News
Garber Announces Advisory Committee for Harvard Law School Dean Search
News
First Harvard Prize Book in Kosovo Established by Harvard Alumni
News
Ryan Murdock ’25 Remembered as Dedicated Advocate and Caring Friend
News
Harvard Faculty Appeal Temporary Suspensions From Widener Library
News
Man Who Managed Clients for High-End Cambridge Brothel Network Pleads Guilty
Between all the chatter, all the matching t-shirts and signs in front
of the Science Center, the “I Support” photos on facebook.com, the
debates and op-eds (with illustrations) in various publications—not to
mention, of course, newspaper endorsements—the Undergraduate Council
(UC) presidential election is completely ubiquitous, and reaching fever
pitch.
At first glance, this is a good thing, a signal of something
positive. The campus is engaged in its politics, is invested in the
institution of student government, and is inculcated with some level of
civic virtue (or maybe healthy self-interest) that could easily
translate into political engagement outside of the Harvard bubble.
Nothing to complain about here; end of editorial.
Yet, in all the excitement, it’s quite easy to miss what this
campaign and this election are all about. Obviously, it’s about
electing a new president and vice president for the UC, but—not to get
all existential or anything—it isn’t entirely clear what that means.
When Fifteen Minutes ran an article and photo featuring Matthew W.
Mahan ’05 at the end of his presidential term (gazing out a window,
wistfully), it wasn’t clear what he was leaving behind. Likewise, with
Matthew J. Glazer ’06 coming up on his last official hair-flip as
president of the UC, it isn’t any more clear what his administration’s
legacy will be in the eyes of the student body, if there is to be a
legacy at all.
This is in no way an indictment of the work of these two
individuals, or any other past UC president; if anything, they are
among the hardest-working students on campus. For all their hard work,
however, not a heck of a lot has changed on this campus in terms of the
undergraduate experience in the last 15 years; reading through The
Crimson’s archives back into the early 1990s finds complaints of
egregious council waste and ho-hum, overly exclusive social life, bad
TF-ing and lousy House community—the same that you would expect to find
if you looked in The Crimson’s archives for this year.
It’s not so much an indictment, then, as it is an
observation: for all we invest in the importance of student government,
it might be capable of accomplishing very, very little, given an
institution so slow to change and a student body that often can’t be
bothered, wrapped up in its own business, perhaps as it should be.
The fact is that many of the issues that our campus
politicians are running on—like improving undergraduate education, or
the construction of a student center, or adequate student group office
space—are things that the administration ought to be doing anyway, but
doesn’t really need to do, because this is Harvard. The yield will
always be high and the admissions rate will always be low, regardless
of lousy sections, lousy social life, and a perceived lack of
amenities. Why? Because of the iconic crimson H, enough U.S. presidents
to field a baseball team, and a small swimming pool filled with Nobel
prizes. The University feels very little immediate pressure to change,
perhaps least of all from existing customers, for whom the Harvard
pedigree has already trumped the desire for cable TV.
Moreover, those existing customers don’t seem to be convulsing
at the lack of successful booze-cruises meant to unite the student
body. At the end of the day, the social life is a direct product of the
people studying here, many of whom (maybe most) are content to exist
without campus-wide binges, Big Ten style pep rallies, and other
trappings of the more stereotypically collegiate social scene. The
Harvard social life is comprised of little spheres of insularity—final
clubs, singing groups, sports teams, and yes, newspapers—revolving
around one another, devouring their constituents’ time wholesale. Any
UC president elected would have a hard time changing that fact in the
course of a year, certainly not without somehow changing the student
body itself.
These observations don’t point to fatalism, but rather to a
bit more pragmatism. It is clear that meaningful change in student life
at Harvard will likely come from one of two places: the administration
and its long term plans, or a kind of sea-change in the attitudes of
the student populace. As important as this race seems (or wishes to
seem) now, only a short year from now, we’ll probably be looking back
wondering what all the fuss was about.
Peter C. D. Mulcahy ’07, a Crimson associate editorial chair, is a government in Cabot House.
Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.