Erôs, insight and Armour Craig
The spring issue of Amherst comes excitingly alive with its article “Erôs and Insight,” about the First-Year Seminar offered by Professors Upton and Zajonc. The article, for the first time in many, many years, reminds us all of why Amherst stands at the top of institutions offering educational opportunities for young people.
The discussion of the seminar reminds me of my freshman English course under Professor Armour Craig in 1943, when we “children” were introduced to an entirely foreign and new (to us) mode of thinking and analysis. Without question, freshman English was the most valuable course of my four years at Amherst (I only received a “C”). Erôs and Insight, I’m sure, will be the same for today’s first-year students.
The description of the course reminds us all of how precious Amherst College is and how all of us must carry the responsibility of supporting the school. Thanks for the erôs and insight of the article.
Hunter Martin ’47
Houston, Texas
Erôs, insight and Theodore Baird
I greatly enjoyed reading the article in the spring issue of Amherst about Erôs and Insight. My guess is that many of these students became so engrossed with the course experience that grades became a secondary issue. If so, good for them and for their teachers!
During my reading of the article, which I found to be demanding in places, I was reminded of the English 1-2 course, which I took in 1948-49 as a required part of the then New Curriculum. I recall that Professor Theodore Baird and his colleagues also had to meet while teaching the course to design future assignments. The course undertook to develop techniques for defining terms, with improved communication as the objective. (I recall a former student’s brief account of his first day in class, when Professor Baird entered the classroom through a window in Appleton, threw his hat in the wastebasket and sat on the desk. As I remember it, the class time was spent talking about the window as a door, the wastebasket as a hat rack and the desk as a chair.)
It’s good to know that Amherst continues to have devoted teachers who go to such lengths to challenge and stretch the minds of its students. Bravo!
Charles W. Beeching ’52
Montague, Mass.
Erôs, insight and unmet cravings
I was very moved by the piece about the new course Erôs and Insight. As a student at Amherst, I was craving this type of inquiry and searched for it in psychology, sociology and philosophy classes, where I would have expected naturally to find it. Yet those courses were dry and did not move me. What is it about this class that jumps out as being different? The professors are daring to be real about the material, so it is not an abstract exploration, but one that dares to consider life’s big questions in a way that is not just intellectual. After leaving Amherst, I actively pursued this type of real self-reflection, and the deeper I went the more I became startled by how rare it is to find support in this direction and at how little our educational system prepares us to even begin to do this. This is not written as criticism about the Amherst education, but rather to acknowledge, in the face of a rare contribution made by this new course, the stark contrast and lack in the system as a whole. I congratulate Amherst (and, of course, Professors Upton and Zajonc) for making a more profound contribution to the education of students, and I hope this kind of offering occurs on a much larger scale. Having gone on to a master’s degree in education, I will certainly pursue what I can do about it as well.
Gerard Senehi ’82
Lenox, Mass.
Disillusionment
I expected more from my alma mater (and those associated with it). Unfortunately, the decline of editing and the carelessness taken with grammar is more than evident in Professor Ilán Stavans’s latest book, Spanglish: The Making of a New American Language.
I’m not talking about the evolving language described by the book, but the appalling use of English in the introduction and description thereof. The content of the book is obviously well researched and codified; however, the spell-checker and other devices used for grammatical continuity are tired and worn-out.
I’m not advocating for its reinstatement, but the English composition requirement at Amherst (which was universally hated) was dumped in the ’70s. This was clearly a sign of the times in that the care taken with language has steadily deteriorated since then. Some of us like to read for pleasure, but when there’s a glaring mistake every 10 or 20 pages it is hard to “get lost in a book.”
Maybe I’m just getting old; perhaps no one cares about the English language anymore.
Dorrin B. Rosenfeld ’85
Vallejo, Calif.
Setting the record straight
The letter written by Joseph H. Nesler in the spring issue of Amherst contained many images of Amherst that were entirely foreign to me: “a grim intellectual gulag dominated by a hard-core cadre of left-wing academics,” “a ruthless regimen of political re-education,” “a steady diet of stale collectivist gruel” and “the steely blows of the ideological hammer wielded by the faculty’s commissars of political correctness.” This seems to cry out that there is a communist conspiracy at Amherst.
