Opinion

‘Alex’ mascot continues a negative trend of conformity

By Cesar Renero ’17

Last weekend, Hamilton hosted a regional water polo tournament, giving me a chance to hang out with an old high school friend of mine who plays for Renssalear Polytechnic Institute. As we talked about our respective colleges, we began to notice that there were rather stark differences between our two institutions. Oftentimes, being isolated on the Hill can blind us to just how different Hamilton can be, compared to other colleges.

My friend commented on how people at Hamilton seemed to be “much more laid-back and open” and also noted our particular blend of partying, such as events sponsored by Greeks for everyone to enjoy, instead of the more exclusive Greek parties that he is used to at RPI. We both concluded that Hamilton is a pretty unique place. However, this uniqueness is not a given, nor is it guaranteed or free from peril.

A prime example is the implementation of the First-Year Experience, starting with the Class of 2018. Hamilton used to be the only NESCAC that did not have first-year housing, but mounting pressure eventually made Hamilton capitulate and join the herd. Hamilton went a step further and completely banned alcohol in first-year dorms, regardless of a student’s age. Arguably, these changes show the administration’s attempt to shield and protect impressionable first-years from violent, drunken behaviour. However, this policy has largely failed, as vandalism is still rampant—with North and the first-year floors in Dunham suffering from particular damage.

More misguided policies removed a beloved unofficial mascot, Al Ham, and replaced him with a cartoonish incarnation of Alexander Hamilton. Publius Virgilius Rogers Professor of History Maurice Isserman addressed some of the problems with this change in last week’s issue, but further prodding led us to clearly see significant similarities between Alex, and the mascots of Amherst College, UMass-Amherst and Hobart College. Not only is the new mascot lacking in inclusiveness, it is quite literally modelled on the mascot of significant athletic rivals. How can Alex possibly be an effective mascot if at Amherst-Hamilton matches, the Lord Jeffs could confuse Alex as one their own?

This is not to say that we should not emulate successful policies present at other colleges. Hamilton bent the knee to both internal and exterior pressure, and became a need-blind institution starting with the Class of 2014. Our previous science, social science and arts buildings have been replaced with beautiful and functional improvements that can meet the needs of Hamilton students and make us much more competitive. But I do not think these changes negatively affected our campus culture. In fact, increased economic diversity and better facilities to pursue intellectual interests only enhance students’ individual development. However, not all changes are fundamentally beneficial to the campus community, and the administration is increasingly moving towards trying to change the culture that has formed on the Hill.

Hamilton is a great institution, and has a lot of things going for it, but what I have appreciated most about this college is that distinctiveness is not only accepted, but encouraged. However, small changes are endangering this distinguishing feature. Our hilltop college seems to be going in a trend towards being as close to peer institutions as possible, but as we trek closer towards the rest, we begin to lose our identity. We’ve lost the whimsy of Al Ham and first-years becoming best of friends with their senior neighbour. What other parts of the Hamilton experience do we have to lose until we realize that something is going awry?

Worst of all, these policies are not doing our motto (Know Thyself) any justice. Interiority, introspection and self-exploration stand at the center of a Hamilton education. As we try to emulate others, we become mediocre and lose the competitive edge uniqueness grants.

No comments yet.

All Opinion