The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 68, No. 29, Ed. 1 Thursday, April 9, 1981 Page: 2 of 24
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Texas Digital Newspaper Program and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the Rice University Woodson Research Center.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Malaise of mediocrity
The status of the library is one of those topics that critics of
Rice always cite as one of the university's major deficiencies.
Fondren Library, the story goes, is not the type of library found
at truly "great institutions." While the critics often exaggerate
the state of affairs concerning the library, there is a general
consensus that the library has problems.
Rice does not have a had library; it is just not as good as
many people expect it to be. Rice has the best library for a
school its size in the state. But Rice has never compared itself to
Trinity University or SMU; Rice thinks itself better than the
UTs and compares itself to Harvards and Yales. When pressed,
however, the administration tends to shirk from comparisons
to the Ivies except on their own terms. "Look at the ratios,"
they say. Yes, the ratios say Rice has put considerable effort
into its library for its size. Unfortunately, ratios don't help
researchers—students or faculty—find obscure works that
Fondren just couldn't afford to buy. Libraries are good on
absolute scales, not relative ones.
* * ♦
But even the administration's ratio arguments don't stand up
fully. Look at the numbers. At $329 million, Rice's endowment
is one of the largest in the nation (ninth in the survey of the
Chronicle of Higher Education). But Rice's library—and
overall quality—is not ninth in the nation.
What is lacking is a commitment from the faculty and the
administration—and the students—to improve this university.
The Board of Trustees is so caught up in Rice's wonderful
investments that it often seems that education is delegated into
the background. To some extent, their concerns are legitimate:
Rice must remain solvent in order to exist. But it must be
remembered that Rice is first—and foremost—an institution of
higher learning. Fondren, for one, has somehow lost out in the
deal.
The faculty is, for the most part, ambivalent towards the
library. Many of them don't use the library that often (science
and engineering professors usually subscribe to relevant
journals themselves) and can only complain on their occasional
moments when they can't find a book or journal they need. The
fact that most departments do not use their book budgets is
mystifying. Fondren just does not have all the volumes it
should, and the departments' neglect deprives both the faculty
and the students.
Students, too, abuse and neglect Fondren. They are only
mindful of its deficiencies when it affects them directly. In
addition, they often molest books, ignore due dates, and deface
the library facilities.
* * ♦
The neglect of the library by all three groups is a
manifestation of a general malaise of mediocrity at Rice. That
attitude even emerged in the decision concerning the location
of the Sealy G. Mudd Computer Building. A centrally located,
accessible site (in the parking lot between Bonner Laboratoty
and the Chemistry Laboratories) was rejected in favor of a site
hidden away in the back of the campus so that money would
not have to be spent to make the building architecturally
compatible with the buildings near the Academic Quadrangle.
Future students and faculty will surely regret the decision.
That malaise of mediocrity can only lead to long-term
problems for the university as a whole. Universities, of all
places, must be vital intellectually in order to bestow that
vitality on its students. Rice is slipping. Soon all that will be left
are those whose only concern is to a degree that is only a job-
placement certificate.
—Richard Dees
personmd; Mytnc curs goih&
STWGKT INTO OU. STOCKS, IftHD
SPeOULMlON AM' SILVER FUTURES
WELL, l|A PRETTY
HEWWWIOGMOUNE,
M/MORTGAGE MK>
BAR/ FOOD
HOW ErWPlWTOPUWMWR
mSm
TW. CUT BACK OTP
investment?™
L4AJU. ki L J..HI
TW Aweriwi-^abaivat/s
OK/ NOW TRV IT...
SPANNING THE HEDGES/by David Dow
()*W
Capitalism has outgrown Adam
Smith's Wealth of Nations and is
being used to justify practices
which the Glasgow professor
would abhor. Smith belonged to
the Scottish moral school, a group
of common-sense philosophers
who believed that a sense of
benevolence motivates human
behavior. So when Smith the
economist suggested that the
common good would be
maximized by individuals selfishly
pursuing their own interests in the
capitalist marketplace, Smith the
moralist did not anticipate a
savage, unrestrained, amoral
profit-motive.
Human nature would therefore
disappoint Adam Smith; it takes
his economic system and contorts
it into an instrument of
oppression. Reacting to the
exigencies which Smith did not
foresee, government policies
attempt to reinforce his teetering,
mistreated model. Thus, to
compensate for the langour of
man's alleged sense of benevo-
lence, government agencies protect
innocent, naive, vulnerable
consumers from avaricious,
unscrupulous capitalists and
professionals. Obviously, not all
businessmen who earn profits rape
the consumers to do so, yet there
are some rather callous ogres out
there who care about absolutely
nothing but money. From those
men, the government tries to shield
the unwary buyer.
Lucky for us. Drugs, gadgets,
foods,"Chemicals, machines — a
seemingly endless number of
products — inundate the
marketplace at such a frenetic rate
that no individual can possible
keep informed about all the
potential dangers. Protective
agencies like the FDA, the CPSC,
and OSHA operate on just that
premise: that the doctrine of caveat
emptor — "Let the buyer beware"
— is utterly unrealistic in today's
society. So dangerous products get
banned. When babies begin to
choke on their pacifiers, when
antibiotics begin to cause
undesirable side effects, when
pajamas treated with a flame
retardant called Tris show a
correlation with kidney cancer,
when the Dalkon Shield IUD
causes 200,000 American women
to develop infections, regulatory
agencies step in.
Suddenly the manufacturers of
these defective products have a
prodigious problem: immense
stockpiles of an unsaleable good.
