Will Princeton Ever Get a Campus Center?: Learning from History

by Tania Naomi Shinkawa '97 January 10, 1995 ART 409

Approaching its 250th anniversary, Princeton University is older than the United States by almost three decades. It is also one of the most distinguished institutions of higher education in our country, with a tradition of academic excellence. As post-secondary education continues to stress the importance of balance between the academic and social life, it is the latter in which Princeton has begun to fall behind. After examining the factors which influence social interaction on a college campus, it is easy to see that Princeton lacks one thing that is central to many other schools' social success, a campus center. It does have a student center though. But that's not the same.

A common misconception is that "student center" and "campus center" are simply different terms that can be used interchangeably to refer to the same thing. In fact, a campus center serves a much broader purpose than a student center. A student center is designed to be a place where members of the student body can come to interact with each other while working out, studying, eating or just relaxing. On the other hand, a campus center is intended to be used by all the members of the university community, including students, faculty, administration and staff, as well as residents of the local area. This is an important distinction for Princeton because as the current administration attempts to fill a void in campus life, they need to determine whether an improved student center or a new campus center would be more appropriate for this university. The reasons why Princeton's social life is lacking are essential in determining exactly what the problem is, and which center would better solve it.

Former president of the university, John Grier Hibben identified the main cause for Princeton's social problems in his retirement address of 1932:

The centrifugal forces of our social life have tended to divide the undergraduate body as a whole into groups of separate interests and activities. The unity and solidarity of our Princeton life must be preserved at all costs and as a practical help to the realization of this end, we need a central building which will be a common meeting place for all members of the University."[1]

"This University Center is not a luxury but a necessity...There are so many circumstances in our campus life to separate us one from another, let us make a determined effort to establish at least one powerful influence which will tend to bring us more closely together and to assure a growing unity of a communal life at Princeton."[2]

Built in the 1830s to house literary and debating societies, the first buildings to be used for campus-wide student activity were Whig and Cliosophic halls. Throughout the nineteenth century, they were the center of college extra-curricular life. Then as the number of student organizations increased, focus was drawn away from Whig and Clio. But not until the beginning of the twentieth century do we see the first attempts to purposefully establish a social center for the campus. In 1908, an alumni committee proposed construction of a university center, but the idea was rejected on the grounds that it would be turned into an overgrown dining hall. Oddly enough, a dining hall, in 1915, with its lounge/club facilities was seen to as a social center. But because too many sophomores elected to use the club facilities in the dining hall instead of joining a club on Prospect Avenue, the university was forced to eliminate the club facilities in 1917 due to overcrowding. Four years later in 1921, a fund was set up to raise money for the sole purpose of a campus center project. These three events in the early 1900s are a clear indication that members of the university community saw a need for a campus center even back then.

The first real plan for a center that was given serious consideration was presented to the trustees by President Hibben in 1926. An information booklet outlining the proposal was published (see Appendix A) Using money from the Princeton Fund - a $20,000,000 fund of gifts and pledges - the proposal was to build a Center for Undergraduate Life on the corner of Prospect Avenue and Washington Road (see Figure 1). It was to be a quadrangle comprised of four buildings, each with a different function and architectural style. Three of the four buildings, the University club, the Athletic Association building and an office building, were designed by an architect named Aymar Embury, Princeton Class of 1900 (for elevations of the University club and the Athletic Association building, see Figures 2 and 3). The University club was to house dining facilities, a grill room, living room, lounge room, library, billiard room, Senior Council room, committee rooms, and suites available for chapel speakers, visiting lecturers, preceptors, graduates or visiting undergraduates such as athletic or debating teams. Unmarried members of the faculty would have also been allowed to live there to promote student-faculty interaction. The University Club was intended to have contributed greatly to the centralizing influence of the center as a whole. The Athletic Association building was designed to contain offices for the all athletic teams and the Varsity club; the third building was the Undergraduate Activities Wing, holding offices to the student organizations or clubs.

