At 2:30 a.m. last Saturday night I was on the first floor of a fraternity, working my neck muscles in time with the music of, to quote one enthusiast, this "totally sweet band that just played in this sweet club in New York which is kind of a big deal." As said muscles trudged their way to their present lactic-acid-induced paralysis, I decided to take a breather and head downstairs. While I am too boring to have an epiphany, something more humble, almost like an idea, took hold of me. I pushed past my own developed allegiances and attachments and realized that, without exception, College fraternity aesthetics were appalling. Fraternities themselves and the College's own policies perpetuate and hinder fraternities from achieving a degree of civility.
Fraternity basements are bare, raw public spaces. While I don't argue for velvet couches and chandeliers, I think something could be done to make them more enjoyable spaces. The aesthetics of fraternity basements encourage heavy drinking alone because no one could conceivably enjoy spending time in them unless they were en route to drunkenness or already there. There is no sign anything has been done to make it look presentable barring spraying the accumulated vomit into the drain and removing the cans if a frat is registered for kegs. I am usually not one to argue for these sorts of subconscious undercurrents, but fraternity aesthetics are so extreme that they merit this examination. Heavy drinking and the raw atmosphere of basements are linked, simply as things which perpetuate one another.
While these issues are unlikely to change, since most frat brothers actually like peeing in their basements and throwing cans of beer against the wall, some changes, which would be hailed by frat brothers, are hindered by the administration. While it is difficult to determine whether this mandate came before or hand-in-hand with the Student Life Initiative, the ban on permanent bars and taps merits discussion. I always thought that the piece of loose plywood which serves as the bar-top in my fraternity was on account of lazy, unenthused brothers being left in charge of house money. I was amazed to learn that this was the College's doing. This has a de-civilizing effect on fraternity parties, which perpetuates the present Dartmouth drinking culture. For as much as Safety and Security checks, keg registration and the like are understandable safeguards which we can't blame the College for enacting, outlawing permanent bars and permanent taps has no real positive effect from the standpoint of the administration. Fraternities will always have bars whether they are ratty pieces of plywood or lacquered mahogany. To enforce the use of the former is simply to keep fraternities mired in their own filth, in direct opposition to the stated agenda of the SLI.
Again, I argue that forcing fraternities to switch to impermanent taps and cans is another de-civilizing force, in no way curbing drinking as it exists, and, possibly, promoting it. This argument has been made countless times before but it is worth bringing up again: cans are the easiest, quickest and simplest way for beer to flow from behind the bar to the basement hordes. A permanent tap versus a portable one is merely a matter of convenience for those who work the bar and not a real question of the flow of the rate of beer. A nice, permanent bar with a presentable, permanent tap would have a significant civilizing effect on people's actions.
