I enjoy reading in PAW about the accomplishments of distinguished alumni. But not all alumni are so noteworthy -- your profiles could lead one to assume that everyone who attends Princeton has a great undergraduate career and graduates with honors. I, for one, did not. I got a "C" on my senior thesis and probably graduated in the bottom third of my class. I bickered at a club but didn't get in, and I was cut from the field hockey team. Although I did go on to medical school, it wasn't an Ivy League one, and I'm not on the board of any organization. Yet I consider myself a success: as a physician I have a busy practice, and my husband and daughter are happy and healthy. I'm more likely to contribute a casserole to a church fund-raiser than a thousand dollars.
When I left Princeton, I felt like a failure compared to my classmates. But things have worked out OK. I'd like to see PAW profile alumni who might fall in the category "they also graduated." Give us stories about happy people who are valued members of their communities, but not necessarily leaders, or who are leaders despite getting a "C" on their theses. Undergraduates need to know that achievement and purpose encompass a broad spectrum in the world beyond Princeton.
Karen D.L. Smith '83, M.D.
Tucson, Ariz.
Recent letters PAW has published suggests that mail is running 2-0 against the appointment to the faculty of ethicist Peter Singer. What a shame. Having read his Practical Ethics as an undergraduate, I viewed his appointment as inspired. His thought-provoking arguments remain with me long after the memories of more inscrutable philosophical texts have grown dim. I wonder if his more vocal critics have read even a chapter of his books.
Reading Singer's work reveals that he is a rigorous thinker and lucid writer, with a respect for divergent viewpoints that comes from analyzing tough questions closely. One reason he makes us uncomfortable is his suggestion that we all bear moral responsibility for the suffering of others. Although some of his solutions are controversial, so have been those of many throughout history who have challenged us to think in new ways about problems that are more easily ignored.
M. Katherine Baird '86
New York, N.Y.
Letters in the October 21 PAW attacking Peter Singer's appointment suppose that his views entail certain absurd propositions -- for example, that it's permissible to kill "less-than-perfect" infants, or even "the chronically ill and impoverished." It would be of benefit to look in detail at the contentions Singer defends in his writings, and especially at the arguments he uses in their defense. Doubtless there will be some who will disagree with his propositions or think them outrageous. As to his arguments, I believe them to be bold, clear, attentive to complexity, and difficult to set aside.
Roger Gustavsson '52
Greencastle, Ind.
In the October 21 PAW I was doubly saddened to read about the death of Margaret D. Wilson, Stuart Professor of Philosophy, and the clamor surrounding Peter Singer's appointment to the University Center for Human Values. Professor Wilson supervised one of my junior papers, a criticism of Singer's controversial article, "All Animals Are Equal." Whatever the merits of his work (I think there are many), I hope that his arrival will bring to Princeton the same subtlety and compassion that Professor Wilson exercised in the scrutiny of ethical issues.
Michael D. Gately '97
New York, N.Y.
Thanks for a great article on Representative Jim Leach '64 (PAW, October 21). Left out was the fact that he was a Schools Committee volunteer in northern Virginia when I chaired the group. I still recall talking with him one evening at my dining-room table and coming to realize through our conversation what a superior young man he was. I had forgotten that we had such similar starts: majoring in politics at Princeton, then obtaining a master's degree in international relations at Johns Hopkins. There we diverged, he becoming a diplomat and I a spy. I lost a great committeeman when he resigned from the State Department and returned to Iowa.
Gordon S. Brown '48
Burke, Va.
It bothers me to see Princeton, hat in hand, looking for a naming donor for the new stadium. Sure, $25 million is real money for most of us, but not so much for an institution with an endowment in the billions. We play our Big Three rivals in Harvard Stadium and Yale Bowl. Why shouldn't they play us in Princeton Stadium? What's in a name? In this case quite a bit.
Thomas Allsopp '39
Sarasota, Fla.
I hesitate to sound a discordant note amidst the hosannas of praise greeting the opening of the new stadium, but I can't help wondering why, for an expenditure of $45 million, the designers failed to supply proper seats for the spectators.
Jadwin Gym and Clarke Field have seats. Rutgers Stadium (built at half the cost) has seats. Yet Princeton Stadium provides just bleacher seating throughout, on an aluminum slab that will only get colder and even more uncomfortable as the season progresses along with our backaches. To make matters worse, the numbered "seats" only allow elbow room between spectators if they are dressed in summer clothes.
Arthur Morgan '44
Princeton, N.J.
More than 50 years ago, alumni seating in Palmer Stadium was moved from the east (sunny) side of the stands to the west (shaded) side. Now in the new Princeton Stadium we're back on the sunny side, supposedly because the shady side is entirely filled with season ticket holders.
Standish F. Medina '37
New York, N.Y.
As a former football player, I disagree with my classmate Matt Bodie '91's criticism of the new helmet (Letters, October 21). Any change away from the all-orange helmet is a move in the right direction. Being called a "pumpkinhead" for four years did not exactly leave the deepest emotional scars, but it served as a constant reminder that we wore the nation's ugliest uniforms. Also, I'm surprised to see Bodie's reference to our "gridiron" heritage, a term no one under the age of 60 would use.
Frank Ille '91
Oklahoma City, Okla.
Editor's note: The word "gridiron" (admittedly a sports cliché) was an editorial change we made to avoid repetition of the word "football."
When we played Harvard on October 24, Halloween was still a week away, yet our football warriors appeared on the field in a uniform that was virtually all black. Darth Vader? The consensus in the stands: tacky.
David K. Reeves '48
Princeton, N.J.
I'm writing in response to the suggestion by William F. Haynes, Jr. '50 that the Princeton Band perform "Old Nassau" at halftime so that the alma mater may be heard "by those many alumni who leave the stadium before the final whistle" (Letters, October 7).
As a Band alumnus and Princeton sports fan, I respectfully submit that if alumni would like to hear "Old Nassau" and demonstrate additional support for the Tigers, they should stay to the end of the game. Anything that encourages fans to leave before the conclusion of the contest detracts from the appreciation shown to the athletes. What's more important, supporting the teams or getting to the clubs for an early beer?
Douglas Natelson '93
Stanford, Calif.
The October 21 Notebook article on "The modern canon" astounded me. Not one of the four professors whom you asked about the books they thought every student should read mentioned the one that for centuries has topped the lists of thousands of intelligent, literate people. George Washington, for one, said that our nation could not be governed without it. I wonder how many of Princeton's "elite" have even read (much less studied) the Bible?
R.H. Van Fossen, Jr. '63
Decorah, Iowa