LETTER: Criticism of college system merely excuse for one's own uninvolvement

---

by Travis Dunbar

---

To the editor:

Last week's Thresher saw an editorial from Amy McKay ("College system limits social life at Rice"), an attack of the college system.

Her letter was rife with inconsistencies and surprising assumptions.

I would like to begin with two corrections.

One, McKay states that there are only two campus-wide dances. Esperanza, Archi-Arts and Rondelet still exist, along with college-sponsored parties with dancing almost every week.

Two, she says there are "a few" campus-wide organizations. The 1995-96 Student Handbook lists 116.

McKay has an interesting take on the lot of the freshmen at Rice. First she states that, "We are basically locked ... into the same set of 90 or so people for four years," implying that each college class is isolated not only from peers at other colleges but also from older stu- dents in their own college.

This is patently false. The college system, from O-Week on, helps to bring students of different ages together.

McKay seems to agree, describing the freshmen's arrival as "refreshing."

And then she goes on to propose a freshman dorm. Odd. At a time when many say that O-Week is too patronizing to freshmen, I wouldn't think the message to send is, "You're not ready to socially interact with college students. Go live by yourselves, freshmen."

McKay continues by propagating the wonderful stereotype of Rice students as antisocial.

"The typical Rice student does not have the effervescent social skills, or at least does not use them, to regularly meet new people at parties," or classes, as she also says.

Now I might not be "effervescent," but I still think I'm capable of striking up conversation with a relative stranger.

But more to the point, what does this have to do with the college system? If there were no colleges, people would go to parties alone to meet people? Classes would be intellectual singles bars? Doubtful.

Similarly, I hardly think "the sheer inconvenience of maintaining a friendship with someone at another college" would be alleviated if we called the colleges dorms.

But regardless, I think a friendship is worth an occasional five-minute walk.

The last and perhaps most puzzling of McKay's arguments concerns the very friendships she so wants to foster.

She states that "if you don't meet your significant other early on in your college, you probably never will."

Another surprise. I thought that most people were at Rice to get an education, grow and hopefully make some good friends. Hey, if you fall in love, great, but for the mate market, might I suggest UT?

But just as she bemoans a lack of enduring, passionate relationships, she suggests shuffling the colleges every year.

In this way we meet more people, get more friends and "new ideas for parties."

I've got some damn good friends, and I'd be pretty irritated if I were told we were all heading to different colleges for our last year at Rice.

But, I suppose if there were a cool, new, campus party (maybe Late '80s), it would all be worth it.

Opportunities abound to meet new, interesting people within and without one's college.

All it takes is a nominal amount of effort to say hello or pick up a phone. McKay's editorial is just another example of someone using the college system as a scapegoat for his or her own apathy.

Travis Dunbar

Jones '96

This item appeared in the Opinion section of the February 16, 1996 issue.

Copyright © 1996 The Rice Thresher. All Rights Reserved.
This document may be distributed electronically, provided that it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice. However, it cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of:
The Rice Thresher, Rice University, 6100 Main, Houston, TX, 77005, USA.