<p>Nobody asked for your opinion on boozing.</p>
<p>Internet.</p>
<p>dont be rediculous, and dont try to impress with you Plato allusions</p>
<p>If you're not getting wasted, then what else do you have to do at 2 AM on a Saturday night?</p>
<p>Well, I'm not a "nerd". I'm a popular, friendly, attractive, "normal" guy who just likes learning a whole lot. I went to a party on my overnight and I must say, it wasn't bad for a Thursday night. If anyone is having a bad time, they can come party at my dorm next fall :)</p>
<p>Some people say such vicious things. They're either bitter, jealous or just insecure.</p>
<p>Dissing on getting wasted??? Oh, blasphemy! Lets lynch him!</p>
<p>
[quote]
I went to a party on my overnight and I must say, it wasn't bad for a Thursday night.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Please understand that there are only three Thursday nights of the year in which there are parties.</p>
<p>1) Thursday of O-Week
2) Prospie Overnight Thursday #1
3) Prospie Overnight Thursday #2</p>
<p>Parties are a Friday-Saturday affair at the UofC.</p>
<p>once again, another person who either 1) Has no idea what they are talking about or 2) Is hanging out with the wrong people.</p>
<p>No, can't be. He is a popular, friendly, and attractive guy.</p>
<p>
[quote]
once again, another person who either 1) Has no idea what they are talking about or 2) Is hanging out with the wrong people.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Let me rephrase it then...</p>
<p>The only "real" parties, those that you think of when you think of college and don't involve Plato or calculus, happen on Fridays and Saturdays. On the ocassion, someone will decide to throw a Thursday or Sunday party, it is very rare.</p>
<p>I'm talking about the parties the "wrong" people go to. You know, the people who are "wrong" because not only are they intelligent enough to succede at the University of Chicago, but they are good looking and know how to have a good time without academics. The ones most of the student body has a strong feeling against, mainly out of jealousy and spite. They are the kids most UofC students hoped they were getting away from by going to the UofC, but, nope...here they are, again.</p>
<p>When I returned to Hyde Park after about a decade away, I remember looking out my window and seeing 18 year old nerds, 30 year old nerds, 50 year old nerds, and 75 year old nerds. I said, "Nerds of all ages!" </p>
<p>Traditionally, Chicago was the most serious, nerdiest of all major research universities (except those specializing in science, such as Cal-Tech and MIT). Years ago, in my wife's entering college class, Chicago proudly trumpeted the FACT that not a single member of the class was a cheerleader or quarterback in high school.</p>
<p>But times are changing. With the rise of US News, and after slipping behind Northwestern sometimes in US News, Chicago now actively seeks the more popular, "well-rounded" student, not just the sort of student represented by its adoption (since at least the 1960s) of the slogan "the life of the mind." </p>
<p>This is a somewhat controversial strategy among faculty on campus (to the extent they care about admissions beyond overall student quality). I've heard the Chicago admissions strategy referred to as "Northwestern lite," but it's probably better thought of as "Northwestern heavy." </p>
<p>Women (and men) on campus used to dress extremely plainly (as they still do at places like Carleton), but now Chicago students look more like students at Northwestern (though perhaps not yet as polished in appearance). In appearance, Chicago students are still a far cry from students at UVA, Duke, Texas, UCLA, Stanford, etc. But Chicago is probably no longer the country's nerdiest university (beyond MIT and Cal-Tech).</p>
<p>Whether you view it as broadening its appeal or watering down its core values depends on your point of view.</p>
<p>Nerdy dress and nerdy itellectualism are two distinct things, and I think your post misrepresents that, MerryXmas.</p>
<p>It is possible to be an intellectual and wear Ralph Lauren apparel, regardless of what any coveters-of-thy-neighbors'-lifestyles might claim.</p>
<p>I think it is quite difficult to characterize an entire student body. Chicago is still America's intellectual powerhouse, but I contend that that does not mean that students who attend are any less fun or goofy (ScavHunt anyone?) than at any other school. As I believe I mentioned before, during the time I spent there, I found the students not much different than students I have met elsewhere except that they were smarter, and on the whole (as W.C. Fields would say), more interesting.</p>
