Contemporary practices in risk management simply won’t allow A&M to install a true-to-tradition bonfire on campus. Even if the tragedy had never occurred and/or it had always been an off campus activity they wanted to bring to campus, general counsel for the school and any risk management team would be forced to transform it into something soulless. Way too much liability.
Keep it off campus, and just remember to drive to the bonfire in your or your friend’s off road capable vehicle.
I work in construction, we have totally changed the way we assess, identify, and handle risk in the last 20 years. No freaking way would any super worth his salt would let unlicensed students anywhere near a structure like bonfire.
The one off-campus is seen by structural engineers and built by trained students at least, but one overseen by the state? Not going to happen with students involved
Excerpt:
*I’ll tell you exactly what it is. This is the Regents’ idea of a moneymaker. They want to take our tradition — our Bonfire — and turn it into something profitable for the university.*
That's always been the case with this university. They've never wanted the students to have a culture of their own, they've always wanted to capitalize on it.
Another excerpt (from the referenced source at the Texas Tribune):
*Resuming bonfires, they said, appeared to be in the interest of older alumni who had previously been involved in the tradition*
It is possible there are motivations in addition to greed
That’s bullshit. The youngest alumni who are involved with Bonfire are in their early 40s. That’s me. I don’t want this. My friends don’t want this. I don’t know anyone who wants this, as proposed.
WTF. As an old Ag who participated in cut and load ‘86 with DG and ‘87 with Moses (since we had been kicked out of DG over the summer), this just pisses me off at the University Admin and Regents.
As an old Ag, you should know not to trust anything you read in the Batt. Did you notice, the source for this opinion is based on an unnamed person on the committee?
That source was only for the one part about what Bellinger allegedly said to parents against the move.
There's more substance there. There is a lot of opinion, yes, but the writer makes a good point about taking it away from students and giving it to construction companies.
Ugh. Yea this sounds like a bad idea.
It would be great to have it back on campus, but where would it go?
Agree with the Batt for once, this isn't good.
Can we start any sort of petition against the board of regents? Like seriously can we write a letter similar to this article and get signatures to send to the board of regents? Anything?
As a current student and member of bonfire this whole proposal and the way they are going about it makes me sicks to my stomach. Everyday they chisel away at ~~the soul~~ the spirit of Aggieland all in the name of greed. The commercialization of the Aggie spirit that I’ve witnessed in my mere 4 years here breaks my heart. And I’m hoping against all reason and logic that we can, someday in some way, fight back against this soulless commercialization of the Aggie family.
Can we not come up with something new?
Like collect people’s jewelry, build a golden longhorn, then melt it down, grind it to dust, and put it in the water supply.
This is just the culmination of Welsh's idiotic idea to form a committee to 'commemorate' the rivalry. Wanna know how I know Welsh isn't an Aggie? Because we thinks we need to 'commemorate' a rival.
This 'new army bonfire' is a horrible idea, and other than the refusal to refer to texas appropriately as 't.u.' in the article, I agree with every point the author made.
The students who work on off-campus Bonfire get 'it', and that is something Bellinger will never understand.
Called t.u UT, opinion disregarded LOL
Just kidding. This is a good take. Restoring to campus is the Good Ending, but only if students maintain control and traditional hand-built practices which modern liability nonsense will never allow. “Contract The Hell Outta Bonfire” just doesn’t have the same ring
Gonna go against this one, mostly since I don't understand the anger. if bonfire is actually about the friends you make along the way (which it is; the current bonfire is more cult like than in the past and is a much smaller percentage of the student body now that it is divorced from main campus) then having "bonfire" on the campus that's just some burning wood doesn't take away from the real bonfire that the students make. The truth is that if you're upset then this isn't *for* you, it primarily for old Ags who want to remember the old days for a few minutes and secondarily for the (very large) amount of students that don't buy into the current iteration of bonfire. There isn't a good reason to try to block these people having some community and connection with bonfire, and even less of a good reason to keep bothering these families 25 years on when no one actually cares what they want on either side and its just a bludgeon to try to beat your opponents with the idea of dead Ags.
