PDF Archive

Easily share your PDF documents with your contacts, on the Web and Social Networks.

Share a file Manage my documents Convert Recover PDF Search Help Contact



The Dartmouth Review 11.14.2008 Volume 28, Issue 9 .pdf


Original filename: The Dartmouth Review 11.14.2008 Volume 28, Issue 9.pdf

This PDF 1.4 document has been generated by Adobe InDesign CS2 (4.0) / Adobe PDF Library 7.0, and has been sent on pdf-archive.com on 19/04/2014 at 01:32, from IP address 129.170.x.x. The current document download page has been viewed 580 times.
File size: 4.4 MB (16 pages).
Privacy: public file




Download original PDF file









Document preview


Dartmouth’s Only Independent Newspaper
Non-Profit Org.
U.S. POSTAGE
PAID
N. Haverhill, NH
Permit No. 1

Volume 29, Issue 9
November 14, 2008
The Hanover Review, Inc.
P.O. Box 343
Hanover, NH 03755

Dickey’s Example

• President

What’s Inside

Dickey’s Tenure • A Presidential Symposium •
A Look at the Dickey Center • Snapshots of the Other
College and University Presidents •

Page The Dartmouth Review November 14, 2008

Presidential Symposium

Editor’s Note: The Dartmouth Review asked several
of its staffers and alumni who have previously contributed
to the paper the following questions: a) What qualities do
you think the new Dartmouth president should have? and
b) What vision he should have for the College? What follows
are the responses we received.

The next president of Dartmouth should respect the
College as it is; we should be wary of any candidate with a
‘vision.’ The next president should see his job as an end, not
a beginning, of ambition. He should not avoid all change,
but he should understand Dartmouth and then consider how
he might improve it rather than conceive an ideal college
and then determine how to turn Dartmouth into it.

Such respect would manifest itself in certain policies.
First and foremost would be an unequivocal prioritization
of undergraduate education. The Presidential Search Committee’s Leadership Statement asserts that undergraduate
studies, faculty research, and graduate programs can all be
improved simultaneously. This may well be the case, but,
should it prove otherwise, the president must not sacrifice
the teaching of undergraduates. The College should remain
a college in more than name.

Our next president’s social policy should also accept
Dartmouth as it is. The Greek system is popular. While the
fraternities should not be treated as sacred, any prospective change should be introduced cautiously. The president
should honestly assess the demand on campus rather than
deciding what social options students should want. He will
inevitably inherit the Sisyphean duty of discouraging binge
drinking, but otherwise, he should not try to change students’
preferences.

The president’s most important role will be a matter
of ability, not philosophy. He will have to do the difficult
things that obviously should be done, such as raising funds
and attracting good professors. Such capacities are difficult
to assess in a candidate, and there are no ideal qualifications
in this respect. Rather, the College must carefully examine
each candidate’s record to determine who would be most
adept. Let us hope she chooses wisely.
—Brian C. Nachbar ‘12


The next president of Dartmouth College must not look
to Cambridge, or Princeton, or Providence for guidance:
he must look squarely at the granite beneath his feet, and
there he will find the proper foundation to continue to build
upon Dartmouth’s storied legacy.

Rather than imitate other institutions, the next president
of Dartmouth College needs to cultivate the virtues that
make this college great. He must defend the Greek system,
continue to promote the importance of the outdoors, and
revive Dartmouth’s lost traditions.

But most importantly, the next president must prevent
Dartmouth College from becoming Dartmouth University,
where graduate-level research, expensive new buildings, and
a burgeoning administration take precedence over recruiting
professors who are simultaneously excellent teachers and

The next president of the College needs to be one
who can understand and connect with the students. One
of the best things about this school is its sense of community. That is why our next president must keep the focus
of the College on the undergraduate experience, and not
on turning us into a research institution. In addition, let us
not forget the importance of tradition. It is necessary that
the new President uphold what makes Dartmouth unique
and respect this school’s history, because that is a large part
of why we all love it here so much.
—Blair E. Bandeen ‘12


The most important thing about Dartmouth is its
unique identity—our next president must have the
he next President of Dartmouth College
vision to protect that identity from change. While
must not look to Cambridge, or Princeton,
Harvard, Yale, and Princeton all retain distinctive
qualities that contribute to their school’s personality, or Providence for guidance: he must look squarethe traditions of the College on the Hill, and most
ly at the granite beneath his feet, and there he
importantly the supremacy of Greek life, put our
school in a mythic class of its own. There is still, at will find the proper foundation to continue to
least in my belief, a strong notion of what it means to build upon Dartmouth’s storied legacy.
be a “Dartmouth man” or a “Dartmouth woman.”


Other institutions’ focus on graduate schools, the de- ambitions toward a higher mediocrity, doomed to lag behind
bilitation of greek life, and the admissions process, which not only the super endowed (and well established) private
focuses more on numbers than on personality, caused universities but the more opulent state universities as well.
them to lose their identities. Dartmouth is the last bastion The stress on emulating the university will inevitably result in
of the true definition of “college” in the top tier. That is its a corresponding erosion of the college’s particular genius.
Simply by attributing strength to a hermaphroditic
identity. Our next president must exemplify Dartmouth’s
institution
with graduate programs in the sciences and
commitment to tradition. He must keep the focus on undernone
in
the
rest of the College, the Searchers think they
graduate students. He must not interfere or attempt to edit
have
dismissed
the problem of operating with disparate
our Greek system like many other college administrations
have done. Clearly, the new president must embody the incentive and reward structures. This postulation would be
most important mission of Dartmouth college: protecting more reassuring if they could cite a single successful model
of the strange creature they envision.
the old traditions.

Finally, I find no reason for comfort in the Search
—Andrew B. Lohse ‘12
Committee’s assertion that it has combed the ranks of deans,
vice presidents, and provosts for candidates. The climb up
this era’s academic hierarchy favors those who learn to ap
Our next president must have a clear understanding pease and accommodate the many interest groups that have
of what it means for Dartmouth to truly be a liberal arts flourished in the contentious campus politics of the past half
century, and it does not attract those who are dedicated to
college in the years to come.

With a plethora of questions surrounding the direction intellectual ferment and true scholarship.
My ideal candidate would present a very different temof our school’s graduate programs that leaves many fear-
perament.
He or she would be a well-educated person with
ing about a potential “Harvardization” of Dartmouth, our
strong,
well-considered
ideas about education, eager to fight
College on the Hill faces a serious identity crisis. The next
for
radical
reform—for
nothing
less than reinvention of the
president must reaffirm that we are what we claim to be: a
liberal
arts
college.
Far
from
being
a step backward, this
college. More importantly, the next president must understand and assert the importance of a liberal arts education, restructuring would not only raise Dartmouth to distinction
but also set the tone for the elite college of the twenty-first
the primary product of a college.

Dartmouth College should strive to become a leading century. Do we really dare? Unfortunately, I think not.
example of what it means to be a tight-knit community —Frank Gado ‘58

T

of scholars that pursues truth and knowledge for its own
sake. Rather than promote the hollow academic trends of
postmodernism or relativism, which are far removed from
the great Western intellectual heritage, Dartmouth should
instead encourage the teaching of, as Matthew Arnold famously put it, the “best that has been thought
and said.”
y ideal candidate would be a well-educated By vocally supporting faculty hirings that
are not subject to ideological litmus tests,
person with strong, well-considered ideas about a stronger core curriculum that requires
education, eager to fight for radical reform—for noth- students to take those courses that are funing less than reinvention of the liberal arts college. damental to fully inheriting the ideals of our
civilization, and policies that uphold a student’s
right to freely exchange ideas in an academic
setting, the next president has the ability to
provocative researchers. The focus of Dartmouth should be
restore the important qualities of a liberal education to
on its pool of talented and well-rounded undergraduates;
Dartmouth College. And, to overcome our search for a
Dartmouth has never been a research university, and it
clear identity, it is by the qualities of a liberal education
never should be.
that we, as a college, must be defined.

Dartmouth must continue to provide the rugged educa—Erich A. Hartfelder ‘12
tion that has defined this school for centuries.

