Have a Nice Millennium

Lend Me an Era

It is with great trepidation that I join the debate over the first year in the new millennium. I find helpful the analogy to one's own lifespan. The first year of my life was the year from birth to age one. On my first birthday, I began the second year of my life. On my second birthday, I began my third year of life. And so on. It is obvious that on my 100 th birthday, should I have the misfortune to live so long, I will have completed 100 years, and will be embarking on my second century of life.

For the sake of simplicity, had I been born on January 1, 1900, then on January 1, 2000, my first century would be over and my second century would commence.

From this simple illustration it is evident, to me at least, that January 1, 2000, marks the completion of 2,000 years, or two millennia, and the beginning of the twenty-first century and the third millennium. Thus the class of 2000, graduating in June of that year, would be the first class of the new millennium.

In a less argumentative vein, you asked us to suggest names for the class of 2000. Nothing would please me more. I have zeroed in on two that might be appropriate. The incoming freshpersons next year ought to be known as either the DCIPHERS or the NIHILists.

WASON@STUDENTS.UIUC.EDU

What shall we call them? (Naug htyoughts indeed!) Since we are well into the computer age, how about the 2K's?

73227.3350@COMPUSERVE.COM

My suggestion is the "Double Naughts." I think this phrase has a better meter and foot than the ones listed in the mag, and thus it will be easier to chant around the Dartmouth Night bonfire and at other key events in the freshman year. "Double Naught! Dou-ble Naught!" You get the idea.

The origin of my suggestion is, however, a little suspect: it comes from what Beverly Hillbilly Jethro Bodine wanted to be, which was a "double naught" spy like James "007" Bond. I really hate that TV show, and I hate the fact that by making this suggestion I'm opening myself up to hayseed jokes at my expense. Nevertheless, I still believe it is a good nickname for the 2000 class, and I stand by it proudly despite its lowly origins.

CHARLES_E-_YOUNG_AT_MEM 003 P O@CK6.USCOURTS.GOV

My vote goes to "double-aught" (or, if that sounds too much like a gun, then "double-naught").

A minor point in the March "Baker's Dozen" feature: I believe the denizens of the city and university go by the name Oxonians rather than Oxfordians.

And related to that (as well as to the piece on the Earls of Dartmouth) is the fact that residents of Dartmouth in England are known as Dartmothians, the middle of the word rhyming with "loathe." This name strikes me as having considerably more character than "Dartmouth student."

MEACHAM@ALASKA.NET

Soon after my son, David, was born in 1978, it occurred to me that he would be a candidate for admission to college (and perhaps even Dartmouth) with the class of 2000. In discussing plans with him when he was younger, I always referred to his college class as "triple aught." Indeed, last fall, after he applied to and was accepted early by Dartmouth, we noted his admission to the College's class of 2000 by saying he was now a "triple aught"—an appellation that has a very nice cadence to it and is virtually unique since no other class will be able to claim it for another millennium.

Thus, no matter what the College or the DAM chooses to call next year's pea greeners, at least two of the men of Dartmouth will continue to refer to them as "triple aughts."

KEITHL@CONNIX.COM

What number comes after 99? 100, of course. The next class should be called the 100s. The year 2000 is the last year in the twentieth century so it is a "hundred" year, not a "zero" year.

MEEM@WWA.COM

Actually, the year 2000 is both the last year in the second millennium and the first year in the third millennium, depending on how you look at it. Current convention and the calendar makers who began with year one drop fractions of years. Obviously when Christ was born he did not have a year already under his belt. Call his birth 0. After the first day he was one day old, not one year. He had to earn his first year over 365 days just like the rest of us. So on his first birthday, one Anno Domini, he completed his first entire year. But calendar makers ignored this first year because, I imagine, starting with year 0 didn't have much aesthetic appeal, nor did starting and ending the year on his true birth date (i.e., 25 December or whatever day it really was).

Similarly, I am 26 by convention but really 26.5 (halfway through my 27th year). So at the stroke of 12 midnight on 31 December 1999, Christ will have completed 2,000 complete years (two fall millennia), and in the next minute he will have started his 2,001 st year, the first minute of the third millennium.

So if you drop fractions you are still in the 2,000 th year and the alumni in the March "Letters" are correct; if you count fractions then DAM is correct that the class of 2000 is the first class to graduate in the third millennium. Why? Because when they graduate in June 2000 they will have already completed their first six months of the new millennium. And there's no looking back.

KOHL@YALE.EDU

All those cranky people who wrote to the DAM about when millennia begin and end need to rethink their position. And DAM itself caved without sufficient thought.

We must, of course, remember there weren't calendars hanging in every kitchen or manger in Bethlehem back then, so dates were a bit sketchy. But I maintain that the first millennium after Christ's birth didn't wait 365 days to start in the year 1; it began on January 1, 000, and ended a thousand years (approximately 365,250 days) later on December 31, 999. Consequently, the coming millennium will begin January 1, 2000, a day after the one we're in ends. Perhaps naysayers might consider this parallel: the Gay Nineties ran from January 1, 1890 till December 31, 1899. They didn't slop over 365 days into 1900. The Roaring Twenties didn't intrude into the Thirties. Ditto the Sixties, etc.

