This post is the same as the one I sent out by email. Since then, Wendy Watson and Tom Keens have agreed to join the steering committee. I am presently recruiting a couple of people from the class of '69 to join it as well, so that planning can actually involve people from both of the first two classes. There has been some concern about the dates, and I am suggesting that we do not make commitments until sometime between the middle and end of September.
Phil
Dear Classmates --
At Sam's request, I am sending out to all a radical alternative to what has been discussed so far. It has the backing of Jim Liljenwall, Joey Townsend, Lynn Archer, Harold Morgan, Claudia Larcombe, Jim Walker, and me. There are no doubt others who will sign on. First, the major points of the proposal; next some possible activities falling under the terms of the proposal; third, some reasons for the proposal and against the standard alternative; and finally Sam’s message to all.
Outline of The Proposal
(1) Declare independence from the College's plans for our homecoming.
(2) Plan instead our own series of homecoming events at venues other than the SJC campus.
(3) Pick the date most convenient for the majority of members of the first two classes.
(4) Empower our classmates living in Santa Fe to make the arrangements.
(5) Choose one of us to be liaison to the college and invite college participation on our terms.
(6) Declare The Odyssey our text of return.
(7) Acknowledge the need for timely decisions and deadlines. Accordingly, recognize a steering committee in short order. Let’s accept July 4th as our date for the onset of our campaign; volunteers for the steering committee need to make themselves known before that date. The steering committee has to be built around our Santa Fe residents, Sam and Jim and Lynn. As someone needs to take the lead here, I suggest that to those three we add Joey and Harold. I am willing to serve as secretary (email conduit) for the committee. Pending the volunteering of others for the steering committee, I urge that we accept Sam as the de facto chairman of the committee. Let the organizing begin.
Possible Activities Under the Proposal (of course there are others)
1) Conversation groups on topics of interest to us, led by class members or others of our choosing. (For example: discussion of the origin of life, led by one or two members of the SF Institute; discussion on the ethics of medical practice, led by Tom Keens; discussion of the Constitution and the Amendments, led by Sam Larcombe and Jim Walker; discussion of the last Harry Potter book, led by Wendy Watson.)
2) Explorations of New Mexico. (These could include field trips led by Sam Larcombe and Rick Flint.)
3) Festschrift in honor of our experience. (This project is already underway and can come to fruition whether we are in sync with the college or not.)
4) Reflection on our lives in a meditative setting (a la a Quaker meeting).
5) Screening of a movie and conversation afterward. (We could rent one of the local theaters for a special showing of, e.g., "The Dead" or "Ulysses" or...)
6) Attending SF Opera and Chamber Music Festival. (Obviously, independent of the college's plans.)
7) Engaging a videographer to record all or some of our events.
Rationale
Do we really SJC tutors, who may be half our age (and who serve only for pay), to lead us in discussions? Are we not quite capable of conducting our own? Is it beyond the realm of possibility that any of us is capable of asking an opening question and gently serving as seminar leader? (Some of us do this professionally or semi-professionally.)
Is the point of our homecoming to see the college and its new buildings, or is it to see one another, to explore our memories, to unburden ourselves of long pent-up emotions, to share our life experiences, our joys, and sorrows?
Should the date of the homecoming be convenient for the majority of our two classes or should it be determined by the convenience of the college?
If some of us have an interest in seeing the college and engaging in activities on campus, there is nothing to prevent their doing so. One of us could serve as liaison, perhaps someone who is currently involved with college activities or someone who is particularly keen to maintain cordial relations.
How does this proposal square with the survey effort? The survey should go forward: its results will be our gift to the college.
