Pomona's Prometheus Mention in Chronicle of Higher Education

Earlier in the semester, I mocked Pomona's Prometheus. I stand by my ridicule. While Pomona students may think themselves Promethean in gifts they have to offer the world, they'll find their really quite Sisyphean. (The metaphorical boulder being of about equal weight with the average Sagehen's ego.)

In any event, I find The Community Colleges Section of The Chronicle of Higher Education disagrees with my aesthetic tastes. (Does anyone else get the rich satisfaction that Pomona is mentioned in the Community College Section?)

The Chronicle writes

The Mexican muralist movement, whose best-known members were Rivera, José Clemente Orozco, and David Alfaro Siqueiros, has left its mark at several other American colleges as well. Rivera painted murals at the San Francisco Art Institute and at the University of California at Berkeley. Orozco, a visiting lecturer at Dartmouth College in 1932, left behind a sweeping series of murals, in the basement of Baker Library, on American civilization. A Pomona College building displays Orozco's fiery mural of Promethe-us.

Of course, Pomona students have a history of defending this artwork, which allegedly spawned the forgotten era of Mexican murals.

When Orozco arrived at the Claremont depot in March, 1930, he was met by an enthusiastic delegation of Pomona students, who were to play an important role in the project. Although the faculty of the time were divided about the merits of the commission, the students rallied to the artist's support, helping to raise funds for his fee. Watching the painting progress from day to day, many came to know Orozco personally, and alumni of the period recall with pride their personal involvement in the project.

Woe onto me for criticizing a work of art, but why doesn't Pomona use its billion dollar endowment to more productive ends?

While the question of international students getting aid is perhaps a discussion for a different time, I'm sure we can think of a great many places to put the money besides murals.

Orhan Pamuk: Don't Ask Me About Politics

Orhan Pamuk came to Claremont McKenna last week. I love his work, but didn't go. In part, that was because I have no desire to hear authors speak. Their words speak for themselves.

In part, I'm glad that he spoke little about the politics surrounding his life. Writers write. Politicians play politics. As far as I'm concerned, never the two shall meet. I find it tremendously tedious when artists presume a moral legitimacy to speak or advocate for something they have not fully studied (read: Bono!)

Still, I hope that the silly Turkish government isn't silencing its most wonderful literary contribution. What's more, I hope he isn't self-censoring. Leadership is needed on these issues and who better than a Nobel Laureate? (The Literature Prize is still prestigious, if the Peace Prize has become something of a caricature post-Arafat and Gore.)

In any event, Will Bingham of The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, showed that Pamuk was willing to deal in generalities about the problems facing writers in a politicized world.

Pamuk, who was charged by the Turkish government for "insulting Turkishness" after his comments on the Armenian issue, said he never set out as a writer to have a political role.

"Because people find that corner of the world a bit troubled, those troubles come back to me as journalists' questions, and sometimes I cannot shut up my mouth," Pamuk said.

"If your country is troubled, if you are translated, it is almost inevitable that a writer in the end finds himself in politics," Pamuk said. "Along with politics comes political problems, trials, hate campaigns, this or that.

"What I have done, and it may come back again at me, what I have done is to fasten my seat belt and wait for the landing."

Mr. Pamuk, the world is waiting to be led away from those hate campaigns by authors of beauty and dignity. We are waiting to be directed away from those trials, from "this or that." Please forgive us for asking you to stand up. We have no one else to turn to.

The Secret To Harvey Mudd's Success

Over at Design News, Charles J. Murray probes why it is that engineering professors are widely considered bad teachers by their own students.

The exception to the rule: Harvey Mudd College.

In a Princeton Review survey, out of the top twenty engineering schools, only Harvey Mudd students said that their engineering professors were good teachers .

Murray points to the cause:

It's worth noting that Harvey Mudd College — the one engineering school that did well in the survey — is not known as a research institution. Another college that has done well in the past, Olin College of Engineering, is also not a research institution.

This survey could give President Maria Klawe grounds to step off her mission to change Harvey Mudd. Maybe all Harvey Mudd College needs to do is continue teaching students engineering.