Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
Support independent student journalism. Support independent student journalism. Support independent student journalism.
The Dartmouth
July 12, 2025 | Latest Issue
The Dartmouth

Major Delusion

In his recent op-ed "Major Consolidation" (Feb. 24), Peter Blair '12 suggests dissolving the Native American studies and women's and gender studies programs because they are "arbitrary and unnecessary," as well as incompatible with Dartmouth's educational mission.

In his crusade to "explain" the view he expressed in last week's "Short Answer" (Feb. 16), Blair brilliantly rehashes the same kind of thinking that for centuries excluded female scientists and African-American surgeons from history books. In doing so, Blair not only validates this view as the model approach to our studies at Dartmouth, he also manages to clarify that he knows nothing about the liberal arts, and even less about Dartmouth's educational mission.

Firstly, Blair's attempt to define the liberal arts objectively through the lens of Webster's English Dictionary becomes embroiled with gendered and racial biases of what is "fundamental and general." For most of our history, educational discourse was dominated by the narrow demographic that Blair not only conveniently belongs to, but singles out as fundamental: Eurocentric white males. In claiming that "general" knowledge (read: the history of white, Western men) ought to be prioritized over the "secondary and specialized," Blair relegates WGST and NAS to the latter categories as if they are inherently superfluous to our larger education. In fact, these histories are a fundamental part of our greater understanding of humanity, and more specifically, American history, culture and thought.

It's a sad fact that fields of study like NAS and WGST, in addition to others such as African & African American studies, would not be "specialized or secondary" if it hadn't been for this deliberate exclusion of these subjects from the educational arena. NAS and WGST are given their own programs because, until very recently, they were suppressed histories. They were not granted the resources, funding and venue to be shared with the general public through education, not to mention fully explored at a scholarly level. Therefore, their admission into the curriculum is not "arbitrary and unnecessary" but significant and essential for the development of our general -- yes, general -- knowledge about cultures and peoples important to our history that were long ignored. Simply stating "WGST classes would fit very nicely into other departments," for instance, totally disregards the fact that WGST, while indeed interdisciplinary, informs other disciplines just as much as it is informed by them.

Blair's statement that these programs are "in disharmony with Dartmouth's educational mission" is simply absurd. I wonder if Blair is aware of Dartmouth's foundational history. The first version of our charter promotes Dartmouth as, "for the education and instruction of Youth of the Indian Tribes in this Land ... and also of English Youth and any others." The Native American studies program is a natural extension of this mission. Moreover, one of Dartmouth's core values is to embrace "diversity with the knowledge that it significantly enhances the quality of a Dartmouth education," further dismantling Blair's invalid claim that departments like WGST are "unnecessary."

Aside from the comedy of his erroneous logic, Blair's op-ed steers away from being a practical approach to academic restructuring and borders instead on sexism. With statements like, "A person could still be considered well-educated if he knew little about feminist theory, but not if he knew nothing about World War II," Blair manages not only to offhandedly disregard equal treatment of women, but also implies that their very existence and contribution to society is irrelevant -- as he also suggests of Native Americans.

Moreover, the article is, at heart, offensive in its blatant disregard for many members of the Dartmouth community. Stating that only a "comparatively small number of students" would be affected by removing these departments is tasteless. These students have just as much of a right to pursue NAS as a major as any other field; in fact, for many the NAS program was a major factor in choosing Dartmouth over other schools. Perhaps to Blair's surprise, the rarity of a NAS program actually gives Dartmouth a competitive edge over other colleges.

With whatever shred of youthful idealism I have left, I will assume that Blair's opinions on these matters is simply ill-informed. Perhaps in the future, he'll consider taking a WGST or NAS class, if only for the practical sake of substantiated argumentation.