Search Views


Browse Archives

Views

On Being the 'Other'

March 31, 2005

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

When one interviews for a tenure-track position at Virginia Military Institute, the process often seems more like an orientation session than an exploration of a suitable match between the interviewee's credentials and the mission of the institute. From the dean to the last of one's future colleagues, the candidate is reminded once and again of the "unique military atmosphere" that defines VMI; the requirement that all faculty wear a uniform, the fact that all uniformed faculty and staff adhere to military protocol, and that one does not refer to the VMI campus as such, but rather as the VMI Post.

No new faculty member could possibly come to VMI and feel unprepared … at least until she leaves Post for her first professional conference, ready to claim her hard-earned place among her colleagues. 

I had, after all, arrived at the conference with the ink barely dry on the coveted paper reading "Doctor of Philosophy." My name tag would no longer read "ABD," and having completed the rites of passage, I had been promoted from the student panels to the regular sessions, the academic equivalent of graduating from the children’s to the adult table at Thanksgiving.

Donning my first professional conference badge with my pristine title and affiliation, I descended into the welcoming cocktail party with all the innocence of a 1,400-pound Miura bull entering the ring, completely unprepared for the reception I was about to receive from my colleagues already abuzz in the ballroom below.

"Oh, my God!  You teach at VMI?  That must be (we)ird," said the Queer Theorist. (Postmodernists use inventive spelling to distinguish themselves from less enlightened non-Postmodernists, curling themselves up in metaphorical fetal positions within the safety of perpetual parentheses, superfluous slashes, and itinerant italics.) Diving for the last piece of Camembert as if it had some protective quality similar to that of garlic in the presence of vampires, he grasped his sherry glass by the stem with all the strength he could muster, then held the Camembert between his front teeth in breathless anticipation of my response.

Catching my  own breath just long enough to check for full auditory comprehension, and at the risk of sounding Clintonesque in the most unflattering of ways, I dared to reply: "It depends what your definition of (we)ird is."

"Well, you know."

Actually, I didn't know. I had no idea. But it took me little time to learn, and by the conclusion of my third conference, I had developed a theory. We are the "other" of American academe, and by "us," I am not referring only to VMI, but also to our colleagues at The Citadel -- both military academies with a small "a" -- as well as the service academies themselves.

We share a similar professional environment, where academic and military cultures meet, where students struggle to stay awake in class, not from a weekend of partying, but from a weekend of maneuvers, and then march to dinner in well-formed lines; no slouching, no talking, no one out of step with the cadence of drum rolls reverberating off the walls of barracks.  We represent the khaki green camouflaged by the blue, yellow and white within the Derridean Quilt -- mort à la différence.   

It would seem that the liberal hegemony of the ivory tower, obviously compelled to deconstruct the academic-military hybrid, has instead managed to formulate its own binary opposition -- "us/them" -- by refusing to acknowledge a third space defined by neither gender nor ethnicity. None of them would think of asking a colleague from India what it is like to go to class in a sari or a visiting scholar from China how he feels about teaching children of Communists, lest they be accused, tried and burned at the stake of Edward Said's Orientalism.

Yet fascination with the outward manifestations of our "otherness" is fair game. While they have been denouncing the patriarchy, assorted empires and most of Western Civilization as a whole for the marginalization of others, they have taken it upon themselves to create the paradigm for both communal identity and acceptable societal parameters of our teaching/research culture in their own image.

"So what's it like to teach in a uniform?” asked the Post-Colonialist as he turned ever so slightly, revealing UC-Whatever on his nametag.

"Gee, I guess I've never thought about it. You first; what's it like to teach in jeans and Birkenstocks?"

Silence (and no more Camembert on the plate); he has no answer simply because there could be no answer to such an inane question. Obviously the Post-Colonialist links his professional persona to his teaching and his research, not to his wardrobe. Who among us does not? 

But the professional activity of academics that teach at a military school always comes second -- if at all -- to curiosity about the institutional aspects of our positions, especially in juxtaposition with the accepted archetype of the American professor, molded by the political activity of the sixties and cultivated by the visibility of the left-wing power structure within higher education.  

"I think it would be far too stressful for me to teach children of Republicans," the Multiculturalist commented over cappuccino in Padua, after expounding on profiling as a bigoted, narrow-minded policy of Eurocentrists.  

I was tempted to ask if children of Republicans, indeed, young Republicans themselves or -- God forbid -- conservative professors were forced to stay in a closet of their own at her college, whose mission statement, after all, stipulates diversity in regards to race, gender and religion, but makes no mention of political affiliation. Would she have them wear a bright red R lest they enroll in her classes or sit next to her in the faculty lounge?

I shuddered to think how any of us would react to a colleague making the same statement, substituting party preference with an ethnic, gender or religious denomination: "It would be far to stressful for me to teach children of a gay couple … to teach children of Arab immigrants … to teach children of "fill-in-the- blank" (then run for cover). Yet no one else at our table seemed to view her statement as bigoted or even the slightest bit outrageous, as the comment encompassed a group considered marginal but not conceded full minority privileges; no hyphen, no prefix, no slashes or parentheses.

"So," remarked the Feminist, cutting her breakfast sausage into tiny little morsels with both purpose and vengeance, "you lived in Spain during the Franco years and now you're back to fascism." The effortlessness with which she had established her analogy between a totalitarian regime imposed through a military coup and the academic environment in which some of her colleagues and their students have freely chosen, far surpassed arrogance to border frighteningly on ignorance. I imagined her at countless rallies, proudly marching behind her sign "Keep Your Laws Off My Body," and wondered how many times she had become infuriated with the small-mindedness of those who do not respect the right of each individual to do with her life as she chooses.

By the time I met the Feminist, however, I had gone from being caught off guard, to sarcasm, to incredulity and all to no avail, so it was she who became the receiver of my wrath, because there are -- as I pointed out to her -- fundamental differences between "them" and "us" and the students we teach.

