After reading Tom Mandel '11's column a number of times ("Concordantly Fratty," May 6), I still find it hard to distill its essence. Mandel begins the article with what seems to be a criticism of "frat" vocabulary at Dartmouth, but soon assures the reader that he only becomes irritated once the lexicon's unvaried and repeated use causes our interactions to "go by without any mental effort." However, after giving an example of one of these standard frat-basement interactions -- which itself is coincidentally free of frat-specific language -- Mandel resumes his original attack of our use of the lexicon, arguing that "we all got so dumbed down" because we lost sight of the irony with which we initially adopted "ultra-fratty" words and expressions. Mandel concludes his article by suggesting that we should improve ourselves by talking about politics and other "real world" topics while in the basement.
The point of Mandel's article remains opaque because Mandel has confounded two worthy, yet distinct, adversaries: one, the "frat" lexicon at Dartmouth and, two, the use of "frat" affairs as conversation material. Despite the title of his article and the talk of "how we all got so dumbed down in terms of language," it appears from the examples Mandel uses, and most importantly, from his concluding advice, that conversations with "fratty" topics are his true opponent. If this is the case, then I believe Mandel is mistaken in bringing in the concept of intelligence (or rather, the lack thereof) as a weapon against his targeted social phenomenon. The content of Mandel's "snapshot" interaction does not suggest that either of his sample "bros" is particularly stupid -- it suggests that one wants to play pong, and that the other is already playing pong (and nothing more).
The fact that we talk about pong, beer, etc., while in frat basements does not make us unintelligent. For one thing, pong is entertaining, so it seems natural that it should make its way into the conversation of its players and spectators. We wouldn't call baseball fans "dumbed down" for talking about batting averages and not poststructuralism while at a game. For another, intelligence is not completely contingent on subject matter -- an intelligent conversation about paperclips is just as conceivable as an unintelligent conversation about behavioral economics.
If, however, Mandel is actually trying to warn us of the influence of the "frat" lexicon on the minds of Dartmouth students, then he may be on to something. In fact, I believe that our imprudent use of language may be somewhat responsible not only for our increased "frattiness," but also for much of the bigotry on campus. And while Nathan Wersal '08, in his reaction to Mandel's column ("Not Dumb, Just Fratty," May 13), argues that users of "'ultra-fratty' vocabulary" preserve their true, "unfratty" identities by maintaining a tone of irony and a high level of self-awareness, I do not believe that the influence of language on thought can be so easily written off. I am reminded of some of my classmates in high school, who began making racist, sexist and homophobic jokes freshman year, even though "they really didn't mean it," yet who ended up graduating with genuinely prejudiced attitudes. Although Mandel might be a bit extreme in his claim that "we have become the very thing we were mocking," I do not agree with Wersal that irony and self-awareness act as an impenetrable defense against the content of our own jokes. Instead, our language may actually be simplifying our thoughts.
Furthermore, I believe that one of the biggest problems on campus, bigotry -- whether it occurs inside the fraternities or out, whether it is directed at women or at marginalized groups -- is caused at least in part by the acceptance, in closed circles, of irony-cloaked yet prejudiced language and actions. If behind closed doors we feel free to talk and act in a way that is otherwise socially unacceptable, then even when we enter the real world, a part of us will continue to consider such behavior permissible. This part of us may remain dormant and repressed most of the time, but on those occasions that we lose control and our secretly reinforced prejudices come out, we may shock not only our fellow Dartmouth students but ourselves as well.