The “soft intellectualism” of Harvard or Princeton
simply will not survive the harsh New Hampshire winter,
and neither will the president that brings this ideology to

The Presidential Search Leadership Statement looks
Hanover.
upon Dartmouth and seeks candidates to usher a future of

If Dartmouth wishes to be perceived as the elite undermore. I would seek candidates who offer a future of instead.
graduate institution in the country, it must be led by someone
No sector of American higher education is as imperiled as
who understands that the College needs to be improved
the liberal arts undergraduate college, once the unique,
from within rather than changed from the outside.
much-envied pride of our system.
—Weston R. Sager ‘09

The very concept of the liberal arts has lost parameters

M

and cohesive purpose. College curricula tend to give short
shrift to the educational needs of students as they increasingly reflect and serve the career interests of the faculty. A
fetish for specialization has displaced love of wisdom.

Do the Presidential Searchers show any awareness of
this enfeeblement? On the contrary, they blindly advance
it. Despite their boasts about Dartmouth as a college, the
overwhelming portion of their attention goes to Dartmouth
as a university. They give importance to research grants,
project greater integration of the graduate schools with
undergraduate instruction, and emphasize undergraduate
students’ pre-professional collaboration with faculty.

Although none of these is exclusively bad, none is an unalloyed good. And in concert, they clearly point Dartmouth’s



Leaving aside the motivations for the last half-decade’s
alumni rebellion, it should not have escaped anyone’s notice
that U.S. News and World Report, Forbes Magazine, and
The Times of London have all recently dropped Dartmouth’s
ranking in comparison to our sister schools.

In the latter publications’s table of the world’s best
educational institutions, Dartmouth is the lowest-rated
institution in the Ivy League. Brown ranks as the secondto-last Ivy at twenty seventh place, and this year The Times
dropped Dartmouth from forty eighth to fifty fourth position.

So what qualities should we look for in Dartmouth’s next
president? Given the College’s stagnant state and the fact
that our next leader bears the responsibility of guiding the
life and education of over 5,000 students and approximately
the same number of faculty, administrators and staff, the
next president should be the finest person available.

I hope that the Search Committee—to paraphrase Dr.
Martin Luther King Jr.—will look exclusively at the content of each candidate’s character, individual abilities, and
proven experience. The Committee should focus solely on
a candidate’s aptitude to be the transformative president
that the College urgently needs—and not on other superfluous diversity criteria. May the best person get the job.
Dartmouth can’t afford less.
—Joe Asch ’79

November 14, 2008 The Dartmouth Review Page

Editorial


Founders

Greg Fossedal, Gordon Haff,
Benjamin Hart, Keeney Jones

“Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win
great triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than
to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy
much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray
twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.”
—Theodore Roosevelt

Emily Esfahani-Smith
Editor-in-Chief

Weston R. Sager
President

Michael C. Russell, A.S. Erikson
Executive Editor

William D. Aubin, Michael G. Gabel
Managing Editors

Mostafa A. Heddaya, Tyler Brace
Associate Editors

Aditya A. Sivaraman
Publisher

John M. Morris
Archivist

Nicholas P. Hawkins
Vice President

Catherine D. Amble
Photography Editor

James T. Preston Jr., Maxwell L. Copello
Sports Editors

Nisanth A. Reddy, Michael J. Edgar
Web Editors

Contributors
Blair Bandeen, Kathleen Carmody, Andy Reynolds, Michael R. DiBenedetto, Matthew D. Guay, Donald Faraci,
Cathleen G. Kenary, Ryan Zehner, Charlie Dameron,
Brian C. Murphy, David M. Shrub, Lane Zimmerman,
Ashley Roland, Erich Hartfelder, Brian Nachbar, Andrew
Lohse, Michael Randall, Athina Schmidt

Mean-Spirited, Cruel and Ugly
Legal Counsel

The Review Advisory Board

Martin Anderson, Patrick Buchanan, Dinesh D’Souza,
John Fund, Jeffrey Hart, Laura Ingraham, Mildred Fay
Jefferson, William Lind, William Rusher,
R. Emmett Tyrrell, Sidney Zion
“Alleged Republicans.”
Cover images courtesy of the Dartmouth College Library
Special Thanks to William F. Buckley, Jr. RIP.
The Editors of The Dartmouth Review welcome correspondence from readers concerning any subject, but
prefer to publish letters that comment directly on material published previously in The Review. We reserve
the right to edit all letters for clarity and length.
Submit letters by mail, fax at (603) 643-1470, or e-mail:
editor@dartreview.com
The Dartmouth Review is produced bi-weekly by
Dartmouth College undergraduates for Dartmouth
students and alumni. It is published by the Hanover
Review, Inc., a non-profit tax-deductible organization.
Please send all inquiries to:

The Dartmouth Review
P.O. Box 343
Hanover, N.H. 03755

Subscribe: $40
The Dartmouth Review
P.O. Box 343
Hanover, N.H. 03755
(603) 643-4370
Fax: (603) 643-1470
Contributions are tax-deductible.
www.dartreview.com

Dickey’s Beloved Example


Every institution has its great presidents. For the
United States, those men include George Washington,
Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Delano Roosevelt. For
Dartmouth College, one president stands out above the
rest: the College’s twelfth president, John Sloan Dickey.
Like Washington, Dickey was a man of state; humility was
a warm spot in both Lincoln and Dickey’s characters; and
finally, both Roosevelt and Dickey displayed their remarkable
powers of leadership by steering their respective institutions
through the most difficult of times: Roosevelt, through the
harsh realities of World War II; Dickey, through the unsure
post-war world.

In this past national presidential election, the nation
was searching for a new president, just as the College is
currently searching for its own. Both national presidential
candidates, Senators Barack
Obama and John McCain,
fashioned themselves after
the great presidents of the
past in order to win popular
support—Obama, after John
F. Kennedy; McCain, after
Theodore Roosevelt. Both men
realized the importance of the
past and the importance of
looking to successful predecessors as examples for their own
presidencies.

As Dartmouth’s Presidential Search Committee continues interviewing and vetting candidates for the job here in
Hanover, the Committee should take a page out of Obama
and McCain’s presidential campaign handbooks and use the
past to help shape the future. The new Dartmouth president,
specifically, should model himself after Dartmouth’s former
president, John Sloan Dickey.

To this effect, it is nothing less than shocking that the
Committee’s Leadership Statement included extended
sections on expanding the graduate programs—with prose
littered on the one hand with business jargon and on the
other with post-modern gook—while no discussion was given
of a model past president of the College, whom the new
president should aspire to emulate in leadership, character,
and grace.

Dickey was known, as explained on pages 8 and 9, as
the Dartmouth president who revitalized the College into
what it is today: a liberating arts college, as he would say,
with an emphasis on developing the spirit, character, and
conscience of its students. While some of these qualities
have certainly waned under the presidential administrations
following Dickey’s, under a new president these qualities
could be refound and reemphasized for one very simple
reason: Dickey did not engineer a college culture from some
grand vision he conjured in his first days as president; he
merely discovered the College’s essence, and reminded the
faculty and students of it. It was his imaginative leadership
that made this possible.

But there is more to leadership than effecting institutional change, and Dickey knew that. When he first arrived
at Dartmouth as an undergraduate in the fall of 1925, the
six-foot-three giant was too clumsy to make the basketball
team. Instead of leaving the team, Dickey stayed on the
squad as a quasi-coach, encouraging his peers and helping
them improve their skills.

Years later in 1982, after suffering a debilitating stroke
that impaired his ability to communicate in the normal manner of speaking and writing, a retired Dickey attended an
early-fall football practice at Dartmouth College with thenpresident David McLaughlin. At the end of practice, the

entire team approached Dickey, who sat in his wheelchair,
with a green blanket covering his lap. The team captain told
the two presidents that he wanted to present them with a
gift. At that point, the football team began singing “Men of
Dartmouth.” McLaughlin recalls, “Mr. Dickey looked at me
accusingly, but as the team broke into the singing of ‘Men
of Dartmouth,’ he reached up, removed the well-used 1929
reunion cap that he was wearing, and with tears in his eyes,
placed it over his heart.”