We drive to Post each day, some of us dressed in a uniform, yes, but all of us wondering which of our students will be kept out of harm’s way and able to return for their 10-year class reunion. In the "small a" academies, we receive out-processing notification for cadets called to active duty with their Reserve or National Guard units before we can acknowledge one last salute and wish them a speedy return from
Guantánamo or Kuwait or Iraq.

We send make-up work to those who have had a negative reaction to their Anthrax or smallpox vaccine as their units await pending deployment orders.  And be it at West Point or The Citadel, in Colorado, Annapolis, or VMI, we all open our email each day holding our breath, hoping not to see “RE: Taps” in the subject line, to mourn yet again the loss of a former cadet at the hands of terrorist enemies (at VMI we have received six such messages since September 11, 2001).   

Ours is the honor of teaching young men and women who have vowed, like generations before them, to uphold and defend those liberties all Americans hold so dear but too often take for granted. Many of them may be asked to pay the ultimate sacrifice so that the Queer Theorist can continue to speculate over wine and cheese; so that the Post-Colonialist may never have to wear a uniform, unless it be of his own choosing; so that the Multiculturalist may continue to enjoy a cappuccino in Padua, some Bordeaux in Paris, or a mate in Patagonia; and to ensure that no one ever deny the Feminist her First Amendment right to label them "fascists".

But the differences between college students and cadets, mainstream teaching assignments and ours, extend beyond the temporal and spatial characteristics of our respective professional environments and are best represented by the ethical code and personal sacrifices that intrinsically define the four-year cadetship. Cadets live by an Honor Code, which they themselves enforce.  They answer questions truthfully, even if it means personal embarrassment or disciplinary consequences, because they have vowed not to lie as part of their Honor Code, and they leave a twenty-dollar bill laying on the street if it is has not fallen from their pockets, lest they violate their pledge not to steal.  Having sworn to choose “integrity over personal gain," cadets do not copy, plagiarize, or cheat in any other way, and the few that do face the shame of dismissal. Professors at VMI do not take attendance, inflate grades or even proctor exams.

The cadets’ rigid schedule requires a strong mind, body, and spirit, and the discipline needed to meet expectations permeates the classroom atmosphere as much as the parade ground or the obstacle course. Cadets thrive on inquiry and debate, exuberantly entering the open forum of intellectual exchange where their opinions, contributions, and inquest are not only accepted, but welcomed. They realize that understanding another language, other cultures, and respect for different value systems and ideologies will be as vital to their success, maybe even survival, as the firing of a weapon or the flying of a plane.

As for me, I continue to attend as many professional conferences as possible, although admittedly I now descend upon each welcoming cocktail party with the watchfulness of a matador waiting for the Miura to charge instead of the blissful unawareness of the bull himself. Upon returning to Lexington, my Otherness reconfirmed, I often go back to the place I first saw the Corps form and watch in awe just as I did the day of my interview.

It is not the uniformity of the ranks, but the individual commitment and selflessness of each cadet there that inspires the profound respect and admiration I hold for them. This nation owes so much of its greatness to a series of Others -- there have been many. Our cadets are this century’s campus Radicals; I revel in their Otherness and they teach me to cherish my own.

Mary Ann Dellinger is an associate professor of Spanish at Virginia Military Institute by choice. She wears a uniform to class, responds to "Ma'am", and has been complimented on her crisp salute by several members of the VMI Corps of Cadets. The Postmodernists featured in this piece are real.

Intellectual Affairs will return on Tuesday.

 

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments on On Being the 'Other'

  • VMI has scandals, too
  • Posted by Not a Plagerist on March 31, 2005 at 1:39pm EST
  • Despite what you say, VMI students are have cheated, lied, and plagiarized before.

  • VMI
  • Posted by Walter Galanty on March 31, 2005 at 2:38pm EST
  • VMI and VMI cadets are not perfect but human and reflect an attitude in responsibility that is often missing from the nation at-large. I applaud Ms. Dellinger and thank her for being a part of VMI.

  • Posted by Citizen Soldier , Duty -Honor -Country on March 31, 2005 at 2:51pm EST
  • VMI is a rare treasure oft times unappreachated.

  • Actually, weird is
  • Posted by Paris on March 31, 2005 at 3:43pm EST
  • a pretty good description for working somewhere that your students die on a regular basis. Most of us can go for years without that happening.

    And given how suspicious US high school students are of the first amendment, the bit about how your students must go risk their lives overseas to protect US freedoms is also weird.

    Enlisting in the military is one widely available route for working class students to access higher education, so I can respect the choices that they are making. I just hope that you are teaching them better critical thinking skills than you are exercising yourself.

  • Fighting truisms with truisms
  • Posted by Sherman Fleischer on March 31, 2005 at 3:44pm EST
  • Perhaps some of the contemporary academic features the author mocks (placing portions of words in parentheses, etc.) have become hopelessly stale, but her rebuttal -- essentially, "Men have died so that you can be postmodern" -- is equally, if not more, hackneyed and lame. As an outsider, my guess is that this is exactly the kind of old-fashioned and simpleminded thinking that academics on liberal arts campuses suspect goes on at military academies.

  • VMI is not the Military
  • Posted by Blue Patriot on March 31, 2005 at 4:13pm EST
  • I suspect some of the reaction--if not all--is because you are at VMI, not because you are at a military academy. VMI has fought recent and visible battles to deny women access to its institution and to indoctrinate specific religious beliefs. The service academies are much more sensitive to issues of diversity and inclusion, "don't ask, don't tell" notwithstanding. In fact, in my experience, some of the staunchest supporters of rigid enforcement of sexual harassment policies and mandatory training on awareness and prevention are ex-military. You might want to consider the message your institution has sent about its values before assuming your interlocutors have an issue with the armed forces.

  • Posted by VMIBeef95 on April 1, 2005 at 8:29am EST
  • Bravo!!!!

  • Virginia Military Institute
  • Posted by FDRLHIL on April 1, 2005 at 10:27am EST
  • When my son announced he wanted to go to VMI, I was pleased because of its fine reputation. Then, I saw the spartan facilities and shook my head. I heard about the study that found that the lifestyle at VMI was worse than most prisons. I read the school paper, went on visits and met the cadets and the faculty. I saw my "Baby Boy" mature into a remarkable man. I honestly believe that Virginia Military Institute is just what some boys and girls need to become the adults that this "weird" world needs. I AM ONE VERY PROUD MOM!

