The Commencement Issue (6.9.2016)

Hanover Review Inc. P.O. Box 343 Hanover NH, 03755

Volu m e 3 6 , Is su e 5

T hu r s d ay, Ju ne 9 , 2 0 1 6

THE COMMENCEMENT ISSUE

COMMENCEMENT 1944 For many Dartmouth students, commencement meant something very different in 1944.

First to Fight Sandor Farkas Editor-in-Chief

It is odd to think of Dartmouth as having a “military tradition.” Eleazar Wheelock founded the College as a civilian intuition, and the decades following the Vietnam War have seen declining interest in ROTC and other forms of military service. At one point, Dartmouth students even dressed as Indians and (allegedly) burned down the neighboring military college in Norwich, forcing it to move. Dartmouth is so remote that it was the only American college to graduate classes throughout the American Revolutionary War, and it is so small compared to larger peer institutions that it seems counter-intuitive that the College should have had any impact on the nation’s wars. In spite of all this, men from Dartmouth College have disproportionately served

this nation in the most trying of times.

Records of Dartmouth students and alumni who served in conflicts before the American Civil War leave much to be desired, but one case sticks out: that of William Eaton, a member of the class of 1790 and a former sergeant in the Continental Army, commissioned as a captain in the United States Army in 1792. He went on to become the U.S. Consul to Tunis, where he advocated military action as an alternative to tribute to the Barbary states. He orchestrated and served as “General and Commander in Chief ” of the expedition against Tripoli that culminated in the Battle of Derna, the first U.S. military victory on foreign soil after the American Revolutionary War. In spite of Dartmouth President Nathan Lord’s unpopular views on the divine ordination of slav-

ery, Dartmouth men were eager to enlist (perhaps to get away from President Lord). Before the war, students formed the Dartmouth Zouaves, a drill unit hat trained students for the coming conflict. While forty-four Southern men left to fight for their home states, 662 Dartmouth men from thirty-one classes ranging from 1822 to 1863 fought for the preservation of the Union. This total includes Charles L. Douglas ’62, the first college student to enlist in the Union Army.

Many students also joined the College Cavaliers, sometimes known as the Dartmouth Cavalry. Dartmouth also had the highest percentage of students leave to fight for the Union out of any college in the North.

Dartmouth men were even more eager to enter the First World War. A number of students left to enlist in the American Field Service, an ambu-

lance unit serving on the front lines of France. Dartmouth students donated two ambulances to the service, and the large number of Dartmouth volunteers resulted in the creation of the “Dartmouth Ambulance Corps.” Richard Nelville Hall, a member of the class of 1915, was killed by a shell fragment on Christmas morning in 1915 while serving with the Corps and was one of the first Americans killed fighting in the war. Dartmouth honors Dick Hall and his comrade Howard B. Lines, who died of pneumonia in 1916, with a cenotaph and a small display in Baker Library.

Some of the Dartmouth men who joined the ambulance corps, such as George Docks ’16, went on to join the Lafayette Flying Corps, an umbrella group of American aviators serving with the French. Other students

> FEATURES PAGE 8

Courtesy Photo

A History of Student Governance Charles Jang

Executive Editor Emeritus “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”

–Winston Churchill “Until [the proles] become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious.”

–George Orwell If we were to take a short jaunt down Memory Lane, we could find an editorial in The Daily Dartmouth pontificating on the subject of student governance. It notes that in “the months ahead, the College is likely to decide on major ideas such as changes in the D-Plan

and clustering, which could have a momentous effect on the Dartmouth Experience” and notes the need for “student forums” to facilitate “opinion-swapping with the Administration,” while lambasting the student government as “quite frankly … a lost cause. Monday’s meeting yielded heated debate on a resolution that ‘acknowledges the importance of community service projects.’

Thanks.” This was published not this year or last, but in April of 1983, complaining not about the Student Assembly, but its predecessor, the Undergraduate Council.

Student governance, which seems like a contradiction

> FEATURES PAGE 4

FIGHT FOR FACULTY OF CHARACTER: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON AIMEE BAHNG

UNDERSTANDING TENURE

A HISTORY OF COMMENCEMENT

An arguement against granting Professor Aimee Bahng tenure based on her academic, ideological, and moral shortcomings.

An examination of the tenure process and how it applies to Bahng’s case.

A look at the evolving traditions of Dartmouth’s commencement ceramonies.

> EDITORIAL PAGE 3

> FEATURES PAGE 4

> FEATURES PAGE 7

2 Thursday – June 9, 2016

The Dartmouth Review

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FRESHMEN WRITE

WORK

For thirty-five years, The Dartmouth Review has been the College’s only independent newspaper and the only student opinion journal that matters. It is the oldest and most renowned campus commentary publication in the nation and spawned a national movement at the likes of Stanford, Harvard, Princeton, and countless others. Our staff members and alumni have won many awards, including the Pulitzer Prize, and have been published in the Boston Globe, New York Times, National Review, American Spectator, Wall Street Journal, Weekly Standard, Village Voice, New Criterion, and many others.

The Review aims to provide a voice for any student who enjoys challenging brittle and orthodox thinking. We stand for free speech, student rights, and the liberating arts. Whatever your political leanings, we invite you to come steep yourself in campus culture and politics, Dartmouth lore, keen witticisms, and the fun that comes with writing for an audience of thousands. We’re looking for writers, photographers, cartoonists, aspiring business managers, graphic designers, web maestros, and anyone else who wants to learn from Dartmouth’s unofficial school of journalism.

PONTIFICATE

CONSERVATIVE

SAFE space

“Because every student deserves a safe space”

– Inge-Lise Ameer, Vice Provost for Student Affairs

Meetings held Mondays at 6:30 PM at our offices at 32 S. Main Street (next to Lou’s in the lower level office space)

INSIDE THE ISSUE First to Fight

An Alumnus Profile: Dr. Conrad J. Duncan

A History of Student Governance

Commencement’s Colorful History

Fight for Faculty of Character

Officer and Gentleman

A Lesson on the Tenure Process

ROTC at Dartmouth

The True Cost of Affirmative Action

A Tribute to Dartmouth Fallen

How the sons of Dartmouth have gone above the call of duty...................................PAGE 1

The story of how Dartmouth wound up with its current system................................ PAGE 1

An arguement against tenure for Aimee Bahng........................................................................... PAGE 3

An explanation of the process and how it applies to the current debate.................................... PAGE 4

A responce to the recent lawsuit............................................................................................................. PAGE 5

SUBSCRIBE The Dartmouth Review is produced bi-weekly by Dartmouth College undergraduates. It is published by the Hanover Review, Inc., a tax-deductible, non-profit organization.

Please consider helping to support Dartmouth’s only independent newspaper, and perhaps the only voice of reason left here on campus. Yearly print subscriptions start at just $40, for which we will mail each issue directly to your door. Electronic subscriptions cost $25 per year, for which you receive a PDF of The Review in your inbox at press time. Contributions above $40 are tax-deductible and greatly appreciated.

Please include your mailing address and make checks payable to:

Or subscribe online at:

The Dartmouth Review P.O. Box 343 Hanover, NH 03755 (603) 643-4370 www.dartreview.com

A profile of a respected Dartmouth alumnus.............................................................. PAGE 5

The changing tradition of graduation ceramonies....................................................... PAGE 7

Jeffery Hart reflects on his time in the Navy................................................................................... PAGE 8

A short history of an important program......................................................................................... PAGE 10

The Review’s belated Memorial Day message............................................................................ PAGE 11

PUTIN READS THE REVIEW. DO YOU?

The Dartmouth Review

Thursday – June 9, 2016

3

MASTHEAD & EDITORIAL EST. 1980

“Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win great triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to takerank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.”

—Theodore Roosevelt

EDITORIAL BOARD

EDITORIAL

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Fight for Faculty of Character

SANDOR FARKAS

EXECUTIVE EDITORS BRIAN CHEN JOSHUA D. KOTRAN

MANAGING EDITORS MICHAEL J. PERKINS ASHWATH M. SRIKANTH JOHN S. STAHEL

ASSOCIATE EDITORS

JOSHUA L. KAUDERER JOHNATHON L. POSTIGLIONE MARCUS J. THOMPSON

BUSINESS STAFF PRESIDENT

MATHEW R.ZUBROW

VICE PRESIDENTS ROBERT Y. SAYEGH ASHWATH M. SRIKANTH

ADVISORY FOUNDERS

GREG FOSSEDAL, GORDON HAFF, BENJAMIN HART, KEENEY JONES

LEGAL COUNSEL

MEAN-SPIRITED, CRUEL, AND UGLY

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

MARTIN ANDERSON, PATRICK BUCHANAN, THEODORE COOPER-STEIN, DINESH D’SOUZA, MICHAEL ELLIS, ROBERT FLANIGAN, JOHN FUND, KEVIN ROBBINS, GORDON HAFF, JEFFREY HART, LAURA INGRAHAM, MILDRED FAY JEFFERSON, WILLIAM LIND, STEVEN MENASHI, JAMES PANERO, HUGO RESTALL, ROLAND REYNOLDS, WILLIAM RUSHER, WESTON SAGER, EMILY ESFAHANISMITH, R. EMMETT TYRRELL, SIDNEY ZION

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF & PRESIDENT EMERITUS MENE O.UKUEBERUWA & BRANDON G. GILL

NOTES Special thanks to William F. Buckley, Jr. “No words to bear the burden of our praise.”

