Three days later, a noticeably tired Dean Warner attended the Wednesday night meeting of the Wabash Christian Men. He thanked the students present for the opportunity to attend and worship with them, and he told them that in the days ahead, the campus would need moral leadership. He had personal as well as professional reasons for attending the meeting. On the professional side, he wanted to reach out to the student leaders to engage them in the oft spoken of “grand conversation.”

“I wanted to make an early connection with guys who I knew would prove to be leaders in the days to come,” he told me in a recent interview. “And it became pretty clear right away—since the president’s Chapel Talk even more—that we’re going to be depending on students to step up and all become leaders…I knew that the Wabash Christian Men was a fairly sizable group of students who I think understand the idea of having a solid moral center.”

But he goes on to explain that his other reason for attending was a bit more personal. “[The death] was pretty hard on me and everyone around who dealt with it,” he tells me. “I actually responded as I was getting ready to go to church on Sunday…I went, perhaps from a selfish perspective, just to be in an environment that would be spiritually supportive.”

Spirituality can take on a special resonance during times of tragedy. American church attendance shot through the roof in the immediate aftermath of the September 11th attacks, as it has in other tragedies, only to wane after the sense of urgency had diminished and things seem to return to normal. For many at Wabash too, the initial reaction upon hearing the news of another young freshman’s death was to turn to prayer—for Smith’s family, for the Wabash family, and for their own peace of mind. It is when events prove to be beyond our poor control that the religious impulse is most powerful and pertinent. Much has passed since the initial shock of that Sunday morning—a memorial service, an investigation, a mandatory presidential Chapel Talk—but Wabash men of faith would be remiss in their duties if they let allowed their desire to help the community through this time to pass as well.

And what can they do to help? In my discussion with Dean Warner, he repeatedly urged students to look inward. In his view, the way forward is linked to personal responsibility, which in turn is linked to the Gentleman’s Rule. “All of us need to take a step back and do as President White suggested, and weigh what our personal responsibility might be,” he says.

And there should be no doubt that Dean Warner is committed to the Gentleman’s Rule. He speaks of it almost religiously itself. “The Wabash community, in a sense, operates under a covenant,” he tells me. “It’s a different covenant than perhaps you may read about in the Good Book, or that the pilgrims signed, but we have a covenantal relationship with each other, and that’s something that makes us a little different than a much huger place. But I have a level of responsibility as a member of the community to other members of the community. And most of the time, this really works quite well here. I think we need to relax a minute, and see that it really does work quite well.”

He speaks often of “relaxing a minute” or “taking a step back” and “speaking up for the Gentleman’s Rule.” There has been some pressure since the tragedy last month to rethink the Rule and its implications. Do students at Wabash have too much freedom? Did the Gentleman’s Rule enable this tragedy? Dean Warner says the critics who believe this miss the point. “President White pointed [this] out during the Chapel and has taken some shots against the side,” he says, “because there are a lot of people in this world that don’t understand what it means to hold young men responsible and therefore allow freedom as a result of that.” In his view, President White’s defense of the Gentleman’s Rule was the right one.

For him, the Gentleman’s Rule is not up for negotiation. Any response, he says, “needs to be done in a way that’s respectful to students because that’s who we are. One of the reasons that the Gentleman’s Rule is not on the table—because there are plenty of people that I imagine would like to see it there—is that that is the real basis of our identity. That is who we are.”

When I mention that the public perception of Wabash College among many in Crawfordsville is not that of a particularly pious community, Dean Warner returns to the same theme of taking a step back and looking inward. “Perceptions are important,” he says, “Our standing in the polls may have been shaken…I think, though, that many of us are now thinking that we should perhaps be a little bit less concerned with the perception that the outside world has, and move inside, and think about what we should do, and what’s right.” He then returns to the idea of individual responsibility and suggests that that is where the solution lies: “I think that the perceptions will improve if we can become stronger inside with our own ethical behavior.” This is not to say that outside views should be ignored completely, he is quick to add. “It’s easy to overreact to public perceptions,” he explains, “but I think that they need to be listened to also, because there’s often an element of truth to them.”

He quickly brings the discussion back to the Gentleman’s Rule and explains the folly of getting rid of it. “I know that if we are patient, and if we look within to where we need to work, that the Gentleman’s Rule, in the end, will be a stronger response to this than hiring, say, a bunch of rental cops, for example, to travel in and out of living units. If that happens, you just push the problem underground.”

Dean Warner is able to make parallels between administration policy and his own personal faith. He explains that as a Quaker, he sees a need to “stop the banter of business and mediate upon what right action might be—meditate upon where God may take me, and is asking me—calling me—to behave in a more righteous way.” When I ask him how his personal faith helped him respond to the tragedy, he explains in more detail:

“In my own tradition, we have a term called ‘seasoning,’” he explains, “which means that if you have an idea, rather than acting on it right away, in an impetuous way, maybe it’s better to let it season a little bit, and in the end, if you get some of your other concerns out of the way—your ego, or your desires that may not be as pure…and allow and wait on my God to help me think through a problem, in the end, it always works better. So that’s a principle that I’ve applied because I had to be very patient with all this investigation. And there’s all sorts of things and lots of people to tell us to act now fast, and some of you may think that you’re dragging your feet.” But thoughtful consideration can often be mistaken for feet-dragging, he says. It is better to focus not so much on the loud complaining created by outside perceptions, but on the still, small, inward voice, and then act upon it. “Point of fact, patience can be a real virtue,” he says, and action should take place “when you have the strength and courage” to act in the right way.

Just as Dean Warner relies on his faith to guide him through these tough times, Wabash men of faith should take the time to step back and seek God’s guidance in order to act responsibly. Inherent in the Gentleman’s Rule is the idea that the students are capable of taking care of themselves—capable of making responsible decisions. For Dean Warner, that faith in the student body has not been shaken. He is confident that the students will come together to make Wabash a better place. “I have great faith in the Wabash community in this regard,” he says, “and that is I have seen Wabash students unite when they needed to on many different occasions, and come together…That’s enormously exciting to me as a person of faith because I see people engaging the Eternal Spirit, and I really believe in human potential. I think that we see that powerfully on our campus.”

“I’m very bullish on the future,” he concludes, “mostly because of who our students are.”

Related posts:

1. Meet Dean Oprisko
2. First Impressions: A Conversation with Dean Will Oprisko
3. Don’t Forget Your Faith: Student Religious Organizations on Campus

There exists a phenomenon surrounding politics. At the heart of the usual political climate are harsh tones, underlying agendas, personal attack, and, of course, personal bias. Any mention of politics rouses an incredibly high sense of emotion in people. In everyday politics talk people get offended, or ignored, or rubbed the wrong way, or simply too caught up in their own personal opinion to listen to others’. All this turns anger on and discussion off. Such a negatively charged climate is an injustice against politics that Messrs. Billy Evans and Cody Stipes are seeking to amend. With their radio show Tag Teamin’ with Billy and Cody, they have opened a new avenue for political conversation, aspiring to spark and hold an appreciation for politics that politics deserves. Together they have worked hard to develop a refreshingly different approach to that wearisome science we call politics.