In the same way that children can be remarkably perceptive and honest, young adults and college students can
intuitively know the makings of a good leader. The members
of the football team, on that fall day in 1982, certainly knew
a good leader when they saw him, and paid tribute accordingly.

While on pages 10 and
11 of this issue, some possible
candidates for Dartmouth’s
president are highlighted, one
that is not mentioned bears
some similarities to Dickey.
That man is Robert Gates, the
current Secretary of Defense,
and the former president of
Texas A&M University. At
Texas A&M, Gates became
renowned for turning the university around into a premier
public institution of higher learning: he recruited top faculty
members, energized the liberal arts program, and reduced
the supremacy of the power-hungry administration.

Beyond that, he was universally beloved: Gates was
regularly seen attending the University’s sports games and
practices, encouraging students and cheering them on. He
left his office regularly to turn up around campus, attending
student planned events, and the like. On several occasions, he
even arrived, sometimes unannounced, at the Army Corps’
practices, and went on long runs with the Corps’ men. On
his final day at Texas A&M, Gates was leaving his office
for the very last time only to be greeted by thousands of
students who knew that they were losing a great leader.

Both Gates and Dickey loved their students and loved
the institutions which they led. Their love was and still is
felt, which is why they both go down in history as leaders
of character and conscience.

At his quiet, brief inauguration to Dartmouth’s
presidency, Dickey was characteristically uncomfortable
as tribute was conferred upon him. As the ceremony came
to a close, Dickey made a brief speech, a part of which included: “Standing in the shadow of predecessors who gave
this College life and strength, and in the presence of men
who daily serve its cause, I have no great words of pledge
or promise to stack beside their deeds and proved devotion.
I do pray God, and ask each man’s help, that my all shall
never be less than the cause of Dartmouth, under whatever
circumstance or chance, shall require.”

Dickey’s vision for the College was not messianic or
grand by any stretch of the imagination. He did not seek to
undo the history and traditions of the College; nor did he
want the College to stagnate into a sleepy stasis, an intellectual stalemate. He simply understood three things—the
nature of man, the nature of Dartmouth, and the nature of
the world—and he brought them into a dynamic interplay
here at the College. In doing so, he lifted Dartmouth, its
spirit, and the spirit of those attending to an elevated ground,
as each met his very high expectations. Whoever the next
president of the College may be, he or she would be wise
to lead by Dickey’s beloved example.
n

By
Emily
EsfahaniSmith

Inside This Issue
The Week in Review .....................................................................................................................................Page 4
Rugby makes it into Semis ............................................................................................................................Page 5
War and Peace Center celebrates years ten..................................................................................................Page 6
Ambassador Yalowitz discusses the Dickey Center and its history .............................................................Page 7
A look at President John Sloan Dickey’s tenure at Dartmouth ..................................................................Pages 8 & 9
Candidates for the Dartmouth presidency ..................................................................................................Pages 10 & 11
Historian Beschloss on presidential leadership and moral courage.............................................................Page 12
Dartmouth’s Rockefeller Center examines the next presidential administration .......................................Page 13
The Stem Cell debate at Dartmouth ............................................................................................................Page 14
Professor Hart on Dartmouth’s next president ...........................................................................................Pages 15
Barrett’s Mixology & The Last Word ............................................................................................................Page 16

Page The Dartmouth Review November 14, 2008

The Week In Review
End in Sight for Affirmative Action?

The ever-zealous proponents of affirmative action are
at it again. In a desperate attempt to defeat Colorado’s
Proposition 46, which would effectively end affirmative
action in Colorado public schools, a group whose website
is known as “No to 46” has engaged in some rather questionable tactics to defeat the ban. In other states such as
Michigan, Washington state, and Nebraska, similar measures
have passed with between fifty-five and fifty-eight percents.
Colorado’s vote count on the proposition is extremely close
at this time, with 50% voting against it and 49% for, and a
sizeable number of provisional ballots exist. Colorado law
prevents the measure from passing or failing with less than
.5% without a recount.

Why is this result so surprising however? Well, it could
result from the fact that more liberal states than Colorado
have supported an end to affirmative action, or because
affirmative action supporters in Colorado have attacked
everything from the language of the proposition to its name
to its intentions and effect, or because of a very nasty web
campaign, but those probably don’t come close to the fact
that this “No to 46” site has essentially claimed that the
proposition is backed and supported by none other than
the Ku Klux Klan. Aside from being thoroughly nasty,
unethical, and meant to misinform, this statement is just
plain wrong. Defenders of affirmative action have once
again employed false information to crusade against the
equal rights of students. Such a new and innovative tactic
for such a worthy cause. Well, maybe not. But good try,
nasty affirmative action defenders, maybe next time your
strategy will end in a decisive defeat of all those who strive
for equality of opportunity. In the meantime, other states
are getting the message.

Pregnant Number

Ivy League schools compete on everything: snootiness,
drinking themselves under the table, etc., but up to this year
there has been one contest in which the Ivy Leagues have
not competed: voting. The Daily Pennsylvanian reports
that this grievous error was corrected last Tuesday when
Dartmouth and Penn went at it in an attempt to prove who
could elect this generation’s Jimmy Carter the hardest. Penn
initially claimed victory, but Vote Clamantis, Dartmouth’s
election drive, is challenging the results based on what could
be called Penn’s “fuzzy math.” Penn Leads The Vote, Vote
Clamantis’ counterpart with a terribly unimaginative name
(but it’s Penn, what’s one to expect?) merely estimated the
number of students that voted by taking Pennsylvania’s voter
turnout percentage for the 18 to 22 divisions and multiplying
it by the amount of students living in on campus housing.

Vote Clamantis used the tried and true method of
simply asking students at Hanover’s only polling station if
they’d voted. These numbers gave Penn a 96.4% turnout
against Dartmouth’s 92.5%. While TDR questions Penn’s
methodology, we’re not sure we want to be the victor in this
case given the results of the election and the asinine nature
of the contest.

Two-Dollar Idiocy

This past week Dartmouth attempted its first Two
Dollar-a-Day Challenge. This so-called humanitarian effort was an attempt to raise awareness of global poverty,
and disturbingly enough, is apparently just a sneak preview
of the upcoming Millennium Development Goals Week,
sponsored by the Dartmouth Coalition for Global Health.

While the goal of this event may have been noble, one
must wonder whether forcing a student to eat his dinner
at the Hop instead of FoCo is really enough to solve the
world hunger crisis. Not surprisingly, The Review has yet to
meet someone who actually participated in this challenge,
the main draw of which appears to have been free t-shirts.
We must applaud the dedication of some Dartmouth students to greater global awareness, though at the same time
cannot help but wonder what exactly this event of theirs
accomplished. We are, of course, eagerly anticipating the
events of the upcoming week, which are sure to be just as
productive.

Dartmouth Student
Elected…to Real Job!

In a squeaker last Tuesday, Democrat Vanessa Sievers ’10 defeated Grafton County Treasurer Carol Elliott,
a Republican. Sievers won by fewer than 600 votes, likely
propelled to victory by fellow Dartmouth students. Following the instructions of The One At The Top Of The Ballot,
a majority of Dartmouth voters exercised their right not to
think (heck, we do enough of that anyway) and voted Democrat straight down the ballot, denying Elliott a fourth term.
Voters across the country did the same, ousting Republican
state legislators and local officials from Maine to Oregon.

The fact that the county treasurer’s position is essentially
nonpartisan makes Elliott’s defeat at that hands of blind
ambition all the more tragic. In lieu of a longtime community member, a college student largely unfamiliar with
Grafton County and its needs will occupy the treasurer’s
seat (in between economics classes and College Democrat
meetings, of course). Despite her excellent track record
and relatively uneventful tenure, Elliott was a Republican
and, thus, unfit for office. Mirroring the nation as a whole,
Dartmouth students and Upper Valley residents decided
they’d prefer a youthful and inexperienced politician to
manage their change.

