Letters - July 5, 2000

Paw welcomes letters. We may edit them for length, accuracy, clarity, and civility. Our address: Princeton Alumni Weekly, 194 Nassau St., Suite 38, Princeton, NJ 08542 (paw@princeton.edu).



Hail, euphoria!

As I left the hallowed campus of Old Nassau and Reunions 2000, my step was surprisingly swifter and lighter. (An overinvestment in P.U. memorabilia added several pounds to my luggage!) This euphoric moment in time is not soon to be forgotten as we, the members of the Class of 1975, reunited, heartily congratulated each other upon our silver anniversary, deepened friendships, and bade farewell to 35 deceased classmates.

As the photographer clicked the class picture at Blair Arch, I noticed that the men appeared more distinguished and the women were more beautiful than I could remember. I felt proud and humbled to be a part of the 25th-reunion class and the Princeton community at large.

As tradition would dictate, the Class of 1975 led the P-rade in our colorful costumes; from the reviewing stands we cheered the Class of 1925 and each class thereafter with spirited gusto. At the ripe age of 47, I sensed my mortality more than ever as each "passage of life" and "epoch of time" proudly marched past university officials and the best class of all.

May I say, "Thank you" to President Shapiro, university staff, faculty, alumni, and everyone in our class who made this 25th reunion an unforgettable experience. And it is with a tear in my eye that this little Irishman wishes each Princetonian a year and a life that is full of God's grace, peace, and abundant blessing.

Jim Menninger '75

Cincinnati, Ohio

Back to full menu of Letters


An independent PAW

There is an extreme urgency to this letter, so I'm asking interested alumni to respond to me right away.

As of August 1 the Princeton Alumni Weekly will be taken over by the university, placing it under the administrative control of the Alumni Council, vs. the desire by many to keep paw an independent publication by and for alumni, as it has been for 100 years.

Per the article in the February 23 issue, the university currently contributes about 10 percent, or $130,000, to paw's $1.3 million annual budget. The paw review committee proposed the university contribution be "doubled," say to $300,000.

So, for about $300,000 the university feels empowered to take control of our 100-year-old, independent paw-a bargain "buy," and one I sincerely hope is not permitted to go through. And, while the proposed arrangement maintains paw's "editorial independence," placing it under the administrative control of the Alumni Council, which can influence the hiring and firing of paw staff members, will ultimately serve to make paw yet another of the university's house organs. Hidden in all of this is the ironic fact that the university will be "buying" the heretofore independent paw alumni voice with alumni money-for it is the alumni, their families, and friends via Annual Giving, gifts, endowments-who openhandedly have given Princeton most of the funds on which it operates. And, since we are all paying subscribers to paw, through our contributions to class budgets, there would seem to be a legal issue here as well.

Our current university administration takes great pride in the loyalty of its alumni, but doesn't seem to recognize that this loyalty has been largely fostered by the class notes, which are submitted by some 80 alumni classes, and by the news, letters, editorial, and photos provided by paw as a frequently issued independent alumni magazine. Consequently, the university has never polled the alumni at large, asking for an expression of their feelings regarding the planned takeover of paw.

To remain totally independent, paw would need an annual infusion by dedicated alumni of about $400-500,000 or the interest that could readily be earned on the prudent investment of about $5 million. I'm fervently hoping that there are five multimillionaires among the 70,000 living Princeton alumni who care enough to call me and undertake to form a paw endowment committee, donating $1,000,000 tax deductible each to help keep paw independent for the next 100 years.

More than any structure at Princeton, which can only be visited when you are there, this is a legacy that would be treasured by alumni around the world-a noble effort enabling an independent paw to be read and reviewed repeatedly throughout the years. I urge those genuinely interested to call me now at 914-238-8720, or fax me at 914-238-0352, or write via Priority Mail to 5 Birch Lane, Chappaqua, NY 10514. In my mind there's no better way to show your love for our university, and to retain our important independent alumni voice, before the imminent takeover.

Alvin R. Kracht '49

Chappaqua, N.Y.

