LETTERS: In defense of Curtis Organ repairs

To the Editor: · The new console will be operated by a computer comprising several circuit boards and components, not just a "computer chip." · Penn alumnus William Brown donated money for a new console for the organ, not for repairs to the mechanical console. · The mechanical console is not original, having been rebuilt and altered extensively in 1980. It contains solid-state components which have been in operation since then. · The mechanical console does not contain leather or canvas parts, although there are some canvas strips on the backing of the roll top. The new console will not, in my opinion, be a "waste of money" due to computer chips which will expire in "four or five years." It is noteworthy to mention that numerous solid state systems manufacturers warrantee their materials for 10 years, indicating that the manufacturers are confident the parts will last far longer than five years -- and far longer than 10 years! The long-term ideal of endowing the organ to perpetuate its proper maintenance is a laudable one. The best case scenario will be that of raising enough money to establish an endowment and restore the mechanical console. Having two consoles on an instrument of the size and scale of Penn's Curtis Organ is an invaluable tool, both for performance and practice. There could be duet concerts scheduled; one of the consoles could be designated for "performance" and the other could be placed in a position in the hall for the player to experience the organ in the room, just as the audience will. The solid state systems will also allow the organ to continue to be used as a MIDI instrument. An organist could record his performance for historical preservation and more, could "listen to himself/herself" playing the organ -- an invaluable practice technique! I question whether a better course of action than that the University has decided upon would be possible. In the face of a generous gift to have a dependable, working console or to have an unrepaired, unrestored console, I think I personally would accept such a gift if I were the recipient. Paul Marchesano Member Curtis Organ Advisory Group u To the Editor: Your article is misleading and includes erroneous interpretation of the advisory group's report and the issues involved. A careful reading of the article reveals scant reference to the true story: the University has decided to commit the necessary and substantial funding for a full restoration of the Curtis Organ. The article focused instead on the concerns held by a minority of the members of the Curtis Organ Restoration Society regarding the organ console. An advisory group, which did include the principal members of the Curtis Organ Restoration Society, was formed to make recommendations for the future of this splendid instrument.The recommendations included a full restoration of the Curtis Organ, acceptance of the gift of a new electronically-based console as stipulated by the donor and an eventual refurbishment of the existing console. The University decided to follow the recommendations of the advisory group. This represents a creative and responsible use of limited funds. Most importantly, the new console will not alter the magnificent voice of the Curtis Organ. The new console, and restoration of the pipes and windchest, will allow that voice to be heard. Make no mistake: We are committed to this priceless Penn treasure and to its complete restoration over time. Max King Assistant to the Vice Provost for University Life From the outside looking in To the Editor: I am an openly gay man, and I regret not having entered into the fraternity process. I wanted to join a fraternity, but my friends dismissed it because they were afraid I would be harassed and would not get into the fraternity I wanted. I ultimately decided to forget it. Now I regret it. I don't know if I would have been accepted in a fraternity or not. I made rash judgments based on experiences with men, not necessarily men who were members of fraternities. But if gay people want to feel accepted, they need to be out and involved. I praise Mike Hammer ("Gay men face challenges within U.'s fraternities," DP, 12/7/98) for being out and in a fraternity. He should not feel alone in his struggles. If gay people want acceptance in that arena, they need to enter it. Don't complain from the outside looking in. And don't bash frats for supposed heterosexism and homophobia without having been involved in the process. If you're gay -- closeted or not -- and want to pledge, do it. Coming out in a fraternity can't be any harder than coming out in a small town in the Midwest to a mother who works for the Catholic church and a father whose family is conservative and racist. I was able to do that. Sadly, I now have a void in my life. I feel a that I have no gender identity, and I miss being "one of the guys." Don't make my mistake. Michael Rogan Wharton '00 A home for ultimate frisbee To the Editor: I am writing to express my concern over an issue that has recently been brought to my attention by the University of Pennsylvania's men's and women's ultimate frisbee teams. They have been actively seeking alternate practice locations, as Murphy field is apparently slated for University construction and will no longer be available for club sport use. It angers me that at this point in the semester, these teams still do not know where they will be able to practice for the upcoming college ultimate season -- only that they will not be able to use Murphy Field. I am sure the University has known about the loss of Murphy Field for quite some time and should have located alternate playing fields for use by all of the club sports teams at Penn, or at least worked with them in good faith to find alternate sites. As a member of the men's Ultimate Frisbee team for two years and as an informal coach for the team in two subsequent spring seasons, I spent a great deal of time practicing, traveling and competing with the team at tournaments across the country. Many of my fondest memories of my years at Penn are from these experiences and the successes attained with the team. While we were not supported in any significant financial way by the University while I attended Penn, we at least had a field to practice on three times a week. While Murphy could not compare in quality to the varsity sport fields, it at least had grass and could accommodate full-sized ultimate frisbee fields. It pains me to think that the teams will not have a place to practice after this semester, or that they will have to find their own fields and their own transportation at their own cost. While it is understandable that club sports will never be provided the budgets and the facilities varsity sports enjoy, it is difficult to understand how the University could not provide for at least the most basic of facilities and opportunities for these programs and for the students that choose to participate in them. I understand that filled space and outdoor facilities are a common problem among colleges and universities situated in urban settings. However, I also know that many other schools in large cities, Ivy League schools and state and private colleges and universities, have successfully confronted this situation and found reasonable solutions so that all students interested my participate in the recreational or athletic activities of their choice. Daniel Johnson College '94