Dorms, Social

Rules Grew

With College

by David Nicolai

in less than one hundred years Grinnell has
progressed from a college supplying no house
ing whatsoever for its Students to one whose
residential system is recognized as one olthe
most distinctive in the country. In the
summer, 1371, edition or the Saturday Even-
ing Past, the noted educator s. 1. iiayakawa
cited Grinnell, along with Harvard and Occie
dental, as being among the Very {ew Amerle
mu college where ”the idea of residence
continues to make a certain amount of sense. ”
Paralleling the physical development or stu-
dent housing has been a gradual “humaniza-
Lion" of the residential system; this liberal-
ization, which was greatly accelerated during
the late 1960’s, has transformed a residential
style that appears to have been artificial and
stiﬂingﬁespecially in comparison to the me
sent housing situation, with its many options
and lew regulations, shows true respect tor
the maturity and individuality oi today’s Grinr
hell students.

It was not until 1888, when Meal-s Cottage
was constructed to house 28 women, that Grins
nell made any attempt to provide student hous-
ing. Students were expected during these early
years to room in one of the titty or sixty
homes in town which would rent rooms to
students. According to the 189273 Student
Handbook, rates tor these rooms ranged be
tween $.75 and $1.50 per week, with most
going tor about $1.00. Board was an additions
at $3.00 per week. Students were not tree to
live as they pleased in on campus housing;
landlords were expected to help in the en-
iorcement of college regulations, including
such gems as a rule against being outside
oue's room after ten P:M. lt is this extensive
use of private homes that accounts for the
presence or so many large. attractive homes
surrounding the campus,

The completion oi the “Women’s Quad»
rangie" (all oi South Campus except Mears
and Loose) in 1915 and North Campus (exs
cluding Younkers, Cowles, and the Norrises)
in 1917 marked a new era in housing. To say
that the College boasted oi these additions is
an understatement. The lounge 0! Central
Hall (Main) was described as “beautifully
imposing, yet a homelike room to bring one’s
guests to. Around its huge lireplace many
lrolics and many serious gatherings take
place.” Again speaking at Central, “The rec
room is a thing or joy. Alter dinner many of
the girls spend a short time dancing witheach
other there." The 1916‘? handbook pros
claimed that, “too much Cannot be said in
praise or the Women’s Quadrangle as the
center or college lite in Grinnell.”

North Campus was considered an equally
valuable asset: “Bringing all otGrlnnell’s
men together in the dormitory liie has had
many marvelous results, ot which two stand
out. A cosmopolitan outlook has replaced
the sectional viewpoint which the house sys-
tem fostered; a new keenness or judgment
in measuring men has appeared. it is exe
plained by the fact that the dormitory system
throws men oi a11 natures and temperaments
together.” Such satisfaction with the men’s
dormitories might account for the rather
grandiose plans mentioned in a student hands
book ot the ’ZD's; seventeen dorms on North
Campus surrounding a central park and a
men’s student union were envisioned

The years 1929 and 1930 saw the addition
ot house mothers, “who made the building
seem more like home and whose presence
permitted the use of the clubrooms on Friday
nights by mixed parties.” Yes, boys and
girls were actually getting together and the
College decided it had better do something
about it! Every Friday night open houses were
held in North Campus “clubrooms”, to which
those .Grinnell coeds lucky enough to secure
a date were welcome. Needless to say, these
activities were closely supervised by the
house mothers and all women were back on
South Campus by closing hours, Wallilowers
were told they could rind “adequate recreae
tion” tor Friday nights in the “rec room”
(no doubt dancing with each otherl). By
lessee, one additional open house per week
end was permitted
in 19404 men could be entertained in the
“cottage parlors” or South Campus from 1:30
to closing every weekday, and train 12:00 to
4 30 on Sunday. At any other time, men were
allowed only in the Main Hall “drawing
room" when on South Campus. By 194“
parlor visiting hours had been revised to:
7:004:00 P.M,, Monday through Thursday;
7.00 to 11.00 P M., Friday; 1:00 memo and
700 to 12:00 PM. Saturday; and 2:30 to
10:00 PM Sunday, Closing hours ior Quad at
this time were 10:15 weekdays; 11:00 Fri-
days; and 12:00 Saturday.

Women had a tougher time seeing North

Campus than men did visiting Quad. Besides
open houses, they were welcome in clubrooms
only from 2:30 to 4:00 on Sunday afternoons
(escorted, oi course) and on weekdays in the
Cowles Hall lounge after lunch until l:l5 and
after dinner until 8:00.

stringent quiet hours were also Spelled out
by the administration at this time and pet‘s
sisted until the ’60's. They were: 8:00 to
11:45 A.M., 1:15 to 5:00 l7.M (except Saturr
day and Sunday), 7:30 to 10:00 12.1111. (except
Saturday) and 10:30 P M: to 7:00 AM

The '50's was a decade marked by only a tow
insigniﬁcant concessions in the matterotcm
educational intervisitation. The big breaks
through came in 1955 with the inauguration
of "openeopen houses”, During these social
gatherings, of which only one per semester
per dorm was permitted. visiting at student
rooms by members 01 the opposite sex could
occur during a thirtyeminute period previous-
ly agreed upon by the house council. otcourse
this daring experiment was closely regulated:
all doors were to be open, rooms were to be
adequately lit, refreshments were not to be
served in private rooms, and halls Weretohe
patrolled by members of the house council
It was the '60's when Sweeping relorm of
the residential system was accomplished,
However, it was not until the mid-’GD’S that
the rapid changes began to occur. The early
’60’s were characterized by gradual changes
and Student apathy toward housing issues: As
a matter or fact, in a poll taken in November
of 1962, only forty percent 01‘ the women
favored abolition of hours and 32% lavored
no extension of hours whatsoever.

The first discussions or the possibility of
housing women on North Campus and men on
South Campus took place in 1955-6. The most
discussed proposal was to place all freshmen
and sophomores on one campus and an upper-
classmen on the other, with fewer regulations
imposed on the upperolassmen, That year nine
students were expelled, suspended, or asked
to withdraw for violations of intervisitation
or women’s hours regulations in three separe
ate incidents. These actions prompted lor-
matlon of a student committee for liberaliza-

 

