Let's Be Positive

By Andrew Grossman | Monday, May 14, 2001

Elsewhere in this issue of The Dartmouth Review, we explain why the College's decision to derecognize Zeta Psi is wrong-headed, hypocritical, and antithetical to Dartmouth's espoused principles and values (see pages 7 and 9 to cut to the chase).

So, in the interests of letting a dead horse be, let us consider the College's decision in another light. In invoking the harshest penalty possible, the administration has set a precedent that it will crack down in the harshest manner possible on speech that is unpopular and offensive, speech that is not at all threatening but simply rude, juvenile. This precedent is a matter of concern for all on campus.

Black's Legal Dictionary, the standard reference for these things, defines 'chilling effect' to be the repercussions of 'any law or practice which has the effect of seriously discouraging the exercise of a right,' in this case the 'freedom of expression and dissent,' which Dartmouth names as a 'Principle of the Dartmouth Community' on the very first page of the Student Handbook. For those who left their handbooks at home:

Freedom of expression and dissent is protected by College regulations. Dartmouth College prizes and defends the right of free speech and the freedom of the individual to make his or her own disclosures, while at the same time recognizing that such freedom exists in the context of the law and of responsibility for one's actions... The College therefore both fosters and protects the rights of individuals to express dissent... Membership in the Dartmouth community carries with it, as a necessary condition, the agreement to honor and abide by this policy.

What does it mean for students when the College decides to renege on its side of the bargain (keeping in mind that the Handbook is the codified basis of a student's relationship with the College)? It means that a student had better put a lot of thought into anything he or she writes or says, whether in a public or private context, for fear of punishment, no matter what's in the Student Handbook—or, indeed, any other official looking document. The College has broken its covenant with students, and now no rule on campus is certain but for the recommendation to 'watch your back.'

In that spirit, I wish to come clean: I have my own 'incident' to confess. On the Green last week, I had a conversation with a young man who, though a Classics major, knew not a whit of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, Beowulf, or, seemingly, anything written prior to 1974, the year of Stephen King's Carrie, for which he admitted great admiration. Later that afternoon, I emailed five friends, all of whom I knew to be acquainted with the Classics major. From the 'Sent Messages' folder of my mailbox, here is the text of that message:

Met [name of student] today for the first time. What a dullard. Must be a legacy.

This was a private communication, but, as we all now know, things happen: the unread Classics major might read my message over the shoulder of one of its recipients; he might find it, on paper, by one of the bins by the public printers, accidentally printed; if I've misjudged one of my confidants, the Classics major may discover the message in his own inbox, by way of forwarding. Dean of the College James Larimore justifies the outing of Zeta Psi's internal newsletter by stating simply that several issues 'in fact came to the attention of some of the victims.' So the means are irrelevant: to this unintended recipient, my remarks are likely abusive and demeaning.

Minimum standards, fortunately, don't apply to individuals as they do to Greek organizations, but given recent precedent, a charge of harassment would probably stick.

And, in that, the similarities between my email and Zeta Psi's newsletter are troubling; thus, this good faith effort to come clean, in the hope of receiving clemency fom the powers-that-be.

I admonish those on campus again: watch what you say, what you write, even what you think for the fear that it may be revealed unknowingly.

No longer can you call a professor a 'lightweight,' a 'stickler,' or a 'hard-ass.' No longer can anyone at Dartmouth be a 'dolt,' a 'dullard,' or a 'dunce,' or, at least no longer can one deserving be so deemed.

Instead, students must learn to express themselves positively. For example, Deans Redman and Larimore are 'swell' and 'honest.' Dartmouth's administration is 'trustworthy' and 'fair.' Just be positive: no more need—or can—be said.

Let's Be Positive

Article Tools

Related Articles