Viewpoints—Spring 2009

Ethanol Options
Regarding “Trouble in Your Tank? Ethanol Fuels More Problems Than It Solves” (fall 2008), in the state of Illinois we have Archer Daniels Midland Co., which pioneered in the production of ethanol from shelled corn. This firm is cooperating with Monsanto, John Deere, Conoco-Phillips, and Purdue University in the development of biofuels from cornstalks and husks. Two universities in Illinois offer degree programs in ethanol. Gas pumps in Illinois contain 10 percent ethanol. E85 (motor fuel containing 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline) corridors are being established. I have not understood why ethanol from sugar cane is not considered in the United States when this has been a success in Brazil.

Janet Galbreath MA’52
Ava, Illinois

Dream Living Rather than ‘Green’ Living
Kara Baskin’s article, “Down to Earth” (winter 2009), seemed to extol the virtues of moving west, developing land, [and] building new houses no matter how “green” the materials, and buying new appliances, no matter how energy efficient. How about focusing on those alumnae who move closer to town and city centers, walk, use public transportation, buy at farmers markets, sell a car, and hang out the wash. Aren’t those the ones reducing their footprints?

Anne Sanborn Lombard ’56
Northampton, Massachusetts

Green on the Cheap
I felt that your recent article on green living, “Down to Earth,” (winter) was one-sided. Although not everyone has the money to build a green oasis, it’s definitely not cost prohibitive to live green. Unfortunately, living green on the cheap isn’t glamorous, and it doesn’t benefit any corporation or government. In fact, it’s detrimental to them. Consequently, it’s not touted nearly as much as measures such as fluorescent light bulbs, which light bulb companies are more than happy to advertise widely.

So, ten ideas at zero cost: eat less meat (or quit altogether), drive less (or quit altogether), turn down your thermostat in winter or up in summer, line dry your clothes, take a shopping holiday (perhaps permanently), grow some of your own food, turn off your appliances when not in use (including that computer!), skip the vacuum and sweep or Swiffer instead, build a rain barrel to catch your outdoor water, and/or build a solar cooker for your summer cooking.

Every one of these actions will save you money, some significantly. Add them all up, and you can make a major reduction in your carbon footprint at a cost savings. The savings probably won’t afford you a green oasis but they will almost certainly cover a few fluorescent light bulbs.

Kate Sandretto ’01
Madison, Wisconsin

Still Balancing Work and Family
I was saddened to read “Family Vs. Work” (winter 2009) because it indicated how little has changed for women. For decades, we have faced the dilemma of family versus work because the culture hasn’t fundamentally changed to allow genuine flexibility for women and men. Most of us must choose to work from dawn to dusk or care for our children full-time or settle for volunteer work or part-time options that pay little more than a token amount. And given the persistent wage gap, when one worker opts to stay home, it’s almost always the woman.

Rather than argue with each other over the nobler or more satisfying path, let’s unite to promote systemic change that will allow both genders to participate meaningfully in the workforce and on the home front, so that we need not decide whether or not to continue working after having children or while caring for aging parents, but instead how to balance our desire to do both.

Sherri Vanden Akker ’87
Reading, Massachusetts

More Than an Errand Girl
Lisa Wlodarski Romano’s article “Family vs. Work” reminded me once again that all of us women—mothers, nonmothers, “working” and otherwise—need to look beyond the narrow occupational categories that constrain our relationships and diminish our appreciation of many wonderful gifts to our collective welfare.

I happen to have a fulltime job that I derive great satisfaction from and that pays me a monthly salary. But I am pretty sure that it is not the most important thing I do with my life. Indeed, nothing made me laugh more than Susan Abert Noonan’s comment that her family treats her as an “errand girl.”

That is exactly how my two sons treat me. Despite the fact that I have worked every day of their lives, they continue to express genuine surprise when I cannot just drop what I am doing and do something they would like instead. Every now and then, in exasperation, I remind them that I am actually an academic department head [of history at MIT]. They always look at me with puzzlement as if that is entirely irrelevant to whatever scheme they happen to be promoting.

Indeed, my older son called home late in November from his first semester at college to talk to me about his various academic struggles and his anxiety over how his professors would grade him. As I proceeded to give him advice, he finally said to me, “Oh, you’re actually a professor too, aren’t you, Mom?” It was a moment of genuine insight for him and a zinger for me, too.

Anne Conger McCants ’84
Belmont, Massachusetts

Working Women All
I have been a stay-at-home mom since 1998. This arrangement works well for me and my husband and, in large part, is necessary because of our son’s special needs. It is not the life I envisioned when I graduated in 1983, but I wasn’t blessed with a vivid imagination!

Whether climbing the corporate ladder or climbing the bleachers to watch our child’s soccer game, we are all working women and deserve each other’s praise and support. Thanks to Lisa Wlodarski Romano ’89 (“Family vs. Work,” winter) for celebrating the lives of a few more “Uncommon Women” among our ranks.

