Queen of the Damned be damned

To whom it may or may not concern:

It was perhaps a few weeks back but the Lord has not allowed me to let go of my reaction and I have been encouraged to write to you. Some time ago there was a movie review of Queen of the Damned. At first I was merely stunned that a Calvin student would subject themselves to such material and then feel as though it deserved the student populous' attention in print. I reigned in my emotions long enough to read the article thinking, `` Perhaps the writer has an ethical agenda and is going to make it clear that a Christian's focus is Christ in a dark world'' but the writer did not have any such agenda. Instead I found a glowing review regarding cinematography, special effects and actors. There was no mention of ethical content. The viewpoint is that perhaps it is just a movie and I am being over-conservative, or that journalism has no boundaries regarding morality. I would submit to you that both are true if I were not a Christian. As a representative of posterity within literature for a Christ-focused institution it is your duty to preserve the integrity of the student body and its literature. You have not done this with such an article. Yet again you have failed to uphold good Calvin principles and have introduced a measure of taint to our campus. The only authority I possess is to remind you as a brother in Christ your obligation to remain not of the world. May God bless your continued work and give you peace.

Benjamin Fradette

`03

Big Whoop

This letter is in response to the ignorant, yet appropriate, opinion of one of the perspectives editors. In the March 1st edition of the Chimes, a blurb was emblazonned on page 14 that read, ``So Canada won the gold in hockey. Two words: big whoop. Perspectives.'' After venting my disgust over the words that managed to put a dent in my week-long patriotic euphoria, I came to realize the appropriateness of the comment. To most Americans, the U.S. - Canada Olympic hockey final was exactly that - a big whoop. However, to Canadians it was one of the top five most defining moments in our nation's collective experience. To Canadians, it was a big whoop. And that is why we won. The Canadian hockey ``dream team'' displayed the characteristic intestinal fortitude that all hockey players discover when they slip the maple leaf jersey over their head. The Canadian hockey ``dig deep, guts and glory'' resolve was quite apparent in the one-game, winner-take-all final against the U.S. This was simply a game that we could not afford to lose. Hockey is Canada's game. It is our unofficial religion. The game cannot be intellectualized; it is far greater than that. The Olympic final represented so much more to the country than just a simple hockey game or a gold medal. What was so important about the Olympic final was that so many watched this game and cared about it that it became a cultural event, transcending sport. Nearly 12.6 million people, almost 50% of Canada's entire population, tuned into the game, making it the biggest one-time audience in Canadian history. The spontaneous post-game celebrations that erupted from coast to coast, most notably in the heart of separatist Quebec, cemented the importance of this day in Canadian history. I will never forget where I was the day Canada beat the U.S. for Olympic gold. For me, and for a country with a new found sense of pride and unity, this day was indeed a big whoop.

Phil Kooy

`02

Testing like real life

As an alumna of Calvin and now a law student, I am sympathic to the author of this editorial. I understand the feeling of frustration when there is insufficient time to write all that you want to say during the time allotted, and write it well. But, before you get too discouraged, realize that students are passing, and some are doing very well. Further, it could be worse. It could be that the test you're taking constitutes the first and only grade you will get for that class. And it is comprised of one broad, ambiguous question. It could be that the question is a story which, at the end, states ``address all relevant issues.'' It could be that the professor alludes to virtually everything you studied over the course of the semester and expects references to all of it.

It could be that your test, which they've generously given you 3 hours to take, really would take a solid 10 to do completely, not including fixing macro- and micro-organizational issues.

It could be that you are expected to remember not only the entire semester of work, but also to be able to apply everything you've learned to ANY real life situations you might find yourself in.

And it could be that the professor just wants to see what you really know. After all, if you truly know it, it should come to mind almost reflectively, right? The only reassurance in higher education is that all students in your class are in the same boat. If you're feeling pressured, so is the next guy or gal (and if they're not, they're over-confident and you need not worry about them). In the end, just remember this general rule: you need only write more relevant stuff than anyone else in the room (after all, most classes that require essays -- and the grading that goes with it -- are pretty subjective anyway). And if it doesn't work out, you've always got next semester.

Anita Y. Woudenberg

Knightvision supplemental tool

Unfortunately I was not able to attend the discussion on Knightvision. I don't know who I should send an e-mail to in regards to it, but I believe that the professors who are against it should reconsider their opinions. I don't remember which person said it, but they do not have to use this program. It is not being forced on them. It is a great option for professors. I really appreciate it when my professors fully utilize Knightvision, because I can then check my grades on-line and see how I am progressing in class, I can check my syllabus on-line, as opposed to printing it out (saving trees--I should hope these professors are environmentally-minded professors--the capacity to save paper through this program is amazing), and it is great for busy students who can't always get to their professor's office to ask questions about class; if the professor fully utilizes Knightvision, everything is there for you on-line-- you don't have to go bug your professors, freeing up their time and yours. I am a theatre major so time is very precious to me. I am at school all day long - 8:30am to 10:30pm. I know there are other students that are busy as well--I will not be so arrogant as to presume that I'm the only busy student on campus. We are very busy. Knightvision is a great tool! I do agree that it should not replace class learning but it can be a great supplemental tool! I also transferred here from a school that refrained from using the internet in any way. My husband graduated from this school and he hates the fact that he can't go to their web-site and find people there, use picture databases and so forth. I really think some of these professors are being a bit childish about this. They should appreciate what they have. It really should be a non-issue--they don't have to use it.

Mandi R. Hutchins

`03