The University is not trying to kill the clubs

This is a particularly important statement, as the contrary opinion is one that is embraced by far too many undergraduates and alumni, leading to an unhealthy and malinformed discourse regarding the future of the clubs. The reality of the situation is that the vague and amorphous phrase “The University” is largely a collection of ex-club members who in actuality have a great affinity for the clubs. Trustee meetings brim with alumni who describe their club experiences with pride and nostalgia. Many of these alumni have children, nieces and nephews in eating clubs. The University officials working most closely with the clubs on reform efforts are typically ex-club members as well, who are just as excited to share stories of their times on Prospect Avenue. Are all individuals who fall under the umbrella of “The University” fond of club life at Princeton? Obviously not. But to view the University’s actions toward the eating clubs as a nefarious scheme hatched by Lord Voldemort is, at best, counterproductive and, at worst, dangerous to the vitality of the clubs.

While “The University” is not engaged in an intentional campaign to destroy the clubs, it has been actively pursuing policies that are not in the best interest of the continued survival of Prospect Avenue. The proverbial Road to Hell is always paved with good intentions. In the interest of diversifying student choice, the University instituted the four-year residential colleges. Choice is good, right? Few would rail against student choice. However, this experiment ushered in problems with financial aid, room-draw game theory, disparate pricing for the clubs and a host of other issues. In the name of opening a dialogue, the University cobbled together last year’s Task Force on Relationships Between the University and the Eating Clubs. While no one would dare decry the usefulness of dialogue, the selective membership of the task force (namely the exclusion of club officers) resulted in a report whose findings came as a surprise only to those who were far disconnected from the current club structures. Out of this task force was borne a recommendation to modify the selection process, so as to lessen the hurt feelings of bickerees who were ultimately not selected. Once again, while the University’s intentions were sincere, the proposal created was more publicity than practicality. Thankfully the clubs were able to negotiate for a year to test the system before a haphazard plan was rushed into place.

So what are the clubs to do to ensure their continued vitality in the face of University policies that appear to do more harm than good? I propose two things: skeptical cooperation and sustained competitive advantage.

The University is a tremendous asset to the clubs. Adopting an isolationist mentality would doom the clubs faster than any perceived University threat ever could. The University has bent over backwards to coordinate numerous trainings for club officers. Associate Dean of Undergraduate Students Maria Flores-Mills has proven to be a priceless mentor to eating club presidents. The dedication that the University has shown to the clubs should be lauded. However, this dedication does not and should not buy blind obedience, and the clubs would do well to remember some of the above mentioned policies that, while coming from the best of intentions, have proven to be headaches for Prospect Avenue.

That said, the only people who can guarantee the continued vitality of the clubs are the members of the clubs themselves. It is imperative that the clubs realize that they can provide one thing to students that the University cannot: a viable, organic, student-centered social scene. The clubs are the largest student-run organizations on campus. They can be responsive to student wants and needs in a way that far surpasses the University. The University’s endless array of residential college events simply cannot compete with the social options that Prospect Avenue is able to offer. It is imperative that the clubs realize this and go on the offensive. The clubs need to aggressively recruit underclassmen rather than complacently expecting those students to come to the clubs. The clubs need to publicize the amazing service projects they complete in the greater Princeton and Trenton areas. The clubs need to make alumni relations a central feature of their identity. If the clubs focus on what makes them unique, on what makes them an attractive option for undergraduates, on what makes them historic institutions that play a vital role in student life, then they will continue to exist and thrive. This competitive advantage is the clubs’ greatest asset, and if nurtured and cultivated, it will ensure that the clubs remain quintessentially Princeton.

Tim Prugar ’06 is a former Interclub Council graduate adviser. He can be reached at tprugar@gmail.com.