March 25, 1997

I'd like to thank you
Down home with Bob Hutton
Columnist

In the past, I've picked up a lot of criticism for some of the things I've written in this column. Some people have said I am inflammatory, arrogant, abrasive and overly pessimistic. They've even said things about me that weren't true.

Despite it all, I've managed to come through with a healthy self-esteem. In other words, when I cry myself to sleep or throw furniture, it has nothing to do with my readers.

That's not to say that criticism never affects me. Any published writer who tells you it doesn't is lying through their teeth. Often, in the midst of one of the spasmodic laughing fits that seize me when I read letters to the editor about my columns, a point made by one of my readers will really hit home. Well, maybe not often, but sometimes. Well, actually, a couple of times. Well, okay, once.

That one instance was the letter from last semester that accused me of being too negative. The writer (who shall remain nameless because I can't remember his name) said that, instead of always being critical of everything, I should take the time to praise things now and then. I take it that this guy must really like our features section.

What do you expect though? Off the top of my head I can't remember the last time I saw an opinion column by any of our writers that was in praise of any individual, organization, or idea on this campus. It's just not done.

When you've got something good, you shut up and keep it to yourself. Otherwise, somebody else wants it. But when you've got something bad, you complain about it. That's just the way it works.

The guy's letter made sense though, and he made me decide to change my ways. Starting with this column, I will have nothing but good things to say about everything and everybody at ASU. This is going to be difficult so please bear with me:

• I'd like to give a big thumbs up to the rest of the staff at the Appalachian. They dress real nice.
• Hats off to the guys at the Student Union pool hall. The pool balls are very round and roll very well (give me some time, I'm just getting the hang of this compliment thing...).
• Here's to all the dogs on campus for keeping Sanford Mall well fertilized.
• Speaking of dogs, I'd like to thank the American Kennel Club for promoting inbreeding. This insures that nice, docile, mentally deficient dogs will stay en vogue and we'll never have to worry about dogs taking over the world. Keep sending those evil mongrels to the pound.
• Thanks to the Administration for promoting campus diversity. Did you know that our campus has more than half-a-dozen different species of trees? And that's without quotas too.
• Kudos to the architect who designed our new combination smokestack/bell tower. Now there's an idea I never would have thought of.
• May I express my appreciation to the Child Development Center for keeping those kids behind a fence. They scare me.
• Mazeltov (I'm Mr. Multicultural) to the Sigma Nu house for not being attacked by hoodlums this semester. Not yet anyway.
• Accolades to the Guerrilla Girls for appearing on TV and giving this university the publicity it deserves. Now all we need is a skinhead pancake breakfast.
• Thanks to my editor for talking me out of doing an entire column in ebonics.
• Thanks to what's-his-name that wrote in a few weeks ago for adding the phrase "freaky white girl" to the campus vernacular (by the way, I'm down for whatever).
• Much appreciation is due to the Food Court for throwing a little Romaine lettuce in the salad bar every now and then. I love Romaine lettuce. Its so green.
• A big salute to the Tradewinds coffeehouse which is much nicer than I expected. I thought that it would blow (Get it? Tradewinds? Blow?).
• Thanks to the Young Republicans for never revealing themselves to me,
• the College Democrats for never trying to recruit me,
• and to NOW for never trying to lynch me. And finally...
• Thanks to everyone on this campus who's a ninny. You've made great subject matter.

Whew. That was tough. I hope everyone now understands why I never do this. Who am I kidding, this was a bad idea in the first place. I tell you what, since I'm so bad at this, why don't I just stop right here and go back to being my old self with my next column?

Thanks. I knew you'd understand.

[back]

Campus Perspectives

As we all know by now, President Clinton suffered a knee injury that required surgery. At the time, the president was staying at Australian golfer Greg Norman's Florida home.

Did Clinton just "fall," as was told to the media? Or was he pushed? Drunk? Being chased by Hillary? Perhaps it was a subversive plot by the Australian government to disable the Golfer-in-Chief.

All of these could quite possibly be true, but we don't have the answer. Instead we went poking around campus to see if anyone had any insight to this perplexing issue.

"He was giving somebody a tour of the Lincoln Bedroom and slipped."
Dr. James Barnes, Political Science

"I think he was partying and fell down the steps. He was probably a little tipsy. He couldn't see down the steps and the blurring didn't help."
Rick Renard, Grad. Student

"I'm not really sure. I heard about it on the news. I know he hurt it at night falling down the steps at Greg Norman's house. I'm sure there's more to it. I'm sure he probably had a few to drink."
Shaun Murphy, Junior

"He was just walking and talking, and I don't know, I guess for some people that's hard to do."
Erica Lian, sophomore

"I think he was trying to make Bob Dole not look so much like an idiot for falling off the podium and get sympathy for Dole.
Heather Mobley, Junior

"He really injured his knee because he had a few shots of bourbon and he was going out to get a supersize fry from McDonalds and he fell."
Kaye Cranford, SGA President

[back]

Our Opinion

Reading program should be changed

Appalachian State University has imposed a summer reading program for incoming freshman. Imposed, not instituted, for where was the student input, when was the forum for students to gain information about the new program, who did the faculty senate speak with to gain support for this program?

Anyhow, the Summer Readings Program will in fact be a reality at ASU beginning with the entering Fall 1997 freshmen. This program is designed to "provide some sort of common intellectual experience for students as they come into the university," according to a proponent. A single book is going to provide this experience? And what is the need for such intellectual commonality anyway? Isn't this university supposed to be supporting diversity, diversity of background, opinion, and thought?

