Off-Campus Living

Since the beginning of the crisis in Vietnam and increased draft requirements, the Harvard Administration has been concerned, and with good reason, about overcrowding in the Houses. Students are living in tutors' guest rooms, many suites have too many inhabitants, and advanced-standing Sophomores are discouraged from applying to the already packed Houses.

Although the Administration has recognized the problem and is planning a tenth House to relieve the pressure, no accomodations have been provided for the overflow during the transitional period before the tenth House is ready for occupation. The obvious solution is to permit more students to live off-campus.

Applications for next year's housing arrangements have proved particularly frustrating for a large number of students who have requested either single hooms or permission to move off-campus. Scarce single rooms are allocated almost invariably to Seniors who will be writing honors theses. It is virtually impossible for a Sophomore to be accomodated in a single for his Junior year, and in some Houses not even all the thesis-writing Seniors are granted singles.

Prehequisites for moving off-campus are at least as stringent, and as a general rule no House allows more than 20 students "off." To be eligible, students usually have to fall into one of the following categories: financially incapable of paying for room and board, a Junior (who will be a Senior the following year), 23 years of age or older, mentally or physically unfit for dormitory life, or in need of more space for special scholastic projects. But permission is not always granted even to students who can legitimately qualify under these conditions.

The Administration has limited off-campus living for a number of reasons. Primarily it argues that Harvard must remain a residential college, a melting pot in which all types of students learn through interaction in the Houses. The House, it contends, is the place where a student can talk to his professor over dinner, out of the academic setting, and a place where the student will be exposed to many different opinions during the evening "bull sessions."

Having spent a year in the House system and two years at Harvard, a student should be able to tell whether the dormitory atmosphere is stimulating or stifling. Allowing these students to make a choice will not impair the House system, while refusing them permission to move off-campus will only increase their hostility towards the House. Furthermore it is highly unlikely that students will demand to move off-campus in large numbers, simply because of the convenient location and facilities of the Houses.

Each student has his own particular reason for wanting to move off-campus. Many of them argue that 3 a.m. conversations have become more of a distraction than an enlightment, and that the dormitory atmosphere is isolated--an Ivory Tower. Others complain that they want to be able to run their own lives, eating when they like, selecting their own company, and winning a sense of independence. Finally there are the economists who insist that they could exist much more comfortably at a lower cost; in fact, many students are paying for two sets of meals--the ones they don't eat in the House and the ones they buy instead.

Another of the Administration's reasons for limiting off-campus living is its fear that misbehavior by non-residents might impair town-gown relations. To avoid this, the Administration could require that only students in good academic standing and those who have not been subject to disciplinary action be considered for the privilege of moving off-campus.

A student should not have to be in dire financial need, a mental or physical basket case, 23, or an artist or musician in order to move to a quiet single room. The tensions of Harvard's academic and extra-curricular life are numerous; there are students who need a place of their own where they can step off-stage, relax, do what they want, when they want, where they want.

It should be remembered that the primary reason for liberalizing the 20-student limit on off-campus living is to alleviate over-crowding on campus. Ironically, there are also students living off-campus who have been refused permission to move into the Houses because of overcrowding. By increasing the number of students allowed off-campus, the Administration could reduce crowding and move closer to its ideal of giving each student his own bedroom. The most rational solution for the transitional period would be to allow students to live off-campus until there is no more overcrowding in the Houses. When the tenth House is ready, the question could be reconsidered.