  • Posted by Legal Alien on April 1, 2005 at 10:42am EST
  • The notion that the military are "defending our freedoms" is usually inacurate and often absurd. More often than not, the U.S. military is ATTACKING rather than defending. Bombing innocent civilians into oblivion is not an act of defense. Many of your students will graduate, be deployed overseas, then find themselves depriving others of not just their freedoms, but their lives.

  • The author should join the real military
  • Posted by Larry on April 1, 2005 at 10:43am EST
  • This is true. VMI is not the military, and many employers I know are aware of its problems with cheating and won’t hire students.

    Portraying the military as homophobic serves purposes of two opposite sides of the spectrum. On the one hand, some like to show that it proves that the military is nothing more than a bunch of uneducated hateful red-necks. On the other hand, some like to show that it “takes no crap” from the “Northeastern Liberals” and is therefore, good. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle and individual soldiers will tell you of their interactions with gay people over the years. (E.g. veterans tell me how people in their platoon came out of the closet, and they had no problem, or feeling sorry for someone who was the victim of a witch-hunt.) In recent months, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces and the at least one military court of appeals have attempted to apply Lawrence v. Texas to servicemen without infringing on military discipline. Likewise, the pentagon has begun the process of transforming the UCMJ to a post-Lawrence world.

    This didn’t happen at VMI. VMI is not the military.

    The author is fooling herself if she thinks her students are uniform-wearing angels. If students want to join the military, there are many ways to do it which don’t involve pretending. The mother of her son, while definitely biased in favor of her son with his spiffy uniform is not living in the real world.

    If the author really wants the military experience she probably can still join the military. Her expertise could be of value somewhere. There is a slightly higher risk of injury, however. And she can't just tender her letter of resignation when she gets an offer from a more prestigious institution. However, VMI is a bunch of kids running around pretending.

  • Posted by Duncan Richter at VMI on April 1, 2005 at 11:31am EST
  • There are a lot of misconceptions about VMI. It's true that VMI is not the military. It is not West Point, and most of our graduates do not serve in the military. But it hardly follows from this that VMI cadets are just pretending. They know very well what VMI is and what it is not. Another misconception is that everyone at VMI is the same. The cadets are not all Republicans or the children of Republicans, and the faculty is certainly not all Republican. People come here for a variety of reasons. For every controversial decision made by the school in recent years there have been cadets, alumni, and faculty members who opposed those decisions. VMI is different from other schools, but some people here are more different than others.

  • Truisms & Critical Thinking
  • Posted by Eric Kaltrider , Cadet at VMI on April 1, 2005 at 12:36pm EST
  • Thank you, ma'am, for your words and your support. At the risk of brevity's inevitable tendency toward generalization, you have described VMI overall in a way that gives a just reply to the highly-perceptive critics who understand VMI all too well by way of their secondhand knowledge.
    In response to Sherman Fleischer: I'm not sure I understand what you're trying to say about old-fashioned thinking, or about triteness in the professor's mention of men dying; but to this cadet at least, there's nothing outdated or hackneyed about fighting for my country whether everyone appreciates it or not. In fact, the "why" of risking our lives in military service is a very fresh and personal consideration for each one of us. Secondly, you referred to the professor's remarks as "fighting truisms" and as a "rebuttal." I would like to assert that the professor's words were not a rebuttal, nor a fight against "-isms" true or false. It was not intended as a rebuttal to disprove any argument, but as a witty retort to express that VMI is too frequently considered fair game for extremely narrow stereotypes and exaggerated assumptions. Perhaps most ironic of all is that the loudest voices for cultural open-mindedness often come out with the most negative, restrictive labels and generalizations for us without a second thought.
    To all, I would like to say this: VMI is an Institute best defined and understood by the lives and character of its Corps of Cadets, not by the political or legal battles the Administration wages. It is as impossible to generalize about us with currently popular labels as it is inappropriate to deprecate any other group with an old-fashioned epithet.

  • Posted by Mary ann Dellinger on April 1, 2005 at 12:57pm EST
  • Thanks to everyone who has responded to my article both privately and on-line and especially to IHE for its publication. Welcome home, VMI Marine Reservists (Lynchburg Unit). See you soon! SEMPER FI. MAD

  • Brilliant!
  • Posted by Mark Lusk , Associate Provost at University of Georgia on April 1, 2005 at 2:54pm EST
  • What a refreshing article. I loved every word. I am so bored with navel gazing in academe; not to mention the sheer hypocrisy of those who would ostracize cadets. At my university, there is a great deal of respect for our ROTC cadet corps. Although Athens is perhaps the most progressive town in the south, there is still a healthy appreciation for you men and women who serve the United States in uniform. Good job.

  • Posted by young prof on April 1, 2005 at 5:30pm EST
  • Having been a tenure-track assistant professor at the U.S. Naval Academy for several years before moving on, I read the article with interest. I'd just like to point out that I never experienced the type of put-downs from fellow academics that Ms. Dellinger did. To be fair, I am not in the same discipline as Dr. Dellinger, so perhaps it is unfair to make comparisons. I should also point out that, paradoxically, the Naval Academy appears to be less militaristic in its approach to its professoriate than VMI. For just one example, civilian professors at Navy do not wear uniforms, and would certainly never salute students unless they were in the military themselves. Finally, I found the students at Navy to be excellent (as does Ms. Dellinger) but nowhere near as monolithically conservative as may be the case at VMI. Overall, I think it is plausible that the service academies, although part of the "real" military (whatever that means), may foster a less militaristic culture than VMI and the Citadel. My .02 cents.

