Click here to go to the NEW College Discussion Forum

Went to see the movie tonight and would love to hear others' opinions. I haven't known any Wellesley grads of that generation, but I have known grads of other Seven Sisters schools and they were impressive -- very sharp, intellectually driven, accomplished in either volunteer work. The depiction of Wellesley in this movie is more along the lines of what I would think of as Sweet Briar. Please, no flames from Sweet Briar alums!

By Marite (Marite) on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 06:28 am: Edit

Aparent:

I have not seen the movie. By the way, of all the Seven Sisters schools, Wellesley students are considered the most career-minded and agressive.

When I went to college (not Wellesley and not Sweet Briar) in the mid-60s, most of the girls were there to find Mr. Right. That was true as well of Wellesley. There would be buses to ferry them to mixers at Harvard and MIT. They were sharp and intellectually acute, and women in those days were involved in volunteer work rather than career. But Betty Friedan wrote for Wellesley women and others like them. By the early 1970s, the sexual revolution was in full swing and life plans changed dramatically. Hilary Clinton's career at Wellesley was part of that change.

By Perry (Perry) on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 12:19 pm: Edit

We visited Wellesley on our swing through the northeast last summer. What a magnificent campus. The student tour guide was the most articulate of any of the guides we had seen or heard. You get the distinct feeling that although the school pushes the students hard, they are also enveloped in a very supportive environment. Nonetheless, I had to laugh at the student guide's "no men" theme. "You don't have to worry about pig pens and big messes here," she said. There are no guys. Believe me, I have brothers and I know how guys live." No comment.

By Marite (Marite) on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 01:06 pm: Edit

Katha Pollitt has a review of the film in the Sunday NYT's Arts section which is really more of a history of Wellesley, from its radical origins in the late 19th century to its embrace of domesticity in the 1950s.

Perry: I have two sons and they are both messy, but so are my nieces. Not much difference in the level of messiness that I could see, though the contents of the mess differ.

By Perry (Perry) on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 03:24 pm: Edit

My own daughter is not exactly the paragon of neatness either. This slander of the male gender was...well, what can you say, what are they teaching those kids. : )

By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 10:50 pm: Edit

Marite, I was excited to see Katha Politt's piece on Wellesley in tomorrow's paper. Amazing that she says the movie depicted Wellesley in the 50s very accurately! And that the school started out encouraging its students in a way that was radical for its time, then took a big step backward in the postwar period.

Not having gone to a women's college, I had always secretly envied them their traditions -- Maypoles and hoops and all that. I went at a time when many of the Ivies were just going coed, and we were totally outnumbered (as in 4 or 5 men to 1 woman), so there weren't any traditions for us girls, really, and, frankly, I didn't find it all that much fun. So I was heartbroken to see the traditions depicted as so regressive in the Mona Lisa movie. Glad to see Politt say that they still do the hoops race but the results are a bit different now.

By Valpal (Valpal) on Saturday, December 20, 2003 - 11:25 pm: Edit

Apparent, Sweet Briar is on my D's list of colleges. What is your impression of it?

By Patient (Patient) on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 01:07 am: Edit

Valpal, this is pretty off-topic, but I went to France during my junior year through the Sweet Briar program. If your daughter is interested in a year abroad, check to see if the program still exists. It was a fabulous program--extremely well-organized, and much, much better at providing a true immersion experience than, say, Stanford's insular programs. We lived with French families, were able to take courses at every university in Paris, even the elite schools like "sciences-po", as well as having courses taught specifically for our program by some of the top professors in Paris. Lots of Sweet Briar students were in the group but also students from all over whose schools didn't have their own programs.

By Culovv (Culovv) on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 04:37 am: Edit

I walked out of that movie. It was perhaps the most boring movie ever created. Maybe i feel that way because im a guy.

By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 09:08 am: Edit

Valpal, my comments on Sweet Briar are definitely referring to its reputation 30 years ago. I know absolutely nothing about it now. I do have a couple of friends who attended in the early to mid-seventies. These speak of Sweet Briar as though it were an exclusive women's club. A contrast to women's colleges such as Vassar, Radcliffe, Barnard, and Bryn Mawr, where students were often from elite backgrounds also but sometimes tended to be more what we called "bluestocking."

Best of luck to your daughter. It's great our girls no longer live in the 1950s.

By Morgantruce (Morgantruce) on Sunday, December 21, 2003 - 09:11 am: Edit

I shudder to think of a college that has not changed its flavor over many generations of students. The one constant that I have noticed about (a small sample of) Wellesley grads is their ability to stand up and talk. You might not agree with what--for example--Ms. Clinton has to say, but she stands there and says it without notes and without hesitation.

