Volume 24 · Number 3 · Spring 2007
Letters
Photo: Karin Higgens/UC Davis
Death star
Regarding your [winter ’07] “Campus Views” article on the Social Sciences and Humanities Building (SSHB), I think not too affectionately dubbed the “death star”:
In 1964, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Potter Stewart famously wrote, “I could never succeed in intelligibly [defining hard-core pornography]. But I know it when I see it.”
In the same sense, I do not have the full architectural and aesthetic vocabulary and background to bring intelligible academic or professional criticism to an evaluation of the SSHB, but as a matter of a practical and usable building, and as a person who has used it, I know stupidity when I see it. And the SSHB is just plain stupid.
I came to this belief as a frequent and frequently inconvenienced user of the top-floor library that requires either many stairs or a sketchy elevator to reach, is literally cut off from level pedestrian access from the rest of the building (let alone the campus), is figuratively cut off from the intellectual intent of the building, is perennially too hot and glare-headache-inducing because of too much glass and, if designed today, I can’t imagine would ever stand up to the practical and moral imperatives of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Thus, I suggest we summon up the courage and bulldoze the thing and start over. But let’s not stop there. Rather let’s start a conversation of how there is this monstrosity of a building and two parking structures at three out of the four major cardinal-direction entrances to our campus. What does that say about us?
Kudos to vet volunteers
The picture of Andi Foster and Professor John Madigan with the new lamb in the winter edition [page 10, in print issue only] of the magazine reminded me how grateful I am to the students and staff of the Veterinary Emergency Response Team. They are to be commended for their efforts following the Yolo County fire and their ongoing commitment to the animals and their owners. They are an inspiration!
The VERT story clearly illustrates how the activities of UC Davis touch our community directly and indirectly every day!
Student suicides
I was shocked to read [in “Focus on Student Mental Health,” winter ’07 issue, in print issue only] that there were nine student suicides at UC Davis between the years 2000 and 2004! And the result was to add a half-time psychologist and a new case manager. This is woefully inadequate. I realize, according to the article, that more help may be on the way, and the report prepared by a committee recommended a three-tier approach to mental health services, but the fact remains that nine students killed themselves in four years, and what is the count in the last two years?
What is going on here? Isn’t this raising huge red flags for the university? More is needed than a committee, moving ever so slowly, and a half-time psychologist and a low-key article in “News & Notes.”
Sue, the report noted nine suicides over five years (2000–01 to 2004–05), and we agree with you that the topic warrants further coverage in our publication. We didn’t have time to prepare a more extensive article for our winter ’07 issue, but we have included a feature in this issue that explores the subject of student mental health and the challenge that UC Davis is facing as it enrolls an increasing number of students with psychological disorders. Our story can be found here.
The Aggie re-remembered
In response to Susan Stathas Houlihan’s remembrance of the Aggie headline the day after the November 1972 presidential election: She remembers it reading “McGovern Sweeps Massachusetts.”
I was also a freshman that year and, at only 17, too young to vote, but I could have sworn the headline read “McGovern Wins In Davis.”
Can someone find out for sure?
The headline of the Nov. 8, 1972, Aggie was “McGovern Sweeps Massachusetts”—in big bold letters over a straightforward reporting of Nixon’s landslide victory. Kathy, you may be remembering the next day’s coverage when the Aggie reported on final election results by including a chart that showed Davis votes only: McGovern 11,902, Nixon 6,327.
Poverty discussion continues
I'd like to respond to the letters on “Other Views of Poverty” (summer 2006), especially that of John F. Jacobs.
Mr. Jacobs, that is good advice you offer. That is, if it's aimed at middle-class folks who aren't already engulfed in the problems you suggest avoiding. If you're already living below the poverty line in some ghetto neighborhood, it may still be good advice but a bit more difficult to follow. If you're a child, you may be living with a parent or parents who are fighting their own drug and alcohol demons. Or perhaps they are clean and dry but exhausted from working long hours for minimum wage or less and trying to keep a home together. They may see no value in education, preferring that you get out and get a job so you can help support the family.
