bonfire, or Carnival, or rushing the field, or whatever) may “mean” something to some people in a vague sense; they may allow some individuals to construct a simulated “
I think it was Larry Morse ’56 who said that
Speaking of senility: please do not support Jay-Z's shitty rap album with your holiday spending dollars. If you are going to buy a major-label rap album this Christmas season, for the love of God (or Jesus) give some shine to the Clipse. If that's not your thing, the Game's new one is more than listenable.
All good points. I'll give it some more thought to this anonymous thing before posting more stupid stuff on your blog.
ReplyDeleteThe '00 guy's comment was by far the most insightful thing I've read on this whole mess, and I regret that it's buried among my less insightful stuff.
The Yasukuni thing was meant to make a very limited point, but I'll admit that it probably didn't make it very well. This Indian business is so emotionally charged that I thought analogies to other things might be helpful, but maybe not as much as I thought.
Your "Third" point and the one right after are the most interesting to me, and I think that's where a lot of the debate is on this issue--many people would read those paragraphs and think that they're true beyond debate, but I think the Reviewers would disagree... but I'll spare you any further anonymous commentary on that.
And I'll agree that Jay-Z's new album sucks. Good luck with the rest of your finals.
Also, I thought you were Seal when I posted, but whatever.
ReplyDeleteJust because you have no connection to alumni who graduated before '76 doesn't mean that your peers do not.
ReplyDeleteThose involved in greek organizations, sports, or who have alumni relatives have a very real connection to older alumni and the dartmouth tradition.
And more importantly - you may not be able to afford Dartmouth without said older alumni, Dartmouth students like you depend on the generosity of those older alumni. The per-person cost of Dartmouth is twice the full-fare tuition. The other half comes from the alumni fund & endowment.
3rd guy- please. I have got alumni relatives (my momma). Fuck a sports team and a fraternity, I don't play that shit. Are those guys' extremely tenuous connections to old dudes really that important? Further, don't even talk about "The Dartmouth Tradition" unless you are prepared to tell me exactly what that is. I don't think it exists, and the burden of proof is on you.
ReplyDeleteAlso, our man David Russ is growing the endowment like a motherfucker. More money on the aggregate means less reliance on old racist whiteys, which in turn means you get progressively less relevant!
eWhile I've never agreed with some of the college's traditions (read: the Indian mascot and associated cheers, murals, and activewear), it annoys me when I hear people complaining about the "tradition of tradition" at Dartmouth.
ReplyDeleteIt's like complaining about the climate or remoteness of campus - it's not like these conditions were unknown to you during the admission process.
Accept the fact that there are many people who do feel a connection with the Dartmouth community over the ages - even if you don't. It is not their responsiblity to prove that to you.
I will not spare you anonymous commentary. My name adds nothing to the arguments I wish to make, and I have no desire for campus notoriety begotten by parading punditry. You have a blog. You clearly do not share my reservations, but I will not be attacked for continuing to hold them.
ReplyDeleteYour treatment of the "anonymous" issue is, I believe, symptomatic of larger flaws in your discussion of current campus controversies. Rightfully, you wish for people to step forward and take responsibility for their words and actions. The Review, at least, has done so, but I and many others have not. You fail to realize that you control the dialogue on this blog, and the anonymous postings you skewer on your website are a defense for those who fear their opinions will be disrespected, and who fear their own credibility will be called into question simply for holding the beliefs that they hold.
This is the central issue on campus, and it divides both sides of the "Indian" argument and most other liberal vs. conservative arguments: there is no respect for the opinion of the other side primarily because each feels constantly under attack. There should be no place for reactionary, victim-baiting politics on either side: the Review appeals to the NADs to point them in the right direction, but offends them on the front page-- BAM! Native Americans are victims. Native Americans and members of the administration scold Reviewers for their beliefs and actions and the protest gets nationwide press-- BAM! The Reviewers are victims. And nothing at all is accomplished except heightened tension on campus.
There has been no dialogue because people like you and Connor refuse to acknowledge that things like The Dartmouth Tradition exist. You are right in pointing out its white patriarchal nature, but you cannot escape the fact that Dartmouth is a world-renowned institution due, in part, to the actions of these old white men (and, of course, the people they subjugated, who, I agree, are owed redress). To take them away from their place at the table is to be ungrateful for what they have worked to give us: the ideals and, what I'm sure matters a lot more to an unsavory few, the reputation of our great College. To ignore their voice is merely to create another marginalized voice, which empowers noone and leaves us right where we started. These old white men did what they did within the acceptable schemas of their time, and they did what they did exceptionally well. It is blatantly disrespectful for you and others to discount their contributions and their right to have a say in this school after they have accepted you into it.
I do not mean, of course, that they subjugated exceptionally well (impossibly terrible term)-- they may have subjugated, but again, they are relics, and had little idea that what they were doing was wrong. Your right-minded impulse to throw away their "badness" sometimes means that you lose a lot of the good in the process. The traditions we share-- those frivolous ones, like drinking hard and running around a fire, or cheering for our sports teams-- bind us together, and it is to the detriment of the college as a unified entity if we abandon them altogether. After all, you may have come in to the college expecting a strictly academic environment, but others may have chosen Dartmouth for its social atmosphere; still others for its reputation of graduating the happiest students in the Ivy League; and others, despite what you may think, may have chosen Dartmouth for its belief in, and respect for, tradition.
Enough of saying a tradition is "theirs" or "ours." Hockey games are a part of Dartmouth, and I'll be damned if I don't love them even if the fan base doesn't know how to cheer. Dissent is a part of Dartmouth, and I'll be damned if I don't love it even if people sometimes take their sides too seriously. We are dealing with ideas, and sooner or later we will all be proven wrong, I guarantee it. So lighten up. Stop taking yourself so seriously that, for example, you start a blog because you are so convinced of your right-mindedness. If I had it my way, there would be no mediated forum for opinion: the forum would be face-to-face interactions and discussion. We need to take this out of the media and into the classroom, where respect, whether we like it or not, is mandatory.
And now, finally, to tradition: The Dartmouth Tradition is one of excellence. Excellence alone. If there is one ideal we can all take seriously, excellence is that ideal. As I said before, the old white men did what they did exceptionally well and continue to do so, and now, happily, we have old white women and old black men and old asian women and old hispanic men and old native american women doing so as well (among others). And they left us the finest institution in the world, with all the silly traditions they hold dear. Let me at least learn first-hand that I don't care to get scalded by a huge bonfire, as I'm sure most 10s did this year. But don't tell me that I shouldn't try to live up to their example, to do some things like they did, because, hell, Dartmouth traditions served them well, didn't they? To paraphrase one of them-- this one's a dead white man-- it is a small college, but there are those who love it. And recent events have shown that we need a lot more of that on this campus.
Hey anonymous person who wishes to remain anonymous because s/he mistakenly feels that I won't listen to him/her even if his/her argument is well-thought out and articulated (which it is), let me give you a link.
ReplyDeleteHere is the speech I gave at the rally. Perhaps you didn't hear it. I'd like you to read it and then re-evaluate your comment.
I know that The Dartmouth Tradition exists. I know that there are excellent aspects to it. I also know that it is not sufficient for Dartmouth in the form into which Reviewers and many alums have ossified it. I don't respect this ossification, I don't accept it as true tradition, and I feel I owe nothing to it. That does not mean that I don't recognize the actual existence of tradition nor that I am unwilling to give it a voice in finding out what's best for Dartmouth. I'm just unwilling to give it primacy, especially in its bastardized form as promulgated by The Review and its senescent supporters.