 |
||
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The Yale Alumni Magazine is owned and operated by Yale Alumni Publications, Inc., a nonprofit corporation independent of Yale University. The content of the magazine and its website is the responsibility of the editors and does not necessarily reflect the views of Yale or its officers. |
|
Congratulations to Yale’s alumni for electing Margaret H. Marshall '76JD to serve as a fellow of the Yale Corporation (Milestones, July/August). Living in Massachusetts has many pluses, among them its culture and the great beauty from Cape Cod to the Berkshires. Perhaps of greatest importance, however, are the history and laws of this Commonwealth. The Constitution of Massachusetts is the oldest living document of its type in the world, having been written by John Adams in 1781. Margaret H. Marshall, as chief justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, wrote the majority opinion of the court this year upholding same-sex marriage. What our constitution says, in part, is that “all people are created free and equal and have certain natural rights, among which may be reckoned the right of enjoying their lives and liberties and obtaining their safety and happiness. Equality under the law shall not be denied or abridged.” What Justice Marshall’s opinion said is that our constitution means just that, and to deny the right of a man to marry a man or a woman a woman—or to call their union by a different name—would be to apply to them second-class citizenship inconsistent with the certainty of equality under the law. President George W. Bush has publicly taken Justice Marshall to task. He has encouraged the people of Massachusetts to overturn her ruling through a constitutional amendment and thereby establish for our commonwealth a substandard class of citizen. Further, President Bush now urges the U.S. Congress to amend the U.S. Constitution and to deny equal access under the law at the federal level, while denying the individual states the right to decide this matter without federal interference. I believe that Margaret Marshall’s wisdom will prevail. From her tenure as a fellow of the Corporation, we can only expect great things, and I wish her all the best. I was dismayed to learn that Margaret H. Marshall was elected to the Yale Corporation. I don’t believe she can understand the depth of contempt that thinking Americans have for judges who usurp legislative functions and impose their personal views in adjudicating public policy. A pox on the Yale alumni who voted for this unworthy fellow of the Corporation.
Protecting the Accused After reading “Lux, Veritas, and Sexual Trespass” (July/August), I found myself disturbed by Emily Bazelon’s failure to consider the gravity of sexual harassment accusations for those who are accused. The point appears only as an afterthought in a quotation from Harvey Silverglate: “I don’t understand what’s educational about a process where at the end someone can get thrown out of their job.” A harsh reality underlies this quip, although Ms. Bazelon pays it no attention. A charge of sexual harassment is a potentially damning accusation that can cause psychological, mental, and social damage and even the loss of one’s career. Victims of sexual harassment incur terrible detriments; so too do the accused, especially if the charges prove to be false or misleading. Unfortunately, the senior Sexual Harassment Grievance Board member does not seem especially interested in determining the veracity of the charges before him. Witness Peter Parker’s comment: “Typically, we sit down with the faculty member or the student who has been accused and say, ‘What the hell did you think you were doing?’” By Professor Parker’s own lights, the priority is hectoring the accused first, and worrying about his or her potential innocence later. That way he never has a “second problem” with a possible offender. This “guilty until proven innocent” mentality undermines the legitimacy of the entire process. I am not sure which is worse, Professor Parker’s sanctimony or Ms. Bazelon’s failure to acknowledge it as such. I cannot even suggest that any of the accused did not receive due process, because these words conjure the image of a trial, something the board clearly entertains no pretense of offering. Its members can therefore rest easy in refusing to allow accuser and accused to confront each other through legal representatives. Yet the board metes out suspensions and firings. I say all of this not to trivialize the terrible physical, mental, and emotional damage sexual transgressors inflict upon their victims. On the contrary, I hope the administration continues to search for effective ways to talk frankly about sex and sex transgression within the Yale community. Given the sensitivity of the subject, any sexual harassment grievance procedure must aspire to the highest standards of judiciousness. Only then will the university have positioned itself to address actual instances of sexual harassment with the appropriate measures.