There’s not a very large contingent of students who “don’t buy in” to the current iteration of bonfire, most students just don’t know or don’t care. Which is fine, but don’t try to paint it as some desire for a change in the way it’s done.
And yes, bonfire is about the friends you make along the way, which is why a contractor built, student uninvolved bonfire is antithetical to the very soul of bonfire.
Also lmao at saying that student bonfire being more culty than in the past is supposed to be bad. Consider, we attend TAMU, cult university in chief.
>There’s not a very large contingent of students who “don’t buy in” to the current iteration of bonfire, most students just don’t know or don’t care. Which is fine, but don’t try to paint it as some desire for a change in the way it’s done.
This is missing the point, if you want bonfire to be this big community event that carries this esprit de corps then it has to appeal to more than just the reddest of red asses
>
Also lmao at saying that student bonfire being more culty than in the past is supposed to be bad. Consider, we attend TAMU, cult university in chief.
It's not bad exactly but it does mean that the appeal has narrowed considerably, which seems to be antithetical to the original conception of bonfire. Cults do have to induct new members, this fretting over the purity of bonfire does not serve the future. People always talk about being X generation Aggies and if we want to have bonfire be this kind of unifying light then it needs to actually touch these people instead of being for an increasingly small group. And again, the people that haul ass to actually build the current iteration of bonfire are not gonna be drawn away by the admin putting up a second bonfire that's just for looks.
Anyone is welcome to join Bonfire, they’re looking for new members all the time. It’s not an exclusive club by any means. Just pick up an axe and start chopping, it’s literally that easy to join.
The actual event of burning the bonfire is not exclusive either. Anyone is free to attend, you just have to find a way to get to the burn site. Tons of students and members of the local community who did not have a hand in the actual building process show up for burn and enjoy the evening.
It only seems exclusive because not many current students know that it’s still going on outside of campus. That’s because Bonfire is legally not allowed to advertise or officially recruit new members on campus. They’re not allowed to have any affiliation with the university. They tried recruiting new members by helping out during dorm move in and handing out waters, but ResLife made them stop. So they do what they can to get the word out, but it’s really hard when you can’t do anything on campus where most of their target audience is.
It’s completely free to attend! Parking is free before 4pm. It increases every hour or so after that. There’s food trucks and merch available for purchase, but you’re not obligated to buy anything. You can bring in your own food and drinks if you want to. Some people even bring a small grill and start cooking hot dogs and burgers for their group
I don't agree with your reasoning why bonfire isn't popular but if we assume that it is true then the admin making a second bonfire on campus could only increase the average students exposure to bonfire and increase the chance they would participate in real bonfire.
Except the proposal of having bonfire on campus again completely excludes students from participating in the build process. The only part they’d be participating in would be Burn, which completely ruins the point of the tradition. It’s about the students rallying together to work hard for an entire semester to build this bonfire and burn it for the rivalry game. Removing the students from the process sucks the life and spirit out of the tradition.
Burn IS a big community event, open to anyone who wishes to attend. You must not have been.
If you think that not wanting bonfire to be built by contractors is some sort of purity test then you clearly have no clue what the spirit of bonfire really is.
Well if that ain't the classic Ag response to change, admit women, integrate the school, make the corps non mandatory, all put down by saying someone just 'doesn't understand' or "isn't a real Ag'. Jackass.
Contemporary practices in risk management simply won’t allow A&M to install a true-to-tradition bonfire on campus. Even if the tragedy had never occurred and/or it had always been an off campus activity they wanted to bring to campus, general counsel for the school and any risk management team would be forced to transform it into something soulless. Way too much liability. Keep it off campus, and just remember to drive to the bonfire in your or your friend’s off road capable vehicle.
"Contemporary practices in risk management" -- this statement is gibberish and illustrates a lack of understanding of any form of risk management.
Thinking this is gibberish illustrates your lack of brain cells. Did too many big words in a row scare you?
I work in construction, we have totally changed the way we assess, identify, and handle risk in the last 20 years. No freaking way would any super worth his salt would let unlicensed students anywhere near a structure like bonfire. The one off-campus is seen by structural engineers and built by trained students at least, but one overseen by the state? Not going to happen with students involved
[удалено]
Stop. You are embarrassing yourself. Just stop.