  • VMI from a cadet's point of view
  • Posted by Cadet06 on April 1, 2005 at 8:39pm EST
  • As a cadet, I have had the same experiences as Dr. Dellinger. My father's co-worker, a very liberal lesbian from New York City, immediately condemned me for going to 'an old-fashioned redneck school that hates women'. First of all, I am a democrat. VMI has a much broader range of views than most other schools, and professors encourage open debate without fear of backlash. They are moderators, not advocates.
    Because cadets all dress the same and all have short haircuts and are shaved, it is impossible to stereotype someone. I know my fellow cadets for their personalities, their attitudes, their accomplishments, etc.
    To the first person who replied, I would like to say that there will always be liars and cheaters, no matter where you go. But at VMI, they will not be here long. If I see someone cheat or hear someone lie, I must report it the same day or I will be drummed out just like them. Cadets patrol their own. This has not created chaos or 'betrayal'. Cadets believe in the honor code and when someone violates it, they have betrayed the corps and are no longer one of us. They are the betrayer.

  • Posted by Adam H. on April 2, 2005 at 5:56am EST
  • Well spoken. Every bit of my respect is granted to those cadets of all Military Academies who have made the decision to put their country before themselves knowing that their ultimate sacrifice, their life, may be for some idiot that burns an American Flag because majority ruled in a Democratic election and he/she did not get their selfish way. Many may make comments regarding Mrs. Dellinger's article stating why "it is not the real military." No, VMI isnt the "real military". VMI is an Academic Military Institution that instills Honor, Integrity, Structure, Discipline, and many more characteristics that a cadet with a sense of service needs to suceed, as well as face those that wish to question their motives who take the life they live in such a beautiful country for granted.

  • Posted by Rob at VMI '70 on April 2, 2005 at 8:30am EST
  • Well said, Prof. Dellinger! Having been a cadet during the Vietnam War, when cadets were considered as "other" as faculty members now seem to be (perhaps by the same people: then radical students, now radical professors), her descriptions ring very true.

    To those who say VMI is pretending or not the 'real' military, you are right trivially and wrong essentially. Right in that VMI is not a part of the federal military services (except to the extent many -- in my day all -- cadets are enrolled in ROTC), wrong in that VMI uses its military framework to teach self-discipline, develop physical and moral courage and leadership, and inculcate a sense of honor and respect for others that is the mark of a fully-actualized adult.

    In my experience at VMI, faculty members' political views, when they could be determined, ranged from quite liberal to reactionary. Similarly with cadet's views. There were even those of us involved in the civil rights movement.

  • ROTC
  • Posted by Cadet06 on April 2, 2005 at 11:13am EST
  • All cadets are required to be enrolled in ROTC for the entirety of their cadetship and are prepared to be military officers.

  • ROTC
  • Posted by rob at VMI '70 on April 2, 2005 at 2:32pm EST
  • Not to put a fine point on it, but while everyone must take ROTC classes even today, as I understand it cadets are not required to be contractually obligated to the Army, Navy, Air Force or Marines as we were back in the Old Corps. In those days, seconds and firsts (except a few who were not physically eligible) were actually in the reserves and had special military draft classification.

  • Well Done
  • Posted by AJ Lynch on April 3, 2005 at 6:35pm EDT
  • Wow, such a well written story. Thanks for sharing your eye-opening experience. Unfortunately, it's a familiar but all too common tale. One wonders what the typical professor will look and sound like in 40-50 years. I suspect they will be very different than today's self-involved and close-minded clowns.

  • Wierd in Paris
  • Posted by Neo on April 3, 2005 at 6:35pm EDT
  • Dear Paris;
    "a pretty good description for working somewhere that your students die on a regular basis. Most of us can go for years without that happening.

    And given how suspicious US high school students are of the first amendment, the bit about how your students must go risk their lives overseas to protect US freedoms is also weird.

    Enlisting in the military is one widely available route for working class students to access higher education, so I can respect the choices that they are making. I just hope that you are teaching them better critical thinking skills than you are exercising yourself."

    And this is your example of critical thinking? Talk about wierd....

  • Posted by Adam on April 3, 2005 at 6:36pm EDT
  • Becoming "the other" is becoming all too common. The true liberal minds - those that are open to new ideas as well as open to re-examining old ones that fell out of fashion in the 70's - are made to be quiet and not ask those obvious but uncomfortable questions that point out the blatant contradictions of the new regime. We witness and feel the repression of an elitist clique, warned not to impede their near-religious quest to reformat the Western mind. Apostacy in such an environment should be celebrated.

  • Good Read...
  • Posted by Mike on April 3, 2005 at 7:23pm EDT
  • Just because one wears a uniform ("real" military or otherwise) does not mean they instanly lack critical thinking skills. That is simply absurd.

    As a Texas Aggie (and former member of the Corps of Cadets), we have a saying, "From the outside looking in, you can't understand it; from the inside looking out, you can't explain it."

    I think that based on my experiences, cadets and alumni of VMI can probably say the same thing.

    Everyone has different motivations to enter the environment that VMI has to offer, from going into the military, developing leadership skills and time management, or perhaps to simply be part of something bigger than yourself. Some will never comprehend that.

  • military
  • Posted by concerned on April 3, 2005 at 10:43pm EDT
  • Liberals always fall back on the canard that "soldiers kill babies'. If not for the military who will protect us from those who wish to kill us?

  • The ignorance on display by some in the comments is appaling
  • Posted by Steve VMI '91 on April 3, 2005 at 10:44pm EDT
  • As a member of the class of '91 and a veteran of the Armed Forces (and current civilian employee thereof), I take issue with the comments of Blue Patriot and Larry. VMI is "not the military" in a strict sense, sure, but if you think it's pretend, you need to pull your collective heads out of your fourth points of contact. VMI is, like Norwich and the Citadel, and indeed much like the service academies, an institution devoted to producing servants of this nation, most of whom serve their country in the military. A "pretend" institution does not produce a George C. Marshall, a George S. Patton, or Chesty Puller, to name but a few of the distinguished American warriors who matriculated at the Institute. You two could stand to learn a few things about both the Institute and the military before trying to pontificate on both.

  • ADFA
  • Posted by Alan E Brain , Mr on April 3, 2005 at 10:44pm EDT
  • I've had the privilege and honour of teaching in a small capacity at the Australian Defence Force Academy.

    No uniforms for the instructors - but otherwise not too dissimilar from the VMI.