A Salon for White Men? It is wonderful to see that School of Architecture dean Robert A. M. Stern '65MArch is regularly gathering “architectural luminaries” in his salon at 964 Chapel Street (Scene on Campus, July/August). But why are there so few women and people of color at this gathering? Is Yale not yet ready to welcome a more diverse group of faculty, visiting critics, and guests associated with the school’s final reviews? Are these the only role models available to guide the more diverse students now enrolled in our design schools? Indeed, are there finally more students of color and women enrolled than when I graduated in 1973? This is a profession that significantly lags behind others in reflecting the society we serve, and the photo only reinforces a stereotype that success in the architectural profession is synonymous with being white, middle-aged, and male.
Poor Choice of Words? I was happy to see discussion of the subject of financial aid in your magazine (Q&A: Rick Levin, July/August). Several aspects of this article, however, seemed to miss the mark. First, to discuss required parental contributions (Levin cites a figure of $500 for families with incomes under $30,000) without discussing the size of the loans taken out by the students of these parents is to paint a very incomplete picture. If a prospective student will have to take out a loan each year exceeding the annual income of his or her family, how much will it matter that the required parental contribution is limited to $500? The enrollment statistic cited in the article appears to answer this question. Secondly, the use of the words “the poor” in the title “Yale and the Poor” was in poor taste. It was unnecessary, and virtually no one likes to be referred to as “the poor.” If Yale is committed to accessible, merit-based education, it is time to turn a more scrutinous eye to the real significance of its “need-blind” admissions policy and its financial aid policies.
Evelyn Hutchinson, the Man It was good to be reminded of Evelyn Hutchinson’s scientific achievements in the recent issue of your magazine (“The Place Where Ecology Was Born.” July/August). But Evelyn was not only a great scientist but also a man of charming wit, something very close to sanctity, and deep principle. After his wife Margaret and I performed a particularly overripe song by Strauss for him, Evelyn commented, “‘commencement de siècle’ is as valid an aesthetic category as ‘fin de siècle.’” In a burst of sophomoric fatuity I once remarked that I had realized that I was brighter than at least some of the population, to which he replied very seriously, “Yes, but it’s fatal to act on that realization.” Although he was deeply involved with teaching and research, his daily care for Margaret never faltered during her long deterioration from Alzheimer’s. He discouraged the award of the National Medal of Science because he refused to accept it from the hand of Richard Nixon—a fastidiousness that the current Yale administration might profit from pondering.
More on Bush, Kerry, and Yale Jacob Weisberg '86 claims that both John Kerry and George W. Bush did not absorb much during their undergraduate years at Yale. Obviously, Mr. Weisberg didn’t get as much as he thinks from his own Yale education. In his article “Missed Opportunities” (May/June), he attributed quotes to me that I never made [“George Bush is in this class! This is the one for us!”] and for which he never called me for verification. As resourceful and clever as he claims to be as a researcher, you would think he would check his sources. Surely he learned this in one of his many worthwhile classes at Yale. For the record, I never trolled for classes during the so-called “shopping period” and I never led the football team into any class. I reserved my leadership for the playing field. It seems to me that Mr. Weisberg possesses a bit too much of the “intellectual adventure” he claims Mr. Kerry and Mr. Bush are lacking. P.S. I am a Bill Bradley Democrat. Jacob Weisberg replies: Apologies to Calvin Hill for not calling to get his version. Memories differ on this one. My source was David Frum’s book The Right Man, which reports that George W. Bush told this “shopping period” story on himself, to another Yale classmate. As it happens, the writer Jim Sleeper '69 recently wrote in the Los Angeles Times that he was present on the same occasion and witnessed the exchange. Sleeper remembers that Bush replied to Calvin Hill’s jibe with a “grinning thumbs-up.” Your cover story (“For Country,” May/June) failed to analyze the presidential candidates and squandered magazine space with an irrelevant Yale-Harvard comparison. The article shifted from its titular subject of U.S. presidential politics to its revealed purpose of putting Yale on a pedestal, “the most fertile soil” for nurturing public service. Yale is not good because it is better than Harvard. Yale is a strong academic