Letters to the Editor

Monday, September 17, 2001

Bring Back This Section

Dear Sir:

Approximately two years ago, some clown(s) in your management decided to eliminate the Letters to the Editor page (or half-page) on the inside front cover—an utterly stupid decision. This section was the one sure forum where your readers could express their politically incorrect but sound and truthful views. It was also a section in which all readers would have a feedback of alumni opinions on college issues. It was the first section I turned to (and I suspect many other alumni turned to) upon receiving the Review.

Although you may have some statistics showing a drop in readership in this section, without some unbiased proof, it is hard to believe that all readership and response by letter (or letter taken from email) has dropped off so drastically as to warrant eliminating Letters to the Editor from the Review. While your newsbriefs do, your lengthy articles just do not have the same bite.

Now, for all practical purposes, Letters to the Editor is gone. I suggest you bring it back—regularly.

Happy trails,
Fred Fulf, Jr. '40

The Editor responds: The Dartmouth Review publishes Letters to the Editor as contributions warrant. Send your thoughts and commentary on TDR articles, College policy, or other matters of interest to students and alumni to Editor, The Dartmouth Review, PO Box 343, Hanover, NH 03755, or, by email, to editor@dartreview.com, or, by fax, to (425) 963-2765.

One 'l' Will Do

Editor:

The headline on page 2 of the May 28, 2001, issue of The Dartmouth Review,

'Who are the 2001 Class Marshalls [sic]?,' and the references to 'marshall [sic]' and 'marshalls [sic]' in the article convince me that a basic education at Dartmouth really must be deteriorating. I am surprised that your proofreader failed to correct this common spelling error. One 'l' will do.

Please do not, as Time did a year ago in correspondence with me, offer the excuse that the Tenth Edition of Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary includes 'marshall' as a second choice. The Review always should strive to be first class.

Sincerely yours,

Joseph F. Marsh '47

The Editor responds: Examples of the alternate, now archaic, spelling 'marshall' appeared regularly through the late 18th Century, when it was superceded by the current 'marshal,' according to citations in the Second Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary. In the future, however, we will endeavor to bring our spelling in line with modern forms.

Wah-Hoo-Wah: Long Exonerated

Editor:

The enclosed speaks for itself.

Sincerely,
Dr. Eugene M. Long, Jr.

[Editor's note: Dr. Long is the father of Eugene Long, III, who was involved in the Psi Upsilon fraternity's 'Wah-Hoo-Wah' incident (see TDR 4/30/01) and found himself harassed and threatened by the administration. The following letter, from Mr. Long's dean, put an end to the cloud of disciplinary proceedings that hung over Mr. Long's final months at Dartmouth and mark the College's grudging retreat from prosecuting Mr. Long for letting go with the old College cheer.)

Confidential
June 4, 2001
Hand delivered to Hinman Box

Dear Eugene:

This is official notification following your hearing of May 16, 2001. I have determined that there is no evidence to warrant any disciplinary action against you. You are not responsible for any violation of the College's Standard of Conduct II as alleged in my letter of May 8, 2001.

I appreciate your cooperation in this matter. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Lisa R. Thum, Dean of the Class of 2001

College, Magazine Abandon Values

To the Editor:

Today, as I received the July-August copy of the Dartmouth Alumni Magazine, I made an aside to my wife as to why they put a picture of an obvious NOW person on its cover. The statement was meant in a jocular manner. After reading the article, I was amazed at my ability to portend accuracy of my statement.

Of all the esteemed graduates of Dartmouth who rated their presence on the cover of the magazine, they chose a lesbian, anti-conventional family activist to promote the College's presence in this arena.

My thanks to The Dartmouth Review for its efforts to promote solid family values. It is a sad state of affairs that Dartmouth continues to hire a preponderance of extreme liberals to its administrative and faculty positions.

It is also sad that the great majority of alumni sit on their pens, typewriters, and computers and callously allow the College to guide its student body to ignore the tenets of Judeo-Christian morality.

Paul S. Miller '47

On Dartmouth's Ladies

Gentlemen:

As I am sure you now realize, the Ladies of Dartmouth are sensitive and need the special protection of the College to maintain their mental and emotional well-being. The rough-and-tumble of free debate and coarse male humor are antithetical to their natures. Just as many Christians were wounded to the quick by Andre Serrano's depiction of a crucifix immersed in stale urine, so the Ladies of Dartmouth are emotionally ravaged by any use of the phrase "date r**e" in a jocular tone. (Please forgive me for not spelling out the "r"-word. While I know that the men of Dartmouth can hear it and appreciate it in the context it is written, I nonetheless cannot bring myself to use the word knowing that some of the Ladies may read this paper and be grievously wounded.)