    Right now, I'm still waiting to see if any of my former students perished when the Helo giving aid in Indonesia went down the other day. The Australian Defence Forces are rather smaller than the US's, about 50,000 all up, so the loss of 9 people would be like 200 for you. Of course, to the Mothers, Fathers, Sisters, Brothers, Sons or Daughters of those who died, such numbers are meaningless.

    I do sometimes wonder at the attitudes expressed by some of the commenters here. The lack of basic humanity, typified by the words:
    "The notion that the military are “defending our freedoms” is usually inacurate and often absurd."

    Some in the military are too busy helping with vaccination campaigns, or providing clean water, or just plain food. And getting shot at for their pains.

    It's bad enough when the sniping is coming from external enemies, but when the kids also have to take verbal abuse from people who've never done anything constructive to help in their entire lives... still, I think they prefer that to the missiles, bombs and bullets.

  • Posted by Chas S. Clifton on April 4, 2005 at 4:39am EDT
  • "Paris" write, "a pretty good description for working somewhere that your students die on a regular basis."

    Of course, for those of us teaching in large state universities, we often see students die on a regular basis from alcohol poisoning, suicide, car wrecks, and so on. Apparently those deaths don't count to Paris.

  • military "a"cademies
  • Posted by Richard A. Vail, ph.d. , Dr. at Not any more...I work for a living now on April 4, 2005 at 4:39am EDT
  • The "private" military "a"cademies fill an important void that exists. They teach and uphold the same traditions that exist in the particular service academies (i.e. USMA, Annapolis, & Colorado Springs), but additionally give an excellent education. Graduates from Norwich University (Military College of Vermont), VMI, the Citadel (the Military College of South Carolina) as well as Texas A & M, serve a vital role in that they suppliment the graduates of the "regular" service academies and provide regular service officers(this is an important distinction) as opposed to RESERVE commisioned officers (10% of the graduates are given regular commissions in the US military, with the remainder holding reserve commissions). This provides the US military a far broader selection of the people than are found in the service Academies. As a former US Marine, I had the distinct priviledge to serve with graduates of VMI, Norwich as well as the Citadel (USMC isn't as popular with T A&M grads). I found all of them to both professional and dedicated to the cause they and I served (the defense of freedome--USMC 1st to go, last to know, we will defend to the death your RIGHT to be misinformed--lol).

    Sincerely,
    Richard A. Vail, Ph.D., LCPL USMC (med ret)
    Baltimore, MD, USA

  • Posted by Charlie on April 4, 2005 at 4:39am EDT
  • This is an excellent article. I'm at one of the "normal" universities, and I don't know how we got this worthless lot of parasites we call faculty. One day there were normal bright people; and it seemed like only the next day that they had been replaced, pod style, by a bunch of hippies with weird ideas.

    I had never considered sending my children to a small a. Now I'm going to investigate that ASAP.

    Charlie

  • Posted by Bob, VMI '73 on April 4, 2005 at 4:43am EDT
  • I' sort of amused by the Liberals who can't accept the existence of military colleges. I'd rather have our colleges each doing something a little different, because you don't know what the future will demand from our citizens and leaders. A variety of experience and outlooks will be mighty useful. Much less flexible is the rather monolithic, single-lens perspective of most of academe, whose solution to challenges is, apparently, to whine and snivel about the situation, then neatly sidestep the problem by placing it an conveniently-named bin (and then ordering more brie).

    My experience at VMI in the late '60s and early '70s exposed me to a greater diversity of opinion than you'll find on most campuses today. I don't think I turned out too bad.

    As I read over my comment, I had one final thought: perhaps the greatest source of dissonance many lefties have with VMI is the honor code, which doesn't square with their moral relativity, which allows them to finesse ethical issues.

  • Thank you Dr. Dellinger
  • Posted by Laurie K. on April 4, 2005 at 4:48am EDT
  • What a wonderful, and exceedingly truthful, piece you have written. As someone who is to the left of the center of the political spectrum, it pains me greatly to see what an intolerant, left-wing echo chamber the academic world has become. Such a teaching and learning environment, bereft of the kind of intellectual diversity in which left and right may meet and come to know each other better, breeds mediocrity, among faculty as well as students. The fact that many of the commenters so strongly resemble the "characters" in the piece without seeming to realize it, says volumes.

    Laurie K.

  • Posted by T. H. A. Edwards on April 4, 2005 at 7:44am EDT
  • Many of the comments here by the aggrieved left illustrate the problems of academia just as well as the author's comments. The more I see of my colleague's blatant political bias and closed-mindedness, the better Texas A&M looks for my kids. As one of my students pointed out the other day, it seems to be de rigeur to become a sarcastic lefty once you get a PhD.

  • ADFA (Update)
  • Posted by Alan E Brain , Mr on April 4, 2005 at 9:57am EDT
  • In memoriam:
    Lt Matthew Goodall.
    (ADFA 1999)
    and his 8 colleagues, the ones who I didn't teach.

  • Posted by Larry on April 4, 2005 at 10:41am EDT
  • Since Professor Edwards has not provided specifics about which comments are by the “aggrieved left” it is difficult to argue with him. The main criticisms here are of VMI, and, what many consider to be its pseudo-military atmosphere. As many have pointed out, and I can attest to, the "real" military is different than VMI.

    Personally, I wouldn’t send my kid to Texas A&M because they see more hung up on various traditions (which always involve drinking) than they do on actually learning. Now, Professor Edwards, can you explain how my disdain for drinking or my disdain people who like to dress up in uniforms and pretend to be in the military is “leftist”?

  • Lighten Up Larry
  • Posted by T. H. A. Edwards on April 4, 2005 at 12:05pm EDT
  • Larry,
    I was mostly referring on Paris' comments.
    I have no problem with your position on drinking. I do wonder why you decided to include it in this discussion, though. Texas A&M students drink no more or less than anyplace else I've attended or taught. Are there stupid traditions at A&M that often involve booze? Yes, just as at many other schools. Now let's get off this tangent.

