Amelia Meyer’s column (“A Poor Choice,” 3/17/09) criticized the University’s selection of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III as commencement speaker. Apparently he’s too conservative for her and many of her classmates.
In her words, “Graduation is should . . . not be about political ideology.” By objecting to Wilkinson’s selection because some or many of his views clash with hers, isn’t she committing the very sin she condemns?
This letter is in response to Kendra Kirk’s column (“Vive la France,” 3/18/2009). For over 60 years, France’s foreign policy has been guided by the goal of reducing America’s influence in Europe and the world, what many call “la hyperpuissance américaine”. An American-friendly president in the Elysée is a refreshing change, however, it would be a fallacy to assume that President Sarkozy is a sign of a fundamental shift in French foreign policy ideology. His government was forced to face down a vote of no confidence in April over French plans to moderately increase military support to Afghanistan. François Hollande (party socialist) accused the president of being a “lackey of Bush” and “folding under American pressure”. Almost any political commentator would agree that France’s reintegration into the command structure of NATO is a big step towards creating an independent European Union defense capability. Thus the dilemma arises. Europe taking a more proactive role in its own security would shift the burden from the US, however, French dreams of an autonomous defense capability for a more integrated EU (led by France) will undermine NATO. This dream will not see the light of day anytime soon with the skepticism of many pro-NATO EU members who prefer to look to the US for their security. However, instead of welcoming the affable Sarkozy with open arms, we should seriously contemplate the underlying French motives, the possibility of a stronger European defense capability, and the implications of a marginalized NATO for global security. Méfiez – vous de la France!
The true meaning of a recession may potentially be as confusing in the health world as it is in the world of economics. Studies have found that the worst recession of a generation actually could produce health benefits. Though a recession may provide indirect health benefits in the short run, other studies have found that a worsening economic climate actually can lead to lasting health problems after the downturn has ended.
The National Bureau of Economic Research defines a recession as the period between an economic high and an economic low. Recessions last for more than a few months and result in a decline in employment, gross domestic product, wholesale-retail sales and real income — income after it has been adjusted for inflation.
On a national level, mortality, obesity and heavy smoking decrease during recessions and increase during economic upturns, according to studies led by Christopher J. Ruhm, an economics professor at the University of North Carolina, Greensboro, and published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics and the Journal of Health Economics. A decline in smoking and obesity, in turn, leads to a fall in the mortality rate. The studies also theorized that shorter work days, sometimes culminating in unemployment, provide people with the time for lifestyle investments, such as improving health through diet and exercise.
In an e-mail, Ruhm suggested that these lifestyle investments occur less frequently during economic upturns because “people tend to get busy and pre-occupied and so they put their health on the ‘back burner.’”
The studies also found that during economic downturns, leisure-time physical activity increases, because people have more time to exercise. Ruhm said the current recession is slated to have the same health impacts seen previously — unless the economy worsens.
“The big question is how long this downturn lasts and how deep it is,” he said. “If we enter a very serious ‘depression-like’ downturn, then all bets are off.”
Other studies have shown that a struggling economy can lead to long-term health problems. Certain aspects of economic decline, depending on the duration and severity, accentuate some health concerns.
A study conducted by W. David McCausland, D. Cooper and Ioannis Theodossiou of the Centre for European Labour Market Research at the University of Aberdeen Business School in Aberdeen, Scotland, quantified the correlation between unemployment and good health duration. The study found that job losses, and, to a degree, reduced income negatively impact health during recessions and perpetuate decreased health quality in the future as well, even after the slumping economy picks up.
“Apart from the clear adverse effect of unemployment on physical and psychological health and wellbeing, there are also wider and longer lasting social costs that adversely impact [our] health,” McCausland stated in an e-mail. “For example, during spells of deep unemployment, things like crime and addiction increase. Even after the unemployment falls, criminal behavior and abuse of alcohol and drugs have become ingrained and so the adverse effects of these behaviors on health persist long after their cause has disappeared.”