These two WNDY disc jockeys bag politics with goof, working original humor into important discussion. “We want to lighten the mood for guys, yet give them some solid information,” says the sophomore Evans. The once-weekly show includes a segment on just about everything, as its opening line, “News, Sports, and Weather…Together”, identifies. They get down to business with Salutes and Pollutes, a witty critique of national, state, and Wabash headlines. Their critical analyses have in the past included such topics as adding support to the iconic Joe the Plumber and, albeit reluctantly, shame onto the once again choking Cubs. The showmen do however try to keep much of the focus on the pressing political issues at hand. As Evans goes on, “You know, we do have a lot of fun, but we still want to be informative. We’ve really hit big on presidential debate coverage, our nation’s economic crisis, different ideas surrounding the proposed financial bail-out— the topics that really deserve the most attention.”

Following this leading news segment is the creatively critiquing Sarah Palin Hour. The jockeys just cannot get enough of the Governor and former vice presidential hopeful. Evans again jumps in, “There are a lot of things about her we find intriguing, not to mention physically attractive.” Yet Stipes, also a sophomore, counters, claiming that even despite his infatuation he considers the Governor’s appeal significantly lessened when she begins talking. “Although”, he pauses, “you’ve got to love that accent.”

At the close of each show is the Final Countdown, which they each agree is one of the defining features of the show. They highlight ten issues of the previous week that were especially noteworthy and relevant to current discussion. They cover these key issues to the backdrop of the segment’s namesake, Europe’s “Final Countdown”. Throughout the show the jockeys enjoy plugging in songs of all nature, anything that might at the moment be fitting. I wondered if the Batman theme song were ever fitting. “Maybe,” guffaws Stipes, “like if we were wearing capes and nabbing cronies or something.” However, as a visit to the show’s Facebook site suggests, the wearing of capes and nabbing of cronies might not be so farfetched. As always, these men take care of business.

The jockeys tackle another of what I consider to be an example of an existing injustice against politics. They claim that the basic goals of their radio show are to promote not only political involvement, but also the creation of open forums for political discussion. Where differences exist between the men’s opinions, they confront them head-on. As Stipes reasons, “There’s no hiding among the hedges. You’ve got to take the bull by the horns, as it were.” Yet the men go one step further to ensure proper balance and debate in their broadcast. He continues, “When Billy takes a more liberal look at something, I’ll combat it from a more conservative perspective, and vice versa. There are so many sides to politics; we generally believe that not all things are always just so black and white.” Evans concurs, “You know, I always try to look an issue straight in the face, not from one side or the other. Whereas some people are all for one side and all against the other, I think it’s fair to say we play the moderate’s ticket.”

Interesting approach, gentlemen. While this is not exactly the perspective of a Phoenix staff writer, it certainly is laudable nonetheless. The two men realize how fully healthy conversation depends on differing opinion, and therefore embrace any opportunity for intelligent debate. Certainly, the heart of a liberal arts environment beats with contest.

In this spirit Mr.’s Evans and Stipes held on their show the widely acclaimed “Great Debate.” The October 13 showdown featured Obama supporter and Democrat activist Gary James ’10 in contest versus McCain enthusiast Mike Bellis ’12, two men whose views could not be more different. Despite their differences the two agreed to meet on the air to talk things over. The debate was formal and well-structured, with the contestants covering a wide range of key campaign issues. Tag Teamin’ provided a relaxed, objective arena for an intelligent contest; an arena which allowed for the discussion to at times become heated, intense, and passionate, yet still topical and informative. In other attempts made on campus to create such forums, the created atmosphere has rarely been so pure. The men ought to be proud knowing that their attempts to reform the political climate on campus have so far been effective.

Though this and the show’s other efforts are small in comparison to larger-scale projects put on by Senate-funded groups, they are efforts nonetheless. “We feel it is our way of making a contribution to the conversation at Wabash, that as citizen-students we are essentially obligated to do,” urges Evans, then grins, “You know, our show knows only three words: discussion, America, and Wabash.” It is this willingness to open the floor to critical comparison that becomes the backbone of social improvement.

According to the Gentleman’s Rule, critical comparison is the elixir vitae of Wabash. A fundamental pillar of personal character development first, in cooperative action critical analysis opens the blinds of skewed subjectivity to reveal a refreshing vista of forward motion. As weary politicians have for nearly two years now muddled through a mire of lie-supported funding, tirelessly degrading campaign ads, speeches that contain more flakey fluff than solid fiber, etc., the mention of constructive forward motion through critical thinking is certainly a notion of hope.

Of course, hope is a word that has been thrown around a lot lately. It is a classic catchphrase, which, once spoken by the man behind the pulpit is taken up and bleated around by a herd of followers. But let us as men be not so sheepish. When a President of Wabash College speaks, we do not merely hang onto every word he says, mindlessly chanting phrases he has taught us to say. As the hope of our college depends so fully upon critical thinking, we must search out the meat in what he says and find what lies behind his smooth, often emotional talk. When we accept his plans of change without carefully looking into them and debating our agreement therewith, do we give up something that defines us as men and citizens? Of course.

The hope of our college rests upon our capacity and utility to think sensibly. We must be prudent investigators, first as independent gentlemen and collectively, in turn, as effective debaters in appropriate forum. At Wabash, discussion is our Batman of sorts – protecting us from the wiles of a society changed, nay, polluted by erroneous ideas.

The two disk jockeys Stipes and Evans agree: capes and the Batman theme song would be not only sweet-action, but moreover appropriate. My claim stands justified. Together they add a final word: “And all others on campus engaged in the conversation around them, cheers, Wallies. You earn yourselves a spot on Salutes.” But, of course, only in line behind Sarah Palin’s darling pronunciation, “Say it ain’t soe, Joe. You knowe, doggone it, let’s looek ahead naow…”

Yes, thank you ma’am. Let’s.

No related posts.

Embedded deep in the American conscience there is an intense love of competition: be it football or Monopoly. However, competition is never isolated to sports and board games. Politics, religion, and academics all entail intense competition, but what is peculiar about this competition is that there are always precisely two sides. The polarization of our society takes away the need for us to think critically, act responsibly, lead effectively, and live humanely.

Let’s start with the most obvious of America’s dualisms: politics. How is it that every issue of national importance has two sides: Democratic and Republican? And what happy coincidence it is that there is little debate about how each party should feel about the issue at hand. Is there one Democrat that opposes universal healthcare or Republican that supports it?