The Editors of The Dartmouth Review welcome correspondence from readers concerning any subject, but prefer to publish letters that comment directly on material published previously in The Review. We reserve the right to edit all letters for clarity and length. Please submit letters to the editor by mail or email: editor@dartreview.com Or by mail at:

The Dartmouth Review P.O. Box 343 Hanover, NH 03755 (603) 643-4370

Please direct all complaints to: editor@thedartmouth.com

This issue honors the great sacrifices made Asian/American Literature & Culture; Gender

by Dartmouth students and alumni in times of & Sexuality in Asian/America; Science Fiction, war. These men gave their “last full measure of and Empire; Sense & Surveillance II; Contempodevotion” to guarantee freedom and justice in rary Issues in Feminism; Visual Culture; Critical America and throughout the world. Dartmouth Surveillance Studies; Science/Fictions of a Third consistently sent proportionally more men to Kind; Women of Color Writers; and 10 Lives, war than other colleges; Dartmouth men were 10+Professors: #BlackLivesMatter. Although some of the earliest to volunteer in the American a few of these courses seem legitimate, such as Civil War, the First World War, and the Second Critical Surveillance Studies, it is important to World War. Why did so many Dartmouth men remember that she taught them not in a rigorous risk their lives for causes so remote to the woods academic framework, but in relation to “transof New Hampshire? national Asian/American literature, feminist sciThese men risked their lives because Dart- ence and technology studies, and queer theory.” mouth instilled in them the republican values of While some of the theses she has advised liberty, equality, and fraternity. They fought seem relatively sane, others seem to because Dartmouth faculty were men be nothing more than exercises in of character who taught their stuthe verbose jargon of progressive dents that there was a higher purpolemics. Her research, teaching, pose in life than making monand mentorship seem to be focused ey at the banks or writing on prolonging the academic study theory at universities. While of meaningless topics that contribthey had the same distracute nothing to human understanding tions and fears as modern of the world or any definable form Dartmouth students., they of progress or knowledge. She had professors who cared deplores Dartmouth students enough to take an active role who waste their education in their development as men on making fortunes through Sandor Farkas and not just as scholars. financial speculation, yet she While the influence of greats such as Eugen encourages students to invest their time in the Rosenstock-Huessy can be seen in the journals pursuit of some perverted mix of science-fiction, of Dartmouth veterans, many more professors feminist/queer theory, and pan-Asian Nationalwhose research and theories were not famous ism. How is that better? made even greater contributions to their stuWhat is worse is that she likely discriminates dents’ lives. Many professors were politically, against students who do not share these beliefs. religiously, or civically active. Before the Civil When I attended a public event in which as War, many Dartmouth professors were active number of professors discussed their infamous in the Republican Party and theologically-based #BlackLivesMatter course, she mentioned that Abolitionist movements. Despite the negative she occasionally had racist students. This ininfluence of President Nathan Lord, many Dart- trigued me, because although I have met racist mouth students volunteered early in the war. In Dartmouth students, they tend not to be openthe days when teaching and personal character ly racist in the classroom. I pursued the matter, were more important than research at this col- hoping to discover what she meant by racist. lege, professors welcomed students into their While her vague language prevented me from personal lives and served as mentors. understanding what students said or did that In this issue, Executive Editor Brian Chen de- made them “racist,” I did learn the way in which scribes the tenure process and gives a balanced she deals with such students. She told me that she account of why the CAP (Committee Adviso- takes them aside after class, questions their mory to the President) likely denied Aimee Bahng tives for taking her class, and pressures them into tenure. In contrast to this explanation of practi- dropping the course. In stark contrast to this taccal reasons why Professor Bahng did not receive tic was her February 2015 tweet, “Students need tenure, I believe there are moral reasons why she more models of intellectual curiosity. Where did not deserve it. Like many Dartmouth profes- along the line of #preparedness did we manage to sors of old, Professor Bahng has been incredibly kill #criticalinquiry?” In addition to this apparent involved in mentoring her students, encouraging intimidation, Professor Bahng invited notorious them to become involved in political issues, and anti-Semite Jasbir Puar to speak at Dartmouth instilling values in them. It is not this role that I despite her highly-publicized remarks that object to, but the values themselves. amounted to a modern blood libel.

It is nearly impossible to understand what By my judgment, Professor Bahng has transProfessor Bahng writes about, when she chooses gressed the boundaries of respectable academia to write. Her words are a mix of jargon and port- and general morality. Her studies, while they manteaus, platitudes and oddly specific referenc- have little tangible meaning, advocate a progreses. An article she published in a 2015 issue of the sive agenda that defies all opposing factual inforJournal of American Studies, titled “Specters of mation. She supports academic freedom when it the Pacific: Salt Fish Drag and Atomic Hauntol- gives voice to an anti-Semite, but opposes it when ogies in the Era of Genetic Modification” is a it allows students to disagree with her. Many perfect example of this. It appears to include ele- Dartmouth professors have educated students to ments of niche science fiction, pan-Asian nation- fight for their values, but this requires professors alism, and quasi-history. Setting aside her writ- to have solid value systems. I oppose granting ing, what does she teach her students? Her CV Aimee Bahng tenure because I believe she does states that she has taught the following courses at not have the moral character required to educate Dartmouth: Contemporary American Fiction; Dartmouth students.

4 Thursday – June 9, 2016

The Dartmouth Review

FEATURES

A Lesson on the Tenure Process Brian Chen

Executive Editor The recent denial of tenure to Assistant Professor of English Aimee Bahng has led to many students to opine about the unfairness of a process they know nothing about. In fact, students are generally unaware as to whether their classes are taught by tenure-track faculty, tenured faculty, or non-tenure-track faculty. To understand the College’s tenure decision, it is necessary to first understand what “tenure” and the “tenure track” are; only then can the particulars of Professor Bahng’s case be evaluated.

Tenure is essentially a guarantee of lifetime employment for academics who have distinguished themselves through scholarship, teaching, and other forms of service to an institution. However, tenure does not protect against a particular program or the institution itself being shut down. Tenure makes it all but impossible to terminate employment except in the case of the most egregious misconduct, safeguarding the academic freedom of those lucky enough to have it.

As an example of how powerful the protection of tenure is, take the case of a tenured Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) faculty member who was found to have committed academic dishonesty in the 1970s.

He claimed to have a doctorate that he did not actually have, and he represented the work of others in his department as his own.

A faculty committee found that even this was insufficient grounds to revoke tenure.

Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, and Visiting Professors hold nontenure-track positions and are hired on one-, three-, or five-year contracts. Visiting Professors and Lecturers are automatically promoted to Senior Lecturer after ten years of service. While Senior Lecturers, who are often spouses of tenured faculty members, are formally contract employees, their positions are more or less permanent. However, as seen with the termination of Siobhan Milde in the Chemistry Department, Senior Lecturers do not have the same level of job secured as tenured faculty members. Furthermore, they do not serve on committees or have research and departmental obligations, allowing them to focus on teaching.

Like that of most other institutions, Dartmouth’s tenure track hires newly minted PhDs and post-docs to the rank of Assistant Professor on three-year contracts with the expectation that they will be considered for tenure in due Mr. Chen is a junior at the College and an Executive Editor for The Dartmouth Review.

time. Assistant Professors meet annually with their division’s Associate Dean (Humanities, Social Sciences, or Sciences) to assess their progress toward tenure and provide feedback. It is also expected that the senior members of academic departments will mentor junior faculty. Although the faculty handbook states that “a department or program recommendation for reappointment must provide evidence of performance that demonstrates high quality in scholarship and teaching and that shows promise of future distinction,” reappointments to a second three-year contract are routinely granted.

At the end of this second contract is tenure review, which can often be delayed by a year or two. Assistant Professors who pass tenure review are promoted to the rank of Associate Professor with tenure. Very rarely, junior faculty can be promoted to the rank of Associate Professor without tenure on a three-year contract with the understanding that a decision about tenure will be made in the future. Assistant Professors who do not receive tenure or a promotion to Associate Professor are given a one-year terminal contract and must enter the market for a position at another institution. After five or six years, Associate Professors can put themselves up for promotion to full Professor, although exceptionally talented faculty can be promoted earlier. Promotion to Professor is not required and exhausts the normal tenure track.

Endowed chairs may also be conferred as a special distinction for outstanding faculty. Most institutions, like Dartmouth, grant tenure at the Associate Professor rank. The one major exception is Harvard, which grants tenure only at the full Professor rank.

The decision on whether to grant tenure or not is extraor-

arship. Other forms of service to the College are considered, but they are considered secondary to the quality of teaching and scholarship.

Tenure review itself consists of departmental or program review, review by the Committee Advisory to the President (CAP), and review by the Board of Trustees.

In the departmental review, both the candidate for tenure and the department’s tenure committee consisting of tenured faculty members solicit the opinions of outside reviewers, typically tenured faculty members at peer institutions. The departmental tenure committee then reviews the candidate’s work and the outside reviews and votes on whether to grant tenure. If the case passes muster, it moves to review by CAP. Unanimous or nearly unanimous department votes are not uncommon, as voting against a colleague’s tenure can lead to awkward situations within collegial academic departments.

Instead, it is common for senior faculty members who have reservations to quietly convey them to CAP. Departmental review may also be colored by the fact that senior members personally know and presumably like the candidate up for tenure. As such, CAP is designed to serve as a dispassionate arbiter of the actual merits of a candidate’s case. The divisional Associate Dean presents the candidate’s case to CAP, and CAP holds confidential deliberations.

CAP consists of the Dean of the Faculty Michael Mastanduno and six senior faculty members, two from each of the three divisions. Currently, these members are John Carey, Nina Pavcnik, Ross Virginia, Kathryn Cottingham, Amy Lawrence, and Gerd Gemünden, all of whom are full Professors who hold endowed

It is better to err on the side of being parsimonious in granting tenure, as one bad decision saddles the College with decades of deadweight, while the College can always hire back a faculty member it mistakenly denies tenure. dinarily important. The faculty handbook describes it as “the most critical personnel decision made by the Faculty.” Indeed, the decision on lifetime employment should not be granted lightly. It is better to err on the side of being parsimonious in granting tenure, as one bad decision saddles the College with decades of deadweight, while the College can always hire back a faculty member it mistakenly denies tenure. Formally, the standards for tenure depend on teaching and schol-

chairs. It is traditional for the President and Provost to sit in on CAP’s deliberations although President Jim Kim famously tried to shirk this responsibility and delegate it to then-Provost Carol Folt. In reality, the President will very rarely disagree with CAP’s recommendation, and the Trustees essentially rubberstamp whatever is decided.

