The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 86, No. 16, Ed. 1 Friday, February 12, 1999 Page: 3 of 20
twenty pages : ill. ; page 19 x 15 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
THE RICE THRESHER
OPINION
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 12. 1999
moo moo MOO
NOD doesn't give us what we want
As several of the college mas-
ters have said recently, maybe it's
time to re-evaluate Night of Deca-
dence. I think maybe it's time to go
one step further and dis-
continue it altogether.
I don't have any moral
objections to NOD, as
most of its opponents do,
but I don't think that NOD
is exactly a jewel in Rice's
or Wiess College's crown
either. Reading the com-
mentary about the issue,
I'm not sure that anyone
else likes NOD much any-
more either.
Those who want NOD changed
or abolished cite the risky alcohol
consumption, the increased risk of
sexual assault and the blatant af-
front to common morality that sur-
rounds NOD. Its supporters cite that
the masters don't have a right to
make changes to Wiess functions
and that discontinuing NOD some-
how impinges upon student's free-
doms. No one tries to mention
NOD's positive effects.
First off, saying that the masters
don't have a right to question NOD
as an argument for the continuation
of NOD is weak and misses the point.
The masters are members of this
community, and they have the right
to question its practices as much as
anyone, maybe more so as they take
on an accountability that students
don't. Second, failing to argue NOD's
benefits is almost akin to saying it
doesn't have any benefits.
Which is not to say that NOD
necessarily doesn't have them. NOD
comes in the middle of fall semester
right when the full crunch of a
student's studies is appar-
ent. With little in the way
of other major university
events around NOD, it is
the major all-campus
event of the fall, very simi-
lar to Beer-Bike in the
spring. There is a lot of
potential there for NOD
to be an incredibly fun and
destressing Rice event.
The problem is, what
we want and need NOD
to be and what NOD actually is are
very different things. We want NOD
to be a great way to forget about
classes and extracurriculars and ev-
erything that is just getting to be too
much. We want NOD to be a way to
get out and do something that we
might otherwise be uncomfortable
with, a chance to experiment with-
out a lot of consequences.
But NOD actually brings on a lot
more stress than it relieves. For a
short time in October, we become
defined by how we react to NOD,
and those who choose to go attempt
to get so much out of NOD that they
often end up going too far, hurting
themselves and others. We've placed
such an amazing burden on NOD to
be the "end all, be all" of college
parties that we become complacent
to the extremes we have to go to to
have and attend NOD.
I personally would see little loss
in abolishing NOD, but I know that
many people support it and have a
great deal offun at NOD. But can we
acknowledge that NOD is somewhat
out of hand?
Could we reduce NOD's promi-
nence on this campus, change it
from an all-campus event to some-
thing that only those who want to
deal with it? (The argument that
people who don't want to deal with
NOD just shouldn't go doesn't work
since you have to make an active
effort to avoid NOD, the pre-parties
at every college, the drunks, the
emergency staff and the worrying
about friends who did go?) Could
we replace NOD with an event that
isn't so heavily focused on deviance,
so that a wider range of Rice stu-
dents could attend?
One final note: I've heard several
comments that changing NOD
would be the first step towards the
Baylorization of Rice. Do we really
want to make NOD the rallying point
for this? If there isn't support for
NOD in its own right, then why
should we fight for it at all?
NOD needs to change or disap-
pear. Those who support it, do you
argue what NOD is, or what it could
or should be? If you find yourself
arguing the latter, can you really
support the former? I seriously doubt
a convincing argument supporting
an environment of excessive drink-
ing, sexual harassment and planned
deviance can be made.
Zach Bonig is a Lovett College senior.
These are play-pretend sticks and stones, Alia
Beware: Even valid words can be no good
Let's say I want to offend you.
Could I do that better by calling you
names or by threatening your
lifestyle?
Consider what Wash-
ington, D.C., cabdriver
James D. McLaughlin told
the Washington Postwhen
asked about the fiasco in
that town over "nig-
gardly": "It's not what
someone calls you; it's
what you answer to," he
said.
As wise as that may be,
words do matter. Even if
you get heckled, and your
feelings are hurt as a
result, remember: It could be much,'
much worse.
But let's discuss the word that's
caused so much uproar. Is it OK to
use "niggardly?"
The nationally syndicated colum-
nists and letter-writers supporting
free and unpersecutable use of the
word cite precedents: The word has
been used by black people, the Su-
preme Court specifically in defense
of blacks, authors, journalists and
so on. They say that "nigger" and
"niggardly" have different origins
and spellings. They also say the First
Amendment protects free speech.