The machine that is American politics is comprised of nothing more than robots adhering to their party’s position of the hour, and often that position does not even match the philosophy of the party. As an example, rewind to 2003 and consider the issue of preemptive warfare. Now, try and explain why it was overwhelmingly Republicans who supported this tremendously liberal idea when they themselves, if they must be partisan, are conservatives. The boundaries that define Republican are arbitrarily defined in such a way that members of this group need no mind or opinion of their own. Politicians are excused from the burden of thinking critically, acting responsible, leading effectively, and living humanely.

Unfortunately, polarization is not confined to the political arena – it spans farther. Consider Christian religion in America, which carries a subtler, yet equally disturbing form of polarization. Since the Reformation, there has been a divide between Catholic and Protestant churches that is understandable to a certain extent, as these two churches are separate by definition. However, the problem lies not in the schism between the Catholic Church and the Protestant churches, but in the schism between Catholics and Protestants themselves.

The intense repelling of these two groups of Christians is not nearly as prevalent today than it was even in our parents’ childhood, but Protestants still find themselves sniffing at papists, who in turn scoff back. Christianity should be better than that. Statements from Protestants such as “Christians and Catholics should work together,” don’t help the situation either. Catholics are Christians. We don’t need to create divisions where there aren’t any. On the other end, the “Protestant bashing” that goes on within the Catholic Church is unbelievable. Is not one of the foundations of any form of Christianity the belief that humans should not judge one another? Christianity does itself detriment when its membership refuses to be one body in Christ.

Polarization penetrates to the very roots of our society: cities, towns and schools – even to places such as Wabash College. The most noteworthy dichotomous division here on campus is the ever-present Independent versus Greek division. To be clear, house pride or pride in the Greek system itself is a wonderful thing, but there is a huge problem with the way Independents and fraternities view and treat each other. The popular theory of Independent inferiority is unfounded and detrimental to school unity. Whatever notions there may be about a lack of pride in Wabash or an abundant antisocialism in the ranks of the GDI’s, they are unfounded. There are antisocial Independents and those who shrug off Wabash tradition, but you can find those people anywhere in the College. The extent to which my fellow freshman Independents and I participate in Wabash activities is equal or greater than my fraternity friends. Anti-Independent sentiment is silly, and Wabash gentlemen should be more mature than that.

But to ignore the Independents’ role in this situation would be exacerbating the problem. Many Independents would like to categorically deny the merits of the fraternities here at Wabash. The fact is that Wabash is a unique place, and the Greek system here is one of our signatures. While fraternity life is not for everyone, the Greek system shapes the college life of all us Little Giants, and without it we would not be the campus we are. So please quit this Independent versus Fraternity rubbish. If we here at Wabash cannot overcome our polarization, how can we expect the rest of the nation to do so?

The grouping of ourselves into polar divisions is a convenient way to shrug the duties that the Wabash mission statement demands of us. We must think critically and determine our own beliefs, act responsibly so as not to find ourselves trapped on the slippery slope of group conformity, lead effectively to garner progress and not stagnation in the web of polarization, and live humanely by treating each other with the respect we all deserve.

Related posts:

1. An Encouragement to Think Critically
2. The Best-Kept Secret: Independent Living
3. America’s Seven Deadly Sins: Loch Johnson’s Critique of American Foreign Policy

When I entered into Dr. Madsen’s office on the third floor of Goodrich Hall, I looked around for evidences of his faith. On one shelf I noticed a copy or two of the Book of Mormon, a book he has read countless times. Also, on one of his walls there is a picture of the statue of Christ located in the North Visitor Center at Temple Square in Salt Lake City. Dr. Madsen grew up LDS in southeastern Michigan as a distinct minority in his community, and it was during his high school years that he truly claimed his faith as his own. Praying about the veracity of the Book of Mormon at age 14, Dr. Madsen believes that the Holy Spirit confirmed the book’s inspiration by providing him with a “sense of peace.” Several years later, he decided to serve as a missionary for two years in Venezuela, where he underwent a journey of self-discovery. While the professor says that he did not particularly enjoy certain aspects of his mission, he learned the important lesson that “when you put your life in the Lord’s hands, different things can happen than you expected.” His faith strengthened, and remained strong during his college years. Indeed, Dr. Madsen said while he was courting his girlfriend (now wife), he racked up expensive phone bills because they would read the Book of Mormon together over a long-distance telephone line. Even today they read it nightly.

Dr. Madsen and his wife were married in a LDS temple right outside of Washington, D.C. Only active members who are recommended by their local bishop can attend rites performed in temples, and while participants cannot reveal what goes on in the ceremonies, I’ve been jokingly assured that nothing nefarious happens there. Instead, according to Dr. Madsen, there is an atmosphere of absolute peace. When he is at the temple, he gets the opportunity to experience tranquility and be able to meditate and catch on to the Holy Spirit’s “quiet promptings.” Worship in the temple provides Dr. Madsen with an opportunity to connect with God in the place where, according to BYU theologian Dr. Truman G. Madsen, “heaven meets earth.”

Dr. Eric Freeze, like Dr. Madsen, is a cradle Mormon. He was born into a Canadian LDS family, served a two year mission in southern France, and graduated from Brigham Young University. He bares a strong testimony of the Book of Mormon, which he has read at least twenty times. Concerning that book, the English professor says: “I really believe that it has truth in it and that it brings people close to God.” His testimony of the book is based upon prayer and feelings which he believes are the promptings of the Holy Spirit.

Being a writer, it might be assumed that Dr. Freeze’s faith – an essential element of his identity – would influence his writing. It absolutely does, but not in the way that one might expect. Dr. Freeze attempts to normalize Latter-day Saints in his fiction. Some of his creative writings do include LDS characters. However, their “Mormon-ness” is not their defining characteristic. Instead, it is incidental. While certain aspects of the culture might evidence itself, his writing does not make Mormonism a central focus of the work. Instead of being didactic or faith-building, Dr. Freeze’s fiction, when Mormonism does make an entrance, utilizes the faith as a normal characteristic amongst many others.

As I was discussing LDS theology with Dr. Freeze, I asked him for thoughts of Joseph Smith, the founding prophet of the LDS Church. He acknowledged that Smith, like all humans, had his flaws. However, do the sins of Joseph necessarily disapprove his status as a prophet? A great difference between Mormonism and mainstream Christianity, according to Dr. Freeze, is the amount of distance between the present time and the time of the establishment of the faiths. It has been approximately 2,000 years since Christ walked the earth, while only less than 200 years separate us from the time of Joseph Smith. Since relatively little time has passed since the early 19th century, there are many existing narratives concerning Smith and his followers that are contradictory. Some of these reflect poorly on the prophet, while others are hagiographic in nature. For humans, it is easier to believe in ancient things where the narratives are cohesive and positive. Dr. Freeze then posed that I found to be a pertinent question to the discussion: Were Christ present on earth today, would Christians believe Him? Unfortunately, he thinks, the answer would negative.

