4A
Friday, September 20, 1996
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
VIEWPOINT
University's scholarships should be more inclusive
The University community is undoubtedly happy when National Merit finalists choose to enroll here rather than at other institutions. Chancellor Robert Hemenway's offer of an annual $5,000 scholarship to those students brought a record number of 59 National Merit scholars, lifting the University's prestige and reputation for learning.
Hemenway, however, must be aware that the University needs a new scholarship system to award wellrounded students who may not perform as well on standardized tests that determine National Merit finalists.
When the University courts National Merit finalists, who have offers of full tuition, room and board, and scholarships to other prestigious universities, $5,000 may not seem to be much money. These students have earned the attention that universities are paying them. But one cannot shirk a large number of exceptional students for an elite minority.
The 1996-1997 application brochure lists several scholarships that are intended to attract exceptional freshmen who aren't offered significant scholarships. Of those seven scholarships, five require excellent standardized test scores, while only two $500 awards are offered to students who may score well but not extraordinarily. Surely standardized tests are not the only gauge for the potential contributions each student may give to the University. Are academic excellence, leadership, school and community service and extracurricular activities reduced to a value of $500 in light of unamazing test scores?
The University needs more financing to award scholarships and a new system that recognizes that the skills of test-taking should not always eclipse the importance of being a leader in the community or other notable achievements.
PHONG HU FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Downtown parking situation doesn't need another study
The City of Lawrence recently commissioned a $14,000 study of downtown parking.
Don Monahan, of Walker Parking Consultants-Engineers Inc., the company performing the study, said downtown Lawrence had a perceived parking problem that required creating new parking lots. He is correct in that the parking problem is merely a perceived one, but the solution is not more parking spaces.
During peak business hours, metered spots along Massachusetts Street often are filled, which leads to many complaints. However, these spaces are not the only ones available downtown. There are numerous free parking lots on both Vermont and New Hampshire streets between Seventh and 10th streets. Each of these lots clearly is marked, and signs at downtown intersections point to their locations. These lots rarely are full.
Despite this relatively convenient, free parking, people still complain. The problem is therefore not a shortage of parking spaces, but rather the attitudes of those who feel they cannot walk an extra 100 feet to get to the stores or restaurants of their choice.
The solution is not to build a new parking garage.
The proposed 300-space garage would cost between $1.5 million and $3 million, excluding land costs.
Even though there have been complaints about downtown parking shortages, the city should not spend time or money constructing a parking garage when there are many unfilled spaces just a block away from Massachusetts Street. The City of Lawrence already has wasted $14,000 on a nonexistent problem. It is unacceptable to potentially spend more than 100 times that amount to satisfy the whims of people who don't utilize the existing solution.
GERRY DOYLE FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
KANSAN STAFF
AMANDA TRAUGHBER
Editor
CRAIG LANG
Managing editor
MATT HOOD
Associate managing editor for design
KIMBERLY CRABTREE
CHARITY JEFFRIES
News editors
DARCI L McLAIN
SARA ROSE
Public relations directors
Editors
KAREN GERSCH
Business manager
HEALY SMART
Retail sales manager
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
JAY STEINER
Sales and marketing adviser
JUSTIN KNUPP
Technology coordinator
Campus ... Susanna Lóíf
Jason Strait
... Amy McVey
Editorial ... John Collar
Nicole Kennedy
Features ... Adam Ward
Associte ... Bill Petulia
Associate sports .. Carlyn Foster
On-line editor .. David L. Teskua
Photo .. Rich Devinval
Graphics .. Richard Mueller
Andy Rohrback
Special sections .. Amy McVey
Wire .. Debbie Staine
Business Staff
Campus mgr ... Mark Ozdemr
Regional mgr ... Dennis Haupt
Assistant Retail mgr ... Dana Gentano
National mgr ... New York
Administrative mgr ... Heather Valier
Production mgr ... Dan Kopec
Marketing director ... Lisa Quesmanbaman
Operations director ... Desmond Lavelle
Classified mgr ... Shelly Wachter
Jeff MacNeily / CHICAGO TRIBUNE
Members of the religious community, take note: Satan is perched aton the dance charts.
