V
12
THE BATTALION
ArBCUT f III I N IN!
1 ' 1 cy DC. ¥. I . MATC {
Collegre Librarian and Staff Columnist “l^ets Us Have It” for Our Editorial
“About Professors”
Any faculty reply to “About Professors.” undoubt
edly the ablest etiitorial which has appeared in the
Battalion in our time, must take largely the form ot
the ‘‘honest confession” that is said to In* so “good for
the soul." In fact, the only objectionable feature of Mr.
Blank’s editorial was its truthfulness.
Which of us profs but must; admit with sharpe,
for example, that we have l»een grossly guilty of “stif
ling the creative impulses” of that richly creative ani
mal, the Texas Aggie? Every one of my readers can
undoubtedly recall with oaie a dozen instances of
eager young minds, simply sprouting with brilliqnt
ideas, but chilled and crushed by the callous indifffcr-
ence or blighting sarcasm of the professor. As a mat
ter of fait, it is notorious that we teachers often dis
cuss among ourselves the problem of keeping down ori
ginality-among our students, t>ewailing their wide
spread interest in new ideas and their dangerous ten
dency to think for themselves, in spite of all that we
can do to‘stifle their “creative impulses.”
As for Mr. Blank's second accusation, that we lay
too much stress on detail in asking questions, I very
much fear that we must also plead guilty. Everyone
knows how cramping it is to the soaring Aggie intel
lect to be called upon fof such sordid matters as facts
and figures. Think of the otherwise pleasant dormi-
tory evenings that we have spoiled by demanding, on
our quizzes, such detailed knowledge as requires whole
minutes—nay, sometimes an hour of concentrated
study to acquire!
We professors must (reluctantly) admit our “lazi
ness,” too,—a laziness all the more inexcusable in view
of the snappy alertness of the brisk young minds with
which we are privileged to deal. Surely we ought to
have realized by this time the teacher’s sacred obli
gations: (1) To prepare the student (painlessly) for
making A’s on quizzes without undue effort outside
the class-room; and (2*) to keep him entertained in the
process. And of course we cannot fulfil these lofty
functions without practically incessant toil in prepara
tion. Truly, we ought to be up and doing if we are not
(dreadful thought) to Imre the dear fellows. (Waiter,
a quart of midnight oil, please!)
The last count in Mr. Blank’s indictment is par
ticularly interesting. Some professors, he says, instead
of confining themselves to nice, stimulating questions
beginning with “Why ?” questions to which it is a
real pleasure to reply in vague and quickly thought-up
generalities—have developed the embarrassing habit
(drat ’em!) of wanting to know, specifically, “What is
‘We profs don’t appreciate what a bunch of poten-
i
tial geniuses we are privileged to teach.”
• • • • • ;
interest ”, “What is a utility?”, “Who won the battle
of X?” In spite of our own guilt in this matter, we can
sympathize with Mr. Blank. We can imagine his an
noyance on some morning when, after having been un
avoidably detained in an important crap-game the
night before, he came to class without having bothered
alnmt the detail of reading the lesson, but fully capable
(in spite of a slight headache) of discoursing in an en
tertainingly imaginative manner on “causes” which
no one can prove or disprove, or on vast, cloudy “ten
dencies.” How boring, on such an occasion, to find that
the professor wants definitions and facts instead of
flights of fancy!
On the whole, then, Mr. Blank would seem to be
right. We profs are indeed a sorry lot! Above all, we
don’t appreciate what a bunch of potential geniuses
we are privileged to teach, how delicately their sensi
tive souls must be handled, and how heinous it is to
plague them with work or boredom (the two l>eing, it
seems, practically synonymous).
We do feel our deficiencies, Mr. Blank. We kiss the
rod and promise to reform. In fact, I personally would
just love to get you into a course of mine, Mr. Blank—
just to show you how deeply your advice has touched
me—yes indeed—just to show you!