institution because that is what it is. Counting U.S. presidents per undergraduate class as a measure of institutional worth is ridiculous. “For Country” did include some insightful bits: a sidebar on Howard Dean, sarcastic humor by Christopher Buckley, details on the presidential contenders. Please focus future articles on the men (or women) themselves. Political biography can help readers sort out their once and future leaders. Your magazine is moving into questionable territory when it starts publishing articles that are personally critical of our own alumni. In “Missed Opportunities,” Jacob Weisberg harshly criticized both presidential candidates and also managed to include, in passing, an implicitly sarcastic remark about one of the greatest football players in the history of the university. I am a lifelong Democrat, but I have long felt that the many personal attacks directed at President Bush have been grossly excessive. In the case of Mr. Weisberg’s comments, the attacks are simply petty. Does it really matter if someone did not follow in his father’s footsteps and join a varsity team? George W. Bush should be commended for his contribution to intramural sports through his membership on several Davenport teams. And if Skull and Bones is such a “silly institution,” why does it matter if he initially leaned toward a different senior society? In the case of John Kerry (for whom I look forward to voting in November), it is absurd to portray his presidency of the Political Union as nothing more than a huge opportunity for networking. That “steady parade of congressmen, senators, and governors” only existed because the officers of the society made it happen. I remember an endlessly fascinating program of speeches and debates, and I also remember that in my freshman year John Kerry was in charge of it all—surely a great achievement. On the wider question of intellectual adventure, there must be many of us who wish we had taken greater advantage of the opportunities that we had. But Yale in all its variety—academic work, peer interaction, political debate, etc.—enabled every student to develop his approach to life, with an appreciation of all that the world has to offer. I should think that this applies as much to our presidential candidates as to anyone else. Jacob Weisberg has a myopic view of Yale, which fails to account for the most significant source of learning Yale offers: Yalies. Certainly, lectures and classrooms have much to offer students. But it is the people of Yale—the students and visiting alumni, guests, and leaders—that make Yale a unique place, offering students the rare opportunity to tap into a wealth of diverse experiences, perspectives, and ambitions. To truly embrace one’s Yale education is to engage with the individuals that compose the Yale community. And connecting with one’s fellow Yalies takes place most meaningfully outside of the lecture hall or the Cross Campus Library “weenie bin.” It takes place in the dining hall, in singing groups, among the Herald staff, and yes, in the YPU and on the soccer team. These kinds of experiences constitute an “intellectual adventure” of the most significant sort, for they are an exploration of people, relationships, passions, and life. Contrary to Weisberg’s contention, John Kerry exemplifies an Eli who embraced the full breadth of his Yale education, seizing the opportunity to engage with the Yalies that bring the lux to Yale. Yale’s tradition of service existed long before the now-sanctified Kingman Brewster, as his own comments and the comments of William Sloane Coffin quoted in Warren Goldstein’s article (“For Country,” July/August) indicate. I have never forgotten the address in 1960 to my freshman class of 1964 by President A. Whitney Griswold, which was essentially as follows: “Welcome to Yale. It is a privilege for you to be here. Over the next four years we will educate you. We will give you the best education in the world. We do not do this for your personal enjoyment or enrichment. We do it as a part of Yale’s sacred mission to educate the future generations of the leaders of this nation and the world. After you graduate we expect you to assume the mantle of this responsibility from us in all areas of our nation’s life: in politics, education, business, the professions, and the arts. You are the next thousand leaders of the new generation. Work hard and be worthy of the trust we have placed in you because the future of our nation and the world will be what you make it.” It was heady stuff and the subject of much late-night conversation as we celebrated our new freedom as freshmen in all-night bull sessions. A member of a class ahead of us came in to visit one of my roommates and heard us talking about it. In a matter-of-fact way, he said that of course that was why we were here. He had come to Yale expecting to become president of the United States. I was blown away that someone