The fourth building to be included in the Center for Undergraduate Life, the theater, is a story in itself (see Figure 4 for the proposed elevation). For years, the Triangle Club had been putting any profits it made into a fund in hopes that they would be able to build their own theater. At the time of Hibben's proposal, the club had in excess of $100,000 saved in their fund.[5] Earlier, Triangle had been using the Casino as their theater, a converted make-shift armory on the corner of University Place and College Road. Then after it burned down in 1924, the club was forced to use the gym in off-hours for rehearsal sand a theater in Trenton for their productions. The following quotation from Booth Tarkington '93 (1893) characterizes the situation:

"Everybody knows Princeton needs a theater, but I don't know how to say it does. I mean, I don't know how to say so to people who already know so. Up at Kennebunkport one day I was running for shelter from a sudden heavy downpour. Old Captain Welsh, also on the run, passed me, his collar turned up and water cascading from his whiskers. 'Rainin'!', he shouted, offering me this information on the wing. Telling friends of Princeton how much the University needs a home for the drama seems a little like that."[6]

In addition to the details of the proposal for the Center for Undergraduate Life, the information booklet contained photos of campus centers at Cornell University, University of Toronto, and Michigan University, as persuasion that there was a need for one at Princeton (see Figure 5). Despite the amount of work put into the idea, many were opposed to spending so much money on something they felt was not needed. The Triangle Club objected vehemently to having its theater built on the quad, especially on that side of the campus. And though it was intended that the faculty use the center as much as the students, the faculty objected on the basis that the administration was sacrificing a faculty need for a central place, in order to give the students exactly that, when they didn't need it.

Because so many groups rejected the idea for a Center for Undergraduate Life, a new idea was developed for a University Center. In January of 1929, the Trustee's Committee on Undergraduate Life approved this idea, and an undergraduate committee was formed to create a proposal. After two years, the committee produced a plan for a University Center where Reunion Hall was then located. Tentative plans that included many of the same elements previously in the Center for Undergraduate Life (see Appendix B for floorplans of the University Center), were done by Aymar Embury '00 and approved for an approximate cost of $400,000.[8] As shown in the elevation in Figure 6, it is also interesting that Embury chose to connect the center to the buildings on each side of it; it becomes an extension of Stanhope and is attached to West College by way of an arcade. This idea too was met with some disapproval. The following two quotes from letters written by Neilson Abeel '25 to the Princeton Alumni Weekly, are examples.

"The theory that Princeton is still one family with a desire for a common social life has not been true for ten years. Princeton is too big and divided in its interests to become one again in the old sense. This may be regrettable, but it is the penalty paid for growing up."[9] "The Quad Plan will do more, I venture to say, to stimulate intellectual interests and common social ties than a score of University Centers. The Quad Plan may not be for Princeton, but its success or failure should be appraised before rushing into the expensive undertaking of a Center which would not be used and which would soon be out of date."[10]

There was something that came out of the two proposals for a campus center in the 1920s though, McCarter Theater. Mr. Thomas N. McCarter '88, President of the Public Service corporation of New Jersey, donated $250,000, that when added with other gifts and the Triangle club's fund, was enough to start things under way to build a new theatre.[11] The architect selected through a competition judged by Mr. C. Howard Crane, Ralph Adams Cram, Aymar Embury '00 and the Triangle Club trustees, was D.K. Este Fisher '13, of Parker, Thomas & Rice in Baltimore.[12] He was selected from a list of architects that had been members of Triangle when in college, and had offices within a reasonable distance of Princeton. They broke ground during the 181st Commencement in June of 1928, and the opening ceremonies were held on February 21, 1930. The resulting building looked very similar to the plan Embury had produced for the Center for Undergraduate Life in 1926 (see Figure 7 as compared to Figure 4). Forty-two years later in 1972, the university ended its direct operation of the theater. The McCarter Theater Company now operates it as a center for the performing arts, and organizes and maintains a professional resident drama company which performs there.[13]

Nothing more was really said or done about the idea of a campus social center until President Harold Dodds established a student center in Murray-Dodge on July 24, 1943. Although it was intended as a recreation center for service men assigned to Princeton, to be run in cooperation with the local USO, civilian undergraduates were also allowed to use it. (There was, however, no mention of graduate students using it.) It was needed to provide adequate recreation facilities in view of the large numbers of servicemen expected in the future and intended to serve "for the duration". The Murray-Dodge Student Center served many purposes, it held student-faculty luncheons, meetings and social functions; was a center for all school clubs; was used for the entertainment of visiting teams; maintained a well-supplied reading room accessible to all students, and the Dean of the Chapel and others organized religious activities and discussions there. Because the university did not financially support the center, everything that was needed, including food, books and games, etc., was donated by community groups and families. Among some of the perks provided at the student center were "Campus Aides" (daughters of faculty members and alumni living in Princeton who were partners at the dances), rooms for weekend dates, instruction in contract bridge, a woman to darn your socks, a tuxedo if needed, money from the pin money loan fund, and a lost and found. As you might imagine from this, the center was a very busy place. The following quotation describes what one might see at Murray-Dodge on any given night:

