D-Hall Divided

After hearing a phrase along the lines of "Wetherell is the healthy dining hall now" countless times since returning to campus a few weeks ago to the now practically infamous Elm renovations, I am struck with the moral and dietary problems that that statement suggests. In a community constantly searching to become as united as possible, it seems like yet another practically mandated division.Unlike many schools, especially at the high school level, Exeter has two dining halls. Inherently, this is bound to cause minor problems and natural divisions based on the proximity of certain dorms, classes, or sports to either one. To add unnecessary divisions, however, seems unreasonable. When a trustee member visited my dorm last winter, he raved on and on about the changes coming to Elm Street dining hall. When a friend inquired how Wetherell would continue to attract patrons, I remember him answering by suggesting a more attractive or better-prepared menu. Thus, a somewhat empty statement or opinion that one dining hall is "healthier" gained some credibility in my mind the more I thought about it.I visited both dining halls on multiple occasions for different meals this week. And while I certainly entered with a set hypothesis and a somewhat unpreventable bias, it seemed clear to me that the comments were, to the best of my observation, true. The reasoning of the trustee began to make sense to me, and I started the process of coming to terms with the fact that for a salad with more diverse and unique toppings, or an overall more balanced meal, I'd be trekking more often to north side. I began to think, however, about the conundrum in a converse manner, and was once again puzzled why Exeter would want an "unhealthy" dining hall in the first place.As adolescents attending a residential boarding school, we are under the power of Exeter; it can shape our brains and bodies into habits that we will likely continue well into our adult lives. Ergo, it seemed illogical to have a "healthy" and "unhealthy" dining hall in a way that may be at least somewhat mandated by the administration, or someone in charge.One friend proposed that students living on a more unhealthy diet will continue that whether the dining hall supports their choices in the options they provide or not, either by ordering out or consistently choosing the least healthy offerings. Hence, why not serve healthy food if so many students will never eat it anyway? But it remains unclear to me why our dining services might support the less healthy habits by encouraging and facilitating the consumption of a food like pizza on a daily basis, which has exceedingly negative dietary implications for any consumer.Even if a student chooses to never eat a vegetable, it's important to present them with that choice daily, in the case that one day they might change their mind. By serving healthy food, it is clear that a dining hall is committed to the physical and mental health of students in one more way. But in the seemingly growing balkanization of Wetherall and Elm Street's food offerings, it's harder to believe that our dining services are doing their best to provide exemplary diet options for all students, no matter which side of campus they decide to attend breakfast, lunch and dinner on, and that is a problem with no fair excuse.