Greeks add to campus life
I am writing this letter in response to the Jan. 24 issue of the CT. I am sick and tired of the negative manner in which the fraternities on this campus are being portrayed regarding the dead cat.
I am not saying that whoever killed this cat did not commit a horrible and repulsive crime ? they did, but it is important to keep in mind that, thus far, no one knows who this person is.
The criminal may not even attend this school and may just be some disturbed individual from the community. And, if he or she does attend this school, there is no proof that they are part of the Greek community.
A fraternity found the dead cat hanging on their door. In my opinion, that makes them victims of a terrible act of harassment. However, they have been put on probation. Why? Does anyone really believe that they would intentionally kill a cat and hang it on their own door?
Pictures of their house were shown on the news and in newspapers, associating their fraternity name with the crime when, in reality, they had nothing to do with it.
Several comments in the CT disturbed me. A freshman student was quoted as saying “I think this type of thing is very typical of the attitudes on the fraternities … they are stereotyp-ically spoiled rich kids.”
First of all, the members of the fraternities are not any richer or more spoiled than any of the other students on campus. Secondly, what in the world does that have to do with this crime? How can this type of thing be called “typical?”
UR alumnus Evan Bergman wrote an accusatory letter to the editor, completely blaming the incident on fraternity boys and likening them to serial killers and even to Osama bin Laden.
Maybe Mr. Bergman would like to hear about all of the amazing things the Greek community at this school does. The fraternities and sororities at this school donate their time, as well as thousands of dollars, to various charities and philanthropies. The members of the Greek community are some of the brightest, most dynamic students the university has to offer. They make a huge positive impact upon this campus.
It saddens me that some people obviously have unfounded prejudices against these people.
In this country, you are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. So why are these people being attacked?
? Sara WallittClass of 2003
Reno shows problems with Strong
The Campus Times coverage of Janet Reno’s speech on Jan. 30 missed one very important point. While Reno has a history of fainting during public appearances, I have no doubt that her recent spell was exacerbated by the chronically deteriorating conditions of Strong Auditorium.
The following morning she told reporters outside of Strong Memorial Hospital that she “got hot” and that her corner of the stage “got progressively hotter” during the speech.
As a four-year veteran of that very stage, I understood what she was saying all too well. An antiquated boiler and non-existent ventillation system can create a sweltering build up of heat that can make even a healthy 19-year-old swoon.
Built in 1930, Strong Auditorium is one of the original structures on campus. In 80-plus years, it has yet to receive adequate renovation. While the building has undergone a few minor reconfigurations, Strong Auditorium continues to be an eyesore and a hazard.
During my tenure at UR, students mounted several attempts to bring Strong Auditorium the attention it so desperately needs. Numerous stories and editorials appeared in the Campus Times (see the Nov. 12, 1998 of the CT for an editorial), petitions were circulated and a student-run group, the Undergraduate Musicians’ Council, was founded with almost the sole purpose of resurrecting the facility.
In 1997, the disgraceful seating ? laughably patched together with silver duct tape ? was finally replaced and the dreary lobby was repainted. In 1998, Lower Strong was transformed into a respectable recital space. But these have been merely aesthetic improvements to a geriatric structure unsuitable for students’ performance needs.
Unless drastic improvements have been made to the hall since my graduation in 1999, I recall a splintering stage, deficient and exposed wiring, frayed rigging above the stage, languishing dressing rooms, a horrid sound system and notably lackluster acoustics. Also, the stage is not handicapped accessible ? only a narrow set of stairs service each side of the stage.
Should Reno have needed a wheelchair, not to mention a stretcher, the task would have been nearly impossible. Reno’s collapse made national news and became fresh fodder for late-night talk shows. The Campus Times, however, should use this unfortunate event to illuminate the fact that Strong Auditorium still needs immediate attention.
UR has always had a wonderful variety of quality concerts and programs. The student body deserves a venue on par with other schools. The university must finally determine the future of Strong Auditorium, allocate the resources to do it right and do it now.
? Jeremy RothmanClass of 1999former CT Opinions Editor, General Manager of River Campus Orchestras andChair of the Undergraduate Musicians’ Council