This new reading program is also supposed to lend an academic aspect to the summer orientation sessions, as though entrance and placement exams were not enough. Incoming students do not need to concentrate on college-level academic work the first time that they set foot on campus. It seems the university should be receptive to enhancing incoming students' social development rather than academic development, for they will have four (or five or six) years to achieve in the academic realm. There is a great difference between social interactions in college and those in high school. Perhaps a program that addressed these areas would be more beneficial than the Summer Readings Program.

There is also likely to be some debate over which book is chosen for incoming freshmen to read. Currently, that title is selected by the Summer Readings Committee. Certainly, limiting summer reading to one book is dangerous. This book may not appeal to some students, or it may be offensive. The committee should compile a reading list, providing at least nine alternatives to the chosen book.

The program is also supposed to encourage college-level academic discussion among incoming students. Once again, students have a great deal of time to learn how to speak their minds in an academic setting during their tenure here. Let them take that time.

One proponent stated that there is a need for Appalachian to become an academic community, not just "a community of football-goers." Look all around—ASU is already an academic community. Students regularly interact with professors and other students in an academic manner. How busy is Belk Library? Are the students slaving in there not focused on academics? Also, total attendance at football games this year dropped.

The orchestrators of this program must also realize that many of these incoming students will simply choose not to read the text. It is their last summer before they make the jump to college, and many of them will have priorities to attend to other than reading a book, such as a summer job or time spent with friends before they all go away. The faculty assigned to lead discussion of the book during Phase II Orientation may find that the discussion is nonexistent. What happens then? Class dismissed?

Another main problem with the Summer Readings Program is that students will receive no academic credit for the work they do in the summer. What incentive does this offer incoming students to complete that work? None at all. If a book is going to be required, and discussions of that book made mandatory, students should at least receive some sort of credit for their labor; for argument's sake, we'll say five per cent of their English 1000 grade.

An opponent of the new program stated that it is similar to asking a mental patient to "start improving before coming to therapy." We at The Appalachian find ourselves in agreement with this assertion. Time and money would definitely be better spent improving the quality of incoming students' education while they are here at ASU, not before classes begin.

The Summer Readings Program is not a feasible idea for Appalachian, and it is a program which should be reconsidered.

[back]

Letters to the Editor

Leave personal attacks out

To the Editor,

This letter is in response to thc editorial concerning the recent SGA Presidential Debate, written by Renee Cagle, entitled "SGA Lacks Student Voice" that appeared in the March 20 edition of The Appalachian. I am appalled that a portion of my student fees pay for, in part, the writing and publishing of such journalistic garbage.

As an observer to the debate, I found that questions asked by the debate panel (i.e. The Appalachian) were merely softballs. Ms. Cagle objects to students questioning candidates in depth about experience and budgetary requirements of platform issues. Could this be because these issues could have a negative effect on the candidates that The Appalachian supports?

Furthermore, Ms. Cagle, do you really believe that the majority of the students present at the debate where there to become informed voters? All of the students present were supporters of one of the tickets. To believe otherwise is "pompous", "arrogant", and ignorant. Ms. Cagle, students at ASU are not that interested in student politics or the debate panel's questions for them. Could it be more obvious which ticket Ms. Cagle and The Appalachian favored during the debate questioning and the election? It is understood a newspaper (I use this term loosely) has the right to endorse any candidate. Ms. Cagle's editorial took The Appalachian endorsement of the Little/Parker ticket to a new level. This editorial was, in effect, another free campaign advertisement.

As for dirt and mud slinging, that was initiated two days after the debate in Ms. Cagle's editorial. Such personal attacks on students have no place in our newspaper. Ms. Cagle, your bias has shown through. Here's a tip. Choose better titles for your editorials. If your going to try to hide your promotion of a certain campaign, at least go about it in an intelligent manner.

Justin B. Hembree
ASU Box 5101

Low blow at candidates

To the Editor,

This letter is regarding the SGA elections. I personally do not a have a problem with the Appalachian endorsing a candidate, but the paper shouldn't campaign for the candidate. This years election had three very diverse tickets. It was too bad the Appalachian in their recent article on March 2O, was inaccurate and unfair in their report on the debate.

Both of these characteristics are in the title of the Appalachian. I ask you Renee Cagle why do you single out one candidate and destruct their character when you know the candidate that you endorsed was the one that was asking all the planted questions. If you are going to report something be accurate!

Your candidate had more people there that were associated with their ticket than both the other candidates combined. Are going to sit back and tell me that the questions asked the other two tickets by the supporters of the Little/Parker ticket were not planted.

Lets at least be fair in the way you report the news. The article was very unprofessionally written, and it accomplished it's (sic) point, it was a low blow at one candidate, and lets not forget that one candidate was not even mentioned in the article.

Michael Candes
ASU Box 9942

[back]

Editor's Note:
Vanessa Urruela
Editor-in-Chief

I'm extremely disappointed in the reactions to Renee Cagle's recent editorial about her opinions of the SGA debate.

Many people seem to confuse the Opinion section with the News section. The Opinion section is a forum for people's individual thoughts, feelings and ideas. The News section is the place we report facts.

When people have called, written to me, and showed up in our offices I've tried to explain to them that Renee didn't do anything wrong when she wrote her editorial. She took a topical, pertinent event and wrote about her reaction to it. She was harsh, but honest about her feelings.

Students who put themselves up for discussion and criticism, as have the SGA candidates, should expect to be criticized publicly. That's part of the whole political process.

If candidates can't take a little criticism, perhaps they aren't fit for office in the first place.

Best of luck to all the tickets.

[back]

E-mail The Appalachian Online at theapp@conrad.appstate.edu