The duration of a recession has been identified as one of the most important factors in determining how a downturn will affect health trends. While longer lasting recessions have been found to have long-term negative health impacts, some suggest that true depressions — an economic downturn where real GDP decreases by more than 10 percent — relinquish all health benefits.
“With low interest rates, those whose incomes are supplemented by saving — particularly pensioners — become worse off,” McCausland said. “Cutting down on health, food, and on fuel to heat the home may adversely affect this very vulnerable group … This would tend to widen [economic] inequality. Additionally, those with middle incomes may reduce their provision for pensions, and hence their future wellbeing may be adversely impacted — their income and health status may be worse than it could have been if they had saved more, and this is on top of the increased taxation they will have to pay in the future to pay off the debt burden incurred by the recent VAT cuts, bank bailouts, etc.”
In preparing for a long and severe recession, one of the most effective strategies is to tackle the individual influences of the recession head on, McCausland noted.
“During downturns, consumption falls — people have less to spend and credit is harder to find and so [people] can borrow less,” McCausland said. “This reduces people’s perceived well-being, but also may affect health in other ways — choosing “basic” products rather than “healthy” products in the supermarket for example.”
Still, others believe that short-term income reductions and unemployment from a brief recession may jumpstart health improvement and enable its continuation in place of the possible negative impacts of a longer recession.
“One issue is that short-term reductions in income may lead to some healthier behaviors, such as reductions in drinking and eating out,” Ruhm said.
McCausland, however, remained uncertain about a recession’s positive influence on one’s health.
“I think the jury’s out as to whether there could be a positive effect on health — perhaps by smoking or drinking less — as opposed to drinking the same and cutting back on fruit and vegetables,” McCausland said.
In addition to the physical and nutritional impacts associated with long-term recessions, stress and fear have been found to appear as psychological detriments. Increased levels of personal debt, McCausland said, often increase levels of stress and anxiety, which in turn can lead to increased levels of physical ailments.
“A good example could be mortgages — when people come off favorable fixed rate deals, they often struggle to get a new mortgage on as good a deal as they had previously. Or, if people have shorter working weeks, or lower income levels, they may struggle to repay loans — both mortgages and e.g. credit cards. The consequence of this may be increased anxiety from fear of not being able to repay, or at the worst case, fear of repossession of a home, and this has obvious negative psychological effects on health and well-being.”
To counter these negative impacts, Student Health Nutrition Educator Melanie Brede recommends creating a plan to save while staying healthy. Maintaining psychological health can be accomplished, by “recognizing your limits,” Brede said. “Take on only as many responsibilities as you truly have time for. Also, take care of yourself. Maintain regular exercise, adequate sleep, and healthy eating habits. Connect with others. Seek out supportive friends and family members.”
Some parts of medicine are relatively dull. Maintaining enthusiasm for high blood pressure and diabetes requires the endurance of a saint, or, say, a general practitioner. Other parts of medicine are unbelievably exciting but inevitably accompanied by some element of sheer terror. Take, for example, flesh-eating bacteria. Although reminiscent of a long-forgotten, sci-fi B-movie title, this actually is a recognized condition. Among medical circles, however, flesh-eating bacteria prefers the more scientifically-minded name of necrotizing fasciitis. Still, I think the former name more aptly captures the vicious and devastating nature of the disease. Even the most seasoned clinician has nightmares about flesh-eating bacteria.
So what is necrotizing fasciitis and how, exactly, does one contract it? Or better yet, how can one manage to steer clear of the disease? The good news is that necrotizing fasciitis is exceedingly uncommon, with an estimated incidence of one case for every 453,333 Americans per year. Take a look at the person to your left and the person to your right. Chances are, none of you will have to worry about this serious, albeit interesting, disease, but it’s always good to stay informed.
Necrotizing fasciitis is a bacterial infection that spreads unbelievably rapidly and leaves destruction in its wake. Many patients do not survive the first 24 hours, as the bacteria run rampant along deep tissue planes, taking no prisoners. Flesh-eating bacteria actually is somewhat of a misnomer, as the bacteria do not actually feed on tissue but instead release toxic substances that destroy the tissue and cause an inflammatory reaction.
