The face of Oberlin is about to turn as white as snow. In the span of one academic year, a sum of ten administrators and faculty of color will bid adieu to Oberlin. Granted some of the people in these positions are due to be gone for their earned sabbaticals, but for the most part many of them have been silenced and cornered and some feel that they were forced out of Oberlin. Some of them have even received "hush" checks to not address some of their honest concerns. But not all. Some administrators will get to tell it like it is come morning time. There is a systematic breakdown that reoccurs in droves and waves. This systematic breakdown is the Academy's Country Club mentality filled with ominous circles that denies black administrative support when they make policy decisions. Although greeted by smiles and nods, when the iron door closes, those privileged at the table will draw the blueprint for the "Oberlin New World Order."

Why is that people of color cannot feel comfortable at this so called "liberal" institution? From the highest levels of administration to the students, we are constantly battling marginalization. When we raise our voices we are rebutted with ancient facts and figures. Many faculty and staff members have been disregarded their due respect; they have been bound and gagged to die an institutionalized death. And so the Academy wins again. What is the real story with the former Dean Charlene Cole-Newkirk? Why is it that Adenike Sharpley who consistently for 19 years, has busted her ass and bent over backwards at Oberlin to ensure that the college enforces its mission to diversity "in learning" may potentially be shafted next year? Why is Associate Dean Kenneth Holmes resigning? Holmes is not only a hard working and back-breaking administrator, but is also a mentor to many black students who would otherwise have no one to turn to. Holmes' impact on the black community has been felt significantly. A single example: I have heard many students who are troubled about his replacement because they fear a lack of compassion will befall them when they need financial assistance. Holmes never handed out money but his compassion to financial issues among students of color was rich.

Can we not see a potential catastrophe sneaking up on us? At every level of the power structure, blacks face institutionalized inequity. And white people don't even recognize it. At Oberlin, there are circles of power that are supported by cliques based on "Who's Who" within the institution, number of years at the College, places where degrees were received, ideological principles, and a host of many other unwritten systems that may exclude black people who are outnumbered by such power circles. Are these systems racist? Probably not, but they are definitely elitist.

All these issues must be addressed. There is a subtle and simmering uneasiness amongst the black community. If this institution continues to turn over its black administrators as it has, the simmering will turn to a boil and the black community will scream! Oberlin is currently recruiting more rich, suburban, preparatory, boarding school types. These students play chess, do horseback riding, play tennis, are members of international baccalaureate programs, and have excellent financial situations. Some of the current Oberlin students are this way too, but there is one difference. Some of us recognize that without our middle-class moneys or without our polished prep school education, we wouldn't be shit- in white people's eyes that is. If Oberlin continues to recruit black students with no sense of political consciousness, then Oberlin will become basic training grounds for "yesmen" who jump on the institution's command.

Now is the time to scream! Question everyday why we are seeing fewer black-eyed peas in this big bowl of white rice. Question the smiles, the nods and the overly firm handshakes. Question your decisions? And your reactions? Question those damn drum circles. Question white privilege perpetrated in poor people's clothing, with no shoes, no baths, and no haircuts- until graduation. Question your leaders. Question the followers. Question the revolutionaries. Question the revolution. Question the world and your job in it. And lastly, if you are white, question your internalized superiority complexes and if you are black, your internalized racisms. Each of these diseases can cancer the growth of this community and keep us running in circles.

The potential for more black turnover in administrative positions threatens sound operations of the College and will negatively impact black students by its trickle down effects. WE are challenging the Board, the President and the Senior Staff to ensure that black administrative representation will be fully replaced. To hit the hammer on the nail, black students should be fully immersed in ALL search committees and trustee meetings. The administrators should make it their priority- under the circumstances that the perception of administrative support for black students is sketchy- to frequent the Afrikan Heritage House and make it their business to keep black students informed of administrative operations as it concerns black administrators. If black students do not feel that they are adequately being represented here at Oberlin we will scream! By any means necessary. Strategic implementation of black voice and presence is imperative. Whether it be student or faculty or administrator, if our perception of inequity remains based on inaction to our needs, expect 1999 not to be a good year.

-Melody R. Waller is a college senior and a news editor for the Review.