Back to full menu of Letters


Malay misperceptions

I take offense to Jane Martin's Letter From the Editor that claims cultural knowledge of Malays in Malaysia (May 17). Speaking with anthropological expertise on "what Malays eat and wear," she must then know that Malaysia is a nation of 14 different states, constituting various cuisines and dialects. How could she possibly claim with such ease this knowledge of their everyday lives? Could she have easily gotten away with it if it were about African Americans or Native Americans instead?

She also made general remarks about the Malays that proceeded only to demonstrate (at least to me, a Malay) how superficial her views on our people are. While it is true that Malays do not keep dogs as pets, this is due to the fact that Malays are mostly practising Muslims, and practising Muslims consider dogs to be unclean. This, however, does not stop us Malays from visiting our non-Muslim neighbors and admiring how cute their pet dogs are. Furthermore, to generalize how poorly we treat "politicians who have fallen out of favor" is another high-handed attitude I find in quite a few Americans. Having lived in the U.S. for seven years, I have encountered, rather amusingly, Americans who actually believe that the same political, economic, and social issues in developing countries do not exist in the great U.S. of A.

Bakhtiar Talhah '96

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Back to full menu of Letters


The real Cuba is no cigar

I was intrigued to read of the student project "In search of the real Cuba" (Notebook, May 17). I recently completed my own search, returning after 42 years to the island where I was partly raised and attended four years of high school. While I commend the ingenuity and intellectual curiosity of the students for organizing the effort, I found the representation of their endeavor idealistic if not naive-at least as it was reported.

To start with, the challenge to answer the question "how could a dictatorship with one seventh of the per capita income of Mexico have the low infant mortality and high literacy rates of a Western European country" was never alluded to again in the report.  Instead, we were treated to a photograph of our students observing a group of scrubbed school children in colorful uniforms highlighted with Pioneer scarves "singing of Elián." We are told our students stayed in a 16th-century converted convent in Old Havana. . . . and "attended four seminars conducted by faculty from the University of Havana on architectural restoration, the state of the Cuban population, education, and health care."

In the article there was no hint of the hypocrisy of the dictatorial regime featuring the Potemkin Village/Disney World of colonial Old Havana (or the Varadero Beach resort) in business to earn dollars for the country that pays its labor the equivalent of $20 per month on average. There was no hint of the disparity between the ample and varied menus in the tourist hotels and restaurants and the limited, and often unbalanced, diets available to the population at large-and that only with a ration book (unless one has dollars).  What did the University of Havana professors in the Restoration seminar have to say about the square mile upon mile of Dresden-like ruins and overcrowded, poorly maintained housing-or did they address themselves mainly to historic buildings and "converted convents" (as displayed in the photo of our students)? What did the professors have to say about the doormen in every hotel with "wires" from their ears to their recorders or phones to keep an eye on everyone's suspicious activities?  What did they say about the observable crowds of people waiting interminably for inner-city or cross-country transport-about the hitchhiking on truck beds, tractor wagons, or horse-drawn carts?  These are questions, to mention only a few, which could occupy a university seminar for days.  Or was it that our students were acting as polite guests should-and not embarrassing the hosts-especially if future visas are anticipated for the Princeton in Cuba group.

I can only hope that our students started to find the "real Cuba" behind the facade of friendly attitudes, lilting music, tropical breezes blowing through royal palms and bougainvillea hedges; behind the restored colonial patios with fountains and cobblestone streets; behind the charming children singing homages to Elián; and that the tragic, cruel, and oppressive underbelly of this island paradise inspired them to a challenging and realistic dialogue with their hosts.

Neil D. Chrisman '58

New York, N.Y.

Back to full menu of Letters


Tigers in high-tech

I was disappointed by your April 19 issue focusing on the Internet.

First off, school spirit aside, Nathan Myhrvold *83 was not involved in the development of the point-and-click interface for personal computers as your article on him stated. Point-and-click was first patented by Douglas Englebart in 1967, the interface was further developed by Xerox in the 1970s, and Steve Jobs was the first to make this technology available to the public in 1984.

As for Jeff Bezos '86 of Amazon.com and Meg Whitman '77 of eBay, let's get real. One company sells books, the other runs a flea market. With all the amazing things going on on the Internet and the many contributions made to the medium by Princeton grads over the years, it was disappointing to read yet another uninspired rehash of these tired and dubious "success" stories.