You may be attending schools that are both dangerous and sadly lacking in ability to provide you with a decent education even if they are trying to do so, which is questionable. You are probably one to three years below grade level and perhaps hopelessly lost in whatever grade you are now placed in. It's hard to keep good teachers in good middle-class schools, let alone in ghetto schools. It may come as a surprise to you to learn that all schools in the state of California are not equal. I speak from experience, as both a student and a parent, when I tell you that ghetto schools are for the most part woefully inadequate.
Few people care. There are plenty of "role models" among the adults as well as your friends and peers to show you how easy it is to blot out, at least temporarily, the misery and hopelessness of your life with drugs and alcohol. Also how easy it is to earn the money to buy all those things middle-class youths take for granted. All you need to do is deal drugs and maybe steal a few things.
If you're a girl you may be impregnated by some male member of your own family or perhaps by the boyfriend who is the only person who shows you any sort of affection. You may view pregnancy, and thus welfare, as the only way out of the poverty-stricken home you live in.
If you're an adult, especially female, the picture doesn't get any better. You may have several children to support. Contrary to popular opinion, welfare doesn't have you living "high on the hog." I know, I've been there both as a child and as an adult. If you're pushed off welfare your wages will likely be for less, and child care is either expensive or nonexistent. So now your children are unsupervised latch-key kids. Even if you could somehow find the money, time and energy to go back to school, how can you justify the additional time away from your kids?
Immigrants, legal or illegal, are a self-selected group. They arrive in this country already determined to make a better life for themselves and their children. Comparing them to those born into poverty and the ghetto in this country is rather like comparing apples and oranges.
Are you getting the picture? I'm still surprised that there are some who start from there and do manage to climb out. How do I know there are some? I'm one of them. The secret to my success: I was lucky. I had a mother who instilled a love of reading in me as well as the belief that education could make a difference. There were fortunately also a few, very few, teachers along the way who inspired and encouraged even long after I had taken their classes. (Professors, you can and do make a difference in the lives of at least some of your students.) Mother then set the example. First by going to work as a secretary for less than she was getting on welfare. (I still fail to see how that benefited me and my two brothers.) When her children were grown she went back to school while continuing to work full time. Eventually she attained a master's degree, became a sociologist, teacher and community college administrator and came close to completing a Ph.D. Would I have gotten myself and three children out of poverty without that inspiration and the encouragement she, as well as those few teachers, gave me? I'll never know the answer to that but I do know it helped. As it was, I started the process when my youngest was three and graduated from veterinary school three days after she graduated from high school.
Arrogant impression
When I received the winter 2007 issue of the UC Davis Magazine I paged randomly through the contents and came upon the article titled “Air Crusader” on pages 24–27. My attention was immediately drawn to the following quote from Professor Cahill: “I want to encourage other faculty to use their freedom to do what they feel needs to be done. Money be damned, space be damned—do it. We’re in such powerful positions as university professors.”
As an alumnus of UC Davis, it was a disheartening surprise to see the arrogant attitude and demeanor of a faculty member (retired) of the university staff. Is that the general attitude of the staff at UC Davis? If this is typical, it is not surprising the UC Davis alumni hesitate and even stop contributing to UC Davis. I know it has affected my thoughts on future donations, however meager they have been, and as of now my checkbook remains closed to UC Davis.
I have enjoyed receiving the UC Davis Magazine and have marveled at all that has been accomplished and changed since I attended and graduated from UC Davis—but when I see statements such as the quote in the winter 2007 issue, maybe it is time to quit.
Editor’s note: After knowing Professor Tom Cahill for many years, I can assure readers that he is anything but arrogant. It’s unfortunate that his quote has left that impression, when its more important point was that university professors should do important societal work regardless of their compensation. Few professors can match his many years of selfless public service—or his congenial, unpretentious character.