Are we leaving other classes in the lurch? That is, what about the classes of 1973, 1978, 1983, 1988, 1993, 1998, 2003? Maybe it's time to think about the meaning of reunion and homecoming. Or maybe we are suffering from a lack of appropriate vocabulary. Truthfully, what do we have in common with the class of 2003? Perhaps one or two tutors? The program itself, of course, but what else? The campus or Santa Fe itself? Both have changed enormously. What distinguishes our coming together (the coming together of the classes of '68 and '69) from a college-sponsored homecoming of all the classes listed above is that our being together as companions is in no way artificial: it does not depend upon the accident of choosing five-year intervals. If the college chooses to hold its homecoming at the same time as ours, then those of us who so wish can certainly participate in college-sponsored activities, such as an all-college seminar (a sock-hop in the new gym? a hot dog feast by the pool?). It is certainly possible that, if the college's homecoming and our reunion coincide, representatives of our class can plan joint activities with representatives of other classes and college officials.
As I have written elsewhere, and more than once, time is not on our side. We have to do our planning and organizing soon – the earlier the better. I have argued that the survey should go out immediately after the alumni association meeting in late July. Who knows what the results will be? Whatever they are, we will live with them. It is certainly conceivable (if highly unlikely) that a majority of SF alumni will prefer a non-summer homecoming. If so, let the college arrange a homecoming for all those classes listed, and any of us so inclined and having the time can attend that event as well. We'll do nothing to undermine it.
The fact remains, though, that this 40th anniversary of our graduation is something of a watershed. Most of us are still alive and relatively healthy, but consider the situation of our 50th anniversary, 10 years down the road. How many of us will still be more or less as we are now? Will we be able to arrange our own events when we are all in our seventies? In a sense, we are at the height of our powers now: we can reflect with full vigor, we can share before it's too late. I, for one, have never had a desire to attend my high school reunions. I am sure I am not alone in affirming that it was our experience at the college and with each other that marked us, changed us, for life – and for living. To what or whom is our debt greatest? Perhaps to Scott Buchanan and Stringfellow Barr; perhaps to our tutors (Brown, Wilson, Darkey, Slakey, Swentzell, Davis, Ossorgin, Bunker, Bell, Kramer, et al.); perhaps to Dr. Weigle; perhaps to one another; perhaps to the courage awakened within each of us to see it through to the end; perhaps to an idea that conversation, among friends, about books and music worth knowing and loving, is the truly human calling. To all these we raise a toast in celebration; it is something we can do only by and for ourselves.
Phil Chandler
Sam’s Message to All:
We decide within two weeks to take over the whole affair. We shall conceive, plan, and execute everything without the college's interference.
Within four weeks, we choose the actual dates of the gathering.
Claudia (Kit) and I will accept appointment as the "logistics grunts" (if so picked in a timely fashion), but only if we get clear, concise tasks and direction. We shall convene a local group of willing classmates (SF 68/69).
All who come in 2008 agree to contribute a tangible "piece" of any sort, whether written or visual, capable of reproduction, personal, intellectual, literary.
All who come agree to offer (either solo or with one or more others) an activity: tutorial; demonstration; performance; discussion; outing; blessing; slide show; civic event.... Of necessity and for elegance, these ought to be "time-limited."
We assent that the whole occasion will be a time of good humor, intimate, and most un-official: twenty laughs to each tear. The motto: Warm and leisurely together.
We agree that a reasonable budget be drawn up by a steering committee, and that reasonable fees be imposed. We shall, I think, want to underwrite publications, meeting place costs, food and drink, and materials essential to activities. Of course, the oily devils of the steering committee must be charged with seducing any of us with real substance into underwriting various costs. (EG: the "Austin W. Pringle Greek Leap and Salad Deconstruction Reflection.")
We agree that by August 31, 2007, we have all fundaments of the event underway.
From my years as a public slave, I know that decisions must be made early and that deadlines must be set. Essentially, cantankerous as we may be, we are herd critters. Let the decisions be made and the herd will gather.
Formally, Claudia and I say to say to the others that we want nothing to do with any institutionally sanctioned and sponsored event. As you know (and may publish), we left the college behind us years ago. It is our classmates we love and want to see.
I am pushing these thoughts forward because I am willing to spent considerable time over the next year helping to make a good gathering happen.
Sam