<p>I really hope no one uses this thread in making a decision to go to the University of Chicago. A lot of people on here seem very anti anything that is not what they see as intellectual. From personal experience, I can tell you that you will find all kinds of people at Chicago who can balance both academics and a social life and dont mind going out and having a raging good time. To be intellectual does not mean you need to be a nerd. And yes, there are parties on Thursday, Tuesday, whenever. Whoever doesnt think that there are these around campus, just isnt looking for them.</p>
<p>Brinestorm,</p>
<p>Yes, it's possible to be an intellectual and dress well and act socially in a polished way. That would describe the majority of Yale and Princeton students, now and 30 years ago.</p>
<p>But the Chicago gestalt had always been different--more intellectually intense than Yale or Princeton or Stanford, and less social. The simple way to put it is that in high school the traditional Yale student was both smart and popular, while the traditional Chicago student was just smart. The traditional Chicago student was a classic nerd in dress and thinking. Or as one Chicago undergrad put it: "in high school I was a misfit, but here at Chicago almost everyone is a misfit, so I fit in for the first time im my life."</p>
<p>But as I indicated, this is changing at Chicago, which has been attracting more "well-rounded" and less nerdy students. That does not mean that most well-rounded students are not intellectuals or smart, but if you give greater weight to club memberships, student council, and sports than you used to in admissions, then you are going to get a less nerdy group. This changes the culture of the school in a way that will make it more attractive to a wider range of students. </p>
<p>Here is another way to put it: I think that Harvard, Yale, and Princeton turn down the majority of those who apply there with 1500+ boards. Among those who have good boards (and grades), these schools tend to want those who also have oustanding activities. Chicago used to happy to take those who were just as smart as those going to HYP, but weren't popular in HS and didn't have the same range of activities. Now that Chicago is looking for well-rounded students like other schools, it is more likely to reject high scoring/low activities applicants than in the past. It's a different mix of students than before--somewhere between the nerdy values of the old Chicago and the well-rounded values that most other top schools attract.</p>
<p>They, HYP, reject a lot of smart people so they can accept the aristocrats, children of famous people (or famous people), and top athletes. That is a smart way to increase prestige (and paint a false picture of students there).</p>
<p>Chicago refused the Queen of England an honorary degree in law, I believe, because she didn't earn it. Now, that is simply Chicago.</p>
<p>The students I knew from Harvard were no more or less socially polished than UChicago students. And, if one can believe the description of Princeton students in the 70's in "Lost in the Meritocracy" The Atlantic Monthly January/February 2005, one could hardly call them "polished."</p>
<p>idad: "The students I knew from Harvard were no more or less socially polished than UChicago students."</p>
<p>And history has never been a better indicator of the present: <a href="http://www.thecrimson.com/printerfriendly.aspx?ref=507065%5B/url%5D">http://www.thecrimson.com/printerfriendly.aspx?ref=507065</a>. A hilarious article which a friend showed me.</p>
<p>For the lazy, here is a quote to pique your interests: "Harvard students can read 'Ulysses' like it's a childrens book, but when it comes to sexual signals, many are functionally illiterate. Thus, we have color-coded dress requirements, where red is for those with significant others, yellow is for the shy and ambivalent, and green is for the horny and desperate. Didnt we first learn with colors in nursery school?"</p>
<p>Brinestorm: good find, very entertaining.</p>
<p>"We get drunk, sadly, because we just dont have it in us to engage in normal sexual behavior, and many of us prefer a stress-free drunken hookup to more meaningful relationships." </p>
<p>Cough (read the posts above about getting wasted).</p>
<p>Why is this thread still alive?</p>