<p>“The Organization Kid”</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.highpoint.edu/~msetzler/Iamreadingnow/AmericasNextEliteAtMo.pdf[/url]”>http://www.highpoint.edu/~msetzler/Iamreadingnow/AmericasNextEliteAtMo.pdf</a></p>
<p>I guess it depends on your definition of “great reading.” I found much of it kind of depressing. I was particularly alarmed by the student who thought there were no “larger issues” out there and was “relieved there are no bigger compelling causes.” I thought wow, can kids at Princeton really be that blind?</p>
<p>Then I noticed that this article is rather outdated – written in 2001, which made me feel a little better. Perhaps things have improved at Princeton in the past 5 years.</p>
<p>I got through only 3 pages. What a sterile and soul-destroying life these students are leading! My reaction was similar to coureur’s. Any supposedly intelligent and well-educated person who believes that there are “no bigger compelling causes” at the moment is pathologically self-absorbed. I can’t believe that this group is representative of Princeton students.</p>
<p>Know I know what the problem is! My son was raise on Ives not Mozart!!! That’s Charles not Burl.</p>
<p>I persevered through page 6. I am amused that David Brooks, described as the New York Times’ resident conservative pundit, is lamenting that this generation of Ivy League students is not as hippie idealist as its parents.</p>
<p>He has a few things wrong. First, about the 3 hours lunch which provokes his nostalgia. The fact of the matter is that most classes nowadays are scheduled between 10 and 3 or 4. This is so students can sleep in (and perhaps their profs can commute). Some students are lucky if they can have half an hour for lunch. Three hours over which to discuss Kant or the fate of Western civilization? Not gonna happen, at least not over lunch.</p>
<p>Emailing at 1:15 AM is not a sign of overscheduled, overworked students. It’s a sign of their general night-owlishness. As far as I know, my S, whether in school or at home, is up until all hours, usually downloading stuff or chatting with friends, not trying to solve math problems or having deep thoughts about the woes of the world. </p>
<p>I don’t know about Princeton. But at Harvard, community service (plus the occasional demonstrations) is a fact of student life. Idealism exists, but at a lower key than in my generation. There is also less hot air and more action than I recall from my student days. I’m all for it.</p>
<p>I got about three paragraphs in, just far enough to confirm that David Brooks found only what David Brooks was looking for. Guaranteed, no quote that didn’t fit the thesis was included.</p>
<p>I know that the high point of college for both my kids is hours long discussions with friends about pretty much everything.</p>
<p>Articles like this are never worth worrying about because, and I think that the big name markets are most guilty of this, they’re written toward a slant, and fit everything to it.</p>
<p>Coureur–I wouldn’t fret about Princeton at all–your kid can give you a much better view than Brooks can.</p>
<p>I got a few pages into this. Campuses have their cultures (they carry satchels? they refuse to call profs by first names? they don’t have time for sex? they have to schedule discussions about the meaning of life? they don’t protest?) – so perhaps this reflects some aspects of Princeton. I don’t know. It certainly doesn’t reflect the college experience related to me by either of my kids, and so I don’t think he has the basis to generalize from Princeton to every other top school and a whole generation.</p>
<p>The part that rings true is the scheduling. Kids brought up being involved in sports, music, tons of extra curriculars, don’t drop them in college. That seems to me a good thing – it shows these activities were a part of their lives because they really enjoy them, and not just because they were creating resumes to get into college. Sports and music and community service etc will probably always be part of their lives. He seems to be taking a bold stand against self-improvement!</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>D1 can tell me all about Harvard, but I don’t think she gets much insight into what is going on at Princeton. Princeton (and many other schools) has been high on my list for D2 to apply to when the time comes.</p>
<p>Oops, sorry, I knew it was one of them :). But the rest of my rant still stands.</p>
<p>I did read the entire article and what bothers me most about the description of the Princeton undergrad is their aversion to challenge authority, particularly at this time. I attended a Sunday,pm conference on the media’a responsibilities in the area of war and peace about 15 months ago on the Princeton campus where the speakers were Noam Chomsky-MIT, Amy Goodman-Democracy Now, Peter Hart-Director, FAIR, Laura Secour-Boston Globe and Gregori Pasko-Russian military journalist jailed for reporting illegal ocean dumping of nuclear waste. Of the more than 500 attendees, less than 10% were Princeton students but a goodly number of Princeton faculty and Princeton Theoogical Seminary students attended. However the P’ton student body seemed to be well represented wandering about Nassau Street that afternoon!</p>
<p>Part of what make college life so special is the opportunity to attend conferences, semimars and performances on almost any day.</p>
<p>Reminds me of the following.</p>
<p>And all the little ants are marching
Red and black antennas waving
They all do it the same
They all do it the same way</p>
<p>Take these chances
Place them in a box until a quieter time
Lights down, you up and die</p>
<p>I read this article a few weeks back in (gasp) its entirety. I also know Princeton fairly well. The piece turns out to be a perfect example of David Brooks’ amateur sociology and its failings – namely, that it is cheap, empty kitsch. Take this little gem:
</p>
<p>These are the sorts of observations which underlie his incisive analyses. A few overheard words there, a lunch with a few students, a few hours spent strolling the campus – and voila, an article. His points about how the present generation is less rebellious and more achievement-oriented probably have some validity, but he sheds no light on the complexity of the issues or even their extent, settling instead for an awkward caricature.</p>
<p>Someday, there will be good sociology analyzing the “millenials”, as Marilee Jones has called us. Until then, I don’t recommend wasting your time on this fairly obnoxious article.</p>
<p>Ben, I think you put into better words what I was trying to say.</p>
<p>Being so shallowly done, the article hardly merits any discussion, since it’s maintained no clear analysis.</p>
<p>I am really sick of David Brooks, so that’s my bias. Oh, yes, and I am also biased as a Princeton parent. But I can tell you a few things:
- As noted above, this article is old. Last year’s Frist Filibuster was named “Protest of the Year” by Mother Jones. <a href=“http://www.princeton.edu/~petehill/filibuster.shtml[/url]”>http://www.princeton.edu/~petehill/filibuster.shtml</a> The College Democrats and the Student Volunteer Council are the largest extracurriculars on campus.
- Students I talk to are furious that when amazing speakers come to campus, area retirees arrive hours ahead of time and get seats, while students – who are attending class and participating in extracurriculars – arrive at the last minute and often end up watching the simulcast in the lobby.
- Tickets to see top speakers at Princeton are extremely hard to get. They’re free, but students who want to see, say, Steve Martin or Bill Gates participate in a lottery. Again, the rest watch the simulcast.
- That said, I do think Brooks was onto something. He just saw it as a negative, while I don’t. Princeton students are not, for the most part, into random angst and hand-wringing. When they see a problem or issue, they start a project, get funding, and take it national. Teach for America is a perfect example. I saw the same kind of ethos at Harvard when we visited.</p>
<p>Yes, David Brooks’ work often lacks content or any real knowledge about what he’s discussing. See <a href=“http://www.slate.com/id/2130120/[/url]”>http://www.slate.com/id/2130120/</a> for an even more amusing example. (David Brooks discusses French gangster rap.)</p>