Monday, April 7, 2008

Continuity and change

I've recently had the opportunity to sit on a committee meeting with two candidates for a senior student life position at the university. One seemed to fit right in here, to take immediately to the intellectual climate here of analysis and discussion. The other candidate brought an entirely different level of energy, and the discussion we had was exciting, spinning off ideas for activities, about how to make connections and draw students together, multiply energies and channel disparate groups toward common goals. Part of what was so appealing about candidate 2 was the fact that this campus already has plenty of what C1 brings to the table--detached, careful, intellectual practice.

The quesion is, when does this desire for something different transform the place into something different? Do we have a responsibility to preserve the uniquely, um, contemplative nature of this institution?

1 comment:

SiouxGeonz said...

Is it continuity for the sake of continuity?
Is the detached analysis valuable?

Would those exciting ideas actually help *reach* the common goals?

Fact is that the different kinds of energy are very seductive. IMO there's an extreme shortage of *genuine* careful intellectual practice. That's not to be confused with what passes for it - closed-minded intellectual protectionism of pet projects and ideas.
True intellectual practice includes challenges and questions. There's no reason it can't multiply energies and channel disparate groups.