To the Editor:
Dan Hogin's column, "The D: An 'Anything Goes' Publication?" [Feb. 21] was an fantastic essay pointing out your columnists' well-demonstrated ability to write endless amounts of fluff pieces that somehow always manage to get published.
After reading it, I felt it was necessary to get something else off of my chest. I know some people agree with the point I am about to make, but don't have the guts to say it publicly:
I think Rachel Gilliar would benefit greatly from reading Mr. Hogins essay and reflecting on her own contribution to The Dartmouth's fluff factor. I used to like reading her column which was always filled with the right mix of passion and intelligence. I think this term she might be trying too hard.
Her column telling us all how difficult it is to actually find something to write about every week made my skin crawl. I had the same reaction to her pseudo-intellectual narrative discussing gender injustice and blue m&m's [Blue m&m's Offensive to Goals of Gender Parity in Modern Society Jan. 10].
Perhaps it is time for Ms. Gilliar to a vacation from The D. She could give the column a rest and find her true, inspired and intelligent voice again. I really enjoyed it in the past.
This letter is not meant to be a personal attack. In fact, I find Ms. Gilliar's sense of humor and style to be refreshing. She is a skillful writer. I just wish that she, as well as the other columnists for The Dartmouth, could consistently offer the student body something to read that would incite debate and make people question the way things work. Isn't that what a good columnist should be doing? No more blue m&m's streams of consciousness, or personal ads. Be bold. Tackle issues head on. No fluff.
As for Ms. Gilliar's poor wanna-be corporate gay male friend [In Search of the Perfect Mate... Feb. 21]; I would seriously go out on a date with him, but only if it would be the impetus for ANY columnist to write something which seriously explores the issue of gay dating at Dartmouth in any real depth and with a sense of understanding and compassion. In other words: no fluff.
On the other hand, the guy described doesn't sound like my type. Too fluffy.