Former President Wright was notorious for using tenure as a political tool, routinely granting it to those who did not deserve it.

PROF. AIMEE BAHNG Under a tenure controversy As such, he had legions of loyal supporters who knew that they would be out of a job if not for him. The faculty will be saddled with these academics for decades to come. President Hanlon and Provost Dever have generally expressed their intention to raise the standards for tenure, although it appears that they have not done so in a transparent way. Associate Deans may not be communicating tenure standards clearly with junior faculty, and this uncertainty may be impeding the ability of departments to mentor their junior faculty to reach tenure standards.

This brings us to the tenure case of Professor Bahng. She was appointed in 2009, meaning that she has already delayed tenure review by one year. She is apparently beloved by students, so there would be limited grounds to deny her tenure based on her teaching.

However, her record of scholarship is questionable at best. Opinions on it have been polarized.

Her record of publication shows a large gap from 2008 to 2015, with only four articles published total. She published two of these articles, one in 2006 and one in 2008, in graduate school. In 2015, she published two additional articles, likely understanding that she would be up for tenure review soon and needed to publish. She also has a book, Migrant Futures, to be published in 2017. As it has not been released yet, there are no reviews of it and there is no idea of how it might be received.

In the world of “publish or perish,” Professor Bahng seems to be perishing, having published only two articles and contributed to an anonymous manifesto since being hired.

Proponents of Professor Bahng claim that as a minority faculty member, she has a greater burden in mentoring students, which is

Courtesy undervalued by the tenure system. Nevertheless, the tenure system relegates other forms of service beyond teaching and scholarship to secondary status for good reason. Dartmouth is unique in higher education because of its unique character as an institution with excellent scholars who are also excellent teachers. Balancing time devoted to students versus research is certainly difficult, especially for junior faculty, but it is a burden that all faculty members face.

One can argue over how much the tenure process should learn toward one or the other, but both are essential to the success of the institution. Professor Bahng does not get a free pass because she has chosen to take on additional responsibilities. There are plenty of faculty members who are fully devoted to their students above and beyond the call of duty without compromising the quality of their research. I, myself, have had the great pleasure of knowing some of these faculty members.

Higher tenure standards are generally desirable. Perhaps more clarity in communicating the standards, as well as greater support in helping junior faculty reach these standards, would be helpful. However, the review process seems to be working as it should. Supporters of Professor Bahng must acknowledge that outstanding scholarship is non-negotiable. A popular professor being denied tenure should not cause a massive public outcry; it should be approached with the understanding that tenure should be given only to a carefully select few who have merits beyond great teaching. Unless gross irregularities are founded with Professor Bahng’s tenure case, which is highly doubtful, CAP’s decision to deny her tenure should stand.

The Dartmouth Review

Thursday – June 9, 2016

5

FEATURES

The True Cost of Affirmative Action Jinsung Bach

Contributor Amidst a sea of rancorous voices howling for racial diversity, Dartmouth has recently become the target of a national civil rights complaint. On May 23, the Asian American Coalition for Education (AACE) filed an official complaint with the Department of Education and the Department of Justice, alleging that Asian-American students were subject to discriminatory practices at Dartmouth, Yale, and Brown. Among these alleged practices are racial quotas and caps, denying qualified Asian-descended students admission while accepting other applicants with similar qualifications.

It is certainly difficult to look at the evidence without raising a brow or two. When black or Latino students in the seventieth percentile of exam scores are admitted over their Asian peers in the ninety-eighth percentile, one questions just how fair the system really is. Why would we deny such good students a chance to study with us? Isn’t the point of admissions to attract the talent and diligence that Mr. Bach is a junior at the College and a contributor to The Dartmouth Review.

Dartmouth needs? The fact that such figures are also common to other Ivy League institutions raises even further concerns. It seems that academia has chosen to sacrifice its own standards for excellence in the name of paying lip service to racial diversity.

Thus the situation lends itself to further commentary upon affirmative action, and a scathing condemnation of the same.

If our society seeks to judge its denizens not on the color of their skin but on the content of their character, then is it too much to ask that its schools follow the same ideals? Ivy League institutions are meant to represent the elite, the very best that American education has to offer. And what is Dartmouth College, if not an elite school of the highest caliber? The qualities of its students should represent these high standards, on a level playing field where race has no meaning. Yet affirmative action would have us admit students on a racial basis, claiming that historical victimization exempts one from playing by the same rules as everyone else. It is a painful irony indeed when a system designed to defeat racial prejudice ends up encouraging it instead.

Let us not ignore the drastic implications that these facts hold for Dear Old Dartmouth. At a

time when our national rankings continue to fall, Dartmouth is in drastic need of high-achieving students. Yet America’s best and brightest are denied a chance to study with us for no other reason than their ancestry. They are casualties of a system that values race over competence, tossed aside to fulfill some deluded racial quota as if that alone will save our school.

And what of these other mi-

for their predicament but themselves.

All too often, the targets of their discontent become the very same institutions that brought them there in the first place. This translates into the very same racial tensions that have rocked Dartmouth and so many other schools in the United States.

One cannot help but wonder if this is what fuels the likes of Black Lives Matter and its ilk.

Why would we deny such good students a chance to study with us? Isn’t the point of admissions to attract the talent and diligence that Dartmouth needs? norities, held to such low standards against their peers, who are admitted to our school in favor of more deserving applicants?

Even as these underachieving students reap the benefits of an Ivy League education, they are ill equipped to face the challenges that come with it. They face vigorous standards that they are simply unable to live up to, and so their achievements suffer for it. Yet many of these students do not seize this unique opportunity to overcome their own obstacles and grow. No, they refuse to accept responsibility for their own academic future, desperate to blame anything and anyone

Perhaps their demands for “safe spaces” and policing speech are symptoms of their own insecurity, as they project their feelings upon others. From Collis to Baker Library, we have already borne witness to the havoc such insecurity can wreak, and more will surely follow if the problem persists. If we continue to admit so many students who aren’t prepared to flourish at this school, then we will see it torn to shreds at the hands of their discontent.

The denial of so many deserving Asian students might be one of the more obvious effects of affirmative action, but in the end the system also does a disservice

to the very underachieving minority students it admits. Unequipped and unprepared as they are for the vigorous world of Ivy League academics, they are simply not in an environment where they can realize their full potential. When they continually fail to meet the standards they feel pressured to keep, one can hardly expect their well-being to remain intact. This is not a fate to wish upon any student, let alone one of our own. And again, the school’s integrity and reputation can only suffer for it.

One can only hope that as the situation develops, the AACE’s position will further reveal the extent of affirmative action’s harmful nature. We must not consider this a strictly Asian problem, for it holds dire consequences for what Dartmouth could become within the near future. For the sake of our own academic integrity, the time is long overdue to acknowledge affirmative action for what it truly is: A well-meaning policy, but a detriment to American education.

The aphorism that the road to hell is paved with good intentions hardly needs repeating. With an eye to the future, we must remember what Dartmouth stands to lose if we continue upon such a road.

An Alumnus Profile: Dr. Conrad J. Duncan Dartmouth Review Staff

Dr. Conrad Duncan is an alumnus of the College, a member of the class of 1978, and now a practicing physician at Chesapeake Urology Associates in Maryland. After excelling throughout his four-year tenure at Dartmouth, Dr. Duncan went on to graduate from the Yale University School of Medicine before completing his residency in Obstetrics and Gynecology at Georgetown University after discovering his passion for the field of women’s health.

He is now a widely published doctor and a frequent lecturer on obstetric and gynecologic topics. He has written and presented on countless such topics,

a member of the American Urogynecologic Society (AUGS), the International Continence Society (ICS), the Society of Urodynamics, Female Pelvic Medicine and Urogenital Reconstruction (SUFU), the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists (AAGL) and the American Medical Association.

Early in his career, Dr. Duncan worked in private practice in Washington, D.C. at Columbia Hospital for Women. Over the years, as technology improved, he began to focus his practice on minimally invasive surgeries, which would serve as alternatives to the conventional surgical procedures. The minimally invasive techniques, of

One of his patients, Donna Stinson, who resides here in Hanover and is the co-owner of the famous Stinson’s Village Store, testified to his uniquely genuine compassion for each and every patient.

which are peer reviewed and validated by his peers around the world who also specialize in obstetrics, gynecology, and urology. In addition, due to his prolific work and extraordinary teaching abilities, Dr. Duncan is a Fellow of the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology and a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons, as well as

which Dr. Duncan has become a renowned practitioner, decrease patients’ recovery times and overall pain.

After continually migrating south, from Hanover first to New Haven, then to Washington, D.C., where he remained in private practice, Dr. Duncan ventured west to Oklahoma, where he served as Chief

of two departments, OB/GYN and Urogynecology, at the Indian Health Service, an operating division of the Department of Health and Human Services.

He was also an assistant professor at the University of Kansas Medical Center before moving back east to Maryland and joining MedStar Franklin Square Medical Center as Director of Urogynecology and Minimally Invasive GYN Surgery, where he served in this position.

After eight years there, in 2013, he took his current position at Chesapeake Urology, returning to private practice once again, where he specializes in Urogynecology and focuses on minimally invasive gynecologic surgeries, female urinary incontinence and overactive bladder, pelvic organ prolapse and female fecal incontinence.

His accomplishments speak for themselves, but there is more to Dr. Conrad Duncan than his resume might indicate.

His patients are captivated not only by his clinical expertise and analytical prowess, but also by his charming, compassionate personality. One of his patients, Donna Stinson, who resides here in Hanover and is the co-owner of the famous Stinson’s Village Store, testified to his uniquely genuine compassion for each and every patient. “He is truly an amazing doctor,” she said,

DR. CONRAD DUNCAN A tremendous medical mind. Courtesy Photo “He diagnosed a problem that plenty of other doctors missed, fixed it, and had me back on my feet pretty much the next day. It was truly amazing. Incredible.”

