Does LSE Need a 24/7 Library?

Daring to take on the popular 24/7 Library campaign, a student put it to the Beaver in a letter to the editor that the respondents to their poll on the library had “answered with a kneejerk reaction” as opposed to a measured or considered response. The student, Sophie Knight, argued that the £74,704 a year that the school would have to pay to staff the library overnight could be better used to improve facilities or, better yet, replace the uncomfortable chairs in the library study areas.

Fair enough, and frankly this Observer truly hopes that they will never find themselves blogging from the Library in the wee hours of the morning. The school’s defense against the campaign (which it has agreed to reconsider), is that during the pilot program last year, occupancy of the library overnight was too low to justify the costs. Is that likely to change in the future? The library is already scheduled to remain open 24/7 during the exam periods, but is the demand there for it to be open during term time? Knight raises a fair point when she says that “many departing at midnight are already beyond tired and their concentration point.” But then again, what about those night owls who feel that they could benefit from increased hours? And what about the students who think that they can save money by sleeping in the library instead of paying exorbitant rents in London?

Tories and Vampire Bats

Daniel Finkelstein in the Times this morning plugs a lecture tonight at the LSE by the Conservatives’ “leading intellectua”, David Willets. The event, entitled “The Ideas that are Changing Politics”, will apparently blend evolutionary biological theory with game theory and politicking. The role of sociology is important, Finkelstein writes, because “sociobiologists argue that our minds and our behaviour – not just our bodies – are the products of evolution.”

So if peoples attitudes and behaviours are evolutionarily formed, then how can these be harnessed to the advantage of a political party? Finkelstein says that the Tories should create social institutions that encourage our evolutionary nature towards reciprocal altruism. He uses a dry stone wall as an example of a system in which each individual component supports and is likewise supported by the other, without any artificial restraint intervening. Instead of unwieldy and bureaucratic nationwide institutions, perhaps smaller, more nimble and mutually supportive institutions are the answer, he appears to say.

Whether this philosophy will be translated into an articulate policy remains to be seen. At any rate, the discussion makes tonights lecture, which as presented hadn’t really commanded attention, more interesting and worthy of attendance.

LSE Underwhelms in Quiz Warm Up

Some LSE students from the law society were involved in a quiz hosted by the law firm Dechert, but unfortunately failed to emerge victorious. In a competition with Kings College and UCL, our legal Beaver’s may well have been the ones who mistook Diana Ross for Twiggy or Lord Denning for J.R.R. Tolkien. UCL claimed top prizes in the competition.

The quiz season appears to be upon us, as the Students Union is currently soliciting students to compete for a spot on the LSE team in the University Challenge game show. The LSE apparently has a long tradition of poor showings in quiz shows, having never won the competition (although we were the runners-up to Imperial in 1996). Of course, given the usually obscure and natively British style of questions, it probably should come as no surprise that the mostly international student body of the LSE cannot tell the difference between Arundel and Warwick castles or be familiar with Old English vocabulary.

Still, if you are keen to show that the LSE can compete with the rest of the uni’s, the initial paper test to join the school’s team will be given next Monday at 6pm in the Quad. Email the GenSec to register.