“What does it mean to be Latter-day Saint in Crawfordsville?” I posed this question to both Dr. Madsen and Dr. Freeze, and I was surprised by the positive enthusiasm in which they answered the question. Dr. Madsen said that it “allows me to stand for what I believe in.” He never feels that it is a particular hardship to be a member of a distinctive minority in his community. Instead, it energizes him to live his faith all the more. He cannot simply follow the crowd like one could in a place such as Utah where Latter-day Saints are the majority. Instead, it is precisely because it is not the norm that he finds it much easier to claim the faith in Crawfordsville. Dr. Freeze gave a very similar answer. Having lived in a city in Canada where Latter-day Saints made up 80% of the population and then having attended Brigham Young University, Dr. Freeze knows all too well what it is like to live in a majority Mormon community. He feels that in such communities there is an unfortunate mixing of what he termed “cultural and gospel elements” through the normalization of the LDS lifestyle into the mainstream culture. However, the situation obviously is much different in Crawfordsville, where there is no opportunity for “group think.” One chooses the faith and its life, which makes it more meaningful. On the whole, living in Crawfordsville has proved to be a boon for the faiths of Drs. Madsen and Freeze.

To gain further understanding of the LDS faith, I made the trek to the Crawfordsville ward (local congregation) off Highway 136. The church is a small, brown brick building that just looks like any other church that has been built in the past 50 years. The interior is likewise reminiscent that of a modern Baptist church, with the pulpit taking prominence in the center of the church and comfortable pews lining the sanctuary horizontally. The attendance on that particular Sunday reasonably filled the sanctuary with families of all ages. There were around one hundred congregants in attendance. The ward’s bishop opened the service (called a Sacrament Meeting) by the reading of various announcements. This was followed by a very traditional opening hymn. After some church business was completed, young men began preparing for the Sacrament, which is comparable to Protestant communion services. Indeed, aesthetically it is similar to the communion practices of Restorationist churches like the Churches of Christ or the Disciples of Christ. The bread is blessed by holders of the Aaronic Priesthood (the lower priesthood held by young men) and is then distributed to the congregants pew by pew. Then, water is blessed and passed around the congregation. The LDS use water instead of wine or grape juice because Joseph Smith claimed that God had specifically instructed the church to use water in the sacrament.

While at most sacrament meetings speakers are chosen from out of the congregation to speak on any given topic, the particular Sunday I visited the Crawfordsville ward was Testimony Sunday. During a testimony meeting, any member – no matter how young – can step up to the pulpit and deliver a testimony of either the LDS Church or of the principles of the faith. For 35 minutes, Latter-day Saints gave their testimonies. Among the major themes were the importance and truthfulness of the Church, the importance of temple work, and the blessings of family. The speakers ranged from grandmothers to nervous little girls to beamingly proud fathers. At this meeting, the devotion of the ward members to their church was on full display.

Following the Sacrament Meeting were Sunday School and Priesthood/Relief Society meetings. The Sunday School session was quite similar to those found in mainstream Christian churches, focusing on how to apply Scriptural principles to everyday life was paramount. The great difference, naturally, was that the text studied was the Book of Mormon, and the words of the president-prophets of the LDS Church were often referenced. After Sunday School, the men went to priesthood meetings while the women went to a meeting of what is known as the Relief Society. Since my host was a member of the Melchizedek Priesthood, I followed him to his meeting, which consisted of an in-depth discussion of the LDS doctrine of the afterlife. The quality of the dialogue during that 50-minute session would be a pastor’s dream. The level of doctrine discussed was deep, and it was obvious that the members were quite knowledgeable of their scriptures and their church’s doctrine. While there was some minor disagreement over interpretations, there was fundamental agreement over the teachings presented by the church publications.

Perhaps now is an appropriate time to make a crucial point – the LDS are not a homogenous group. When one usually thinks of the LDS Church, one thinks of a highly structured, authoritarian church led by one man and filled with Republicans. The reality is otherwise. While there is a great amount of doctrinal uniformity that is typical of a strongly hierarchical church, there is diversity amongst the members. The ward was filled with Republicans, Democrats, and Independents. On one member’s messenger bag I spotted an Obama button – a sight I would expect at a mainline Protestant church more so than at a LDS ward. Just like any other church, it is impossible to paint Mormons with a single brush.

In this article, I have tried to avoid the doctrinal issues that differentiate the Church of Jesus of Christ of Latter-day Saints from mainstream Christian churches. That is intentional, as I wanted to focus on the Saints themselves – not their dogma. The Latter-day Saints of Crawfordsville are a distinct minority who possess strong values and testimonies, and they live them out. While there are most definitely differences that should not be ignored, all people can look at the devotion and stalwartness of the LDS community of Crawfordsville as a positive model for their own lives. As St. James wrote in his epistle, faith without works is dead.

Related posts:

1. In Times Like These: Dean Warner on Faith and Tragedy
2. Keeping the Faith: Religious Opportunities at Wabash
3. Don’t Forget Your Faith: Student Religious Organizations on Campus

On October 28, 2007, Wabash College freshman Patrick Woehnker, 19, fell to his death after gaining access to the roof of an academic building. Woehnker and four other students entered the building via an underground maintenance tunnel.

The five underage students had consumed alcohol, but it was ruled out as a factor in the accident.

College officials claimed the students had entered the tunnel through a man hole and that the building was secure. However, following an unrelated investigation the following year, an incident report surfaced that showed the college found earlier the same week that students were entering the building through the tunnel. The incident report completed by campus security for the Associate Dean’s office, just six days before Woehnker’s death, stated that there were “footprints coming from the tunnels in goodrich [the academic
building]” and that it “lokks [sic] like someone has been in tunnels.”

It is not clear what, if any, action the college took to keep students out of the building following the October 22nd report of the student entry.

However, even more devastating is a Crawfordsville police report requested by The Phoenix staff that revealed the group specifically went to Goodrich Hall because, as one student stated, “Patrick said he wanted to go to Goodrich hall [sic] because he did the other night.”

Though it was possible that Woehnker was the same student who accessed the building six days before his death, the October 22nd incident report in which the college acknowledged
the entry was not made public during the investigation or ensuing media inquires. College officials denied the opportunity to immediately comment on this investigation.

Even more unanswered questions surround the college’s recent disbandment of the Beta Psi Chapter of Delta Tau Delta Fraternity. On November 6, 2008, President White sent an e-mail informing the campus community of their decision to withdraw recognition of the fraternity and declared the house a residence hall “effective immediately.”

In a statement released by the college explaining the decision, President White cited “a culture and practice of ungentlemanly behavior and irresponsible citizenship, which are inconsistent with Wabash’s Gentleman’s Rule, mission, and core values.”

Delta Tau Delta students informed The Phoenix staff that they were told by the college that a decision on the fate of their house would be made at the end of the joint investigation being conducted by Wabash College and Delta Tau Delta International.

