July 03, 2002
Felons and Class Presidents
NPR carried a story this morning (and here's a print media link) about a 17 year-old student at Shelby High School in Shelby, N.C., Curtis Preudhomme, who has been elected student body president for the upcoming school year despite a conviction for armed robbery at age 13, and a subsequent parole violation at 15 that earned him 9 months in a youth detention center. He's carrying a 3.0 now, is praised by teachers, his principal, fellow students (the 54 percent of them who voted for him, anyway), and the pastor where he now attends church and leads the choir. Others in the community are predictably angry, and of course the case has racial overtones; Curtis is black, his victims are Asian, and many upset parents are white. Personally, I hope Curtis proves to be a great success, and that he goes on to do something productive with his life.
It's the subtext of this story that interests me. First, there's the supportive school principal, introduced as "Dr." Bill Anderson, both by NPR and in the print stories I checked out. Do you know how you get cited repeatedly as a doctor, when you are neither a scientist, medical doctor, or professor? By making sure every reporter you speak to knows that you have your doctorate. And I'll give you one guess as to the content (and therefore the quality) of his doctorate. Once again, people: if you can't perform a tracheotomy, or identify the longest unbranched alkane with a linear global minimum conformation, then you don't get to insert "Dr." in front of your name.
Then there's Curtis, who I'm pulling for, but who doesn't leave a good impression. Let me restate that -- he leaves a very good impression with government school teachers, their charges, and pastors of churches long on emotion and short on doctrine. All of this, of course, mitigates against his leaving a good impression with me. Apparently he won the election on the strength of his speech, which one student said "was like a sermon," and which a teacher described as "very emotional."
Very emotional, yet without, according to those who witnessed it, mentioning his past. What then, was the source of the emotion? The teacher explained that "he challenged the students to allow him to be the best he can be and help Shelby High School be the best it can be." My suspicion is that Curtis delivered the sort of speech that appeals to most youngsters -- full of emotion, yet without substance. I suspect this not only because of statements from those who described his speech, but also because of the statements he gave to NPR.
As he explained, for example, what drives him to excel in school, he used lots of the right phrases, the sort of things one might hear from an Oprah audience member, about "issues in society," and the need to "contain knowledge" and "take the opportunities in front of me." Of course one can't expect much more from a high school student than such a regurgitation of socially approved phrases, but his skill at doing so suggests that it may become his crutch, his way of opening doors without exhibiting any valuable insight or skill. Having his teachers fall all over themselves because he's the only kid in class who talks probably doesn't help -- we already bestow excessive social rewards upon juvenile expression without regard to its form or content, and now it seems we make it the basis of student body elections.
One more thing about Curtis' comments irked me; in referring to his crime, he never apologized, he simply said he made a mistake, and that "it wasn't worth it". This is probably just more socially approved phraseology, the sort of thing that gets head-nodding and loud "Mmmhmm's" from large teary-eyed women when it's testimony time at the church revival. Yet his remark invites the question: what would have made the crime "worth it"? A bigger take from the cash register? Not getting caught? The statement suggests that when he thinks upon his crime he thinks predominately about its effects on his future, and not the harm he brought to his victims. It's a common narcissism, and one that in his case will probably serve him well in his future role as a politician or pastor.
Still, I hope he proves his detractors, including me, wrong.
Posted by Woodlief on July 03, 2002 at 08:53 AM
Very good post (not surprisingly, of course - it is you, after all). I'll have to check out the article; I blogged a while back about a series of crimes in the Carolinas - and I think NC - against Asians by local black youth that was getting racially "sensitive" coverage - i.e. no real blame against the perpetrators. I wonder if Curtis was a part of that?
His criminal past, loudly decried and prominently displayed, will likely take him far, as you say, as either politician or pastor in a church I wouldn't want to attend. It's obvious that you've done your time on the benches, given that Mmmhmm imagery. Remind me to tell you the joke some time about the large woman and her two large sons who arrived late at the revival and had to sit in front on the slat-board pew.
And meanwhile - say on, brother.
First, I think that anyone who put in that much time and effort in acquiring their doctorate, deserves to call themselves "Doctor" if the want to. Maybe I'm overly impressed with the achievement, having less than a year of college myself.
Next, I also think it's ridiculous that anyone at all would demand such a title be used. It seems ultimately arrogant to me. "Doctor" is what they are, not who they are. It's as stupid as my local wrench monkey wanting me to address him as Mechanic Smith, or my local grocery store kids wanting to be addressed as Food Bagger Jones and Cashier Williams. The only reason it seems less stupid to most people is that it has been in practice for so long. Maybe the work "Doctors" of all stripes put into their degree warrants such arrogance, but I still find it BS.
I know what Alley means and yet I'm giggling at the thought of everyone putting their degree in front of their name, ie, BS Lola Marks. heh. It almost makes me want to finish that last semester so I can be BFA Ciscley Elliott. Ahem, anyway, I think Curtis is a, not going to call him Reverend even if you hold a gun to my head, Al Sharpton in the making. Or Jesse Jackson, don't want to limit him, y'know.
I lived in Shelby about 10 years ago, and noticed the story when we visited friends about a month ago. It's a small conservative town that is still big enough to have a Wal-Mart/Lowe's and the usual fast-food strip. The man who was robbed is a restaurant owner (good hot&sour soup there) who took his kids out of school because of this situation. For more on Curtis, here is the local paper's story.
I think we need to give him the benefit of the doubt and extend forgiveness. We can get caught up and want to see someone say sorry and act repentant, but we can't make them (like getting Clinton to be sorry for lying to the US). The students voted, so let them be stuck with their choice. Curtis does attend a church in Waco (NC) by coincidence.
Good editorial, thoroughly enjoyed it.
Your point of emotional, yet diluted-for-mass-consumption speeches is welcome and appreciated. Effort alone deserves little credit, honesty and altruism (especially for those in public service) should be much more demanded.
Let's hope Curtis will surprise us all.
Zoltan
I thought it was also interesting that "Dr." Bill Anderson refused to reveal the election results to the losing class president candidates.
Here is a link to a nice interview with Lyle Prouse, a pilot arrested for flying drunk in 1990. His story of rehabilitation and redemption provides a stark contrast:
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TRAVEL/NEWS/07/03/drunk.pilot.cnna/index.html
In Curtis, I see a master extortonist/criminalin the making,like Jesse Jackson. I hope, he gets caught while attempting another crime- i think he will commit one again, cuz remorse is not Curtis' strong point. Hopefull some armed citizen or an alert cop will put an end to his dual career as a criminal/politician!!!
Isaac Asimov once got asked if he was "a Ph.D. doctor or a real doctor". He replied that medical doctors were "mere technicians" and, so, holders of Ph.Ds, the broader, more scholarly kind of doctors had a greater claim to the status if "real doctor."
Of course, Asimov's Ph.D. was in Biochemistry or some such, and earned before one could get a Ph.D. in theoretical basket weaving, so he may have qualified it more in the instant case.
Susanna has already made the point, but I too relished the irony of the child-thief's career aspirations. Why use a gun when you can extract people's money legally? And have them love you for it!
Good post, as usual, Tony.
