SUMMER READING STIRS DEBATE

For most Oberlin students, references to summer reading inspire memories of books assigned by an AP English teacher that werenąt read until days before the beginning of school, or annoying journals kept on personal reactions to the exploits of Madame Defarge. For this yearąs incoming first-years, summer reading conjures up images of greedy politicians, smoky backrooms, soft-money and the most recently dug dirt on campaign excesses.

This summer, new Oberlin students were asked to read Elizabeth Drewąs Corruption of American Politics: What Went Wrong and Why? as part of a new plan to get students talking and debating as soon as they arrive on campus to prepare them for intellectual exchange.

It is the hope that after reading Corruption of American Politics , students will want to attend Drewąs lecture Oct.

Unfortunately, judging from an unscientific poll of first-year students, the request to read Drewąs book wasnąt heeded by a substantial number of them, and hadnąt even come to the attention of others. Reasons for this ranged from laziness to aesthetics. College first-year Ben Alschuler said he bought it and was interested in reading it, but never ended up doing so. He said, "Maybe if the cover art had been a bit better I might have read it."

According to Alschuler, it was unclear that they were being asked to do read the book, as the recommendation came unannounced in the middle of a packet incoming first years received about the upcoming year. Other students also mentioned the fact that they didnąt know about the request.

Despite the fact that there were no consequences for not having read the book, many students were embarrassed to be quoted in the Review because they had not read it. According to one first-year resident of South asked not to be named, he began to read the book, but then lost interest. He said he didnąt attend the discussions, although he was aware of the recommendation to read the book.

According to Dean of Students Goldsmith, the debates were well attended. The professors who facilitated them, Associate Professor of Politics Eve Sandberg, Monroe Professor of Politics and Law Ronald Kahn, and African-American Studies Department Chair James Millette ­ could not be reached for comment this week.

Interestingly, for some students the discussion wasnąt as interesting as the professorsą introductions. "The professor was really cool," said first-year Shane Boris, speaking of the discussion he went to headed by Milette, but adding, "The discussion wasnąt very good."

While it is hoped that this program will be continued each year, the relevance of this book to the upcoming elections made it a natural choice. The selection, which was made by Kahn, Sandberg and Goldsmith, was made because they felt it was fairly balanced and non-partisan. Goldsmith said "The book was not chosen because we expected everyone to agree with it, but because it held out the possibility of sparking conversation and controversy."

It is hoped that the program will be continued in upcoming years for new students, and not just with politics books. "We are very interested in identifying texts that are sufficiently multi-disciplanary," Goldsmith said, adding that "the impetus for choosing the texts

must come from the faculty, since they are the ones who will be leading the discussions."