While true, those reasons make
for a weak case. Here, precedent
and etymology are irrelevant. Hun-
dreds of dignitaries and ordinary
citizens use — and have throughout
history used—words that are offen-
sive. A thing's acceptibility is not a
function of its prevalence. And word
origin and spelling don't usually
matter to people in everyday discus-
sion. Neither is the First Amend-
ment applicable: Personal judgment
and consideration for others — not
law — should keep this particular
word from common use.
What is relevant then? The lis-
tener is relevant. Discretion is rel-
evant and perception is relevant. If
the world were a better place, intent
would be relevant, too.
Some good news: David Howard,
who resigned from D.C.'s Office of
Public Advocate, has been rehired.
Howard had used "niggardly" in a
conversation and managed to offend
one of his staffers. That black em-
ployee disregarded Howard's imme-
Angelique
Siy
diate apology and explanation. When
Mayor Anthony Williams accepted
Howard's resignation, he added that
he didn't think Howard had said
anything inherently racist.
Immediately, people criti-
cized Williams for bad
judgement, saying essen-
tially what National Asso-
ciation for the Advance-
ment of Colored People
Chair Julian Bond said
about the whole situation:
People should not have to
censor their language to
meet other people's lack
of understanding.
I agree with Bond. But
just as this isn't about free speech, it
isn't a censorship issue either. With
"niggardly," there are several easy,
elegant synonyms unlikely to be
misconstrued: miserly, stingy,
cheap, tight-fisted and parsimoni-
ous. Is anyone so in love with "nig-
gardly" that he feels compelled to
use it — to force it on listeners?
As Mike Agnes, editor in chief of
Webster's New World Dictionary, told
the Post: "I would not hesitate to use
it, but I'm in an office with 15 other
people working on a dictionary. ...
We lose words every day. Language
is always in process, always in flux,
always changing, particularly from
generation to generation. We lose
words, we lose dialects, we lose en-
tire languages."
Why not slowly lose "niggardly?"
Professor Standis.h Henning
teaches English 215 at University
Wisconsin at Madison. Henning,
during a Monday lecture on
.Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, used
"niggardly" to describe a character.
Junior Amelia Rideau, an English
and political science major, said she
had never encountered the word
before and thought Henning said
"niggerly."
Rideau decided to look the word
up at home before confronting her
professor. After the next class ses-
sion Wednesday, she told Henning
she was offended by the word, even
though she knew what it meant, "be-
cause I can't separate the sounds
from their associations." Henning
apparently said he understood
where she was coming from, that he
had in fact thought twice about his
use of the word after saying it. Then,
Rideau said, both parted believing
the matter resolved.
But Henning began Friday's class
with a discussion about. David
Howard's experience in D.C., and
with Henning and her classmates
writing the word in their notes all
around her and using the word over
and over as part of the discussion,
Rideau was overcome. She left the
room crying.
"It doesn't matter what he was
trying to do," she told me over the
telephone. "It doesn't take away from
its offensiveness to me."
I argued with Rideau, but only to
prod her, to test her argument. She
is not crazy. She doesn't come across
as anything like the close-minded
employee of Howard's. Nordoesshe
talk like some African nationalist
radical I could expect might be of-
fended by "niggardly."
But it just so happens that the
word does offend her. And we have
See WISCONSIN . Page 5
LUNPGM
Push the dissenting opinion
under the covers and smile
It was the scariest thing I have
ever heard a Rice student say.
She stood up during an open
forum on the Thresher's "Rice
women are like ...
backpage and said
something like:
"I read it, and I
thought it was funny.
But I was talking to
someone else later and
saw how offensive it
was. We need to edu-
cate people to realize
that they should be of-
fended."
I'm fine with people
being offended. I'm
fine with people arguing their
opinions. But people telling other
people what they should think,
that is a very scary thought.
Unfortunately, it is all too typi-
cal at Rice. Perhaps at some uni-
versities, students rally around
free speech. At Rice, students,
faculty and administration rally
around killing the messenger.
As a member of the Thresher
staff, I have helped make some
controversial decisions. And I
have seen myself and the rest of
the staff called racist, sexist, ho-
mophobic and anti-Semitic.
All of those issues deserved
public discussion. But words like
those aren't part of a discussion.
Essentially, they all translate into
"You don't have a right to have
that opinion."