Hope and Change come to
Vermont

When one hears the words “administrator” and “published author” here at Dartmouth, one is apt to think the
worst. While these two things would normally be signals for
students to head for the nearest hills, Mary Childers is an
exception and one that students should be happy to have,
despite her work as a diversity consultant. As Vermont Public
Radio reports, Childers was in Burlington on November 7
to talk to low income Vermonters and discuss how to break
the cycle of poverty. Unlike many high minded academics,
Mary Childers is a true story of the American dream. She
was raised on welfare and managed to educate herself and
worked hard enough to rise to her current position as a college ombudsperson here at Dartmouth despite tremendous
pressure to the contrary.

She stated to VPR that “there’s a problem with the
school system, and there’s a problem with how some people
see education,” namely how family and acquaintances fear
being seen by their educated brethren in a worse light, a
condition that she terms “defensive ambivalence.” In her
book, Welfare Brat, she shows that her mother was “concerned that if I became educated, I would look down on the
family. I was beaten up for talking differently.” If anything,
her inspiring story ought to show those currently trying to
break out of poverty that Hope and Change™ are possible
for anyone and do not require redistribution of wealth to
achieve.

Rev. Wright Enters Speaking Circuit

The Reverend Jeremiah Wright, the America-damning
former pastor of Barack Obama, delivered the keynote address at a Northwestern University student group’s “State of
the Black Union” event. Over 900 Northwestern students,
Evanston locals, and Chicagoans attended the event, as
did Wright’s fellow controversial Obama associate, former
Weather Underground member William Ayers. The event
was Wright’s second public appearance after a long silence
for much of the election.

Wright’s speech did not focus on the election or his own
controversy in his speech, instead discussing the history and
progress of the American civil rights movement. However,
he did mention president-elect Obama, calling his election
“awesomely inspiring.” Still, he cautioned that America’s
problems were not instantly solved, advice which some in
attendance may have actually found sobering. During a
question and answer session following the speech, Wright
discussed his treatment by the media during Obama’s campaign. The pastor remarked with characteristic tact that “Ray

Charles can see” that he was treated unfairly and that “Never
in the history of this country has there been a demonization
of a person like I’ve been demonized.” Wright also blamed
the media for pressuring Northwestern into their decision
to revoke the offering of an honorary degree. Northwestern
had offered the degree to Wright before the election made
the pastor (in)famous and reversed themselves following
the explosion of controversy.

Campus Political He-Said
She-Said over ‘Postergate’
Falsely Indicts TDR

You may have gotten the campus-wide, recipient listsuppressed blitz on election-day sent out by pro-Obama,
anti-school policy “whistle-blower” Sasha Otero ’10; no, it
wasn’t the one titled “LOST BLACK NORTHFACE @SAE”.
In her blitz, and in a subsequent article in The Dartmouth,
Otero and “D” writer Drew Joseph ‘11 took turns taking
shots at the College Republicans and TDR over their alleged
roles in “postergate.” As one can imagine, the alleged Republicans were skewered for—gasp!—following the school
policy of removing political posters in undesignated places.
In her narration moronically CC’ed to the entire campus,
Otero even went so far as to implicate The Dartmouth
Review in her unverified claim that she witnessed College
Republicans President Jenn Bandy tearing down Obama
posters and replacing them with copies of our paper, going
so far as to write in her blitz that “that **** was ****’ED
UP!” (Remember, Hope and Change means removing
the shackles of polite language and etiquette). Just as our
country’s Constitution establishes and mediates the rights of
citizens, certain college rules about how, when, and where
political posters can be hung serve to keep campus political groups coexisting peacefully, not to mention keeping
Dartmouth’s picturesque campus relatively clean of those
viral Soviet pop-art style “Hope” Obama posters. There is
nothing to be gained when these rules are thrown by the
wayside—but as CR President Jenn Bandy said in the “D,”
“if the things that happened to the College Republicans
happened to any other group on campus, there would be
another ‘rally against hate.’” We hope Otero is embarrassed
about her Blitz, but we doubt it.

Bleeding Green

The current financial crisis has hit home. Dartmouth
recently announced that it is reviewing its financial plan
following a first quarter erosion of the endowment, a
$220 million or 6% loss that now leaves the endowment
at $3.44 billion, the second lowest in the Ivy League. The
trustees recently met to craft a strategic plan to manage
the institution’s troubled balance sheet as it seeks to avert
an unbalanced budget. The board currently has no plans
to drastically increase tuition or to explore potential new
revenue streams, but will instead seek to cut costs. Board
Chair Ed Haldeman has said that any changes will continue
to support key goals, supporting the college’s main concerns
of teaching and research and continue to expand Dartmouth’s
financial aid program. Haldeman says that the board “feels
the Dartmouth administration has done a very good job of
managing the institution’s financial resources in a very challenging economic environment,” although some of its peer
institutions, such as Harvard, continue to post growth. The
board will continue to monitor the financial crisis and will
attempt to weather the economic storm through “creative
and sound financial approaches.”

November 14, 2008 The Dartmouth Review Page

Rugby Cruises into Semifinals
territory and possession in the first twenty minutes.

However, Dartmouth’s stingy defense held the Black

After a disappointing loss to #5 Army, Indians rugby has Knights to only a penalty kick. Captain Conlan O’Leary
dominated their last three opponents on their way to the made a strong tackle which led to a turnover and a try for
Northeastern semifinal. Unfazed by the loss, twelfth-ranked freshman Nate Brakeley ‘12. The penalty kick was just
Dartmouth (10-2, 7-1 league) dominated the University wide, putting the score at 5-3 in favor of the Indians. As
of Connecticut, Northeastern, and Brockport this season, the half wound down, Tommy Brothers ‘11 was able to add
a penalty kick. However, sloppy play at the breakdown led
scoring an impressive 118 points in the three games.

On a brisk autumn day in front of a 500+ crowd, Dart- to a penalty kick for Army and a yellow card and sin-bin
for co-captain Anthony Arch ‘09,
making it 8-6 at halftime.
Even though it started off the
half shorthanded, the Dartmouth
squad kept pace with the cadets.
After many defensive phases, the
defense finally cracked and Army
scored two quick tries. Dartmouth
responded with tries by O’Leary
and freshman Derrick Fish who
scored a try in his first start. Army
was able to push in another try
leading by three with the clock
winding down. Dartmouth had a
few chances to come back and win,
but a poorly thrown quick lineout
led to a try for the Black Knights
sealing the game.
After the match coach Alex
Magleby said, “I was pleased with
the way our boys played, we played
our way into a position to win
and some silly decisions was the
difference.” The loss meant that
Dartmouth would have to play in
the Northeast Championships for
a shot at going to Nationals.
The Indians had little time to
recover from the tough loss as
UConn came to town to decide
the top seed from New England
in the playoffs. Dartmouth proved
to be up to the task, crushing the
Huskies 52-8. Dartmouth’s spread
game and backs proved to be the
deciding factor, though the Indians
dominated almost every statistical
category. Nick and Chris Downer
‘11, who missed the Army game for
—Indian Rugby...hard guys or cheerleaders? You judge—
family reasons, came back strong,
scoring four tries between them.
mouth took the field against Army, a game which determined Freshman Derrick Fish also continued to make an impact,
dominance in New England as well as a free pass into the scoring two tries. By halftime, the score was 31-3. DartNational Championships in May. The men in green seemed mouth continued to dominate in the second half, with many
a little nervous at first, with Army taking up most of the of the reserves getting some valuable experience. After the
match, Coach Magleby said, “UConn is a big, athletic team

Mr. DiBenedetto is a junior at the College and a
and they’ve had some success this season, so it was a good
contributor to The Dartmouth Review. He plays for the
win for us.”
Indian Rugby Team.
By Michael R. DiBenedetto


Dartmouth ended the regular season playing Northeastern in a game with no playoff implications for either
team. However, Northeastern played a tough match, often

A

fter a disappointing loss to #5 Army,
Indians rugby has dominated the last
couple of opponents on their way to the
Northeastern semifinal.
challenging Dartmouth at the breakdown. The first forty was
played in rainy conditions and Dartmouth seemed to be a
bit apathetic after securing the top spot in the Northeast.

