United Colleges - Vox Yearbook (Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada)

Page 7 text:

THE COLLEGE OF TODAY IN THE WORLD OF TOMORROW A. R. CRAGG T HE British Broadcasting Corporation started a series of talks last summer called, “I Protest,” in which speakers were allowed to protest against anything that would seem worth while protesting. We can be very certain there was no shortage of topics, and no lack of zeal and enthusiasm in exercising the freshly granted privilege. If there is one thing that mankind in general is inclined to do with some readiness, it is to protest. And for not a few, the last twenty years or even more have been a period in which presidents and deans, professors and lecturers, alumni and not wholly disinterested laymen have joined in a chorus of protest against education, until the reports and addresses and articles have made a library of lamenta¬ tion. When Woodrow Wilson was still President of Princeton, he spoke of the note of apology everywhere for education, of the lack of definiteness of aim in teaching, and the hopeless confusion and utter dispersion of energy among students. Nicholas Murray Butler, then President of Columbia, lamented the tendency of academic institutions to drift with the tide rather than to formulate definite policies and to labor for their execution; and the tendency to be made the prey of every passing whim rather than to pick up the slack in discipline, to accept the responsibility for passing upon relative values, and to dispel the confusion between general train¬ ing and vocational preparation; the choice of which, he claimed, would be a choice between suicide and salvation. Less dignified protesters have condemned our “curriculum as chaotic, our college professor as a cloistered recluse out of touch with the broad human currents of contemporary life, and our stu¬ dents as vagrants of the higher life, and college days themselves, as at best, a pleasing interlude after strenuous high school days and before the more serious activities of life.” It is a sign of hope that the protesters, whether dignified or undignified, were often those who knew the college best. Higher Education has actually become popular, attracting thousands of young people from every walk of life. Here we find students whose parents belong to the oldest traditions and others whose parents are New Canadians; here, those who come to spend four years of leisurely loafing, and many more who have to prac¬ tise rigidly planned economy; here, those who have some notion of 15 ]

Page 6 text:

able of appreciating any attempt at cultural advancement which might be undertaken by the magazine through the medium of ar¬ ticles by outside contributors and faculty members. But the largest class is that composed of average students, to whom the word stu¬ dent is hardly applicable, whose reading tastes lie in the realm covered by “Academic Antics.” And it is this group which, by faith¬ fully contributing its forty cents per year, pays for the magazine. This is the primary consideration for any faculty editor. Regardless of the grandiose dreams of his academic superiors for a second Queens Quarterly in this metropolis of the west, regardless of the offended tastes and carping criticisms of the intellectually alert, it is patently his duty to bear tidings “which shall be to all people.” He must sell his soul for forty cents, forty pieces of copper. The criticisms of the editors of Vox in the past five years have been numerous and bitter, and, interesting fact, from all three fac¬ tions. To date an attempt to steer a middle course has failed. Dis¬ content is bound to continue if the editor is given his just due—con¬ trol of the policy of his magazine. But it is not too much to ask of the critics that they take into consideration this situation of triple pressure and save him at least from Selkirk or Brandon. CONTRIBUTORS Rev. A. Russell Cragg Neil A. Dewar, ’36 M. D. Gilchrist, ’37 W. A. McKay, Theo. R. Purvis Smith, ’39 A. Flowergarden, ’34 R. J. Leighton, Theo. Margaret McCulloch, ’37 Bill Thorne, ’39 [ 4 ]

Page 8 text:

a purpose, and those whose only purpose seems to be to have no purpose; here, young idealists eager to go crusading, and young adventurers who must have demanded “their share of the family portion which falleth to them” to spend, if not in riotous living in this far country, at least in aimless living. Truly, university and college halls can be called the “melting pot” of nations and of social classes. According to one writer, who made an extensive survey of fourteen of the higher institutions, the most vulnerable point of this higher education is the diversion of interests of the students from the true aims of the college. Athletics, dramatics, social activi¬ ties, and a multitude of extra (really intra) curricular activities have cut down to the minimum the attention given to studies. As President Wilson used to say, “The side-shows are so numerous that they have swallowed the circus, and we in the main tent do not know what is going on.” Those who have been the smartest of the student body and have not needed to work to lead the pack have often been the guiltiest in the side-showing. They have always been able to find enough patrons to give the side-shows the appearance of a real circus, without the need of a main tent. The performance is, as a rule, excellent. No generation has ever had such clever children, athletically, dramatic¬ ally, socially. Therein lies the tragedy. For no generation ever has had so many problems crying out for capable leaders to solve them. All the tight-rope walking and loop-the-looping will not hint at even a makeshift solution. At its best, the college is the birthplace of noble ideals, endur¬ ing friendships and deep, broad understandings. At its worst, it is a winter resort where young men and women may gather for the purpose of “rubbing off the rough comers, of knowing how to meet people, and of getting in the swim of things, as if there were some magic elixir in academic atmosphere which should transform bust¬ ling and purposeless undergraduates into gentlemen and ladies of culture.” Parents have not been blameless in the matter. Those with money gave it lavishly to their young-bloods; and those who hadn’t pinched in their own expenditures in order to keep up appearances, “all in the hope of providing their children with everything but energy of mind and decision of character necessary to accomplish anything worth while.” Parents have known all along that hard work and high-mindedness develop personality and leadership, and yet they expect almost a miracle from snap exposures to either one Quotations from this survey. [ 6 ]