So, what is it about the word "pledged" that sticks out when mentioning the Greek system? Let me go into a history of the term.
Prior to about the 1990s, I would say, most fraternities and sororities deemed the period prior to full membership a "pledgeship." More correctly, this could be deemed a probationary period. If a prospective member did not perform adequately or to the particular standard of the current membership, be it behavioral, appearance, task, or any other sort of standard deemed necessary by said membership, they could be removed from prospective membership. If a prospective member performed to the standard, they would be accepted into full membership. That is how a pledgeship works under the most basic terms.
Of course, with the rise of hazing (or rather, it hurts me to say, the more public acknowledgment of hazing), this phrase denoted a disparagement between membership classifications. In a broader sense, classifying a member as a pledge separated them from full membership and thus, treated them differently--because pledgeship had negative connotations (those mentioned above).
So, in sororities, national organizations traded "pledge" for the friendlier "new member"--a new member cannot be removed from membership just for being new, after all. Fraternity nationals opted for "associate member," though some still retained the moniker "pledge"--and most fraternities still utilize the associate membership as a probationary period anyway. Fraternities and sororities are different kinds of animals, so don't judge this too much.
Knowing all this, it is probably best to examine why "pledge" was used in the first place.
As a noun: "a solemn promise or agreement to do or refrain from doing something." Or, as a verb: "to stake, as one's honor." I rather like the combined definition "A solemn promise to stake, as one's honor."I feel this is why "pledge" was chosen for a probationary membership term: those under such a term promise to stake their honor for these organizations.
Without the unfortunate inclusion of hazing and the like, I think this is a rather idealistic way to put it. By making an oath to stake our honor, a pledge/associate/new member is not necessarily giving up themselves or selling themselves out, but rather they are putting forth the effort to become the type of person the organization idealizes (and this can take a bad turn, but I did mention we were putting aside the negative aspects of such transformation).
Many people seek to put forth this oath to become something larger than themselves, or more exactly, to become the type of person they view as ideal. I feel like having these ideals to aspire to and having these rituals and purposes to live our lives through have given any pledge a higher goal and a deeper connection to life, friends, bonds, and so forth.
For these reasons, I rather like the idea of a "pledge." Call the participants a new member, an associate member, or even retain the pledge moniker. But regardless of these, I think pledgeship ultimately keeps the notion of retaining and staying true to one's ideals a real thing.
Ultimately, even if it's called something different, everyone has pledged in some capacity.
No comments:
Post a Comment