The cause of this terrifying infection oftentimes can be traced to surgical wounds or foreign bodies, but many cases are idiopathic, which basically means no one’s really sure what the heck caused the disease. Nor does it matter, because the treatment is the same, and every minute counts. As with other bacterial infections, antibiotics are used, but the mainstay of treatment is surgery. Although crude, removing the infected tissue is absolutely vital, and this can mean amputating arms, legs or other body parts. Necrotizing fasciitis is a difficult infection to fight, and as a result, surgeons need to be aggressive. Needless to say, these operations are hardly cosmetic but can be life-saving.
Still, the CDC estimates that 20 percent of people affected by necrotizing fasciitis will die from the disease — although many estimates are much higher — and up to 80 percent of patients will suffer from something like losing a limb or the ability to walk.
Luckily, you have a better chance of being struck by lightning than coming down with necrotizing fasciitis. Still, a disease this fierce requires a certain level of awareness and even prevention. Certain conditions can predispose a person to acquire this infection, including diabetes, alcoholism, cancer and HIV/AIDS. Keeping yourself healthy can help protect you from the so-called flesh-eating bacteria and other untoward consequences as well. If you think you have a skin infection, some of the warning signs of this particular type of infection are rapid spread of the infection, numbness or purple discoloration of the skin and a crackling sensation — think Rice Krispies — when the skin is pressed, a phenomenon caused by gas-producing bacteria. If you are concerned about a skin infection, it’s always a good idea to seek help and seek help early.
Hopefully, this doesn’t give you another reason to lose sleep or contribute to the hypochondriasis already so prevalent among medical students and the Internet-savvy. Instead, impress your friends with this newly-acquired medical knowledge on the off-chance that the topic of conversation at your next cocktail or dinner party veers the way of flesh-eating bacteria. On second thought, first consider your audience. Sometimes flesh-eating bacteria are best left on the B-list movie screen.
Emily Graham is a University Medical student. She can be reached at e.graham@cavalierdaily.com.
Americans are finally taking environmentalism seriously. Individuals are making an effort by replacing plastic and paper bags with reusable cloth bags and buying hybrid vehicles. Obama pledged to create green jobs and a good chunk of the stimulus bill was allocated to make our economic infrastructure more ‘green.’
But there’s just one little, daily thing that makes us a whole lot less green than we realize: toilet paper. Most of us are using toilet paper, facial tissue and paper towels made from virgin tree fibers. The virgin fibers are what make toilet paper and tissues so fluffy. Fluffiness is the one quality that is difficult to sacrifice, especially when your nose is chafed and you have a monster cold.
On the other hand, trees are our best defense against climate change, as they are the best natural absorbers of carbon dioxide. Scientists have recently begun warning that carbon dioxide is starting to reach such high levels in the atmosphere that it is approaching a point of no return, at which it will reproduce itself in a feedback loop. At that point, global warming will be inevitable and even hotter than previously predicted.
I don’t quite comprehend all the science — I already made an attempt at majoring in biology and realized in retrospect just how misguided that was — but it seems to me that we’ve already committed and begun to make sacrifices in the name of the environment. Surely, fluffy toilet paper isn’t more important to us than preventing global warming.
Several measures have been proposed to reduce the carbon footprint produced by our toilet paper consumption. Sheryl Crow suggests using just one square per bathroom break — for the ladies — although admitting that there may occasionally be “pesky occasions where two to three could be required.” But I’m not quite sure that’s feasible. I use less toilet paper than the average girl and I still think one square is a little restrictive.
Christian Wolmar of The Guardian, a British news publication, raves about using water instead of paper. He discovered the method in India, and of course we’ve all heard of the infamous French bidet. Using water is more hygienic and more effective — you are much cleaner after washing with water than just wiping with paper — and it’s much less environmentally destructive. This truly seems like the ideal solution. On the other hand, it is unlikely that the University will see fit to install bidets in Lambeth Field Apartments or the Gooch Residence Area anytime soon.
