Let's suppress euphoria over graduation

Is it OK to deconstruct an institution that seems to bring universal reverence?
Can anyone say anything negative about the ritual of honoring our nation's young people at the time of their graduation from halls of academe?
Well, we have the institution of the graduation reception, which seems to be a bigger deal now than when the boomers finished high school. They seem more public, for one thing.
Drive around any community at the end of May and you'll see balloons and signs pointing out a graduation celebration at someone's home. Years ago I think these gatherings were geared more toward close family friends and relatives.
The intent behind this is wholly good. The socializing is fun. However, these host families seem to assume that visitors want to shovel a substantial amount of food down their mouths.
There is a high awareness of this nation's obesity epidemic, but we make exceptions all the time where food diversions are thrust on us in an obligatory way. You'll notice this if you ever go on a strict diet in which your food intake is strictly specified, or you count calories in a very strict way. You'll find yourself having to decline consumption opportunities in ways that can make you feel socially awkward.
Graduation receptions have become quite the productions. It's a worrisome trend in a way, because many families might feel an unreasonable pressure to "put on a show" like some of the trend-setting families. Medals, trophies and photos are nice, but what about the young people whose school experiences were humble, low-profile and relatively uneventful?
What about kids who aren't really sure what they'll do now that school is done? Do they feel awkward at graduation receptions where a common, conversation-starting question is "What are your future plans?"
Hey, there is nothing wrong with being totally indecisive at this point in your life.
The Star Tribune recently had an article about how some colleges feel it essential to get younger students better equipped with life skills. A lot of 18-year-olds don't realize how important a good diet is. They got adequate nutrition through meals their parents insisted on them consuming. But most of the meals they relished were at McDonald's and the like.
What they may not realize is that you can't sustain yourself sufficiently with the fast food family of choices. If a college freshman has a cafeteria contract, fine, although many of these individuals probably choose to sleep as long as possible in the morning and not eat breakfast. That would be a terrible shortcoming.
College freshmen can have a number of other adjustment problems. An expert appearing on one of the C-Span channels a while back was talking about generational shifts - a favorite topic of mine which you'll notice if you visit here periodically. This writer asserted that the traditional structure of your college dormitory is outdated.
Kids today don't want that motif. It has kind of a mass production atmosphere about it: youth are crammed as if into a sardine can into a big, nondescript building, two to a room which is terribly problematic if lifestyles clash, with common bathrooms and showers on each floor and common areas for other purposes.
If today's youth reject this, though, what are the consequences? I assume whole campuses can't be rebuilt. As usual I will have a drastic thing or two to say. But on closer analysis maybe you'll conclude my points aren't really so drastic. Maybe those fresh high school graduates who down deep feel indecisive should not commit to anything right away - certainly not college.
We as a society should remove the stigma from young people who might want to be tentative and patient and just stay at home for a while.
This isn't to say they would be lazy and just lounge around. They would be contributing family members, find some basic labor in the community or volunteer work and use the Internet to explore and develop long-term career plans.
Given our fluid economy, with creative destruction, layoffs, restructuring, downsizing and outsourcing happening all over the place, what is a "long-term career" anymore?
Go into teaching? Florida nearly passed a law recently that would have eliminated teacher tenure. Only Charlie Crist, that free spirit politician who refused to take marching orders from the GOP's right wing, stood in the way of that measure with his veto. So the notion of job security is steadily fading. Young people need to be nimble.
The Internet with its unlimited horizons is their best friend. I'll be blunt and say it: Our bricks and mortar educational institutions are going to fade into obsolescence. It's already ridiculous for hundreds of squirelly college freshmen to be packed into a single dormitory building. Many of these youth engage in foolishness that will cause then profound embarrassment when they reflect as adults. So why do we subject kids to this? Tradition?
The Internet is assailing our assumptions about everything. I read a major op-ed piece that asserted that the Internet and the whole realm of new communications tech are like a ticking time bomb toward our colleges. This op-ed suggested that colleges should brace for the same effects as what the newspaper industry has felt. The writer stated that colleges and newspapers have close parallels, that both are engaged in "the collection and reporting of information."
A theme much like this is presented in the Charles Murray book "Real Education." Murray asserts that way too many young people seek a B.A. degree. A fundamental assertion of his book is that we as a society have made the B.A. degree into an "artificial job requirement." This is a tremendous disservice to youth who may not quite have the aptitude or desire to climb those tedious steps.
And it also has the very unfortunate effect of stigmatizing kids who simply choose to bypass those steps.
A recent letter writer in the Star Tribune scolded a school board member who was quoted saying that all graduates of a particular high school should be "college ready." This letter writer would be in unison with Charles Murray in stating emphatically that college isn't for everyone. And we must value people who become competent and polished in professions that don't require a college education.
Murray says our emphasis as a society on college grew out of egalitarian leanings that probably date back to the 1960s. We felt that the barriers to our society's "elite" should come down. All should have a shot at it. Unfortunately it's rose-colored-glasses thinking. What Murray says is that "like it or not, our society will continue to be ruled by an elite - people who grew up with privileges." (This is a close paraphrase.)
Our presidents will come from Ivy League colleges and not St. Cloud State University.
Here's my conclusion: Maybe the elaborate graduation receptions that I focused on in the early portion of this post are part of the undue pressure we put on kids to declare a new chapter in their lives.
Perhaps these young people are really at a juncture where they ought to just slow down and be a little more restrained, thoughtful and deliberate. And yes, realistic.
Maybe the bombastic euphoria that seems to project from a typical graduation is just part of that institution's process of selling itself. Try to peel through the pretense.
It's a cliche that graduation represents "an end and a beginning." Maybe we ought to soft-pedal our reaction a little more and just view it as a night when 17 and 18-year-olds don hot, stuffy robes and pretend to look interested during pompous, predictable and cliche-ridden presentations. Beyond that "piece of paper" diploma, they'll have to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
The reception? Have a few close friends and relatives over to socialize. Skip the balloons on the street corners. The pile of ham buns isn't essential either.
Attention grads: You needn't expect to feel fundamentally different when you get out of bed the next morning. Life is a marathon, so cool it and show reasoned judgment. Find your most practical path and you'll be happy.
-Brian Williams - morris mn Minnesota - bwilly73@yahoo.com