Ken McCarthy '81

Tivoli, N.Y.

 

Myths, once they have gathered momentum, are difficult to correct. The Myth of Henry Ford by Harvard's Professor Galbraith unfairly downgrades Henry but is the only Ford history I've come across that emphasizes the fact that his early associates were able to persuade him to tap the wealth of local businessmen in establishing dealerships. This enabled Ford to save his capital for "core business." And in 1921 the urgent request for $25,000,000 from dealers (cash for cars) saved the company from bankruptcy.

What has the foregoing to do with Jeff Bezos '86? Bezos did not create the cyberlode of online bookselling. But he was the first to recognize how rich it is. The multivolume reference Books-in-Print has been available as a computerized database for 15 to 20 years, accessible by author, title, key word, and publisher. BIP likely remained in low profile due to concerns by traditional brick-and-mortar and direct-mail booksellers that claimed online sales would interfere with their longstanding methods of doing business. Bezos was simply first to the party, and the veterans, now turning to the Internet, are having a difficult time catching him.

Robert N. Carpenter '43

Plandome, N.Y.

Back to full menu of Letters


Witherspoon manse needs funds

On a recent trip to Scotland I passed the dilapidated manse in Beith, Ayrshire, where John Witherspoon lived while he served as pastor of the Presbyterian Church from 1745 until 1757. It was there that Witherspoon's devotion to democracy ripened and where his leadership abilities first became apparent. In 1766 John Witherspoon accepted the call to become president of the College of New Jersey. He became, perhaps, the greatest of many distinguished presidents of Princeton. He was the only clergyman to sign the Declaration of Independence.

The good people of Scotland have been raising funds to restore the Witherspoon House and the surrounding historic buildings in Beith. I would like to invite fellow members of the Princeton family to join me in contributing to this worthy project. Contributions can be sent to Kenneth McKelvie, Planning Officer, Beith Townscape Heritage Initiative­Witherspoon House, Perceton House, Irvine KA11 2DE, Scotland.

William Happer *64

Professor of Physics

Princeton, N.J.

Back to full menu of Letters


Peter Singer redux

 

I find Professor Singer's views on health care, expressed in his letter (April 5), incomplete. When he cites other countries' systems and says, "National health insurance does work," he neglects to define what he means by "work." Every system that exists "works" in some sense. He may prefer systems that ration scarce health-care resources by forcing people to form queues rather than through some form of pricing mechanism. Perhaps the trait that disturbs many of his critics is not just his views but fuzzy thinking.

Wynn V. Bussmann '63

Birmingham, Mich.

 

In Singer's rebuttal he states, "Australia certainly does have national health insurance. . . . As a result most Australians get better health care than all but the very wealthiest Americans, while paying much less for it-including what they pay through taxation. But the same can be said for Britain, France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands . . . "

On what data does he base this statement?

Many British citizens are not pleased with their system. Routine hospitalization or surgery can be delayed for months. Many have separate, private medical insurance or pay out of their own pockets for private-practice doctors.

Singer could have added the Canadians to his list of countries with national medical plans. Then he could have mentioned how many come across the border to use our hospitals because they can't get served in their own system.

Ethical opinions be darned, be faithful to the facts in your arguments.

Don R. Kline '55

Yellville, Ark.

 

Let me see now. Peter Singer, who argues that a chicken may be of greater moral value than a baby, has been appointed to a chair in bioethics at Princeton. This is justified on the basis of "intellectual diversity," say professors Amy Gutmann and George Kateb. With that logic, had Hitler survived WWII, surely he and his holocaust philosophy would have made the Princeton cut.

I was in the service during WWII, and close enough to the horrors of Auschwitz to know where Singer's philosophy leads. It leads eventually to a total collapse of democratic society.

O. Dean Call '49

Seattle, Wash.

 

Dr. Singer's clarification of his remark that the primary impact of religion is to stop people from thinking is not reassuring. That irreligious people are more willing, in his words, "to take the argument further" is simply a sign that these irreligious people are more easily led-or misled. A religious person knows that an ethical system that allows infanticide, undoing many centuries of development in ethics and morality, is wrong, even if he cannot put his finger on the precise location of the error. One does not need to be an expert in textiles to see that the emperor has no clothes.