In the early portion of the game Dartmouth mishandled
a few balls but Northeastern failed to capitalize and as the
weather calmed, the Dartmouth open game continued
its dominance. With the exception of a pair of defensive
lapses, it was just another day at the office for the Indians,
who dominated the set-piece, wheeling scrums with ease.
The individual highlight of the game was scrumhalf Tommy
Brothers ‘11 who kicked four conversions and a penalty kick
after struggling earlier in the season. The final tally was
46-14 and the Indians ended the regular season at 6-1.

After a couple of big wins, Dartmouth entered the

D

artmouth will now face an improved
but untested Rutgers team who are
coming off of a blowout of UConn. The
winner of the match will face the winner
of Harvard v. Syracuse for a trip to the
sweet sixteen.
quarterfinals confidently with Brockport coming to town.
Brockport, however, would not make it an easy win for the
Indians. The game was hard fought on both sides, especially
at the breakdown. Dartmouth was forced to fight for a 5-3
lead at halftime.

The game was heated on both sides, and the referee
called the game very tight, producing three yellow cards
in the match. The men in green had a great second half,
with Ry Sullivan ‘09 scoring a try in his rugby debut. The
final score of 20-3 did not do justice to how close the game
really was.

“Credit to Brockport, coach Mike Hodgins has done a
great job with them,” said an unflustered Coach Magleby.
“They have some real athletes and they played well.”

Dartmouth will now face an improved but untested
Rutgers team who are coming off of a blowout from UConn.
The winner of the match will face the winner of Harvard v.
Syracuse for a trip to the sweet sixteen.
n

Stinson’s: Your Pong HQ
Cups, Balls, Paddles, Accessories
(603) 643-6086 | www.stinsonsvillagestore.com

Page The Dartmouth Review November 14, 2008

Ten Years of War and Peace
By Michael J. Edgar

Editor’s Note: In its commitment to former Dartmouth
President John Sloan Dickey and his legacy at the College,
The Dartmouth Review presents this article on Dartmouth’s
War and Peace Center. Issues of war and peace were never
far from Dickey’s mind; he was a man who spent his young
adult life working in Washington D.C. as a State Department official, in addition to holding other posts in D.C.

It is 2008, and America is at war—waging two wars
at the same time, in fact, for the first time in its history.
We’re in Iraq, and Afghanistan, and Iran’s probably building
nuclear weapons. Every photo released of North Korea’s
Kim Jong Il has been photoshopped; who knows who’s running that country. Russia invaded Georgia last summer and
until Obama enters office, the Kremlin will not continue
negotiations regarding the missile shield being deployed in
Poland. The issues of War and Peace have never been more
pertinent, and in turn, neither has the Dickey Center’s War
and Peace Studies program.

As originally designed by Professor emeritus of government Allan Stam, Dickey’s War and Peace Center was
aimed at students interested in issues of conflict reconciliation, nuclear disarmament, and international relations in
general. Today, as it celebrates its tenth year, the War and
Peace Center advances both a minor at the College and an
illustrious fellowship.

The War and Peace minor has seen mixed success;
while initially popular upon its introduction, “Nobody has
graduated with the minor in the last two to three years,”
described War and Peace Chair Daryl Press, a government
professor at the College. This does not discourage him from
this year’s prospects, however, as minors at Dartmouth
are loosely regulated. “It’s difficult to say who’s enrolled,
because you can apply for a minor at the last minute,” he
explained.

The small numbers of War and Peace minors are
surprising. The issues of War and Peace have been at the
forefront of public and political discourse as they are now.
In addition, the War and Peace minor is extremely flexible.
The application lists such diverse fields of study as “nuclear
proliferation; conflict resolution; trauma studies; war and
environmental resources; comparative studies in imperialism and decolonization.”

A student could approach the program from the social
sciences, the hard sciences, or even a humanities background.
The dearth of enrollment likely stems more from lack of
awareness among students than any limitation or structural
issue with the minor itself.

On the other hand, the fellowship has been far more
successful. Every term, student fellows pick two to three
public figures they would like to bring to campus, and the
Dickey Center pulls the strings to make it happen. After the
speaker completes his public engagement, the fellows have
exclusive access in a private dinner setting, for two hours.
They can ask any questions they would like, and can engage
some of our most prominent public officials on a personal,
intellectual level. They are also provided this level of access
to many other speakers that Dickey attracts to campus.

A

s originally designed by Professor
emeritus of government Allan Stam,
Dickey’s War and Peace Center was aimed
at students interested in issues of conflict
reconciliation, nuclear disarmament, and
international relations in general.

The other cornerstone of the fellowship is the yearly
trip to Washington, D.C. Only a select few fellows can
partake in the trip each year, and typically seniority takes
precedence in deciding who may go.

For those who have gone, it has proven to be by far the
most rewarding experience of the fellowship. Instead of the
five to six speakers they meet per term, the fellows meet
dozens of government officials and representatives from
NGOs—all in the same small-group, personal setting.


Mr. Edgar is a sophomore at the College and a Web
Editor at The Dartmouth Review. Freshman year was the
best two years of Mr. Edgar’s life.


Press noted the goal of the D.C. trip is to “give fellows
a sense of how the foreign policy process actually works. We
help them arrange meetings with people at a wide range
of organizations—including the State Department, the
Department of Defense, CIA, Treasury, NGOs, the IMF,
WHO,” and others. “It’s all about leadership, and small
sessions with prominent speakers.”

This format clearly leaves a mark. Student fellowship
administrator Gabrielle Emanuel, who went to Washington
last year, recalled the most striking experience of her time
there:


We were meeting with Daniel Byman, who works
at the Brookings Institute, and directs Georgetown’s
Peace and Security Studies. We had a very nice dinner
with him our last day in D.C. A lot of our discussion
revolved around Middle East security, which he’s an
expert on, and there was a great intellectual debate
between him and the students. One student just raised
his hand and said, ‘What careers do you recommend
for those who wish to pursue this field?’ Byman gave an
honest and genuinely supportive answer, and offered
to speak with us about our lives, careers, and pursuits,
if we just called him up afterwards. I’ve been in e-mail
contact with him since. He offered his personal connections and insights to us in a very genuine way.

—Press is the director of the War and Peace Center­—

These kinds of connections are exactly what the fellowship hopes to foster, and according to Press the reactions
to the trip are consistently positive. While some find that
their positions on issues may shift, or their ideas become
more nuanced through the on-campus discussions, going
to Washington D.C. provides direct insight into the real
political process.

As Press described it, “The way the trip changed the
fellows was this: students often get the sense that the U.S.
government is a bumbling organization full of bumbling
people. What the fellows came away with, by contrast, was
that the mid to senior level people they met from State,
Defense, and at the dinners were highly qualified, capable
people.”

Despite physically going on the trip, Press in fact did
not play any significant role in the fellows’ experience. In
fact, the faculty plays no role in governing the fellowship,
its choice of speakers, or planning the Washington trip.

When asked if the administration had ever declined a
speaker, Emanuel noted “In my time here, we’ve never had
a problem. I know that in the past, they’ve been concerned
about overly controversial speakers...but in the end, Dickey
brought them here.” Press agreed, stating “[The fellows]
select topics and speakers without any role by the chair.
They then contact them, and the Dickey Center provides
the money and support to attract them.”

As the chair of the War and Peace initiative, Press is in
fact forbidden from attending the dinners and discussions.
Fellow Jennifer Gaudette ‘10 described their most recent

meeting with Former CENTCOM Commander General
Abizaid: “There was not a single ‘adult’ in the room; it was
just us, and he invited us to ask him anything we wanted.”
Instead of interacting with the fellows, Press provides overall
guidance for the program as a whole.

P

ress hopes that by providing exposure
to prominent speakers, both on campus
and in Washington D.C., fellows will more
strongly consider service with government
or NGOs. And to his credit, it seems to be
working. “Just under half of [the fellows]
end up in careers pursuing foreign affairs,”
Press estimated, “but that’s way higher than
the College as a whole.”

