I wish it were that easy at Princeton. I can easily imagine President Tilghman reading this newspaper every day and thinking, “Damn, these children is triflin’!” Of course, she would never say this — not just because she is unfamiliar with Mississippi Delta vernacular, but also because she would fear the inevitable media repercussion. Well, if she can’t say it, I will: Princeton, we be triflin’.
We trifle over political issues: No one gets worked up more than a college kid with a bone to pick about responsible investment. The last sit-in at NYU (a few weeks ago) was to protest financial opacity. (That is, until it wasn’t, when the protesters added demands for scholarships for Palestinian students.) Similarly, an article appeared in this newspaper earlier this year about the University’s 2 cent investment in Zimbabwe and general lack of an ethical investment review. I understand that responsible investment is a good thing, but I often have trouble believing that the outrage is commensurate with the evil.
We trifle over environmental issues: Greening Princeton has all sorts of nice, small initiatives, like the push for no trays in the dining halls. I’m certainly for reducing waste at zero cost. Still, how on earth is this something to get angry about? If you like the idea, you still have to know that it only would reduce waste so much — and if you don’t like the idea, you have to know it would only be a minor inconvenience that you’d get used to.
We trifle over University services: The Editorial Board in this newspaper often nitpicks University policy, like not having Cafe Viv food at late meal. To their credit, they usually keep a respectful tone, but that doesn’t mean they’re not triflin’.
We trifle over student groups: There’s a particular group, who has, I think, been mentioned in this newspaper every day this week for one reason or another. I’m talking about the “Panscombe Pociety,” and I think you know who I mean. Anyway, if you ever read this newspaper or — heaven help you — the comments on the online articles, you know people love nothing more than getting worked up about this student group, and members of this student group never miss an opportunity to defend themselves and throw back some jabs of their own. Even if both groups think immense issues are at stake, I still cannot understand why such ferocity of conversation is warranted.
Maybe one of the above-mentioned proponents of one of these groups would claim that minor issues are emblematic of major issues. Therefore, he might say, if we don’t care about the details we won’t care about the big problems either; when all the chips are down, we’ll balk. I think this argument relies too much on a fallacious slippery slope argument. Being calmer about small issues does not mean we will lack the wherewithal to speak out when it really matters. Fine, go on the record objecting to the small issues — but put the real effort and vigor into the big ones.
I’m not advocating for less debate, only for a sense of perspective. In my estimation, eating disorders are a big deal; poor counseling service is a big deal; alcohol policy is a big deal. Remarkably, the debate about all of these has been rather sedate and reasonable. We’re clearly capable of handling big problems with poise, so why do we get so worked up about the trifles? One idea is that we’re out to change the world. After all, we’re told all the time that we can change the world — and God knows the world needs changing. But the truth is, most issues around Princeton aren’t so important, and blowing them up with so much hot air won’t change this. Wait till you get out in the world, and then you can get worked up, from your neighborhood council all the way to the White House. A time will come for angry letters, protests, Molotov cocktails and more — but until then, I think we do better when we tone it down.
Greg Burnham is a math major from Memphis, Tenn. He can be reached at gburnham@princeton.edu.
Read More
Why can’t lecturers win the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching?
Jerry ZhuLet’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Let’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Princeton’s administration of justice is Trumpian
Frances BroganThe disparity between the University’s approach to Giberson and its approach to pro-Palestinian protestors reflects a concerning trend of appeasing an increasingly emboldened right rather than resisting the threat it poses to academic freedom and the wellbeing of Princeton students.
Secular Opening Exercises? Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water
Frank StrasburgerThe secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
The secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