Macarena craze is a sign of pop culture's demise
or maybe it's the Body Snatchers, controlling the gross motor skills of bar-goers across America, forcing them to hop down from their stools and flail their limbs. I don't know what sinister force is responsible for the Macarena, but it is out there and I am afraid.
I hate the Macarena. I hate it, first of all, because it's one of those publicly owned mass dances, and I'm one of those anti-prole proles with a tendency to dislike anything liked by more than five people.
But the biggest problem I have with the Macarena is that it's symptomatic of a larger disease: the dumbing-down of this decade's pop culture. If the '09s is psoriasis, the Macarena is the recurring flaky scalp that's failing to respond to treatment.
The fatal flaw of the Macarena is not that it's shallow. Pop culture has always been shallow; that's its job. Pop is supposed to be about surfaces. But it's also supposed to be about style. The '60s produced mod, the Beatles, Andy Warhol. The '70s brought forth disco, designer jeans and Deborah Harry. The '80s — arguably the best decade for pop — had everything from Take on Me and West End Girls to two of the Star Wars movies, The Breakfast Club and Atari.
The '90s, so far, have birthed two Sister Bear films, the Achy Breaky Heart, Tori Spelling, the Macarena and a score of interchangeable garage bands tripping over them.
STAFF COLUMNIST
selves while attempting to camouflage their close cousinship to Foreigner with gallons of Manic Panic 'n attitude. Stone Temple Pilots, anyone? How about a nice, cool Oasis?
Music isn't the only place where the trough at the Idea Saloon has run dry. The movie sequel
craze is in a perpetually full swing. Television does nothing if not clone itself. Fashion has cascaded through the mod revival, the '70s revival and the punk revival. We've been so busy reviving the past that the present day is flatlining. Enter the Macarena.
I don't recall being consulted.
Nobody I know watches 90210 or
unces the Macarena, but People magazine is telling the world-at-large that's all we do. It makes me wonder who pop culture belongs to. Whose kitsch is this anyway? I'd call on Oliver Stone to investigate a conspiracy theory, but I'd be afraid he'd make it into something starring Juliette Lewis. Ick.
So where did things go wrong? The American public has always had a short attention span and an appetite for trash. The problem is that the trash isn't fresh anymore. The real blame lies with the people who determine which garbage is fit for our consumption — the powershatter-be who are responsible for the Rachel haircut overshadowing the clever writing of *Friends* and a curate-Kildare-by-day-becoming-Batman-by-night. Last year alone, they decided that if we liked one pack of GWGs (Geeks With Guitars) channeling the Sex Pistols, we'd love 30 more.
And besides, Time-Life Music already has begun to preserve this decade's music for posterity, attempting to create some 1-900 cohesiveness from this morass, and coming up with: Roxette. Divinyls. Right Said Fred. The title of the collection: Living in the '90s. It's so appropriate it aches.
And just for fun, let's revive the art
And just for fun, let's revive the art—first popularized in the late '60s—of sitting around and talking about fighting back. I have a solution for getting rid of the *Macarena*: a prizefight between ABBA and Los del Rio. *Fernando vs.* *Macarena*. Winner takes all. Loser shuts up and is relegated to airplay on MTV Somalia.
My money's riding on Frida and Bjorn. In my mind, there's no contest. At least not for best costumes.
Michael Martin is a Lenexa sophomore in English and theater and film.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Democrats also guilty of limiting discussion
Reading the editorial written by Ann Marchand ("Republican's exclusion will cost them key votes," Sept. 16), I am impressed how liberals are able to make such eloquent arguments without letting facts get in the way.
When Marchand claims she watched the GOP convention, she is lying. Her account of what happened is simply not true. All views were expressed (except if you watched the major networks).