"A visitor to the Center between the hours of 5 and 8 might find two swing bands (in different rooms) giving out with noisy, hot rhythm, two ping-pong tables going full blast, somebody pounding out a letter on the typewriter in the kitchen and lines forming at the telephone booth and cigarette and coke machines. Upstairs someone might be playing either classical or jazz records on the record-player and in another room a group of singers might be tuning up on a surprisingly good rendition of anybody's old favorite. And somewhere else there might be a bull session, while in the main lounge of the building soldiers, sailors, marines and civilians would be sitting about reading the latest periodicals."[14] (see Figure 8)

"[The student center] has seemed to me to be the principal unifying influence in bringing together groups so dissimilar in their composition, their programs, and the conditions in which they live and work." (referring to the Army and Navy units as well as civilians)[16]

Several years later in 1950, an event of indirect importance took place after the sophomores started a petition against the Bicker system. President Dodds' response was a proposal for an "eighteenth club" on the site between the Old Observatory and Dial Lodge. He described his idea in this statement:

"...The proposal...recognizes the responsibility of the University to provide a plan which will make available to all upperclassmen adequate eating and social facilities. Specifically, I believe that the University should supply a new and adequate building for an eating and social organization based on democratic principles in accordance with the responsibilities I have described. While offering comparable facilities for the enjoyment of campus life, it would differ from the present clubs in the methods of selection of its members and operation...The new enterprise is not to be interpreted as an "eighteenth club" but rather as an opportunity for undergraduates to select the kind of organization they desire to be identified with."[17]

At the same time during 1950, Richard W. Murphy '51, chairman of Orange Key's Campus Center Committee, was trying to reestablish Murray-Dodge's role as a social center by planning several events there. Since the war's end it had declined in popularity and was seen at the time as merely a snack bar. Unfortunately, due to a lack of student enthusiasm, he and his committee eventually gave up to channel their energies toward other promising activities. But for those that continued to think the idea of a new campus center, there were other concerns that needed to be addressed. For example, the amount of capital that would be necessary for an investment of this size was simply not available. There was also some confusion as to whether or not the project should be taken on at all, and if so, what function the center would actually serve and to what extent campus activities should be centralized. The most prominent concern, about finances, was what ultimately caused the Undergraduate Council to unanimously pass a resolution to remodel Chancellor Green into a new Campus Center, in November of 1951. (Though they intended it to be a campus center, it turned out to be a student center.) "As if to punctuate the need for these new facilities, Murray-Dodge, [then] doubling as a religious and social center of the campus, let go a large chunk of ceiling plaster that narrowly missed a student standing in the reading room."[18]

Before progress on the renovations went too far, doubts led the committee to investigate how much it would take to build an entirely new building to house the center. Some thought that a new building would costly only a bit more than the projected costs for remodeling - $150,000 to $200,000 - and thus give the university more purchasing power per dollar. The inquiry showed though, that another accessible site was not available, and constructing a new building would really cost twice as much. Realizing this, the general consensus shifted back to the idea of converting the Chancellor Green Library (see Figure 9 for a view of Chancellor Green Library before its remodeling). Then, in order to raise money for the project, a committee chaired by Alexander Fraser of St. Louis raised around $300,000 by soliciting donations and gifts from recent graduates and parents of current undergraduates - those that were not yet being targeted by annual giving.[19] The largest gift, however, was from the Class of 1934, which donated its 20-year memorial insurance (individual endowment policies taken by members of the class upon graduation) and held a special fundraiser for an additional $40,000, to total just over $100,000. This money was given specifically for construction of the main hall, which was to be named after them.[20]

Fortunately for those working on the project, "The monumental task of moving Princeton's 1,200,000 volumes and half million other items into the newly completed Harvey S. Firestone Memorial Library took place during July of 1948, and since then the two buildings [had] been used for other purposes." (Having built a new library before even making the plans for a center, it was obvious that Princeton's priorities lay in the academic arena.) The remodeling responsibilities were given to Stephen F. Voorhees, Class of 1900, Trustee Emeritus and a member of the New York firm of Voorhees, Walker, Foley and Smith. When the work had been completed, many were happy with the results:

