I would like to echo my support for Emily Schaffer's and George Farish's previous Viewpoints, which argued that the Omidyars are, indeed, a good choice to speak at commencement. But I wish to elaborate upon a specific thought, one which Mr. Farish's Viewpoint brought to mind: Are Tufts students, as a whole, too concerned with "brand image?"
An informal survey by the Tufts Daily found that students' biggest priority for a commencement speaker was "celebrity status." ("Bacow books unidentified commencement speaker," 1/24/02) That idea, to me, is reflective of the majority of our campus. Consider last year's Issam Fares lecture. Over a thousand eager students filed into the Gantcher Center to watch the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Colin Powell, speak. Consider the hype surrounding former president Bill Clinton's speech to be held at the Gantcher Center in only one week, or the complaints regarding limited seating availability at Al Gore's lecture last month. People want to attend these lectures. But how many come to hear their messages, and how many people just come to hear famous people talk?
Tufts draws a myriad of speakers every year. Just this past weekend, Tufts hosted the EPIIC Symposium, in which a large collection of renowned figures converged on the Hill for a weekend of intense intellectual discourse. Panel discussions involving economists, ambassadors, academics, NGO leaders, authors and other well-respected individuals made their way to this Symposium to discuss global inequities along many different facets. How well-attended was EPIIC? Well enough to fill Alumnae Lounge roughly 50 percent of the time. That is pretty good, but suppose that a household name were to appear in a panel. Students would be lining up around the block to get tickets. Inevitably, there would be another uproar on Tufts' campus about limited seating availability at a public speaking event.
Forget academics for a second. Not everybody is an intellectual (although one would hope to find more than a handful at this school). Few people are not lovers of music. That is why Cohen Auditorium was jam-packed with students when Billy Joel came to Medford last Nov. 13. Yet, why is Goddard Chapel's Noon Hour Concert Series perpetually poorly-attended? Last Thursday, a little over a dozen people came to watch, much to the thrill of the performers who had hoped to draw at most a crowd of six. Where were people at last Saturday night's Tufts Symphony Orchestra concert? Cohen Auditorium was barely half full for that event. I would hazard a guess that the missing hundreds were out at the frats, exploiting the underage drinking scene. Hats off to the ones that missed the TSO concert for the 8:00 pm EPIIC Symposium panel discussion; that's okay in my book.
It's likely that I'm beginning to sound elitist to some, using phrases such as "intense academic discourse" and "symphony orchestra." The association of elitism with such words is a real tragedy, but I will spare the reader in this case. I am just trying to ask the question, what is it about fame that attracts so many Tufts students (or people in general, for that matter)? Why do people base their judgments around such artificial credentials? I heard once that placing famous people in advertising works because it gives the target audience the impression that a product vendor is wealthy enough to afford well-known figures.
Well, that's an uplifting statement considering that we all know that the richer a company is, the better the quality of the products it turns out, right? That's why Microsoft is ahead of the competition; its products are better than others. It has nothing to do with the fact that it has more lawyers than programmers, and more marketers than lawyers. Surely, that is why Home Depot is better, and why it wiped out the tiny Mom and Pop hardware store in your hometown; its hammers are obviously better than Mom and Pop's hammers because Home Depot is a behemoth corporation. And finally, that is why Harvard is definitely better than Tufts. It has an $18 billion endowment and we do not.
If you believe anything in the last paragraph, I have some Argentine pesos to sell you. I have been at Tufts for four years, and I, too, was once concerned with Tufts' reputation and its slipping in the US News and World Report rankings. But in my later years, I have learned to look past that and focus on more important issues, such as my education. There are so many learning opportunities at Tufts that it is simply astounding. If you want to capture this experience, go and audit a class just for the simple joy of learning. Attend a panel discussion or lecture on a topic with which you are completely unfamiliar. Enjoy intimate music-making in Goddard Chapel some Thursday afternoon, or visit the little-known Tufts art gallery the Daily wrote about last Friday. Dare to engage in intellectual discourse rather than frat house imbibing.
Raise your standards and raise the common denominator at Tufts. Then ponder this for one moment: Doing all of this just might heighten the public's perception of Tufts University, and (dare I say it?) it might do something to improve Tufts' own brand image - what a refreshing change that would be. Much better, if you ask me, than students repeatedly asking administrators to fix Tufts' lack of reputation. Do you know how many students I have heard complain that other Tufts students are apathetic? It hurts me when I think of the numbers. But who can blame them when less than 12 people showed up to the freshman election debates in February? Prove them wrong and, please, prove me wrong, too.
Ted Shevlin is a senior majoring in computer science with a minor in multimedia arts.
