University of Virginia Library

New IFC President Speaks

Fisher Views Plans For Fraternity Future

By Thom Faulders
Cavalier Daily Staff Writer

Termed as an office of increasing influence and
authority, the office of Inter-Fraternity Council President
has been assumed by Robert Fisher after his election
unanimously last week. Mr. Fisher, a resident of Atlanta,
Georgia, and a member of Phi Delta Theta social
fraternity outlined his views and plans for the future of
the IFC and fraternities at the University in an interview
with The Cavalier Daily.

CD: Are fraternities presently relevant in University
life?

MR. FISHER: I think the question of relevance is a valid
one; it is a question that must continually be asked about
all institutions within a world as dynamic as a university. I
hope, however, that my answer will be accepted as
equally valid. Although I am very much prejudiced in
favor of fraternities, I think I can present information of a
more objective nature. As a part of the Rush Evaluation
which was recently conducted, the first-year men who
were not interested in pledging were asked this same
question. Of this group, 60 per cent answered
positively-that fraternities had a definite relevance in
University life. Of the remaining 40 per cent, 25 per cent
had no reaction and 15 per cent reacted negatively. Some
of the reasons which I will now give for this relevance
may be disagreed with by many people, but apart from
being my own beliefs, many were pointed out by the
non-pledging first-year men that were interviewed.

While fraternities have played an integral part in the
University in the past, they will play an even more vital

role in the University of the future. Coeducation and
growth will add to the importance of fraternities. Aside
from the usual "social" aspects-parties, meals and a place
to take your date-fraternities offer more. They offer to
the individual student as orientation within the growing
University. So often we hear that students are just
numbers and nothing more. Fraternities offer an answer
to this problem-they offer an opportunity for identity
within the masses. As lost as the student may become, he
can always return to his fraternity, a group of close
friends with which he can identify. A university should be
a total educational experience, and fraternities offer
lessons in community living and responsibility to others.
If this answer tends to be idealistic, I apologize, but I
emphasize that whether there are fraternities at the
University in the future or not, people will always tend to
group themselves socially and many of the present
criticisms of fraternities will be applicable to whatever
system emerges.

CD: Do you view fraternities as primarily social
organizations?

MR. FISHER: Yes, I feel that the primary purpose of
fraternities is social, but as must be apparent from my
answer to your previous question, my definition of
"social" includes many areas other than parties.
Fraternities exist to meet the social needs of their
members. These needs may be quite different depending
on the individual, but in general, I would include the need
for involvement in close personal relationships with peers,
to feel part of a group, to feel responsibility to such a
group, to work together for common goals, and to have
planned activities and a place to go with a date. This, of
course, by no means exhausts the list of social needs
which confront the individual, but I hope from this you
can understand the perspective with which I say that
fraternities are primarily social organizations. From this
point of view, almost any type of activity (community
service, scholarship, political activity on and off the
Grounds) can relate to this primary goal of fraternities. In
as much as other practices relate to this goal, they are
derived goals of fraternities.

CD: How do you view the newly established power
bestowed on the Committee on Fraternities and the
Governing Board?

MR. FISHER: The change of responsibility for
fraternity housing from the University Housing Committee
to the Committee on Fraternities was, I feel, a very
constructive move from the point of view of fraternities,
as well as from the administrative point of view of more
effective control. I think the Inter-Fraternity Council's
housing committee and the fraternities will benefit from
the change because the Committee on Fraternities, being
closer to the situation, will be able to administer matters
more effectively. I do not believe that this will mean less
stringent standards or easier inspections, however, just the
opposite, it may mean that inspections will be much
harder to pass in the future, but I do believe that the
requirements will be more reasonable. Any archaic and
unrealistic requirements (such as the requirement for
sprinkler systems, which the University Housing Committee
was fortunately never able to realize) will be removed.
For this reason, I believe that although inspections may
get tougher, this change in responsibility will be for the
overall benefit of fraternities.

The other important change which has occurred was the
change in control of visitation hours in the houses from
the Committee on Fraternities to the Governing Board. I
feel that the Governing Board is quite capable of handling
the visitation rules, as well as all the social rules governing
the fraternities. The Governing Board has, since I have
been associated with it, been comprised of very intelligent
student leaders with a necessary measure of foresight. I
am confident that these high standards will remain in
effect, and for this reason believe that any responsibility
delegated to the Board in this area will be to the benefit
of fraternities in the present and the future.

The policy of the Board pertaining to visitation hours
was to lay down liberal limits for visitation within which
the fraternities would, if they felt it necessary, set their
own, more conservative limits. This policy was laid down
on a trail basis and will return to the Governing Board for
final approval in the next few weeks. I do feel this was the
most effective means for handling the situation because it
allows for the delegation of responsibility for social rules
to the level of the individual house, but provides for
insurance against possible disasters which might occur if
any house is unable to efficiently assume such authority.

CD: Will your approach to the business of the IFC
differ from approaches in the past?

MR. FISHER: The approach taken by the IFC
during different administrations depends on the particular
situation and problems facing fraternities at that time.
Because of the successful approach of the last
administration and because of the difference in
circumstances between today and this time last year, the
approach to be taken may differ in several respects.
Fraternities should, whenever possible, be dealt with on
an individual basis, realizing individual problems and
personalities. At the same time,
however, the fraternities
must come to realize that as fraternities at the University,
they are part of a system. For this system, individual
feuds, grievances, and greed must be forgotten as much as
possible. The problems which will confront fraternities in
the year 1969 will make it necessary for fraternities to
keep in the front of their minds the implications of their
actions, not only for themselves, but for the system as a
whole. Fraternities which are unable to adjust their set of
values in such a way may emerge as the problem children
of the new administration. In short, the new administration
will urge co-operation.

CD: Should the officers of the IFC act on their own
authority without the mandate of the IFC beforehand?

MR. FISHER: Officers of the IFC, especially the
President, Are elected to serve and represent fraternities.
It is my belief that while serving in such an office, a
person cannot effectively act in public as an individual
apart from his office. He cannot publicly represent his
own personal feelings without these feelings being
misinterpreted as the general consensus of fraternities.
This is not to say that officers of the IFC should not lead
fraternities. The President of the IFC should use his
influence within the system to enlighten and direct
fraternity men whenever possible. I believe this to be an
extremely effective means of leadership.