In addition, she attested to the personal touch he puts on each patient’s care. Before seeing Ms. Stinson, back on her feet, on her way back to Hanover, Dr. Duncan introduced her to his family, who are pictured standing with Ms. Stinson outside the hospital.

Exceptional bedside manner is a dying art in the world of healthcare. With increased in-

stitutionalization each and every day, the practice of medicine is becoming more and more impersonal. It is truly incredible to see this accomplished Dartmouth alumnus providing the highest quality healthcare, and augmenting each and every experience with his own personal touch. Dr. Conrad Duncan is a truly exceptional physician who cares deeply about his patients and their overall wellbeing.

There are many doctors across the world, but Dr. Duncan surely ranks among the most impressive.

6 Thursday – June 9, 2016

The Dartmouth Review

FEATURES

A Tale of Apathy and Incompetance > CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 in terms (the way wags jab at “military intelligence”), has been a thorny issue at the College for decades – from the first meetings of Palaeopitus in 1899 to the controversies of Student Assembly today.

Palaeopitus began as a secret society in the fall of 1899. Alumni Association member Edward K. Hall ’92 floated the idea as a way of “putting through [an] athletic constitution” and “a more united action in straightening out the student body and keeping it on all fours in matters of vital importance in the student life,” according to a letter written by Homer Eaton Keyes ’00, one of the fourteen founding members. The impact of the society’s on the latter purpose was somewhat blunted by the secrecy to which the members were sworn. In September 1902, future President of the College Ernest M. Hopkins ’01, himself a former member of the society and clerking for President William J. Tucker, wrote to Hall asking if “it [were] not better to throw away the encumbrances which have hampered it, readjust itself to these needs which are before the College, and with the prestige of such life as it has had take up this and similar questions?”

Hall and the Palaeopitus leadership agreed, and published a declaration of purpose in the Daily Dartmouth in October. The November 1941 Dartmouth Alumni Magazine issue reflects, “From that time on, Palaeopitus was clearly recognized by the undergraduate for what it was – a society dedicated to the best interests of the College, constituted by student leaders representative of almost every phase of college activity … [Though] its authority as a governing agency is one of assumption rather than grant, it has been used so judiciously as to preclude serious opposition or question.”

Questions over the society’s role would arise in five short years. By 1946, a new organization for student governance would be established – the Undergraduate Council – which had a more official basis to its foundation, with a constitution approved by the Board of Trustees and the Administration’s recognition as the official mouthpiece of the students’ interests. Why such a sudden change, when the aforementioned reporting from the Alumni Magazine had presented such a rosy situation? One answer can be found in the social changes that took place in the intervening years. The half-decade between 1941 and 1946 was quite eventful, of course, what with the war that was occurring and such. The College felt the impact of the conflict even after its conclusion; many Dartmouth students set out like Vikings of old, and many veterans came back to fill their brains and

Mr. Jang is a senior at the College oand a former Executive Editor of The Dartmouth Review.

veins with granite on the blessings of the G.I. bill. They certainly left their mark on the College. Professor Jeffery Hart wrote some anecdotes about them in his recollections of Winter Carnival in a previous issue; he remembers how they flouted social rules and College regulations by ignoring parietal limits, holding shooting practice with a .45 in a dorm room in second-floor Wheeler, and sending a security officer down a staircase with a deluge of firehose water. It can be argued that the veterans brought a more egalitarian attitude back with them, along with a healthy skepticism of authority.

Such cultural forces led to the establishment of the Undergraduate Council. A memo sent to the President’s Office by Dean of the College Lloyd Neidlinger ’23 mentioned issues with reviving Palaeopitus to its original state: that it had been limited by “the lack of any grant of power or mandate from the student body to represent them officially” and that the Administration was similarly “unable to negotiate the solution of undergraduate problems with any group … who had authority to enter into agreements with any guarantee that the student body would accept and live up to … approved by their representatives.” An issue of representation, in other words. President John S. Dickey set up a committee to work out a new system of student government, which took inspiration from Williams, Princeton, and Harvard – schools that had implemented student-council type of systems and had seen an increase in administration-studentry cooperation. A vast majority (72%) of the upperclassmen signed a petition approving proposed bylaws for the new council, though Neidlinger notes that while “very few men declined to sign, very few were enthusiastic, and most of the signers seemed to be indifferent.” As to questions of legitimacy, the Dean noted that though the College’s charter “established an autocratic government” and that “legally we must live under [it] but this had not prevented the Trustees from conferring rights and privileges” upon other community members. “There are, I think, good reasons why the boys in a college are quite generally denied having final word in deciding just how it shall … make men out of boys – but certainly in modern times nobody running a college thinks that student opinion can be ignored or that thoughtful students cannot contribute ideas for its improvement.”

The development was greeted with optimism. Apparently reassured of fears of giving the Undergraduate Council power to impeach its editor, the Daily Dartmouth extolled the new institution on the front page of the October 14, 1946 issue by calling it “a new high in the placing of democracy and responsibility in the hands of the student which is unprecedented and unparalleled in New England and possibly any other college in

the nation.” The article notes that the Council drew representation from “every phase of campus life,” including the “captains of athletic organizations, the chairmen of the Executive Committees of the three upper classes, representatives from the Council on Student Organizations, the Dartmouth College Athletic Council and the Dartmouth Outing Club, and presidents of fraternities, functional organizations, and honorary societies” as well as editors-in-chief of publications. Palaeopitus maintained a level of prestige as the Council’s executive committee. The Council’s broad powers were seen as a benefit, directly contrasting Palaeopitus’s perceived inability to represent all students.

What are we to take from this?

It is clear that the Administration, popular opinion, and the Daily D alike valued it as an advance in democracy and student representation. Though everyone recognized that the Council would not be able to implement populist ideals – what Dean Neidlinger referred to as “longer hours for women in dormitories and more freedom to get drunk” – a large majority of students approved of greater representation through the Council (albeit passively, as noted by the “indifferent” petition signers above). Something clearly changed over the years to make this wide mandate for representation erode to apathy, which, few would disagree, poses an issue to ensuring that the Administration hears the voice of the studentry.

This shift towards apathy and indifference was clear by the 1980s.

Though the UGC was reorganized with a new constitution in 1979, involvement remained low. The Daily Dartmouth reports that quorum was difficult to achieve in the Council’s weekly meetings. In addition, the UGC was just one of many organizations vying for student attention, as was mentioned in our opening quotation. The Inter-Dormitory Council and Inter-Fraternity Council formed alternative fora to discuss student life. (Palaeopitus was disbanded in the 1960s and would not return until 1981, when it reverted to its old role as a senior honor society.) Steve Barnett ’83, a UGC member, would write an editorial for the April 22, 1983 Daily Dartmouth venting his frustrations with the system: that there were no constituencies (instead “popularity-based at-large representation”); no unity (“the many campus governing bodies … spend so much time working at cross-purposes with one another that they unnecessarily duplicate work, waste time and energy and present a divided, factious student voice”); no responsibility (“the lack of student responsibility over the allocation of College funds”); and no clout (“Since there is no strong, singular, and representative student voice on campus, the administration can pick and choose student opinion that is most in line with their interests”).

The spring of 1983 saw efforts at reforming the Undergraduate

Council. A proposed new constitution would dissolve the UGC and IDC and form a “constituency-based representative body [allocated by dormitory cluster and fraternity] … responsible for both policy and social matters,” according to an April 11, 1983 Daily D article. Ideally, the new organization would, according to UGC President Rob Stein ’83, have a “centralizing effect” that would leave the Administration “no choice but to deal with us.” (UGC Committee of Undergraduate Affairs John Hall ’83 was quoted in the same article describing student governance as “an octopus with about ten different legs.”) The new organization would “meet with and represent student interests to the Dean of the College, the Dean of the Faculty, the President of the College, and the trustees on a regular basis, represent student representatives to Trustee, Faculty, Administrative, and College committees, be responsible for the finances of the Student Assembly … [and] to conduct regular meetings which shall be open to the student body.” In order to facilitate all this, the new organization planned to charge each student ten dollars in social dues. (The current SA constitution makes no mention of such dues. In any case, however, this does bring up the controversy from last year over how the Assembly approved the purchase of Patagonia fleeces for its members.) A referendum was held on April 21, 1983, but failed when a “miscommunication” led to several voting tables not being set up; a new vote had to be arranged to ratify the proposed constitution, this time by a two-thirds supermajority of students, who had to sign a petition. While this May 2, 1983 petition succeeded in ushering in the new Student Assembly, it did not satisfy previous complaints about the UGC. A 1986 editorial in the D, bluntly titled, “Created to improve UGC, Assembly still isn’t effective,” notes several occasions when the Assembly “failed to obtain a quorum” on policy matters like amendments to its constitution and divestment. The piece notes that several representatives were forced out due to unexcused absences. The Student Assembly inherited the UGC’s reputation for sloth, which remained unshaken for a long time.

One illustrative incident took place in 2001: a spat between the Student Assembly cabinet and the Daily D, as recorded in an email exchange preserved by the Rauner Special Collections Library. A Daily Dartmouth op-ed written by the editorial board lambasted Student Assembly for a “lack of legitimacy” and “plummeting clout with the College Administration” – third verse, same as the first. The D’s editors proclaimed, “When Jorge Miranda ’01 took over as President last year, he promised us a ‘new assembly’ … but like in years past, this has simply not been the case. The College administration made some of the most important decisions

[concerning financial aid changes or President Wright’s Student Life Initiative] affecting student life this past year without even consulting the Assembly.” In Ignatius J. Reilly-esque tones, the Daily D’s editors stop short of calling the SA mongoloids by blustering, “We all know your leadership holds meetings with administrators, your executives form useless committee after useless committee and your members attempt to bury the pointlessness of their ‘resolutions’ under lofty rhetoric. We know that, and so does every student on this campus who isn’t sitting in 101 Collis on Tuesday nights. We expect more from our Student Assembly ... we urge you to make real changes now.”

