Before I go any further, let me qualify this first paragraph with several lines. First of all, by opening with the anecdote I chose, I do not mean to seem dangerously frivolous or casually flippant. I realize that there are sufficient differences between a Russian palace, however old, and a college dorm, however new, as to make any extended comparison between the two difficult, if not impossible. Secondly, do not get me wrong-I feel I speak for a decisive majority of the dorm's residents when I say that I am completely satisfied and duly appreciative insofar as housing goes. The dorms are extremely nice-and extremely expensive-to say the least; I have even heard the word hotel spoken once or twice by people grasping for a way to describe the interiors. Amherst has done us proud, and we are grateful, let there be no doubt of that fact.
However, the administration, in its turn, should realize several facts. King and Wieland are composed almost entirely of seniors. This means that we can drink legally and are accustomed to being able to gather in a designated area. The two new dorms, being both our homes and not alcohol-free, qualify. We live here, and therefore we will socialize here. Second, we are-bear with me-fairly responsible and not stupid. We realize the College has no intention of letting its newest jewels get ravaged and plundered by tipsy hordes, and we, as residents, have no intention of letting that happen for reasons of simple respect, as well as the astronomical fines that would resultingly occur.
We will not allow people in the dorm, as our guests, to behave in a manner detrimental to our home, nor even as might occur on some of the rowdier nights in the social dorms. Any one of us could have chosen the social dorms, but didn't. We realize that beauty goes hand-in-hand with value, and that privilege is ever-shadowed by responsibility. But to fine two or three residents $100 or more for beer stains on carpets or walls which very likely could have been wiped off by those same residents if given half a chance-well, it is common knowledge it was decided they should be "made an example of," but what sort of example is this?
In all fairness, we as prospective residents were never informed that the new dorms would have "quiet" policies or anything else of the kind. This is because they do not. We go to college, and we value our social lives in this last year. Just as the administration should realize and respect (or at least give us a chance to prove) our responsibility as seniors, it should realize we are seniors, and this goes both ways. I am all for King and Wieland being kept clean, neat and unstained, but pristine and perfect for eternity is another matter. I do not at all mean to suggest that damage is bound to happen and should be accepted, but rather that we do not live in a museum, but a college dormitory. Unless arrangements are made to purchase boxes of felt slippers with which to clad offending feet prior to entering these newly constructed halls, I ask that we be given a chance, as seniors, to monitor our own behavior, and to respect these walls of our own volition.
Editor's note: This was written prior to the Monday meeting between the residents of the dorms, RC's, campus police and Dean Boykn-East, which the writer said clarified some concerns.