Anne Babcock O’Dell ’83
North Wales, Pennsylvania

Longing to Lounge
I had the opportunity to tour the new residence hall during reunion last spring, and I’m glad to hear that it opened to rave reviews. When our tour guide took us into one of the floor lounges, I recalled how nice it was to have floor lounges in Prospect when I was a student, and since my class was housed in Prospect, I realized that the floor lounges are no longer there. (They were converted into muchneeded rooms.)

I hope that as the new residence hall allows the college to embark on a rotation of upgrades to the older residence halls, consideration will be given to reintroducing floor lounges into Prospect and some of the other dorms. It was nice to be able to wander just a few feet from one’s room, books in arms to study while a roommate slept, or to chat briefly while a roommate studied.

Also, the occasion of my writing prompts me to say how much I appreciate your new series on “What everyone should know about...” and the professorial insights you are providing on current issues. Thank you!

Deborah Simpson Hutchings ’78
Walpole, New Hampshire

Where the Heck Is the New Dorm?
I have now had two publications from the college that featured the new dorm. There has been no mention of where it is on campus, or its name. Don’t you think this is relevant information? It may not have a name yet, but it must be located somewhere! I’d be interested to know more.

Judy Clarke Johanson ’55
Brunswick, Maine

Editor’s reply: The new residence hall is located where the parking lot south of Pratt Hall (the music building) used to be. Thus the new dorm faces Rooke Theatre, with Stony Brook visible behind the building. Morgan Street borders the far end of the residence hall.

The new dorm is known universally by students as “the new dorm” and has not received a more official moniker. (Little-known tidbit: because the building has no official name, pizza companies won’t deliver there. So students living in the new dorm must cross the street to Abbey-Buckland to pick-up their pizzas.)

Lots more letters to the Quarterly—We asked, we received; thanks!—see below.

Greener, Yet …
I was dismayed by some very important oversights in the article “Down to Earth” (winter 2009). The article started by showcasing two families whose answer to “living green” was to move to rural areas, build energy- and resource-efficient houses, and live there. The article failed to mention how these people get into town for work or chores.

Are they working from home every day? Are they independently wealthy and don’t have to work? If so, terrific. If not, do they drive to work? If you must drive a private car fifteen or twenty miles every day to bring home a paycheck or take your kids to school, you are not living green, regardless of how you built your house.

If you work in a city or town, you make less of an impact on the planet by living where you can walk, bicycle, or ride public transit to work, even if that means living in a townhome or condominium. Turning your yard into a vegetable garden or wildlife habitat certainly is a greener endeavor than creating an expanse of lawn that consumes too much water and nitrogen, but if you pump carbon into the atmosphere every day by driving to work, you more than negate your green efforts.

It’s frustrating to listen to developers brag about the 3,000-square-foot homes they build far outside town entirely of “green” materials. They market these homes to customers who then clog highways as they drive to their jobs in the city. Such customers praise their “green living” in the country, but they are part of the urban sprawl that leads to the high carbon-producing lifestyle that threatens the climate.

If you really want to live green, and your work doesn’t require that you live in the countryside, live in the city instead and lobby your city government to provide better public transit and incentives for people to use it. Work to ensure that neighborhoods are fitted with safe alternatives to driving. Sidewalks, bicycle routes, and flexible transit options help more people reduce carbon emissions than ready availability of green construction materials.

Progress toward saving the planet from the ravages of climate change will not be made by the fortunate few with the means to build a green home on 8.5 acres in Wyoming, but from millions of people who leave their cars at home and walk or ride transit to work.

Elizabeth J. Bailey ’83
Bothell, Washington

 
Precious Resource
I so identify with Lisa Wlodarski Romano! Many times I, too, have looked at the Quarterly’s class notes with a heavy sigh. After graduation, I worked in the advertising/public relations business for over twelve years. I worked full time after my son was born, not because I had to but because I wanted to. But things changed after a difficult pregnancy with my daughter and I decided to stay home. That was almost ten years ago.

I have never regretted it and have been thankful that I have this option. However, when looking over the Quarterly and class notes it does seem that I have somehow been left behind. People ask me what I do all day. I may not be taking care of a client or working with a printer anymore, but I am taking care of my most precious resources, my family. So I may spend the day carpooling, volunteering my time with the school and PTA, and doing laundry (lots of laundry!), but I wouldn’t have it any other way.

There will be time for me to work when the kids are grown and gone. In the meantime, I find time for me when they are at school and my husband is at work. And when reading about other alums who are bigwigs or traveling the world, I just have to tell myself, good for them!

Shannette Frazier Hoelscher ’89
Corpus Christi, Texas

Happy at Home
I absolutely loved, loved, loved Lisa Wlodarski Romano’s reflection on “Family vs. Work.” I am a stay-at-home mom who does part-time bookkeeping for our family business. Like Lisa (who I remember fondly from Abbey-Buckland), I have always read my classmates’ updates about their high-powered careers and wondered who would want to read about my more “mundane” life. I applaud Lisa and the other women mentioned who feel like I do. Our MHC education continues to benefit us no matter which path we choose. Thank you for publishing the most relevant article in my twenty-two years since graduation!

Marianne Schirch Hurley ’86
Guilderland, New York