Those of us in Midway House who read your editorial “A house without a home” (10/4/11) feel that it grossly misrepresents our house.
A principal opinion of the article is that our house lacks identity and culture, and yet it does not cite anyone who would actually know—that is, Midway House residents. Instead, the article consists of speculation by those who don’t live in Midway House, and who seemingly didn’t have the time to find out the real story.
The article says that Midway House is a “setback…to creating a positive dorm environment” which “cannot possibly provide [a] close-knit culture.” However, we feel that there is a strong culture here—indeed, our relative isolation on campus and our small size have quite possibly made our community even more close-knit than other houses.
The article also fails to note the perks of living in converted graduate student housing: All but two rooms are singles, every room has its own bathroom, and we have a private gym, among other amenities. These benefits certainly help outweigh some of the flaws.
When I found out I was placed in Midway House this summer, I was worried that I would be deprived of the house culture of other dorms, as the article says. However, the strength of the community has exceeded my expectations. Comparing what friends in other houses here have told me and my own experiences of dorm life at a boarding school to my time in Midway House, this house has been a success, not a failure.
My housemates and I strongly believe the editorial fails to grasp the real picture and demonstrates sloppy journalism. The article shows an insulting arrogance on the part of the Editorial Board that they should presume to know more than we do about our own dorm’s culture.
Andrew Mitchell, Class of 2015, with input from numerous students in Midway House.