Principals take a stand on materialism

Designer gowns, post-parties and a whole lot of controversy. It’s not something out of… Designer gowns, post-parties and a whole lot of controversy. It’s not something out of Hollywood, but rather the reasons for which two catholic high schools in New Jersey have canceled their proms. Principal Kenneth Hoagland of Kellenberg Memorial High School has made national headlines in the past week for refusing to participate in what he considers to be an example of our “decadent culture.”

Several months after sending a letter to parents requesting that they stop “financing” prom night – which has become known for extravagant displays of wealth, underage parties and sexual expectations – Hoagland made the controversial decision to call off the event entirely. He was shortly followed by Chaminade High School, which stated in a recent New York Times article that prom night’s “showcase of affluence” was “opposed to our value system.”

The debate sparked across the United States because of this decision has brought national attention to a larger issue than merely prom, but rather what Hoagland calls the “decadent culture” of American youth. Prom is simply a controllable representation of the larger self-indulgent, showy nature of what these school officials claim is a materialistic culture.

Kellenberg and Chaminade have not only enraged several hundred upperclassmen on Long Island, but in canceling their proms, they have brought national attention to an often ignored issue – what they have labeled as the “decadent culture” of American youth.

This is not the first time, however, that a high school has taken action against the “prom culture.” The same New York Times article reports that in 2002, after several students went to the hospital with alcohol poisoning, New York’s Rye High School took a different approach to the issue. Rather than canceling prom entirely, students are now required to show up at the school with a parent – who leaves a consent form and contact phone number – and then all students are bused to the dance, thus eliminating opportunities for underage drinking.

Despite my tinge of empathy for these students who will miss out on what should be a celebratory event, I still believe what Hoagland has done in refusing to promote an event that has become a polar contrast to the school’s value system is admirable. It is not only about morals, but also about safety and a willingness to confront an underground, underage culture that is often ignored.

Nevertheless, the argument that this is just another example of a “just say no” approach to education is also valid. Those who criticize Hoagland’s decision believe that such a black-and-white approach to prom is unrealistic and does not take into account the idea of compromise, something that the conservative right has been criticized for in its approach to sex education as well.

The solution for disappointed high-school seniors and concerned, repulsed school officials seems to exist in the type of dialogue started at Rye High School. Not talking about these issues of underage drinking, sex and materialism has perpetuated them. It is certainly not the fault of well-intentioned principals, but perhaps the blame does not exclusively belong to these “decadent” teenagers either.

Would busing students to and from the event solve everything? Probably not. But a lone high school is not responsible for changing the entire culture of American materialism. It is not Kellenberg or Chaminade’s place to give each student a spending limit on their satin gowns. It is, however, their responsibility to provide a safe event if they choose to have it.

Rye High School has demonstrated that such a compromise is possible.

E-mail Lindsey at lsa2@pitt.edu.