In response, Miranda replied with a submitted editorial, listing off initiatives like “four summits on Student Involvement in decision-making with trustees, faculty, and administrators” or “ongoing SA projects” that were the subject of “demands issued at the Parkhurst protest” as “never printed or acknowledged in your editorials or articles.” He continued, “All the stories you wrote about the Education Department this year came because the Student Assembly … handed you the story. … And then you promptly forgot where it came from. And then it struck me, who the hell cares what the D says? … It’s obvious to me that all the D has to go on is stereotypes.” Unfortunately for scholars of Dartmouth history, the Rauner file does not include how the Daily D’s editorial board responded; one is reminded in this situation of the amusingly titled The Incoherence of the Philosophers, a tract written by Muslim theologian Al-Ghazali, to which fellow Islamic philosopher Ibn Rushd rebutted with The Incoherence of the Incoherence (though, sadly, the chain did not continue with The Incoherence of the Incoherence of the Incoherence.)

This leaves the question of the Student Assembly’s role today. Earlier this term, of course, a new President (Nicholas Harrington ’17), Vice President (Sally Portman ’17), and cabinet were elected along with other Assembly members. Out of a campus of roughly 4,000 students, only 1,556 cast ballots for the Student-Body President and 1,379 for the Vice-President. A similar low turnout occurred last year, and apathy has been a major issue in representation. While candidates may have the best of intentions, with plans to use SA funding to fuel worthy projects, the questions of clout, apathy, and representation remain. The Student Bill of Rights proposed earlier this year was a visible step in asserting SA’s public role as a representative of the studentry, but will this be enough? With the Administration clearly on a long march to impose its own views of what Dartmouth College – or, God forbid, “Dartmouth University,” should look like upon us, it remains to be seen how, or indeed, if, student organizations will be able to stand athwart it.

The Dartmouth Review

Thursday – June 9, 2016

7

FEATURES

Commencement’s Colorful History BLAKE NEFF Alumnus

Editor’s Note: This article origionally appeared in The Review’s 2010 Commencement Issue.

For a college which supposedly sets a watch lest the old traditions fail, graduation at Dartmouth has had surprisingly eclectic history. Often shifting in location, length, format, and even the language in use, graduation and commencement are far better used as an opportunity to look at the variety within Dartmouth’s past. With another year and another commencement having arrived, it is perhaps worthwhile to take a look back at Dartmouth graduations through the years.

Dartmouth’s first graduation took place on August 28, 1771, on the spot currently occupied

by Reed Hall. The class contained only had four students, but much like today, the school wouldn’t

“Until 1827, Latin was the official language of the ceremony, used for all announcements and most speeches.” let such a trivial issue get in the way of a good party. John Wentworth, the British colonial governor, came to town with 60 guests, an ox, and a prodigious amount of rum. In typical Dartmouth fashion, the cooks dove into the rum straight away and became so intoxicated that they were unable to prepare the ox for dinner. Despite the jolly atmosphere, though, not enough trustees were present to sign the graduates’ diplomas. And thus, an elite educational institution sent its first graduates into the wild world.

Over the next century, Dartmouth graduations would strike an interesting balance between the patrician and the plebeian.

The speeches given at graduation would no doubt be intolerable for the modern Dartmouth student.

Until 1827, Latin was the official language of the ceremony, used for all announcements and most speeches, with anything said in English prefaced with “in lingua vernacula.” Not content with one dead language, though, speakers mixed it up over the years. In 1807, addresses were given not only in Latin and English, but also in French, Greek, Hebrew, and Chaldaic, no doubt testing the linguistic faculties of even the most studious graduates. During this period, about ten to twenty speeches were given each year, making graduation a minor feat

Mr Neff is a member of the class of 2013 and a former contributer to The Dartmouth Review.

of endurance. In 1835, though, college president Nathan Lord took things to an entirely new level. Decreeing that “ambition and emulation are selfish principles, and therefore immoral,” Lord eliminated all class ranks, honors, and competitive elements from graduation entirely, and additionally required that every student give a 10-minute speech. With some 48 students graduating that year, the ceremony became an all-day marathon of fruitless suffering. After four years of agony, Lord relented and required that only half the class speak. This approach still lasted for several dreadful hours, but survived all the way until 1863, when the former abolitionist-turned-pro-slavery-advocate was forced out by the Board of Trustees. After Lord’s departure, the number of student speakers gradually shrank, hitting six in 1898 and eventually reaching the current lone speaker in 1939.

In contrast to the dull affair the ceremony itself often was, though, the general event of graduation could often be a rowdy affair. The whole event was a major social scene for the entire region and drew guests in from miles around, much like a farmer’s market. The Green would be dotted by booths selling not just food, but also trinkets, soap, medicine, and the like. Some more ignoble activities prevailed as well. As one observer recounted, “I should think there were in sight of one another 30 places of gambling…During the graduation exercises in the meeting hall, the vociferations of a dozen auctioneers were to be distinctly heard in the house.” In 1833 a crowd of “peddlers, gamblers, drunkards, and shows” were noted to be among the attendees. Sometimes, even horse races were a part of the affair. It was, overall, a quite lively atmosphere, especially when contrasted with the inanity of the actual ceremony.

Guest speakers at graduation have a similarly diverse history.

Supposedly, the very first commencement speaker was a Native American speaking from a pine branch. 19th-century speakers included Ralph Waldo Emerson in 1838, who gave an address on literary ethics, and a most unusual speech by the poet Walt Whitman in 1872. Whitman chose not to wear the traditional cap and gown, and instead wore a flannel shirt which partially revealed a hairy chest that “would have done credit to a grizzly bear,” according to one witness. Whitman declared that he enjoyed his visit to the New England village, and found the town comfortable even if it was “very Yankee.”

In the 20th century, commencements took a variety of forms. From 1900-42, as well as from 1972-1982, there were not speakers from outside Dart-

mouth; from 1943 to 1945 there was in fact no commencement at all, leading to a very large commencement ceremony in 1947, as students returned from the Second World War. When the school started settling into a routine of inviting outside speakers, the guests displayed a great deal of variety. Some have been notable alumni, such as Nelson Rockefeller ’30 in 1969 or Robert Reich ’68 in 1994. Other strains of commencement speakers have been foreign statesmen (Oscar Sanchez and Jean Lesage), journalists (Walter Cronkite and Bill Moyers), religious figures (Fr. Theodore Hesburgh and Douglas Horton), and political figures of all stripes, from Senator Bill Bradley to Fed chairman Paul Volcker.

Most notable of all, of course, have been the United States presidents who have spoken at graduation. Dwight D. Eisenhower addressed the Class of 1953, giving an “informal response” to the official commencement speaker Lester Pearson. The event drew over 10,000 spectators, and security was tight, with gunmen in the windows and on rooftops, and Secret Service agents disguised in cap and gown mingling amongst the graduates. Eisenhower had originally planned to give a standard address, but changed his mind and delivered an extemporaneous address attacking censorship and McCarthyism, then at its height.

“Don’t join the book burners,” Eisenhower implored. “Don’t think that you’re going to conceal faults by concealing evidence that they ever existed. Don’t be afraid to go in your library and read every book, as long as any document does not offend our ideas of decency. That should be the only censorship.”

“We have got to fight [communism] with something better, not try to conceal the thinking of our

own people,” he said.

Of communists themselves, Eisenhower declared, “They are part of America, and even if they think ideas that are contrary to ours, their right to say them and their right to have them in places where they are accessible to others is unquestioned, or it’s not America.” Of course, the

“Supposedly, the very first commencement speaker was a Native American speaking from a pine branch.” very fact that Eisenhower gave a speech urging graduates to not hate leftists too much is interesting and amusing in its own right.

President Bill Clinton also addressed Dartmouth students, speaking at Memorial Field in 1995 on the continuing importance of education in a modern economy. Clinton noted that at the time men ages 45 to 55 were seeing their incomes decline as their shortage of high-level education held them back.

“We cannot walk away from our obligation to invest in the education of every American at every age,” he said. Interestingly, Clinton’s visit led to a minor health scare, as a student who shook the president’s hand came down with meningitis the very next day. The Review was spared the inevitable blame it receives for all things deemed bad at Dartmouth when Clinton was tested and found to be completely healthy.

Although many complaints about commencement typically concern how prominent the speaker is, Clinton’s address notably sparked a series of complaints as well. The announcement that commencement would occur at Memorial Field, instead of in front of Baker Library instigated

COMMENCEMENT A changing tradition.

a “Keep it at Baker” campaign among students who feared that the use of the football field would make the experience exceedingly sterile. This campaign faltered however, largely thanks to the harsh reality that students would only receive a handful of tickets if the event stayed on the Green.

Clinton’s speech wasn’t the only one to result in complaints.

Rockefeller’s speech was notably bad, with one observer saying it was “either the wrong speech ... or some dumb thing about finance in the state of New York.”

The choice of Henry Paulson ’68 as speaker in 2007 provoked both the standard unhappiness from those who had never heard of him (this was prior to his fame in the financial crisis) as well as an amusing response from the faculty. Some forty-seven members of the faculty signed a letter drafted

by Bruce Nelson criticizing the choice, saying that “by inviting [Paulson] to speak in a certain sense the College and the trustees were validating the Bush administration,” which they deemed “a clear and unprecedented danger to our democracy.” Nelson insisted that his criticisms were not an attack on Paulson, even though he was in essence accusing him of complicity in a fascist takeover of the United States. Nelson also claimed that more faculty would have signed the letter, were it not for a “culture of fear” he claimed had been created at Dartmouth by recent trustee elections, which had seen the election of petition candidate Stephen Smith.

