{ title: 'The Prospector (Helena, Mont.) 1916-2015, April 06, 2005, Page 3, Image 3', download_links: [ { link: 'http://www.loc.gov/rss/ndnp/ndnp.xml', label: 'application/rss+xml', meta: 'News about Chronicling America - RSS Feed', }, { link: '/lccn/TheProspector/2005-04-06/ed-1/seq-3.png', label: 'image/png', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/TheProspector/2005-04-06/ed-1/seq-3.pdf', label: 'application/pdf', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/TheProspector/2005-04-06/ed-1/seq-3/ocr.xml', label: 'application/xml', meta: '', }, { link: '/lccn/TheProspector/2005-04-06/ed-1/seq-3/ocr.txt', label: 'text/plain', meta: '', }, ] }
About The Prospector (Helena, Mont.) 1916-2015 | View This Issue
The Prospector (Helena, Mont.), 06 April 2005, located at <http://montananewspapers.org/lccn/TheProspector/2005-04-06/ed-1/seq-3/>, image provided by MONTANA NEWSPAPERS, Montana Historical Society, Helena, Montana.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Too Many Complaints? Dear editor: This is my 60th year of involve ment in Higher Education of which nearly50 have been as pro fessor in Catholic Colleges and Universities. In all of those years I have read newspapers faithfully, always factoring in the gap in age and experience. In moments of dis agreement, I have resorted to my grandfather’s counsel: “Turn the page and rise above it.” Thus I have refrained from carping “Letters to the Editor.” However, the monumental silliness of the recent issue of the Prospector can not go without some comment mainly because I am aware of how the recent issue has offended many serious, hard-working people whose salary your writers imperi ously boast of paying. At the outset, I might suggest that the editorial decision to pres ent an “Opinion Issue” was highly questionable. Opinion, being pri vate, is for biographers. It can have little public use except for compil ers of statistics. As a noun coming from the verb to opine , “opinion” carries with it the connotation of being “off the top of one’s head” ephemeral. I find no suggestion that it can be “the funnest” as you so archly say. College student essays are supposed to demon strate powers of observation and analysis. They should be taken seriously even when they are play ful. Opinions are for diaries and barrooms. This leads to the issue of writing “skills” as educationalists say. The writing in the March 2 issue is at best conversational, sprinkled with clichés and solecisms to the extent that I wonder what these students have learned in their highly publi cized writing courses. The slog ging narratives recounting inci dents of outrage could be humor-\ ous if they were not so ineptly put thrown together. Not only do they reveal a complete lack of serious awareness of style or polish, it is fairly obvious that few of the writ ers show any regard for the disci pline of careful writing or critical revision. I was once told by an eminent stylist, “Never spend more time reading a manuscript than the writer did in composing it.” In short the slapdash writing offered is for the most part “off the top of one’s head,” a hallmark of reckless opinion. Writing is serious work. My further concern is that the subject matter, the thinking behind the essays, is embarrassingly immature, redolent of a grammar school newspaper. I know we are supposed to laugh at the heavy- handed essay on book prices, but the anti-intellectualism and biblio- phobia with which it plays are nei ther clever nor amusing. It plods. I suspect that writer is not in the habit of buying books beyond the assigned texts. The counting of pages and cost thereof is on a par with the silly statistics which pad the student parking article. The calculator key on the word-proces sor should not be used to hide lack of wit, a quality usually necessary for even limping satire. But there are more obvious transgressions in certain articles. The recurring allusions to the Catholic nature of Carroll reveal juvenile, parochial school over simplifications, suggesting, in turn, a parochial agenda and mindset. Remember, parochial connotes limited; catholic means universal. Carroll College is not Oral Roberts University, it is rather the heir of the great tradition of Catholic higher education dating from \Sapienza\ Rome where Aquinas taught complexity not over-simpli fication. Cardinal Newman found no need for “Loyalty Oaths” in his “Idea of a University.” Personally, I found most offen sive the letter about rude employ ees whose “salary we pay.” Talk about snobbery! Marie Antoinette was never this demeaning and look what happened to her. The writer may be “noblesse” but should also remember “oblige.” I was raised to believe that if you were polite to people they would be so to you and I have never found anything but courtesy in those venues which so grieved your correspondent. Before one should judge, or sym pathize, it would be interesting to hear how the altercations began. We read “rolled eyes,” “sighs” W anted : Spanish-speaking student with home healthcare experience. Sixty-one year old stroke sur vivor and his working iwfe need help. Lives near campus. Please call 439-4199, ask for Kathy. “disgustingly.” “extremely both ered,” “reluctantly,” all dramatic interpretations of the “enemy” (or should I say servant?) But what words or attitude opened dialogue? Perhaps more offensive was the essay about drinking (recycling?) which turns out as nothing more than childish machismo and I hope that some day its writer grows up enough to be ashamed of it. We all make mistakes of judgment in life, but only the unfortunate suffer them to be published. The essay on manners in the dining room has nothing to do with Catholic Colleges, Franciscan or otherwise. (Who are these Phar isaical mosquitoes who keep nip ping away?) The subject has to do with civilized manners of young people (Catholic or not) who should be struggling to become mature. The issue goes beyond refraining from derogatory names or crude language. It has to do with adult behavior. Does anyone find it odd that so many students in the Cube come in from outdoors, and plant their muddy boots on the tables and couches? Doesn’t any one remember a parent saying, “keep your feet off the furniture?” Maybe parents don’t care nowa days. But let me assure you that out there in the cold, cold world, beyond collegiate indulgence and pandering, there are many people who do respect property. This is not a matter of opinion. Most Carroll students whom I have met in my 15 years here are hard working, intelligent, consci entious, polite and affable. They have no taste for spinning off the top of their head half-formed, prej udiced even bigoted opinions. They deserve better than the child ish adventure of the Prospector of March 2, 2005. Criticism, even controversy, is always necessary in a vital institution. But that is not a justification for “funnest opinion.” I hope you have learned that to be considered an adult you have to think like a mature adult, write like an educated adult and edit like a responsible one as well. Edward F. Callahan Visiting Professor Response to Blog Dear Editor/Dr. Hardwick: Your Blog on the Prospector was a missed opportunity. When more than a dozen student writers comment on how to improve the campus, I would hope the response would be to respond to the suggestions - not to say \wish you'd written about other things.\ Students have precious few outlets to voice criticism. The Boards has been censored to the point that it's no longer a forum. When students do speak up, as in the last issue, I would hope the campus would cheer - and respond. No one has to agree, but to actually respond to the specifics would prove that their voices were heard. Sure, there's always uncovered stories in every issue. But what about what they DID say? Ed Callahan wrote a sizzling response, very critical...That's appropriate. I'm sure they would like to hear your view on their suggestions for improvement. I actually don't think your Blog was totally honest. What you said, in so many words, was that you did NOT appreciate the criticism and that their efforts were better spent reporting good news about campus rather than looking for bad news. Your praise was back- handed at best. I do not agree with some of what they wrote, and wish it was all better written. But I'll defend to death their courage to speak...and I hope they'll get direct responses...not just requests to redirect their efforts. Most of all I would hope we'd here \thanks...we're listening...not always agreeing...but listening.\ They did read your Blog...and commented on it in class. They did not see it as praise. Thanks for listening, Brent Northup Chair of Communications Dep. WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 2005 VOLUME 88, NO. 6
