Letters to the Editor

Kennan was true Princeton treasure

To the many memories of George Kennan in the March 21 issue of the Princetonian, I would like to add my own. As graduate students at the Woodrow Wilson School in the fall of 1966, a few of my classmates and I were fortunate to be enrolled in Kennan's Seminar on International Relations. Every Friday afternoon, for the entire semester, we had George all to ourselves.

Courtly, elegant, always dressed in a three-piece suit, he faced us while standing in front of large maps showing the geopolitical transformation of Europe from 1866 to 1945. As eloquent in speech as he was with his pen, he wove together literature with history, especially when reading from the works of Rupert Brooke and other World War I poets. His lectures on the 1930s and 1940s were, of course, compelling.

For me, the final chapter of Kennan's seminar came in February, 2004, when I attended the Kennan Centennial symposium on campus and visited the Mudd Library to read the original Long Telegram and met members of his family.

George Kennan was certainly one of Princeton's and the country's greatest treasures. For all of us, he was a kind and very decent man. Edward Burke GS '67

Legacy admits need not be reduced

Regarding 'Tradition fails to justify legacy admits' (Tuesday, March 22, 2005):

Freddie LaFemina writes that "tradition fails to justify legacy admits." Even if that were correct, it wouldn't mean we should join him in wishing for a "George Soros-like figure who would pledge a billion dollars to the University if it would end its 3-to-1 advantage for legacies in admissions." Why? Because tradition isn't the only, or even the best, explanation for the higher admissions rate among legacies.

The best explanation is that people who get admited to Princeton on their academic merits often produce children who are similarly capable. So it's reasonable to expect that people whose parents went to Princeton are going to be among the best-qualifed applicants, regardless of whether the admissions office knows that their parents went to Princeton. Legacies do get an extra boost. But LaFemina's argument implies that without the boost, only a third of the legacy applicants would get in, and that's almost certainly too low an estimate. David Robinson '04 Former 'Prince' Opinion Page Editor Balliol College, Oxford

ROTC might not mesh with Princeton ideals

Regarding 'Honoring the decision to serve' (Wednesday, March 23, 2005):

Thomas Bohnett, in his column "Honoring the decision to serve," bemoans the lack of participation by Princetonians in the armed forces. However, an ignorance of our "historical calling to be soldiers of the American democracy" (a calling of which I was not aware before reading the column) may not be the only factor causing the ROTC's low numbers. There is occasional pressure put on Princeton's administration to bar military recruiters and the ROTC from campus because the military's discriminatory "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which prohibits openly gay Americans from serving their country, contradicts Princeton's own anti-discrimination rules. Since November, colleges and universities have been able to restrict military recruiters' access to students without the risk of losing federal funding, but Princeton has not taken the opportunity to lead in this area. It would be in keeping with Bohnett's hope for moral leadership from Princeton for the University to restrict, rather than encourage, the armed forces on this campus. I would amend his final sentence: Let us prove that it is still within the capacity of Princeton University to inspire a nation with its service to that nation's principles, rather than merely its institutions. Zachary Woolfe '06