Greenpeace seems to have come up with the most feasible option for the time being. The organization has ranked toilet paper by brand according to the percentage of post-consumer and recycled materials that goes into the product, as well as the toxicity of the chemicals used to bleach the paper. Using its chart, you can stock your bathroom and kitchen with toilet paper, tissue and paper towels — and feel good about yourself at the same time.
I gave it a try. I haven’t checked out the conventional grocery store items just yet, but the environmentally friendly brands are readily available at the more health-oriented and environmentally conscientious food stores like Whole Foods. But I can’t afford to shop at Whole Foods all the time, so I’ll soon be checking Kroger and Harris Teeter. So far, the environmentally friendly toilet paper and facial tissues aren’t as fluffy as the brands I’m used to, but they remain a step up from the TP pulled from those industrial rolls found in our University bathrooms and the restrooms of large stores.
If you’re interested about all the different brands, check out the Greenpeace Web site and type ‘tissue’ into the search bar. It will be the first document on the results page, a handy and colorful PDF. If you heed its advice, you’ll soon be leaving a significantly smaller carbon footprint. As for me, I can definitely work with the new brand of TP and tissue. But the next time I have a cold, I still may turn to the luxurious brand of facial tissues with lotion. For now, though, I am satisfied with this very minor lifestyle change and I am confident that we will continue to come up with new and innovative ways to make our lives ever greener.
Andrenne is a fourth-year College student. She can be reached at a.alsum@cavalierdaily.com.
Human history is as much a product of forgetting as it is of remembering. What actually goes down in the pages of history can be unpredictable and seemingly arbitrary.
Listen to Beethoven’s famed Sonata No. 9 in A Major, Op. 47, commonly called the Kreutzer Sonata after the French violinist Rodolphe Kreutzer. It is sometimes assumed that Beethoven originally dedicated the sonata to Kreutzer. In reality, Kreutzer never could perform the sonata.
Instead, he reportedly told Beethoven the piece was “impossible to play” — a notable complaint, given that Kreutzer was considered one of Europe’s top violinists at the time.
But it was not impossible. By this time, Afro-European violinist George Polgreen Bridgetower had already played the sonata, said Creative Writing Prof. Rita Dove, who recently wrote a book about the musician.
Bridgetower was a Mulatto violin virtuoso. His musical talent was so impressive that Beethoven originally wrote the piece for him, not Kreutzer, Dove said. Why, then, did Beethoven rededicate the sonata to Kreutzer, a violinist who refused to play it? Also, why did history subsequently forget George Polgreen Bridgetower?
Dove, a former U.S. Poet Laureate, said she aims to recover Bridgetower’s lost significance in her latest book of poetry. “Sonata Mulattica” dramatizes in lyric verse the life of the violinist and the different factors that led him to historical obscurity rather than fame.
“I wanted to discover [Bridgetower], Dove said, “and poetry was the way I wanted to discover him.”
In a joint concert with Dave Matthews Band violinist Boyd Tinsley, Dove will celebrate the release of “Sonata Mulattica” Friday evening as part of the 15th Annual Virginia Festival of the Book. The blending of poetry, music and conversation will begin at 8 p.m. in the Paramount Theater.
“[When] Dove mentioned that Boyd Tinsley was cited in one of her poems … we all agreed that it would be fantastic if there could be a joint program,” said Nancy Damon, program director of the Virginia Festival of the Book. Kevin McFadden, the festival’s associate director and a former University student, said he felt that there would be “large interest” in the program, and eventually the festival invited Dove and Tinsley to perform together at the Paramount. Dove used Tinsley’s name in her poem, “The Bridgetower,” describing him as one of today’s gifted people forgotten by time. She said she contacted him after finishing writing “Sonata Mulattica” to let him know he was featured in it.
Dove and Tinsley enjoyed working together on the upcoming event, Dove said. “He works similarly [as] I do … on improvisation,” Dove said, adding that both are artists who experiment with their craft to expand its scope and range of expression. Combining the two crafts of poetry and violin music to share one message is in itself a chance for improvisation.
