Opinions from Our Readers<\/p>\n
I thoroughly enjoyed the Winter 2011 issue and the story \u201cGood Eggs.\u201d My love affair with chickens began on a bulletin board at Bates in the spring of 1945. Because of the war and the draft, Bates students could graduate in two and a half years by attending summer sessions. I had been at Bates for two summers, but that was enough. I wanted some other experience.<\/p>\n
A small note on the bulletin board asked for volunteers for the Women\u2019s Land Army. This meant working on a farm in Maine to help with the labor shortage. I landed on a family farm in Fairfield. For three months I took care of 1,500 chickens, helped in the fields, fed the bull, and thoroughly enjoyed the experience.<\/p>\n
If I hadn\u2019t been at Bates it wouldn\u2019t have happened. Were I at Bates now, I would certainly be involved in social-justice issues. The students who are involved will be influenced for life, as I was by working on a farm. I wish to share a few lessons that I learned from a lifetime mentor and friend, Dean Emeritus of the College Jim Carignan \u201961, who died Aug. 14, 2011.<\/p>\n I got to know Jim professionally in 1999, when he asked me to join a civic leadership institute in Lewiston-Auburn. During our work together, he talked about his own growth as a leader. In the trajectory of his story, which became a case study during my doctoral studies, I saw parallels to what leadership theorists have learned about good leadership: At its core, it is about people and relationships.<\/p>\n In his 33 years at Bates, Jim moved from a top-down, command-and-control leadership style to a collaborative and relational approach. As Colin Powell has said, \u201cLeadership is not about organizations…. It is all about people \u2014 motivating people to get the job done.\u201d<\/p>\n Jim learned that leadership sometimes means serving as an intermediary and a facilitator of process \u2014 a servant leader.<\/p>\n For example, I\u2019m sure some alums recall when seniors, years ago, turned Wood Street into an out-of-control block party during Senior Week. The rowdiness attracted a great number of Lewiston police, and they were on the verge of arresting students when Jim showed up.<\/p>\n He asked the police for 10 minutes so he could work with the students to get them to take control of the situation. In the end, he got the street cleared and the stereos turned down, and the police were able to drive away without making arrests.<\/p>\n This is what Jim said about that event: \u201cIf you\u2019re in a crisis situation, you\u2019ve got to change from confrontation to something short of that, where two or three parties are able to fulfill their expectations while respecting the other groups.\u201d<\/p>\n Jim had a reputation for taking risks and for solving problems face to face and in the moment. He once called an open forum in the Chapel on sexual harassment issues that turned explosive but, finally, productive. Afterward, the president told Jim that \u201cone of these times you are going to roll those dice and it is not going to work \u2014 but I am glad it worked this time.\u201d<\/p>\n Jim brought an incredible spirit, optimism, and integrity to his leadership. One of his toughest times was going through not one, but two heart transplants. He was on a heart-lung machine for two days before a second heart could be found. In fact, the doctors were reluctant to do a second transplant. But Jim basically said, \u201cLook, we didn\u2019t come this far to turn down a heart. You take me in there and do it. I\u2019ll make it.\u201d<\/p>\n Jim\u2019s third heart was a woman\u2019s heart \u2014 he joked that it was the reason he was able to see the relational side of leadership.<\/p>\n In his good humor, his strong and sincere relationships, and his ability to read people, Jim was the best of leaders. He was, and is, a remarkable model. caption:\u00a0In 2003, Jim Carignan \u201961 stands next to an oak planted near the Chapel to honor his retirement as dean of the college.<\/p>\n That was a beautiful photo in the Winter issue of refurbished Garcelon Field, iconic venue for fierce athletic competition. Ironically, a few pages beyond, Bates sociology professor Francesco Duina maintains that we Americans are too competitive and \u201cobsessed\u201d with winning. It makes us unhappy and disliked abroad. He says the Danish noncompetitive system is \u201cmore civilized\u201d even though it \u201cdoes deprive a lot of people of freedom.\u201d He knows they are not the happiest people \u2014 \u201cbut they are content.\u201d<\/p>\n Americans of my generation will recall that most Danes were \u201ccontent\u201d to be deprived of their freedom under Nazi occupation, which they endured with only a murmur of resistance. If Americans were like \u201ccontented\u201d Danes, America today would be a British dominion fenced in east of the Mississippi by foreign powers who had divided up everything west of it. But, hey, Professor Duina is a sociologist, not a historian.