    As for the students at A&M, VMI, and the Citadel just 'pretending' to be in the military, I ask how is this different than law schools' moot court competitions, or the engineering schools' concrete canoe races. In most educational programs there is healthy dose of 'pretending,' and it is generally accepted to be a form of training. The difference is that in ROTC there is generally a commitment to the government (I could be wrong these days, but I had to go though basic training at enlist in the reserves when I went through ROTC {and not at VMI,A&M, or the Citadel}. Requirements probably have changed in the last 15 years). These students are no more pretending to be soldiers than student teachers, co-op interns, or law clerks are pretending to teachers, bussinessmen, or lawyers.

  • Otherness
  • Posted by J Thornton at USNA on April 4, 2005 at 12:24pm EDT
  • I am an 'other' fm USNA abt 40 yrs ago.
    Many of your repliers show evidence that you made some sense. Since 1992, and reaching a real low during and after the recent election, I have had this feeling: If we were invaded, how many 'Americans' would step up to defend us? I don't trust the Left who consider 'others' weird.

  • Neither left nor right
  • Posted by Geoff on April 4, 2005 at 5:29pm EDT
  • Please, let's not turn this discussion into one of political left vs. political right (even if the military itself has become more enmeshed in civilian politics over the last few decades than it should have). In particular, let's not assume that the forces of "liberalism" all have it in for VMI.
    A major point of the article is that, paradoxically enough, some academics dismiss institutions like VMI using the same kind of categorical thinking that they condemn in others. What they don't realize is that the institution is more diverse than it appears at first glance (e.g. a College Democrats chapter exists alongside its Republican counterpart, even if the latter is admittedly larger). Also, crazy as it may seem, liberal arts, theoretical, and natural sciences are ALL valued far more at VMI today than they are at an increasing number of state universities, whose administrations have adopted increasingly "business-like" approaches to higher education. VMI has its problems, and I wouldn't go as far as the author does in praising it, but it also has a lot to offer that one doesn't find in many other universities and colleges today--regardless of whether they are dominated by "leftist," p.c. forces that teach their own orthodoxies or "Republican, business-types" who favor vocational, practical education over fundamental skills in critical thinking, writing, and intellectual exploration.

  • stop chasing waaambulances
  • Posted by Larry on April 4, 2005 at 5:32pm EDT
  • So, Mr. Thornton gives us more of the same: once people disagrees with him, he calls them traitors. Rest assured, Mr. Thornton, my country (USA) was attacked, I would be right up there with you defending Springfield from the Russians or Arabs or French. I am sorry that he feels alienated, but he should stop chasing waaambulances, and instead at least try to communicate with people without calling them traitors.

    Again, most people have nothing against the military academies. This might be because most employers encounter their grads after they have actually served, not as newly minted graduates.

    VMI has a bad reputation among many, because of the cheating, sexual harassment, and idea that once someone puts on a uniform they are automatically better.

  • Larry's last comment
  • Posted by dick on April 4, 2005 at 10:10pm EDT
  • I noted you last comment and the thought that immediately came to mind was that while they thought they were better by putting on a uniform you knew that you were better because you didn't. And as to the comment that you would step right up, why were you not there immediately after 9/11 then if that is your claim. I guess we know how much faith we can put in that then. So then what is your real claim to fame in all this. That you can make snarky remarks?

  • Posted by Larry on April 5, 2005 at 10:35am EDT
  • What I love about these conversations is that it always comes down to the great “I am more patriotic than you” snarkfest. Just as some people like to keep telling everyone that they reject concepts of “normalcy” (or spelling) the reaction of some people to any war or tragedy is “why didn’t you volunteer?” I am a little old to volunteer. Last time, not having the proper connections, I did not have a choice whether to “volunteer” or not.

    To a poster above, it is worth noting that most law clerks, at least the ones for judges, are, in fact, lawyers. There are some who have made a career out of it.

    Finally, I upon further reflection, I don’t think that saying that something “must be weird” is necessarily an insult. Anyone who has taught at UAF has probably been asked “isn’t it cold” or “isn’t it weird [to teach where there is sometimes 20 hours of darkness.]?” To my knowledge they don’t take this as some sort of insult by Americans with Equator-centric amounts of sunshine.

  • VMI article
  • Posted by Samantha on April 5, 2005 at 10:36am EDT
  • What a wonderful article! Being the sister and best friend to many VMI alums, I can honestly say that the 'I' is a standing model of the best and brightest. It's hard enough living in today's society - the bombardment from the Left is a plague on college campuses. Thank God there are still some places left that men and women can learn discipline, honor, courage and knowledge. God Bless the Keydets!

  • Posted by Larry on April 5, 2005 at 2:26pm EDT
  • I fail to see how “discipline, honor, and courage” (if they can be taught) can only be taught at a place that one has declared to be free from those pesky leftists ? I suppose that giving a professor a uniform lets her teach courage and courage. (Since my experience with VMI grads has given me the impression that they are less than honorable, I am not sure how the uniform thing works.)

    In my experience, having litigated campus free-speech issues, most actual incidents of rules that violated the first amendment are not part of an organized effort to suppress certain views, but rather are the product of well-meaning professors who don’t understand the law, or clueless administrators. The restrictions often cut against students of numerous ideological persuasions. However, in public, everyone loves to whine.

    This article is great. It simultaneously declares victory, and claims "victim" status.