Christof
Spieler
We just don't want to
deal with
unpleasantness. It
bothers us. We 'd
rather be happy and
warm and fuzzy and
love each other.
Perhaps I'm a throwback. I
was born in a country that bans
extremist political parties in the
name of democracy. But then 1
learned about the Bill of Rights,
and Joseph McCarthy, and I con-
cluded that there was a better
way to deal with extremism. Sim-
ply let everyone express their
opinions, and sensible ideas will
be.seconded while irrational ones
will be ignored.
The founding fathers figured
that they could trust the public
to think. But Malcolm Gillis
thinks he can't trust
Rice students to do as
much. After all, he
sent out a letter to the
entire campus last
year telling us that the
Holocaust did hap-
pen, and people who
say it didn't are igno-
rant. Duh.
But maybe Gillis
wasn't talking about
the Holocaust at all.
Maybe was saying
that he doesn't have the courage
to deal with hate face to face and
would rather ignore it.
Just like the students and staff
who responded to the fact that
the Student Association presi-
dent might be ineligible to serve
by saying that nobody should
have brought up the issue.
Just like the SA senators who
were privately convinced that Bill
had done something wrong but
just sat there because they didn't
want him to be mad at them.
Just like the Orientation Week
coordinators who, stayed silent
about how they were steamrolled
by the Vice President for Stu-
dent Affairs into stopping jacks.
Just like everyone who com-
plains about T-shirts hanging in
their way in the Rice Memorial
Center but won't talk about rape.
We just don't want to deal
with unpleasantness. It bothers
us. We'd rather be happy and
warm and fuzzy and love each
other.
Except, of course, that we all
say bad things about each other
behind each other's backs, even
as we criticize the people who
say the same things in public.
I still think that a university
ought to be a place where issues
can be raised and heard, where
people can be free to speak their
minds without being shushed or
censored.
But it would seem that Rice
isn't that place, not right now.
Is it any wonder that this uni-
versity has a reputation for turn-
ing out excellent middle man-
agement?
Christof Spieler (Sid '97) is de-
sign consultant and a graduate
student in civil engineering.
He can be reached at
spieler@rice.edu.
the Rice Thresher
Brian Stoler
Editor in Chief
Nick Zdeblick
Business Manager
NEWS
Usman Baber, Editor
Jennifer Frazer, Editor
Gordon Wittick, Page Designer
OPINION
Joseph Blocher, Editor
Michael Sew Hoy, Editor
SPORTS
Jose Luis Cubri'a, Editor
Leslie Anne Carter, Asst. Editor
Kathleen Corr, Asst. Editor
Carter Brooking, Page Designer
Michelle Tham, Page Designer
PHOTOGRAPHY
Abi Cohen, Editor
CALENDAR
Amy Krivohlavek, Editor
Louren Reed
Advertising Manager
ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT
Marisa Levy, Editor
Jett McAIister, Editor
Macy McBeth, Asst. Editor
BACKPAGE
Packy Saunders, Editor
ONLINE
Jace Frey, Editor
COPY
Marie! Tam, Editor
Ben Weston, Editor
Angelique Siy, Ad Prod. Manager
Carly Halvorson, Office Manager
Louren Reed, PD Manager
Christof Spieler, Design Consultant
Su Yin, /lss<. Business Manager
Eden King, /tssf. Advertising Manager
The Rice Thresher, the official student
newspaper at Rice University since 1916; is
published each Friday during the school year,
except during examination periods and
holidays, by the students of Rice University.
Editorial and business offices are located
on the second floor of the Ley Student Center,
6100 Main St., MS-524, Houston, TX 77005-
1892. Phone: (713) 527-4801. Fax: (713) 285-
5238. E-mail: thresher@rice.edu. Web page:
http://www. rice, edu/thresher.
Annual subscription rate: $40 domestic,
$90 international. Non-subscription rate: first
copy free, second copy $703.
The Thresher reserves the right to refuse
any advertising for any reason. Additionally,
the Thresher does not take responsibility for
the factual content of any ad.
Unsigned editorials represent the majority
opinion of the Thresher editorial staff. All other
pieces represent solely the opinion of the
author.
The Threslier is a member of the Associated
Collegiate Press and the Society of
Professional Journalists. The Thresher has
been rated an ACP All-American newspaper.
Just in: Lindsay Germano Day this weekend!
© COPYRIGHT 1999.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Stoler, Brian. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 86, No. 16, Ed. 1 Friday, February 12, 1999, newspaper, February 12, 1999; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth246639/m1/3/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.