University Press (Beaumont, Tex.), Vol. 76, No. 17, Ed. 1 Friday, October 29, 1999 Page: 3 of 6
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Texas Digital Newspaper Program and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the Lamar University.
- Highlighting
- Highlighting On/Off
- Color:
- Adjust Image
- Rotate Left
- Rotate Right
- Brightness, Contrast, etc. (Experimental)
- Cropping Tool
- Download Sizes
- Preview all sizes/dimensions or...
- Download Thumbnail
- Download Small
- Download Medium
- Download Large
- High Resolution Files
- IIIF Image JSON
- IIIF Image URL
- Accessibility
- View Extracted Text
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
UlEditorial
University Press • Friday, October 29,1999 • Page 3
University Press
The opinions that appear in editorials are the official views of the
University Press student management as determined by the UP
Student Editorial Board. Opinions expressed elsewhere on this
page are the views of the writers only and are not necessarily those
of the University Press student management Opinions are not nec-
essarily those of the university administration.
Editorial
Education alternative
TO ‘FIGHT CLUB’ MESSAGE
The movie “Fight Club” has been described by some as vio-
lently pornographic. Reviews have criticized the movie because
of the violent mentality of the male characters who use violence
to cope with their feelings of frustration and alienation in society.
This disturbing mentality is one level of the movie, but the
critics miss the larger issue. The movie is about society waking up
from its mind-numbing state and realizing that people are not
defined by their possessions and superficial accomplishments.
Tyler Durden, the character portrayed by Brad Pitt, says the
things you own, end up owning you. He says it’s only after you’ve
lost everything that you’re free to do anything.
In the movie, the Fight Club represents this freedom from
society’s expectations, restrictions and formalities. The violence
is the tool the characters use to wake themselves from their
dazed state.
In the movie, several characters turn to psychological thera-
py first; but it only pulls them deeper into an oblivious state of
mind. Consequently, they resort to violence.
The question viewers must ask themselves is whether there
is a way to reach this enlightenment without resorting to vio-
lence.
The answer is yes, there is an alternative, although it does
not have the same appeal that face bashing and bone crunching
seem to have. Knowledge, however unglamorous, is the key to
true self-awareness.
When students begin college, they have a very narrow view
of the world. Their beliefs and values are based on what their
parents have told them to believe. They do not question why
they think the way they do, they just do. Like the characters in
the film, they tend to define themselves by what they own. They
don’t question society’s materialistic values.
It is only when students are given knowledge that they real-
ize how much bigger their lives are than the name brand clothes
they wear or the kind of car they drive.
Education and knowledge also give the wisdom that the
characters in the movie find through violence.
The movie is brilliant if it is looked at metaphorically.
* But, on the other hand, the movie is a great failure if taken
literally.
A literal interpretation of the movie could result in the glo-
rification of the violence by the very people that the movie
should enlighten.
This movie has an important message, but it must be inter-
preted with the meaning in mind that the producers intended.
University Press
©1999 University Press
News
Editor.....................................................Shontta Stevens
Managing Editor..................................Christina Miner
Copy Editor..................................................Raj Kanuri
Staff Writers...........................................Sylvia Streeter,
Lori Gayle Lovelace, Jennifer Ravey,
Ashley Salter, Matt Gorris,
Josh Cobb, Natasha Dailey, David Ball,
Daisy Hargraves, Jason Rahmani,
Kuntal Kotnis, Rajesh Subramaniam
Graphics...................................................Leah Guillory
Photography
Photo Editor.........................................Henrik Sandsjo
Photographers......................................Rachel McCain,
Mukund Yallambalse
Advertising
Assistants..................................................Amber Willis
Director................................................Howard Perkins
Assistant Director...............................Andy Coughlan
Advertising Manager..............................Linda Barrett
Letters to the editor
policy
Individuals who wish to speak out on issues should send
a letter fewer than 400 words in length to Letters to the
Editor, P.O. Box 10055, LU Station, Beaumont
77710, or drop letters off at our offices in 200 Setzer
Student Center, The writer’s name, address, phone num-
ber and social security number must accompany each
letter. Letters received without this information cannot
be printed. Letters rhay be edited for length, grammar,
style and possible libel. Opinions expressed in letters are
not necessarily those of the UP student management.
Letters by the same writer on the same subject will not be
published. Poetry, reprints, anonymous letters and reli-
gious debates will not be published.
•tVE^YIU'MO W4S FINE
"UU-lGXTDmfCUFSU
Bioqc-TWEN l pfcro?
him CANW4NPv)lEr
9CPTC£ ICST ANmM...
‘...the dopes are at the White House gate’
Fame plus beauty doesn’t equal presidential timber
Our presidency, it has been said, is the
toughest job in the world. One person repre-
senting 273 million. One person who can rally
the nation and inspire its dreams, who can
shape law and negotiate treaties, send sol-
diers to war or rain nuclear fire down from
heaven.
You try to imagine the person in whom
you would vest such awful power and hum-
bling responsibility and it is only natural that
your thoughts turn immediately to Cybill
Shepherd. No? Well, how about Warren
Beatty? Donald Trump?
Hey, all of them have been hinting with
varying degrees of coyness that they’d like to
be your next president. Which brings us to the
topic of today’s diatribe: What the heck is
going on here?
I wake up one morning and American
politics has become the Ted Mack Amateur
Hour. A bunch of beautiful people who’ve
never held elective office, never forged coali-
tion, never made law, never done much of
anything except be beautiful, suddenly decide
that they are quite qualified for the presiden-
cy of the United States.