My experiences at Amherst and about Amherst are in marked contradistinction to Nesler’s. As a student in the 1950s, I found the professors and instructors to be varied in their backgrounds, and they rarely expressed any partisan political opinions. At no time did faculty members attempt to stuff a political viewpoint down my throat. During my occasional visits to Amherst as an alumnus, students have appeared to be free to register differing opinions on various topics and certainly did not appear to be oppressed by members of faculty or administration. The writings of Amherst students and graduates demonstrate a wide diversity of opinions, political and nonpolitical, hardly reflecting undue influence from faculty or administration.
I read a number of articles taken from The Amherst Student around the time of Justice Scalia’s visit. There was demonstrated, again, a spirit of openness to divergent opinions and behaviors. One disturbing statement was that there is only one politically conservative person among the faculty. Somehow, I doubt that as a fact. It definitely was not true in the 1950s. In any case, what does that have to do with quality in education?
Amherst’s mission is about providing the best liberal education possible for a very intelligent student population, provided by a faculty well known for excellence in research and teaching. This says nothing about political persuasion or political correctness. Part of the Amherst education is provided by invited speakers and artistic performers, and I heartily believe that men and women of diverse opinions should be invited. Students can be encouraged to offer diverse responses to those presentations.
My hat is off to President Marx and preceding presidents of Amherst who have invited oft-controversial guests to address faculty and students and who have led subsequent discussions to air differences of opinions.
Thomas C. Washburn ’53
Fernandina Beach, Fla.
And straighter still
Joseph Nesler’s letter to the magazine made me wonder if he learned anything at Amherst. He calls the faculty “commissars” and accuses the college of brainwashing students into leftist leanings. Mr. Nesler also probably believes that global warming is a figment of the liberal imagination, that Saddam really does have WMD somewhere, that Fox News is “fair and balanced,” and that Republican deficits are good for the economy. I guess he’s been away from the thoughtful, challenging atmosphere of Amherst long enough that he has lost the questioning lessons taught us so long ago, and has gone over to the unquestioning and simplistic right.
G. Corson Freeman ’77
Freeport, Maine
Listening to all sides
I commend President Anthony W. Marx for inviting guest lecturers with such diverse views as Justice Scalia and Mr. [Anthony] Romero. However, I am saddened to learn that 16 faculty members protested Scalia’s visit by staying away and by publicly stating that they would not offer a tacit endorsement of his presence on campus.
All these years, going back to my undergraduate days, I believed that a mainstay of an Amherst education involved listening to all sides of an issue and then making up one’s mind. It seems to me that these faculty members have violated that basic principle. Justice Scalia, as an invitee of the college, deserved to be treated with the common courtesy of at least listening to his opinions. More importantly, the 16 faculty members have sent a terrible message to the students: If you don’t agree with someone, you should boycott and ignore that person.
If this is a prevalent faculty policy, I am concerned about the future of my alma mater.
Richard C. Sturtevant ’54
Valdosta, Ga.
Kudos for the spring issue
If there is a Pulitzer Prize for alumni magazines, the spring issue ought to get it. It’s outstanding.
Richard L. Carrie ’45
Vero Beach, Fla.
More kudos
Hot off your presses and into my sweltering mailbox, the excellent spring issue recently arrived. I use the descriptor “excellent” for many reasons. Not because it contains my “JFK” letter, but for the highly creative way it was grouped with those other three “Kennedy’s leagacy/voice/host” letters. Also, from the terrific cover photo of Bill Taubman to the inside look at a First-Year Seminar to the fascinating, mind-expanding, extremely well-written and illustrated “Flight Unseen” article, eventually I got around to my own class’s notes (which I always used to read first).
Lee Perlman ’62
Ashland, Ore.
Lord Jeff’s menagerie
I was interested in the Jeffery Amherst note in the summer issue of Amherst. Did you know that there is also an Amherst pheasant—in this case a real species? There is a fine picture of it in the Mead Art Museum. The magazine is interesting.
Jack Hagstrom ’55
Water Mill, N.Y.
Re: Reunion
I was disappointed that there was absolutely nothing about the college Reunion held last May in the recent issue of Amherst. I was present at the Reunion, representing my class of 1934, with my son Robert, also an Amherst graduate [Class of 1970]. It was very well organized, and my son and I toured the campus, admiring the many new facilities. My only regret is that I was the only member of my class to attend.
Charles W. Nielsen ’34
Bedford, Mass.