  • VMI Is What it Is
  • Posted by Blue Patriot Redux on April 5, 2005 at 2:27pm EDT
  • I must defend myself from the accusation that I characterized VMI as a "pretend" military. Using the word "pretend" is of course offensive, and if one thing is clear, it is that VMI, its cadets, and alums, are not pretending to be anything but what they are.
    It is equally clear that VMI is a state, not national, institution, and as such that it is distinguishable from the national service academies. This is a fact.
    As a distinctive institution, VMI has adopted practices and customs that differ from those found at the service academies. It is possible to support the military, and the education and practices of the service academies, while realizing that VMI as an institution does not share the same values.
    Although some of the remarks mentioned in Dr. Dellinger's article reflect ignorance and deliberate offense, one needs to recognize that some thoughtful and patriotic--yes, even devout--people could never work under the conditions found at VMI. And please--don't assume that I do not know what those conditions are. When people like us meet people who choose to work at a VMI, or who elect to send their children and money to such places, it sends a message that we harbor fundamental differences. I don't think I'd have a lot in common with you and wouldn't enjoy hanging out with you (and I expect you wouldn't like me much, either)...although my tack at a conference would be to keep my interactions with you on a professional and arms-length basis
    So go ahead and be proud of VMI, of your job there, of your education and that of your relatives--I am glad that you all had good experiences and feel enriched by your association. Isn't it wonderful that there are different opportunities for different people. And the sacrifice of some VMI alums in the defense of our country is beyond question. On the other hand, don't kid yourself that VMI is an unrivaled paragon of unambiguous virtue. Historically--and to some extent today--VMI reflects values that are targets for legitimate criticism from people who are just as proud and loving of this country--and its military--as you are. We choose to teach at institutions that share all of our values, and to avoid those that do not.

  • Unbelievable
  • Posted by Brenda Knapp on April 5, 2005 at 10:34pm EDT
  • After reading all the above comments, it is now perfectly clear why a college degree is equvilant to a high school diploma these days. All of these so called liberal profs, as they are being called, are so full of 'it' that I can hardly stand it. First of all, I have 2 grown children that attended a very large Big Ten university. I can say without a doubt, that niether one of them ever saw a professor or PhD. Their classes were taught by teacher assistants or grad students. The professors were off at a meeting, luncheon, or downtown at the coffee bar or just plain bar. I personaly am sick of the college professors who seem to think they actually know everytning and feel so superior that they can put everyone down that doesn't happen to agree with them.

  • Posted by John USMA '78 on April 6, 2005 at 10:35am EDT
  • I served on the English faculty at West Point for four years (I'm a USMA grad as well). When I attended academic conferences, I was ever amused at the cognitive dissonance that registered in the demeanor of some confreres when they discovered that soldiers actually did serious intellectual work. Some seemed terribly nervous that the tools of scholarly inquiry were being appropriated -- perhaps profaned? -- by, um "those people."

    But not all did -- in fact not many did. Many were clearly pleased to hear and comment on my work and credit me as a fully coequal toiler in the vineyard. I've had long-running associations with not a few of them.

    And, of course, there were others who didn't notice me, some who saw my name and institutional affiliation and thought, "hm," or "that's interesting" or "I wonder what that's about."

    Which gets down to a problem I see in the discussion above: so much stereotyping and hasty generalization. "Liberals" believe this; "the academic elite" or "professors" are like that; "military schools" are like something else. If we are really scholars, we'd be more careful about making such facile assumptions.

    As to whether VMI, et al, are real or pretend military academies, I can only say that I served with many officers who were commissioned out of VMI, Norwich, the Citadel, and Texas A&M, and they were all top-notch, and exceptionally well prepared. I know that's not exactly on the point of the discussion, but I wanted to offer my regards to those many comrades.

  • Response to Blue Patriot
  • Posted by John Fisher, VMI '89 on April 6, 2005 at 11:01am EDT
  • In response to Blue Patriot, you mention in your second post that you value diversity and a range of options in higher education, and you criticize VMI for attempting to deny access to women. This legal position was driven by the belief that single sex education has value, and that military style education is best accomplished in a single sex environment. There are a lot of reasons for this, but space constraints prevent a detailed explanation, and coeducation at the service academies has not been an unmitigated success, read up on the scandals at the Air Force Academy for some examples.

    Single sex education is on the verge of extinction in the US, and that loss has reduced reduced the range of choices currently available in higher education. Military schools are places that are not well understood by the general public, they are closed societies that are difficult to truly understand without knowing them from the inside.

    VMI is not a perfect place, nobody who knows the Institute well would argue that, and if we seem a little thin skinned in responding to criticism, legitimate or other, keep in mind that very few people who are not closely associated with VMI and The Citadel, which are significantly different that the service academies, understand them well enough to offer informed criticism.

    I don't question your patriotism or consider you a leftist true believer for having the gall to criticize VMI, but with all due respect, VMI is not a bastion of sexism and right wing dogma, although it is viewed that way by people with only superficial understanding of the place.

    John Fisher, VMI '89

  • Hoo-ray for Single Sex Private Education
  • Posted by Blue (and getting bluer) Patriot on April 6, 2005 at 1:13pm EDT
  • How could one dispute an institution's right to offer education in the manner which it believes best advances its mission, which in some cases means to a single sex? Heck, I think Barnard and Morehouse are pretty good institutions! But U.S. v. Virginia effectively limited gender segregation in higher education to privately-funded institutions. VMI lost that fight, and that it was fought at all will be long remembered by many of us.

    My point is...the atmosphere and education at VMI are not for everyone..or even most everyone (I think you would probably proudly agree), but the fact that many academics do not believe that VMI is the cat's meow goes beyond its militarism. Sometimes the more one knows about a place, the less one likes it. That doesn't excuse ignorant people at a conference being rude or insulting, but just provides an alternate explanation for what is going on.

  • We agree on some things
  • Posted by Larry on April 6, 2005 at 2:31pm EDT
  • At least some of us are coming to a consensus.

    John makes a good point that we should all do our best not to stereotype. The author seems to have done this, and also accuses others of stereotyping her.

    Of course, stereotypes serve a purpose. They make life much easier to deal with. You don’t have to get to know people on a personal level if you have a stereotype. While most of us would probably be quick to say “Oh, I don’t stereotype,” when it comes down to the wire, most of us are pretty quick to take a calculated risk about people based on ethnicity or national origin. (See I just stereotyped someone, myself.) Imagine how difficult life would be if, before avoiding unsavory homeless people I would have to get to know them on a personal level. But John’s point is well taken: once you get your ticket into academe, stereotypes have no place.

