Turning Down Valedictorians

I found quite interesting Dean Karl Furstenburg's article on admissions in the November issue ["The Inside Story"]. But he left me with unanswered questions. Why did fewer than than half the applicants accepted actually enroll? Alumni interviewers would appreciate more comparative data about the institutions with whom Dartmouth primarily competes.

I would point out, incidentally, that in spite of the efforts of admissions officers like Dean Furstenburg to explain the admissions process, it remains a puzzle to many alumni interviewers like myself why some of the applicants we give high ratings to are turned down. If 17 percent of the Dartmouth class of 2000 are valedictorians, what percent of valedictorians were included among applicants turned down? After 50 years of dealing with students, especially student leaders and the rare disciplinary case which reaches the president, I am convinced that evaluation of student potential at age 17 and 18 is far from a science.

Providence, Rohode Island

"Being a high school valedictorian holds no particular magic in admissions selection," Karl Furstenberg told us. " When you seek to admit bright, engaged students you tend to get a lot of valedictorians." More than half of the valedictorians who applied for the class of 2000 were denied admission. Dean Furstenberg said that students apply to an average of seven or eight colleges; "the strong candidates have many admission offers to choose from," he noted. This is why only half of the admitted students actually enroll. A "yield" of 50 percent actually puts Dartmouth in the elite of selective schools: Furstenberg estimates that no more than ten institutions in the nation get half or more of their admitted candidates to enroll.

It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the uniqueness of the year 2000. It has three zeros, not two.

Why not call the class the class of '000? Class of triple aught!

Hanover, New Hampshire

Good Nature

Right on! Place does make the College unique. ["Second Nature," October]. I just wish that I felt that the senior leadership shared that view.

Dartmouth's relationship to its physical environment provides a uniquely powerful perspective and context upon which to build the educational experience, particularly as we move into the next millennium. To the degree that we embrace this sense of place, we have established an environment for developing our physical, social, and spiritual self; for understanding how the past, the present, and the future are inextricably intertwined; and for recognizing our personal and societal obligations to the environment and to each other.

I believe that this can and should be the foundation of the Dartmouth experience. On this we build a climate of academic excellence, of social and economic diversity, and of personal fulfillment. Without the foundation, we're just another "good" school.

I'm afraid that this sense of place has come to be just another feature or added benefit"...and it's a nice place to live for four years if you aren't addicted to city life." I hope I'm wrong. Certainly it is through articles like yours that we'll preserve and articulate the vision.

BILL.BASCHNAGEL@VALLEY.NET

Chapter and Verse

It pains me to rain on a good parade; Robert Pack '51 espouses a worthy and important cause in his "Naming the Animals" [October]. We are, to be sure, dirty birds who foul our own nest. Unfortunately, the misrepresentation of a couple of key citations weakens his case.

Chapter nine of Genesis does not present a "fatal shift toward aggressive domination." That theme was clearly enunciated in chapter one, which, as Pack himself quotes, gave mankind "dominion over...every living thing that moves upon the earth."

In fact, expanding the human menu from plants (Gen. 1:29-30) to include flesh (Gen. 9:3) may well be no more than a gloss. By general scholarly agreement, both the "Darwinian commandment" of chapter one and its modified version in chapter nine's "covenant with Noah" are from the hand of the same P (priestly) editor. He may have conflated two ancient traditions, but he hardly contradicted himself or imputed to the deity a mistake requiring a change in the rules. (The Lord's decision to eliminate mankind as a botched first attempt is reported in Gen. 6:5-7 which comes from the J [Jahwist] strand.)

Worse yet is the statement that Adam's naming of the animals was not an act "of appropriation, but appreciation." This naming account is from the J strand, and the overwhelming scholarly consensus, concisely rendered by Interpreter's Commentary, is that "By giving animals their names, the man exerts his rule over them." Thus while J and P differ in many particulars, they are not far apart in picturing mankind's sovereignty over nature.

To be sure, myths do get retreaded and overhauled, especially in passing from one culture to another; and, as knowledge increases, myths tend to become eroded or re-evaluated. I can think of several that presently need, or are in the process of, revision. The myth of man's unrestricted license for domination is one which Pack correctly deconstructs.

However, when one ascribes a new and different meaning to an ancient passage with a commonly accepted and clearly attested significance, it behooves one to demonstrate the validity of the new hermeneutic, not simply proclaim it as fact. Or one should label the personal insight as such to avoid implying the absence of more traditional interpretations. At least one should not seem unaware of them.

Foster, Rhode Island

Robert Pack Replies:

Thomas Hall seems determined to "appropriate" my essay rather than "appreciate" it, but that is what we have come to expect of current scholarship that peaks in jargon such as "the validity of the new hermeneutic." If Hall can't discern a difference in grimness and intensity in the Biblical text from when the Lord addresses Adam to when He addresses Noah in describing man's relationship to living creatures in the words "and the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea," then all the hermeneutics in the world will not move him to direct his concern where it should be: on the ecological crises as anticipated in the Bible, which is the subject of both my essay and my poem.

Robert Pack fully explored cause and effect of the demise of nature without the usual reference to national parks as islands of preservation and handholds of hope. Rightly so. From personal knowledge I can tell you that extirpation, loss of habitat, disappearance of whole genera of flora, and invasionleading-to-domination by exotics from as far away as New Zealand are changing not Newark, not Kansas but Yellowstone National Park.

Pack's language argument helped me find a possible rational explanation for such an implausible outcome under management by the best conservation agency in the world. In my dad's time park staff spoke fluently the acknowledgment-language of plants, animals, and rocks. This fluency signified a bond; for employees' families, too. Mother used to get Dad to take her for a drives in the fall so she could hear elk bugle in the golden aspen. The parks were farther from Washington then as well—a useful language barrier. Now position (salary) depends on how faith- fully one can concatenate like a DC-ite, and nature-namers are consigned to the GS-5 ranks as seasonal naturalists. They're the ones who talk to park visitors, and because they love the park they love telling people about it. They also have a high turnover, it being hard to live at the poverty level. Those few who wish to rise to manager level quickly learn another language.

Park management recently trans- ferred out all research and fisheries staff, so now you can walk the halls at headquarters almost assured you'll not hear the names of species that lack public constituencies. I fear the unspoken policy is "ecosystem relativity," and, yes, the Yellowstone ecosystem is in good shape...relative to Newark.

GEO.LOGIC@WORLDNET.ATT.NET

Eric Buchman 'OOHometown: Tampa, Florida Dorm: Russell Sage DOC trip: Hiked in the College Grant Major intention: Government Physical side: High-school swim and track teams; considering trying out for crew as a coxswain Roundedness: Senior class president, "a lot of clubs," did magic tricks at an occasional birthday party Becomingly modest about: Accomplishments as president of his class. "Our officers actually did stuff." Application essay: His height (five-four), and "turning it into an advantage over the years. When I was in elementary school I always found the best hiding places in Hide & Seek. My campaign slogan in high school was 'Good Things Come in Small Packages."' Currently reading: Dr.Seuss and Mr Geisel (Judith and Neil Morgan) Why Dartmouth: "From what I've seen, it's highly competitive intellectually and very relaxed socially." Winter could be a challenge: He caught a cold on his DOC trip. Went clothes shopping in Chicago while attending the Democratic National Convention: "They don't sell winter clothes in Tampa."