<\/p>\n Neither is he a political scientist, but he thinks that Al Gore is viewed as a loser because he should have won the 2000 election because \u201chis opponent was perceived as weaker.\u201d Perceived by whom? Among those who have experienced American politics and politicians close up, I am not alone in perceiving Al Gore as a phony political windbag.<\/p>\n Professor Duina says that he was inspired to write his book in part because of \u201cGeorge Bush\u2019s insistence on \u2018winning the peace in Iraq,\u2019\u201d which he calls \u201can absurd concept.\u201d Would he apply that label to Barack Obama\u2019s insistence on spending trillions of borrowed dollars on \u201cwinning the future\u201d? Probably not. Bates would consider that racist, and he would be shunned in the faculty lounge (assuming that after all the recent building Bates actually has a faculty lounge!).<\/p>\n Professor Duina seems an amiable young man who is probably not obsessed with winning. But he knows how to win in the competitive world of leftist, feminized academia: write a book denigrating America\u2019s competitive spirit and throw in a few barbs at our 43rd president. Francesco Duina responds: Mr. Radcliffe, in his comments about my book,<\/em> Winning, doubts whether I would be critical of President Obama\u2019s recent fixation on \u201cwinning the future.\u201d As it turns out, I have discussed our president\u2019s language during town library meetings and in a number of interviews, including with David Phillippi for the blog<\/em> New Books in Sociology and with Connecticut Public Radio\u2019s<\/em> Where We Live program. I\u2019ve talked about President Obama\u2019s language about the future, including wanting to be \u201cNo. 1\u201d in the world, as \u201ccircuitous\u201d and \u201cterribly confusing and loose phrasing,\u201d which is representative of our collective American tendency to view much of life in competitive terms, with serious consequences for how we live our lives, how we educate our children, and how we relate to others.<\/em><\/p>\n Kudos for running the very interesting story \u201cFamily Affair\u201d (Winter 2011), about my classmates Erik Mercer, Rachel Segall, and Tony Hurley. The article, as well as Rachel and Tony\u2019s uncommon generosity, was a vivid reminder of all of the characteristics that caused me to apply to Bates 25 years ago and are ones that have kept me connected to it: its open and tolerant outlook, the firm commitment to diversity and egalitarian principles, and an enduring friendliness without pretense.<\/p>\n Rachel and Tony\u2019s gift to Erik and Sandro is a very contemporary twist on those ideals. The fact that Bates Magazine<\/em> ran the story made me proud to be a Bobcat! The article \u201cThe Gay Resume\u201d (Winter 2011), which reported on a Homecoming 2010 panel discussion about the intersection of careers and sexual orientation, failed to address the larger implications of identity masking during the job search.\u2028The very notion of passing as straight presupposes an understanding of several nuanced conversations. The first is what potential employers might deem \u201cqueer,\u201d whether through attire and body language or through a resume that includes certain club affiliations.<\/p>\n The second is procedural: How might one best succumb to hetero-normative stereotypes? And how would doing so merit a capacity for ethical decision making?<\/p>\n The third would be qualitative: How do we measure the emotional, physical, and even monetary sacrifices that one undoubtedly undertakes in order to pass? \u2028To this regard, what does the article\u2019s implicit approval of sometimes hiding one\u2019s sexual identity say about other marginalized groups facing issues of discrimination? For example, a black woman cannot with the same ease hide her perceived race or gender, though research abound tells us that both categories will also place her at a disadvantage in achieving the career goals espoused by panelist LK Gagnon, \u201cto be paid and be comfortable.\u201d<\/p>\n While this article does remind us that workplace politics are as complicated as ever, it surrenders to the ill-fated norms of present-day inequalities rather than offering a spirited advance toward the aspiration of our mission statement, where we \u201cengage the transformative power of our differences\u201d and cultivate the very noble notions of \u201cinformed civic action\u201d and \u201cresponsible stewardship of the wider world.\u201d<\/p>\n Here, at this \u201ccollege for coming times,\u201d I would\u2019ve hoped for this to be normal practice.
\nRohna Isaacson Shoul \u201946<\/strong>
\nNewton, Mass.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nCarignan\u2019s Way<\/h3>\n
\nJoc Clark \u201986<\/strong>
\nParadise, Calif.<\/em><\/p>\n
\nIs Winning<\/em> a Losing Proposition?<\/h3>\n
\nCharles W. Radcliffe \u201950<\/strong>
\nAnnapolis, Md.<\/em><\/p>\n
\n\u2018Friendliness Without Pretense\u2019<\/h3>\n
\nSteve Moore \u201991<\/strong>
\nBoston<\/em><\/p>\n
\nPassing Thoughts<\/h3>\n
\nWalter Garcia Fairfax \u201912<\/strong>
\nStonington, Maine<\/em><\/p>\n
\nPlease Write!<\/h3>\n