"As for the brave new wonder in Chancellor Green, we're happy to report, first of all, that the Ruskinian Gothic exterior of the building is virtually unchanged. Except for the substitution of clear glass in the windows, the familiar gingerbread is intact, and the premises still look like a squat, distorted cathedral. But the interior, from the uncluttered lounge in Chancellor Green proper to the gleaming snack bar in Pyne, is as trim and inviting as any underclassman could wish."[21]

The dedication ceremony was held on October 23, 1954. A pamphlet entitled, "Take a Break," was published and distributed triumphing the success of the new center, with pictures of students at the student center enjoying themselves doing a variety of activities (see Appendix B). Because there was still a seven o'clock dormitory eviction rule for members of the opposite sex in effect during the 1950s, many Princeton men took their dates to the student center after then. Since upperclassmen sometimes went to the center instead of their clubs on Prospect Avenue, and faculty often stopped by, thus increasing student-faculty relations, many began to view the center as, "the hub of underclass social life." It is important to note here the word "underclass" (graduate students have never really seen it as their place) and the fact that it was named the Chancellor Green Student Center. Perhaps there was no rhyme nor reason to calling it that, but in light of how it is used, it is the appropriate title. The following is a very detailed description of what one might have found there when it was first opened.

"The Center provides a host of attractions to seduce the underclassman away from the higher pleasures of Firestone Library. Three pool and four ping-pong tables are arrayed in the main room of the subterranean level, flanked by a smaller game room (with piano) in one wing and a 61-seat television theatre (with 27-inch screen) in the other. On the main floor is the lounge, given by the Class of 1934, with five conversational nooks where five reading alcoves used to be. Here are varied collections of periodicals for desultory reading and the panel for the music which is piped through the Center. For more intimate conversation, the balcony has been preserved, although the tight spiral stairs by which it was formerly attained have been removed as a nuisance to high-heeled dates, and two modern staircases now take you aloft to a duplicate set of alcoves, cloistered and carpeted. The east wing off the main lounge houses administrative offices. The room in the west wing, which was used for meetings of the Board of Trustees from 1873 until 1950, has been remodeled at the expense of the Class of 1897 and is now reserved for the Undergraduate Council, which oversees the Center's operations. At the other end of the entrance hall, in what used to be the north stacks, is the cafeteria, with black-topped tables and some 270 orange-covered chairs. Discreetly screened from ground level is the snack bar, serving sandwiches, soups, hot dogs, assorted beverages and discounted doughnuts. At the opposite end of the room are most of the Center's automatic vending machines, which yield solid and liquid refreshments during rush hours and after the food bar has closed."[23]

Save for a few minor alterations and redecorating, the sole University-run social center on campus at present is the very same Chancellor Green Student Center, supplemented only by a few cafés and cafeterias. In recent years, the issue of establishing a new campus center has become one of increasing speculation. Several concentrators in the School of Architecture have even written and designed detailed center plans for their senior thesis. The latest of these was done by Dugald McConnell, Class of 1993. His proposal was for the site adjacent to Whig, including the intersection of McCosh walk and the old campus axis. Though he supports this idea with campus architectural and planning analysis, it is still not a convincing proposal. That particular area of the campus is already quite crowded and is not really open to accepting another architectural style on a building with yet another function. It would be surrounded by a modern academic building (McCormick Hall/Art Museum), a faux Greek temple with administrative offices and debating rooms (Whig Hall), and an arts, religion and service building in Murray-Dodge.

Quite a bit earlier, David John Maloney '75 designed a center that was to be located where Reunion Hall used to be, between Alexander Hall, West College, Nassau Hall and Stanhope (as was the plan for the University Center in 1929). Figures 11 is an aerial three-dimensional representation of his plan illustrating its location. As is evident in the figure, this site is also one that cannot really accommodate a large building, or even a small one for that matter, without creating a feeling of crowding. It's a high traffic area as well , students going to class, administration from Nassau Hall and West College and the Department of Public Safety in Stanhope. Maloney proposed to alleviate this by cutting a path through the ground floor of the building (see Figure 12 for elevations). The center should be popular enough that people walk through it because they want to, not because they don't feel like going around. This feature combined with the large number of windows on the side facing Nassau Hall and the unattractive feature on the rear side makes for an unattractive modern building. A social center should be inviting from every angle and stand out because of how much energy it radiates. This one would stick out like a sore thumb because it is a modern island in a sea of traditional and historic architecture. Only some would consider this a good thing.

