A View from the Moon
Topless Women and My Apartment
by Patrick Mooney
Forum Editor
As anyone who bothered to read the schedule of classes for fall term is probably aware, Southwestern has a new student. Her arrival on campus was so important to the school that a short article about her appeared in the Southwestern Oregon Community College News, the quarterly paper in which the schedule of classes appears. Her name is "Liberation" and, unlike most of the other students on campus, she is made of bronze. The SWOCC Foundation paid money to bring her here, and it was money which, as I've pointed out before, probably could have been spent on other things. However, by spending this money on a piece of sculpture, the SWOCC Foundation has now managed to acquire something for the school that we have desperately need- ed for over thirty years: a statue of a small-breasted, apparently topless woman thrusting her hips forward.
Now, lest anyone think criticism of this financial decision springs from a lack of aesthetic taste, I want to state for the record that I think the sculpture does add a nice touch to the campus and that I admire the artist's skill. I just think that the money probably could have been spent more usefully on other things. Living within a budget, you see, is something that I myself have been learning to do during the time that I've lived in my own apartment, and I think that I'm now qualified to comment on a few things life has taught me about setting financial priorities.
Now, I would definitely like to decorate my new apartment and make it look really nice. I'd like to have tasteful decorations on the walls, gold-plated fixtures for the bathroom sink, and expensive rugs on the floor. A couch for the living room would be particularly nice. However, I have a limited amount of money tospend, and there are other things that are more important. One of the best examples of something more important is the rent. I will not purchase any rugs for the floors until I have accounted for next month's rent money. Another payment that comes first is the utility payment, because as nice as it would be to have a couch, it's even nicer to have electricity and phone service.
Although I haven't looked into the matter closely, I trust that the college has done an admirable job of accounting for its equivalent of rent and utility payments. However, rent and utility payments are not the only payments I make. Another example of an expense toward which my money is directed is food. As nice as it would be to have gold-plated bathroom fixtures, it's not going to happen at the expense of my food budget. Until rent, utilities, and food have been paid, I'll just have to be happy with the Salvador Dalí print that hangs on the wall above my bed.
My point is that I think the SWOCC Foundation, in choosing to spend this money on a piece of sculpture, has neglected its food budget in favor of its decoration budget. The actual education that a school offers to its students is, in my opinion, very similar to intellectual meat and drink, and when a school begins to offer a nicely decorated campus with few choices in education, that school is putting decor ahead of cuisine. There seem to be fewer literature classes every year that I've been here, for instance, and it seems that the ratio of 200-level to l00-level (and lower) classes in the fall schedule is a little off-kilter.
If I were asked for a concrete example, I would point out that the first year I was here, it was possible to take either American Literature or British Literature, or both at the same time. Now, however, I am told that they are offered in alternate years: this year it is possible to take the British Literature sequence, and next year it will be possible to take the American Literature sequence. It is also true that the ratio of l00-level or lower course sections to 200-level course sections under the subject heading "Writing" is 35 to 2, and under the subject heading "Mathematics" this ratio is 48 to 5.
The reason usually given (to me, at least) for these ratios and cuts is that "not enough students are interested in those higher classes." To me, this sounds suspiciously like "we can't afford to teach those classes if only you and six other people want to take them." That is to say, if a certain number of students aren't interested in a class, the school isn't about to waste money teaching those few students who are interested, no matter how much this may benefit those students. And what is the reason that the school can't afford to teach those few students? Why don't they have the money to buy this intellectual food? In part, because the money has already been spent decorating their apartment.
Earlier, I freely conceded that I like the sculpture and admire the artist's level of skill. However, when it comes right down to it, would you rather eat Spam in a mansion or steak in the suburbs? To me, the answer to the question of where the SWOCC Foundation should have spent this money is fairly obvious.
I bring this subject up again because there seems to be a possibility that the school board will purchase more sculptures; in fact, former school board member Kay Heikkila tossed out the idea that we could buy a statue every year and create a "sculpture garden." I suggest that those of you who are concerned about the rations of high- to low-numbered classes, the difficulty of fitting her-numbered classes into your schedule, or the cuts in programs write to your school administrators and let them know how you feel. And for the school board members and administrators reading this, I have a request for you: Don’t furnish before you feed. Or, to paraphrase Marie Antoinette, let us eat steak. Even if it has to be in the 'burbs.
Space for this page provided by
Get your own free home page.
