I awaited Brown University's report on its 18th-century ties to slavery with great interest. Students at my elementary school were conditioned to think only of the American South when we thought of slavery, a horrid place where our ancestors suffered, just below the Mason-Dixon line that marked this country as half-slave and half-free. Brown's Committee on Slavery and Justice (made of students, faculty and administrators) discovered that Brown, along with numerous other northern-based institutions, possessed much stronger links to slavery than they could have ever anticipated. The New York Times noted that even members of Brown's governing board "owned or captained slave ships, and donors sometimes contributed slave labor to help in construction" of the campus during the 18th century. People familiar with Brown's liberal reputation may find it hard to believe that such horrible things took place. To me, the bigger surprise was that it took so long for history to resurface.
I doubt we would be similarly surprised at Princeton, where the "conservative, Southern Ivy" brand remains. Good, old boy values and aw-shucks charm go just as far as they did in generations past. Despite its move toward a no-loan program, increased student diversity and an aggressive recruitment of low-income students, the University continues to battle its dogged reputation that can sometimes serve to deter otherwise enthusiastic admits. No doubt there exist prefrosh who chose other top schools because of their discomfort with the eating clubs. One such example is my friend Devin at Harvard, who I met this summer in Los Angeles through another Harvard student.
While our conversation first confirmed my speculations that all Ivy League black folks were part of a fluid, booming power network (he knew my friends at Princeton; I knew many of his friends at Harvard), I was taken aback when he told me that the eating clubs served as his prime deterrent from applying to Princeton. I remember pointing out that Harvard's finals clubs were no bastion for egalitarian values themselves, but he quickly countered that unlike Princeton, they failed to serve as the focal point for socializing on campus.
One wonders just how many students turn down Princeton life on account of their intuition, which is mostly composed of hearsay, about that two block stretch that wields tremendous social power for four short years. While we can partially blame the admits for being too passive in their attempts to understand the nature of the Street, the University has to receive more of the blame.
Through mutual experience alone, every Princeton undergrad knows that when admitted, students receive the snail mail propaganda blitz about almost everything but the eating clubs. Perhaps it is mentioned in passing when discussing the residential college dining halls, but that's about it. Downplaying the clubs' importance as part of the Princeton experience can only serve to confine the University's options when deciding how to approach this crucial aspect of student life.
President Tilghman and her burly band have almost no chance of eliminating the clubs with one fell swoop. Since students and alumni are aware of this fact, testimonials by Tilghman and Executive Vice President Mark Burstein affirming the importance of Prospect Avenue have the effect of appearing more obligatory than anything else. While a dialogue is always encouraged, positive rhetoric is useless without positive action.
During the first inaugural Toni Morrison Lectures, Professor Cornel West GS '80 praised members of the Tilghman administration for supporting the creation of the Center for African-American studies here at Princeton. Tilghman wasn't there, but I was able to catch Provost Chris Eisgruber '83 and Dean of the Faculty David Dobkin beaming with delight as West made his heartwarming remarks. West added the mandatory "there's much progress yet to be made" in so many words, but his cheerful remarks had already left their mark. I wondered if the caution that followed West's compliments fell on deaf ears.
For a University notorious for getting too comfortable with past norms of society, spirited self-examination, the vehicle that drives our University's progress, can transform for the worst if University officials cultivate a sense that the job is done. Concerned Alumni of Princeton existed only 20 years ago, blacks didn't begin attending the University until the 1960s and the Class of 1973 was the first class to feature female graduates. Only 90 years ago, our greatest president, who turns 150 years old in December, reportedly said that the racist film narrative "Birth of a Nation" was like "writing history with lightning." We should look to Brown as an example because Princeton is closer to inequity and hypocrisy than many are ready to admit. Here's to hoping that the continued progress remains just that. David Smart is a sophomore from Los Angeles, Calif. He can be reached at dsmart@princeton.edu.
Read More
Keep academic authority in human hands
Lily Halbert-AlexanderThe Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
The Trump administration’s attacks on research and higher education as well as a blind reliance on AI chatbots are reflective of a societal backslide: a commodification of knowledge that prioritizes “efficiency” over the messy process of getting to an answer, where nuances are flattened and the truth is fungible.
What do we owe society for a Princeton education?
Jia Cheng ShenThe social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
The social and moral responsibility that comes with receiving a degree subsidized by both private generosity and public trust is significant.
Notes from a so-called enemy’s classroom
Jennifer JenningsIt wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.
It wasn’t revolutionary. It was homework. But it was homework that asked: how do we build schools that work for all kids? Inclusion, after all, is the “I” in DEI. That’s what we’re thinking about together. And caring about each other’s experiences and opportunities, it turns out, isn’t something you can outlaw.