The mysterious cancellation of the new photography lab not only left a lot of unanswered questions about the construction project, but about the administration's feelings toward the arts as well.

With no public announcement, Penn State quietly axed plans for a new photo building this summer, as if the proposed project would fade from the minds of the students and faculty who were so anxious for a place to call home.

Built in the 1960s, the current lab contains mostly equipment on the verge of ruin.

The department has one classroom in which regular critique classes are held.

Digital photo equipment is stored in borrowed space in the Mitchell Building, which is slated for demolition in the Master Plan. Ten photo enlargers are shared by about 120 students while 25 students in more advanced programs share the remaining four enlargers.

Students point to equipment older than them — and the lack of equipment to begin with — and say it's not fair.

Well, it isn't fair, especially when the proposed Chemistry and Life Sciences Buildings carry a price tag of $93.7 million, roughly the same as the stadium expansion.

Complex underground plumbing and electrical work were some of the reasons given for the building's cancellation.

Does Penn State actually believe that its tuition-paying students are as naïve to accept that the university cannot figure out how to install some pipes after all the university's ground-breaking accomplishments?

Penn State could do this if it wanted to. And students deserve to know where the project's money went.

Students need to maintain competitive in all areas, not just science and technology.

Penn State should give all its students the opportunity to have a competitive edge in the workforce upon graduation.

Unfortunately, this is not just a isolated problem on this campus.

It is no secret that the arts will not bring in the mounds of research money that science and technology programs attract.

But the arts cannot be expected to generate research grants; this is not its purpose.

The role of the arts is evident every time you see a sculpture, painting or photograph that brightens a corner of campus on your walk to class.

Our current crisis with the condition of art facilities is reflective of America's view of arts in general, but this does not mean Penn State should succumb to this uncultured mentality. Other countries, like England, have healthier endowments set up to support fledgling artists.

Penn State flaunts its role as a pioneer in many areas — perhaps it should try forging the way to put arts first.