Elyssa, while I appreciate being spared from your critical Wespeak, I am compelled to respond to your column calumny. Cutsey crap aside (at least until you get to Schulkin’s film column), you should remember that, while some of your general points are valid, others are simply matters of opinion. For instance, your Wespeak cites a “dynamic duo” of columnists. I happen to only agree with half of that, but that’s just my opinion. See, Elyssa – not-niceness is contagious. Haley Joel Osment would say you paid it backwards. I will now reverse things and pay it in the appropriate direction: Jordan, I love your cutsey crap.
Seriously, while I think more students should write Wespeaks about things they have problems with in columns and articles (my fucking column is called “On the Offensive” and no one has ever written about being offended and that makes me die a little inside), you also have to recognize that the Editors need to choose a group diverse enough to appeal to different tastes and identities among the student body.
Also, you have to understand what you’re reading. Jamie’s delightful “Do-Si-Do” is about the overlooked quirks of the local area, hence the column’s title, “Community Chest.” It wouldn’t make sense for her to write about white cops in New Orleans viciously beating an unarmed black man and how law enforcement and police brutality are inextricably linked in this country based on systemic racist tactics and social control. Likewise, it wouldn’t make sense for me to write about Contra dancing. (Though I could go on for hours about the “spread gun” versus the “laser gun” in Contra on NES.) Cato and O’Shaughnessy both write columns that I enjoy, and, though they aren’t necessarily controversial, there are many people who look forward to reading them.
Elyssa, you should be applauded for being critical of the columns in the Argus, but you should also be nice about it. Writing “Not fucking contra dancing, for Christ’s sakes,” is not nice, is it? Elyssa, it wouldn’t be nice of me to ask you about your opinion that we should have “a unique angel on an issue of substance,” would it? No, it wouldn’t. Did you mean Lucifer? He’s a unique angel. There are nine orders of angels, so I guess that falling into one of those orders would make you not unique. Cupid is armed, so that might make him unique. Remember, too, that different angels have different opinions about which issues are “issues of substance.” Seraphim, for instance, are really into how to bling your Lo Rise. Elyssa, will you be my unique angel?
It is true that public discussion at this school appears to be on the decline. The Argus used to be rife with debate. Now, what passes for debate is, unlike The Ampersand, laughable. Let’s change that, but let’s do so responsibly and respectfully.
Leave a Reply