“It’s been a great process of getting to know one another,” Dove said of her collaboration with Tinsley, who, like Dove, is a Charlottesville resident. Dove added that Tinsley wants people to remember what happened between Beethoven and Bridgetower in 1803. Both Tinsley and her aim to “connect the dots from Bridgetower all the way up to Tinsley,” Dove said.
Damon said she anticipates that the event will be “a very exciting combination of words and music which fits perfectly into [the festival’s] goal of encouraging people to read.” She added that “with any success, the story contained in Dove’s book and Tinsley’s music — the life of George Polgreen Bridgetower — will encourage people to explore what they read more deeply, to examine the personal significance every story offers them.”
Dove said her initial decision to versify Bridgetower’s 200-year-old story happened largely by chance. As a former cellist, she heard Bridgetower’s name long ago but did not give it much thought. That changed years later when she glimpsed a portrayal of Bridgewater’s genius in the 1994 film, “Immortal Beloved.”
By the age of 10, Bridgewater, already a prodigy, was on the road performing.
“That was really interesting — a little boy, half-black and half-white, playing in concert halls across Europe,” she said.
As a young man, Bridgetower came to Vienna, where he impressed and befriended the already legendary Ludwig van Beethoven. The friendship, however, was short-lived.
“The Bridgetower,” which was printed last November in the New Yorker, explains why: In May 1803, Beethoven and his new friend first performed their new sonata together with the German on pianoforte and the Afro-European on violin. The performance moved the composer so deeply that he “leapt up to embrace his ‘lunatic mulatto,’ the playful nickname he had given Bridgetower.
“[But then they had a] falling out over a girl nobody remembers, nobody knows.”
Bridgetower apparently insulted a woman who was one of Beethoven’s acquaintances. In response, the composer chose to dedicate the sonata to another musician. The pair would never renew the friendship.
How might racial categorization both in and beyond classical music be different if Bridgetower’s fame had survived the first round of history’s cuts? How many more figures like Bridgetower might there be today if their names were better remembered? His own mulatto identity literally bridged African and European cultures, and his technical abilities surpassed even those of the famous Kreutzer. Beethoven’s sole reason for renouncing Bridgetower had nothing to do with music and everything to do with emotion. But because of a chance combination of factors, Bridgetower “has kind of dropped out of history,” Dove said. Remembered here and there, maybe, but more as an interesting detail than as anyone historically influential, she added.
For Dove, obscure stories like Bridgetower’s history point out the shortcomings of history and the need for something beyond it that can be used to remember human life.
Around every famous historical figure, there are countless other people — “living, breathing people,” Dove said — who were just as significant. Perhaps these nameless contributors would be the ones in history books instead if a few circumstances had worked out differently.
For those select few that history does remember, it seems to do so incompletely, which offers the world only small, scattered windows into past lives as vibrant as the ones that people are living now, Dove noted.
“What has always fascinated me [is] the realization that we all have interior lives,” Dove said. “What history does is to point out, rather graphically, just how little of that interiority can be passed down through generations.”
This is one of Dove’s main reasons for writing poetry, she said. She aims to acknowledge and explore that interiority with the intent to expose the personal, emotional side of history.
“History … tells us what happened. It doesn’t tell us why it was worth it,” Dove said. “That’s the job of poetry.”
As I write this column, there’s a Beethoven piano trio playing all around me. The light tinkling of piano keys, the lyricism of a violin and the dulcet tones of a cello are filling the room. The sound is so clear, it almost seems as if the players are right here in the room with me.
They aren’t, of course; I already checked. (Despite the fact that cello players are extraordinarily upstanding people, it is never a good thing when one breaks into your home.)
By listening to this lovely piece, I’m committing a tiny act of rebellion against prevailing social trends. The simple fact of the matter is that classical music has been slowly losing its hold on society since, oh, about 1703, and that process shows no signs of stopping.
