What is the general character of the typical Prize Fellow? It has been proven that he is not a grind, but interested in extra curricular activities.
Impressions gotten from interviewing the Fellows is an indication of general type. The reactions of 20 undergraduate interviewers resulted in the following general picture: Fellow 1., something of a dude. . . . sticks well to the books--knows how and where he is going--likeable and dependable;
Fellow 2., have found him to have a keen mind . . . slated to go a long way in his field; Fellow 3., brilliant mind, fluent speech--takes part in college life with enthusiasm;
Fellow 4., ill at ease in society, hesitating manner--strictly a country boy--does not smoke--his passion is study; Fellow 5., serious minded, but with a large group of enthusiastic friends . . . listened to with respect . . . perhaps a little too serious;
Fellow 6., swell but eccentric--a cynic, quick thinker, unusual sense of humor--innate idealism; Fellow 7., friendly and hard working . . . no originality or wit . . . doesn't talk much;
Fellow 8., hardworking, quiet sort without any particular vices--uninteresting; Fellow 9., extremely pleasant and likeable fellow; Fellow 10., jovial, genial, all around person . . . most hospitable; Fellow 11., quick mind revelling in sophism . . . ardent punster;
Not a Grind
Fellow 12., certainly not a grind; Fellow 13., reasonably intelligent, but scarcely brilliant . . . grave sense of humor; Fellow 14., intellectually on his toes, confirmed pacifist, sees through things easily; Fellow 15., not completely submerged in studies.
Thus it goes. The conclusion would again be. . . Conant Prize Fellows are not narrow minded grinds.