I enjoy reading the impassioned letters of readers wondering how I could be so self-centered to demand the LSU Office of Parking, Traffic and Transportation provide reliable transportation.
I know, the nerve of me!
But after reading your equally impassioned responses to the column Nov. 1 on the University’s anti-hazing policy, I feel it’s my obligation to inform you of a little secret in the literary world.
It’s called satire.
The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy defines satire as “a work of literature that mocks social conventions, another work of art or anything its author thinks ridiculous.”
I find it ridiculous that at a university where we pay to receive public transportation, I typically wait 20 to 40 minutes for a bus. Sure, I can walk or ride a bike. But maybe my knees are bad, or I don’t have money to buy a new bike.
That’s not even the real issue, however. We pay money to the parking office to help them do their job. In return, we expect they will do their job.
It’s not so much to ask, is it?
As for the hazing column, the main point was how ridiculously vague many of the University’s policies, particularly its policy against hazing, are. The reality is, it’s true, if you read the University policies. One of the examples was that if we are going “to fully comply with PS-108,” we will not do a great job of preparing the ROTC cadets.
The problem is, people get so worked up on the first part of a sentence, paragraph or column, they don’t read through the entire piece of work to see the true message behind the words. By doing this, readers miss valuable points and valid questions. Far from criticizing the work of the ROTC on campus, the column pointed out how ridiculous and vague the policy is.
It’s a legitimate question, and one to which you should want to find an answer.
In 1993, then-Student Government President Stephen Moret created a President’s Special Commission on SGA Reform. Moret formed the commission to address student complaints with SG and to simplify processes they used. During a meeting on July 8, 1993, the discussion arose about why many University policies use such complicated wording. In the meeting’s minutes, then-Dean of Students Tom Risch is quoted as saying he had seen University departments use the complex wording to their advantage in order for these departments to control how student initiatives are carried out.
Are the University’s motives that sinister? You won’t know if you don’t investigate.
Using satire to draw people’s attention to problems in their communities is a time-tested tradition. Take, for example, “A Modest Proposal” by Jonathan Swift. Written in 1729, Swift proposes the poor parents of Ireland fatten their malnourished children up and serve them to the country’s landowners so their children will become “sound and useful members of the Commonwealth.” Swift’s purpose in using such dark satirical humor was to draw attention to the poor’s problems while poking fun at Ireland’s more privileged citizens.
Unfortunately, even back then, some people were too quick to jump to conclusions. Some people actually believed Swift was promoting cannibalism. Luckily for Stephen Colbert and other modern satirists, others were able to appreciate Swift’s biting sarcasm.
So I challenge you to read carefully next time you get riled up about an opinion column, because occasionally we trick you into thinking we’re as dumb as you think we are. But often we’re the ones who get the last laugh.
Ironically enough, although I jokingly proposed the University build a monorail, West Virginia University has a monorail-style system called Personal Rapid Transit that has been in use for over 30 years. “Computer-driven cars arrive at your station within five minutes after you swipe your Mountaineer Card or employee ID,” according to WVU’s transportation Web site. If the PRT is out-of-service for longer than 15 minutes, “direct bus service will be provided for [that] portion of the system.” Keep in mind, West Virginia was ranked fourth by the U.S. Census Bureau in 2003 in having the most people below the poverty level, but they don’t use that as an excuse to not have adequate, innovative public transportation at their flagship university.
So although the monorail idea seemed impractical for the University when it was written, maybe Chancellor Sean O’Keefe was right when he said in his letter to the editor Oct. 17 there “may be a monorail in [our] legacy.” However, what’s more important than building a monorail is getting administrators, faculty and students to work together toward a better working and living environment rather than having administrators making decisions for us.
And that, dear readers, is not a satirical statement.
—-Contact Laura Bratcher at [email protected]