As part of that guidance, the goals of the fellowship
themselves have evolved since Press started as chair just
fourteen months ago. What began as a purely educational
program now also hopes to excite students about future
careers in international affairs. Few Dartmouth students
consider pursuing foreign policy after graduation, and
typically find themselves browbeaten into the corporate
mentality of their classmates.

Press hopes that by providing exposure to prominent
speakers, both on campus and in Washington D.C., fellows will more strongly consider service with government
or NGOs. And to his credit, it seems to be working. “Just
under half of [the fellows] end up in careers pursuing foreign affairs,” Press estimated, “but that’s way higher than
the College as a whole.”

The fellowship also hopes to emphasize networking in
the future, between both speakers and with fellow students.
Student networking has especially been lacking — those
fellows interviewed by The Dartmouth Review could not
name more than two to three of the over fifteen other fellows in the program.

The administrators—both student and faculty—are
aware of the problem, though, and hope to correct it. “That
was a concern we had a year ago, that we didn’t get to know
people until the D.C. trip,” Emanuel noted. “We’ve tried
to do meetings at the beginning of the term to get to know
each other. We also talked about one-night event in the fall
term to get to know each other. It’s all hypothetical—we’re
working to change it.”

While entrance to the fellowship is guarded by an application process, Emanuel points out that such selectivity has
its benefits. “The goal is to keep the size of the group small,
to maintain that personal engagement with [the speakers].
Requiring an application has made it so everyone in the
group is really committed, and really interested. It’s truly a
small hurdle to participate; I find it kind of beneficial.”

Press noted that they can only take 30-40 percent of
students who apply, but he feels that number might be
deceiving: “It’s even more selective than that, because the
applicants are very good. Students aren’t drawn randomly
[from campus]—we get the top notch applicants, and we
can still only pick one out of three.”

All told, the War and Peace Studies Program is doing a
great service to campus, in the spirit of former Dartmouth
President John Sloan Dickey himself.

B

y attracting public leaders in foreign
policy to speak on campus, especially
ones chosen by students, the fellowship
brings discussion about War and Peace to
the student body at large.

By attracting public leaders in foreign policy to speak
on campus, especially ones chosen by students, the fellowship brings discussion about War and Peace to the student
body at large. The benefits of being a fellow—personally
and intellectually engaging these leaders, both here oncampus and in Washington, with no faculty influence—is
the opportunity of a lifetime for an internationally-oriented
student.
n

November 14, 2008 The Dartmouth Review Page

Dickey Center: Bringing us the World
If a clash of civilizations is going to occur in our genraeli conflict, Iran may be on the verge of acquiring nuclear
weapons, which could slip into the hands of our enemies eration—which it may not—it is important to know what
entrenched along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, and our civilization is in the first place, whether it is possible for

Editor’s Note: The Dartmouth Review presents this
once existential-rival, Russia, invaded the small and unas- prospective civilizations to clash and how this will affect the
article on Dartmouth’s Dickey Center for International
world. Yalowitz notes, “This is going to be your world, it is
suming Georgia this summer.
Understanding, named after Dartmouth’s former President

This (and more), compounded with the international the world that you’re going to shape. These are the problems
John Sloan Dickey.
financial turmoil, will require a great deal of “international that your generation is going to have to manage.”

There are many opportunities to become involved with
understanding” both on the part of the American populace,

Established in 1982, the Dickey Center was created in
the Dickey Center. Each year Dickey sends 50 to 60 students
and the newly elected president.
honor of John Sloan Dickey, Dartmouth’s twelth president.

According to Yalowitz, the ultimate goal of the center is overseas through either internships or research projects.
Its purpose is to instill in all Dartmouth students what Amthat students “know what’s going on in the outside world and The Center currently sponsors five student organizations,
bassador Ken Yalowitz, the current director of the center,
do something to deal with the problems.” This is particularly including the Dartmouth Coalition on Global Health, the
refers to as the “essence of good citizenship” by emphacritical because “the world is changing, and the United States War and Peace Fellows Program (see page 6), and the World
sizing President Dickey’s “commitment to international
is changing as well. Our population is becoming much more Outlook Journal.
understanding and knowledge of world events as well as
diverse. The very nature of
activism.”
our population is becoming
hough many people find it hard to reconcile the idea of a liberal

As described by the College’s Board of Trustees, the
more international. The
Dickey Center’s mission is to “coordinate, sustain and enarts education with the study of international affairs, the two
world is coming to us.” Livrich the international dimension of liberal arts education at
ing within the “Dartmouth are surprisingly compatible, and in fact build upon each other.
Dartmouth.” During his presidency, Dickey was particularly
bubble” causes student to
known for his passion for international affairs and even creThe Dickey Center is in the process of creating a new
forget sometimes their responsibility to go into the world
ated the “Great Issues” course which each graduating class
and become good, upstanding citizens. The purpose of a group devoted to studying the Middle East, a Model United
was required to take to further its knowledge of world affairs.
liberal arts education, as it is classically understood, is to Nations, and a group dedicated to international business.
The Dickey Center attempts to impart this same knowledge
train students to be just that: good citizens. The Dickey The Center is also hoping to establish a new International
to the current generation of students and foster an interest
Studies Minor, which is currently being approved. Each year,
Center is picking up that mission.
in the outside world.

Though many people find it hard to reconcile the idea the Center brings several Dickey Fellows to the school to

The new home of the Center is centrally located on the
of a liberal arts education with the study of international carry out research and work on projects (this year there are
first floor of the Haldeman Center, a fact which a sizeable
affairs, the two are surprisingly compatible, and in fact build six Fellows focusing on the theme of international conflict
portion of Dartmouth students may be unaware. A recent
upon each other. Both place emphasis on a multidisciplinary and reconciliation). Lectures sponsored by the Center boast
survey conducted by the Center itself showed that 86 perapproach to looking at the world. In terms of international distinguished speakers and are open to all on campus.
cent of responding Dartmouth students have heard of the
“We want to bring the world to Dartmouth through our
affairs, Yalowitz points out that “There is no one answer to
Dickey Center, and 50 percent of them have attended at
lectures
and our seminars, and we want to bring Dartmouth
every problem,” and every issue must be examined from
least one public lecture.
many angles. One purpose of a liberal arts students to the world through our overseas internships and
education is to equip students with the skills the research programs that we send students on,” claims
e want to bring the world to Dartmouth through to analyze issues from differing perspectives, Yalowitz. Yalowitz goes on, “The world today is in the midst
so that they can be open and ready to engage of two ongoing but somewhat contradictory processes.
our lectures and our seminars.
One it is coming closer together through globalization and
in a quest for knowledge.
Aside from the emphasis on problem communications: everything is pulling us closer and closer

Yalowitz, when asked about student involvement in
solving, there is a second important parallel between the together. At the same time there are lots of forces like ethnic
the Center, tells the Review, “A lot of students know about
liberal arts and international affairs. In order to understand conflict, climate change, and global health that threaten to
us and a good number of them participate in what we are
international conflicts and problems in the first place, it pull us apart.”
doing, but what always saddens me is when I find students
During his lifetime, President Dickey was concerned
is critical to understand the history, culture, and guiding
who are not aware of what we’re doing. We would love
principles of the nations engaged in the problem—whether with the factors that lead to World War II. He was reportedly
to see more students take advantage of our programs, our
that nation is Iraq or the United States. It is impossible to extremely wary of isolationism and of fracturing international
internships.”
engage in nation-building in Japan, Germany, or Iraq without relations. According to Yalowitz, “Today, the problems are

The Dickey Center, at this moment more than ever,
first understanding the people in those countries and the different, but we are facing the same set of underlying
is extremely relevant. This nation finds itself in the midst
concerns. We’ve got to be engaged in the world.”
history informing those people.
of a critical political transition, with a newly elected Presi“The commitment to do something” is a phrase that