Paulson, to his credit, poked fun at his own choice and refused to be overtly offended, thereby preserving perhaps the only real tradition that can be seen in commencement. Whether the speaker is a president or a professor, the ceremony one hour or ten, the location Webster Hall or a football stadium, the show must go on.

Courtesy Photo

8 Thursday – June 9, 2016

The Dartmouth Review

FEATURES

Officer and Gentleman Jeffery Hart

Professor Emeritus

Editor’s Note: This article by Dartmouth Professor Emeritus and Review mentor Jeffery Hart appeared in an October 2008 issue of The review.

The North Korean army smashed across the thirty-eighth parallel on June 25, 1950. I had just finished my junior year at Columbia. By the time I graduated in June 1952, MacArthur had carried out his brilliant landing at Inchon, the seaport for the South Korean capital at Seoul, and then had cut off and largely destroyed the North Korean army. But his plunge northward toward the Chinese border had brought China into the war, disastrously for MacArthur’s army.

It became clear that I would become subject to the draft before graduating from Columbia in 1952. Mark Flannigan, president of Phi Kappa Psi, was planning to enlist in the Navy and suggested I look into that. It seemed a good idea so I decided to visit the New York headquarters downtown near Wall Street, intending to ask questions, maybe pick up some literature.

Things moved quickly, to put it mildly. Almost immediately I found myself in my underwear, standing in line, taking a physical examination. Then, still in my underwear, I was taking some sort of IQ test.

Allowed time to dress—while the IQ test was graded—I found myself in another line passing between some desks. It turned out that my test scores had been high enough to qualify me for naval aviation or naval intelligence. A student I had known at Dartmouth had enlisted in the Army Air Corps and, crashing his jet trainer in Florida, had burned out an acre of swampland.

Not surprisingly, I chose naval intelligence. But that meant regular Officer Candidate Training at Newport, Rhode Island, along with the regular candidates for commissions as line officers. I would have a line officer designator of 1105 until my intelligence designator (1635) came through while I was at Newport OCS. With a 1635 designator, I would be assigned to Naval Intelligence School at the naval base in Anacostia, Maryland.

Things had progressed so quickly since I had gone to that navy office building to ask questions and pick up literature that it hardly seemed possible that I had buttoned myself into about four years in the Navy, a threeyear enlistment plus time at OCS and at Naval Intelligence School.

So it was then, in January 1953, Dr. Hart is a Professor Emeritus of English at the College and author of The Making of the American Conservative Mind.

that I found myself on a chartered Greyhound Bus full of other OCS enlistees headed with false bravado for the Navy base in Newport, Rhode Island.

Learning Your Manners Upon arrival at the OCS section of the Newport naval base, we were given assorted shoes and issued enlisted men’s sailor suits, bell-bottom pants, and blouses with a bib in the back.

Newport is frigid in the winter, so we were issued pea-jackets. When we graduated in the spring, we would wear officers’ summer whites.

I found myself in K (“King”) company. We were assigned to double deck wooden barracks, and two-man rooms with two desks for study and double-decker beds. My roommate had graduated from Williams, but most of the others had engineering backgrounds from such places as MIT. This was important for the Navy since the Navy consists in large part of millions of tons of steel that must be moved, sometimes at high speeds.

Lieutenant Commander Husted, in charge of K Company, had a very short blonde crew cut that made his head look like a bowling ball. Sitting behind his desk in the Company office, he regarded us with sovereign contempt. He had played football at the Naval Academy and had a ribbon on his chest indicating a very distinguished Navy medal.

As I understood it, he had won it for an extraordinary feat as a Navy SEAL in Korea.

Intelligence had determined that senior North Korean and Chinese officers were to meet in a former one-room schoolhouse in the near future. Unfortunately for them, the schoolhouse was near a river. Intelligence understood that this being winter, the school house would probably have a wood stove. So it prepared high explosives that looked like logs. With the “logs” packed in a knapsack and wearing a wetsuit, Husted swam up the river, found the schoolhouse and the stove, and left the logs in it. The officers must have been pleased by such thoughtfulness. Then the schoolhouse evaporated.

The Navy taught you how to walk, talk, and present yourself to others while on Navy business.

Even if you were going down the company street to drop a letter in the mailbox you were supposed to walk purposefully. “Out for a stroll, sailor? Five demerits.”

Fifty demerits flunked you out of OCS and deposited you in enlisted men’s training at Bainbridge, Maryland: sailor suits forever.

Since we were training as officers, we were required to speak with authority: stand erect, shoulders back, look the other man in the eyes and speak in clear declarative sentences. Or-

ENSIGN JEFFERY HART newly comissioned from Officer Candidate School in 1953. dinarily, on Navy business, you are cordial but not friendly. And the Navy is clean, probably because the confined life aboard a ship requires it.

Every Saturday morning we had an inspection. Our shoes had to be polished until they were almost mirrors. Our sailor hats had to be chalky white.

Lt. Cmdr. Husted actually went around our room with white gloves, testing surfaces for dust.

He found a thread on our floor, and we each got five demerits for “rope on the deck.”

Husted and the Chief Petty Officer doing the inspection seemed to have magnifying glasses for eyes. One of them actually bounced a quarter on the bare sheets covering our beds.

Fortunately, the quarter bounced twice. To produce that tension you bend the mattress up by both ends and stretch the sheet over them so that when the mattress straightened out, it is like the head of a drum. The take home message was that life on a ship is crowded, and the Navy is clean.

At first I thought some or a lot of us were on our way to Bainbridge. I gradually realized that the Navy had made an investment in us and wanted us to succeed. Only one man went to Bainbridge, and that was voluntarily. He decided that two years as a sailor was preferable to three as an officer—that is, three with OCS, plus whatever other schools were added on. I hoped that my 1635 intelligence desig-

nator would come through so I would go to Intelligence School.

“We’ve Never Lost Anyone on This.”

Frequently during classroom work in engineering, navigation, or gunnery, the officer running the course would relax a bit and talk about World War II. Our navigation instructor had been on a cruiser off Okinawa when the kamikaze raids came in for the kill. He said there had not been a clean set of underwear on the ship.

He had commanded a submarine in the Pacific. His name was actually Commander Fish, and he was a “mustang,” meaning a man who had begun as an enlisted man and worked his way up.

He was proud of the silver submarine pin on his chest. He had a blonde crew-cut, a somewhat pointed head, and if you squinted—I’m not kidding—he actually looked like a torpedo. He was enthusiastic about the devastating job the submarines had done on Jap shipping.

By the end of the war, he said, the Japs were moving their supplies on rafts. He was joking, I suppose. Commander Fish did tell us an important thing about over-complexity in weaponry.

Our submarines had periscopes that were raised and lowered pneumatically. This mechanism sometimes failed, a serious matter for a submarine. German U-Boats were simpler. Their

periscope was raised mechanically by a large cogwheel, operated by a lever. A sailor operated this manually, and up went the periscope. It never failed.

When not in class, we did damage control exercises at the bottom of the Newport harbor.

The Navy had simulated steel ship compartments on the bottom. We climbed down a steel ladder through a vertical steel tube and into the compartment.

We had been told what would happen. Down in the compartment there awaited some 2x4s and some large steel plates. We were told that suddenly a substantial aperture would open in the side of the compartment.

Our job was to “jump to,” show teamwork, grab the steel plate and the 2x4s, and cover the hole while the harbor poured in. Before going down that ladder, the Petty Officer running the exercise said, “We’ve never lost anyone doing this one.”

I got used to that sentence: “We’ve never lost anyone on this.” I don’t suppose I was the only one who thought silently, “There’s always a first time to become toast.” The Navy’s attitude was “If you do this right, it will work.” But: “If you don’t do it right, don’t blame the Navy.”

The Combat Information Center Before my term was to start at the Intelligence School, I had a three week empty period and was

The Dartmouth Review

Thursday – June 9, 2016

9

FEATURES assigned to training in the CIC (Combat Information Center).

An intelligence officer might well be assigned to sea duty and be responsible for a CIC. The training facility was located in the headquarters building of the First Naval District, called the Fargo Building, a tall office building that stood on the southern edge of Boston Harbor. The smallest warship with a CIC was the destroyer; larger ships had larger and more elaborate CICs. The basic CIC, a darkened room below deck, contains a radar screen on which you see whatever the ship’s radar sweeps above. Since this is only a training exercise, a recording is what we saw. The sweep shows up on the screen below as a line moving clockwise around the screen and indicating the objects picked up in the sky.

You learn to report sightings in a standard way, for example: “Incoming. 275 degrees. 8 thousand feet. 300 knots.” “Incoming” is a particularly scary word. You have to learn to distinguish between planes and a flock of birds.

The CIC has another screen that receives results from the ship’s sonar device. This sends out underwater impulses that bounce back and refract on the screen with blips on a graph. You have to distinguish between a whale, a school of fish, and a submarine. I learned an esoteric fact: a whale farting can produce the same track as a torpedo.

While at CIC training I lived in the Fargo Building at the Bachelor Officers’ Quarters (BOQ) and ate in the officers’ dining room.

No more fried baloney, like at OCS. On that point alone, not a minor one, as well as on many others, OCS had been worthwhile.

Then it was on to Anacostia and whatever was offered at Intelligence School.

Intelligence School in Anacostia At Intelligence School we

heard lectures from a variety of experts, senior intelligence officers as well as civilians from the FBI, CIA, and State Department. We got down to the serious business about how the Cold War was being waged. A regular lecturer also taught at nearby Johns Hopkins University, another at the Georgetown school of Foreign Service. The lectures introduced me to another realm of knowledge beyond what I had been studying in college.