The last of the three theses, by Fred Bernstein '77, is the best proposal of the three. It is, however, most appropriate to be a student center, which is recognized by the author in his introduction when he calls it, "a student activities center for the Princeton University campus...a facility near as many dormitories as possible...in the center of the main residential area of campus."[25] Located south of Dillon Gymnasium (as shown in Figure 13, a site plan), the building would go over, under, in and around the wings of what now exists, as illustrated in Figure 14. He intended to integrate the new addition of a student center and the old gym to create a single recreation and activities complex from the two adjacent buildings. But turning a big structure with an already complicated interior system into an even bigger one, would create an incredible labyrinth. It did, however, allow him to put in many interesting components though, a courtyard, an outdoor stage and outdoor theater are some examples. For this and other innovative ideas, Bernstein's proposal received enthusiastic support from both the University's Office of Physical Planning and from the office of the Dean of Student Affairs.

Amazingly enough, the work of each of the individuals mentioned above is more than the university has been able to accomplish by now, even with their numerous committees. Of the most recent attempts at getting a campus center for Princeton's campus, the first began in the late 1980s. A committee was formed whose purpose it was to examine possible uses of a campus center, its relationship to a possible 6th residential college, its effect on the eating clubs and their relationship to the university, while also assessing other schools' campus centers and the role of Chancellor Green. The surveys they distributed to all groups on campus revealed that there was definitely a need and a desire among them all to reduce fragmentation between under & upperclassmen, graduate & undergraduate students and to provide office space for various organizations. When they released a report in November of 1987, it was intended to make the idea of a campus center a pressing issue. It was obvious from the tone of this report that the administration supported the idea, but lacked any specific suggestions or real commitment.

A year later, the committee decided that development of a new facility was not "practical or appropriate", so they hired an architect to do a space survey of the campus to look into possibility of simply renovating or expanding Chancellor Green. The survey results revealed that adding on to Chancellor Green to increase dining areas and add lounges would be best. Because of lack of funds and a consensus on the location, the decision was made to pursue the enhancement of Chancellor Green. Richard Spies GS '72 (VP for finance & administration) expressed the feeling of the administration at the time, "I think the needs are real...at the same time, there are needs in other areas. It could be physically feasible but not high enough on our list of priorities at the time."[26] Due to this attitude, the undergraduate committee, led by USG president Jason Weinstein '90, started a project called, "Campus Center Now." The intent was to try and raise funds toward the end of getting a campus center, in order to show everyone that there was legitimate interest in such an idea. It looked promising after the committee recommended the Chancellor Green site, because university president, Harold Shapiro, announced that the campus center project would be added to the university's list of capital projects for the next 5 years. Architect selections began and an account was established for donations to the campus center project. Then, in 1990, administrators chose to delay submitting the plan to the trustees to allow the committee's head, Eugene Lowe '71- Dean of Students, to return from a year-long sabbatical. Unfortunately by the time it got to the trustees, it seemed less important and was set aside. The work done in the late 80s was basically forgotten, because when a new committee was created by President Shapiro in 1993, they started with the assumption that there would be an entirely new building constructed to house the center.

Dean of Student Life, Janina Montero, was named as head of the committee whose job it was to decide essentials for the new campus center while keeping in mind that the current student center would retain some of its functions after the construction of the new campus center was complete. Surveys were once again sent out to examine campus centers of other schools and get the opinions of the university community. After a year's work, the committee determined that the Core Program Components would require a minimum of 80,000 to 100,000 square feet of space.

"The campus center should provide dining facilities that offer a variety of options, especially for upperclass independent students and graduate students; common space for services ranging from vendors to an automatic teller machine to a post office; lounge areas; multipurpose meeting rooms; accommodations for student organizations; and the possibility of including the International, Women's and Third World Centers."[27]

The efforts of the Campus Center Committee this year appear to be focused on which site is more appropriate for the type of social center that is needed at this university. The first site is Dillon Gym, which is considered to be the "crossroads of undergraduate life," and the second site is at Palmer Hall, "the intersection of academic, residential and social life and of internal campus and external community life."[28] The administration is currently leaning toward the Palmer Hall site because: any future campus expansion will be toward the east and the south; Palmer is convenient for faculty and graduate students spending time near there, as well as undergrads at class and the clubs; and the addition to Dillon would make it a "gross and hulking building." Although the Palmer Hall site would also require relocation of several academic departments, it is estimated to be $7-8 million cheaper than the Dillon site.[29] Taking the opposite position, Dean of the School of Architecture, Ralph Lerner, does not favor the Palmer Hall site because: Dillon is more central to the campus; Palmer creates increased traffic nearby Washington Road; he is concerned about the architectural stability of Palmer Hall; Palmer renovations will still not make a center that is open and public, but one that is buried in a closed, inward-looking and labyrinth-like building.[30]