John F. Fay *85

Mary Esther, Fla.

 

The basic facts here are simple: The university had a chair specifically in medical ethics. This is, admittedly, one of the weaker fields in philosophy, but there's no question that Peter Singer is one of the two or three obvious choices in the world for that chair. That his arguments and positions offend the ignorant and biased-even those with Princeton pedigrees-should be of no moment to a serious academic institution.

Brian Leiter '84

Austin, Tex.

 

I have read only one of Peter Singer's books but because of personal experiences I strongly support his views. I have also found that I have to be very careful where I express them because of the violent emotional reaction they may incur. The university is about the only place where conflicting subjective views can be exposed to reason and discussed peacefully.

Our nation's founders recognized the problems of these differences when they wrote the constitutional guarantees of freedoms of speech and religion. For this, we are eternally grateful.

The trustees and administration of the university should be commended, not condemned, for the appointment of Professor Singer.

Robert Seyfarth '36

Melbourne, Fla.

 

Peter Singer's crime is discussing in plain language problems that we would rather not think about. In particular he forces us to consider the plight of children born with appalling defects. The choices faced by parents are either to subject the baby to a series of operations that promise, at best, a few months or years of pain and suffering, or to give little or no care so that the baby dies of dehydration or starvation in a few days or weeks.

It's natural to consider the possibility of giving the infant a quick and painless death. Don't blame Singer for bringing the subject up. That's his job. And don't condemn him just because you disagree with his conclusions. What would be more useless than a philosopher everyone agreed with?

Robert B. Blizard '44

Littleton, Colo.

 

Peter Singer seems to be asking many of the right questions, if not arriving at a few of the answers. Since our species is rapidly developing the means to control its own evolution, we need some serious thinking about what direction it should take and what we should do to correct the mistakes that will inevitably occur. We are not about to put the genie back in the bottle. That Princeton and Professor Singer are addressing these and related issues I find commendable, necessary, and probably long overdue.

Bob Ringland '58

Del Mar, Calif.

 

In regard to your interview with Peter Singer (cover story, January 26), it is certainly no surprise that he is an atheist.

Did Jonathan Edwards, the greatest mind this country has ever produced, stop thinking? Professor Singer is not able to comprehend it yet, but it is his mind that is closed to new thinking. He is one of those so aptly described in the Bible (2 Timothy 3:7) as "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."

Nicholas Gotten, Jr. '61

Memphis, Tenn.

 

Singer's writing is infused with sensitivity about unnecessary suffering and insight into the intellectual justifications for human acts that contribute to, or fail to alleviate, such suffering. Whether or not one ends up agreeing with Singer, any reader with an open mind and at least half a heart cannot help but be stimulated and challenged to give serious consideration to his views, and respectful of the courage it takes to raise

issues that make us uncomfortable to

ponder.

I have never been prouder of my alma mater than I am now for supporting free thought and provocative debate, no matter how many grumble or threaten to suspend donations.

David Rosskam '78

Washington, D.C.

 

Genuine academic freedom, like freedom of speech, mandates that a faculty member must be at liberty to proclaim any position to which his or her studies have led, regardless of that position's popularity, either with the general public or with any specific alumnus.

I disagree strongly with many elements of Peter Singer's ethical philosophy. Nevertheless, to stifle his views because of their unpleasantness would be disastrous. A pernicious ethical system can be defeated only by rebuttal in open discourse, not by the silencing of its proponents.

York Dobyns *87

Princeton, N.J.

 

Right on! I applaud this voice in the wilderness. Surely those who matriculate at Princeton, unlike six-year-olds so susceptible to brainwashing, can sort right from wrong, grain from chaff, sense from nonsense, etc.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if we, in some remote time, were able to create a "universal code of ethics," permitting us to scrap all religious beliefs responsible for so much suffering over the millennia?

Peter Singer can't hurt.

I plan to continue financial support for Princeton as generously as I can.

John C. Wilsey '45

Greenwich, Conn.

 

I am writing to commend the university on the selection of Peter Singer as professor of bioethics.

