|
Web Exclusives:
Under the Ivy March
26, 2003: The Character Question, Circa 1933 "Seldom has the
Weekly been privileged to present in a single issue three letters
more challenging," wrote editor Datus Smith '29 in PAW's March
24, 1933, issue. The letters discussed three concerns of the day
— concerns that still echo in our day: the role of education
in national life, the club "problem," and the necessity
of alcohol at alumni events, specifically Reunions. (This last was
inspired by a remarkable letter from the chair of the Reunion committee,
Charles Browne 1896, which read in part, "...no class reunion
can be worthwhile or successfully carried through without the use
of alcoholic beverages.") Smith invited alumni to respond and
debate each point. The latter two questions
earned mostly eye-rolling and here-we-go-again-ing. Sarcasm reigned
heavy in Richard G. Preston '18 's response to Browne
— "Nothing more need be said on the reunion problem"
— while Lloyd Haupt '16 wrote in exasperation, "May
I not suggest that if this club problem, whatever it is, is perennial
and nobody does anything about it, like the weather, that we just
quit talking about it." (He received a tart response from
Smith: "One is inclined to ask whether Mr. Haupt's
defeatism extends to the problem of crime — whether, because
crime is perennial, no efforts should be made to cope with it.") But the letter regarding
the first question, the role of Princeton in preparing men of character,
inspired a sharp debate. Written by John Bright 1890, it was in
response to a speech by acting Princeton President Edward Duffield
1892 (who was serving while the Board of Trustees, which he chaired,
searched for a replacement to President Hibben, who had retired
in 1932). When reading excerpts
from Duffield's speech, given on Alumni Day 1933, it's
hard to know what would raise Bright's hackles. Duffield
laid out three general goals for Princeton: that "we must
recognize the importance of maintaining here on this campus a residential
college unequalled in this country or abroad"; that the "end
of education is the development of a man and of a leadership which
will improve existing conditions"; and that "we should
give a man a philosophy of life ... The purpose is not only to
send out men of leadership, but men who have a philosophy which
gives them a willingness to sacrifice for their fellow men." Not entirely controversial
sentiments on their face, and Bright had no problem with the first
tenet, that of academic excellence. It was the next two that gave
him pause. "Under the second heading are listed some of the
worst features of modern American education," he railed. "Just
what is meant by training the character I do not know. ...It
is the spiritual quality of those who achieve greatness in politics,
morality, or murder. ...The official statement that the purpose
of education is to improve existing conditions in the outside world
is the very sublimation of toryism." The third point, he went
on, "is quite as devastating as is the second to any valid
system of thought," because Duffield based his notion of a
philosophy in Princeton's Christian roots. "Religion,
by definition, is belief ... and is not subject to proof. Now,
how a philosophy which must have its support in the reasoning mind
and to which the tiniest unproved premise is a deadly poison can
be formed out of a religion that is forbidden to question a dogmatic
assertion is a riddle for which there is no answer in Princeton,
Rome, or Mecca." Alumni rose to Duffield's
defense, if only to scold Bright for his "ungracious"
attack. Duffield himself had the last word, however. At an athletic
banquet, PAW reported, football coach Bill Roper 1902 remarked,
"When we win games we talk about football; when we lose we
talk about character building." When Duffield gave his own
speech, he said he must be there to represent one of the "off"
years, but added that he hesitated to touch on the topic of character,
because the last time he did so he read a letter in the Weekly criticizing
him for undermining American education.
Jane Martin ’89 is PAW's former editor-in-chief. You can reach her at paw@princeton.edu
|
