The ultimate gist of Mr. Spring’s response [to Nov. 6th’s “And that’s how leaders are made”] is that we should not become negative Nancies, but rather focus on just how wonderful UD is. Such an attitude is firstly pointless; if we did not all already recognize the positive aspects of this institution and the community that resides within it, we would have chosen to attend an institution that was less expensive, less challenging and better known to potential employers.
We love this obscure bastion of liberal learning, and recognize its excellence; focusing on that excellence of the institution, however, leads to our community becoming elitist. This is the primary downside to UD: Our bubble is noted to be snobbish, insular and stifling. By focusing on the evidence that our student body is composed of many individuals who are far from elite, we guard against this tendency.
Secondly, he argues that the action in question was not itself a negative worth dwelling on, due to evidence that the individuals in question were not inebriated malcontents but sober students engaging in some early a.m. shenanigans, imitating the children’s own play earlier that day (as if this behavior is suddenly appropriate as long as those engaging in such have made a rational choice, their mental faculties totally unimpeded, to loudly smash and/or immolate things).
This childish behavior (along with other known aspects of the regular destructive Old Mill playtime) might be fine if it only affected the college community. But Old Mill is not just part of UD’s community. That those same children have to live in an environment where rich white boys are setting their dumpsters on fire at 4 a.m. is somewhat insane.
We should not brush this off, nor focus on what a great environment UD otherwise is. We should instead recognize that we as a community do not live up to what we portray ourselves as.
– Rob Sherron, class of 2013