But discussions and debates are not necessarilystaid.

"Masters are very vocal," Liem says. "They'revery lucky they are not on television."

Wednesday's meeting included a chat with Deanof the Faculty Jeremy R. Knowles, and featured adiscussion on the academic and social roles of theHouse community.

Last month, President Neil L. Rudenstinevisited the Council of Masters, sharing hisobservations from meeting with alumni acrosscountry.

"The dominant tone is a group of friends withsimilar responsibilities," Ware says. "There arevery few issues that have the potential topolarize."

Randomization, anyone?

Life Without Choice

Before Ware or McCarthy joined the Council,masters had participated a heated debate--a debatethat may be rekindled in the near future.

The spring 1995 decision--known simply as"randomization"--placed all first-year blockinggroups in randomly-assigned Houses. Previously,the College had taken smaller steps to limitstudent preference, with the larger goal ofdiversifying the makeup of each House community.

"History constantly gets rewritten," says Deanof the College Harry R. Lewis '68. "People saythat the Houses were supposed to be special.President [A. Lawrence] Lowell [class of 1877]didn't have that in mind...Each House is supposedto be a cross-section of the College."

Many masters say they agree with the ideal ofdiversity, and feel that the decision three yearsago has placed Harvard on a positive path.

"If randomization brings diversity, and thatdiversity is inclusive...that's wonderful,"McCarthy says. "And that does seem to happen."

"The gods of randomization smiled on MatherHouse," says Master Sandra Naddaff '75. "Indeed,randomization has given us a more diversepopulation. That's not to say we didn't love thecharacter of the House as it was before."

Shinagel says he spent "10 years or morefighting for randomization."

"Harvard spends millions of dollars to find aheterogenous, diverse class--geographically,racially, politically, socio-economically,"Shinagel says.