At the proposed Dillon Gym site, there are three options for expansion: to the east toward Brown Hall, to the north toward Little Hall (favored by Dean Lerner), and to the south towards the tennis courts. An addition to the east would necessitate going across Elm Drive, therefore that does not seem like it is a good possibility since it would make transportation inside campus more difficult. Because expanding to the north would mean making the entrance to the gym be from another approach or through the student center, it would change the whole area. The current entrance to Dillon would no longer be an exterior surface, and it would be a shame to lose that neo-Gothic architecture to what will probably be a modern replacement. The idea of an expansion to the south is probably the best idea. Fred Bernstein's thesis proposal is one example of how it could be done. Whether or not it would be that big with as many components is doubtful. Financial restrictions would probably mean that a good number of the elements he included would not feasible. Bernstein also mentioned that the center could be a real social option at night because of its location in the center of the university's residential area. This is probably true, but its distance from the clubs on Prospect Avenue and any other social venue would be likely to keep it from reaching its full potential in that respect. Another aspect brought up by Mr. Bernstein in his thesis, is that of combining the athletic and recreational facilities of Dillon with the social facilities of the student center (by way of its location, the center would be catering to the undergraduates and thus, by definition, be a student center). Since many people, including undergraduates, graduates, faculty and staff, already come to Dillon to work out, they would also likely use the center facilities in the same way and create a more barrier-free atmosphere (at least in the center, and this is good start to improving the situation all over campus).

The idea at the Palmer Hall site is to expand to the south towards McCosh Infirmary and Guyot Hall (see Figure 15 for a view of this side of the building, and Figure 16 for a proposed site plan). Those who are looking a little more closely at the big picture tend to favor Palmer for several reasons.

As previously mentioned, in the future, the campus will be expanding to the south and east. Nassau Street and the residential area to the west of campus prevent the university from adding on to the north or west (except for additional off-campus or faculty housing). Since the university owns land south until US Route 1, there is much potential in that direction. There have also been plans for a quadrangle including the Computer Science Building for some time, and there are other areas by the academic buildings to the east, that would be ideal for further development. By putting the center at Palmer, not only will it be between the academic and residential worlds on campus, but it will also be in a prime location to be the center of campus for a long time to come. This brings up the issue of when people will most likely be using the center; is it better to have it near academia where most of the community will be during the day, or near the dorms, where students are sure to be in the evening? The current president of the university, Harold Shapiro, said a study was done to determine where the majority of people in the university community spend most of the hours in their day. The results showed that if the center of campus were to be defined by these statistics, Palmer would very nearly be the center of campus.

A third concern is that of having to move several academic departments, most prominently the physics department. As for this, several university officials have expressed that there is a need to relocate the physics labs regardless of where the campus center is located; they are in need of more modern facilities and the department faculty would like to be closer to their offices and the advanced labs in Jadwin Hall. The relocation of other departments such as the East Asian Studies Department, does pose somewhat of a dilemma though.

Creating a plaza to be between Guyot, McCosh and the center sounds like a fabulous idea. It would definitely aid in establishing the campus center as a prominent part of the campus. Traffic to the center will surely be heavy and its proximity to Washington Road will make a world of difference. Pedestrian traffic in the area presents another problem to solve, but even now without the center there, it exists. The campus center would then only serve to press that issue. On the other hand, the campus center's nearness to the clubs on Prospect Avenue would help students to view it as a viable social option, and many upperclassmen would pass by it on their way to the clubs. In this sense, the center would be convenient for upperclassmen. Taking a look at the routines of other members of the university community, Palmer is also much more accessible for underclassmen at their classes, faculty in their academic buildings, graduate students in the apartments, and for the residents of the area. All in all, the positives for the Palmer Hall site seem to outweigh its negatives.