would have the courage to think something like that, let alone say it out loud. He later became a governor, U.S. senator, and president of a university. With that history, I have had no question why there are so many Yalies in the forefront of our nation’s affairs today, although the crush for the presidency this year is coincidental; I suppose there are other schools. But I believe that if the magazine broadened its research on the subject and just counted the number of Yalies in leadership roles other than the presidency, in all areas of state, local, and federal government, it would be astounding how deep the ethic of service runs. I strongly object to your article “For Country” stating George W. Bush was “elected president.” After receiving fewer votes than his opponent, Mr. Bush was selected president by a Supreme Court packed with judges appointed by his father and his mentor. If this sham had taken place in Africa, Mr. Bush and his ilk would still be howling about it and insisting we cut off aid to such an illegitimate regime. Apropos of Yale’s pride in presidential candidates, my reaction: George Bush II is a disgrace to God, to Country, and to Yale. His political ascendance has more to do with family connections and wealth than with his Yale (and Harvard) education. As for Kerry, he may be smart and accomplished, but clearly lacks social IQ and principles. Yale can take no pride in these two, and it is to its disgrace that it saw fit to award Bush II an honorary degree—even if we all can surmise the expedient reasons. Before we become too self-congratulatory about Skull and Bones’s apparent lock on the Presidency for the next four years—and about Yale’s wise choice of chaplain and university president in an era where many of us had hope that the United States could become a caring, moral, and responsible society following reason and law—we ought to ask whether Yale is now following a course that promotes the real spirit of “public service.” In 1980, I was overjoyed when our class committee selected Senator Bill Bradley (though a Princeton graduate) and me to deliver the Class Day orations on themes that would stress commitment to community. Yet it turned out not to be my best Yale memory. Many in the graduating class hissed or booed both of our speeches. The concept of public service that was instilled in many of my classmates seemed to be more about fulfilling a desire for power and prestige than about using our special skills and position to build a more humane and tolerant world. Two months after graduation, I was guilty of the same. I marched myself into the office of the prime minister of Mauritius and into the country’s fishing villages, spouting theories about democracy and my ideas for the country’s policies from my senior essay that had won the Charles Washburn Clarke Prize in Comparative Politics—an essay written without ever having visited the country. One of the biggest shocks of my life was meeting the people whose lives I believed I could simply run based on book-learned theories. Yale had left me unprepared, and I am sure my youthful arrogance was not much different from that of some fellow alums who have marched into democracy-building or war with similar preparation. In international development work, I find it easier for a Yale graduate to be offered work for the World Bank and U.N. and U.S. development agencies, which share a common top-down world view, than from more innovative and visionary public service organizations that can demand much more. Though I work for both, much of my time is actually spent fighting the mistrust that the various publics who are to be “served” have of Yale and other elite university graduates, while trying to educate my colleagues at the major development agencies to listen to the people they will “serve” and to look more at empirical results and apply logic rather than try to defend book-learned doctrines. Given the lack of Yale-graduated leaders today who can match the wisdom, accessibility, depth, and vision, or even the morality, of William Sloane Coffin and Kingman Brewster, perhaps the real question is, What has Yale learned about public service? Recently the Yale Alumni Magazine has carried pieces disparaging both John Kerry and George W. Bush for refusing to divulge their Yale undergraduate senior society’s secrets. A letter in July/August condemns their silence as contrary to the national interest. But would one really wish to commend a person who breached the confidences of his or her private club just to please the curious or get votes? I would be more concerned about public officials who revealed the identity of, say, CIA agents to the media for political purposes; or who concealed important public information such as the makeup of an advisory committee developing national energy policy. Such actions clearly would be against the national interest and disloyal to the American people.