However, at 10:00 on the evening of November 5, the men of Delta Tau Delta were informed that their attendance was required at a meeting with college administrators at 7:15 the following morning. At this meeting, Dean of Students Michael Raters informed the men that the college was disbanding Delta Tau Delta, terminating its lease, and requiring students over the age of 21 to move out within 72 hours.

Though the college claimed to have reached this decision in conjunction with Delta Tau Delta International, a division president called the decision “unilateral” and “disappointing,”
and the Executive Vice President of Delta Tau Delta Jim Russell said, as quoted in The Paper of Montgomery County, “we were hopeful, upon the investigation’s completion, in partnering with the college on an appropriate joint course of action.”

A Practice of Irresponsible Citizenship

“Woehnker fell Sunday from the top of Goodrich Hall, an academic building that was closed at the time.” Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, October 30, 2007

Little else came from the investigation. It was a simple but sad story in which a young made a foolish mistake, like most of us have done on any number of occasions. Unfortunately, this one cost him his life. The campus grieved for the loss of a brother, sent sympathies and prayers to his family, and eventually recovered. The only other news received was a quiet and almost unnoticed coroner’s report a few weeks after the tragedy that stated the nineteen-year-old’s blood alcohol content of .04%.

Roughly three months after his death, The Phoenix staff was investigating campus security issues and made a formal request for a copy of the college’s daily crime log, a public log which is federally mandated by the Jeanne Clery Act. The law gives the college 48 hours to comply with public requests, but the college did not meet the deadline. No explanation was given other than ignorance of the specific stipulation requiring the crime log.

The consequences of non-compliance are very grave. The Secretary of the Department of Education (DoE) is required to report non-compliant institutions to appropriate congressional committees and fine said institutions up to $27,700 per infraction. As a result of the January request, The Phoenix staff sent the administration a copy of the federal law and a DoE compliance handbook, but a story on the log was not published.

Eight months later at the end of September, and at the end of National Campus Safety Awareness Month (named so by Congress July 2008), another request was made for the daily crime log for a Bachelor investigation. By the 48th hour, it was evident that the college would not only miss the deadline but that Wabash still did not have a log.

After a meeting with Dean Raters on October 2, 2008, it was obvious that the college had not made any effort to solve the problem which was brought to its attention nine months earlier. Dean Raters admitted the school did not have a log. “The point of debate where I would agree with your point is that, do we have a daily log? Well, apparently we don’t. I didn’t keep a daily log. You’ve asked for one a couple times and not gotten it,” said Dean Raters, “but I don’t think that is from the DoE perspective—The paper work that they send is what they look at to see if we’re in compliance—in my mind—and therefore we are in compliance.”

The interview indicated that the college did not understand the law and had yet to carefully read the compliance guide sent nine months earlier.

Sadly, two nights later on October 4, 2008, Johnny Smith, age 18, died of acute alcohol poisoning. Due to the sensitivity of the events and the inevitable media coverage the campus would be receiving, a report on the crime log investigation did not run in The Bachelor that week.

After the campus climate started to return to some sort of normalcy, another crime log request was made so that the investigation could continue. However, this time the administration responded immediately and made available a “daily crime log” of sorts that had supposedly existed all along unbeknownst to the administration.

The log was an internal document maintained by Campus Security which listed summaries of incident reports made to the Associate Dean. Most of the incidents were not of the type required to be maintained in the federally mandated log. Some entries named students or discussed sensitive but non-criminal incidents which some could argue were not in the college’s best interest to make public. It certainly did not appear to be maintained
for public viewing.

The entry for October 22, 2007, just six days before Patrick Woehnker’s death, is pictured below.

In the very next entry dated October 28, 2007, the comment section reads, “It was found that the subject entered tunnel by man hole by hays hall. Entered goodrich where he gained acsess to the roof. [sic]” The rest of the details need not be shared here.

Despite the existence of an incident report, initial news articles reported that the college had no idea how the students gained access to a secured building. Spokesperson Jim Amidon told the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette, “They’re [roofs] extremely dangerous places to be…The building itself was secure.” Though details about the students gaining entry through the maintenance tunnels were publicly acknowledged, the log entry made six days earlier was not.

It is unclear what actions the college took to mitigate the problem brought to their attention in the October 22, 2007 incident report. Recent events have raised similar concerns about the college administration’s decisions.

A Culture of Ungentlemanly Behavior

On November 6, 2008, the college decided to withdraw recognition of the Beta Psi chapter of Delta Tau Delta due to a “culture and practice of ungentlemanly behavior and irresponsible citizenship, which are inconsistent with Wabash’s Gentleman’s Rule, mission, and core values.” The decision was met with surprise from students, alumni, and international fraternity leadership.

After all, the college initially offered support to the men of Delta Tau Delta. In a letter dated October 15, 2008, President White informed college alumni that “Our first concern in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy was the welfare of the young men in Delta Tau Delta and Johnny’s friends in the Class of 2012.”

However, later in the process of the investigation, the college failed to keep students, alumni, and the international fraternity informed. “We received more information from the police than the college administration,” said Delta Tau Delta senior Matthew Lee, “it’s the same thing that’s been going on for the last five or six weeks. He [Dean Raters] comes in and talks for a long time and doesn’t really say anything.”

Though the students and alumni were told the conclusion of an official investigation would determine the future of their house, the college acted swiftly and—literally—overnight to disband the fraternity. The campus community, as well the alumni, and international fraternity were shocked by the surprise decision. Eastern Division President of Delta Tau Delta International, Larry Altenburg, said, “I expect the college is doing what they need to do to cover their own interests.”

Details on the culture and practice of ungentlemanly behavior and irresponsible citizenship were not given, and many have disagreed with the administration’s characterization of the men in the house.

The men of Delta Tau Delta have had a very difficult semester. They’ve endured three investigations. All of the members have gone through counseling, and some are receiving medical treatment related to the emotional trauma.

Wabash College President Patrick White was away from campus and unavailable for immediate comment. The Dean of Students, Michael Raters, abruptly cancelled a scheduled interview and declined to answer the questions until the following week.

Authors’ Note

It is important not to confuse these new findings. Patrick Woehnker broke the Gentleman’s Rule in entering the tunnels and Goodrich Hall. Let that not be forgotten. However, it is our belief that the above facts suggest that the college administration has also promoted and practiced a culture of ungentlemanly behavior and irresponsible citizenship, which are inconsistent with Wabash’s Gentleman’s Rule, mission, and core values.

Did the administration submit the October 22, 2007 incident report to police? If not, did they believe it was irrelevant to the investigation?

The administration was also unresponsive to investigations into possible violation of federal law.

Seemingly to protect their interests, the college manipulated and misled the brothers of Delta Tau Delta, and, under questionable circumstances before an investigation was even completed, the administration issued a verdict condemning the brothers and casting them out on their own.

The administration will defend students in so far as it does not threaten the administration’s own interests. It is ironic that the administration should cite the Gentleman’s Rule against the brothers of Delta Tau Delta when the administration itself has threatened the integrity of the same rule.

