On my arrival at this college as a freshman, I was struck by a particular aspect of the culture of Dartmouth, namely, the emphasis on tradition. I was especially struck by the line in the Alma Mater that goes "Dear old Dartmouth give a rouse/Lest the old traditions fail." Being more impressionable then than I am now about the College, it seemed to be quite a fine thing that so great an emphasis was placed on tradition here. It made me feel as if I had joined some great and noble family, which with time and achievement had earned the right to its own peculiar customs and eccentricities.
Since then, I have come to learn a great deal more about Dartmouth. While I cannot deny that something of my feelings during the early weeks of freshman fall still lingers, I must admit that I have come to view with greater suspicion the way the word "tradition" is bandied about, and often outright abused, at this college.
In thinking about tradition we must ask ourselves why it is that we value them so much in the first place. What is it about the Dartmouth Outing Club trip, Winter Carnival, and other such customs unique to Dartmouth that makes them as important to us as they are? Why is it that some members of the student body hold tradition so sacrosanct that the change of the College symbol from the Indian to the Big Green sends them into such a frenzy?
It would seem, from examining the literature and by utilizing one's own senses, that the reasons people place so great an emphasis on tradition include the need to stand out, the need to feel membership in some community greater than oneself and the need to feel a chain of continuity between oneself and those that came before one. To know that we do some of the peculiar things that the great men who came here before us did; to know that by running around the Homecoming bonfire we participate with thousands of our peers in something that will give us tales to tell in our later years -- these are the kind of things which make traditions great.
Many of our peculiar customs are perfectly harmless, and perhaps even do a great deal of good in providing feelings of belonging in this college where the D-Plan and the housing system allow for little continuity in our acquaintance-ships. Some of our other traditions, however, are not so beneficial. Traditions which serve to bond one small section of the College while simultaneously serving to alienate another section should have no place at Dartmouth. Traditions which serve to scare away the best and brightest of future generations, in the long run, can only do our common cause harm.
At this point it would be instructive to examine the decision of the Kappa Chi Kappa fraternity to rename itself Kappa Kappa Kappa. One reason amongst others given by the fraternity members to exculpate themselves from the unpleasant connotations of their name change was that Kappa Kappa Kappa, or KKK as it was formerly abbreviated, was the name of the fraternity since before the civil war, before the Ku Klux Klan as well. This statement, as a fact, is beyond reproach. The KKK fraternity came before the men in white hoods. But this is not reason enough for the members of Kappa Kappa Kappa to get off the hook.
We all remember the National Socialist regime, and we remember that a prominent symbol of theirs was the swastika. What is perhaps not known to many of us is that the swastika is also a religious symbol of great antiquity - the symbol antedated the Nazi's. Abiding by the logic of the members of Tri-Kap, were a member of any of the religions which hold the swastika sacred to parade one on his person and in his dorm room, we would have no justification to take offense. Yet somehow, I find it difficult to believe that anyone would actually say such a thing in public.
Both the Kappa Kappa Kappa name and the swastika symbol are traditions, and the swastika has a much greater weight of tradition and antiquity behind it than the fraternity name, however venerable Tri-Kap may be. How is it that we can find one unacceptable and the other not? Is it because the suffering inflicted by the Klan was less mechanized, and was spread out over a longer time than the atrocities of the Nazis? Or is it simply because one has the weight of Dartmouth tradition behind it while the other does not?
I do not believe that the members of Tri-Kap will be much swayed by my argument, as their blase attitude to student criticism seems to demonstrate. The fraternity wants to shore up its alumni support, so it can press forward with forging bonds of lasting friendship amongst its members. It is a shame, however, that, as with many other groups on this campus, Tri-Kap has to forge bonds between its members at the expense of the student community at large.