Oberlin Aid to Strays cannot function on a budget of $384.00

Today members of Oberlin Aid to Strays saw the postings of the SFC's budget allocations for Oberlin College's student organizations. We confess that there have been math problems that have made us want to cry, but never before have we been more disheartened by a bunch of numbers. The SFC allocated $384.00 to Oberlin Aid to Strays. Out of the proposed $11, 599.00, this will cover only 3 percent of our estimated operating costs for the OASIS dog shelter and the cat program. $11,599.00 is a lot of money, we admit. We did not expect to get that much- we originally received $2516.14 and our appeal resulted in an additional $1089.00 for a total of $3,645.14 last year and we somehow managed to live on it, through some combination of miracles and donations. Who worked the miracles and gave the donations? Well, we did: Vera, the woman in charge of the shelter, Donna, another townsperson who volunteers there, Heather, the OAS treasurer, myself and Andrea, OAS co-presidents, and numerous other student volunteers. We picked up the difference.

As much as it matters to us, and as much as we wish we were rich, we just don't have that kind of money and we can't pick up this much difference. We can't even cut corners on expenditure: what shall we eliminate from our budget? Food? Heating? Medical bills? Advertising? The SFC knows this very well and I'm wondering why they awarded us any money at all if they are so dead set on closing us down. We simply cannot function on a budget of $384.00.

Last year we appealed and appealed and appealed some more. We asked the SFC for more money- they said they'd fulfilled their responsibility. We asked the town for money- we were literally laughed at. We asked the college for money- nobody wants the responsibility. It's a vicious circle, playing hot-potato with this issue, everyone putting responsibility on someone else. The SFC believes the town should take care of their own stray problem, the town blames the college for making the stray problem as bad as it is, and in terms of the college, OAS is a student organization. Well, fine, let's pretend this is a political issue.

The town has a responsibility to provide animal control. Stray dogs and cats are potential carriers of disease, proliferate uncontrollably, damage public property, and they are notorious trespassers. Up until the founding of Oberlin Aid to Strays, the town delegated the animal control function to the police department. The police responded to complaints by capturing the offending animal, holding it for 3 days in a shed, and then having it put to sleep. That was how the town fulfilled its responsibility and people were relatively content and/or ignorant of this.

When Shari Kalina came to Oberlin in 1989, she was, like many of us, interested in the animal population of Oberlin. When she learned about the town's policies on animal control she decided to fix the situation.

Shari convinced the town to allow her to take over the animal control in Oberlin and with an army of Oberlin College student volunteers, she founded Oberlin Aid to Strays and created a place where stray dogs could wait comfortably for someone to come and adopt them. Last year, Oberlin College student Susannah Telsey added the cat program. Previously, students had been trying to feed and care for Oberlin's stray cats, but lacked the funding to do so.

Recently we built a new dog shelter and renegotiated our contract with the town. They agreed to provide us with a free building site, free water, and free electricity. We paid for building the shelter. We pay the heating bill. We pay for dog food, collars, spaying/neutering, vaccinations, and advertising. As far as the town is concerned, these things are luxuries- if OAS were to disappear, the town would inevitably put all of our dogs to sleep. In their view, the town is being very generous. Essentially, the attitude is, "If college kids want to support those dogs, let them."

So we turn to the SFC. We are a student organization. We have a charter. Estimating conservatively, we generally have 20+ student volunteers in any given semester and we offer the Oberlin Aid to Strays exco course which usually gives credit to around 30 students per semester. We have a high success rate in obtaining supplemental funding from co-ops and dorms. We're not a select group of bleeding hearts- caring for animals is something that a large number of students at Oberlin sincerely care about.

