Kurt Stutt ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
 
: Topic #2:
 
: RPI vs. Rensselaer
 
: This is all because, in 1987, the school was looking to project a more
: "friendly, human" image.  So instead of the cold, harsh RPI (and the
: bullet), the school was to be known as Rensselaer (with the gray-bar
: logo).  As an alum, I prefer RPI.  As a radio announcer, I prefer RPI.
: It's catchier and easier to say.  As well-intentioned this idea was, it was
: flawed for two reasons:
 
: 1.  As Tony Buffa stated, people identify with RPI more than
:     Rensselaer.  It's easier to spell.
 
: 2.  It didn't change the character of the school.  It is still cold and
:     harsh, to a certain extent.  This week's Polytechnic had an article to
:     that effect.  You can call an apple an orange, but it will still taste
:     like an apple.
 
: However, the idea the school is now "Rensselaer" is administration
: policy.  It's fun to walk around campus and locate the "bullet"
: someplace, since it's been almost totally removed.  Get your souvenirs
: while they last!
 
: Finally, I don't miss the bullet as much as the swarm.  I really liked the
: bee, especially since we have no mascot whatsoever now.
 
 
: Kurt Stutt
: [log in to unmask]
 
It's interesting that no one except alums and current students have ever heard
of "Rensselaer" (in my limited experience) and most of them still call RPI RPI.
NO ONE not connected with the school calls it anything other than RPI. And we
are still an engineering school. Part of the reason I chose to come here was
the weak humanities. I wanted to take engineering classes, not History and
English. I certainly did not want to pay for them. Changing the name will not
change the school, and it will take decades before the administration will
actually effect substantial change. I hope someone with some sense joins the
administration.
 
It would be nice to have a mascot, engineers is a little boring...
 
-Steve Wintner '97
 [log in to unmask]