DUDLEY

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

Your editorial of May 20th came as a complete surprise to one who found a "Home" at Dudley for three and one-half years prior to its officially becoming a House.

It is, of course, quite true that many members of Dudley House never set foot in the building. As much as we would like to have them, there is no law forcing them to participate. It is also true that many members of Resident Houses participate in House activities only to the extent of eating and sleeping in the building; there is no law forcing them to participate either.

Your solution of making all commuters residents much as we would like to have them, there is no law forcing them to participate. It is also true that many members of Resident Houses participate in House activities only to the extent of eating and sleeping in the building; there is no law forcing them to participate either.

Your solution of making all commuters residents is, of course, an ideal situation which does not guarantee more student participation and does not take into consideration married students, personal financial circumstances, or the local resident who would be forced to maintain a room at college in addition to a room at home, although they are within a mile or two of each other, simply to meet a college residence requirement.

Further, if Dudley House were torn down tomorrow I wonder what would happen to the group of ex-commuters who, although having long since moved into Resident Houses, still spend much of their time in Dudley House.

To further dwell on the question of whether Dudley is a "Home" is unnecessary since the Administration by its promotion of Dudley to full House status after a twenty-five year period of "experimentation" has finally and positively decided the question.

Whether a "Home" can be made a true House is the problem now confronting Dudley. Foremost among its problems are the need for a new physical plant and an effective non-honors tutorial program--hardly problems limited to Dudley House alone!

Finally, Dudley must achieve full recognition from the Harvard community in order to truly become a House. Most of the impetus for this must obviously come from within Dudley House. However, much could be done from without. The monumentality of the latter problem is no more eloquently shown than by your edition of May 7, 1959, which, while devoting the better part of three pages to a sympathetic survey of the problems of Dudley House, could at the same time list the Junior Ushers from Dudley House underneath the other seven Houses, identifying them only as "the remaining ushers" and seemingly representing Wigglesworth Hall, Cambridge, and Dedham respectively. Wallace O. Davis '59.

To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

I read with great interest your recent article on commuters at Harvard. I went to M.I.T. '30 and while I lived in Monday through Friday, I went home every weekend to save money, and had practically no social life. I was a sort of a "demi-com-muter."

I find myself wondering what a survey would show that studied the "years later" on commuters and residents.

Are they as creative?

Are they as happy?

Are they as secure?

Do they follow their discipline in their careers?

Are their careers successful?

How do they do financially?

I do not think wearing a "hair shirt" in college builds character, and believe me I have not even guesses as regards the answers to the above questions.

If a survey could be made on say 100 commuters and 100 residents, all of them post war graduates (because the world after the war is such a different world) I think it would be a valuable complement to your article.   Gregory Smith, M.I.T. '30.