Deathand taxes. The two certainties in life, unless of course you are a right-wing immortal extremist who denies the validity of the United States government. The rest of us, mere mortals, can be assured that death and taxes will always be there.
Considering the time and place -- early Fall term at Dartmouth -- we can also be assured of the presence of many other certainties. One in particular comes to mind -- our judgments of other people here, as they compare to yourself perhaps, or, as is often the case, of how they fit into the larger Dartmouth scene.
Upperclassmen may already be familiar with some of the more popular personal pigeonholes at Dartmouth, and '99s will be acquainted with them rather quickly. There are the Greeks, non-Greeks, Dartmouth Review staffers, Spare-Ribbers, jocks, environmentalists, conservatives, and the list continues ad nauseam. We become comfortable with such labels and reach a point where they are generally acknowledged as a requisite part of the landscape surrounding Dartmouth's public square.
To some extent, labels are almost necessary, and to an even greater extent, our labels are convenient. Imagine yourself visiting any one of the aforementioned pigeonholes, and you will be able to know exactly who you will meet there. If pressed for a description, you should be able to provide a physical description and ideological outline at the very least.
For all the convenience provided by quick classifications, they can be very dangerous, and they can create a severe impediment to communication and understanding between and among groups at Dartmouth. Lest the situation be exaggerated for the sake of this editorializing, it must be noted that the situation is not incredibly dire; there is some fruitful communication between and among groups here.
The true danger is that we do not recognize our labels for what they are. Considering the number of people at Dartmouth combined with the necessity of communicating with many people, it is all too easy to speak with a representative of a group rather than an individual even though the two are different facets of the same person. We can isolate the ideas from the individual for the sake of our own clarity, but in doing so, we forfeit the understanding which is needed for true resolution of differences.
Conflicts of ideas enliven Dartmouth and create interesting opportunities for discussion and growth. Clash is not a bad thing. When ideological differences do not vitalize Dartmouth, but instead stagnate it, when differences do not provoke discussion, but end it, when we can see the group without understanding the individual, we know it is time to question our assumptions and question each other.
To members of the Class of 1999: You have met many people and received many welcomes. The initial "Hi. Where are you from? What trip did you go on? Where are you living?" stage will eventually wind down and you will discover yourself to be a member of a lively community.
Yet, this community is only as alive as each member of each class allows. As we become members of different groups and take hold of new ideas and prejudices, let us not become complacent. Rather, let us aim for understanding of the individual rather than tolerance of the group. As Dag Hammarskjold writes in "Markings," "only your immediate experience of the detail can provide the soil in your soul where the beauty of the whole can grow."