Completion of our program carried six hours of graduate school credit at Johns Hopkins and other universities. Through those courses, I first heard about and read George Kennan’s “long telegram” to President Truman, later published in Foreign Affairs by “Mr. X.” The telegram analyzed the sources of Soviet conduct and advocated the containment policy that ultimately won the Cold War. My own opinion of Truman rose sharply. He had put in place the elements that would carry the Cold War forward, with divided Germany the prize. Berlin was the key to Germany and therefore to Western Europe as a whole.

For a research project, I studied the fascinating example of the Institute of Pacific Relations and its guiding spirit Owen Lattimore, who also edited its magazine Pacific Affairs.

Senator Joseph McCarthy had called Lattimore the leading Soviet agent in Pacific matters. “Agent” sounded like “spy.”

If McCarthy had called him “ a major agent of Communist influence,” he would have been correct. This was demonstrated in the investigation by the “McCarran” Committee, the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee.

This Senate committee evidently had an able staff and legal team, which exposed, on evidentiary basis, Lattimore’s ties to communism. Lattimore and his close associates shared the Communist worldview and assiduously promoted the Communist line on Asian issues. Communist

authors were always reviewed favorably in Lattimore’s magazine Pacific Affairs, even when elsewhere reviewed critically or ignored. Lattimore was adept at turning Communist boilerplate into acceptable prose. Experts in his field had little respect for him, and though he later defended himself in Ordeal by Slander, he did not deserve to be regarded as a martyr, as he was by many liberals.

Strange Bedfellows A startling and disgraceful episode involving Lattimore is little known, and is recounted by Marvin Liebman in his autobiographical Coming Out Conservative. Marvin Liebman is little known today. After the war, he had been a Zionist, serving on the passenger ship Ben Hecht to run Jews into Palestine despite British restrictions. He was remarkably talented: a movie director, a publicist, and an author.

He also seemed to know a wide range of celebrities, including movie stars.

He was also agreeable, intelligent, suave and excellent company. He was a longtime friend of the Buckleys and National Review. He pioneered political mass mailing, which later became a small industry as developed by Richard Viguerie and others.

Liebman launched “The Committee of One Million Against the Recognition of Red China.”

Marvin also published a Chilean newsletter about the new Chilean regime of General Augusto Pinochet, who had led the coup that overthrew the Marxist government of Salvador Allende.

Marvin organized my own trip to Chile in 1982 and during the Reagan administration had a post in the National Endowment for the Arts as the organizer of receptions, cocktail parties and other such activities for friends of the Endowment.

During that period I visited Liebman at his Washington

apartment and learned for the first time that he was gay, which was the subject of Coming Out Conservative. By that time he was worried about the influence of the religious right in the Republican party, especially its hatred of gays. It was then that I first heard from Liebman about this episode involving Lattimore.

Elinor Lipper, a friend of Liebman, was a Russian who, accused of counter-revolutionary activities, had been imprisoned for eleven years in the Soviet slave labor camp Kolyma in Siberia, a freezing and primitive place where the attrition rate was about seventy percent each year. Because of Lipper’s medical training, she was assigned to the camp hospital. She told Liebman that during the war, a rumor swept the camp that the president of the United States would visit. The prisoners were driven at a frantic pace to clean the place up, repair it, paint it—it was a Potemkin Village.

It wasn’t the president who visited but Vice President Henry Wallace. The inmates were gathered together to smile, wave and greet him. Wallace himself waved and smiled as he walked surrounded by Soviet dignitaries. The dignitaries told Wallace that this was a camp for the incorrigibly mentally ill. “Suddenly,” Liebman writes in his book, “a woman ran from the ranks and threw herself at Wallace’s feet.

She screamed in Russian how the prisoners were being treated, how they were dying, how they were innocent, as innocent as the snow at his feet.

“Please,” she sobbed, “please help us.” She was taken away of course, while Wallace’s translator told him that she was mentally ill. Wallace’s translator was Owen Lattimore. In 1952 Marvin phoned Wallace in New York and was surprised to find how easy it was to make an appointment to see, along with Elinor Lipper, a former Vice President.

Marvin writes: “She told him what actually had happened that

day in Siberia. As she spoke, his face paled. ‘I didn’t know,’ he said. ‘I didn’t know—please believe me—I didn’t know.’ I saw in him the sense of betrayal that was engulfing many of us who had worked with the Communists.”

Lattimore was more than a fellow traveler. He probably did not belong to the Communist Party, even the underground party, but was all the more valuable for that reason.

Setting Sail At the completion of our course at the Intelligence School, we were given a variety of assignments. Some of us went to sea duty as intelligence officers now able to run a CIC. Others went to stations abroad. Our Rhine River Patrol stationed in Wiesbanden was a desirable post. Our Embassy in Paris would not have been bad either.

But I was delighted to be assigned to the Intelligence Office in the First Naval District located in the Fargo Building, Boston, familiar to me from my recent CIC training. I decided to live in Cambridge, maybe make use of the Harvard library, and commute to work in Boston. I was as near to being at graduate school as my circumstances permitted.

I was lucky to find an apartment at 48 Boylston Street (now renamed for John F. Kennedy), the building a former Harvard dormitory. About two blocks north was Harvard Square. In the other direction Boylston Street led to the Lars Anderson Bridge over the Charles River and to the Harvard football stadium, Soldiers Field. For the next three years, I attended the Harvard home games there.

I enjoyed wandering around the Harvard campus, particularly on the lawns and among the trees in front of Eliot House, and reading by the Charles as the Harvard crews practiced. This was not at all a bad way to serve in the military.

Like Vikings They Went Forth... > CONTINUED FROM PAGE 1 traveled to France to directly join the Lafayette Escadrille, the most renowned unit of American aviators. Warren T. Hobbs ’19 and Ernest A. Giroux ’19 lost their lives while serving under the Indian-head symbol of the Escadrille.

When the United States entered the war, all but twenty-five undergraduates joined the Student Army Training Corps. The College built a massive trench system in the Mr. Farkas is junior at the College and the Editor-in-Chief of The Dartmouth Review.

athletic fields to train students in trench warfare, and patriotic displays became a common sight on the campus. Over 3,400 Dartmouth men from the class of 1883 to the class of 1922 served in the war, and 112 perished. Fifty-two faculty also served in various capacities.

While many students were not eager to enter World War Two, Dartmouth President Ernest Martin Hopkins was an early advocate of military intervention against Adolf Hitler and Japanese aggression. He created the American Defense Dartmouth Group in early 1940, which served both as an interventionist think tank

and an organizing committee for Dartmouth mobilization.

By 1942, Hopkins had restructured the College to accommodate the war. He welcomed the V-7 and V-12 programs, which trained young men to be Navy and Marine officers, onto campus. Most residents on campus were participants in these programs, and civilian student enrollment sunk to the low 200s at one point.

Before the campus became a landlocked Naval base, a few Dartmouth students chose to strike out for Europe on their own. Eight Dartmouth men joined the King’s Royal Rifle Brigade, an elite British unit descended from the 60 th

American Regiment, a provincial unit from the French and Indian Wars. Of these eight men, two fell in combat in North Africa and all were wounded. A few Dartmouth students signed with the Abraham Lincoln Brigades in Spain, one of whom died in combat. Many other Dartmouth students joined Allied armies, including some foreign students. Of particular note were the Chinese students who chose to return to their homeland to fight a brutal war with the Japanese. Two German Dartmouth alumni fought with the Nazis, one of which was captured and sent to a prisoner of war camp in

Canada.

In all, 11,091 Dartmouth men served in the Second World War. This number constituted over fifty percent of all living Dartmouth alumni and students at the conclusion of the war. 301 Dartmouth men died during their service in the war. The U.S. Army Air Corps’ number one and number three aces were both Dartmouth men, and many alumni served with distinction.

Dartmouth may not have a military tradition in the usual sense of the word, but its students and alumni have always been the first to answer their nation’s call. We can only hope this has not changed.

10 Thursday – June 9, 2016

The Dartmouth Review

FEATURES

ROTC at Dartmouth

V-12 CADETS Study a shipt model with an instructor.

Sandor Farkas Editor-in-Chief

Editor’s Note: a version of this article origionally appeared in a May 2014 issue of The Review.

Dartmouth’s Army Reserve Officers Training Corps, better known as ROTC (R-O-T-C, not “rot-cee”) rarely garners much attention from students, aside from the conspicuousness of its occasionally camouflage-clad members. ROTC trains students to become officers in the United States Army: upon graduation, many of them receive a commission and serve for varying lengths of time. In recent years, the program’s membership has fluctuated from ten to twenty cadets. While its presence on campus may seem insignificant, ROTC has a storied history reaching back 63 years that constitutes an important element of Dartmouth’s story.

Long before ROTC came to Dartmouth, the College on the Hill had a proud military tradition. Dartmouth, the only college to graduate classes during the American Revolutionary War, was the alma mater of Sylvanias Thayer, who went on to become known as the “Father of West Point.” Dartmouth men eagerly flocked to their nation’s banner during the American Civil War, even forming all-Dartmouth units. Most famously, Dartmouth men beat their countrymen to the punch by sending an ambulance corps to France long before the United States entered Mr. Farkas is junior at the College and the Editor-in-Chief of The Dartmouth Review.

the First World War. Many of our alumni volunteered their services to the British and French armies during that war, and a Dartmouth man was the first American to fall in that Great War. The College even constructed an entire trench system on campus for training purposes. The entire Dartmouth family came together to fight the war: almost every Dartmouth student volunteered for military training in a proto-ROTC program.

Thousands of students and alumni and dozens of faculty served in the war, with many never returning to complete their studies. This period saw a Dartmouth that was willing to take the ideals of the classroom beyond the woods of Hanover. A group of young men who had internalized the lessons of morality and justice they had learned in Dartmouth’s halls strove to fight for their brothers and sisters in need (or perceived need).