Vive la Différence! If Anne Fadiman, the new Francis Writer in Residence (Milestones, July/August), can teach Yalies to say “different from” instead of “different than,” she indeed will have achieved a noble aim. I can’t tell you how many times my wife (Columbia Journalism '67) and I have listened to the News Hour on PBS, interrupting the TV every three minutes or so with choruses of “FROM!” Perhaps in time Yale will hire someone who can teach every student to say “nuclear” rather than “nucular.” Let us hope so. A footnote, in passing, to Christopher Swanson’s letter (July/August) about the makeup of the Yale Corporation: Of course some constituencies are overrepresented. That is hardly new. At one time, if memory serves, the Corporation included three men (Fred Dent, Ed Woodsum, Vern Loucks) who had played the same position—end—on the football team. Like Anne Fadiman, I, too, have been annoyed by people saying “different than” instead of “different from.” My favorite peeve is “try and,” which is heard just about every day on TV and radio. Another one is the love affair with “as well,” which is used to end almost every sentence, whether applicable or not. For example, I heard a weather forecaster say, “Also, tomorrow it will be cloudy as well.” Good luck, Anne, in your mission.
Kudos to Ken Thanks for your July/August issue, especially Bruce Fellman’s piece on Linsley Pond (“The Place Where Ecology Was Born”). We happily see the magazine thanks to our son (JE '04), and liked the commencement article. I only wish that an absolute high point of the weekend (along with that unexpected breathtaking clip of Willie Mays’s brilliant catch) had received more than a rather perfunctory “Ken Burns looked to history in his Class Day address.” Of all the speeches I’ve heard during 45 years in academe, this stands at or very near the top—and my sense is that a strong majority of those hearing it felt similarly. Burns put everything he had, from Lincoln to his graduating daughter, into an eloquent, passionate address that made us proud to be Yale parents, just as Garry Trudeau’s now-famous “differently enabled” Class Day address did when our daughter graduated (JE '91). It’s good to have Burns’s words online.
Head Counts In Findings (July/August), you had a summary of a research report concerning the risk of strokes in people who lost their jobs near retirement age. There were 8 strokes in 457 people who were laid off, or 1.75 percent, and 67 strokes in the 3,763 “controls,” or 1.78 percent. There is no difference between the two groups, unless there is an error in your figures. The figures are not erroneous, but they are misleading, and we shouldn’t have used them out of context. Participants who left the labor force voluntarily during the study were removed from the sample, so the number of participants in the study changed over six years. The incidence of strokes in the group of laid-off people is in fact more than twice that of the control group.—Eds.
What Can’t Coffin Do? Robert K. Reynolds '45W points out in the July/August Letters that Bill Coffin (“Crisis of Conscience,” March/April) is an excellent pianist. I might add that Reverend Coffin is also an expert yodeler, as I can attest. In 1956 or thereabout, I broadcast a concert in honor of the centenary of music at Yale as a staff member of WYBC. On that occasion Reverend Coffin displayed his skill as an Alpine vocalist. President A. Whitney Griswold also participated in the concert, strumming in the front row of a large banjo band.
When Yale Snubbed a King David Boyle’s letter in the May/June issue concerning Dr. Martin Luther King (“Old Yale,” Jan./Feb.) leads me to share the following. When I was a student at the Divinity School back in the late 1970s I asked a senior faculty member why Dr. King had never delivered the Lyman Beecher Lectures on Preaching. The faculty member’s response was that Dr. King “wasn’t prominent enough.” I was so shocked at this response. How prominent does one have to be? Dr. King was one of the towering figures of the twentieth century in both church and civil life. Yale made a huge mistake with this one.
Corrections In our July/August Letters section, we reported that there are two Yale alumni currently serving as governors of U.S. states: George Pataki '67 of New York and Bob Taft '63 of Ohio. We forgot to include Gary Locke '72 of Washington. In the Class of 1954’s 50th reunion report (July/August), we erroneously referred to reunion chair Joel Smilow, presenter of the class’s record-breaking gift to Yale, as Joel Schiavone. In our article on G. Evelyn Hutchinson and Linsley Pond (“The Place Where Ecology Was Born,” July/August), we referred to an animal pictured with Hutchinson as an African tailless monkey. The creature was in fact a potto, an African primate but not a monkey.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
||
©1992–2012, Yale Alumni Publications, Inc. All rights reserved. Yale Alumni Magazine, P.O. Box 1905, New Haven, CT 06509-1905, USA. yam@yale.edu |
||