With student protesters waiting outside, this week's General Faculty (GF) meeting ran more than an hour over its usual endpoint as faculty discussed punk band Tribe 8's Oct. 28 performance at the `Sco and subsequent statements made by administrators about the show. During the discussion President Nancy Dye said her earlier statement that the concert should have been stopped was "stupid."
Concerns over free speech ignited after a show during which Lynn Breedlove, lead singer of Tribe 8 performed part of the set toples and wearing a dildo as part of the band's political message. A roadie then performed simulated fellatio on the dildo.
A review of the show and two photos, one of the shirtless Breedlove holding a knife near the dildo, ran in the Nov. 1 issue of the Review. Several people who did not attend the show saw the photo and raised questions about the appropriateness of the concert's content.
Almost 120 students demonstrated outside the GF meeting Tuesday by standing silently outside King 306 wearing blindfolds and gags. They held signs with the names of previously censored artists, scientists and authors.
Protesters waited outside the meeting until it was over, hoping to hear the faculty's response to the issue. Some even held an ear to the door during the meeting trying to hear conversation.
The discussion inside the room was tabled at 6:35 p.m., and no vote was held on a proposal added by students to the agenda that day. The motion affirmed the GF's support of free expression in the arts and encouraged expression to be a priority in the college.
Discussion of the issue was urged by senator junior Chapin Benninghoff and Professor of Theater Roger Copeland during previous agenda items. Benninghoff told faculty that no discussion of the issue would be interpreted by students very negatively as silence.
During a discussion on the elements of education that occur outside of the classroom, Copeland said, "I'd like to call attention to the large group of students outside this classroom, that want very much for us to discuss what is important to them."
Once faculty turned officially to the proposal and students' perceptions of censorship, Copeland and Dye were the first to speak.
Copeland opened discussion by reading the same statement he read at a student meeting on Sunday night held to discuss the issues of Tribe 8 and censorship, as well as organize Tuesday's protest.
Copeland said that the content of the Tribe 8 performance was similar to content he includes in his courses, and warned that regulation of this content threatened the academic freedom of professors.
He also said that Dye's opinion, even if it held no direct power in terms of band-booking policy, would effect the tone of the College. "When the president of a college makes a threat, it carries weight whether it should or not," Copeland said.
Copeland also attacked Dye's naming of the performance as sexual harassment. "How can a performance constitute sexual harassment?" he asked. Copeland called on Dye to reaffirm Oberlin's support of free speech as well as freedom in performance-speech.
At this point Dye relinquished the chair in order to respond to the statement. She opened her comments by saying she endorsed the student motion, and then read several paragraphs from the Review's Nov. 1 review of the Tribe 8 show.
She read: "Violence was a key theme, as well; throughout several numbers, Breedlove threatened her arm with a jagged bowie knife, without failing to preach her lyrics on key, all at the same time ... Breedlove challenged the audience numerous times with statements such as: `If you can think we're unladylike, then you can such my dick.'"
Dye continued to read the description of the simulated fellatio.
"I said it was exploitative and sexual objectification," Dye said about the concert, adding that she had said the performance encouraged sexual violence.
Dye said that some of her initial comments stemmed from the fact that she had originally been under the impression that singer Breedlove had dismembered the dildo with a knife. She stood by her comments that the show was sexually exploitative and violent.
Dye did not however, stand by her statement that the show should have been stopped. "The behavior was wrong, but it was stupidity on my part to say it should have stopped," Dye said. She went on to say that nothing had been stopped, and her statement would have no effect on bands or performances in the future.
"I don't believe in decency codes or censorship," Dye said. She argued, however, that the issue was not one so much of censorship, but defining the values of the Oberlin community.
"Oberlin is not a values-neutral community," Dye said. She said she is concerned when she hears that Oberlin is a community where everything goes, and that that freedom is what makes Oberlin progressive. Dye said she does not think Oberlin is a place where anything goes.
She said she believes Oberlin is an intentional community with values. However, she said, "I would never seek to impose my values on the community."
After Dye spoke, the faculty continued to discuss the issue, dealing with the right Dye has to share her personal opinion, the existence of community values or guidelines, the appropriateness of students' reaction and the proposed motion.
The faculty agreed practically unanimously that Dye has the right to speak and share her personal opinion about community values. "Does she have the right to state her opinion? I say hell yes," Ray English, director of libraries, said.
Copeland and student senators at the meeting continued to press the issue of the trickle-down effect that Dye's statements can have. Copeland pointed to statements made by Interim Associate Dean of Student Life Joe DiChristina the week after Dye's original comments as proof of that effect. DiChristina's statements discussed the formulation of guidelines for performers in the future.
Copeland said that while DiChristina may not define these guidelines as censorship, Copeland did. "I suggest you read some Orwell," Copeland said to DiChristina.