During World War Two, President Ernest Martin Hopkins brought the Navy’s V-7 and V-12 programs to campus, which represented an early incarnation of Navy ROTC. The entire campus was militarized, the civilian student population dropped below 300. By the end of the war, the United States Army had reformed their program for educating young men attending colleges in the arts of warfare and leadership. After initial hesitation to adopt this “Reserve Officers Training Corps,” the trustees of Dartmouth College brought Navy ROTC to campus in 1946 and Army and Air Force ROTC in 1951.

All were immediate suc-

cesses: over 1,000 Dartmouth men, more than 40% of undergraduates, were enrolled that year. This heyday of ROTC saw around 200 men receive commissions as officers each year, and a full range of military, cultural, and geopolitical classes were offered by the ROTC department.

Dartmouth even became the second college after Norwich University to offer Mountain Warfare training. The 1960s saw a slight drop in commissioning, with “only” 100 students earning commissions each year, though ROTC remained popular as a way to develop leadership and other practical skills.

As the Vietnam War entered the American conscious and colleges nationwide began to divest themselves of military ties, students at Dartmouth pushed the College to reconsider its ROTC program. In 1967, around 250 cadets participated in ROTC out of a total of 3100 undergraduates.

Many chose ROTC to avoid conscription and as an assurance of the continuity of their studies. With the increasing scale of protests on campus in 1967, including one that had resulted in a nearly violent confrontation with police, the decision was made to hold the annual ROTC Armed Forces day parade in Memorial Stadium (named in honor of the Dartmouth men who fought in the First World War). A contemporary article even criticized the College for its perceived cowardice in the face of “fringe peaceniks.”

Their fears were shown to be well-founded when a mob of students sporting black armbands and chanting anti-war

slogans and songs formed within the stadium, though thirty policemen and state troopers kept them from harassing the cadets and their noise was drowned out by the military band. 1967 saw the continued success of ROTC: later that year, cadets gathered 1,040 pieces of clothing to send to Vietnamese children, proving further that the spirit of Dartmouth’s young officers was not one of hate.

Mounting pressure in 1969, this time from the faculty, resulted in ROTC classes losing their status as academic courses with credit. This decision came partially from the anti-war sentiments of the faculty and partially from a growing academic exclusivity that rejected the status of a military officer as equal to that of a professor. In April of 1969, a group of 200 students held a three-hour sit-in inside Parkhurst Hall demanding the expulsion of the ROTC program, all while keeping their actions within college regulations. When their demands were not met, a smaller group of less than 100 students occupied Parkhurst that May, demanding all faculty leave the building. Most did, locking their papers and personal effects in drawers as they left. Two senior officials refused to leave, and were forcibly removed by the students, who then barricaded themselves in. The College wasted no time in setting in motion a chain of legal proceedings, and, after being given many warnings and opportunities to leave of their own will, the protestors were arrested by police and state troopers who forced open the doors. Forty-five students were jailed and fined $100.

June 1969 saw a faculty resolve to terminate ROTC by the year 1973. In July of that year, the Air Force announced it would leave Dartmouth by

1971 instead, and the Army and Navy soon announced they would leave by 1970. At that time, 200 cadets remained in the program, more than at other elite colleges in the same circumstances. ROTC juniors were promised accelerated commissions, while other students were initially told they would no longer be able to receive commissions.

In actuality, it took until 1973 for Dartmouth to graduate its final Navy ROTC cadet.

After the tribulations of the early Vietnam War years and severe alumni pressure, the trustees voted to reinstate ROTC in 1975. The new program saw Dartmouth students training at Norwich University, a Senior Military Academy. 1981 saw the first Dartmouth student in over a decade graduate the college with a commission through ROTC as a second lieutenant.

In 1985, the Dartmouth Army ROTC program became a state detachment of the program at Norwich University, with the Navy and Air Force ROTC programs disappearing entirely. By the 1990s, ROTC maintained a steady enrolment averaging fifteen cadets.

In order for ROTC to return to campus, one important waiver was made. A specific exemption from the College’s policy against discrimination was written for ROTC, as at that time, the military still barred openly homosexual men and women from joining its ranks.

This caused an understandable stir and resulted in formal requests by President Freedman and the Trustees that the Department of Defense revise its policy. Dispute many ultimatums, nothing ever came of student demands to again shut down the program. Recent changes in legislation have since abolished this prohibition, and ROTC now welcomes students of every background.

President Truman Reads The Review.

Do You?

The Dartmouth Review

Thursday – June 9, 2016 11

FEATURES Men of Dartmouth They were mighty men of old That she nurtured at her side; Till like Vikings they went forth From the lone and silent North, And they strove, and they wrought, and they died; But the sons of old Dartmouth, The laurelled sons of Dartmouth, The Mother keeps them in her heart And guides their altar flame; The still North remembers them, The hill-winds know their name, And the granite of New Hampshire Keeps the record of their fame; And the granite of New Hampshire Keeps the record of their fame.

DICK HALL Part of the Baker Library memorial containing a canvass fragment from his ambulence and his temporary grave marker.

BARBED WIRE AND AN ABATTIS replace goals and turf on Dartmouth’s fields, allowing students to train for service in the First World War.

The Hill-Winds Know Their Names

In consideration of Memorial Day, this issue is dedicated not only to the thousand members of the class of 2016 who are leaving these halls, but to those Dartmouth graduates who can never return to them. In its early days, The Dartmouth Review printed a Memorial Day list of those laureled sons of Dartmouth who made the ultimate sacrifice for their country in its hour of need. Unfortunately, the College stopped keeping track of these names after the Second World War, likely because more Dartmouth men gave their lives in that war (301) than graduated in the average war-time class. While “Men of Dartmouth” implies that “the granite of New Hampshire keeps the record of their fame,” there is no current list of those Dartmouth students and alumni who fell in combat. All those who perished in the Iraq Wars and the War on Terror do not appear in available lists, and neither do those who died in the wars before the American Civil War. In lieu of a list that honors all of the Dartmouth fallen, The Review presents these images as meager tribute to those “mighty men of old.” The granite may be worn smooth, but the hill winds still known their names.

V-E DAY President Hopkins prepapres to adress the student body on the historic occasion.

12 Thursday – June 9 2016

The Dartmouth Review

THE LAST WORD GORDON HAFF’S

COMPILED BY CHARLES C.W. JANG AND SANDOR FARKAS

“There is always room at the top.”

–Daniel Webster

“Everything starts somewhere, though many physicists disagree. But people have always been dimly aware of the problem with the start of things. They wonder how the snowplough driver gets to work, or how the makers of dictionaries look up the spelling of words.”

–Terry Prachett

“We may be tossed upon an ocean where we can see no land – not, perhaps, the sun or stars. But there is a chart and a compass for us to study, to consult, and to obey. The chart is the Constitution.”

–Daniel Webster “The voice of one crying in the desert: Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the wilderness the paths of our God.” –Isaiah 40:3

“You have brains in your head.

You have feet in your shoes.

You can steer yourself any direction you choose.”

–Dr. Seuss, Oh, The Places You’ll Go!

“When you want to build a boat, do not start to gather wood, cut boards, and distribute the work, but raise in the hearts of men the desire for the sea, great and vast.”

– Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

“There are no rules of architecture for a castle in the clouds.”

–Gilbert K. Chesterton

“Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once.

Of all the wonders that I yet have heard, It seems to me most strange that men should fear; Seeing that death, a necessary end, Will come when it will come.”

–William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar

“Why should I care about posterity? What’s posterity ever done for me?”

–Groucho Marx “If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever.”

–George Orwell “Revolutions are the only political events which confront us directly and inevitably with the problem of beginning.”

–Hannah Arendt

“If we work upon marble, it will perish; if we work upon brass, time will efface it; if we rear temples, they will crumble into dust; but if we work upon immortal minds and instill into them just principles, we are then engraving that upon tablets which no time will efface, but will brighten and brighten to all eternity.”

–Daniel Webster

BARRETT’S MIXOLOGY

The Sleep-Deprived Editor Ingredients

• Water • Lou’s coffee • I think that’s tequila

Even though the curtains are blocking out the feint rays of morning, I can still feel the basement room grow lighter. Or, I am dehydrated and the lightness is in my head. I would go get a cup of water, but Lou’s is almost open and I might as well wait to get up from my chair until I can get a cup of coffee.

That said, I can’t really tell if I’m tired or not. I have had decent sleep lately, but I have been editing since noon. I had intended to take a break for drinks, but I’m pretty sure my friends meant five in the evening, not five in the morning. It’s a little late for that now.

I check the drawer for some alcohol. None. I check the refrigerator.

None. I scour the office until I find a handle. It appears to be alcohol, possibly of the tequila variety. My mother told me never to drink tequila.

It’s not that she didn’t want me to drink, it’s just that she can’t stand the stuff. I think that’s because she drank some when she was pregnant with me. Maybe that’s why I’m hallucinating.

Now that I’m up, I go fill an empty (used) paper cup with water. I drink some, and I glance at the clock. It’s 5:54. I head over to Lou’s, and I order a coffee. I’m usually the KAF type, but these are not the usual KAF hours.

I take a few sips, and I burn my tongue. I don’t feel it. I add some water to cool it down, then add a little tequila to recoup the flavor. Then, I’m back to work.

— Breaker Morant

“What love commences can be finished by God alone.”

–Victor Hugo, Les Miserables “I will not say, do not weep, for not all tears are an evil.”

–J. R. R. Tolkien “Education is simply the soul of a society as it passes from one generation to another.”

–Gilbert K. Chesterton “There is always need of persons not only to discover new truths, and point out when what were once truths are true no longer, but also to commence new practices, and set the example of more enlightened conduct, and better taste and sense in human life.”

–John Stuart Mill “In the interests of our people, and of other people in this part of the world, let’s work together. Why do we have to exclude people because of their colour, whether they are white, brown, yellow or black? Let’s accept that we are all a part of Africa, all part of the world. Let’s all work together. And the more we can get people to accept that philosophy, the greater the hope for the whole world.”

–Ian Smith “And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness?”

–Hebrews 3:17

ADVERTISEMENT