Time To Step Up for Later Parties

In November, The Crimson’s weekend magazine asked if we should have gone to Yale. Harvard is undoubtedly superior to our New Haven rivals in all respects—but when it comes to partying, the contrast can start to seem grim. Elis have late-night food, administration-sanctioned “party suites” and relaxed party curfews; we have limited off-campus options for eating and socializing after dark and our dorm parties have to stop an hour after midnight. The “People’s Republic of Cambridge” will not be looking to relax city licensing laws anytime soon. But I refuse to believe that Harvard students do not want to go out, meet people and break it down on the dance floor—well, at least to go out and meet people. In fact, every once in a while that fun-loving, free-spirited side of Harvard breaks loose, and on those nights it seems like the music has a little more bass, the clothing a little more flair, the smiles a little more intimacy…and then the clock strikes 1 a.m., and like Cinderella, we abandon parties long before the night feels complete.

Over the last three months, the Undergraduate Council has worked hard to make the case for later dorm party hours, drawing primarily on a phone survey conducted in 2001 by former council representative Brian R. Smith ’02. The survey—which reached 300 undergraduates—found that an overwhelming 91 percent of students favored a one-hour extension, while 66 percent of students said that they did not go to bed before 3 a.m. on a typical Friday or Saturday night. This year, we issued a supplementary report revealing that all other Ivy League colleges and a handful of other peer institutions had private party curfews of 2 a.m. or later.

But the survey does not capture some important qualitative arguments for an extension. For the well-connected or those over 21, final clubs and local bars currently end up being the post-room party destinations of choice. These spaces are legal, enjoyable and safe for many students—but a challenge to their ascendancy in the Harvard social scene could only contribute to a more inclusive and safer community. There must be viable alternatives to male-owned or otherwise exclusive social spaces, so that the entire undergraduate community has a range of social options.

Perhaps the strongest argument for an extension is simply that it would greatly benefit students while imposing only a minimal additional burden on the rest of the community. Adding another hour to the curfew will certainly not increase loitering in the neighborhood, since students will have a place to be for more of their waking hours. Moreover, as was mentioned at a recent meeting of the Committee on House Life (CHL), House security guards currently leave at 12:45 a.m., meaning that the Harvard University Police Department (HUPD)—whose numbers do not change between 1 a.m. and 2 a.m., according to shift information provided by HUPD Chief Francis D. “Bud” Riley—will continue to be the primary enforcer of the curfew.

The convincing case for 2 a.m. parties has apparently not been lost on the administrators, students and House Masters on the CHL, which recently gave tacit approval to a trial run for extended hours. If Dean of the College Benedict H. Gross ’71 confirms the trial run, students must respond by stepping up our efforts to adhere to the College’s party regulations and suggested strategies for being good hosts. This information, recently put together by a subcommittee of council representatives and Allston Burr senior tutors, is conveniently located in the revamped and standardized party request form.

We should all be deliberately conscious of the fact that our actions have an effect on those around us and a cumulative effect on our community. The council’s 2001 survey also found that noise from 1 a.m. parties made it difficult for 12 percent of students to sleep—and that 9 percent of students were opposed to an extension of hours. This is a small minority of the campus and very few entryways regularly host parties. Still, membership in a minority group does not justify a decrease in individual rights or respect. As the new party request form stresses, the effect on neighbors within partiers’ dorms could be substantially reduced by e-mailing the entryway in advance and keeping guests out of hallways.

We ought to keep in mind the broader Cambridge community, too, as we hopefully party later this semester. It is true—as we eagerly point out—that the College enhances property values in the neighborhood. But our neighbors should not have to listen to people screaming in their front yard at 2 a.m. or wake up to find their hedge destroyed by students who mistook it for a trampoline the night before. Besides, if we ever want the city to loosen licensing laws and care about students’ needs—late night food, for instance—we must make a good faith effort to keep the party in the rooms and off the sidewalks.

To borrow from Alexis de Tocqueville, I am encouraging us to act according to our self-interest well understood. We should strive to take care of each other and be respectful of our neighbors because the basic norms of human decency demand at least that much of us—and because, by clearing the way for permanently-extended party hours, responsible behavior will enable us to enjoy a better social life and stronger community in the long run.

Matthew W. Mahan ’05 is a social studies concentrator in Kirkland House. He is the president of the Undergraduate Council.