ELEMENTARY, MY DEAR WATSON
As an English major and, for many years, a college-level English teacher, I was naturally interested in "From the Bard to Beloved" (September Bulletin). I am more than slightly appalled by the sheer number of courses offered in the English Department. Without having seen a catalog, I wonder whether Swarthmore is offering too much of a multicultural cafeteria with not enough delving into the truly great writers.
The list of current authors was bemusing. I wonder greatly about including writers such as Raymond Chandler, Conan Doyle, Susan Glaspell, Sue Grafton, Dashiell Hammett, Felicia Hemans, Alfred Hitchcock, Kipling, and Jules Verne. Kipling and Doyle are good, but who needs to study and discuss them? Darwin, Queen Elizabeth, Claude Levi-Strauss, Marx, Thomas Merton, Nietzsche, and Max Weber belong in other disciplines.
In my day (as we all say), there were fewer courses, but all of them probed deeply into the required texts, and most of them were so stimulating that graduate school was a big letdown. But we obtained a solid and thorough basis for future study and teaching, plus the ability to read critically. I can read Sherlock Holmes on my own, thank you.
Louise Zimmerman Forscher '44
Exeter, N.H.
AS GREAT AS ... LAGERLÖF?
One of the things I learned at Swarthmore was a respect for the meaning of words. One that I found particularly misused in "From the Bard to Beloved" was "great." Surely, in describing writers, it is a word that should be used with the greatest discrimination--and, to be safe, hardly at all. To call Toni Morrison, talented and seductive as she is, "great" is really stretching things. Her greatness seems to be based primarily on the fact that she was awarded the Nobel Prize, which puts her in the exalted company of Sinclair Lewis, Selma Lagerlöf, and Maurice Maeterlinck, among others--all of them great?
I thought Swarthmore might somehow, with its Quaker background, have evaded the worst of political correctness and the vagaries of fashion, but I find it a proud ringleader. Oh dear (sigh)!
Stanley Baron '43
London
DISTURBING THE PEACE
Reading about Professor Emerita Kathryn Morgan ("Disturbing the Peace of Racism," September Bulletin) was truly inspirational. Her courage and spirit are exactly the ideals that Swarthmore should hope to embody.
What a shame, then, that the article did not recognize how Swarthmore has failed to embody those ideals. Beyond honoring Morgan's life, the article implicitly congratulates the College for its emphasis on diversity. If we are to be proud of Kathryn Morgan's triumph as a professor, however, let us not forget that the only reason Morgan was able to build a legacy at Swarthmore was because she won a lawsuit against the College to gain tenure. Surely this is not something worthy of self-promotion or congratulation.
The recruitment and granting of tenure to minority professors has not been pushed enough by the student body or pursued earnestly enough by the administration. Swarthmore's percentage of minority professors is still below any level to be proud of noting in an alumni magazine article.
Perhaps the greatest good that can come out of the article is that alumni, students, and administration will heed Morgan's example by "disturbing the peace of racism" to push for more minorities on the faculty.
John Dolan '01
Swarthmore
COLOR BLIND
I went through Swarthmore color blind, as only a middle-class white man is allowed to do in our society. In only the last decade has my own racism and privilege become apparent to me. Swarthmore taught me many things, but seriously thinking about racism was not one of them. I'm very glad to hear that this is less the case now than when I was a student.
Ronald Diamond '68
Madison, Wis.
GENTLENESS OF CHARACTER
Dean Janet Smith Dickerson is one of the few Swarthmore administrators I remember by name. She was very kind to me when I was struggling for purpose and direction during my college years. I was pleased to hear about her appointment at Princeton (September "Collection") and to see her portrait. It captures her gentleness and steadiness of character.
Shirley Kathryn Holmes Woods '87
Sewanee, Tenn.
CONSORTING WITH THE DEVIL
A few weeks ago, we received a call from a telemarketer for MBNA [Maryland National Bank Association]. I would have told her we don't respond to telephone solicitations had she not also made the arresting statement that Swarthmore College asked her to call. For that reason, I cooperated--until she requested my Social Security number and my mother's maiden name. Because such information provides access to private financial accounts, I refused to answer. She promised an application through the mail, and, a few days later, a credit card came--with my name spelled incorrectly.
