Praise for “Despair,” real and wonderful essay, SAT (math) question, higher ed debate, and more.
Appreciation and Thanks
The May|Jun 2025 issue of the Gazette captured my interest more than most. The article “Welcome to Despair” caught and captured my attention. The course strikes me as a liberal arts education in a semester. Obviously, it’s not, but it seems an introduction and a world-broadening experience. The article also provided me with insight into the current generation of University students. Hurrah to you for devoting so many pages to this topic!
In addition to writing my appreciation and thanks, I am wondering if it’s possible to get a book list of what Professor McDaniel has used in the past. Though I’m a voracious reader, his recommendations would be welcomed. Not that I’m looking for despair. … I have a sense that his recommendations form the basis of a well-rounded, educated reader. That is what I want to continue to be.
Laura Denton GEd’73, Oakland, CA
Professor McDaniel says he does not share a reading list but is open to hearing directly from alumni at [email protected] and will cater a list to their specific needs and tastes.—Ed.
Blown Away
“Welcome to Despair” was an incredible article. I first came to know author Dave Zeitlin’s writing when he was a beat writer for the Philadelphia Union soccer team. When I finished his article about Justin McDaniel’s course, I was really blown away. I looked back at the title page to see who wrote it and was not surprised to see his name. Keep up the great work!
Paul Costa C’96, Merion Station, PA
Real and Relevant
I just finished Caren Lissner’s essay “Close Your Eyes” [“Alumni Voices,” May|Jun 2025], which was wonderful; I hated for it to end. Some very dear family members of mine are homeless, so the article really resonated with me, and I so wanted to read more as I worry about them constantly.
Caren’s work is so real and relevant. I can’t wait to read the memoir on homelessness she mentions that she is working on. I am proud of Caren for writing this piece, and of the Gazette for publishing it—for “keeping it real,” and not pretending that all those who attend Penn have it “all ivy.” The genuineness of her work is what makes it so impressive and engaging.
I received my degree from Penn in 1978 in sociology and later received my master’s in writing from Portland State University. I’m retired now. My historical novel, Avezzano and New York, is on Amazon under my pen name of Glo Lewis, and I have a blog of fiction writing advice and my short stories at writingforseniors.blogspot.com.
Gloria Lewis C’78, Auburn, CA
Higher Math (and Verbal)
I noted with interest the story reporting that Penn has restored the SAT/ACT requirement [“Gazetteer,” May|Jun 2025].
One would anticipate that, in a test-optional environment, the people most likely to report test scores would be the people who do well on tests. This does seem to be the case with Penn: according to the story, only 41 percent of matriculating students reported test scores, but “the median SAT score of incoming College students who’d chosen to submit it was a perfect 1600.”
That is an awesome achievement, but I’m a bit puzzled as to how it was achieved. My statistics professor at Penn taught me (over 50 years ago…) that the “median” number in a set of numbers was the center number—that is, the “median” was the number where half of all the numbers in the set were higher, and half of all the numbers in the set were lower. If 1600 is, indeed, a perfect score, what scores could possibly have been higher? Or does Penn have a different, um, “mode” for quantifying statistical results?
I guess this means that 20.5 percent of Penn’s incoming College students (that is, half of the students who reported test results) are better than “perfect.” Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Hahvud!
Michael T. Shutterly C’74, Henrico, VA
Not better than perfect, but more than half of the students reporting SAT scores got 1600—so perfection was the median.—Ed.
Penn’s Complicity Can’t Be Cloaked
With respect to the article “Universities Targeted” [“Gazetteer,” May|Jun 2025], where the administration attempts to explain their positions on transgender athletes to the Penn community, I was disappointed in their explanations: (1) Penn never had its own policy, (2) Penn followed the laws/rules then in place, and (3) Penn follows the NCAA policy of now. A statement worthy of Hogan’s Heroes’ Sgt. Schultz (“I know nothing!”) if he had gone to law school.
Penn’s complicity can’t be cloaked behind the letter of the law/rules. It was wrong then and continues to be wrong today.
Peter D. McManmon C’70 GAr’74, Marion, MA
Egregious and Unfair
“Universities Targeted” quotes Penn President J. Larry Jameson on the University’s concern over President Trump’s “pausing” of $175 million in federal grants. Trump’s executive order was to penalize Penn for allowing a transgender woman, Lia Thomas C’22, to swim on the women’s team, garnering a personal NCAA championship while doing so. Penn is also under investigation by the Office of Civil Rights for Title IX violations in regard to its athletic participation policies.