Yet, it is not enough to understand each country in
dent taking office during economically and internationally
isolation: it is critical to understand how countries relate and Yalowitz cited repeatedly in conversation with The Review.
challenging times. The international issues of the day are
react to one another in the international arena. Thus, the This commitment is one that both the students of this colvitally important to the well-being of the United States: as
flip-side of understanding Iraq, Japan, or Germany, and their lege and the future president of Dartmouth should aim to
security conditions improve in Iraq, they are simultaneously
respective roles and positions in the world, is understand- fulfill. President Dickey had a vision of uniting the academic
deteriorating in Afghanistan; in the meantime, the Bush
ing our very own country and its role in the world. This is to the practitioner. The ideal Dartmouth president would
administration made little progress on the Palestinian-Isthe fundamental purpose of studying Western Civilization, personify this union, a union which is made manifest in all

n

Ms. Bandeen is a freshman at the College and a con- the Western Canon, and American civics—the staples of a the work the Dickey Center does.
liberal arts education.
tributor to The Dartmouth Review.
By Blair E. Bandeen

T

W

TDR: 28 Years of Covering Impropriety

Page The Dartmouth Review November 14, 2008

International Man of Character
By Charles S. Dameron

Christina Gillespie, whom he married three years after he free-trade legislation on behalf of the State Department.
graduated from Dartmouth in 1929.
He then compiled a blacklist of companies dealing with

He was the only president of Dartmouth ever to assist
In his recollection of college, Dickey noted two particular the Axis powers, and finally ended up as the first director
in building the Winter Carnival sculpture. Regularly spot- experiences that would come to shape his perception of the of the State Department’s Public Affairs Office, where he
ted with an unlit cigarette in his mouth after he gave up place and would guide his policies as president less than was instrumental in drumming up domestic support for the
smoking, he was often asked if he needed a light. He always twenty years later. The first was his freshman English class, United Nations Charter.
responded that he just liked playing with cigarettes. He was where he recalled walking “back and
the man who described himself not as a “president,” but forth across the campus with men
y all accounts, John Sloan Dickey was highly regarded
just “the man on this job.”
from class…this was one of the great
by students, faculty and alumni both for his good humor

By all accounts, John Sloan Dickey was highly regarded features of the Dartmouth education
by students, faculty and alumni both for his good humor and in those days which stayed with me. and humility. But what set him apart was the true magnitude
humility. But what set him apart was the true magnitude of The common experience of having
of his accomplishments as president of the College.
his accomplishments as president of the College. “The man had the same subject. I never forgot
on this job” brought to Hanover a zeal for tailoring educa- it, and it was part of the experience
His tenure at Dartmouth did not prevent him from
tion to public service and international engagement. Under that went into the Great Issues [class] when I came back
engaging in public life, either. In his years as president of
his stewardship, Dartmouth vaulted to its place as one of on the job in ’45.”
America’s most renowned undergraduate institutions.

The second came with his presidency of the Theta Chi the College, he served as the vice chairman of President

But, most significantly, Dickey identified and empha- house, when during his senior year a controversy arose over Truman’s Committee on Civil Rights, acted as a consultant
sized the mission of the academy as both an intellectual and whether or not his fraternity would pledge a Jewish student. to the government on disarmament, and served on the board
of the Brookings Institumoral one. The goal of a liberal
tion.
arts (or, as he insisted, liberating
B u t w h e n D i c k e y
arts) education was not merely to
came to Dartmouth in
make the student smarter—the
November 1945, he
student was meant to become
brought with him much
a better human being. Dickey
more than a reservoir of
was committed, above all else,
establishment connecto graduating men from Darttions; he brought a defimouth who possessed not only
nite vision for what the
the relevant technical skills, but
mission of the College
who had also internalized the vital
should be, a vision that
first principles of conscience that
was formed by his own
would inform every department
Dartmouth undergraduand all curricula.
ate experience and by a

And that led into the secbrief teaching stint at
ond critical component of his
the School of Advanced
presidency: he realized that
International Studies
Dartmouth’s small size made
in Washington, where
it possible to create a common
he had formed a broad
character and academic experiphilosophy on higher
ence among its students. His
education.
tenure as president was relent The Dartmouth College
lessly devoted to creating such
biography of Dickey,
a community—and to that end,
by Charles Widmayer,
he accomplished a great deal,
recounts Dickey’s 1952
from developing the celebrated
Convocation speech.
Great Issues course, to estabIts theme was “The
lishing the Tucker Foundation,
Business of Being a
to overseeing the construction
Gentleman,” which “has
of the Hopkins Center. But his
a deep and direct bearlargest goals and achievements
—President Dickey was one of Dartmouth’s most beloved presidents—
ing on whether you ever
weren’t tangible: he aimed to
become a liberally edumake Dartmouth a tight-knit,
cated man,” according
intellectually fervent, and naYears later, Dickey recalled his surprise: “I hesitate to say
tionally prominent college with an unmistakable sense of how naïve I had been about the racial/religious prejudices to Dickey. Widmayer summarizes: “He was talking about
purpose.
that were operating on campus. I knew nothing about them, manners, he added, not in any foppish way, but in the sense
of self-discipline, concern for others, and sensitivity, all of
hadn’t thought about them.”
Wonder Boy: An Undergrad at Dartmouth

After standing up for the pledge, Dickey asked just what which are part of ‘the ancient tribute—a gentleman and a
was wrong with pledging a Jew, and his brothers pulled out scholar.’” This was, as it were, the Dickey Doctrine, and his

Dickey’s own undergraduate days at Dartmouth were a copy of the Theta Chi charter, which explicitly prohibited commitment to the gentleman-scholar ideal would course
marked by a definite sense of purpose, too. He had grown Jews. After it was firmly established that the pledge was through the major actions of his presidency.
up in deeply rural Lock Haven, Pennsylvania. As the son Jewish, Theta Chi turned him down. That ugly rearing of
The Great Issues Course
of a manager at the local woven-wire factory, he was the prejudice nagged at Dickey for a long time.
first in his family to go to college. Even though he towered
Nearly fifty years later, in 1975, Dickey would tell an
The first of those actions, his advocacy of the Great
at six-foot-three, his lack of coordination had turned him interviewer, “What I should have done, as I look back on it,
into a football manager, where every year he watched a few probably, was get out. But this wasn’t being done in those Issues course for seniors, was launched in 1947, almost
chosen recruits matriculate at schools like Yale and Penn. days; it never occurred to me…from that day on I decided immediately after his inauguration as president. In pushing

Dickey, inspired by their example, applied to Dartmouth that one of these days I was going to have something to say for the Great Issues program, Dickey was certainly inspired
on something of a lark and was accepted. By his account, about this, and I did. And that’s a fairly large part of the by the unity of purpose and learning he had experienced in
his freshman year at Dartmouth, but also by what he saw
he was one of just a half-dozen from his graduating class story of my first few years [as president].”

One of Dickey’s first as a lack of consciousness of world affairs among college
generally.
efore he remade Dartmouth, however, Dickey took an ac- actions as president of the Col- students

“Today
our seniors leave college without public purpose,
lege would be to instruct the
tive role in government. His association in the Roosevelt admission office not to consider or as Dr. [William J. Tucker, ninth president of the College]
administration with such figures as Dean Acheson and Cordell race or religion in its selection used to call it, ‘public-mindedness.’ They lack that sense of
intellectual unity which in part at least is aroused simply
Hull would later prove an invaluable resource to the College. process. It would not be until through the common study of live issues,” said Dickey.
1954 that students voted to ban

The course featured Monday evening lectures from
Greek discrimination.
distinguished
visitors, who would stay for Tuesday mornto attend college. Whatever preparations high school had
ing
discussions.
Every Thursday, seniors would receive a
Public Life: From D.C. to Hanover
given Dickey for Dartmouth, he was ready for the place. He
preparation
briefing
from a member of the Dartmouth
ended up graduating magna cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa,
faculty
in
advance
of
the
next week’s visiting lecturer. The
Before he remade Dartmouth, however, Dickey took
and a candidate for a Rhodes scholarship. All that time in
first
year’s
themes,
or
focuses,
were Modern Man’s Political
the library not only gained him admission to Harvard Law an active role in government. His association in the RoosLoyalties,
The
Scientific
Revolution
and the Radical Fact
School, but also facilitated a romance with a Baker librarian, evelt administration with such figures as Dean Acheson
and Cordell Hull would later prove an invaluable resource of Atomic Energy, International Aspects of World Peace,
to the College. During Dickey’s Washington D.C. days, American Aspects of World Peace, and What Values for

Mr. Dameron is a sophomore at the College and a conhe floated around Foggy Bottom, working to help pass Modern Man?
tributor to The Dartmouth Review.

