October 17,1989
The Lance
Editor's
Desk
Michael Roberts
Well, it’s finally here! And with my
sincere apologies. Getting the second issue
of Th£_Lanc£_has been a chore, to put it
mildly. If I could even begin to explain the
obstacles that had to be hurdled to produce
this newpaper, it would read like a cross be
tween a Three Stooges Comedy and a
Stephen King Novel. Suffice to say that
there were numerous mechanical difficul
ties, and the conditions under which TTie
Lance must be created are far from conven
ient and even practical.
It was the policy of some previous editors
to come up with something, anything, as
long as a compilation that could be called a
newspaper was released. It is my personal
policy to get rid of the fluff and the trash.
You deserve more than eight pages full of
meaningless filler. It is my intention to pro
duce a paper that is interesting and informa
tive, even if it is a little late.
I was overwhelmed by the positive com
ments that my staff has received on our last
issue. Many hours go into producing a
paper, and it is sometimes a thankless job.
Students, staff, and faculty seemed to be
very pleased with the first issue.
You will undoubtedly notice a few
changes in this issue. I am open to sugges
tions and criticisms, and will continue to
consider suggestions from the St. Andrews
community. Pat Hoss' column has not been
scratched, although it is under minor restruc
turing. .
Although I do not feel this particular issue
is as good as it could be, or might have been,
I will continue to strive to keep this a good
student newspaper. I hope to be printed on a
regular and predictable schedule. We are
currently building a staff of crack reporters
to cover all that interests and concerns the
students of St. Andrews. Thanks for bearing
with us, and if you ever have an hour or so to
kill, come to my office and hear about the
trauma behind the elusive Lance.
What Makes St. Andrews
St. Andrews?
Alan Abrams
Again I have one of those
questions which seems to
have limited signifigance:
What makes St. Andrews?
I think that it’s obvious
that the buildings and
campus do not constitute St.
Andrews. They may be the
setting, but I don't think that
the unique mix of people,
ideas, attitudes, and
enthusiasnw exists because
of the collection of buildings
on a small campus in the
middle of Nowhere, N.C.
Is it the adminstration? If
so, how is it that the college
continues even though
there has been a nearly total
administration turnover in
the past two years?
Perhaps, though the
Function of administration
is necessary to the
continuance of the college,
neither that function nor the
specific administrators are
critical to the Life of the
college. In other words, the
act of administrating and
tending to financial
business is not a
characteristic unique to St.
Andrews. j
Is it then the faculty, the
professors, those people
who have insights and
experiences to share in the
classrooms? I personally
want to say yes, but the
faculty have been turning
over rather quickly in the
last few years. Does this
mean that St. Andrews is in
the danger of becon\ing run
of the mill? I hopje not, but I
don't know. I rather doubt it
— I think that the faculty
retains the whateveritis that
makes their part of the St
Andrews concoction work.
However, the question
arises, can the faculty
develop a personality, can
they find their respective
niches in St. Andrews
without some stability? The
education department was
visually emptied last year.
The theater and
communication
department has had the
"Looks Eternal" was a haunt-
T A QTT A TPfT
JLj v-' mIj Jl jtjL JT
Michael A. Roberts
Jennifer Spangler
Kathy Sellers
Nancy Often
Mary Cay Gibson
Dr. VVD White
I’at Hoss
Viking Davis
Rooney Coffman
Jennifer Hitch
Editor.in-Chief
Asst. Editor
Assoc. Editor
Photo Editor
VP Adver.
Columnist
Columnist
Arts & Ent.
Photographer
Quill and Ink
The opinions expressed on the Opinion
page are not necessarily those of the
Lance Staff, but of the writers
themssclves. The Lance Editor reserves
the right to edit as seen necessary.