<p>idad,
They were both works of fiction. And Tom Wolfe doesn't do "warm." In fact, sometimes his stories/distortions are so outrageous that they make you cringe. He can really make his satire "hurt" as some former "masters of the universe" can probably attest. </p>
<p>As for the supposed campuses. I think that Duke and Dartmouth are both great places and I believe that the vast majority of students would be happy on either campus.</p>
<p>Wolfe always writes in a kind of over-the-top manner, but usually saves himself with at least one or two characters that the reader can like. I didn't find any of the characters in Charlotte Simmons particularly likable. I do think the book was well researched and that it manages to compress a lot of real issues and incidents into its narrative. I just didn't care for it all that much.</p>
<p>Bonfire and A Man in Full were better, IMO.</p>
<p>"well researched"? Not sure what that means. Do you believe that the characters are accurate depictions of real students? Or that the characters are constructions of the worst qualities that a person can find while scanning any college campus?</p>
<p>Regardless, "well-researched" is vastly different from "mostly accurate or applicable to the specific case of Duke University in the quantity and quality presented by the author," however. My disagreement on this thread would be with anyone who tries to claim that CS is (a) an accurate portrayal of Duke University and (b) only Duke University... I will say that I lost my bet with myself about how quickly someone would jump in with the Rolling Stone article, though.</p>
<p>Another "read them all" Tom Wolfe fan here. I enjoyed "I am Charlotte Simmons" and I thought the fictional campus was based on maybe three different places. </p>
<p>Looking forward to the next one, in 2009...sooo long between books!</p>
<p>And Duke or no, second hand impact of binge drinking...ick, who needs it?</p>
<p>DukeEng- As I said, my sister thought it was an accurate depiction of Penn in the late 70s. I think it screams "Duke" because of the whole basketball thing. Of course it isn't the ONLY accurate depiction of Duke. It depicts a certain segment of the Duke (and other universities as well) society. Wolfe is over the top, but he hits on some real segments of the communities on which his books focus. I, too, did not like any of the characters in Charlotte Simmons.</p>
<p>Cottonwood: Agreed, and definitely agree that there are different percentages at different campuses. However, no campus is as monolithically degenerate as depicted in the book, and certainly no such campus so described could sustain any real academic learning, when in fact it is actually a commonplace activity at all the campuses suggested as models for this book (and actually, at all campuses, I believe.)</p>
<p>Which goes back to my main complaint as a reader: there is satire, and good satire is a treasure, and then there's lazy exaggeration for shock effect.</p>
<p>The book is right on.You must read Presumed Innocent-the recent book exposing the absolute corruption of the Duke administration and faculty re the lax team's travail.</p>
<p>From a couple of years ago:</p>
<p>I found it took stereotypes to the extreme - none of them were believable except as gross caricatures. Still, there was was nothing so shocking in the story to me that hasn't occurred on most any college campus for years , except maybe the coed bathroom scene (just another exaggeration). I was probably too harsh in the previous thread with respect to my comment about the the author himself(I think I called him a wanna be frat boy) since I've always enjoyed his work in the past, but all in all I did not care for this book - less because of the "shocking" (not) subject matter than the fact that I found the story none too compelling and the characters neither very credible nor likeable.</p>
<p>Re #27:</p>
<p>Is this the book you are referring to? </p>
<p>"Until Proven Innocent -- Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case," by Stuart Taylor & KC Johnson</p>
<p>I'm not entirely sure how UPI supports or refutes CS... If anything, UPI uses the Coleman Report to show that many of the more outrageous stereotypes painted by Wolfe and used to full effect in the first days of the lacrosse case were wrong or grossly stretched beyond credulity. To Wolfe's credit, versus others, at least he was intending to write fiction.</p>
<p>^ I agree. Maybe Tigers Rule was referring to another publication?</p>
<p>Even the title, "Until Proven Innocent" is much different than his / her reference to "Presumed Innocent"......:o</p>
<p>I went to Duke - graduating over 25 years ago. I found the book accurate in parts; hyperbolic in others. </p>