What is important for the committee to remember when choosing the site, is that both sites have their advantages and disadvantages; but the decision should ultimately be based on what will best serve this university and provide what is needed. While last year's committee outlined what was to be contained in the campus center, they did not specifically say what they hoped having those things in a center would do for the university community. It is important that everything possible be done to solve the problem of fragmentation that exists on this campus. Although this is a problem that exists because of the social and residential patterns that are unique to Princeton, it must be recognized that we are attempting to alleviate it by creating opportunities for the integration of groups in a campus center. For example, the theater and student organizational offices are places that both under & upperclassmen would go and must be essential in any plan in which unification of the undergraduate student body is a goal. Another wise suggestion might be to try to put everything viewed to be necessary for our purposes, because to omit some things for only financial reasons seems impractical. After waiting for so long for a campus center, if we are going to do it now and take so long to decide every aspect of it, then we might as well take the time to do it right. If a campus center has the anticipated affect on this university, it will make worlds of difference. In the words of former president of Princeton University, John Grier Hibben:

"For many years we have had in mind the need of a university center which would afford our undergraduates a natural meeting place. While it has been one of the distinctive features of Princeton that we enjoyed upon our campus a communal life of intimate relations one to another we have never been able to provide a convenient and attractive place for our students to assemble from time to time and to realize more adequately of our Princeton group.. The doors of [this] building will be open at all times, to all classes, the democratic spirit of the place will have full manifestation here and a larger scope for its realization...It is my hope and expectation that the completion of this enterprise will give to our undergraduates a richer and fuller life, a more sympathetic understanding one of another, and an increased loyalty to the ideals and traditions of Princeton."[31]

Appendix D

Campus Center Committee members for the Academic Year 1993-94

ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBERS:

Jon Hlafter - Director of Physical Planning

Karen Jezierny - Assistant Dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs

Nancy Malkiel - Dean of the College

Eugene McPartland - Vice President for Facilities

David Redman - Acting Dean of the Graduate School

Linda Sheridan - Assistant in Alumni Council

Richard Spies - Vice President for Finance and Administration

Marianne Waterbury - Assistant Dean of Students

Thomas Wright - Vice President and Secretary

FACULTY AND STUDENT MEMBERS:

Michael Jennings - Germanic Languages and Literature /Rockefeller College Master

Alexandra Navrotsky - Geological and Geophysical Sciences

James Sturm - Electrical Engineering

Sean Wilentz - History

Justin Bekelman '95

Yara Delgado '94

David Golden '95

Camille Logan '95

Weihsueh Chiu GS

* while members of the committee for this year have been chosen, a formal list has not been publicly published

Bibliography

Abeel, Neilson. "The University Center," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 3 April 1931.

Aldrich, Donald B. "The 'Heartland' of the Princeton Campus," Campus Center Report, 16 October 1953.

"Alterations Planned for Student Center," The Daily Princetonian, 2 March 1966.

Balestri, Carlo H. "Old questions may threaten planning for campus center," The Daily Princetonian, 1994, p. 1, 4.

Bernstein, Fred. Senior thesis. 1977.

Bradner, Alexandra. "Committee studies center renovations - Architect presents plan," The Daily Princetonian, 13 February 1989, p. 1, 4.

Bradner, Alexandra. "Committee to hire architect for campus center project," The Daily Princetonian, 18 November 1988, p. 1, 7.

Bradner, Alexandra. "Panel to interview planners for center," The Daily Princetonian, 27 November 1989, p. 1, 2.

"Campus Center Committee reports findings to president," Princeton Weekly Bulletin, 13 June 1994, p. 5. (Appendix D)

"Campus Comment," The Daily Princetonian, 8 January 1929.

"Campus Melting Pot," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 8 October 1943, p. 5-6.

"Campus Center Plans Unanimously Passed by Undergrad Council," The Daily Princetonian, 16 November 1951.

A Center for Undergraduate Life at Princeton, 1926, p. 1-23. (Appendix A)

"Council Resolution Commends Center," The Daily Princetonian, 13 May 1931.

The Daily Princetonian, 27 January 1989.

Davies, Thurston J. " The University Center," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 2 October 1931, p. 27-31. (Appendix B)

Delaney, Edmund. " Letter Holds 'Center' Unnecessary," The Daily Princetonian, 6 May 1931.

Durden, Abby. "U-Council Debates site at Palmer Hall for campus center," The Daily Princetonian, 14 October 1994, p. 1, 11.

"The Faculty and the Center," The Daily Princetonian, 16 March 1931.

Fieldston, Evan. "Committee presents drafts of campus center site plans," The Daily Princetonian, p. 1, 4.

Fisher, D.K. Este. "McCarter Theatre Now Rising," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 2 July 1929, p. 1142.

Fox, Col. Arthur E., Capt. Frederick G. Richards, and Dean Wicks. "Unifying Influence," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 9 March 1945,

p. 4, 6.

"A Future Leader in American Drama," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 22 October 1926, p. 112-113.

