Separate but Unequal

The administration’s adamant assertions that “there are advantages and disadvantages to every House” are beginning to wear thin. Despite the disputable pros and cons of each location, only the blindly obtuse could refute that residents of Harvard’s three “Quad houses”—Cabot, Currier, and Pforzheimer—will be disproportionately affected by the recent budget cuts. Although the university has only announced $77 million of the reported $220 million in cuts to the Faculty of Arts and Sciences budget, the most significant changes—closing the Quad’s Hilles library and drastically reconfiguring the shuttle schedule—directly concern only Quad students. With 25 percent of the Harvard undergraduate population bearing the brunt of the university’s cutbacks, it appears that George Orwell’s famous adage holds true: Some Harvard students are more equal than others.

Quad students are faced with diminished access to university facilities and legitimate disadvantages as a result of their location—a claim founded on more than a lazy reaction to a 15-minute walk. The recent budget cuts only heighten existing shortcomings, so that the number of holes in services available for Quad students has now approached the point of absurdity. Students may soon find themselves without cell-phone reception, unable to call the escort service that would have replaced the shuttle that isn’t there, to take them to a library that isn’t available nearby.

In addition to obvious safety concerns that demand revocation of current cuts, the lack of late-night transportation limits Quad students’ ability to hold late -night jobs or participate in many extra-curricular activities. Religious students will now be offered no transport for the journey to services on weekend mornings, and no one would envy the fate of a Quadded athlete, forced to rise before the sun in order to travel to practice by foot on university holidays.

This prohibitive lack of transport options presents the greatest inconvenience for Quad students with disabilities. Even prior to the cuts, the disability van became the night van after 7 p.m., meaning that students with disabilities were often forced to face a 45-minute wait each time they used the service. The situation is only likely to worsen as the number of shuttles falls and demand for the night bus increases. Furthermore, the decreased number of shuttles means that those remaining will be even more crowded, presenting significant accessibility concerns for students with wheelchairs. Given the lack of convenient travel options, Quad students with disabilities have considerably diminished access to River facilities, to the extent that the dearth of late-night transportation practically imposes a curfew on their leaving the Quad.

The inconvenient impact of recent cuts to Quad services is only compounded by a general shortage of concern for the needs of student residents. For years, students’ objections to the erratic shuttle schedule have been ignored, and the same dismissive attitude is awarded to Quad faculty. Upon release of the recent budget cuts, all Quad resident deans and House masters expressed extreme dissatisfaction at not having even been consulted. So great is the lack of consideration awarded Quad concerns that during town-hall meetings, administration officials professed unawareness of the ineffectuality of the escort and van service and even ignorance about transportation available for Quad students with disabilities. Quad students, constituting a full quarter of the undergraduate student body, do not deserve to suffer from such flippantly imposed cuts.

The diminished services that result from the budget cuts greatly substantiate perceptions that Quad Houses are in some way “lesser” than River Houses. All are familiar with the embarrassing Housing Day spectacle of tear-stained cheeks on the devastated faces of those who didn’t gain coveted access to Adams or Eliot. While much of the strange stigma associated with Cabot, Currier, and Pforzheimer Houses is ill-founded, transportation difficulties may now begin to outweigh the beautiful rooms and tight-knit community. Implications of the Quad commute might now actually provide a credible excuse to cry on Housing Day.

The Quad has no cause to be considered the unfortunate domain of reluctantly banished unfortunates. With its spacious quarters, strong sense of House pride, and short walk to many shops and restaurants, the Quad is a wonderful place to live. But students will only consider it as such when the administration seriously considers the needs of those living there. Quad students now have justifiable safety concerns about returning home late at night and considerably lesser access to the many late-night activities on campus.

Budget cuts are a reality, and we understand that the Quad must be affected; in an economic climate like this, we all must make sacrifices. As the university cuts back, however, it must ensure that options are in place to provide each undergraduate with a relatively equivalent experience. The budget cuts should impact the university as a whole, and, if aspects of Quad life—such as the shuttle—must be compromised, then adequate substitutes responsive to student need must be provided. If Quad students must be subjected to “separate but equal” rhetoric, then Harvard must at least give this principle the impression of sincerity.


Olivia M. Goldhill ’11, a Crimson editorial writer, is a government concentrator in Pforzheimer House. James K. McAuley ’12, a Crimson editorial writer, lives in Weld Hall.