A friend of mine blames this on Bill
Clinton. I figure, why not? Seems like every
bad thing can be blamed on Clinton. Or, fail-
ing that, Richard Nixon. Anyway, my friend’s
theory is that big Bill has lowered the bar.
Folks figure that if this Gomer can be presi-
dent — twice elected, yet! — anybody can.
Me, I think it’s a waste of time trying to
figure out who pioneered the notion that any
Commentary
Clarence Page
Tribune Media Syndicated Columnist
dope can be president. The bottom line is, the
dopes are at the White House gate.
It was simpler in the days when the only
people who ran for president were political
pros, standup comics and the occasional
humor columnist. They all spent a few months
making you laugh — some of them intention-
ally. Then one of the pros went out and won
the election, which seemed only fair, given
that he was usually a guy who’d formed his
exploratory committee back in kindergarten.
And now? Now Warren Beatty thinks he
has what it takes to sit in the big chair. Hey,
maybe he does.
On the other hand, we wouldn’t even be
having this conversation if his name weren’t
Warren Beatty, would we? That speaks vol-
umes about how pervasive the culture of
celebrity has become. There was a time when
a famous person’s only job was to be a famous
person, signing autographs and waving at the
crowd in vague distraction. Fame was the
nearest thing we had to royalty.
Now fame is even more. Now celebrities
set our standards, mold our tastes, establish
our goals. They are the vessel of our desires,
the mirror in which we see ourselves, incom-
plete and struggling to become as thin, gra-
cious, composed, smart.sexy' —jiawless as
the image that stares back at us. Fame
becomes a value judgment, an element of
moralforra sign of worth: •» _ _•
So, at a time when it’s not uncommon for
an actor to testify before Congress on some
issue he or she first learned about while
preparing for a movie role, maybe it makes a
certain amount of sense for a famous person
to ponder a run for the presidency based sole-
ly upon the fact of the fame. The lines blur.
The fantasy factories" merge. Hollywood
Boulevard intersects Wall Street intersects
Pennsylvania Avenue.
In the end; of coilfse, a political pro will
be our next president. Count on it.
Makes me pity the celebrity wannabes.
You get the sense that they’ve mistaken the
sideshow for the real show, that they think
this thing could happen. President Shepherd
entertaining a foreign king. The name
“Trump” in gold letters on the White House
gate. They seem not to recognize all this for
the millennial silliness it is*.
More to the point, they seem not to real-
ize that fame is a reward that invariably takes
revenge. What was it Public Enemy said?
“Don’t believe the hype.”
Warren, Cybill and The Donald should
have listened.
The only thing sadder than people believ-
ing too deeply in an image is an image believ-
ing too deeply in itself.
Academic Advising
Taking only core courses becomes folly
Each year, a substantial number of stu-
dents transfer to Lamar University from one
of the local campuses or from some other
junior college.
In many cases these students will have
taken most or all of the courses in the core cur-
riculum and virtually nothing else. In addition,
a fair number of students at Lamar University
are taking only core courses each semester.
The argument is made here that these students
are usually making poor choices.
The student who is undecided sees sub-
stantial risk associated with taking a course
toward a major. The student understands
that such a course may not count toward the
degree finally chosen, and both money and
time may be wasted.
All true, but there are also substantial
risks in not taking any courses toward a
major. In general, the student who takes only
core courses for much longer than one semes-
ter is almost always making a mistake. How
significant a mistake depends upon the
degree plan the student eventually chooses.
In the College of Engineering, many
courses have very strict prerequisites. An
engineering major who completes the core
without also having completed Calculus I and
II and Physics 2425 can easily find it impossi-
ble to enroll in enough courses to be a full-
time student.
Failure to be a full-time student can affect
eligibility for scholarships, financial aid, vet-
erans’ benefits and medical insurance.
All the natural and computational sci-
ences begin with a two- or three-course
sequence that is a prerequisite for virtually
every course that follows, he student who
completes the core without having also com-
pleted that sequence is in trouble.
Business degrees also have a fundamental
set of business courses that are prerequisites
for the advanced courses. Taking only major
courses is but a nuissance if they only last for
one semester, but it can be painful if stretched
to four semesters.
Thus, it is important that the student
choose a major as soon as possible. Being
aware of the problem, the General Studies
Center, in conjunction with the Career
Center, use counseling and interest testing to
help undecided students choose a major.
The colleges of engineering and business
also have undecided majors within their
respective colleges and must help these stu-
dents make their final selections.
In my opinion, if you cannot decide on a
major, then try to choose a field or at least a
college.
Granted, an early choice of major may
not be the final and best choice, and you may
change your major yet again. In this event*
most degrees have electives and some or all of
the courses taken in the discarded major may
be applicable to the new degree.
On the other hand, they may not; but
until you choose a path, you are merely run-
ning in place. Such running in place for more
than one semester is probably a mistake.
UP COMMENTARY
Myers Foreman
Guest columnist
Director - Engineering Advisement
Center
i
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.
Matching Search Results
View six places within this issue that match your search.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.
Stevens, Shontta. University Press (Beaumont, Tex.), Vol. 76, No. 17, Ed. 1 Friday, October 29, 1999, newspaper, October 29, 1999; Beaumont, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth500587/m1/3/?q=a+message+about+food+from+the+president: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Lamar University.