In the meantime, I called the College and learned that Swarthmore has indeed made its name available to sell credit cards through telemarketing, providing that the College share in the profits. We strongly regret and protest that decision.
In addition to Swarthmore's many other assets, it was founded on spiritual values, including a special commitment to social conscience and ethics. Through the years, these values have played a major part in Swarthmore's leadership in American education. Surely those values should not be abandoned now. Swarthmore's decision to participate in the growing evil of telemarketing is much like consorting with the devil. This ethical point alone would seem adequate reason for Swarthmore to abandon this method of fund-raising.
Swarthmore has such loyal supporters that it has thrived without need of commercial telemarketing. One must question whether it is needed now. More important, should it be introduced at the risk of losing a significant part of this loyal support? Swarthmore can never know how much alumni contributions are reduced because of donor reactions to this commercial approach.
If one looks at the bottom line, MBNA is the only sure winner in this matter. Swarthmore itself has far too much to lose--in both its traditional principles and traditional financial support--to engage in this highly questionable, and ultimately divisive, mode of fund-raising.
Virginia Stern Brown '49
Kenneth Brown '47
San Francisco
Diane Crompton, director of advancement operations, replies: The College's decision to allow the Maryland National Bank Association (MBNA) to market a Swarthmore credit card was not driven by expectations of enormous financial gain but rather by the desire to give Swarthmore alumni an opportunity to identify with and promote the College every time they use a credit card. Only a tiny fraction of each purchase made with these cards accrues to the College, and it is being added to endowment for financial aid.
We chose MBNA because the bank shares the College's high standards regarding the privacy of alumni information. MBNA received only names, addresses, and telephone numbers--not Social Security numbers or mothers' maiden names. This information was not sold to the bank, nor may MBNA transmit it to other parties. Our agreement is solely to promote the affinity card.
More than 230 individuals applied for the Swarthmore affinity card during two weeks of telemarketing in September, and more than 200 more have submitted applications by mail. Persons who do not wish to be solicited may be taken off the list on request. Please write to the Alumni and Gift Records Office, telephone (610) 328-8592, or e-mail records@swarthmore.edu.
WORK ETHIC
Joanne Weill-Greenberg's ['96] letter in the September Bulletin sparked vivid memories of what I found most disappointing about Swarthmore: the contrast between the Quaker tradition of humility and the judgmental rhetoric of many who would invoke the mantle of "social responsibility." Weill-Greenberg feels her two-year presence in Kensington doing "good, productive work with disempowered people" gives her the right to chastise Empowered Painters (June "Collection") for mentioning that some of their employees don't have the "right work ethic." After calling this a "moralistic judgment," invoking the dreaded "middle- and upper-class values" and describing her view of the correct attitude for a Swarthmore graduate, she concludes with the hope that they will change their "characterization" of the people from Kensington. I disagree.
I agree that work ethic is a social construct, but in the United States, there really is a "right work ethic" for success in sustainable jobs. It includes punctuality, treating others with respect and fairness, doing the promised work for the promised price, and finishing the job in a timely fashion. Despite their "cultural context," most North Philadelphians are certainly capable of applying the same standard.
Jan Menefee McDonnell '78
La Canada, Calif.
The person identified in the middle photograph on page 34 of the September Bulletin was actually William Howard '44. Thanks to Howard Bowman '44 for pointing this out. He also identified the "lovely lass" in the top photo as Zoe Steliotes Meisenhelder '45.
WRITE TO US
The Bulletin welcomes letters concerning the contents of the magazine or issues relating to the College. All letters must be signed and may be edited for clarity and space. Address your letters to: Editor, Swarthmore College Bulletin, 500 College Avenue, Swarthmore PA 19081-1390, or send by e-mail to bulletin@swarthmore.edu.
ALUMNI DIGEST / BACK PAGES/ BOOKS BY ALUMNI / COLLECTION / EDITOR'S NOTE / FEATURES / IN MY LIFE/ LETTERS / PROFILES / ARCHIVE / TALK BACK
Swarthmore College. All rights reserved. 2000