I read with great interest the article in the Post today about athletic cutbacks'lacrosse, swimming and track; everyone's heard of them. My interest in the story intersects with my wonderfully useful history major status; particularly British history, and something Oliver Cromwell said: Weeds and nettles G? have thriven under your shadow
dissettlement and division discontentment and dissatisfaction together with real dangers to the whole.
Disregarding the operatic feel of all this, I feel something on this campus smells rotten, and Cutler Hall is the source of it.
Something is wrong with these cutbacks. The University takes away viable sports that draw crowds, claiming doing so will cut costs. And yet money still seems tight. And the impression one gets is that OU is not only dwindling in scale (Title IX noncompliance means leaving the NCAA) and potential (since Dr. McDavis' entrance, major programs like Art History have been cut), but perhaps even circling the drain (after all, if we're at such a financial deficit, how much longer can OU be financially viable?).
All the while, the campus is riddled with construction and hay-covered hills and an alcohol culture that can't seem to die (though Cutler desperately wants to simply wish it away). And the new Baker University Center remains just half-complete. Unfinished business. Too many weeds and nettles growing out of the problems Cutler is sweeping under the rug or outright ignoring. Too much going on at once, and all the while one asks: Is the administration hearing student's concerns, and what are they doing aside from holding a meeting during class time?
I understand Dr. McDavis and Cutler Hall are trying to recast OU from a college of stone to a college of comparative marble. But their fingers are in too many pies, the university's reputation is on cracking ice and cutting good programs with dedicated students therein enrolled simply does not alleviate these concerns.
The pessimist in me screams that these cutbacks are the end of the way we do business; if OU doesn't have the money, the programs don't have life and that's the agenda for the future. My Marxist sensibilities (though it pains me to call them such) make me wonder where all the money from education grants and administrative pay-raises is going, if certainly not into athletics.
I also wonder what they'll cut next. Hockey? God help us. Women's basketball? Wrestling? Facilities and Auxiliaries? Residence Life?
In the shared interest of student and administrator, bring these issues up among friends. They deserve attention, and the governed deserve an explanation from the governors.
- Chris Creamer is a junior history major.
17
Archives
Letter to the Editor
