Dear Editor,
Some years ago I heard a story about a poor boy who was a student at Queen’s College – I pray my memory serves me well. The story goes that he went to school with his shirt darned, which was something not normal or allowed. The Principal at the general assembly made reference to the shirt, stressing the prestige of the college and the importance of maintaining impeccable standards. He had therefore come to the decision to send the boy home to change his shirt in keeping with the policy of the institution. The boy in turn explained that it was the only shirt he had. The story went that the late Walter Rodney – that champion of the working class from a tender age, and then a student there also – got up on a point of order and made representation on the boy’s behalf, pointing out that poor folks attending the college were merely there because of their brains. Some had one uniform, as was the case with this boy, which they would wash in the afternoon/evening. The shirt, he said, was clean and neatly darned and had nothing to do with his learning; as such he should not be penalized. As it was told, Rodney got the attention of the Principal who rescinded his decision.
Editor, this story came back to me days ago when a parent beaming with delight that her son who had done well at CXC was now attending QC – that esteemed institution. In her excitement she went on to tell of some difficulties she encountered getting him in shape, the main ones being finding a place for him to stay in Georgetown; and finding some nine thousand dollars to acquire the necessaries upon entering, namely, monogram, tie, jersey, contingency fee, etc – contrary to the Minister of Education’s statements about contingency fees. But what I found strange and hard to figure out was when she mentioned the administration’s strictness with regard to uniform material; that students were required to wear pants of a particular material and if students turned up wearing pants of a khaki material they would be told that it was unacceptable. I honestly couldn’t believe that these things were still happening. I thought that we had made radical changes in respect to some things. Obviously khaki material would be cheaper and more suited to the poor man’s pocket, so why then this non-acceptance? Remember that those poor folks are there because of their ability – no other reason.
One can appreciate the insistence and need for quality and high standards, yes! But the emphasis ought to be on discipline, neatness, cleanliness, and students should not be penalized for being unable to afford fine apparel. In any event, should not their education be first in the order, over and above quality material? Hopefully after acquiring their education they may be able to have it all. But why is it that we fail to take an interest in things that seemingly don’t affect us? Because of the way QC is structured, with the gentry comprising the board, ordinary working class folks attending meetings are oftentimes too timid and hesitant to speak up freely; thus by their silence they have to go along with whatever decision is made.
It is so sad that we are so far from really becoming One People One Nation One Destiny; that there is no Walter Rodney in this institution with a piercing revolutionary mind and humanitarian working class outlook to stand up and speak up. That we remain so entrapped, smug and haughty that we are among the privileged, and that’s all that matters. Then we sit in a corner and wonder why the things we detest so much are imperceptibly and rapidly consuming us with each passing day.
Yours faithfully,
Frank Fyffe
