Every year we are reminded in newspaper editorials and Undergraduate Council debates that Harvard lacks a student center, that this defect is a critical flaw in our lives as undergraduates and that we must work to create such a place. Although the idea of a building dedicated to the needs of undergraduates is at first glance appealing, is a fabulously impractical solution to problems that can be more easily resolved by modest measures. This annual and futile appeal for a building distracts us from the many workable ways to achieve what a student center might provide.

The partisans of a student center pin the blame for various defects in life at Harvard on the lack of a building dedicated to the needs of students. If we had a student center, they remind us, student life would be less atomized, there would be a greater sense of community and Harvard's rather hit-and-miss social scene would be invigorated. Though undergraduate life does suffer from these problems, focusing our energies on lobbying for a student center is futile and counterproductive. The obstacles are obvious and formidable--the lack of any suitable land in notoriously crowded Cambridge, indifference or opposition from much of the administration and the staggering cost of any new construction. Moreover, the two main proposed purposes of a student center, more office space for student groups and a new locus for student community, can be easily realized with existing buildings and institutions.

Student center boosters are on the strongest ground when they argue that a new building would provide expanded office space for extracurricular groups. They are right that while the number of student groups has ballooned, almost all office space in the converted basements of Yard dormitories is already occupied; a new student complex could easily accommodate offices for many student groups.

But a student center is not the only way to provide needed office space. Many upperclass houses have underutilized basement space which could be renovated as several Yard dormitories have been. The publication center proposed several years ago is another very feasible solution. It would be an area with computers and storage space which could be used by various campus publications in turn, since most have different publication cycles.

Nor is there any reason why offices need to be in a student center, since organizations working away behind closed doors are not particularly related to a student center's mission of creating a common space for all students. Although Thayer basement is crowded with offices of diverse organizations, it's far from a common ground for undergraduates, and there is little reason to think that office space in a student center would be any different. Since office space does not contribute much to the social experience, it is would be wiser to separate this issue from impractical hopes for a student center.

But while perhaps office space could be found elsewhere, the supporters of a student center argue that only a dedicated building could provide a place for students to meet, relax and provide the common ground that so often seems lacking at Harvard. As appealing as a greater sense of community may be, a student center shows no promise of providing it. Loker Commons was built to fill this role, and equipped with most of the amenities that a proposed student center would boast--fast food, meeting space, a central location, e-mail terminals, games--but the idea of hanging out at Loker is a snide joke or sarcastic put-down. The proposals for a student center would only create another version of Loker Commons, perhaps without the glum basement feel and uncomfortable metal furniture, but equally unused.

Neither Loker nor the plans for a new center recognize that to function as a common ground a physical space must be integrated with the rhythms of the community it serves. Loker shows that we Harvard students do not want to go off to a special room or building to relax. Only during lunch does Loker have the feel of a bustling campus center where you chat with friends and classmates; the Fly-By system integrates the Memorial Hall basement into the habits and daily cycles of enough students to make it worth a visit. Without such an integration, no matter how many pool tables, cable televisions or plush couches a student center might have, it will remain outside the daily habits of Harvard students.

A common space integrated with our lives does not need to be built; many exist around us and can be better used to create many lively centers of community. Houses and dormitories are more natural hubs for community than a student center, and activities and services that focus on these existing units will achieve far more success than the engineered and artificial Loker commons or a student center would.

Only a decade or two ago it was normal for students and tutors to relax in the Junior Common Rooms of the Houses and chat after eating; this was a natural pairing of convenient physical space and the downtime between meals and evening work which drew members of the community together. Bringing back this custom would be an excellent way to create solidarity through already existing and conveniently located physical resources.

The midnight snacks program in the dining halls during exam and reading periods brought students out of their rooms several times a week and down into the dining hall to chat while grabbing snacks and getting a needed break from cramming, and students chatted or studied with the housemates and friends they might have missed at meals. Hopefully the new late night snack provided by Harvard Dining Services will continue to have this effect throughout the year.

Similarly, House events draw students together and cut across the usual dividing lines of blocking groups and extracurriculars. While it would be beyond difficult to get enough money to build a new student center from the Harvard administration, these sort of institutions and events are comparatively inexpensive and can easily be organized and funded.

The supporters of a student center rightly remind us of the need for institutions to bring Harvard students together. But by persisting in an unrealistic desire for a new building, we neglect the many ways that we can improve the environment we already inhabit to support student groups and strengthen our community.

Charles C. DeSimone '01, a Crimson editor, is a government concentrator in Dunster House.