Issue one is abortion. Less than 10 percent of Republicans identify this as a major issue. The vast majority of GOP members do not even consider it a voting issue. While there are pro-choice Republicans, the platform is decided by a
democratic process. Unlike the Democrats who write their platform in secret to conform to Bill Clinton's flavor-of-the-day policymaking style.
The hypocrisy of the left becomes apparent when one considers that almost 33 percent of the Democratic party considers itself pro-life. Where was Robert Casey? Where were any prochoice speakers? They were muzzled under the gestapo-like directions of the National Organization for Women, Pat Schroeder and Hillary "I will raise everyone's kids" Clinton.
minorities in the GOP are forced to think in any given way or forced to say a certain party line.
It is true that support among African Americans is not what it should be. The author accuses the GOP of slapping minorities who do not say the right things. I suggest that Marchand is lying. There has never been any evidence that
If you want to be equal and blame both parties for their informials, fine. I will accept that the GOP did not put on a pure conference. When you claim that the Democrats can do no wrong and the GOP can do no right, you are not only ignorant, but a liar.
The Democrats are notorious for presenting what they want. There was not one piece of critical thinking at that convention. At least the GOP almost had a floor fight and there was significant debate on all phases of the platform.
Lewis M. Reagan Manhattan law student
Moral bridges in America are falling down
While visiting my brother in New York last weekend, I braved the Big Apple on a mountain bike. My intrepid expedition from Brooklyn Heights to Manhattan's West Village included traversing the Brooklyn Bridge. For me, the trek was as insightful as cathartic. I swallowed so many sociological/political metaphors, I nearly lost my breath. Lady Liberty staring stoically to my left and the Empire Building standing to my right made my mind race.
But it was the faces on the promenade of the Brooklyn Bridge that best captured my penchant for abstraction. They told me about the possibilities that America represents for people around the world. The morning sunlight shining on the faces of so many ethnic
backgrounds gave me such hope for this fragile experiment we call America.
It was the same emotion I felt when I watched the Olympics this summer. While one could discern several common physical traits specific to the East European, the Chinese or the Latin-American teams, the USA teams had many diverse athletes. However, despite their physical differences and multiple ethnic heritages, they all shared the USAemblem.
In the presidential campaign, rhetoric about visions of America in the next millennium has been crafted around bridges. While the candidates are trying to articulate to which tax bracket their bridge will guide us, they both fail to describe the capacity of their bridges, who will be on them and where they will lead us. The debate lacks a more pertinent question: How can we create a bridge to America's heart and soul? Vigorous populism and myopic vision is responsible for the delay of constructing this bridge. With such high economic consequences at stake, many Americans want to reel in our drawbridge, making immigrants swim.
It's true that recent political attacks on America's immigrants stem largely from economic insecurities and paranoia. However, if America is going to excel in the next century, foundations need to be secure. Recent political trends of using immigrants as economic scapegoats (primarily from the right) or using them as political tools during election time (by the left) will just result in us pushing each other off the bridge.
On the university level, multiculturalism has been infiltrated successfully. In the morning, I usually say "hi" to my neighbor Anwar, a student from Mexico. At work I see Ted, a student who immigrated to America with his family from Laos when he was 12. On Tuesday, I eat lunch with Moussa who is from Mall. These are the faces of America. Unfortunately, most students' commitment to diversity is not tested during their college years. When economic realities become more salient, diversity is seen as troublesome.
America is an idea. Often we wonder if it is a good idea. The last 220 years of democracy were not easy, so no one should believe it's going to get easier. But with candid debate we can find the right bridge. It won't lead to a utopia, but it can be firm and made of strong, moral commitments.
Now is no time for gephyrophobia (fear of bridges).
Andrew Longstreet is a Liberty, Mo-
n senior in law and political science.
OUT FROM THE CRACKS
Bu Jeremy Patnoi