Opinion | Editorial
Sloping Upward
February 4, 2009 - 12:00amOn Thursday, the Cornell Concert Commission announced that it would graciously donate $30,000 to the Slope Day Programming Board to help compensate for an estimated $70,000 loss in funding from the University. But showering funds into the Slope Day budget paints a gilded image of the increasingly bleak financial outlook that Cornell faces.
The contribution will be used to help foot the sumptuous bill for the day’s musical lineup. However, as budgets across campus continue to be slashed, why is it necessary to still pump close to a quarter of a million dollars into the annual spring festival?
The century-long tradition predates big-name headliners that can cost upwards of $100,000. Slope Day has been evolving since its most nascent stage as a Naval Ball in 1890. The first celebratory “Spring Day” occurred in 1901 — a day that encompassed a variety of events, including a mock bullfight, circuses and a Fraternity Float parade. Later, political unrest in the ’60s and ’70s brought a much more subdued tone to the day’s festivities.
The first incarnation that resembled the modern Slope Day occurred in 1979 when Cornell Dining sponsored “Springfest,” which provided students with a barbeque, beer and music at the foot of Libe Slope. 1987 brought Cornell’s first “Slope Day,” but by 1988, the University refused to recognize the event. It was not until 2003 that the University stepped in, to provide entertainment, food and drink, in addition to restricting public access to the Slope.
What followed was an arms race to bring bigger, brighter and better-known bands, perpetually trying to out-do previous years.
But today, times are tough. With the economy in a recession, the time is ripe to reconsider the emphasis on hiring chart-topping, multi-platinum musical guests. Realigning its focus and concentrating its resources to recruit a number of smaller, up-and-coming artists could give Slope Day a new feel that is more appropriate in such perilous times.
The SDPB may be hesitant to revert back to the scaled-down Slope Day of years past for a number of reasons. The failure to draw droves of people to the slope — where emergency medical services and security readily oversee one of Cornell’s most celebrated days of intoxication — is certainly a cause for concern. But Slope Day is an institution embedded in the culture of Cornell and it will be maintained despite a constrained budget.
Not one pocket of life at Cornell is immune to the wrath of the current financial crisis. We hope that the SDPB does not see the CCC’s gift as a green light to follow-through with what has become a tradition of grandiosity. Put simply: the day — not its playbill — sells itself.
You make it sound like its
You make it sound like its our tuition dollars being stripped from academics and research to put on the event... by your own graph its overwhelmingly the Student Activity Fee that goes towards putting this on. I agree that the SAF is exorbitant and that for most undergrad's, it's money that virtually just disappears, never to be seen by them again.
But that debate aside, why not put it to a well attended event rather than all the other crap it goes to? I think its safe to say Slope Day is the biggest baddest celebration of the year and is relatively legendary at Cornell and beyond. Since there won't be any cuts in the SAF anytime soon and none of that endowment makes its way to Slope Day, why on earth should we suddenly scale it back?
Interesting editorial
Interesting editorial considering your last one regarding Slope Day asked all student groups on campus to consider giving money to the SDPB. I agree that Slope Day can be streamlined, but at least decided where you stand on the issue.
Not Quite
While you are correct that Slope Day has in more recent years attempted to out-do the previous year's event, with regards to notoriety of musical acts, you are mistaken as to the reason why.
Slope Day has evolved into what we now know because of the change of legal drinking age to 21. This change fueled a cascade of events that led to the halting of Slope Day, and drinking related activities (many of which were funded by the school).
The event then became an excuse for frats and students to independently throw huge drinking-fests, many of which led to alcohol poisonings, not a point taken lightly by the administration.
In an attempt to revamp Slope Day into an event that the Cornell Community could enjoy safely, President Hunter R. Rawlings III issued a charge to the President's Council on Alcohol and Other Drugs to assemble a group of staff, faculty and students to critically assess and address the role that alcohol and other drugs (AOD) played on Slope Day. This group became known as the Slope Day Steering Committee.
Since that fateful day ~8 years ago, this group reviews the statistics from the year before to decide how safety can be improved.
Statistics show that a larger band draws a larger, more sober crowd. Therefore, SDPB attempts to read the minds of the community, a very difficult task. As for the money, the $30K will help bring artists of similar caliber, but it will not be a green light to spend outrageously. Logistically, bands are more expensive than just their fees (which are high to begin with). Sadly, alcohol will still be affordable enough for students to treat the day as if it were the biggest Slope Day ever, so why not allow SDPB and the administration figure out a way to best control this behavior.