Auburn isn't a bastion of bohemia. The "other"--the artist, dancer, thespian, him or her decidedly unlike--is not celebrated. The closest your favorite band has gotten to Lee County is Atlanta. (Birmingham if you're lucky.)
There is the odd art show at Jule Collins, poetry reading at Gnu's Room and marathon Chaucer reading in the library's basement, granted, but there isn't any real sense of artistic community and camaraderie in Auburn, neither University nor town.
Or is there? Is there an undercurrent unknown to most students?
If not, if Auburn really is devoid of any and all semblance of artistic oneness, who or what is to blame?
And, another question largely left unasked, is this good or bad, or does it matter?
"I don't know if it's the culture here, but for some reason we think we can only do three things well: football, engineering and agriculture," said Shelli Brown, senior in psychology and ambassador between the University and the Layman Group--a nonprofit arts organization headed by local artist Doc Waller (from: "Nonprofit seeks to inspire creativity," B1).
Joe or Jane Blow might not give a good damn about the "arts."
But there are people and groups, such as the Layman Group, that do. Auburn can and should be about more than "football, engineering and agriculture."
Assuming Auburn's lack of artistic community, what is to blame?
Perhaps it's the small-town, gee-shucks vibe of Auburn. Take away the University and Auburn is like any other small town in Alabama, which includes the good: neighborly caring and Mayberry-like-ness--as well as the bad: gossip, backwardness, aversion to anything "artsy."
Perhaps it's the culture of the University, where Saturdays are sacred, uniforms unstated but no less culturally mandatory and the herd instinct ever present. Not to say all who dress alike think alike, or that appearances are the be all, end all of human personality; they're not.
But it's hard not to question, and perhaps point fingers at, the Typical Auburn Student as a culprit for the lack of artistic diversity.
There are outliers, of course. Auburn's 24,000+ student body contains multitudes of these "others," perhaps even forming a silent majority.
But is the inborn and perpetually-refreshing Auburn University culture to blame?
Or should the faculty itself share blame?
Lost in the petty infighting, solipsistic scholarly writing and tenure concerns of large swaths of academia is the real reason for any student to pursue art: to use that pursuit, whatever it may be, as a tool to improve actual living.
Professors' time would be better served leading and engaging students in actual, real-life situations. Sure, there are plenty of real-world reasons why this leading and engaging doesn't happen (outside lives and families, other personal concerns, etc.). But is that an excuse for clock-punching, factory-esque professorial labor?
Perhaps the biggest impediment to Auburn's artistic growth is money. Commerce, more than teaching, more than learning, more than pointless platitudes, rules this University. C.R.E.A.M.
And, sadly, the independent and avant-garde don't make money, at least not as much money as a Velcro Pygmies show at SkyBar Cafe or a (insert sorority/fraternity) Rodeo for Auburn.
All this is an attempt to answer a single basic question: "Why is Auburn not hip?"
It'd take thousands of words, dozens of books and teams of sociologists, psychologists and assorted researchers to approach anything close to the "truth" of that question.
But, lacking truth and admitting the above provided more questions than answers, what do you think? Do you agree? Disagree? Is Auburn perfectly fine the way it is? Sensationalist claptrap?
Do you have more questions to add?
Maybe together we can cobble together something approaching an answer.
Do you like this story? The Plainsman doesn't accept money from tuition or student fees, and we don't charge a subscription fee. But you can donate to support The Plainsman.
