Over the years, in part due to the difficulties encountered by dual career couples, the faculty residential requirement was loosened, first to 10 miles and then abolished altogether. Now some faculy members commute from significant distances, 40 or 50 miles. Party permits no longer require faculy assent to attendance, and fewer faculty members attend any student functions, parties or not. Faculy criteria for retention and promotion de-emphasized ‘community’ activities and shifted to emphasis on ‘scholarly’ activities.

Coupled with that was the geographical balkanization of the faculty, with departments acquiring their own buildings or sections of buildings where before there was at least some interlacing of members from various departments.

The interactions between students and faculty members shrank to the classroom and lab, abandoning the informality of a fraternity lounge or a bench on the lawn. The college is poorer for it, but I’m afraid it was inevitable.

I hope that’s not not an old guy’s hazed memory of a golden age, bit I think not.

So in the case of intentional community I don’t think there’s a formula that will work for all times. It’s a continuous dynamic balancing of world images, rights, duties, opportunities, powers and so on, requiring more than anything else willingness and disposition to engage in and trust deliberative process. But to say that in any particular case just seems like more of the usual academic handwaving.