My Q&A with Ben Howland

SC-ucla Myths Dispelled (Part 3)

SC and ucla people are different, it has been said.

Really?-- First, we all are a part of Los Angeles, so we all are going to be a product of the same environment, as opposed to, say, a Washington-Oregon (intense rivalry) alum comparison.

And living in a big city often breeds a less desirable personality than in the outlying areas, which is true in any big city, New York, Paris et al

And since ucla and SC have such an ethnically diverse following, how does one compare Chinese to Latin to WASP cultures? They're all good, they're all different.

And what if we choose individual anecdotes to form our opinion i.e. I "interviewed" a ucla alum once to see if I wanted him as my stockbroker. He was quite brilliant in his field, but over the course of an hour lunch he talked 98% of the time and incessantly interrupted me. You know the type, not our type, right?

Or my 'big sister' at SC who was a scholarship athlete and I still recall how genuine and sweet she was.

These examples aer not typical, so one cannot take specifics and draw generalizations.

Additionally, differences in people are also due to financial differences rather than schooling. I will generalize at this piont and say in my experience people with big money are usually boorish, arrogant, and too comfortable for their own good. And so SC people, coming from above-average economic surroundings ($180,000 or so for a 4-year SC ride), are probably going to be "above-average arrogant."

But don't ucla alums have their own upper crust finanaical people as well? And their personalities seem to be on a par with SC alums.

When all is said and done, I would rather hang with the poor people of downtown Los Angeles. They are more real and often more funny.

LAWYER JOHN

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - You, sir, are the king of anaphora.