COMMENTARY

E D I T O R I A L S:

Breaking the silence, building a community

The students, faculty and administrators at the open forum yesterday witnessed a broken student community in search for some difficult answers. Several students organized the forum to give the student body an opporunity to question and defend Charlene Cole-Newkirk about a variety of issues concerning decisions she made as Dean of Student Life and Services. But anyone present at the forum quickly realized that the focus of the forum went beyond any issues students had with Cole-Newkirk.

The Oberlin community is not a community. The divisions between the multitude of unique groups on campus have grown too wide, creating an unhealthy and hostile environment at Oberlin. The worst for our generation may be over. Emotions and concerns sincerely expressed during the forum broke the silence. Students were acting like mature individuals by sharing their thoughts, yet the barrier between the individuals and groups present was evident.

We are at a starting point to building a strong community at Oberlin. We must strive to keep our minds open and free. Suggestions made to continue discussions should undoubtedly be taken seriously. We must remember that the student body has the greatest potential to be a strong and healthy student body. The Oberlin community can be a community.


Stand up, or hang, for your beliefs

"I think they probably have better things to do with $30,000 than hang from the library all day," spouted first year Isaac Natter. Natter echoed the opinions of many who stopped flat in their tracks after viewing Joshua Raisler-Cohn and Kimberly DeFeo hanging from Mudd Library next to a 750 foot banner proclaiming "Changing the World Starts Here, Stop Live Animal Experimentation."

We agree with Natter that there could be better things for students to do with 30,000 a year than hang from a building ... but why aren't lots of students doing these things? And honestly, what better to do with $30,000 a year than to stand, or hang, for what one passionately believes. Activism comes in all kinds of packages, and the most effective types of activism are usually those that are initially labeled as assanine, trivial or over-the-line. Of course the publicity protest didn't change folk's minds about Neuroscience, but was it really supposed to? Sometimes, making people aware of a perceived wrong and the accompanying lengths people are willing to go to, to right those wrongs are what's initially most significant. Tuesday's protest provided, among other things, a model of what students can and should do to make their activism seen and felt.


New sources of funding needed

Sometime before the parents arrived on campus last weekend, someone put an expiration date on Shabbat. Signs that had appeared on campus warned that Spring would mark the end of Shabbat at Oberlin. The signs were somewhat misguided; Shabbat isn't a carton of milk. A tradition that has weathered thousands of years of oppression, pogroms and inquistions isn't going to disappear overnight, no matter how harsh the SFC budget cuts might be. There is a teaching that Jews have not kept Shabbat, Shabbat has kept the Jewish people. As Hillel has reiterated, the celebration of Shabbat is essential for the matienence of Oberlin's Jewish community. Food at Shabbat is not a luxury; it is a neccessity. The problem is that all that chicken and kugel cost a lot of money. There is currently no adaquate structure in place to fund the Shabbat meal. The SFC is already taxed by the enormous burdens placed upon them to fund everyone from philosophers to steel drummers. However, the President's discretionary fund is even more problematic. Running to the President for emergency funding, before exhausting all the other possible sources of funding and using the appeals procedure in place, is unproductive. OSCA should be paying Hillel a reimbursement and there should be an easy way for Hillel to get its reimbursement from CDS. These solutions should not be thought of as permanent however. The College needs to determine a viable alternative funding mechanism for religious organizations that would prevent disputes like this from happening.


Editorials in this box are the responsibility of the editor-in-chief, managing editor and commentary editor, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff of the Review.

Back // Commentary Contents \\ Next

T H E   O B E R L I N   R E V I E W

Copyright © 1997, The Oberlin Review.
Volume 126, Number 5, October 3, 1997

Contact us with your comments and suggestions.