The Consequences of Expansion

By James S. Panero | Wednesday, June 12, 1996

In the winter term, Dartmouth College released a progress report on the planned expansion of Baker Library. News of this addition, to be called Berry Library, spurred reporters from this paper to dig further. When they did, they uncovered College plans that called for much more than an expanded library.

In 1989, top Dartmouth officials met and resolved to expand the College northward. Dartmouth would create a second green, lined with new buildings, to be located behind Baker Library. The master plan then called for a substantial increase in student enrollment — perhaps to fill future graduate programs. The 1989 plans were made in secret, and to this day — save the disclosure of the library plan — they remain secret. It was only through the benevolence of a high-level official, who leaked the master plan to The Dartmouth Review, that any news of expansion has gone public.

The first three issues of spring term, this paper set out to explore the many consequences of expansion. Through a number of interviews, we tried to bring a range of ideas and expertise into the discussion. The following are excerpts from those interviews.

—James S. Panero

Roger Kimball on Dartmouth architect Bob Venturi

Editor's note: While the architectual plans for Berry Library have yet to be released, the College has announced that Bob Venturi will design the structure. The Dartmouth Review contacted Roger Kimball to discuss this choice.

Roger Kimball is Managing Editor of The New Criterion. Educated at Yale with degrees in philosophy and classical Greek, he has written extensively about architecture and its role in modern society. His articles have appeared in Architectural Record and The New Criterion, covering such topics as Post-Modernism (TNC 6/88), Bob Venturi's design for the National Gallery in London (TNC 12/91), and even Dartmouth's own Hood Museum (TNC 11/85). This interview ran in our April 10 issue.

The Dartmouth Review: What is Bob Venturi's role in contemporary architecture?

Roger Kimball: The important thing to understand about Venturi is that he has instantiated post-modernism perhaps more adroitly, more cunningly than almost any other architect. Philip Johnson once said that post-modernism installs the giggle into architecture. I think that was a very sly and accurate observation on Johnson's part. Venturi has been very adept at providing the architectural landscape, especially the cultural architectural landscape — museums, educational institutions and so on — with a kind of nostalgic look back to the past that is fake through and through. There is something deeply fraudulent about what Venturi does. In his repudiation of modernism he has embraced a kind of jokiness in architecture that is at odds with the seriousness of the institutions that he is proposing to serve.

Review: You wrote that Postmodernism treats tradition as a storehouse for stylish tricks. Just as modernism in architecture may be brutally honest, what drives postmodernist architecture to be so dishonest?

Kimball: Fundamentally, the techniques of pastiche of parody come to the fore. One is no longer interested in building in such a way that there is an effort made to materials honestly, to ornament honestly. The appliqué of historicising ornament comes forth so that you will have a building which is essentially a modernist shell with curtain walls. Then stuck up on top of it would be a classical pediment. It is just fake through and through. Postmodernism is an architecture of the dear, an architecture of the Hollywood stage set.

Review: Venturi aside, how should any architect, in your opinion, approach a library design, especially within the context of Dartmouth?

Kimball: Make it as inconspicuous as possible. When you have an established architectural ensemble, you want an architecture that can devote itself to the task at hand and not call attention to itself. Postmodern architecture is egotistical, often largely at odds with the purpose it means to serve.

Review: A bit of a quandary, then, is how to create a building that is impressive and at the same time suitable and fitting.

Kimball: Indeed. One of the faults of many architects today is a longing for monumentality that is often inappropriate to the situation. There is a place for grand architecture. I am not sure a small college campus is one of them.

If the library that is already in situ will continue to be Dartmouth's architectural focus, then you want an addition that blends in and defers to the original.

Denise Scott-Brown on Dartmouth's northern expansion

Editor's note: In keeping with this architectural theme, The Dartmouth Review spoke with Denise Scott-Brown, of Venturi, Scott-Brown and Associates. She spoke candidly about the new Berry library and shed futher light on the master plan of 1989.

Born in Zambia and raised in South Africa, Denise Scott Brown holds degrees in architecture and planning from London's Architectural Association and from the University of Pennsylvania. She met Bob Venturi in 1960 when they were both on the faculty at the University of Pennsylvania, and the two married in 1967. Since then, this husband-wife team has collaborated on nearly every project involving the northern expansion of Dartmouth. This interview ran in our April 17 issue.

The Dartmouth Review: How did Venturi, Scott Brown & Associates become involved with the development of land north of Baker library?

Denise Scott-Brown: We were first the architects for the additions to the Thayer building. While we were working on that, I was approached by the Office of Campus Planning to help think about the problem — in a conceptual way — of what would happen when the medical center moved out. We likened that to as if the lake dried up in front of Chicago.

Review: In other words, the College now had this opened land and needed to decide how to redevelop it?

Scott-Brown: Yes, right in the center of everything. People were very wise. They said we just can't dive into anything. We must think very carefully about who we are, what we want to be, and how we use this space.

Review: What did you decide?

Scott-Brown: We came up with thoughts for the re-use over the years of all the land from exactly north of the library. During that time it became evident that the addition to the library would really be the kind of center of that new campus. It is a part of an overall vision which sees a mall to the north of primarily liberal arts classrooms and department buildings.

Review: It sounds like the buildings would face in to a kind of courtyard or green. How will the library addition fit into this?

Scott-Brown: The library would look straight along it and be in a very strategic position. People would go from the social sciences to the sciences right across the library.

Review: When did your firm first begin to explore uses for the land north of Baker Library?