B

B

November 14, 2008 The Dartmouth Review Page

The Tenure of John Sloan Dickey

Daily reading of The New York Times or the New York
Herald-Tribune was required, as was, in that first year, reading the Declaration of Independence, the Charter of the
United Nations, and the Communist Manifesto. It was not a
token course, and its compulsory nature and rigorous standards bothered many seniors who would have preferred to be
freer of obligations in their last year. But it won Dartmouth
plaudits from other academics, and put Dartmouth on the
national stage in a new way. And, despite the grumbling from
some quarters, surveys years later showed that a majority
of students who had taken Great Issues ranked it as one of
the most valuable parts of their Dartmouth experiences.

Dickey felt similarly: in the oral history of his life, he
called Great Issues “the single most valuable initial experience that I had on the job because it required me to work
at formulating my views about the purpose of the institution
[and] about the implementation of that purpose.”

competence and conscience.” Dickey goes on to note that
any institution of learning, by its very nature, will naturally
and fairly easily incline to graduating men of competence.
That, to Dickey, was not the mark of a great institution:
“To create the power of competence without creating a
corresponding sense of moral direction to guide the use of
that power is bad education.” Dartmouth College, Dickey
decided, would not be in the business of providing a bad
education.
Founding Tucker, Seeking The Good

of the College, and nothing could have had a purpose in
which Mr. Dickey believed more completely.”

Today, the Tucker Foundation identifies as its mission
“to educate Dartmouth students to think and act as ethical
leaders and responsible citizens in the global community
through service, character development, and spiritual exploration.” But after the end of his presidency, Dickey recalled
a simpler, clearer directive for the Foundation that had been
provided to him by Beardsley Ruml, a trustee who worked
closely with him on creating the Foundation.

According to Dickey: “He said, ‘We’ve just got to keep
it broad. But we must come back to it that there is a duty,
there is a choice before men. And that this College has made
a choice to be committed to the good rather than the evil.’
He said, ‘Don’t say anything more than that…Men will still
understand that fifty years from now as they understood it
for two thousand years before.’”


In Dickey’s mind, the Tucker Foundation was established with the express purpose of providing that education
of conscience. In a 1960 address at Oberlin College, he spoke
frankly about the societal changes that motivated his passion
for moral education. The central dilemma, he believed, was
a decline of religion’s place in the
academy.
A President to Remember and to Emulate
ickey emphatically rejected the hands-off, relativistic ap- “The dispersed and reduced posiproach which he had the displeasure of encountering in tion of formal religion in secular John Dickey accomplished much in furthering the eduhigher education is the most cation of competent young men at Dartmouth—he oversaw
the academy. And so he threw himself energetically into the conspicuous
and probably the huge capital campaigns that upgraded both Dartmouth’s
establishment and preservation of the Tucker Foundation. most powerful negative factor in physical facilities and its faculty; he used his personal experithe progressive weakening we are ence outside of academia to bring the world to Dartmouth,
witnessing in the college’s sense and to apply the undergraduate education to practical uses

But it did three other things for him, which he beof
a
dual
purpose.
This
negative
factor is paralleled on the for America and the world; and he professionalized Dartlieved were of great benefit to the Dartmouth community.
positive
side
by
the
rise
of
a
philosophy
of pluralism and mouth’s then-neglected Medical School and Thayer School.
Because he actually took the lead in instructing the Great
relativism
that
while
nurturing
the
imperatives
of special- But to him, those were merely baseline accomplishments.
Issues course, “it also brought me in touch with the total
ized
scholarship
has
so
far
proved
a
thin
and
acid
soil for He believed any college could accomplish the training of
student body in a way that I could not have been in touch
any
new
growth
of
institutional
purpose.”
competence. Dartmouth would not be excellent because
with through teaching a normal class. It brought me in touch

Anticipating
this
seemingly
inevitable
decline
of
the
it had the largest endowment or the greatest number of
with faculty.”
church’s
presence
in
college
life,
Dickey
hoped
to
provide
internationally distinguished professors. Neither its build
Finally, because he was developing the roster of visiting lecturers, “it involved my keeping in touch with people a secularized moral focus for Dartmouth
at the top level of government, in the foundations, and in the form of the Tucker Foundation.
throughout the American community. This was something By recasting the liberal arts imperative
hat made him proud, what made him and his Dartthat Dartmouth needed and will always, I suppose, need to of a dual purpose in a non-Christian way,
mouth unique and excellent, was the idea that the
a little larger degree than an institution located in Boston Dickey hoped that the dual purpose
could
be
preserved.
or New York or one of the great metropolitan centers.”
liberal arts could serve a greater moral purpose, and could

In this effort, Dickey met with
plenty of skepticism, as he would later turn out men and women of character and conscience.
Men of Character and Conscience
recall: “The more I talked with faculty

A few years later, in 1951, Dickey would oversee the here and elsewhere, there was either a
ings nor its place in the Ivy League would set it apart. All of
founding of the William Jewett Tucker Foundation, in honor combativeness about these elements of man’s relationship those things were and are good, and Dickey secured them,
of the former president by that name, who would prove to to the universe as perceived in institutions of higher educa- but they did not amount to excellence.
be a remote mentor for Dickey throughout his presidency. tion…Or, there was a more benign attitude that, well, this
What made him proud, what made him and his DartEver fond of the use of the word ‘conscience’ to refer to is a valid aspect of human concern, but it has no place in mouth unique and excellent, was the idea that the liberal
moral and spiritual qualities, Dickey may have been bor- higher education, that it was something that had to be left arts could serve a greater moral purpose, and could turn
to the churches, it had to be left to the family; it simply had
rowing that terminology from Tucker.
out men and women of character and conscience. Dickey

Widmayer, Dickey’s biographer, writes that “President no validity as an element of purpose or concern, institutional saw, as few in his time or ours saw, that only such a mission
Dickey admitted that a good deal of his own thinking about concern, in higher education.”
Dickey emphatically rejected the hands-off, relativistic could give coherence to education.
moral purpose in liberal education came from his exposure

His Atlantic Monthly article included this quote from
to Dr. Tucker’s writings.” Writing for an April 1955 cover approach which he had the displeasure of encountering in President Tucker, as relevant to our time as it was to Dickey’s
article in the Atlantic Monthly, Dickey meditated on “Con- the academy. And so he threw himself energetically into the and to Tucker’s: “Seek, I pray you, moral distinction. Be not
science and the Undergraduate,” in which he directly quoted establishment and preservation of the Tucker Foundation. content with the commonplace in character any more than
Tucker, and elaborated on Tucker’s theme by inserting his Widmayer’s biography says, “It was Mr. Dickey more than with the commonplace in ambition or intellectual attainment.
anyone else who had the idea of the William Jewett Tucker
own call to purpose for the liberal arts.
Do not expect that you will make any lasting or very strong

“I suggest that the American liberal arts college,” Dickey Foundation to promote the moral and spiritual growth of impression on the world through intellectual power without
wrote, “can find a significant, even unique mission in the Dartmouth undergraduates. Nothing could have been closer the use of an equal amount of conscience and heart.” n
duality of its historic purpose: to see men made whole in both to what President Tucker hoped to do while he was head

D

W


Related documents


the dartmouth review 11 14 2008 volume 28 issue 9
the dartmouth review 4 9 2009 volume 28 issue 15
the dartmouth review 4 21 2008 volume 28 issue 10
the dartmouth review 10 17 2008 volume 28 issue 3
the dartmouth review 8 21 2009 volume 28 issue 20
the dartmouth review 5 14 2009 volume 28 issue 17


Related keywords