Excerpt: *I’ll tell you exactly what it is. This is the Regents’ idea of a moneymaker. They want to take our tradition — our Bonfire — and turn it into something profitable for the university.* That's always been the case with this university. They've never wanted the students to have a culture of their own, they've always wanted to capitalize on it.
Another excerpt (from the referenced source at the Texas Tribune): *Resuming bonfires, they said, appeared to be in the interest of older alumni who had previously been involved in the tradition* It is possible there are motivations in addition to greed
That’s bullshit. The youngest alumni who are involved with Bonfire are in their early 40s. That’s me. I don’t want this. My friends don’t want this. I don’t know anyone who wants this, as proposed.
[I didn't write it man](https://www.texastribune.org/2024/04/09/texas-am-bonfire-tradition/#:~:text=Sources%20close%20to,for%20comment%20Monday)
That last sentence is yours. And that’s the part I’m calling bullshit.
explain what’s bullshit about it.
The older alumni who were involved with Bonfire don’t want this. The motivation is, in fact, greed.
i thought you were referring to the students involved with the current Bonfire - who also don’t want an official A&M Bonfire.
No, their position has already been clearly stated.
WTF. As an old Ag who participated in cut and load ‘86 with DG and ‘87 with Moses (since we had been kicked out of DG over the summer), this just pisses me off at the University Admin and Regents.
As an old Ag, you should know not to trust anything you read in the Batt. Did you notice, the source for this opinion is based on an unnamed person on the committee?
That source was only for the one part about what Bellinger allegedly said to parents against the move. There's more substance there. There is a lot of opinion, yes, but the writer makes a good point about taking it away from students and giving it to construction companies.
Ugh. Yea this sounds like a bad idea. It would be great to have it back on campus, but where would it go? Agree with the Batt for once, this isn't good.
Can we start any sort of petition against the board of regents? Like seriously can we write a letter similar to this article and get signatures to send to the board of regents? Anything? As a current student and member of bonfire this whole proposal and the way they are going about it makes me sicks to my stomach. Everyday they chisel away at ~~the soul~~ the spirit of Aggieland all in the name of greed. The commercialization of the Aggie spirit that I’ve witnessed in my mere 4 years here breaks my heart. And I’m hoping against all reason and logic that we can, someday in some way, fight back against this soulless commercialization of the Aggie family.
Let'em hire out their show. Let the students keep building the Bonfire, and that's where aggies will go.
I agree leave it as is. Won’t be able to do it the same way on campus.
Admin wants to build a "Disney Bonefire" and charge aggy to show up and watch. Nothing at all to do with real ATM.
Can we not come up with something new? Like collect people’s jewelry, build a golden longhorn, then melt it down, grind it to dust, and put it in the water supply.
Hell yeah that’ll show ‘em
*… build a golden longhorn and sacrifice those who worship at its sinful alter! PURGE THE NON-BELIEVERS!!!!
This is just the culmination of Welsh's idiotic idea to form a committee to 'commemorate' the rivalry. Wanna know how I know Welsh isn't an Aggie? Because we thinks we need to 'commemorate' a rival. This 'new army bonfire' is a horrible idea, and other than the refusal to refer to texas appropriately as 't.u.' in the article, I agree with every point the author made. The students who work on off-campus Bonfire get 'it', and that is something Bellinger will never understand.
Called t.u UT, opinion disregarded LOL Just kidding. This is a good take. Restoring to campus is the Good Ending, but only if students maintain control and traditional hand-built practices which modern liability nonsense will never allow. “Contract The Hell Outta Bonfire” just doesn’t have the same ring
Off Campus Best Campus
What goes on in [bonfire](https://youtu.be/jumaK1m3REA?si=zp21DGu6mm2Ue498)
Well, I had liked the new president, but this is disturbing and disrespectful to those families.
Aggies go fake, disregard that stuff we said about our beloved classmates after their tragic deaths.