Certainly some questions will be raised in to the appropriateness of this investigation. When the facts came to our attention, we discussed at length those very questions. Is writing this story the right thing to do? Are the consequences it will have on the college worth it? Is it morally just not to publish this story?

Ultimately, we decided that by not making the results of our investigation public, we would be aiding in covering it up. Though there are considerable consequences to this article, we are doing what we think is right because the college did not.

If we, as a college, are to gain anything from these tragedies, all parties involved must share the responsibility. This administration, however, has placed the burden solely on students. It is time that the college takes an objective look inside its own house, because the trust between the students and the current administration is broken. After all, in the very least the Gentleman’s Rule means following the law and taking care of each other.

Related posts:

1. The Phoenix Mission
2. The Death of the Student Judiciary: The Inside Story of the Idea’s Rise and Fall
3. Remembering What We Used to Say About Our Students

I was born and raised in Richmond, Virginia, and my father was very active in politics. In fact, he ran for the U.S. Senate and won. However, he died in a plane crash, and John Warner took up the mantle and was elected to the senate in 1978, so he’s been there a long time. That’s when I got involved – when I was a little girl. I was one of those strange children that loved political speeches and watching the news. When I was ten, Reagan became President, and that really solidified my desire to be involved and try to make a difference. He was everything I believed in – he had this capacity to comfort and inspire a nation after the disastrous presidency of Jimmy Carter. Now, we are on the precipice of having another Carter-esque administration – and that should really be scary. Young people don’t remember, but many of the things Barack Obama talks about – that’s what Carter did as President. It should make old-timers sit up and take notice, and young people should turn to their history books.

What was it like running the Virginia GOP?

It was the hardest job I’ve ever had and hopefully ever will have. The best part of the job was working with the grassroots, working with the people that put on the potlucks, or the chicken dinners, the auctions, and the barbecues. Those are the people who make up our party; they are the foundation of our party. They are willing to leave their families, their kids, jobs, and go out and sacrifice and build the party because they believe in it because it supports their values. The harder part was dealing with the elected officials or the party officials. With a governing body of over 80 people, its like trying to heard cats. There’s a lot of complaining and second-guessing, and really you have to decide that your vision is for the party. Mine was build the grassroots, build the party from the ground up, implement technology, because the democrats are getting so far ahead of us. I became chairmen in 2003. I got to go through the Karl Rove/ Ken Mehlman election of President Bush, and I got to see what is happening at the local and state level. It made me have an appreciation for how important technology is, but also how to run a campaign from the bottom up, to make sure you have everybody on board, to make sure you have all your coalitions addressed, and everybody pulling in the same direction. That’s the reason George Bush became our President in 2004 – because of the massive operation to focus on technology and micro-targeting, [such as the] focus on what magazines people read so you could send mailings to their house that pique their interest. Overall, it was a fascinating experience, probably the hardest experience of my life, but the most rewarding too.

We see that in 2004, 54% of the electorate described themselves as “Conservative” or “Slightly Conservative.” Why do you think Sen. Obama has such a spectacular following?

We’re still figuring it out. [Chuckles] He (Sen. Obama) is a phenomenon. He has this unique ability to connect to individuals, and I think that’s what it really is. His lofty rhetoric based on “change” and bi-partisanship, really appeals to people. People love the idea that we’re not going to be bickering and that we can just be one glorious happy family. I think it’s a disservice to our country because the reason our country and way of life is so vibrant is because we have the free and open exchange of ideas. It’s because we have Democrats and Republicans who argue from their hearts what they believe and because of that clash of ideas we come out with the best possible ideas. We have to sell our ideas to the American people. We don’t do what Barack Obama is stating, “We’re going to go beyond your ideas, and have consensus and harmony.” That is based on nothingness – it’s based on feelings and emotions, and he has a unique ability to touch people’s emotions. Sen. Obama gets them to turn away from ideas, logic, and reality and have people reaching for this nebulous notion of peace, joy, hope, and change. I can’t explain how he has done this from a technology standpoint. But yes, he has implemented the Karl Rove playbook, play-by-play. He has developed coalitions in unions, churches – all the national coalitions and brand new coalitions. He has been working on them masterfully for at least two years, but arguably longer than that. But it’s really his hypnotic rhetoric that really disturbs and bothers me. But as a student of American history, I see our country going in a different direction with Barack Obama and it makes me very uncomfortable.

Oftentimes people confuse the Conservatism and “Republicanism.” Where do you think the difference is, and why is the line often times blurred.

I am a conservative first. I champion ideas and analyze elections. I’m a Republican because I think the GOP is the best vehicle for furthering our conservative ideals. It is the only practical political vehicle right now for furthering conservative principles – and the best. Some people say, “ I’m a Republican first and I’ll do anything to support and build the party, just for the sake of the party.” I think your party is determined by your philosophy. My philosophy is what drives me. Furthering and promoting an individuals freedoms and liberty – that’s why I’m involved. I can do that best by articulating my position in newspaper articles on college campuses, speaking at conferences, but also being involved in the Republican Party structure. So really, I see it as a vehicle to further my ideas. I fight to keep the conservative party conservative; I fight those internal battles between moderates ad conservatives. I get in there, roll up my sleeves, and fight hard to make sure the governing body of the party supports conservative principles.

In 2006, you left the Virginia GOP. How did you keep active in the political arena?

The first thing I did in 2006 after George Allen lost the U.S. Senate race [that] is I went to work as his Chief-of-Staff for the brief time until the end of is term. George Allen was one of the reasons I became involved in the party – his beliefs in the founding principle of our country and his “conservative-first” stance. I wanted to see his term out and wrap it up in as positive a manner as I could. After that, I don’t really know how but FOX News called me. I think National Review had noticed and then recommended me to them. I was requested to speak on FOX News sort of as a
“talking head” or political analyst. So, I have done that consistently for three years now – also MSNBC, CNN, Larry King. I never watch it, but I’m on it! [Laughs] I also have four children, and that is what I spend the bulk of my time doing – being a mother to these four children. But at the beginning of the summer I decided that in addition to doing television and speaking on college campuses, I wanted to do something full time where I could really be promoting my values and my principles. The means for doing that for me is Young America’s Foundation (YAF.) At the beginning of the summer, I went to work as a vice president there. I’ll be doing a lot of media work, but also just working with the students on college campuses. We own the Reagan Ranch out in California, and our goal is to pass along Ronald Reagan’s principles and visions to you guys – the rising generation. The ideas of Reagan are in essence those of our Founding Fathers. Unfortunately, young people don’t know that – they don’t know Ronald Reagan. If we can pass along a little bit of Ronald Reagan to the next generation, I believe we would do a real service to our country.

All across America, we see conservatives harangued for their opinions. This is happening so much so that some are breaking away from the movement. What is your opinion on such conservatives, and what about those of us who haven’t abandoned the cause?

