University of Virginia Library

The Dance Societies

Tomorrow night in their annual election
meetings the University's two dance societies,
the P.K. Society and the German Club,
will consider for ratification a new constitution
which is to supersede any old ones that
may or may not be extant. According to the
new constitution, membership in the societies
for fraternity men is to be the same as it
has been, namely one member in each
society from each class in each fraternity.
The provisions for independent members are
that candidates should "secure sponsorship
from two members" of the society in question,
appear before the officers of the
society for an "informal interview," and then
be voted on by secret ballot at a meeting
of which a majority would be required for
admission.

This method of selection of independent
members of the major organizations
responsible for popular entertainment at
the University seems not only snobbish but
unwieldy. Considering the interest most
fraternity members take in the societies and
the relatively easy admission they have to
them, it is unfair that an independent interested
enough to go the trouble to try
to get into one of them should have to go
through such screening and testing to secure
membership. It is true that the societies
have always been fraternity-oriented, but it
is also true that independents as well as
fraternity men to the concerts. It is
thus only fair that the independents should
have not only more voice in determining
what entertainment is contracted, but also
fair opportunity to avail themselves of the
advantages membership in the dance societies
offers. The provisions in the proposed constitution,
rather than encouraging independents
to join the societies, are more likely
to scare them away, to say the least.

Perhaps a greater number of sponsors
rather than the interview and the ballot,
in conjunction with some sort of quota or
ratio of independents to fraternity men,
would be a more encouraging and fair
method of considering them for membership.
If the societies are exclusive to the point
that it is felt that the officers should interview
prospective independent members presumably
for the protection of those already
members, it is safe to assume that a number
of members potentially acting as sponsors
would have sufficient discretion to
sponsor an unwanted candidate. We do not
think the societies are anywhere near being
that exclusive, as evidenced by the interest
in them taken by the average member as
manifested through attendance at meetings,
and so we do not think an independent
should have to be considered quite so intensively
as the new constitution proposes.

We hope the officers and members will
consider this matter before they vote
tomorrow night and perhaps come up with
a more equitable plan. If they do pass the
constitution as it is, we hope they will
have the foresight not to dismiss the issue
without further consideration, both for the
sake of the independents and for the sake
of the strength and respectability of the
societies.