"Success in the end eclipses the mistakes along the way."
        -the fortune cookie I got with tonight's dinner

I must say "way to go" to the women of 4 and the folks in Marchetti. It
is exciting to see the hope of coming changes! What a thrill it is to
see people actively involved in their environments! How cool that all of
the troubling, full-force problems that were dropped on our heads
completely unexpectedly on Monday already seem to be working out!

How wonderful life would be if they'd never happened in the first place!

Laugh if you must when I say this: I make a concerted effort not to be a
negative person. There is no mystique for me in putting wrinkles on my
face and excess acid in my stomach. I take little thrill in argument. I
do not like frustration, or sleeplessness. I have no psychological need
for enemies or something to rage against. I like to be happy. I just
want to clear these points up, because I don't want it to look like I'm
typing just for the sake of being mad. (And I certainly don't want to
come across as... emotional.) It's just important to me that these 
successes don't eclipse the (repeatable) mistakes.

Buck wrote:
> Kathy asked for involvement and no one had the interest. 

As far as I'm concerned, this falls into the category of "Res Life
Misunderstanding." It should look familiar; whenever we agree on one
thing and another is done (such as room priority two years ago, the loss
of our office for vacuum cleaner storage, the decision regarding
apartment priority for people with probation issues, etc.), we always
end up chalking it up to such a "misunderstanding." In this case, when
we were asked to contribute to wellness floor implementation, I and
several others (probably most others) took that to mean contributing to
the program's set-up: types of programming, frequency of programming,
discussing what kind of things the typical resident would want in a
wellness floor, and so on. Since no one in RHA had any interest in such
a floor in the first place, no one felt qualified or motivated to
participate. 

HOWEVER, I woulda had a HELL of a lot of interest in contributing to
deciding whether or not large groups of people were being involuntarily
relocated, and how to try and prevent that from happening. Just about
everybody in the ROOM would have had something to say. And you know it.
So I implore you, for the good of what remains of my sanity, quit
telling people RHA wasn't interested in getting involved. It makes us
looks like jerks as individuals, it makes us look incompetent as an
advocacy organization, it made us look like ABSOLUTE morons last Monday,
and frankly, it pisses me off.

> understand that;  but what I cannot understand is the feelings of
> mistrust and deceit that some feel - as if the've been taken, had,
> or had their lives intentionally messed with.  What happened, I think,
> is that people allowed emotion direct action.

So, reflect rather than react. Hmmmm....
(Jim pauses for an introspective moment)

I do not in the least feel that Residence Life or the University have
intentionally tried to hurt anyone. After all, to hurt someone
intentionally, you must first take their feelings into account. At the
very least, you have to make an effort to find out what someone's
feelings are before you can hurt them on purpose.

The truth of the matter is, a lot of people feel like SLU and Res Life
give no thought whatsoever to students' wishes. Myself definitely
included, and I've been up close and personal with the Department ever
since the "'brain'storming" incident two years ago. It often seems that
SLU decides to play catch-up with Georgetown or Res Life decides to
chase some shiny new housing fad, and once they get it in their heads,
well, batten down the hatches and pack yer bags, it's movin' day again!

A vital point must come here, the most important thing I can ever hope
to convey to SLU administrators. The most basic principle of
communicating with functionally literate human beings, whether you're a
psychologist, an advertiser, or a mugger, is that what you're *doing* is
not that important. What you THINK you're doing is *completely*
worthless. The only thing that matters is what the audience thinks
you're doing, what the listener gets out of your words and deeds. And
make no mistake: a big whopping heap of SLU/Res Life's audience, the
students WHO LIVE HERE RIGHT NOW (remember them?), think that the people
in Walsh basement are totally unconcerned with them, if not out to get
them.

 And it's not because the students are impossible to please, and it's
not because the students are unrealistic or idealistic, and it's
certainly not because they're too "emotional." It is, if anything,
because others are UNemotional. They are professional in the worst sense
of the word. They are disconnected. Ambition and personal agendas are in
the front seat. Today's squatter means less than tomorrow's non-smoker.
They are Jesuits who talk to you about Community while living in
Marchetti instead of Jesuit Hall. They are priests who consider board
positions at casinos. It doesn't matter if these people think they're
helping SLU if that's not what the public sees in their actions.

Mistrust? How could a student possibly trust Res Life at SLU? Every time
we take our eyes off 'em, they do something ridiculous! The women of 4
Gries shouldn't have to meet with Kathy Humphrey twice a day to ensure
fair treatment and basic living conditions! It should be a bare minimum
expectation, fer Christ's sake! Kath has an entire office full of people
whose sole focus in life is to facilitate and nurture community and
comfort! It's all they do, all day long, and half the time it feels like
we're devoting two or three meetings a week just to putting out their
fires! I mean, do you have any concept of how many hours students have
spent this year working their asses off for things that are supposed to
be expectations? Meals at home on the weekends? The simple right to keep
a community they've been building all year? Classes, programming,
strengthening friendships... everything put on hold, time and time
again, and for what? For the right to subsist. Two meetings a week just
to keep heads above water. To hell with that. It's no way to live, and
it's no way to have to feel about your school.

The response to these arguments would typically be that there are many
factors we don't see. God, if I had a nickel for every time I've heard
about these invisible factors. Things we don't understand. Budgetary and
resource concerns. Long-term goals over short-term losses. I often
wonder if Res Life and its employees ever truly realize how that sounds.
I come into the office and say, "I feel screwed by this. A lot of people
are upset. It doesn't have to be this way." And in response, I'm told,
"We understand you're hurting, but we're helping you in ways you can't
understand right now. We have to sacrifice somewhere for the greater
good, and this time that sacrifice is your feelings. Come to us, though,
if you have any problems, and we'll be happy to explain how they're not
actually problems but rather opportunities." Does anybody in the office
even care how condescending that is? How much it resembles talking to a
brick wall? How can staffers keep spouting these things and not
understand where all the frustration comes from? Has in-group culture
really left everybody that completely out of touch with one another?

There have been times this week, and a lot of them, when I've felt like
the last two years of my life were for nothing. I hope none of you ever
have to experience the feeling. It's a lot like drowning on a mouthful
of Sprite, scary and despairing and really really stupid all at once. If
I manifested those feelings inappropriately, I'm sorry, but I still
think that emotion is the only just response to things as they've
recently been. Anything less would be a disservice in my opinion. I'm
too used to having my solutions rejected to suggest any here, but I do
have two wishes. One, that all future Res Life staffers would be
required to read something like this on their first day at work so that
no student ever has to go through anything like this week again. Two,
that at least one controversial figure, from Jim Hoppe to Fr. Stark,
would have the courage before I graduate to just stand up at a public
meeting and admit in all honesty, "There are times when we completely
forget about the people we're serving. They just get lost in the
shuffle. We're sorry." 

-- 
This latest offense has been brought to you by:
jim (ski)