10.4.02 @ 12:02AM
Continuity and change, as they say, on the Current Campus.
From the second-floor window of my office, facing west and
shaded in the fall afternoon by a line of tall elms, I look down
idly through Venetian blinds at the students below. They cluster in
small groups and walk back and forth on the grassy hillocks hemmed
in by the campus theater across the lawn and, to the right, the new
music building.
The campus has expanded quite a bit during the 27 years I've
been teaching here. My office is in O'Connor Hall, a three-story
classroom building flanking the mission church at the center of
campus -- or a 1926 replica of the original mission, at any rate.
In fact, O'Connor Hall, with a cornerstone dated 1912, is fourteen
years older than the mission church.
O'Connor has heavy walls, wide staircases, an arched colonnade
on one side, and a high passageway through its middle, rounded at
the ceiling, with gray marble sides and strips of chiseled leaf. In
the rainy season, the translucent thick-glass tiles on the raised
porch behind the colonnade can be slippery.
The newer buildings -- despite their adobe tile roofs to match
the California mission decor -- are less weighty, more spare, more
functional, vaguely brittle in design and construction. The main
library, built in 1964 during the first years of the school's
physical expansion, is already scheduled for demolition. It will be
replaced by a bigger and much uglier state-of-the-art "Media
Facilities Complex," or words to that effect; it will not be called
a library.
Do students ever change? It's Monday afternoon, late in
September, the first day of class. I have four classes this
quarter, and I've gone through the introductory routines with each.
Looking out my office window, I see three or four students of mine
from past years, and I think I recognize a few of my new students.
I don't know the names yet, but I seem to know the new students. I
already know, on sight, which ones are going to be dependable and
which will be the flakes. "You can tell on the first day!" an old
colleague, now retired, once told me. "It's uncanny -- you can see
it in the whites of their eyes!"
In a few weeks I'll have their personal stories, from essays or
class discussions, or indirectly from their behavior. In some ways
there's a widening gulf between them and me. Two of my own children
are older than my current students. I was born during the Roosevelt
administration and World War II; my new students were born during
the Reagan administration and the last years of the Cold War.
If they are as knowledgeable as last year's students, they will
not be able to date Franklin Roosevelt's presidency or World War II
accurately within three decades, and they won't know what the Cold
War was about. They will be familiar with Mel Gibson, Jodie Foster,
Matthew Broderick, and Russell Crowe; but James Stewart, Claire
Bloom, Orson Welles, and Henry Fonda are names they won't know,
much less Walker Percy or even J.D. Salinger.
Yet, aside from the incorrigibly opportunistic among them, they
will be immune as well to the blandishments of political
correctness, prompting the aging progressives on campus to fault
them for "apathy." Many of them will be unable to date the Civil
War within the right century, but most will be equally indifferent
to the daily status of each week's left-wing cause
célèbre.
They will appear to be casual relativists, even without the
propaganda of multiculturalism. Those who espouse any traditional
religious faith at all will seem taken with a kind of Christianity
Lite -- "social justice" of a narrowly prescribed character and
self-congratulatory execution, nestled in warm glows of
nonjudgmentalism, without the Cross or even the Resurrection. What
else? I teach at a university historically Catholic gone secular,
and these are my students.
On the other hand, I can't say they're so different, really,
even from me. We'll be reading Homer and Aeschylus, snippets of
Plato and Aristotle, Sophocles and Euripides and Virgil and (by my
reckoning) key chunks of Scripture and St. Augustine. Within weeks
they'll be startling me with insights I never thought of, and
startling themselves, apparently, with how judgmental they
needfully are.
I'll be responding to their writing with a ferocity they're not
used to (and with much exasperation, but that part's a secret) --
and they'll come back, most of them, with real effort and, some of
them, with surprising elegance. By the fifth or sixth week, the
females won't be chewing gum in class or slurping cokes, and the
males will walk into class with the bills of their baseball caps
properly turned forward, doffing the caps after they sit down.
What is there about reading the classics and sweating nickels
over the choice of words in an essay? The effort seems to bring out
latent good manners in young people. I never raise the topic in
class; the change just happens.
Among the freshmen, a fair number will have the right mix of
curiosity and aggressive docility to become Classics majors, but
very few will also be sufficiently at loose ends about "career
goals" to put up with learning Greek and Latin; most of the talent
needed for a major in Classics will already be claimed by Computer
Engineering, or Finance, or Biology on the pre-med track.
I get into this reverie once a year now, looking out my office
window at the passing students in the afternoon of the first class
day. I was pushing 40 when they were born; by the time they reach
my age, I will have been dead, no doubt, for some twenty years.
What kind of world will they inhabit? What kind of company will
they be for my own children?
topics:
Law