PAGE 2
THE BELLES
MARCH, 1982
The Belles
of
StMary’s
College
PHONE: 828-2521
900 HILLSBOROUGH ST,
RALEIGH, N.C. 27611
THE BELLES STAFF
Editor Mary Glenn Barwick
Faculty Advisor Douglas Murray
Reporters Anne Latham, Cree Taylor, Julie Glossen,
Mary Newman. Mary Nell Hassell, Kathryn Heath
Karen Lado, Foo Vaeth, Lynn Jones, Kathleen Kinkaid
Leslie Derby, Ann Campbell. Becky Rogers.
Virginia Hodges, Elizabeth Archer, Tracy Braent
Photographers Ellen Block, Patty Bab.
Ann Campbell, Foo Vaeth
Typists Leslie Derby, Kathryn Heath.
Anne Latham. Lynn Jones
We have had many
speakers for our new forum
series. All of them have had
something interesting to-
contribute. Our forum series
has included women
gynecologists, designers,
fashion retailers,
broadcasters, actresses - the
list goes on. Not many could
argue against this new series.
Not only does it entertain, but
it educates at the same time.
Another positive feature is
that it draws outsiders’
attention to St. Mary’s and its
diverse educational offerings.
Perhaps this will become
another St. Mary’s tradition.
There one feature that
seems to be included in each
forum series speech we listen
to. THE St. Mary’s
STANDING OVATION. As
long as we have been on this
earth we have understood the
standing ovation to be a
situation where one stands on
their feet after an
exceptionally good speech.
Here at St. Mary’s we have
begun to feel that THE
STANDING OVATION is done
out of a sense of duty. Perhaps
it is done because we are on
our feet already, so it is faster
to get out. Hopefully, this is
not the reason.
We were particularly
upset after President Rice’s
December speech. In our
opinion, that speech deserved,
on a scale from 1-10, an 11.
That speech touched us so
much there were tears in our
eyes. After the speech was
over, we dutifully stood up and
clapped. It is our feeling that
since we had held a standing
ovation for every speaker, we
were saying that this speech
was like any other.
What we are trying to say
is: other speeches have been
good, and it is all right to give
them standing ovations; but
what about OUTSTANDING
speeches? We think many of
us will agree that Jane
Goodall’s speech was
exceptional. After giving her a
standing ovation, we felt as if
this was not sufficient since
we had done the same for
other speakers. As a result,
we felt that we hadn’t shown
her enough appreciation for a
truly excellent speech.
Perhaps St. Mary’s
students feel that this showing
of appreciation (THE
STANDING OVATION) is
necessary. But it is our
opinion ttat too much of a
good thing grows old soon.
Perhaps we should truly listen
to our speakers and then
evaluate - was it good enough
for a standing ovation? Then,
if it is good enough, by all
means let the speaker know.
It is difficult to determine
between a “10” and a “1”
speech; however it is even
more difficult to tell between a
“5” or “6” speech. Together,
however, we feel we can form
a universally satisfactory
opinion and make THE ST.
MARY’S STANDING
OVATION not an unnecessary
tradition, but the perfect
culmination to an exceptional
speech.
Mary Glenn Barwick
Jacque Taylor
fl irt'tirDC TA till-
Dear Editor:
A few weeks ago.
President Rice discovert
quite a few girls had skipped
chapel and were munching
down in the cafeteria.
Because of the rule which
requires chapel attendance,
these girls were supposed to
be campused. They were not,
due to the large number of
girls and a few
misunderstandings. But this
did raise the question among
the students of whether chapel
should be required or not.
There is some feeling that
chapel should not be required.
I have done some research on
the present rule and why it
should be changed.
To start, I contacted the
Reverend Dillard, the present
chaplain of St. Mary’s. He,
himself, does not feel that
chapel should be required
because he doesn’t like the
idea of forcing people to go to
or participate in something
they would rather not. But, the
chaplain read the book before
he got here and in spite of
required chapel, he felt there
was a good ministry here. The
Rev. Dillard also informed me
that St. Mary’s Junior College
is a non-profit, private
organization; it is not a
parochial school. A parochial
school is one supported and
controlled by a church. St.
Mary’s is controlled by the
Board of Trustees and it is
their decision to require
chapel. Although St. Mary’s
was founded by an
Episcopalian priest and has a
chapel, the school is not under
the jurisdiction of the diocese
or a church. Therefore, St.
Mary’s is not an official
parochial school.
Next, I contacted Mrs.
Martha Stoops, Associate
Professor of History, who is
writing the history of St.
Mary’s. She told me that in the
fall of 1971, the question of
required chapel had been
raised and told me where I
could get the information
concerning the controversy. I
then obtained the St. Mary’s
Bulletin. This presented the
reasons of the girls petitioning
“non-compulsory chapel” and
those of the President and the
Board. Some of the girls’
reasons resemble those of
today.
Chapel (religion) is a
tradition at St. Mary’s and an
integral part of our school, but
it is not the reason why the
girls decide to come. They
come mostly for academic
reasons. Chapel can still be a
tradition at St. Mary’s even if
it isn’t required. The feeling is
not to abolish the chapel, just
the rule of required chapel.
Forcing the students to
attend chapel at an age when
they are just beginning to
evaluate their religious values
and morals can alienate them
from the church and cause
resentment towards it. If
chapel is not required, the
girls still have the option of
attending chapel and would
probably get more out of it.