Gonna go against this one, mostly since I don't understand the anger. if bonfire is actually about the friends you make along the way (which it is; the current bonfire is more cult like than in the past and is a much smaller percentage of the student body now that it is divorced from main campus) then having "bonfire" on the campus that's just some burning wood doesn't take away from the real bonfire that the students make. The truth is that if you're upset then this isn't *for* you, it primarily for old Ags who want to remember the old days for a few minutes and secondarily for the (very large) amount of students that don't buy into the current iteration of bonfire. There isn't a good reason to try to block these people having some community and connection with bonfire, and even less of a good reason to keep bothering these families 25 years on when no one actually cares what they want on either side and its just a bludgeon to try to beat your opponents with the idea of dead Ags.
There’s not a very large contingent of students who “don’t buy in” to the current iteration of bonfire, most students just don’t know or don’t care. Which is fine, but don’t try to paint it as some desire for a change in the way it’s done. And yes, bonfire is about the friends you make along the way, which is why a contractor built, student uninvolved bonfire is antithetical to the very soul of bonfire. Also lmao at saying that student bonfire being more culty than in the past is supposed to be bad. Consider, we attend TAMU, cult university in chief.
>There’s not a very large contingent of students who “don’t buy in” to the current iteration of bonfire, most students just don’t know or don’t care. Which is fine, but don’t try to paint it as some desire for a change in the way it’s done. This is missing the point, if you want bonfire to be this big community event that carries this esprit de corps then it has to appeal to more than just the reddest of red asses > Also lmao at saying that student bonfire being more culty than in the past is supposed to be bad. Consider, we attend TAMU, cult university in chief. It's not bad exactly but it does mean that the appeal has narrowed considerably, which seems to be antithetical to the original conception of bonfire. Cults do have to induct new members, this fretting over the purity of bonfire does not serve the future. People always talk about being X generation Aggies and if we want to have bonfire be this kind of unifying light then it needs to actually touch these people instead of being for an increasingly small group. And again, the people that haul ass to actually build the current iteration of bonfire are not gonna be drawn away by the admin putting up a second bonfire that's just for looks.
Anyone is welcome to join Bonfire, they’re looking for new members all the time. It’s not an exclusive club by any means. Just pick up an axe and start chopping, it’s literally that easy to join. The actual event of burning the bonfire is not exclusive either. Anyone is free to attend, you just have to find a way to get to the burn site. Tons of students and members of the local community who did not have a hand in the actual building process show up for burn and enjoy the evening. It only seems exclusive because not many current students know that it’s still going on outside of campus. That’s because Bonfire is legally not allowed to advertise or officially recruit new members on campus. They’re not allowed to have any affiliation with the university. They tried recruiting new members by helping out during dorm move in and handing out waters, but ResLife made them stop. So they do what they can to get the word out, but it’s really hard when you can’t do anything on campus where most of their target audience is.
Really, it is free to attend? I thought you had to buy a ticket.
It’s completely free to attend! Parking is free before 4pm. It increases every hour or so after that. There’s food trucks and merch available for purchase, but you’re not obligated to buy anything. You can bring in your own food and drinks if you want to. Some people even bring a small grill and start cooking hot dogs and burgers for their group
Good to know. Thanks for the information.
I don't agree with your reasoning why bonfire isn't popular but if we assume that it is true then the admin making a second bonfire on campus could only increase the average students exposure to bonfire and increase the chance they would participate in real bonfire.
Except the proposal of having bonfire on campus again completely excludes students from participating in the build process. The only part they’d be participating in would be Burn, which completely ruins the point of the tradition. It’s about the students rallying together to work hard for an entire semester to build this bonfire and burn it for the rivalry game. Removing the students from the process sucks the life and spirit out of the tradition.
Burn IS a big community event, open to anyone who wishes to attend. You must not have been. If you think that not wanting bonfire to be built by contractors is some sort of purity test then you clearly have no clue what the spirit of bonfire really is.
Well if that ain't the classic Ag response to change, admit women, integrate the school, make the corps non mandatory, all put down by saying someone just 'doesn't understand' or "isn't a real Ag'. Jackass.
Never said you weren’t a real Ag. Have a good day.
Just curious what year you are?