<p>I myself was a bit socially ostracized because I rarely drank (a beer or two was fine from time to time) and never would have considered drugs of any kind, and, unlike many of the students there, was poor - as in absolutely nothing but the clothes on my back and the athletic scholarship that permitted me to attend school. The poor thing actually drove the lack of vices more than anything else - I couldn't imagine wasting what little I had on anything other than something extra to eat when the meal plan was insufficient, not to mention the loss of scholarship - I viewed the partiers by and large as rich, frivolous, and not very tough. Plus, the poor thing didn't not go over well with enabling the dating of young women - even with the plus factor that appearing in major sports publications and news obtained - I didn't have much to offer and certainly did not know how to, or appreciate, things like socials and dances. I was a rough around the edges kid who reacted by being shy and isolating. I am not sure, though, that all of this this made Duke a bad place - because most other top flight schools seem to have the same problems and challenges. So in the end what I remember and value most about the place was the education itself (a fantastic experience), something that stays with me to this day - and how lucky I was - offspring of an unemployed single mother with no job skills - to attend a good university at no cost, and succeed in a honors program to boot. That makes the lousy social life complaint seem mighty trivial, and rightly so. </p>
<p>And I might also add I never had to deal with helicopter parents. They quit helicoptering when I was less than ten year old, and with the poverty came absolutely delightful freedom. Think about this as you parents deign to helicopter.</p>
<p>Eventhough the Lacrosse team was ultimately found innocent of rape, the fact remains they were having a drunken party with paid strippers. So, we're not talking about choirboys having a tame get together.</p>
<p>Of course... we can't all be St</a>. Albans.</p>
<p>hawkette: I was referring to the fictional campuses not Duke or Dartmouth, I regret any confusion.</p>
<p>3-2go, has your daughter had a chance to stay overnight at Duke or any of the colleges she's considering? If so, did she have any thoughts on this issue? Also, the two of you might want to look into the substance free dorms. It seems like that would be a very good way for her to meet like-minded friends.</p>
<p>Actually, it is my son. He will be going to one of the Blue Devil Days soon so he will check things out for himself.<br>
These posts have been very interesting and have actually calmed my nerves somewhat.<br>
Thanks to everyone who posted</p>
<p>My D is fairly "innocent", felt a little removed from the visiting high schoolers who attended the overnight with her, and had many bemused observations about the drunken debauchery... but she still wants to go...</p>
<p>The April 4 WSJ had an article called "Sex Education" by Donna Freitas. The drop quote--"Time to choose a college? Check out the 'dating' scene"--reminded me of this discussion. The article appears to be a taste of Freitas's just-published book "Sex and the Soul: Juggling Sexuality, Spirituality, Romance & Religion on America's College Campuses". A really lazy web search (i.e. looking at the first three links that popped up) didn't produce a link to the article, but here are the last two paragraphs:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The question remains, though, why students who feel bad about hooking up, who wish their peers would act less casual about sex and who dream of living with at least some restrictions on their sexual relationships then choose to act as they do. The answer lies in community. Most campuses do not provide an environment where acting on romantic desires, rather than sexual ones, is feasible. It takes a village to set standards for dating.</p>
<p>So, parents, you may have done an excellent job raising your kids with good morals, strong boundaries and high expectations when it comes to romance and sex, but it would take an 18 year-old of superhuman strength to stand up to the pressures of most college environments. In other words, find out about the deating lives and party havits of students at your child's dream school, or whether hooking up has replaced dating altogether. As students told me time and time again, romantic relationships--the good, the bad and the ugly--can make or break the college experience. Before you mail that check, do your research.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Is there a smiley for lighting a bunch of kerosene-soaked rags and then running away? :) Seriously, I'd think that the book is going to be a subject of discussion here, anyway, in the months to come. Just to be pre-emptive, aside from the author mentioning in the WSJ article that this was a national survey of over 2500 students, and that she taught a course on "Spirituality & Sexuality in American Youth Culture", I know nothing about the author or her methodology.</p>
<p>Ah, here's a link: Sex</a> Education - WSJ.com</p>
<p>3-2go, I'm glad your nerves have been calmed by these posts. I hope your son enjoys his visit to Duke.</p>