![]() | The Cavalier daily Thursday, October 22, 1970 | ![]() |
More On Fraternities
Recently a rather large amount of space in
this newspaper has been devoted to the
subject of fraternity rush and fraternities in
general. Some good criticism and some
perhaps misguided attacks on that system
have appeared in our columns, with many of
the latter being identified as our editorial
opinion, which they certainly were not. We
have been disturbed with the response to
these attacks, which from time to time have
been rational and very readable, but which all
too often have descended to a somewhat
lower level. No one, in our opinion, has
bothered to present some of the more
forceful arguments for joining a house, even
though we have invited quite a few people to
do just that.
So for the sake of fairness and objectivity
we would like to make a few additional
remarks on the subject of fraternities.
Fraternities at the University are certainly
unlike those at most other schools. They
don't go rah rah every chance they get, build
floats, sing songs, or get orgiastic over the
football team. They won't tell you that a
combination of the fraternal mysticism mixed
with the sweet sugar of brotherhood will
make a man out of you or solve all your
problems. Fraternities on the Grounds have
always, to their credit, attempted to maintain
at least a facade of dignity.
And, although fraternities do not enjoy
the monopoly on non-academic life at the
University they once enjoyed, they do fill a
definite social void for many, although the
social functions of many houses can become
rather boring after a year or more of the same
thing.
Although a lot of students maintain that
fraternities are basically anti-intellectual, it
has been our experience that conversations on
Rugby Road and Mad Lane are not less
"intellectual" than those on Alderman Road.
A good many of your more interesting
students on the Grounds are members of
social fraternities. For many students who are
concerned over the mushrooming size of the
University, fraternities provide a place to
enjoy a small and well-defined circle of
acquaintances where lasting friendships can be
made.
A great many houses have come to the
realization that they must change to survive
and have taken a close look at themselves,
dropping many of the vestiges of past
decades.
We have been pleasantly surprised at rush
this year. The number of rushees has been
less, but that has forced many fraternity men
to realize that a student should be evaluated
on more than his clothes or the length of his
hair. Those dreary rush conversations have, at
times, been rather lively this year.
Perhaps fraternities will save themselves.
Certainly they are still worth saving. They
must begin to change at the same pace this
University changes, however, or they will
become mere repositories for the
conservatives, as they have at so many
schools.
There used to be a time when fraternities,
which are essentially the largest organized
group of students, did a lot of community
service work. We would like to see them
revive this tradition.
Whether or not fraternities survive is still,
of course, an open question. They have been
declining for a great many years now and
perhaps the trend is irreversible. Ten years
from now fraternities may well be gone. If
they go it will not be because this newspaper
was not enthusiastic about them. They will
survive or fail on their own merits. Only
fraternity men can do the necessary work to
keep their institution relevant — to use that
overworked term — in a changing University.
We wish them luck.
![]() | The Cavalier daily Thursday, October 22, 1970 | ![]() |