And while some blame this decline on the younger generation, that’s being a bit unfair. Although the youth cohort of today does tend to prefer music made by people wearing jeans instead of evening attire, it’s hardly the only age group in which classical has fallen out of favor. Kids today may favor Franz Ferdinand to Franz Schubert, but the baby boomers, by and large, will go for George Harrison before they turn on Georges Bizet.
Who or what is causing this unfortunate development? First and foremost, is the length of the music. Classical music pieces are pretty long and this is an era in which many of us lead busy lives and have the attention span of a fruit fly to take the time to enjoy a lengthy classical symphonic orchestra. It’s unfortunate, then, that many symphonies and operas rival “The Lord of the Rings” in length without offering the spectacle of orc corpses flying around to hold people’s interest. Short pieces like Chopin’s “Minute Waltz” are more of the exception than they are the rule.
Still, that’s not the whole story. There’s also a certain air of un-hipness that attaches itself to whoever claims to like classical music. In some circles, admitting to being a classical music lover is the equivalent of saying, “I enjoy a nice glass of Metamucil while staying in on Friday nights and crocheting.” It’s not an image calibrated to attract the trendy young 20-something-years-old or the dopey middle-ager who thinks he’s a 20-something. It’s far safer, we assume, to stick to stuff that most people like, rather than be outed for a predilection for a good toccata and fugue.
Finally, many people avoid classical music because it may be perceived as the province of snobs. It’s not difficult to see why this is. On a classical radio station, you’re likely to be bombarded by so many jewelry store commercials that you feel poorer just by listening to them. There’s also a dignified atmosphere that pervades classical performances, where gentlemen and ladies show up dressed to the nines, and your old Ramones T-shirt is decidedly unwelcome. It’s easy to jump to the conclusion that classical music is a realm for elites and that claiming to like it will mark you as an enemy of the common man.
But that isn’t to say that people don’t get any exposure to classical music whatsoever, because they do. Pieces from Rossini’s “William Tell Overture” to Wagner’s “Ride of the Valkyries” are featured in commercials hawking all sorts of goods. Of course, one can’t help but think that, if Robert Schumann had ever dreamt that his work might one day appear in a promotion for toilet paper or the like, he probably would have attempted suicide much earlier than he did. But even a little classical in one’s life is better than nothing.
The fact is that classical can be a wonderful addition to one’s musical diet. In an age where every other song seems to be a whine about being wronged in some way by one’s “baby,” it’s nice to hear music that explores the depth of human emotions through colors and moods, rather than words. It also can be refreshing to hear a wide range of instruments, employed simultaneously, after listening to a steady stream of pieces featuring good old Mr. Guitar.
Though none of this is meant to suggest that classical music is superior to any other sort of music, we simply ought to allow classical music equal standing. It’s not as hard as you might think. There are performances by classical orchestras everywhere and many of them are cheaper than a rock concert. (I would still probably leave the Ramones T-shirt behind, or at least accent it with a nice blazer.)
So why not get a little more classical in your life? It might pleasantly surprise you.
Matt’s column runs biweekly Wednesdays. He can be reached at m.waring@cavalierdaily.com.
According to a Student Council press release dated March 10, the end of the trial period for the Free Ride Program is Sunday, March 22. The release states the change will be heavily advertised: “Extensive publicity will take place to inform students of the close of the trial period, and Student Council is working closely with Yellow Cab to ensure a smooth transition.” The advance notice, planned publicity and cooperation with Yellow Cab all sound like reasonable ways to end the trial period. But a call to the Yellow Cab dispatcher revealed, “As far as I know, it’s ended.” Students thinking of taking Free Ride for the rest of the week should be wary; if the cab driver does not think the Free Ride program is still active, he will ask for payment at the end of the ride.
Katie Peabody, Council Safety and Wellness Committee Chair, said she has worked only with the administration at Yellow Cab and not the cab drivers. She added that there has previously been miscommunication between the administration at Yellow Cab and its drivers. Peabody said Yellow Cab originally told Council not to include tips for the drivers and Council decided later to add tips because many students reported problems. Since adding in an automatic 15 percent tip a month ago, Peabody said there has been “a lot of positive feedback” from both students and Yellow Cab.