Let me just say that those “conservatives” that are jumping ship, they love where they are right now because the liberal media loves them – so do Democrats. But in a couple weeks time, they’re going to be dropped like a hot potato. Nobody’s going to care about them; they’re going to go back to being scorned and disdained by the Left – just as John McCain has experienced. Those conservatives are enjoying their little day in the sun after they’ve been used, because that’s what the Left does. Whenever I start to think I’m hot stuff, something great happens, or I get a particular accolade, all I have to do is go to the blogs to bring me down a peg or two – I keep my feet on the ground. It’s stunning to see how cruel, vicious and untruthful people are. All I can say is it’s done a lot to strengthen my faith, and I think that’s been a great outcome of the criticism of it. You realize you can’t care what all these people, who have too much time on their hands, think about you. You have to care what your Creator thinks about you and the people closest to you. I am again in it because I feel as though I have a purpose, and that is to share what I believe are right ideas, and I’m not going to stop because I irritate some people on the Left or, frankly, people within my own party. I see a lot of those folks for what they are.

Wabash, being an all-male school, doesn’t often get a female perspective on things. What is your opinion on Sarah Palin as a woman and as a conservative?

Sarah Palin has suffered the most grossly sexist treatment of any woman on the public scene that I have ever witnessed. Most of it is coming from the Left – from those supposedly open-minded, tolerant, feminists, or progressive men who claim to be so high and open-minded. It reveals their cause is a complete and utter sham. Their entire careers have been built on something false because they do not believe in equality for all women. They believe in equity and supremacy for liberal women. It has nothing to do with all women. Conservative women suffer more scorn and contempt than any [other] women do – it’s appalling. Coming from the perspective of a, not hockey, but a soccer mom, I love Sarah Palin. I love the image she projects. I love her confidence in being a mother and being proud to carry her infant son onto the stage. You don’t see women in the spotlight doing that – ever. Some people think it’s a weakness to have a baby and act in your role as a mother. Gov. Palin is saying it is not only OK; it is essential that we put our children first in our lives. That’s why she carries baby Trig on stage.

Do you think Gov. Palin was a good choice for John McCain?

I think she was the best choice for John McCain.

Related posts:

1. Race, Conservatism, and the GOP: An Interview with Joseph C. Phillips
2. Yes, Virginia, young Conservatives DO exist!
3. Much Ado About Nothing: the Conservatism of John McCain

One of the addresses recorded in These Fleeting Years is a 1953 Chapel Talk by Dean Trippet, who told the story of Francis Cayou, the head Wabash football coach from 1904-1907. This was a groundbreaking time in Wabash history. In 1900, as Trippet relates, “the college had reached an age and had achieved a reputation which caused her friends and admirers to begin to regard the college as a venerable institution.” This status allowed Cayou’s football teams to gain regional and state recognition for their scrappiness. Cayou also coined the moniker “Little Giants,” praising his team for out-fighting their bigger opponents. An Indianapolis newsman overheard the comments, printed them the next day, and Wabash teams have been known as the Little Giants ever since.

The more celebrated account dealing with Coach Cayou is during halftime of a 1907 game against St. Louis University. “Ki,” as his players referred to him, told all of them how proud he was of their efforts through the first half even though they trailed. Then he told them, “You’ve got to beat them, boys – you’ve got to beat them! And I will not start a single one of you this half unless you will take my hand and promise that you will not leave the field without a victory.” Each one of his players put in their hands and promised “Ki” they would go out and fight. The result: Wabash-12 St. Louis-11.

Another Wabash football legend is Coach Pete Vaughn. His tenure was from 1919 to 1945, and during that period, he compiled a record of 113 victories, 84 losses, and 23 ties. His squads from 1921-1926 shut out DePauw by an incredible combined score of 118-0. Another remarkable fact: Coach Vaughn, from 1927 onward, did not let limited funding deter him from fielding competitive teams year after year, compiling a record of 72-60-19 during that time period.

It would seem proper at this point to spin a few yarns about Monon Bell games that Wabash likes to remember and DePauw wants to forget. Unfortunately, I have to bring up last years miracle by a kicker from a certain school that starts with a “D” and ends in a “W.” Nevertheless, Wabash has also been the provider of some last minute heroics, and a few that come to mind are the 1986, 1991, and 1992 games.

The Little Giants came from behind in the 1986 game in the 4th quarter to beat DePauw 24-23, with a minute left and the game winning field goal delivered by Tim Pliske. This was a very extraordinary come back, considering that at the start of the 4th quarter Wabash trailed 23-7.

A similar story can be told for the 1992 classic. Once again Wabash was down to DePauw – this time a margin of 17-7 at the end of the first half. The Little Giants picked away at the lead with freshman quarterback Chris Ings leading the charge. In the final seconds of the game, a short field goal by Alex Costa that incidentally bounced off the left upright but through for the 17-17 tie. The Bell would stay in Crawfordsville for the second year of a 5-year span.

The 1991 game was a seesaw battle back and forth with the DePauw leading midway through the 4th quarter on a blocked punt for a touchdown. Bear in mind that DePauw, coming into the game, had possessed the Bell for five years, so the Little Giants had enormous motivation to strive for the win. With the outcome of the game being uncertain, the Wabash’s offense got the ball and marched down the field. The 57-yard drive with all seven plays being carried by freshman running back David Kogan would be the game-winning possession. Kogan would make the touchdown in the closing minutes, and the Bell returned to Crawfordsville.

I could not summarize it any better as an example of Wabash College being that “band of brothers” from Shakespeare’s Henry V. We are one college, one family together today, we are WABASH, a “band of brothers.”

Related posts:

1. Wabash, The Bell, & What Sets Us Apart from DePauw
2. Tradition and Excellence
3. Utterback Launches Bid for Sheriff

Before examining biases, I first need propose a few ideas concerning objectivity. Firstly, to be objective means the ability for one to separate oneself from sentiments in order to examine something both calmly and rationally. Secondly, the objective world is the world in which truth lies and concrete events occur in their entirety. Here is where the problem occurs: We are emotional creatures, blinded by our sentiments and unable to separate ourselves from our beliefs/biases. Ergo, we as humans are unable to completely access the objective world in its entirety. Our biases, obtained (a posteriori) through life experiences, determine how we interpret the objective world. In addition, since our biases interpret the objective world, it is indeed possible for our biases to strengthen or weaken themselves in accordance to what we hear. Here’s an example:

As a concrete event, let’s say we have a horrific two-car accident that leaves both cars fused together and drivers with life-threatening injuries. After hearing this fact and filtering it through their biases, here is how a few parties may react via first impressions. The physics student may first question the force of the impact so that the energy transferred was able to fuse the two cars together. The Christian, such as myself, would wonder if they are saved. Meanwhile, a third person yearns for universal healthcare. In this example, we witness a concrete objective event interpreted through biases and the resulting product, i.e., first impressions. (Note: Although I merely address first impressions, this would inevitably affect the ‘spin’ of the event covered. It should follow that this “bias filter” would show when hearing about the event in the news.)

