Several weeks ago, I was quoted in a New York Time article on President Freedman as saying, "Too many creative loners are coming. I'm all for intellectualism, but I think it is crucial that balance be found."
Though it is impossible to summarize a half-hour conversation into two sentences, the quote was a fairly accurate representation of my personal impressions of President Freedman's "creative loner" ideal. I would like to state, without chicanery or schmoozing, that president Freedman is going to go down in Dartmouth history as one of the most successful Presidents this institution has ever had. Freedman has spearheaded the charge for excellence and respect amongst the Ivies by doubling Dartmouth's endowment to well over a billion dollars, and by coordinating the most phenomenally successful capital campaign drive in the history of the school. Freedman has not only been impressive in protecting the financial endowment of this institution, but he has also been very successful in nurturing what he has termed the "intellectual endowment" of the school. I am honestly impressed by his accomplishments. Those are some rather large bullet points to have on the old resume.
I don't feel, however, that by stressing a "creative loner" as an ideal, President Freedman is giving respect to what I would term the "identity endowment" of the student body. This may sound like a rather dubious notion, but I believe there are many parallels between a financial endowment and the "identity endowment" of the student body -- none the least of which is that the trustees carefully monitor both. One is monitored through stock investment portfolios, and the other through admissions portfolios.
The least of my intentions is to sound like a meathead anti-intellectual bully. I'm a pre-med. I'm fully intense on my academics, and like many of us here I caught a lot of flack from beer-drinking losers in high school. Their insistence that wedgies are humorous may be the ultimate root of my painful Napoleon complex.
There is an enormous difference, however, between students at the school I transferred from (Carnegie Mellon) who are brilliantly intense academians, and Dartmouth students who are brilliantly intense academians. The difference I believe, lies in Dartmouth's unique student body "identity endowment." This identity endowment is overflowing with a rich history of alumni who have demonstrated an amazingly well-rounded breadth and balance in life, time and again. Just like any other endowment, it offers a continual source of its asset -- breadth and balance -- to those who are currently benefiting from it. When I was in my first year here, the seniors passed onto me a sense of Dartmouth's distinctly balanced and unique character. I can only hope to fulfill this cycle with the freshmen I know this year.
To exert pressure to admit "creative loners" endangers the Dartmouth student body "identity endowment." It is a push for one angle that is unhealthy, lopsided and runs counter to arguably the strongest asset of this school. Stressing the "creative loner" ideal is much like stressing investment in a hot company like Microsoft. Sure, the short term returns are probably very good right now. You'll turn a profit with Microsoft. Your SAT scores and US News & World Report ranking will probably rise by admitting those who lean more towards being "creative loners." My freshman year roommate at Carnegie had the highest SATs I've ever heard. The problem was, he couldn't figure out he should take a shower every two weeks or so.
In the long haul, any investment firm will tell you that the true strength in your financial investments comes from a broad and balanced portfolio. It is my argument that in the long haul, Dartmouth will be better off by admitting an identity endowment that maintains its diversity and balance. It most certainly should foster a comfortable atmosphere for those who would term themselves "creative loners," but should not idolize or search specifically for the "creative loner." To select this one segment of the community as more desirable for admissions may have long-term repercussions that may not be visibly played out until years down the road -- perhaps through a decline in the overall active and positive campus attitude (as my Carnegie experience would lead me to believe). To refer back to the financial analogy, do you think the Trustees would publicly announce a drive to increase investments in a stock that shows high short-term yields but has a relatively brief and unknown track record for long-term performance?
I will be the last to attempt to espouse a definition for an ideal Dartmouth student, as the "identity endowment" is fulfilled by students who have pursued excellence down a limitless range of avenues -- including the "creative loner" avenue. When taken as a whole, the balance in the "identity endowment" offers a synergism of energy and excellence -- a compounded interest that simultaneously offers and draws excellence to our campus. It is this balance that I feel is unique to Dartmouth, and is the essence of the Dartmouth spirit. To lose this endowment would be to lose the heart of Dartmouth -- no matter how rich it is.