The apparent miscommunication between the Yellow Cab administration and its drivers has again proved problematic for students. There is currently no guarantee that students will be able to get home for free if they call Yellow Cab, and many students may not be aware of this until the end of the ride. If students are unable to pay, they can still charge the ride to the Dean of Students’ Office and pay the bill later. But students should not have to be surprised by the end of Free Ride. Council’s early press release was intended to avoid such surprises and Yellow Cab’s failure to inform its cab drivers of the correct end date is unacceptable.
Should Council choose to continue the Free Ride program in the future, it should use another cab company because of the multiplicity of problems it has had with Yellow Cab. Because the University’s agreement with Yellow Cab to allow students to pay later nicely complements Free Ride, the Dean of Students’ Office and Council should together look for another company willing to participate in both programs. Now that Council has sensibly included tips for the cab drivers, any cab company will surely be open to accepting such an influx in business.
A problem undoubtedly exists when the Secretary of the Board of Visitors has to assure students that the commencement speaker for the 2009 graduation ceremony is in no way “a racist or an ideologue.” Yet Secretary Alexander Gilliam and other members of the administration responsible for the selection of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III as this year’s speaker seem to have missed that point. Wilkinson is a conservative judge who ruled in a landmark court case that United States citizens could be detained indefinitely without trial if suspected of terrorist activities, who has spoken out against gay marriage, and who has also been accused of being a racist both for his court rulings and for the ideas present in his publications. His selection as commencement speaker is highly symbolic of the distance that exists between a dynamic student body and an out-of-touch administration too ensconced in its good ol’ boy traditions to understand — or even to consider — the pulse of the student community.
In a phone interview last week, Secretary Gilliam characterized the opposition students and others have expressed to the choice of Wilkinson with two words: “Pure crap.”
His words, not mine. Such was the response to members of the student community whom he and other members of the Board of Visitors purport to represent.
My fellow fourth-years and I have anxiously awaited the announcement of the person who will deliver our 2009 commencement address. Though I had prepared myself for the possibility of disappointment, the release of Wilkinson’s name last week was much more than that.
Wilkinson has been a friend of the University for decades. He graduated from the law school in the early 1970s and later returned there to teach. According to Gilliam, he was the first student member of the Board of Visitors and a “boy wonder” in his time as a student here.
Yet Wilkinson’s conservative rulings as a federal judge the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, his position against affirmative action, and his insider status as a beloved member of a stagnant University administration call into question his relevance to the graduating class of 2009. His selection also calls into question the process by which the University chooses its speakers. It is not that Wilkinson is a conservative. It is that his political biases will alienate a large number of students when a commencement speaker should bring students together. Graduation is should not be about political ideology.
According to Gilliam, who chairs the subcommittee in charge of developing a list of graduation speakers, the committee that develops a list of potential speakers is made up of both students and faculty members who generate ideas for speakers and eventually rank their top ten before giving the list to President Casteen. Students on the committee are “encouraged” to talk to their peers about what speakers they would like to see. Ultimately, according to Gilliam, President Casteen can pick any name from the ten as his choice for commencement speaker.
The process clearly possesses a number of flaws. President Casteen’s power as sole selector at the end of the committee’s deliberation leaves open the all-too-likely possibility that he’ll opt for one of his BFFs over other potentially more appropriate speakers. Moreover, the lack of transparency that characterizes the entire process and the lack of a large amount of student input widens the already present disconnect between students and administrators. Did they really think a speaker like Wilkinson is what we wanted, or what we deserved?
The selection of Wilkinson in particular has angered many students, leaving them wondering why he was the University’s choice. Yet I suppose in the end it’s not a surprise that this is the outcome of a bureaucratic decision focused more on granting favors than on providing students with a relevant, thought-provoking end to the four years they have spent at the University.