Are the entrepreneurs benevolent?
Do they admit that their products
are dangerous and decide to *ake a
loss by des:r.wino —nrt !;«
already been produced? Rarely.
Lacking a domestic market.
manufacturers simply look for
victims overseas and proceed to
dump the surpluses in the Third
World. Government agencies
protect only American consumers,
so insidious businessmen can
easily circumvent the regulations:
They maim and kill foreign buyers.
Inhabitants of backward countries
have strange, exotic goods thrust
upon them by desperate American
businessmen. Oblivious to
potential dangers, the Third World
citizens eagerly devour the gifts of
the Industrialized United States.
Their anxiousness to have
American goods makes them easy
prey.
This revolting practice has been
called a "subtle genocide"; in truth,
it is not all that subtle, as President
Carter discovered. Though he
could have gone much further than
he did — he could have banned the
overseas distribution of products
outlawed in the U.S. — Carter did
do something: He signed an
executive order which would have
required that the State Department
notify foreign governments of the
risks found in products so
dangerous that they cannot be sold
in the U.S.
I say "would have required"
because Reagan nullified the rule.
All that the regulation mandated
was notification. But no more.
Now companies have been freed
from even that bare duty. Our
indifference is inexcuseable for
two reasons. First, Third World
countries cannot help themselves;
they lack even a semblance of
competent regulatory agencies
which can test, issue warnings
about, and ban certain products.
Second, the receptacles of these
products' dumps rarely if ever
learn that the U.S. government has
banned domestic sales of the goods
in question. Deception is rife. The
Velsicol corporation, for example,
obtained an experimental permit
from the government and used it to
persuade Third World nations that
a fertilizer it was producing had
been approved for use in America.
Needless to say, there had been no
such approval. And with Reagan's
action, companies will find it even
easier to deceive unknowing
foreigners.
Not only is this reticence on the
part of American officials
disgusting, it is the height of
hypocrisy. Reagan has taken it
upon himself and the United States
to support repressive right-wing
dictatorships as a means to
frustrate so-called Communist
subversives who will presumably
trample even more human rights
that the reactionary generals.
That policy has always been
controversial, and now Reagan
has contradicted it: At the same
time he pretends to look out for the
welfare of unsuspecting peasants
in backward countries, the
president has given equally
ruthless capitalists a free rein. He
has rescued Third World nations
from Russia's Reds only to sacrifice
them to America's businessmen.
yj RICHARD DEES
3C Editor
1EIDECUED david ross
inrarancrc Business Manager
Bruce Davies News Editor
Kathryn Mason Managing Editor
Ruth Hillhouse Advertising Manager
Jay Grob Sports Editor
John Heaner Fine Arts Editor
Bruce Davies Photography Editor
Kelvin Thompson Back Page Editor
Assistant Editors Debbie Knaff (Fine Arts),
Jeanne Cooper (News), Lisa Yee (Typesetting)
Contributing Editors David Dow, Karen Strecker,
David Butler, Gary Cole, Ron Stutes
News Staff Pam Pearson, Ellen Spraul, Chris Ekren,
Joan Hope, Michael Tinkler, Michael Trachtenberg, Sumit Nanda.
Cecile Closmann, John Hulme, Patty Cleary, Robert Johnson.
Laurie Mango, Mary Ellen Trunko, Sandi Wong,
Pat Nieuwenhuizen, Carl Winstead, Tom Morgan. David Keen.
Ken Mitteldorf, Gus Acevedo, Dennis Owens
Fine Arts Staff Chris Castarieda, Scott B. Solis,
Thorn Glidden, Andy Hathcock, Tom Birch, Barry Watkins,
Franz Brotzen, M. Christopher Boyer, Andy Hathcock
Photography Staff Mike Gladu, Laura Rohwer,
Walter Underwood, Naomi Bullock, Beverly McKinney, Kirk Hughes.
Bill Bailey. Paul Williamson, David Keen, Patricia Wallace.
Rosanna Dill. Tom Glidden. Jay Abramowitz.
Steve Bailey. Dennis Owens
Sports Staff Donald Buckholt. Matt Petersen.
Dave Chilton, Michele Gillespie, Cameron Bird, Bobby Tudor.
Margaret Bennett, Sandy Snyder, Joseph Halcyon
Art Staff Harold Nelson, Randy Furlong, Lynn Lytton
Production Staff Pam Mason. John Van der Put
Mike Dishart, Hank Petri, Steve Bailey, Elif Selvili,
Pam Pearson, Ron Stutes, Steve MacCall, David Miller.
Joan Hope. Patti Wuerz. Scott Solis. Everett Hallford
Circulation Staff Vincent Fonseca. Susan Ripper
The Rice Thresher, the official student newspaper at Rice University since 1916. is published on
Thursdays during the school year, except during examination periods and holidays, by the students of
Rice University. Editorial and business offices are located on the second floor of the Rice Memorial
Center. P.O. Box 1892. Houston, TX 77001. Telephone (713)-527-4801 or 527-4802. Advertising
information available on request. Mail subscription rate: SI 5 per year. The opinions expressed herein arc
not necessarily those of anyone except the writer. Obviously.
* 1981. The Rice Thresher All rights reserved.
The Rice Thresher, April 9, 1981, page 2
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Dees, Richard. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 68, No. 29, Ed. 1 Thursday, April 9, 1981, newspaper, April 9, 1981; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth245470/m1/2/: accessed June 22, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.