Scott-Brown: That was about 1989. The Thayer building [designed by Venturi, Scott-Brown and Assoc.] was in construction and almost complete then. The library came on board at that time. We've been at it since then.

Professor Frank Lentricchia on the impact of graduate programs

Editor's Note: Dartmouth College has not made an official statement about expansion of its graduate programs, nor do the plans leaked to this paper make explicit reference to graduate expansion. Nonetheless, with the planned enlargement of Dartmouth's physical plant, graduate expansion is a real possibility. In this interview, and the one to follow, we asked two prominent scholars about the impact of graduate programs on undergraduate education.

Frank Lentricchia is the Katherine Everett Gilbert Professor of Literature at Duke University. He has published After the New Criticism and an autobiography entitled The Edge of Night. Two novels will be forthcoming this fall. Aside from teaching and writing, Professor Lentricchia was also the editor of the South Atlantic Quarterly from 1988 to 1993. This interview ran in our April 24 issue.

The Dartmouth Review: How do you see the recent developments of campus expansion at Dartmouth?

Professor Frank Lentricchia: The general situation is clear. Dartmouth intends to expand into a graduate institution of research. If that is the intention, then Dartmouth College as it is known will no longer exist.

Review: How long could it take to build a graduate program with a reputation good enough to attract top-notch graduate students?

Lentricchia: Depending on how much money Dartmouth is willing to put into this, it could happen extraordinarily quickly — in two or three years.

It obviously can't happen across the board. If you moved across the board you would need more money than Harvard has. But a specific department can be transformed in two to three years. The word goes out very quickly.

Review: We have some excellent undergraduate programs. The geography department comes to my mind. Could this department make an easy transition to a graduate program?

Lentricchia: If they are already high profile, yes, but I can't imagine doing it without great resources or the promise of great resources. They must be confident that they can do this.

Review: The College just acquired $30 million for the new Berry library. This was just a portion of the latest capital campaign. The money might be there...

Lentricchia: My question is, why would Dartmouth want to do this? I mean, there are enough great graduate research institutions out there. I don't think this country needs another one.

The health of the culture depends on really dedicated and passionate undergraduate teaching. Sure, Dartmouth can make this transition, but it would no longer be Dartmouth College.

It will no longer be a place dedicated to the nurturing of students between the ages of 18-22. It will be dedicated to the nurturing of professionals — many of whom will have dubious value for the culture, at best.

Review: Do you think Dartmouth's English department, for instance, could produce a viable graduate program down the road?

Lentricchia: I think they could. I would hope they wouldn't want to do this. I think it is a mistake but the powers that be at Dartmouth will prevail in this.

Professor Donald Kagan on graduate programs at Yale, and the questions that should be asked at Dartmouth

Editor's note: Donald Kagan is the Bass Professor of History, Classics, and Western Civilization at Yale University. He has published, among other books, Pericles of Athens and the Birth of Democracy, A New History of the Peloponnesian War, and most recently On the Origins of War and the Preservation of Peace. This interview also ran in our April 27 issue.

The Dartmouth Review: At Yale, how do the graduate and undergraduate programs interact?

Professor Donald Kagan: It is a moderately complicated story. There are two major kinds of interaction I can think of. One is where graduate students perform as teachers one way or another. There are many ways in which they can teach. Minimally, at the bottom of the list, they grade papers. At the top of the list they actually teach courses as though they were professors. In between there are various levels of teaching fellows who teach discussion groups and lecture courses.

The other major way that undergraduates interact with graduate students is that in some courses, they are fellow students. I can't tell you just how many such courses there are, but I can tell you that my most successful courses are seminars in which both graduates and undergraduates are students. Not everybody has the same experience, and not everybody has the same opinion of them. But I believe over my long career they are the best classes I've ever had.

Review: If Dartmouth decided to expand its graduate programs today, how long might it take to build up a new department?

Kagan: Hard to predict. If Dartmouth chose to take that route, it would have an advantage because it already has such a fine reputation as a center of higher education in general. It would be easier for Dartmouth to attract the high caliber faculty. Consequently it would be easier to convince graduate students to come. Potential graduate students are not always terribly informed about the technical details of what is going on. They very often, like undergraduates, are swayed by the institution as a whole. So Dartmouth would be helped by that, but there would be a while before the thing worked out.

Review: Do we create a problem if Dartmouth begins graduate programs in some departments and not others?

Kagan: It would be a very big problem. It would create a sense of second class citizenship in those departments who would be left without graduate programs. It will definitely be a divisive matter and cause considerable grief ad infinitum. You can count on it.

Review: Would you then say it is a good idea for Dartmouth to expand its graduate programs?

Kagan: Everything depends upon the details. People who are the least bit curious about whether this is a good idea ought to press for details. You don't want to lose the plusses of your excellent undergraduate arrangement now, and somebody should assure you that you won't be worse off. Questions that should be asked are:

Is it your intention to have the faculty teach less than it teaches now?

Will you be substituting graduate student teaching for faculty teaching?

If not, will you swear an oath to that fact?

That's the way it goes. That's the price, traditionally. I don't think it is in any way necessary. There is nothing wrong with someone saying we continue to regard our undergraduate education operation as a special, unique quality. We're not going to let it go down in any way and we pledge that the following things will not happen. Then, fine — if you can find the resources. That's another question, of course.

But even if you did that, it would be fair to ask this question: while you are out there getting resources for this new program, you could theoretically have gone out and gotten those new resources and strengthened the undergraduate program instead. Make the case that it is better to do A than B.

The Consequences of Expansion

Article Tools

Related Articles