Singer is controversial. Good. He will make a lot of students examine their assumptions and preconceptions.

For my part, I am sending a larger donation to the university to compensate for my fellow alumni who are cutting off their dollars. If Princeton can't hire someone who challenges our assumptions, who will?

Alexander Randall V '73

St. Thomas, V.I.

Back to full menu of Letters


Houses for Mexicans

Thanks to Celia Hank Nuñez for her letter about our work and process (April 19). But the comment about "Mexican" house design preferences needs to be taken in the context of the article and our work.

Our goal is to create very specific designs for very specific individuals. The comment in the article referred to our working with a very specific population that numbers about 4,000 annually: migrant farmworkers from Mexico working in Adams County, Pennsylvania. Our stated conclusion about their public/private spatial preferences is relevant to this population only and was based on 147 written surveys as well as seven extensive oral interviews.

Bryan Bell '83

Gettysburg, Pa.

Back to full menu of Letters


John Fleming's online course

The Alumni Council and Professor John Fleming of the English department merit top marks for their online course The Spirit and the Flesh: Twelve Centuries of English Religious Poetry. More than a bit taxing but a real mind-bender. Very good for the soul. Congratulations all around, and may the beat go on.

B. J. Duffy '41

Hingham, Mass.

Back to full menu of Letters


Female Economics Majors

In the May 17 issue I read that "only about a third of undergraduate economics majors are women. A new study suggests ways to improve that number."

Doesn't this put the cart before the horse? If female economics majors are a minority, perhaps one should try to find out whether women are somehow intimidated or discouraged from studying economics; but the number and proportion of female economists seem to me to be wholly irrelevant in themselves. If women made up only 10 percent of the majors, or exactly 50 percent, or, as in my own academic field, an overwhelming majority (maybe 75 percent; I've never bothered to do the math), what does it matter? The point, it seems to me, should be that every student should be encouraged to study the field that most appeals to him (or her!), assuming always that he (or she!) is qualified for it. Anything else threatens to become a silly, though potentially ominous, numbers game.

John Polt '49

Oakland, Calif.

Back to full menu of Letters


A Malkiel mouthful

There is a title used in the magazine, and many other places about Princeton and New York, the meaning of which escapes me: Princeton's Burton Malkiel *64, Chemical Bank Chairman's professor of economics.

It appears that Princeton and the Chemical Bank chairman share ownership of Mr. Malkiel? I can understand the possessive usage in the Princeton case, but what does the other mean?

In the old days, when it was just Professor Malkiel of Princeton, I enjoyed reading him and discussions about his views. Nowadays it just seems a bit much.

Robert B. Horner '43

Crestwood, Ky.

 

Editor's Note: According to the office of the dean of the faculty, in 1988 Burton G. Malkiel was named to the Chemical Bank chairman's professorship, which was endowed by Chemical Bank in 1986 in recognition of the contributions of four Princeton alumni who were successive chairmen of Chemical Bank: Harold H. Helm '20, William S. Renchard '28, Donald C. Platten '40, and John F. McGillicuddy '52. Professor Malkiel's title thus becomes the Chemical Bank Chairman's professor of

economics.

Back to full menu of Letters


Raising Canes

I'm asking that all William H. Cane Scholars, in particular those from the classes of 1959 to 1976 (whose alumni records were damaged by water), contact undergraduate financial aid officer Don Betterton (P.O. Box 591, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544). I want to explore the possibility of forming an association to honor Mr. Cane and to function as a reminder of what his generosity has done for us.

Martin A. Dale '53

Incline Village, Nev.

Back to full menu of Letters


For the record

In our May 17 issue, we gave an incorrect Internet address for Philanthropic Research. The correct address is www.guidestar.org.

This is our last issue of the publication year. The next issue will be dated September 13, 2000.

Back to full menu of Letters


Paw welcomes letters. We may edit them for length, accuracy, clarity, and civility. Our address: Princeton Alumni Weekly, 194 Nassau St., Suite 38, Princeton, NJ 08542 (paw@princeton.edu).


GO TO the Table of Contents of the current issue

GO TO PAW's home page

paw@princeton.edu