This would give the girls a
chance to understand and
determine their religious
values.
An argument for required
chapel is that the student
knows when she decided to
come to St. Mary’s that she
must attend chapel services.
There may be, however, girls
who decide not to come to St.
Mary’s because of required
chapel. Competition for
students is getting worse
every year, and St. Mary’s is
having a hard time recruiting
students. Even though
enrollment is up, what does
the future hold in store? If the
rule for required chapel were
eliminated, several more girls
would probably decide to
come here. This would
strengthen enrollment, and
still give those girls desiring
religious services that
opportunity.
For these reasons and a
few of my personal ones, it
seems that the rule of
required chapel is irrelevant to
a non-parochial school and
may do more harm than good
to one’s religious feelings and
to the future of the school.
Sincerely,
Robin Hardy
Dear Editor:
I was extremely pleased
when I was asked to
participate in the chapel
service last evening;
however, my pleasure was
dampened as the service
progressed and the conduct of
the students became a barrier
to worship - even to
contemplation and reflection.
If they do not wish to worship
themselves, the least they
could do, out of respect for the
service and their fellow
students, would be to KEEP
QUIET! Whether or not they
wish to be there is immaterial
~ this is a chapel service and
should be given the respect
due the occasion. This, in my
opinion, also requires at least
a modicum of proper dress. I
am not suggesting “Sunday
best” but simply modest
clothing.
Perhaps the saddest part
of the abhorrent conduct
displayed by so many of the
students is the lost
opportunity for them simply
to be quiet and reflect and
allow the benefits of this
frame of mind to be theirs. I
strongly suspect the reason
that they do not take
advantage of this opportunity
is that they have had the
experience so rarely they
forget what it is like to “...be
still and know...God.”
I sincerely hope that I will
be able to return to a service
at some future time and be
able to worship. Although this
is my letter, I am sure that I
speak for others who attended
the service.
Janice C. Doffey, PhD
Associate Professor
of Biology
Dear Editor:
Dinner at 4:45???
Yesterday afternoon was
EDITOR’S
THE BELLES staff
encourages letters of any size,
shape or form, concerning any
subject matter. Letters, '
terribly busy for me. I had
classes straight until 3:00 and
by then I was exhausted. After
classes I had several errands
to run and before I knew it, it
was 5:30; 5:30 meant it was
time to go see “Raisin in the
Sun” which was required. I
went in spite of the fact I was
so tired and I might add
enjoyed it thoroughly. I didn’t
get out of there until 7:45 and I
realized I had missed dinner
in the dining hall once again.
The dining hall’s hours
are from 7:15-8:30 in the
mornings; 11:30-l: 15 at lunch,
and4:45to6:00at dinner. Now
I agree that an hour and 15
minutes is a long enough
period for each meal, however
I do not agree with the times it
is served. The first period of
classes begins at 8:00 and
ends at 8:55 or so. Instead of
breakfast beginning at 7:15,
which is 45 minutes before
classes begin, I think it should
start at 7:30 and end after
9:00. This way, people who
want to eat breakfast but don’t
wish to get up before first
period could still eat.
I believe the lunch hours
are suitable since they are
from 11:30-1:15 you can eat if
you have from 11:00 to 12:00
free or 1:00 to 2:00. My big
complaint is about the dinner
hours.
Who gets hungry at 4:45?
If you eat then, you are
starved by 8:00. If someone
gets hungry before then it is
easier for her to walk
somewhere else to eat if
transportation is a problem.
The only problem I can
see in changing these hours
are in the dinner shift. People
say that the workers like the
present hours better.
However, if the only problem
is getting the workers to
agree, maybe we could talk it
over with them and institute
new hours on a trial basis. If
these new hours fail, then they
fail, but at least we can say we
gave it our best shot. Perhaps
housemothers and students
could help out with the hours.
It worked smoothly when it
snowed.
In conclusion, I would like
to stress the importance of
these hours, especially dinner.
The dinner hours of 4:15-6:(X)
are not practical. We are
paying to get food along with
our education so we should
actually get both. Lastly, I
think it is interesting to note
that although dinner is over at
6:00 p.m., basketball practice
is alM over at this time. Is this
fair??
Sincerely,
Mary Tad Carson
NOTE
however, are subject to
revision. Any letters can be
sent to the editor. Box 17
campus mail.
LITTLE
(Continued from Page 1)
Hunter Elementary School.
The water fountains hit
mid-thigh. The basic chair
was two feet off the ground.
One had to take a great plunge
downward in order to sit on
one of the tiny seats. The little
people themselves were all
very candid and wonderfully
delightful, each in their own
way.
Each classroom was
divided into four groups with
the minimum of four children
and the maximum of seven
(perhaps more). Some brave
girls taught by themselves
while others were doubled up.
Various stories were read and
acted out to the youngsters
PEOPLE
who either participated or sat
enthralled at the “teachers”
telling the stories. A name tag
was made for each story
representing something
wiUiin that particular story.
Games seemed to be the high
light of the whole hour. The
most favorite of these games
was seven-up (memories
huh?) and of course, the
golden oldie, duck-duck goose.
When the St. Mary’s
students left the school, they
left with a sense of not only
having taught something, but
also having learned a great
deal from the little people. All
in all, it was a marvelous
experience for both the old
and young