If what I proposed holds true, the idea of objectivity in reporting is quite absurd. Why should reporters be held to a different standard than normal people? Are they too ministers of truth? Relating this idea to other forms of news media, the idea of objective reporting is as absurd as thinking that the presentation of two sides of an argument will ultimately yield objectivity. If you want to see this point for yourself, try watching FOX’s Hannity and Colmes—a show that is dedicated to both strong conservative and liberal viewpoints only yields arguing!

As was earlier stated, it would be much easier if media outlets would just admit their biases. Think about it. Instead of wasting untold amounts of time debating on who is being fair, we could just cut to the chase and hear the news. Why not skip the guesswork and listen to the news that agrees with your viewpoint? In addition, if the outlets were honest, then the news environment would finally resemble a free market as opposed to bitter ideological enemies pretending to get along.

I ask you (and be honest with yourself), why are you reading The Phoenix? Aren’t you aware that we are biased? Maybe this is where the idea works: We don’t lie about our views and you read it all the same. Would this concept not work for a liberal/progressive publication? Instead of forcing “objective equality” by providing the token conservative, liberal, and moderate viewpoints, we simply provide one. Why not have partisan news networks that autonomously function? The idea of partisan news networks truly allows for competing viewpoints and ultimately, lets the consumer choose what they want to hear. While you run the risk of people vehemently getting stuck in their ways, at least they’d be honest about where they stand.

Related posts:

1. Evan Bayh and the Media Narrative
2. Can __ Win? – Addressing media bias in the presidential elections

Having said all of that, there are stories in Winesburg that speak directly to the heart of the human condition, and no writer that I know can compare to Anderson’s mastery of the mood of unspoken sadness. But that is not what I want to talk about. What I want to say is that these stories could not have been set in Indiana. They are Ohio stories, as the title of the book announces, and they could not have been set anywhere else. Ohio went through industrialization sooner and quicker than Indiana, and its small towns were hit harder by the growth of its big cities. Small town life stayed strong through much of the twentieth century in Indiana, so no Indiana writer could have been this disparaging of the simple life.

Ohio is a state defined by its proximity to the east coast. It is and is not the Midwest, and therein lies its distinctiveness. Most of the characters in Anderson’s book came from the East, and they were looking to build new lives in a small town. In other words, they were unhappy to begin with, yet, stuck in a small Ohio town and bereft of the culture they had left behind, they were unable to make sense of their unhappiness. Most of the early settlers of Indiana came up from the South, more particularly, Appalachia. They were people who trusted their own instincts, but they also had a deep trust in God, which Anderson’s characters do not. They combined self-reliance and reliance on God in a way that kept them optimistic in even the hardest of times. In many cases, the early settlers of Indiana were leaving the South because they wanted to leave slavery behind. Slavery offended their egalitarian sensibilities. Hoosiers embraced small town life, perhaps because everyone in Indiana was from a small town, since even Indianapolis was little more than a very large small town. Anderson could not have set his stories in Indiana, and he would not have written them if he had been from Indiana.

I can imagine someone reading this and asking about The Magnificent Ambersons, Booth Tarkington’s 1918 best seller that won the Pulitzer Prize. This book is indeed a vicious attack on small mindedness, just as it is also set in the era of the first tremors of industrialization. On the surface, it seems to be very similar to Anderson’s book. However, the differences are fundamental. Tarkington attacks not small town life but the presumptions of inherited wealth. George Minafer, the main character, is an aristocrat who has no grasp of the dynamic nature of capitalism. He is a European nobleman in a Hoosier setting, which makes him more ridiculous than tragic. Tarkington is thus defending small town values in this book. Minafer, in fact, thinks of himself as a gentleman, an aesthete, that is, a keeper of cultural standards. Tarkington is attacking the very idea of artistic privilege that Amberson advances, and he did this because he was a born and bred Hoosier.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not a fan of the message of The Magnificent Ambersons. It has an almost socialistic aversion the cultural consequences of inherited wealth, and it is also one of the most vicious attacks of the idea of gentleman ever written. George Minafer’s entire downfall, in fact, is rooted in his sense of honor, and no novel has ever been more single minded in dismantling the connection between masculinity and honor. Tarkington’s novel is thus much more radical than Anderson’s. He takes Hoosier humility and egalitarianism to an extreme, whereas Anderson’s book is, in the end, just another justification for the lonely artist who must flee his roots in order to find his voice, etc. Attacking privilege from the perspective of small town values is much more devastating than attacking small town values from the perspective of privilege.

Speaking of Indiana novels, without a doubt the great Hoosier novel is Raintree County, written by Ross Lockridge Jr. It is much neglected today because it is so long and the sappy movie version did it no favors, but also because its author committed suicide shortly after its publication, which left it orphaned in the world of literary self-promotion. Raintree County was postmodern before postmodernity was invented. Lockridge uses a variety of styles, and even incorporates social documents from a myriad of genres, in order to convey a vivid sense of the simple and settled quality of Hoosier life. Far from being an exercise in nostalgia, though, the book is brimming over with sexual energy and looks backward (the story is told in recollection) only in order to get a clear view of how different the future will prove to be. There is in this book a wonderful statement of what Indiana means. “Meanwhile, Corporal Johnny Shawnessy had begun to hate this earth that made him suffer so much. He was a man from the flat country, and he now perceived a new beauty in the level of Raintree County. It tranquilized the spirit, it was the image of space, it suggested civilization and good roads. It meant peace and plenty and contentment.”

The only other writer I know of who has been this penetrating about the Hoosier landscape is Michael Martone, who recently visited Indiana. From an essay called “The Flatness,” he compares the land to abstract art. It is all surface, pure material and canvas. But “those who live here begin to sense a slight unevenness.” When you live on flat land, you become very sensitive to the most subtle of disturbances. And here is a beautiful image from this fine essay: “And way off in the distance, the land almost met the paralleling sky, and the flat-bottomed clouds, and there, between the land and clouds, hung a strip of air without color that the sun set through.” I feel sorry for people who did not grow up in Indiana but live here now, because I wonder if they will ever have that experience that Martone describes.

To get a sense of the particular form that wonder takes in Indiana you ahve to read Oliver Johnson’s A Home in the Woods: Pioneer Life in Indiana. Indiana was thick forest, and the trees were cleared one at a time. Think about that when you wonder about the plain spoken patience that is bred into the Indiana bone. And one last recommendation is a much neglected classic, Graham Hutton’s Midwest at Noon. The chapter entitled “The Cult of the Average” should be required reading for every Hoosier, though Hoosiers are much too polite to force such a thing on anyone.

Related posts:

1. Thoughts on the Warsaw, Indiana Republican Senate Debate