As for "Mona Lisa Smile", the best thing I can say about Julia Roberts is that she has managed to not appear in a lot of movies I have thoroughly enjoyed. Keep up the good work Julia.

By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 08:58 am: Edit

New article in today's Times, written by Wellesley alum Marian Burros, contains a group interview with Wellesley alums of the 50s, who all found the portrayal of their college in the movie to be off base. Although they say that it is true that most women married after graduation, they also said that it was not a bastion of conservatism and that many details were wrong (e.g. they did not have early curfews and they did not go to class all dolled up, etc. etc.). Fwiw

By Marite (Marite) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 11:38 am: Edit

"All dolled up" is relative. Many women's colleges did not allow women to wear trousers into the 1960s. Many of my friends wore several pairs of tights in winter. Weren't most universities rather conservative in the 1950s? This was the McCarthy era, after all.

By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 12:24 pm: Edit

In the Times piece the women say they wore jeans to class! I would post the link but don't have access to the Times from this computer.

My father, who went to college in the '30s, had to wear an academic gown to class...

By Emeraldkity4 (Emeraldkity4) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 01:38 pm: Edit

wow I remember not being able to wear pants to junior high in the 70's, then we could wear pants one day a week but they couldn't be jeans- this was a public suburban school that I didn't think was unduly cinservative.
Considering what some of the skirts looked like I would have thought that pants would have been more conservative.
By the time I was in 9th grade in 1972 we were able to wear jean on pants day.

By Mike (Mike) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 02:07 pm: Edit

A very intellegent female friend of mine went to the U of Oregon in 1964. She had a meeting with the Dean of women who had been a classmate of her mothers. My friend was very good at languages and wanted to be a translator. The Dean told her she need to take secretarial classes because women didn't get work as tranlators.. I got a very angry upset letter from her at my school.
Glad we have moved on beyond that kind of thinking. Mike's female classmates are thinking about Medicine, Law and the Ministry and a couple will be able to do it with sports scholorships.

Mike's Dad

By Aparent4 (Aparent4) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 02:58 pm: Edit

We couldn't wear pants to my pretty mainstream public high school until I was a senior. The explanation was that when girls wore pants they tended to sit in all sorts of comfortable positions, thus lowering the tone of the school.

Aparent
Lowering the tone since 1972

By Xiggi (Xiggi) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 03:25 pm: Edit

You might not agree with what--for example--Ms. Clinton has to say, but she stands there and says it without notes and without hesitation.

Without integrity and sensitivity would complete that summation quite well. You do not need notes when being truthful is only of secondary and distant importance.

I'm such a big fan of hers!

By Mike (Mike) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 05:15 pm: Edit

Girls in my HS couldn't wear pants in the 60s until the skirts got so short boys could see their panties. They used to have to come to the office and get checked by the secretary. They had to kneel on a bench and the skirts had touch the bench to get into school. Then the girls went to the restroom and shortened them. They finally figured that much less girl was showing with pants on so dropped the rule.


Mike's dad

By Perry (Perry) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 05:27 pm: Edit

I recall the public schools in my district abandoning any semblance of a dress code in the late 1960s. I think the fellows in the superintendent's office couldn't resist the mini-skirts.

By Soozievt (Soozievt) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 05:39 pm: Edit

I remember that starting in 8th grade, girls were finally allowed to wear pants to school.

We sure have come a long way. However, these days some outfits worn to school make me shudder (thongs showing and the like).

Susan

By Coureur (Coureur) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 06:42 pm: Edit

Girls were never allowed to wear pants to school when I was in high school. A breakthrough of sorts took place in my senior year (1969) when girls were allowed to wear culottes (sp?). I think pants were first allowed a year or two after I graduated.

These days I think many schools would be gratified if girls would agree to wear pants.

By Soozievt (Soozievt) on Monday, December 29, 2003 - 09:15 pm: Edit

Coureur...that sounds about right. I was in 8th grade during '70-'71 (sorry but I am younger than you ).

And I totally agree with the last comment in your post.
Susan

By Ooga (Ooga) on Wednesday, February 04, 2004 - 10:08 am: Edit

terrible movie. the only sparkling moment perhaps was when julia stiles did the cinematic flipout at julia roberts and demanded her how it's really a choice if the new generation is frowned upon for choosing the traditional even after careful review of reality.

anyway, kudos to wellesley. excellent school. was going to go there if chicago didn't accept me early. = D