Wilkinson will in all likelihood remain our commencement speaker; there is little we can do to change that. He is a man beloved by an administration too out of touch with the students it represents, and he is immune to criticism from members of the law school because of his influence as a judge on Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (after all, a clerkship at such an institution is a coveted opportunity).
What we can do is make sure that everyone who attends graduation and who asks about our commencement speaker knows exactly who he is and how he was selected. Do your research, disseminate the information, hand out leaflets at graduation describing the implications of Wilkinson’s court decisions, his position that affirmative action leads to ethnic separatism, and what it means that the University chose him anyway. It is not about attacking the man, but instead about challenging his positions and questioning the University’s decision-making process.
Instead of celebrating graduation by honoring the selection of Wilkinson, we can celebrate graduation by coming together against it.
Amelia Meyer’s column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at a.meyer@cavalierdaily.com.
In recent times, there has been some anti-French sentiment and a few caustic remarks made regarding our neighbors across the pond. The small number of Franco-Americans, as opposed to other groups such as Japanese Americans or Hispanic Americans, makes it more socially and politically acceptable to hold and express negative stereotypes of the French. This is demonstrated by a 1995 episode of “The Simpson’s”, which calls the country’s residents “cheese eating surrender monkeys,” and the Onion’s sarcastic comment, “in case of emergency, the red and blue parts of the French flag detach for a quick surrender.”
However, it looks like a turning point is on the horizon. With France’s recent decision to finally end a four-decade rift and rejoin military forces with NATO, France is about to become one of our new best friends. This is a very good thing, both for Franco-American relations, and for the global community at large. Joining NATO allies France politically and ideologically with the United States and the rest of the European Union, and will ultimately ease minor tensions that have prevailed since France left NATO militarily.
To understand where our relationship with France is going, we need to look back at our troubled past, starting with Charles de Gaulle. Coming off a French defeat in Vietnam and Algeria in 1955 and 1962, de Gaulle decided to rebuild the pride and morale of the French by resigning from NATO in 1966, removing himself from what he saw as the shadow of the American president. De Gaulle also supported Québec’s independence, recognized Communist China and objected to Britain’s entry into the European community, all of which angered the US. Things have improved slightly under de Gaulle’s successors, but once again, a rough patch was met in contemporary times with President Jacques Chirac. In the wake of their UN Security Council refusal to get behind US proposals supporting military action and ultimately the invasion of Iraq, feelings of betrayal surfaced. A new wave of anti-French sentiment broke out, most memorably when the United States House of Representative Office buildings changed the name of French fries to freedom fries.
Others, such as conservative political commentator Bill O’ Reilly, called for boycotts of French products. Despite the United States’ wrath, France held firm, stating clearly its reason for opposing the war: that it doubted the existence of weapons of mass destruction, that it believed a war would destabilize the Middle East and fail to provide long-term solutions, and that this militaristic course of action would not be consistent with the war on terrorism. France also worried that U.S. military aggression could unite the opposing forces in the entire Middle East. Judging from the current state of affairs, it’s likely that France now feels vindicated by their early stance on the matter. France’s independent, confident and brutally honest nature is exactly what we need in an ally. France was made to be our counterpoint, and call us out on our shortcomings, errors and poor decisions.
Though we may not always see every issue eye to eye, it is through careful analysis and multiple viewpoints that one reaches an informed decision. Perhaps by examining issues from France’s point of view we can begin to improve our own society. For instance, the French government-funded health care model would be of great interest to many people. In addition to bringing France and the US into alignment, the country will also increasingly endear itself to the European global community. This deepening of political and ideological alliances will fall in line neatly with the strengthening economic bond, embodied by the European Union.
While there was conflict between George Bush and Jacques Chirac, things improved when Nicholas Sarkozy was elected president of France in 2007. It had been years since the U.S. had such a good friend in France. Things improved even further with the French’s manic enthusiasm for Obama, termed “Obamania.” Though French forces have been with our own for some time in Afghanistan, Sarkozy’s symbolic decision to rejoin NATO speaks well of our future with France.
Kendra Kirk’s column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. She can be reached at k.kirk@cavalierdaily.com.
