I do not mean to be overly dramatic, but as the chainlink fences go up and trees go down, I grieve more and more over the loss of beautiful spots on our campus. I remember when I first saw the sign illustrating what the Hunter Henry Alumni Center was going to look like. As an ex-member of the School of Architecture, it appeared to be yet another building on our campus that strayed away from showing any signs of coherence with the rest of campus. Please don’t get me wrong, I admire the architects’ work, and I agree that it is a great piece of modern art; however, I don’t think it is the type our campus needs. It seems to me that Mississippi State Univeristy has quite a history of allowing structures to be built that do not reflect on each other. I’m sure when Allen Hall or Simrall Hall were built, they too were beautiful pieces of modern art. Yet now, I think most will agree that they are less than attractive. State really has some beautiful buildings on its campus, and I think that after the recent completion of Swalm engineering building and its reflection of Lee Hall, people really realize what our campus would look like if we follow a similar motif throughout.
I have visited some beautiful campuses in my life, and one thing they all had in common was some form of unity. The University of Virginia is a perfect example of a campus that has gone to great lengths to maintain a unified campus. Consequently, it is ranked among the nation’s most beautiful campuses. The unity of the campus also contributes to a feeling of tradition and heritage, whether it exists or not. I can remember visiting colleges when I was in high school. Being from Mississippi, I knew what MSU was about. However, as I walked onto the campuses of other colleges, I usually did not have the experiences of yelling for the school at a football game, nor did I already know I would have great experiences socially and in the classroom. When I got home, often all I had to reflect on was what the campus looked like and whether I could see myself there. Therefore, I believe giving our campus a facelift could attract a more competitive applicant pool.
Not only would following the same type of architecture provide a more beautiful campus, but buildings could also be more easily maintained. If we agreed on a common style of architecture, we would not be stuck with buildings in the future that were once referred to as “great works of modern art.” We simply don’t have the funds to redo these buildings every time they begin to look outdated. We also would not be forced to spend millions of dollars recreating facades. Instead, we could only be concerned with preserving the interiors.
Another thing that seems to be a constant complaint is parking. I agree with the student body on this one. Parking is a pain. Yet, the reason parking continues to be a pain is because our campus continues to become more and more sprawled. I am sure that sometime in the future I will need to take something to the new alumni center. In order to do this, I will probably have to get in my car and drive there because it is so far away. Solution: bring our campus together. I know that there has got to be an existing building that we can afford to lose in order that its spot could be the new home of a new (hopefully more conservative) alumni center. If our buildings were more multi-use in addition to being close together, people would be encouraged to walk. In the case that our campus actually achieved this closeness in proximity, building a parking garage right in the middle of it all would be no problem. No longer would we have to swim across seas of concrete in order to get to where we are going or in order to find our car.
One day, I would love to see some changes made to an already great campus. I think that changing some of the things I mentioned would take a long time, but they would be well worth the wait. I believe that MSU would be surprised at how things could change if we were more conscious of how our campus is built and developed. In closing, I understand that this is not another campus like the University of Virginia-this is Mississippi State University. We have certain distinctions that make us who we are. Never would I want to do anything to delete parts of our heritage for aesthetic reasons. Rather, I write this article out of concern for a school I deeply love. I hope that my suggestions will be taken merely as suggestions and not as shots at the people responsible for that they concern. I know that I deeply care for State, and I am happy to be here. I can only hope that in the future others will get the opportunity to care for a great school as I have-whether it looks the same in the future as it does now or not.