This was a good letter to Camille Paglia in her current Salon column:
The purpose of this message is to express my outrage at the frequent criticism of Sarah Palin for having gone to five schools before she graduated from the University of Idaho. What many of her critics fail to understand, or smugly disdain, is the reason she attended several schools. Sarah's parents told their four children that they could not afford to pay their way through college, and if any of them wanted to go on to college, they must figure a way to pay for it on their own.It is a towering credit to Sarah Palin's ambition, courage and will to persevere that she acquired college credit hours when and where she had the opportunity and could pay for them and had the drive and guts to earn her B.A. Although a degree from the University of Idaho may not impress someone who attended an Ivy League school, having the title the University of Idaho on her sheepskin is certainly more elegant than, say, Southwest Wyoming State Teachers College.
Those whose parents paid their way through school evidently don't appreciate what extra effort it took Sarah to acquire her B.A. But I do, because hailing from Galena, Kansas, the only Kansas town mentioned in John Steinbeck's "Grapes of Wrath," I know what it's like to grow up poor, at least poor in relative terms.
It's common for working-class youngsters who manage to go on to college to go to one school, as did I, for their first couple of years. In many cases, a kid will live at home while going to a nearby college. It irks me that smug, spoiled brats have the gall to criticize Sarah Palin for going to several colleges, because she didn't flunk out of those schools -- she was scratching and clawing to grab credit hours when she could.
Although I graduated from the University of Kansas very near, if not at the very bottom, of my class, I remain proud of the degree I earned, because it enabled me to wiggle my way out of the lower working-class. I busted my fanny to make it through school, working as a busboy at a tavern and as a waiter in a sorority house. But first I went to school at a small state college, Kansas State Teachers College at Pittsburg, near my hometown, before transferring to the University of Kansas to earn my B.A. from a school with a better reputation than KSTC's.
My father was the youngest of ten children born to a farm family and probably never had a penny which he hadn't earned by his hard labor. He chose to lease and operate a gas station in Galena, Kansas, until he'd earned enough to purchase the station from the oil company. Operating a gas station was his vocation for more than 40 years. In all those years, I knew him to take only one weekend vacation, when he and my mother drove to St. Louis to watch a Cardinals game.
Dave Livingston
Colorado Springs, CO
You'll want to read Paglia's response, which ends with the line: "We're in a horrendous cultural vacuum because our status-besotted education industry is geared toward producing not original thinkers but docile creatures of the system."
This reminds me of something two childhood friends who went to the Ivies, but who spent a semester at LSU with me to qualify for a cheaper year-abroad program, said about going to the state school versus their Ivy (from which both graduated): that they got a lot more out of class at LSU because you actually got to interact with professors, and because the students didn't seem to have a sense of entitlement about being there.
Anyway, I liked this letter because what the letter-writer says is true, and because it also explains why so many people identify with Sarah Palin, despite everything. Understand me clearly: I think Sarah Palin is a fatally flawed vessel, and would be a terrible national leader. But please separate your thoughts and feelings about Palin long enough to understand why someone like Dave Livingston would identify with her, and come to loathe at least some of her critics. The Palin populist discerns, probably correctly, that much of the Palin hate is not only spite towards Palin herself, but spite towards a certain kind of American, and his tastes, his dreams, and his experiences. It is too bad, and maybe even a kind of tragedy, that Palin is personally not capable of sustaining the hope ordinary people put in her. Anyway, I know people can't talk about Palin anymore without going crazy, but Dave Livingston is worth listening to. I know a lot of people like him. He's why I wanted Sarah Palin so badly to be good, and was so disappointed when she wasn't.

Add to Newsvine
Add to StumbleUpon
I don't disagree with the writer about the working class and attending multiple colleges to get a degree. I respect that. I attended junior colleges (community colleges today) during the summers to take classes and shorten my time to earn a BA. I worked my butt off at jobs throughout my 4-years of undergrad.
What bugs me about Sarah Palin is her inability to use whatever knowledge she gained from her degree.
If she'd been in MY media law class she would have known that the media cannot violate her First Amendment rights. The media may have violated her privacy or even dissed her speech but the elite MSM didn't violate her First Amendment rights. My students learn that the First Amendment is a restraint on the GOVERNMENT, not private industry, not private employers. Much as I may wish I had free speech in my workplace, I realize that I do not.
That Sarah Palin didn't learn this during the time she took sports journalism classes makes me wonder how she passed. She would not have graduated from SJB at Oklahoma State without knowing how the First Amendment works.
I should clarify that my workplace is now a private university, not a publicly-supported university.
RSG, I largely agree, though it might be more accurate to say that her complete lack of curiosity, her narcissism, and her short attention span were the cause of her attending five colleges. Sorry folks, I hate snobs as much as the next person, but calling Palin a potential disaster is not snobbery; it's just tough-minded realism.
Re: it is ludicrous to assert that only the working class go to state colleges and only the rich go to the Ivy's.
Some state schools can be pretty elitist too. The University of Michigan is an example.
I was a working class student there (my father was a truck driver), but most of the kids there were decidedly upper middle class. That never bothered me one way or the other, but then I have very thick skin about such things. I got a very good education there (I was a physics student) but apart from occasional twinges of nostalgia I've never felt any real connection to the place as an alumnus.
As for finances, I was an in-state student, and I did get a free-ride in terms of tuition (grants covered it fully). My family circumstances were unusual though since my father was retired due to disability (he was in fact slowly dying, and did so in my third year), so as far as the financial aid office was concerned I independent of my family. I did have to work for spending money, and I lived at home, which made sense as we lived within biking distance of campus and my father's illness was a factor there. At least twenty years ago it was still possible to get through college (at a rather pricey institution) without debt.
As has already been pointed out, she was hardly scrambling for credits. She went to private and public out of state schools, which means she was not ever looking for the cheap way to do it. And she also failed courses in two of them, and had to make up credit hours. I get a little tired of the myth of the heroic working-class college student. The reality is that a lot of working-class people fail out repeatedly and overspend on out of state or private schools and no, that isn't worth lauding as a triumph of the lower classes.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.