Campus commercialization
It was a Wednesday, and as I normally do around noon, I was walking to a Spanish class. It was unseasonably warm, the tail end of an Indian summer. Sweaty feet notwithstanding, I had to admit it was a pretty nice day. The wind was blowing those tiny leaves up off the pavement, gently, not like it would blow them on Thursday, the definitive end of that seasonal anomaly. I decided there was not much point in going to class that day – not much point in there really being a university, in fact. With weather like this, the whole of Richmond might have simply melted away, leaving us bereft of indoors. The only feasible thing left to do would be to go down to the James and wallow mindlessly on its suddenly pristine banks.
Two ideas from the preceding paragraph I’d like to highlight: first, that there was not much point in there being a university; second: wallowing mindlessly. Eugene Trani – or some member of his administration – was evidently in agreement last Wednesday at noon. You’ve heard about how Dr. Trani has been commercializing VCU. Perhaps you have seen the new strip of chain stores on the first floor of Ramz Hall, or if not, maybe you were sad about Carriage House Books closing, in part because of a policy requiring professors to inform the VCU Bookstore of its orders at that locale.
In any case, I’d like to draw a line. I’m sure I could be convinced that a little commercializing is healthy for our school. There must be some good explanation, aside from Dr. Trani’s extra-deep pant pockets (thank you for stopping to consider my argument at this point, Dr. Trani). The line that I’d like to draw is the one I imagine at the border between reasonable commercialization and offensive, disruptive, un-academic prostitution.
When I walked through the Commons and out into the pleasant noon Wednesday, what confronted me made me gape in disbelief. Occupying the Commons Plaza were several brand new cars, doors flung open. A slick-looking character in a lightly colored business suit was sweet-talking a few interested students. In front of the cars was a long table from which free food was being distributed. To my right were the thudding sounds of mindless dance music (no offense to the DJ, it’s your job). As if this weren’t already an appalling scene, it was undeniably happening in the center of university activity.
As if it weren’t enough that the learning community ought to be a champion of the environment given the massive, ever-growing body of evidence of its destruction, and hence in opposition to the continued consumption of fossil fuels, I’d like to be crystal clear: a car company does not belong on our campus. That sort of display is patently unacademic, totally disruptive to the university atmosphere and downright disturbing. Those responsible should know better. Shame on them.
– Jeremy Bass
Election contention
Dear Editor,
While I enjoyed your attention to the statewide elections, I believe that your statements about the results are inaccurate.
First, you called the election a Democratic victory even though their candidates only won a single race for statewide office.
Plus, Democrats held the governor and lieutenant governor posts during the past four years. Now they only hold the top spot.
Also, the attorney general was described as being “equally important” as the governor. How could this be true if you called the election a Democratic victory and a Democrat did not win attorney general?
As a reader of The Commonwealth Times I am more concerned about the misleading statements than the grammatical errors, but I do look forward to an explanation.
Cordially,
Phillip Bogenberger
Editor’s reply: In Thursday’s Opinion in Brief section, the “headlines of Democratic victory” referred to the front-page coverage given to Kaine’s gubernatorial victory, as well as other Democratic victories in New Jersey and California. The attorney general race in Virginia remains undecided by a margin of less than 1 percent of votes cast. A greater number than this margin voted for governor and did not vote for an attorney general. The point of the editorial was to show that voting for an attorney general is just as important as voting for a governor. Thank you for reading The Commonwealth Times.