Benninghoff talked about the chill he felt among students who perceived the president's statements as a real threat.
Senator sophomore Chuckie Kamm said to Dye, "Everyone thinks it's censorship. Perhaps you weren't aware that when you speak, people think you speak for the College. You need to make it really big ... You really have to take it really seriously."
Faculty mirrored Dye's opinions about the existence of community values at Oberlin. Professor of Philosophy Alfred MacKay said, "There is no reason to give up our authority to self-define our community."
Terry Carlton, professor of chemistry, said, "I think it's appropriate for this institution to make guidelines."
Professor of Politics Ron Kahn suggested group forums to decide what standards are acceptable in performances. Kahn said that such forums would ensure that no one person has absolute power over determining the standards.
Most faculty also agreed that students seem to have misinterpreted the power of the president's statements. English said that he wished the students outside the room protesting could hear the discussion inside.
"Students, while taking the correct position, did misinterpret things," Bob Piron, professor of economics, said.
The last speaker before the meeting was adjourned, Professor of English Dewey Ganzel, said that the student senators present at the meeting should report back to their constituents the content of Dye's statements.
Discussion on the actual motion was limited. Some spoke in favor of passing it as a reassurance to students, while other felt it would be too rushed an action.
English said that this issue had become a problem because of a lack of communication, and simply legislating a solution would be inadequate.
Ganzel had another problem with it. "If the vote is to be taken as a censure of those who have spoken out against the performance, I would have to vote no," he said.
The meeting ended with tabling the discussion and vote on the proposal. The faculty, who had been slowly trickling out of the meeting, voted strongly to end the meeting, with the only audible nays coming from the pocket of senators and Copeland.
Faculty, somewhat taken by surprise by students' concern about the issues that arose from the Tribe 8 debate, reacted in varying ways to the GF meeting's discussion and student outrage.
Most agreed the meeting was beneficial. "I thought the debate was open and robust," Kahn said.
"I think the issue has been clarified in some important ways," Clayton Koppes, acting dean of the College of Arts and Sciences, said.
Many faculty, unaware of the debate before receiving student-produced fliers the day before the meeting, were surprised by the protest. While entering the meeting, faculty called the protest dignified and very artistic. Another professor entered asking, "What exactly is this display all about?"
English said, "I really liked the protest. Students had thought a lot about what they wanted to say and were not disruptive. I applaud that."
Most faculty responded more to the ideas of the protest. Some believed that students overreacted to Dye and DiChristina's comments.
"I can understand students' concerns, but there is no case of censorship here at all," Ganzel said. "The issue has been overdrawn."
"I think anytime there's a perception that freedom of expression may be compromised people should be concerned, but I do think that some of the reactions were out of proportion," Koppes said.
Piron said that he feels that students overreacted, and that now, even after Dye's clarification's, if students are still upset, he thinks faculty will be upset by that.
Other faculty did not feel students had overreacted. Visiting Instructor of English Linda Dorff said that instead of students overreacting, "I kind of see the whole administration's reaction as an overreaction to the whole controversy."
Dorff went on to say that the issue was one that should not have involved the administration to begin with. "It was a place where their voice was not needed," she said.
An often-repeated comment throughout the faculty was the complexity of issues this debate raises. English said that the basic controversy was resolved when Dye admitted to making a mistake, the reactions point to issues that were brought up and are yet unresolved.
Ganzel spoke about the issue in terms of context. "The disco is a place for entertainment, not instruction," he said. He said that the content of a performance there differs from the content of a classroom because in a course, students are under guidance from a faculty member.
English said that the real issue comes down to questions of taste and appropriateness, questions he called very subtle and involved.
"The best way to work through issues like this is the kind of dialogue we were beginning to have in the meeting," English said.
Koppes shared a similar view. "I hope there will be more discussion. We now have a foundation for a broader dialog in terms of where we want to go in terms of community understandings," he said.
Piron saw the matter more simply. He said that as soon as Dye made her statements, the issue and meeting should have been resolved. He said he saw no reason for the further discussion. "The whole thing is moot as far as I can tell," Piron said.
Other faculty mirrored this view. Ganzel shared Piron's opinion that the issue was resolved, but he felt it should not have been an issue in the first place. "Nothing Dye said needed to be taken back," Ganzel said.
Another question brought up frequently by faculty was whether students now feel the issue is resolved. They didn't try to answer this question. Few had had much direct conversation with students about the issue.
Related Stories:
Tribe 8 performance within the bounds of artistic expression
-Roger Copeland (Professor of Theater)
-November 22, 1996Censorship contrary to Oberlin's standards
-Jocelyn Curry (College Junior)
-November 22, 1996President acts in our best interests
-Booker C. Peek (Associate Professor African-American Studies)