Gertler, Howard. "Palmer Hall gains support as site for campus center," The Daily Princetonian, 19 October 1994, p. 1, 4.

Hibben, John Grier. " First, the University Center," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 27 February 1931.

Johnson, Barbara L. "McCarter Theatre Plans Extensive Renovations Next Summer with Focus to be on Improved Comfort and Better Acoustics," Town Topics, 19 September 1984, p. 1B, 20B.

Lee, Jefferson. "Shapiro forms committee to assess priorities for new student center," The Daily Princetonian, 5 January 1994, p. 1, 4.

Letter from Sarah Marshall Wertenbaker, 15 April 1988.

Lim, Paul J. "USG caucus outlines proposals to raise funds for campus center," The Daily Princetonian, 20 February 1989, p. 1, 9.

Lynn, James D. "The Student Center," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 22 October 1954, p. 8-12.

Maloney, David John. Senior thesis, 1975.

McCarthy, Sean L. " No Place to Go," Nassau Weekly, 5 November 1992, p. 10, 11.

McConnell, Dugald. Senior thesis: A Campus Center for Student Activities At Princeton University, 1993

Minda, Roland L. "Varied Services and Homelike Atmosphere Make 800 Come to Campus Center Each Day," The Daily Princetonian, 26 November 1946, p. 1, 3.

Miller, David. "Campus center debate," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 8 February 1989, p. 13.

"Murphy Stymied in Plans for Active Social Center," The Daily Princetonian, 13 April 1950.

"Murray-Dodge Hall, aided by SFA drive, serves as university center for campus," The Daily Princetonian, 29 October 1937.

Newman, Jon O. "A University Center: Problem on the Princeton Campus since 1908," The Daily Princetonian, 14 April 1951.

"New Campus Center," Princeton Bulletin, 13 August 1943.

"President Proposes 18th Club," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 24 February 1950, p. 5-7.

Princeton Alumni Weekly, 22 October 1924, p. 78.

Princeton Alumni Weekly, 16 October 1953, p. 7.

Princeton: Past, Present and Future, 1927.

Princeton Triangle Club. Committee report requesting a theater, 16 November 1922.

Princeton University Department of Public Relations, news release, 7 October 1953.

Princeton University Department of Public Relations, new release, 27 October 1954.

Rose, Nelson P. "Some Undergraduate Views," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 7 November 1930, p. 168.

Shaver, Katie. "USG plans fundraising campaign to finance possible campus center," The Daily Princetonian, 17 February 1989,

p. 1, 5.

Shi, Maggie. "Students react with indifference to debate over campus center site," The Daily Princetonian, 23 November 1994, p. 1, 2.

"Some Sites," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 22 June 1928, p. 1121.

Tadaki, Joy. "Committee report favors proposal for creation of campus center," The Daily Princetonian, 1 February 1988, p.17.

Take a Break. (Appendix C)

Tickner, Geoffrey L. "Campus Center Approved," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 18 April 1952.

Tickner, Geoffrey L. "Campus Center Delayed," The Daily Princetonian, 19 October 1951.

Tickner, Geoffrey L. "Trustees Consider New Campus Center," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 25 January 1952, p. 10.

"Trainees and Civilians Both use Facilities," Princeton Bulletin, 26 July 1943.

"Triangle Club Opens New McCarter Theatre," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 22 February 1930, p. 503, 504.

"Trustee group to decide fate of new center," The Daily Princetonian, 11 March 1952.

"Trustees committee endorses proposal for University Club," The Daily Princetonian, 10 January 1929.

"Trustees study possibility of building new center," The Daily Princetonian, 10 December 1951.

"Undergraduate Quadrangle," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 26 May 1926, p. 889, 890.

"Views of the Undergraduate Center," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 22 May 1931, p. 799.

Weinstein, Jason. "The Faltering Genesis of a Campus Center," The Daily Princetonian, 2 March 1989.

Whetzel, J.F. "Campus Center Celebrates First Birthday," Princeton Herald, 11 August 1944.

Whetzel, J.F. "Campus Center Grows in First Year; Hopes to Continue After War," Princeton Bulletin, 7 August 1944.

"Will Break Ground for New Theatre," Princeton Herald, 15 June 1928.

Williams, Susan. "Campus Beer Hall," Princeton Alumni Weekly, 6 March 1973, p. 7.

Yessios, Dorina. " Architecture dean reviews campus center site," The Daily Princetonian, 1 November 1994, p. 1, 4.