I say, welcome, class of 2000. Have a nice millennium.

FAIRLEE, VERMONT

May I throw my hat in the millennium ring? Anno Domini translates to "in the year of our Lord"—the first year being zero to 1 A.D. When a clock strikes midnight it signals the end of p.m. and the beginning of a.m. One a.m. comes an hour later. A baby is born at zero and 365 days later it is one year old. When a timer starts a footrace with a stopwatch he starts it at zero, not 1. How then could the first millennium have started at 1 when the first year had not yet elapsed?

PORTSMOUTH, NEW HAMPSHIRE

"I have given up on it," says Ann Landersepochally in her column. "In due time, theexperts in this area will straighten it out."One wonders what it takes to become anexpert on the turn of a millennium. Founda religion? Major in Millennial Studies?

As for what to name the class of 2000,Barbara Wallraff in the Atlantic Monthlylists the zilches, the naughties, and the preteens.More seriously, she suggests the ohs,the double Os, and the aughts. The NewYork Times has thrown its considerableweight behind the ohs.

Now: What do you think of ScottMeacham's Dartmothians?

Ice Broken

Yes, I am one of the old, grouchy "alums" who have resisted changes such as ladies in attendance, lack of an Indian theme, unusual cover art, etc. But I have just finished reading the best feature

article that the Dartmouth Alumni Magazine has ever printed.

"Can Science Save the Arctic?" by Lynn Noel '81 [March] is an absolutely marvelous article. Lynn should get some type of a reward for all of her research.

I trust that it has been submitted to Reader's Digest. This article is a must for every person in the world to read. Her in-depth study is fascinating.

REDWOOD CITY, CALIFORNIA

Networking

It was with great pleasure that I read the notice ["D-Mail," December] regarding the student/alumnae network being organized by the Women's Resource Center at Dartmouth and supported by a generous gift from Christie and Win '72 Neuger. Especially in light of the fast-approaching commemoration of the 25 th anniversary of coeducation at Dartmouth, this project promises to create productive and enriching links between current and past Dartmouth students.

I would like to ensure that any alumna or alumnus who wishes to participate in or learn more about the Network or the 25th anniversary commemoration be able to reach us, as the published e-mail address was incorrect. Please contact us at or call us at 603-646-3456.

DIRECTOR, WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER

Careering

I was thrilled to read "Honey They're Home" by Mary Cleary Kiely '79 [January] and realize that I am not alone. While I have no regrets about having stayed at home since my 14-month-old twin daughters were born, I share many of the mixed emotions expressed by other alumna in the article. At times I have even wondered if I am failing my Dartmouth education by not working.

Ann Fritz Hackett '76 makes an important point about the fluidity of women with children in the workplace. We should be able to move in and out of work situations without it being an allor-nothing scenario. While the business world will have to adapt to this, ultimately all of society would benefit from arrangements which would enable women to be able to give the best of themselves to their families and to their careers at different times.

BROOKLYN, NEW YORK

Running to the Cauldron

Many, many, many congratulations to Bob Kempainen '88 for his sterling win at the Olympic marathon trials.

Speaking as a former Olympic hopeful, I watched in admiration as Bob surged to victory while spewing forth the waste from "shocking his body." Ha, the granite in this man's bones is obvious. Only a Dartmouth Wonder could look so magnificent while performing this feat of regurgitation.

I am predicting that in Atlanta, Bob will go out on the pace for the first eight to 13 miles, depending on conditions. A series of timely surges will bring him to the wall and the home-field advantage. The race will then evolve into a swift, tortuous grind which Bob is going to win.

ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI

Rabin Was No Lincoln

In his tribute to Yitzhak Rabin ["Presidential Range," March], President James O. Freedman compares the assassination of Rabin to that of Abraham Lincoln and states: "Like Lincoln, Rabin was seeking to heal a nation riven by ideological differences and torn by violence."

In fact, Rabin was a polarizing figure and almost the exact opposite of Lincoln. It is difficult to imagine Rabin saying to his domestic opponents, "With malice toward none, with charity for all..." Friends and foes of Rabin alike acknowledge that he was an abrasive, confrontational leader; this putative "healer" was the man who dubbed his opponents "enemies of peace" and the opposition party "collaborators with Hamas." He was openly contemptuous of public opinion ("They can spin like propellers for as long as they like," he stated of demonstrators), and of those whom he opposed.

Yitzhak Rabin achieved much as a soldier and as a chief of staff; his place as a political leader will be debated for years to come. Unfortunately, President Freedman's tendentious essay does not enlighten the participants in that debate.

NEW YORK, NEW YORK

Mold-Breaking D'Souza

Doggonnit—just as one's gorge is about to crest the river banks with the steady flow of "ain't we great" articles, DAM comes along with a break-the-mold piece like Dinesh D'Souza's "Multiculturalism's Hidden Hand" [January]. And with no snide editorial asides! (What restraint must have been practiced.)

Well, OK, a great job. Congrats to the editor and all that. And long live Dinesh D'Souza.

PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA

D'Souza declares that the excessive touting of multiculturalism has degenerated into a culturally relativistic viewpoint that lacks the clarity and precision required to see the flaws in nonWestern cultural standards. This is simply rubbish. Nobody can reasonably dispute that multiculturalism as an ideal can be taken to ludicrous extremes. There will always be those who for myopic, political reasons or lack of intellectual rigor forsake thoughtful, critical evaluation and prefer to say that "we cannot judge." D'Souza's arguments, however, simply reflect the other pole: those who fervently wish to judge. If Hip Hop is lower down on the cultural hierarchy than Bach, then it ineluctably follows that its aficionados must not be doing all they can to achieve higher cultural and social standards. QED, we as a society can blame them for not rising to our lofty standards, decry the baseness of their lifestyles, proclaim their ignorance, and neglect their needs.

There is abundant evidence of this agenda in the "hidden hand" of "superior "anti-multiculturists such as D'Souza, that clearly demonstrates their notion of noblesse oblige from the exalted peak of the cultural hierarchy: cuts in the welfare budget; a lack of political will to place rational restrictions on the sale and possession of firearms that are devastating inner-city youth; exorbitant funding to drug-producer nations to fight against narcotics trafficking when the money could be better spent on education, treatment, and rehabilitation at home; tax breaks to the most affluent when our country seeks to balance its accounts; and the piteous state of our nation's capital. This willful neglect is the reality of D'Souza's notion of the End of Racism.

ROTA, SPAIN

On the one hand Dinesh D'Souza denies that there is a "presumption of inferiority "in his approach to "other cultures," while the remainder of his argument seems to be that the West can claim some "cultural superiority." I wonder how there can be a concept of superiority without some form of inferiority implied as well.

Why can we "be just as certain...that government by popular consent is a better system than religious theocracy or political totalitarianism"? I don't disagree, but I at least am honest enough to admit that my preference is based on a prejudice instilled in me through an upbringing in a democratic and largely secular society. "Better" is a term that implies some standard ruler for comparison, and Dinesh's ruler is clearly that of Western society. Much as he (and I) might like our ruler to be congruent with an absolute scale of Tightness, I see no reason why it logically must be so.

Dinesh's argument is mainly concerned with impugning the motives of anyone who might want to question the historical status quo. He implies that this is some sort of radical conspiracy to destroy Western society. Multiculturalism is not about better and worse, and is definitely not about destruction. Many decent and moderate people believe that all the planet s cultures have something to contribute to humanity. One doesn't have to endorse every aspect of every society on the planet. Multiculturalism is simply about starting out with respect for all peoples, recognizing their cultures as ways of coping with the world as it is, and recognizing that our own is no different in that regard. We in the West have certainly achieved much of which to be proud, but that doesn't make us better than our fellows—just richer.

PHULTIN@BLDGWALL.LAN1.UMANITOBA.CA

The AIDS Link

Regarding AIDS, Paul Gross MD 74 writes in the March "Graduate Chair, "Might we create an atmosphere where the link could be acknowledged and openly explored?" This reminds me of a distinguished alumnus of the 1950s, who died in 1992 of AIDS. The New York Times obit said, "He died after a long illness," but did not elaborate. A sibling in the Midwest was listed as his only survivor; his long-time companion of more than 25 years, a fellow alumnus, went unmentioned.

A memorial service was attended by more than 200 with many distinguished eulogizers, none of whom mentioned AIDS. Those of us there who knew his lifestyle and active support of AIDS research were all convinced he died of AIDS and were disappointed that his employer, family, and friends did not publicly acknowledge it. Contributions were, however, suggested to be made in his memory—not only to Dartmouth but also to the American Foundation for AIDS Research.

AIDS is not just a sissy's disease from which macho Dartmouth men are immune, but a plague which touches all in our community. The more we are aware of that, the more quickly a cure will be found.

NEW YORK, NEW YORK

Stearns Irony

I was delighted to see in the March "On the Hill" the piece on John Barker Stearns '16, a great classicist and a great man.

I did think it ironic, however, that the Stearns "Tales Out of School item should have run four pages from "E. Wheelock's" description of an Orozco response to a Churchill Lathrop question: In his smiling, halting English, Orozco's response was "Al-ma Mater."

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Life Chancer

I read with sadness of the death of Churchill P. Lathrop on December 21, 1995. I hope that the Alumni Magazine is planning an appropriate tribute to this wonderful teacher who changed so many of our lives.

Though I am a businessman, I am deeply committed to the arts in my community. My company tithes to the arts. I and my partners and associates serve on numerous boards of arts organizations in our community. We attend performances and openings at many galleries. The arts are a significant part of my life because of Churchill Lathrop.

I thought I was signing up for his Modern Art class (which I think was Art 56) for a relatively easy high grade. We used to call that course "Darkness at Noon." He made me passionate about his subject.

ATLANTA, GEORGIA

Par

I was interested to learn (from a letter entitled "Chip Shot" in the October issue) that "Never up, never in referred to golf.

BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA

Before we decide on the namefor the millennial class, we haveto agree on when it is.