I hope you men will find some consolation in knowing that the Ladies of Dartmouth have truly not changed. Many of you may mistakenly believe that this is some new plot or campaign against you. It is not. The Ladies of Dartmouth are merely reverting to their true natures, that of sensitive and ethereal creatures for whom special accommodations must be made.

In an earlier age, men respected the Ladies' sensitive nature by retiring to the smoking room to engage in lively discussion and debate—discussions that were not considered seemly for the Ladies to hear. Indeed, their sensitivity and natural inability to participate without having their sensibilities offended was one of the reasons that the Ladies were barred from the College. It was well recognized a hundred years ago that their refined natures were unsuited to such activities.

Perhaps unfortunately, numerous women insisted that such attitudes were antediluvian, that women were the equal of men in all respects, that they could be free and equal participants with men and could handle the often rigorous and challenging intellectual conflict at colleges across the United States. To shield young women from the coarseness of life was infantilizing and patronizing, these women argued. And so, about 1970, colleges were were coeducated.

Clearly times have changed and the Ladies (despite their previous exhortations and promises) have reverted to their true natures.

My only regret that both they and your President are unwilling to let you retire to your "smoking room", your Zeta house, for male comradeship and verbal jousting. Even their Victorian great-grandmothers (who recognized the fundamental differences in female and male constitutions as their great-granddaughters are apparently unwilling to) would have permitted that.

My Heartfelt Sympathies,

S. Michael Patton

Wah-Hoo-Wah, Origins Of

To the Editor:

In a recent letter to the Editor in the Review (see TDR 5/14/01), a student commented on the disproportionate Administration response to the cheer "Wah-Hoo Wah". Just as an interesting note, I had an Alumnus of the University of Virginia friend who had a bumper sticker on his car which reads Wah-Hoo-Wah.

I copied the following from www.uva.edu web site:

"'The Good Old Song' was written in 1893. Sung to the familiar tune of "Auld Lang Syne," it has since served as UVa's unofficial alma mater. Although the words to the song are attributed to the late Edward H. Craighill, Jr., of Lynchburg, Va., Craighill wrote in the October 1922 issue of the University of Virginia Magazine that 'no one man should be credited with the authorship' of the first stanza. He said it was a byproduct of a welcoming home of a victorious football team and was the joint production of several students.

'The cheer 'Wah-hoo-wah' was in vogue with the student body and was incorporated into the song. The song is most frequently heard during home football games as Cavalier fans stand and sway, arm-in-arm, singing 'The Good Old Song' after each Virginia score and at the end of the game. The song is also sung at numerous other UVa athletic events and University-related functions.

"That good old song of Wah-hoo-wah
We'll sing it o'er and o'er
It cheers our hearts and warms our blood
To hear them shout and roar.
We come from Old Virginia,
Where all is bright and gay.
Let's all join hands and give a yell
For the dear old UVa
Wah-hoo-wah,
Wah-hoo-wah,
Uni-v, Virginia,
Hoo-rah-ray,
Hoo-rah-ray,
Ray! Ray! U-V-a

"The origin of 'Wah-hoo-wah' is uncertain. The cheer was used to root on Virginia teams as early as 1890 and may have been borrowed from Dartmouth College, whose athletic teams were once known as the Indians.

'Legend attributes the yell to Natalie Floyd Otey, who sang the ballad 'Where'er You Are, There Shall My Love Be' at Charlottesville's Levy Opera House in 1893. The predominantly student audience noticed that Otey warbled the first three words of the song between each of the stanzas and decided to join in the refrain. By evening's end, goes the legend, the crowd had corrupted 'Where'er You Are' into 'Wah-Hoo-Wah.' The Levy Opera House stood at the corner of High Street and Park Street and has since been renovated into an office building."

You might make note of the historical and honorable origin of the cheer which has absolutely nothing to do with anti-Indian, anti-Feminist, or anti-anything else sentiments that should upset tender Administrative ears on the Hanover Plain.

Hang in there—there still must quite a few folks who haven't given up totally on Dartmouth.

Cheers,
Jack Felter '54

Letters to the Editor

Article Tools

Related Articles