The term “eating club” is self-evidently centered on the concept of providing a good meal with friends. A century and a half ago, undergraduates complained that the meals of the University’s only dining hall were simplistic. Even though the residential dining halls have since become better, joining an eating club is still worth considering because of the differing student-dining dynamic.
Descriptions of the benefits of being in an eating club usually begin with the quality of the food. I received my first and most complete explanation of eating club dining from one of the club presidents during international student orientation. Suppose you eat a meal with badly cooked fish and chips. Any and all members can tap the shoulder of the kitchen manager or equivalent undergraduate officer and say, “The fries were great, but that fish was a little undercooked.” The kitchen manager then goes around asking people what they thought of the food. The complaints and compliments are taken into consideration when planning and preparing the next meal with a similar dish. It is a system that works well because the people who share responsibility for the quality of the food are also the friends of the members. A kitchen manager has an easier time getting ahold of and asking a fair proportion of 150 of their friends what they thought of the food compared to asking a similar proportion of 700 strangers.
More importantly, conversations, too, follow a different route when taking place in an eating club as compared to a residential dining hall. Try shouting across from one table to another in a dining hall; people will stare at you. Conversations tend to be limited to a handful of people around a single table. But within the relatively small community of an eating club, it’s entirely possible for conversations to occur between tables with interjections coming in from people initially unconnected with the conversation. The small size of a club gives it a sense of closeness.
The television show “Cheers” celebrated the concept of a place where “everyone knows your name.” In an eating club, people want to know who the strangers are. Because of the small size of the clubs, there exists the expectation of knowing the names of the majority of the other members. That can be a very refreshing and welcoming feeling. That expectation also makes it difficult to have a bad day: People in the club notice when their friends are acting differently and accordingly attempt to cheer people up.
I strongly urge all sophomores to check out the eating clubs. There exists a fair bit of variation to choose from with regard to the food and atmosphere of the clubs, and quite a few people will find clubs that best suit them. Of course, eating clubs are not a good fit for every Princeton undergraduate. The consistency in the food choices offered by the residential colleges may be an important factor for some, and being able to live in a residential college may be important to others. All choices are equally valid. But I love being a member of Charter Club, and I’d advise everyone to give the clubs a shot.
Most importantly, however, sophomores should choose to eat with friends, no matter where they decide to do so. If all your friends want to join a club, join the same club. If all your friends go independent, go independent. If all your friends eat at Whitman College, eat at Whitman. Eating clubs work because of the close friendships that the small club atmosphere fosters. The amateur theology of the Last Supper is predicated on the inherent goodness of meals with friends.
Christopher Troein is an economics major from Windsor, England. He can be reached at ctroein@princeton.edu.
Read More
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.
Return Pete Hegseth’s educational ideologies “to sender”
Lily Halbert-AlexanderHegseth believes students are being raised to “see America as an evil place” because his confining approach to education leaves no room for admiration and criticism, hope and horror, to coexist. He treats American history, patriotic ideals and the “pillars of Western civilization” as if they were made of glass, as if “cross-cultural encounters” and critical race theory, the “cornucopia of diversity” he criticizes, could shatter them.
Hegseth believes students are being raised to “see America as an evil place” because his confining approach to education leaves no room for admiration and criticism, hope and horror, to coexist. He treats American history, patriotic ideals and the “pillars of Western civilization” as if they were made of glass, as if “cross-cultural encounters” and critical race theory, the “cornucopia of diversity” he criticizes, could shatter them.
