COLUMN: With the best of intentions

From Mike Madden, "Opiate of the Masses," Fall '98 From Mike Madden, "Opiate of the Masses," Fall '98Looking back over what I've written this semester, it might seem like I set out to be "Gadfly Number One" on The Daily Pennsylvanian's editorial page. And I heard some similar stuff about the DP's news section when I was the managing editor. People criticized the paper for being too negative about what Penn was doing; we were looking for problems when there weren't any; we found faults with every big announcement, from Sansom Common to Trammell Crow. So you might think I'm looking forward to graduating so I can get away from Penn, which I obviously can't stand. All this grousing must be because I think the place is doomed. But in fact, that's not the case at all. The reason I looked so critically at the University while I was here wasn't because I hated what I saw around me, but because I wanted to make sure Penn was as good a place as it could be. And I don't think the frequent complaints from students, faculty and staff are a sign of a disgruntled University community, either. On the contrary, I'd call such criticism a sign of engagement -- and more. People complain around here because they care about the University and want it to improve, not because they hate it. And in the end, more dialogue and more discussion of what's happening on campus -- even if it's critical -- is good for the place. The campus has changed a lot in the four years since the Class of 1998 and the current administration started together. It's hard to evaluate exactly how well things have worked out. Universities move very slowly -- too slowly for most undergraduates to see them evolve. Projects announced more than a year ago, like Sansom Common, or more than three years ago, like the Perelman Quadrangle, won't be finished for some time, and this year's senior class literally won't be around to see the outcome. But as each new idea has sprung forward, people have thought up some dire scenarios. When the Perelman Quad was announced, for example, student leaders were stunned, and most of them predicted campus life would wither on the vine. So they said so -- loudly, frequently and in ways that made it quite clear that not everyone on campus agreed with the plan to drop the Revlon Center. Obviously, these complaints didn't derail the Perelman plans. That's not necessarily the point, though. What they did do was force the people behind the plans to respond to them, and in doing so, helped bring potential problems to the surface. Similarly, this year saw a much more concerted effort to oppose vending regulations and outsourcing deals. Neither push stopped the University's plans outright, but they boosted public awareness of what was at stake. Now many students are looking more critically at the administration's plans for retail, mostly because they've heard so much criticism of the vending plans. That should be good news, even to the top administrators coming up with the plans. More critical thinking and careful evaluation of what's going on can only help. If there's merit behind a proposal, it should be able to withstand criticism; if not, the questions raised about it may help planners devise a new one. Some officials do see that. Former Provost Stanley Chodorow once told me he'd never seen more people complaining about their school than he did at Penn. But rather than taking offense, Chodorow said, he eventually realized that complaints were just a standard feature of dialogue at the University. Gripes were, Chodorow said, the way people showed their love for the school. So to the rest of the Penn administration: Remember that. There are a lot of very good ideas you've put out over the past four years, but they're not all perfect. Don't take criticism personally, and don't assume it means people think your whole plan is a stinker. And likewise, for students, faculty and staff who call Penn their home: Take a good critical look at everything that comes down from College Hall. The more you care about Penn, the more you should insist that it does the right thing, whether it's in relations with the city or blueprints for a new dorm system. By not giving Penn the benefit of the doubt, you're helping to improve it. By looking for trouble before it's too late, you're helping prevent it. And in the end, you'll leave Penn a better place than when you arrived.