<p>Apparently, Campus is closing because not enough people joined. Anyone who joined the club has to find somewhere else to eat this year. So now the Prospect 11 is down to the Prospect 10!</p>
<p>Wow, how did you find that out? ;-) You must be on the inside track at Princeton.</p>
<p>yeah, i havent heard anything</p>
<p>yeah, campus club is closing, they sent stuff out to all the alumni and to the band (which had made up most of its limited membership)</p>
<p>Why was no one interested in joining?</p>
<p>Aw... isn't it possible that if they'd held out, they might've seen a huge turnaround like Colonial did a couple of year ago?</p>
<p><3 Colonial
but I don't think they got the turnaround by holding out; they made an active effort to improve themselves and attract people. But anyway, there's always the possibility of re-opening.</p>
<p>the undergraduate enrollment expansion, once complete, will increase the number of club-eligible upperclassmen by about 250. that alone should make campus club viable again, and may even allow cannon to come back from the dead.</p>
<p>In every effort to order undergrads by their social status, there is always one grouping (or eating club) on the bottom rung of the prestige ladder.</p>
<p>distinguish: harvard's final clubs, like yale's secret societies, "tap" harvard students, while princeton students interested in its selective clubs have to "bicker" those clubs on their own initiative. i'd say the former is a more effective way of ordering undergrads (well, at least all males, since the final clubs continue to exclude women) by their social status. that said, there is no "bottom rung" among eating clubs, since half employ non-selective admission processes, meaning anyone can join, whatever their "status." campus club members are campus club members because they signed in there, while their peers signed into other clubs like charter, cloister, colonial, and terrace.</p>
<p>So what are they going to do with the house?</p>
<p>Here's the difference: the "final clubs" at Harvard and the "secret societies" at Yale include only a tiny minority of undergrads and can be safely ignored by those having no interest without fear that they will be socially scarred.</p>
<p>At Princeton, on the other hand, the "eating clubs" are central to undergrad social life, accept people on a sliding scale of acceptability, and doom those not making the cut as outcasts, no matter what rationalization they may offer.</p>
<p>It is for this reason that the Administration rat Princeton very much wants to marginalize or eliminate the "eating clubs." Moreover, in an alarming development, 15% of Princeton undergrads now belong to regular fraternities - with all the "hazing" associated therewith. The Administration is determined to stamp them out, even if it means steering potential members, temporarily, as a lesser evil, to the "eating clubs."</p>
<p>Surveys have consistently shown that the perceived snootiness of the "eating clubs" are the principal reason many admits reject Princeton, and often a reason why strong candidates refuse to apply in the first place. They are a remnant of a bygone era that Princeton needs to eliminate as soon as may be feasible.</p>
<p>
[quote]
doom those not making the cut as outcasts, no matter what rationalization they may offer.
[/quote]
This is so much of an exaggeration as to leave the planet of truth altogether.</p>
<p>Let hope Aludaughter makes it through " bicker"! I'm sure she will.</p>
<p>I made it through. I was accepted to what was at the time the most selective of the co-ed clubs. I joined. I didn't like it - I'm one of the blue-haired people at heart:). I quit senior year. I did not feel remotely like an outcast nor did I know anyone else who did.</p>
<p>The parties are easy to get into if you want to go. And several clubs are non-bicker. And as I have said what is now tens of times, stop referring to my daughter.</p>
<p>Finally, the university is moving toward offering other social centers, hence the residential colleges. And you have to love the new dorms, Bloomberg with the bamboo hardwood floors, and Whitman is on its way.</p>
<p>"Surveys have consistently shown that the perceived snootiness of the "eating clubs" are the principal reason many admits reject Princeton, and often a reason why strong candidates refuse to apply in the first place. They are a remnant of a bygone era that Princeton needs to eliminate as soon as may be feasible."</p>
<p>I hate the fact that I'm asking you to do this, but prove it. Link me to these surveys because that is one statistic I just am not believing.</p>
<p>If you don't like the atmosphere of Princeton, fine, don't apply. But I am sick of people being all "oh noes Princeton is all elitist and preppy it must change and be mediocre and commonplace just like EVERY OTHER COLLEGE." I'm not going to lie: the fact that Princeton is full of preppy, elitist WASPs is just fine with me, and is one of the things that I love so much about it. And I don't even expect to be one of the "popular" kids - I don't plan on bickering, I'm not joining a sorority, etc. etc. Some people just fit in better at a school with this kind of atmosphere.</p>
<p>And for some of us, it's things like the eating clubs that attract us to Princeton. Ivy league colleges are MEANT to be elite. That's what a lot of people look to them for. Princeton without eating clubs wouldn't be Princeton.</p>
<p>Alumother, I highlighted that <em>exact</em> sentence to copy and quote. Doom? Outcasts? Oh how my knees shake at his gory sensationalism. </p>
<p>Byerly my friend, firstly, you can't not make the cut of a club which doesn't do cuts at all. If you don't make a bicker club or don't want to bicker, you are in no way 'outcast' - you can join the many other non-bicker clubs which offer the same eating club facilities. In fact, you don't necessarily have to join a club at all to spend a night at one. Secondly, eating clubs are a meal option for <em>upperclassmen</em>. "Undergrad social life" is a deliberate exaggeration on your part. Thirdly, the image you're trying to portray that the bicker clubs are impossible or even difficult to get into is , again, desperate exaggeration. </p>
<p>I don't see how size matters. In an eating club, students choose a club to eat at (if they want a club at all). The conception of a finals club where students are chosen by the club if they are deemed wuhr-thy and in which women are excluded, is to me infinitely worse. However, I'm not surprised that you don't see H's social discrimination of women a problem. After all, what was your response to H's paying male faculty significantly much more than female faculty are paid? "Well H professors get paid more than P professors." <em>.......clap. clap.clap.</em></p>
<ul>
<li>just for the record, unlike prettyfish, I don't like the idea of eating clubs. However, they are exaggerated by people like Byerly, when really they aren't a big deal. Personally? When in two years the eating clubs become an option, if the food's better, I'll join one. If it ain't, I'll continue enjoying all that Princeton has to offer, none of which is outweighed by the presence of eating club options.</li>
</ul>
<p>Why is this debate going on again? We had a four-page thread on this two weeks ago in which Byerly's talking points were systematically discredited.</p>
<p>"Discredited" eh? Well talk to the Admissions Office about what their ongoing study shows. "Eating clubs" are popular with alumni, who are quite defensive when the Administration makes noises about de-emphasizing them.</p>
<p>Defend them all you want to ... I really don't care in the slightest.</p>
<p>But the image they present of Princeton is not a positive one, and is a principal reason why the RD admit rate is barely over 50%, and why, "based on information obtained from students admitted to the University who chose not to attend, Rapelye confirmed that most of Princeton's cross-admits choose Harvard, Yale, Stanford or MIT over Old Nassau."</p>
<p>Further, given the recent falloff in the yield rate, "the Admission Office has hired a research firm to conduct focus groups with current undergraduates and prospective students. Rapelye said she hopes the research will shed light on "good and bad stereotypes, myths and outright misconceptions" about the University."</p>