Contact Information
The Spectator
Face Off: What Really Makes a Great Name Great?
Accomplishments
by Jerome Noel '09Layout Manager
First, I want to stress that this opinion piece is in no way an attack on the committee that choose the Sacerdote Great Names speaker. Each year, they take up an unenviable burden: to choose a person with a broad appeal to the Hamilton community to give an entertaining and enlightening speech. Such a task inherently invites criticism. At least one person is bound to be, ultimately, disappointed.
Respectfully, I must disagree with the choice of Jon Stewart. If the sole criteria for a speaker was availability on the lecture circuit, then "Great Names" is a misnomer. The series should be called the "Sacerdote Speakers Who Are Available Series." As history has shown, the speaker should be someone that does or did something great, a standard Jon Stewart simply does not fit. Past speakers have included such illustrious "somethings" as two presidents, a vice president, a mayor, a prime minister, a journalist, an archbishop and a holocaust survivor. The inaugural speaker, Colin Powell, was the chairman of the Joint Chiefs under Presidents George Bush and Bill Clinton. These men and women illustrate precisely what a great name should be.
The series has also included entertainers, such as legendary blues guitarist B.B. King, innovative comedian and author Bill Cosby, and Grammy-winning soul singer Aretha Franklin. Tom Brokaw drew from his years of experience as a journalist and television show host and producer, and his research when writing his bestseller The Greatest Generation. As a comedian first and foremost, a role Stewart himself admitted during his speech, Stewart simply does not match his predecessors, even his fellow entertainers like Cosby or King.
Obviously, the list of possible and potential speakers is finite. Hamilton can only invite speakers who are currently touring on the lecture circuit. Hamilton cannot simply invite Prime Minister Putin, Bono, or the Pope to come to the fieldhouse and give a speech. The choice is limited. Suggestions, even from the choosing committee, are not always guaranteed potential speakers. The committee has to weave through a process that involves availability, scheduling, popularity and pricing. And the broad based appeal, which Stewart indeed brought to the Hill, is also a necessity. The support for Jon Stewart was overwhelming due to his popular television show. His fake-newscast The Daily Show has been a hit since he took over. There is no getting around it: his show is absolutely hilarious. And he has met and interviewed some amazing people, from Tom Cruise to Barack Obama.
But is Jon Stewart, hilarious as he is, truly a Great Name? Has he actually done anything? Popular comedian, yes. Emmy-winning writing, yes. But look at the other potential candidates: Tony Blair was Prime Minister for a decade under the last remaining Western monarchy. Like him or not, Karl Rove almost single-handedly got President George W. Bush elected. Kofi Annan was Secretary General of the UN. Michael Jordan won the NBA national championships six times, and was named MVP five times. And J.K. Rowling wrote one of the most beloved series in modern literature. During all of this, the only thing Jon Stewart did was write jokes.
Appeal
by Lauren Moon '10Features Editor
The vast majority of the Hamilton community celebrated the selection of Jon Stewart as Sacerdote Great Names Speaker. Despite Stewart's popularity, opposition to any major decision is to be expected. However, I find such criticism to be misplaced.
Stewart has been a front-runner for the Great Names series for the past three years. Unfortunately, budget and schedule constraints have led the Great Names committee to pursue other options. At the beginning of the summer of 2008, the committee sent out a campus wide survey to gauge the interests of the Hamilton community. The Office of Student Activities received a staggering 1180 responses in 12 days. The amount of feedback alone is indicative of the popularity of the series itself. In the survey, the Hamilton community was given a choice of 20 famous names from varied professions including politicians, actors, artists, athletes, activists, musicians, journalists, authors, and no less than three comedians. Survey takers were asked to rank each candidate on a scale of one to seven, with one being little interest and seven being strong interest. With over 75% of survey takers ranking Stewart with a five or above, the comedian and Daily Show host blew every other candidate out of the water.
After these results came in, the Office of Student Activities felt that a third and final attempt to book Stewart would be necessary. Student Activities jumped through monetary and scheduling hoops to ensure this year's speaker was both affordable and available. It is important to note that there were two dates Stewart's agent offered Hamilton. One of the dates was over Fall Break, and the other was November 14, the date of the performance. There were other scheduled events going on at Hamilton that weekend; however, they were not on the master calendar at the time that Jon Stewart was booked. Additionally, it would have been difficult to justify losing the opportunity for a Great Names Speaker three years in the making with over three quarters of the Hamilton community desiring his attendance.
Another concern among dissenters is the charge that Stewart is not worthy of the title "Great Name." Many people seem to have adopted their own personal mission statement concerning the proper use of the generous Sacerdote fund. The fund, however, makes no mention of any specific educational value of the speaker, nor does it specify any career fields necessary to qualify the person as a Great Name. The language of the mission statement indicates that any popular touring famous figures are appropriate choices for the series.
The choice of a comedian for the Great Names series is not unprecedented. Stewart shares this spotlight with the award-winning Bill Cosby. While these comedians' accomplishments may pale in comparison to some of the great political and journalistic thinkers of the past, I believe it is Hamilton's duty to not only diversify the hosts but, more importantly, appeal to the majority of Hamilton voices. The turnout at last month's performance was the largest in history, and it would be hard to find an attendee who thought the performance was sub par. For those who are worried that the future of the intellectual integrity of the series is now compromised, I wouldn't worry. The rumor mill has it that certain very influential world leaders (that shall remain anonymous) are available for speaking engagements within the next year.