Are more organizations the solution to the Dartmouth social option problem?
Before I came to Dartmouth, I dreamed about the four years I would have, inseparable from my new found total independence, to discover who I was, what fascinated me, and who I wanted to be. I expected that I would be incessantly amazed by the people I met, and their own irrepressible individuality.
I remember hearing President James Freedman's speech my first night at Dartmouth in which he described outstanding characteristics that exemplified the individuality of the Class of 1994. I remember feeling inadequate, and yet blessed to be in such an intense environment. Now, three years later, I wonder what happened to those '94s he spoke of - a guy who lived in the woods and 12 ballerinas. Did they, too, succumb to the pressure of finding their identity in a social organization rather than within themselves?
Socially, freshman year was a shock for me. For the next two years I thought there must be something wrong with me: Why didn't I feel comfortable in the social situations that everybody else seemed to thrive in? Finally I came to the realization that there was nothing wrong with me. The dominant Dartmouth social scene was just not my style.
After inane hours of analysis, I realized what it was that was so repugnant to me about the nature of the prevalent Dartmouth social life: the will to conform.
As I stated before, I dreamt about these four years as a period filled with discovery of outstanding individuality.
Conversely, the present social structure of Dartmouth protects its students from throwing their raw souls into the fire of possibilities. It shelters them from exposure to their vulnerability as undeveloped individuals, by loaning them an identity that ties them to an organization.
After reading about the College's recognition of Amarna, the new co-ed social organization, I expected that it would be a favorite mealtime topic for at least a few days. A week has gone by and I have heard nothing but indifference while I sit eating my Hop fries.
For most Dartmouth news, I too assume the role of apathy, expecting someone of my point of view will speak my reactions for me. This time I have heard no voices other than the one inside my head, and so I must stop pretending that I, too, have nothing to say about what the inauguration of this new society means.
Reading about Amarna, I got the impression that the students who took the initiative were responding to the dire need for the College to find alternatives for the students who don't feel at home in the fraternity system. That system is definitely not for everyone, but I am not certain that the formation of a new social organization will be the best attack against what I see as the most serious defects of that system.
I appeal to those students who relish their desire to be an individual to abandon any hope that there could ever be an organization, or enough organizations, to make the Dartmouth social system an open and comfortable environment for all students. However formed, any organization is inherently predisposed to exclusion, and we are fooling ourselves if we think that is not true.
Dean of Residential Life Mary Turco, discussing the limit of 75 members in Amarna, stated that it was her desire that this would lead to the formation of even more social organizations. Is it her expectation that the growth of social organizations will ultimately create a place for everyone to fit in?
When will we realize that the inherent nature of social organizations is an immediate indicator of their exclusiveness, and their pledge to conform?