    As to Brenda’s comments about professors not interacting with her students. She knew or should have known that at a large university, there would be little interaction between undergraduates and professors. Large universities do not seriously attempt to encourage this because undergraduates are viewed as a necessary evil. At best they have little to offer a professor, since they don’t even know the basics of the discipline. If her kids wanted a closer relationship to their professors they could have gone to a smaller school. So, basically, Brenda and her kids are getting what they wanted. As a normative matter, I think that most undergraduates don’t deserve any of a professor’s time, because they generally don’t do the work and spend too much time drinking. (See, another stereotype.)

    If Brenda is sick of someone’s behavior she needs to provide specifics. However, “putting people down” is an unfortunately common device used in today’s discourse.

  • Blue Patriot Response, Part II
  • Posted by John Fisher, VMI '89 on April 6, 2005 at 2:46pm EDT
  • I agree with you points about VMI not being for everybody and that greater understanding of VMI will not necessarily translate into admiration from some people. I've contemplated VMI's role in society and it's relationship to the higher education establish quite a bit and I'm fine with it. There aren't many VMI alumni crying themselves to sleep at night because not everybody loves us, we're a pretty confident, happy go lucky group by nature.

    Schools like Brown and Oberlin have their place in society and their natural market, just as VMI does. But to change the topic from VMI to the rest of the article, the part that really concerns me is the impression it leaves about the state of higher education elsewhere in the country. The woman who stated that she couldn't imagine teaching Republicans because she would find that too stressful is clearly in the wrong line of work. She may not come into contact with Republicans regularly in her current environment, as students or colleagues, but given that they account for about 50% of the population, it seems that she is operating in a very sheltered, limited discourse world that is not directly confronted with opposing points of view very often. Not exactly the Jeffersonian model for an institution of higher learning.
    It is a given that college faculties are dominated by liberal Democrats, not that the party affiliation means much in the grand scheme of things, but the one dimensional, group think departments that exist on many campuses are not conducive to producing an enlightened society.

  • Lighten up Larry, Part II
  • Posted by T. H. A. Edwards on April 6, 2005 at 9:36pm EDT
  • Why is Larry continually referring to student drinking? This isn't exactly a new problem, but it seems to be a re-occuring theme in his posts.

  • Rah Virginia Mil!
  • Posted by Rob VMI '71 on April 7, 2005 at 6:09pm EDT
  • To Dr. Dellinger:

    Nicely done.

    “So what’s it like to teach in a uniform?” asked the Post-Colonialist as he turned ever so slightly, revealing UC-Whatever on his nametag.

    “Gee, I guess I’ve never thought about it. You first; what’s it like to teach in jeans and Birkenstocks?”

  • Part of a Larger Genre
  • Posted by Jim , Mr. on April 8, 2005 at 1:34pm EDT
  • Last night I watched an interesting program on Judicial Activism in the U.S. and this morning my sister emailed me this link with Mary Ann Dellinger's article. Points of view are many and opinions abound although we can never know with certainty which person's position is more right than wrong. The most striking thing to me is that the debate generated by "On Being the Other" is yet another example of the ever growing genre of Americans who seem to be relying on self, ego, and intellectual pride to explain, rationalize and shape the world around us. Sometimes I do not understand why we "intellectuals," liberal, conservative or in between, just don't get it. We may yet go the way of the Romans if we do not return to our principled and oft characterized antiquated beliefs rooted in our early history as a Nation. Our degress, where we graduated, titles, career tracks and personal points of view are unimportant. What is important is that we love one another with our minds, hearts, and souls and that we serve one another no matter our differences. What greater guiding principle and beacon of truism can there be?

  • Posted by Will on April 9, 2005 at 3:38pm EDT
  • "What is important is that we love one another with our minds, hearts, and souls and that we serve one another no matter our differences. What greater guiding principle and beacon of truism can there be? "

    The Constitution. But yours is pretty good too.

    The biggest problem with this article is that the kind of responses engendered are understandable on some level as the author seems as though this is something she looked forward to being able to write. She WANTED these responses from these people. SEE, I KNEW THE LIBERAL ELITE WERE LIKE THIS. It's self-vindication via self-victimization.
    In reality, they just don't understand or have a clue about the VMI; it is weird to them, and I don't really understand why it wouldn't be.

    There is no need to politiscize, label or insinuate as to what their motivations might be; that's not critical thinking, it's political hackery. And being standoffish to play to the Kneejerk Masses (which is really the only reason for this article to exist in its current format) only drags the fact that the VMI does, in fact, produce excellent citizens, down into the political mud.

  • Never Heard of VMI until Last Year
  • Posted by MAF on April 15, 2005 at 3:39pm EDT
  • The irony of this discussion is simply that the liberals in society often espouse views as do not judge, and that everyone is entitled to live their lives as they see fit. However, apparently, that view only applies if the person happens to be living the way that liberals see fit. Whether or not I agree with the traditions of VMI or how its students are taught is irrelevant. What is relevant is that there are students who wish to attend VMI knowing that it will take them out of the "mainstream" for four years, yet still choose to do so. These students attend VMI. I respect any high school graduate who rather learn about defending the US, being loyal to a fault, and being true to themselves.

  • RE: Larry
  • Posted by John, VMI 03 on April 20, 2005 at 3:59pm EDT
  • It is apparent to me that Larry, who was a bit venomous in his comments, simply doesn't understand what VMI is, and thus criticizes it ineffectively.

    The purpose, the mission, and the very concept the drove the founding of the Virgina Military Institute was the "citizen-soldier" concept.

    Faithful to spirit that drove Roman farmer-General Cincinattus, VMI trains young men and women to be prepared to leave their civilian jobs and take up arms in defense of their country. Over half of VMI's cadets go into the private sector, some 40% enter as professional military officers.

    VMI is not perfect, but those petty inperfections to do make it any less noble of a school. Those who chastize the Institute -like Larry- tend to unintentionally reveal a very profound ignorance regarding the school's basic philosophies.

    In the spirit of Mark Twain, tis better to be thought a fool Larry, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

    And as a final comment: I had "Major D" for two semesters during my cadetship. She is one of our finest scholars -a real treaure of the Institute-, and selflessly devoted to her cadets. She is tough, but fair, and does everything in her power -including working some very long hours- to ensure all of her students have the best chance of doing well.