President Jameson reiterated Penn’s core values and contributions to valuable research in “innumerable and lifesaving medical research”—all of which is true. However, much of the nation’s population outside of elite educational institutions find Thomas’ incursion into women’s sports egregious and unfair. Jameson’s defense against this assault on Title IX appears to be somewhat tepid. He acknowledges the University has never had its own policy on transgender athletic participation (and one wonders why) but has consistently followed NCAA policy on that issue.
With his extensive medical background, President Jameson should know that if one were to test Lia Thomas’ DNA, an X and a Y chromosome would be found. That signifies maleness and, regardless of Thomas’s desire to be regarded as female, s/he is not. There is no “trans” gender—we humans remain binary.
Perhaps it’s time for Penn to think beyond the vagaries of the NCAA and format fair rules (i.e., uphold Title IX) for Penn’s female athletes. It would be an honorable and painless way to retrieve their federal grants.
Dr. Alan E. Deegan D’59, Highlands Ranch, CO
Exercise in Futility
In “Universities Targeted,” President Larry Jameson says the right things, but his arguments that Penn contributes greatly to the economy and the health of the nation are an exercise in futility. President Donald Trump W’68 doesn’t care. He will use any far-fetched pretext to justify reducing, even eliminating, federal funding. His goal is to render universities impotent, to have little influence. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.
The attack on elite universities is a component of a coordinated campaign to downgrade education. He put a wrestling executive in charge of the Department of Education on the way to closing it. He ended funding for educational television. Why is education the target?
Trump told us explicitly: “I love the uneducated, and the uneducated love me.” [After winning the Nevada primary in 2016, Trump listed the groups he had received strong support from, including “the poorly educated,” and added, “I love the poorly educated.”—Ed.] This was a truly brilliant stroke for a candidate with no political training or experience, and with enormous baggage ranging from not paying income taxes to sexual misconduct. He found a way to create a huge base, a mass of ordinary folks who came to believe that an avaricious billionaire would represent their interests.
Who are those uneducated? Uneducated people are not stupid, but they generally don’t get trained in critical thinking. They are easily led by a charismatic leader; they don’t question what he tells them. Admittedly, that’s an elitist perspective; but it appears to be the reality in a deeply divided country.
The uneducated can’t see that tariffs are merely sales taxes with a little animosity tossed in, instituted with the goal of reducing taxes on income, which are graduated, with taxes on consumption, which are not. Who benefits most from that shift?
Trump plays into xenophobia and racism, as with his reported reference to Haiti and African countries being “sh—holes” and calling for more immigration from places like Norway. He has successfully diverted the uneducated from the data showing that immigrants help the economy in multiple ways, while being less likely than the native-born to commit crimes (see the Gazette’s report on Wharton Professor Zeke Hernandez’s research [“The Newcomer Dividend,” Jul|Aug 2024]).
President Trump views trade as a competitive, zero-sum game, and he uses the economic and military strength of the United States to help him achieve wins. In contrast, and as I was taught in the one class I took in the Wharton School, trade can be the rising tide that lifts all boats. I get fresh summer fruits and vegetables during the winter, while those who grow them get cell phones and television that are not made in their locales.
I trust I speak for all alumni in supporting President Jameson’s efforts to defend the University on rational grounds. I have little hope that will suffice. Perhaps a more practical approach to make things better before President Trump leaves office is to join the sycophants and award him an honorary doctorate.
David J Weiss C’66, Brea, CA
Beetle Mania
I found the passage about the former Volkswagen Beetle in “Sweet Chariots” [“Rabbit Hole,” Mar|Apr 2025] very amusing, as it brought back wonderful memories of a trip I took to Europe after graduation in 1957, accompanied by fellow classmate Nick Taubman W’57.
We rented a Volkswagen Beetle for this tour, and often one of us had to exit the car and “push” it up hills, especially in Switzerland.
As many know, the Beetle had a small engine in the rear that reminded us of a sewing machine motor. Nonetheless, the Beetle was otherwise very reliable throughout this trip, and I was sorry to see Volkswagen discontinue the Beetle.
Ron Harwood W’57, Tulsa, OK
Welcome Recognition for Military Service
Thank you for including reference to the military service of the individuals listed in the alumni obituaries in the Pennsylvania Gazette.
The graduates in the years around mine (1968) knew that the war was close, but maybe not as close as it turned out to be for many, based on the frequency of service references in the listings for those years.
The times were such that many of those (us) who served were motivated to suppress any acknowledgment or recognition of military service in or around the Vietnam War … for years.
The reference to military service in the Gazette obituaries for all who served is fitting, for sure, and appreciated, I believe.
Anthony P. Morris C’68, Boston
The writer shared that he served in the US Navy from 1968 to 1973, including in Vietnam in 1968–69.—Ed.
