Trinity v Loyola

The most obvious difference between Trinity College and Loyola is the difference in age. Trinity is about 400 years older than our school, and it shows in the architecture. In an effort to broadcast it’s Jesuit doctrine, much of Loyola’s campus is designed to imitate religious structures of the middle ages (most notably the horseshoe facing St. Charles Street). In my time as a student though, most of the campus has been a construction zone. I’m in favour of improving the school, but its an important difference between the general atmosphere of the two schools. In the past several centuries, Trinity has figured out where the buildings ought to go, and stuck with it. This provides a sense of balance and organization sometimes missing at home.

If you were to deconstruct Trinity, you’d end up a pile of rocks. It’s beautiful, yes but from the outside its made mostly of granite, including the pavement. I’d have been disappointed if there weren’t cobblestones in Dublin, and Trinity hasn’t failed me on that, but I’m starting to realize the convenience of modern sidewalks. When I’m trying to get somewhere in a hurry at Loyola, I’m able to run with the only danger to avoid being other people and tripping over my own feet. I’m wary of running through the quad at Trinity, because the ground is uneven (and usually wet).

 New Orleans tourism is a part of life, but Loyola is exempt from it for the most part. Travellers tend to stick to the French Quarter and if they do venture uptown, it’s to see Audobon Park, the Zoo, or some other attraction, leaving us somewhat separated from gawkers. Trinity, on the other hand, seems to be as much a tourist attraction as it is a school. I think I might have trouble dealing with a crowd of outsiders as I went about my daily business were this my permanent school. For now, though, I understand that I am a guest as well, and rather enjoy the privilege of living in a place that’s so desirable.