On Hillflint

This past week, all members of the Class of 2017 received an email from the class council telling us about this year’s class gear. The chosen product? Traditional-looking sweaters from Hillflint, a company that started selling sweaters in 2012 and was founded by two students from Dartmouth and Princeton. To be very blunt, the product is expensive, traditional sweaters from Hillflint. The decision to sell these sweaters as class gear is classist and exclusionary. The class council has two price options: $75 or $55, depending on the material you select. Our school has a student population where 60 percent of students are on financial aid. These prices are bound to be unaffordable for some students. The purpose of class gear is to build spirit and unity among members of the class. What does it say when some students are completely shut out of this experience with no way to get in?

In its email, the council presents the idea of the sweaters as part of a tradition that stretches back to the early 20th century, a tradition that we can now bring back. I would argue that we should actually be striving to reject the traditions represented by such a sweater. These traditions are a part of an earlier Princeton, one run only for and by men from wealthy families. Of course, it is impossible for one sweater to completely undermine years of progress in the direction of equality, but it does promote a lingering sense of elitism that we should instead be trying to combat. A common perception of the University is that it is unwelcoming to people from underprivileged backgrounds. Offering an expensive sweater as a token of belonging in the class does nothing to dispel that notion.

It is not the norm for class gear to be so expensive. For example, last year’s Class of 2017 class gear was a sweatshirt that cost only $20. This represents a larger spirit of inclusivity on the part of the University, as the lower price is less of an insurmountable boundary for students from lower-income backgrounds. Even in last year’s scenario though, the most inclusive path would be to subsidize for students on financial aid. However, this year’s ratcheting up of the price makes the need for action more immediate. With the price hike, the sweater has become more inaccessible. That is, more students are now excluded from class spirit. Something needs to be done about this.

There are so many different paths the class council could have taken in order to be more inclusive. First of all, there could have been a reduced cost for students on financial aid. This is a tactic used to ensure that people can join in on other Princeton bonding experiences, such as Outdoor Action. Even the expensive eating clubs are subsidized for students on financial aid. Of course this would come at a financial cost to the University, or perhaps even to the council’s budget, but if the sweaters are important as a Princeton tradition, then it would be worth it. It would, in any case, be better than shutting out people whose families have lower incomes. Another option would be to create a partnership with Hillflint similar to how the University Store has a partnership with brands like Brooks Brothers and Ralph Lauren. Or, independently of that, the council could design and offer affordable class gear, as it has in years past. This would allow people who have the means and desire to purchase the sweater, without excluding others.

My intention is not to criticize students who have ordered the sweater or to decry the existence of luxury goods in general. It is a fact in this world that if you have a higher income, you can afford to buy more expensive things. However, that does not make it acceptable for luxury goods to be promoted at Princeton as a symbol of belonging to the class. The end result is making people with lower incomes feel unwelcome at their own school. It is extremely privileged to assume that everyone can afford such an item and, in the context of spirit wear, that is very important. It is imperative to create an atmosphere of equality and inclusion here at Princeton. These sweaters are representative of the fact that, unfortunately, this is not always the case.

Zeena Mubarak is a sophomore from Fairfax, Va. She can be reached at zmubarak@princeton.edu.

Correction: Due to a reporting error, an earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that Hillflint was a company that was in operation at the start of the 20th century. The company was started in 2012 by two college students.