This is evident in some of the writings submitted by students in the exco course. Many students have pets at home that they had to leave behind. Cheryl Courtice wrote, "My cat (who unfortunately isn't in Oberlin with me) is my best friend." Gretchen Hangar wrote, "At home I have a dog named Smokey. He's a Collie/Shepherd mix. We've had him since he was a puppy... I love him to death and I miss him terribly." Alison Carter said, "I have two black labs named Holly and Thurber... I miss my babies so much but they must stay home in Chicago to comfort my parents in my absence." I could cite a million examples. Oberlin Aid to Strays gives students the chance to visit with dogs and cats, to ease the sadness caused by leaving their own pets behind. It also gives students a chance to make a difference- to participate in a shelter where abandoned dogs are given every chance to find good homes. It gives them the chance to hear a cat purr and to feel the pride that comes with winning the trust of an abandoned creature. In the most recent edition of the Oberlin Review, SFC treasurer, Rebecca Barnes says, "We don't make value judgments, like 'theater is better than sports." Theater, sports, cat-feeding, and dog-walking are things that students do. Whether it is SFC's responsibility to care for Oberlin's strays or not, students care about these kinds of things, and the SFC is here to maintain things that students care about.

However, the SFC is trying to pass the responsibility along. Barnes says, "The city does not provide a normal municipal service for it. We want the city to think about it, so they realize they are the ones who should be funding it." SFC member Danielle Hirsch is quoted as saying, "It was a really tough cut to decide, but we hope it puts pressure on the town to pick up these costs." We can tell you what the city thinks: they're doing us a favor by letting us keep strays alive. In our most recent contract negotiations, the town manager wanted to include the requirement that our dogs be put to sleep if not adopted within 2 months. You can't put pressure on the town. The town does not care what happens to the dogs as long as they get taken off the streets, where they cause problems. They utterly ignore the stray cat population.

In dealing with the SFC last year, they informed us of their views on responsibility and asked us to find alternative sources of funding. In response to this, last semester a committee was formed on Student Senate dedicated to find funding through the college for Oberlin Aid to Strays. Senate realized that college students are a large part of the reason for the stray problem. Unfortunately, as it says in the Review, "Despite the council's efforts, no resolution materialized." We haven't seen any money from the college. Because college students often find themselves in transitional states (i.e.. from year to year; entering the job market), they often find themselves in situations where pets are not allowed. Because of the strong affection many people have for animals and the service they do us in alleviating loneliness, many students get pets during their college years. They usually don't think about the future of their pet. Large numbers of cats and dogs are "set free" in Oberlin because students leave and can't take them. Students are also notoriously irresponsible about neutering and spaying, which results in large numbers of unwanted baby animals.

Oberlin Aid to Strays is not only dedicated to picking up these unwanted animals and taking care of them, we are also dedicated to educating the town and the campus in ways to help the problem. Unfortunately, we can't afford to print out flyers when we don't even have enough money to buy dog food. We can't make pamphlets about the importance of neutering and spaying when we can't even afford to neuter and spay our own animals. And who do we think is responsible for paying for this? Everyone. Everyone who cares, directly or indirectly, about these animals. The town has interests, the college has interests, the SFC has interests. We understand your politics. But understand this: a dog is not a liability, a cat is not an expenditure, the people who care are not a minority. We're here and we're alive and we're asking for your help.

-Vania Stankiewicz is a college sophomore & OAS co-president

-Andrea Ahne is a college sophomore & OAS co-president

-Heather Van Aelst is a college sophomore & OAS treasurer

-plus 164 other Oberlin students

Copeland should support ingenuity in lieu of corporate influence

(This is an open letter to Roger Copeland)

I am a graduate of Oberlin (1988) and am moved to write to you upon reading excerpts of your interview with Julie Taymor printed in the April '98 Around the Square which is sent to me by the college. I realize that the excerpted nature of the short article on Taymor's visit prevents me from appreciating the full depth and scope of the talks she had with the students and yourself. However, when I read that you lauded Taymor as "the only living American whose work deserves a place in that international pantheon of theater directors that includes Peter Brook, Ariane Mnouchkine, Peter Stein, " etc. I felt moved to write you, (as well as Around the Square and the Oberlin Review) because this view ignores so much of what is happening in theater today, (particularly the world of puppet/object theater) and because of the glaring omissions in yours and the student body's apparent but problematic embrace of The Lion King.

What was not discussed (at least what was not evident in the reportage of the discussion in Around the Square) was the fact that the Disney empire for years has had several notorious instances of use of child labor in underdeveloped nations, that Disney's contracts with megalithic fast-food chains, super stores, and publications ensure the manufacture of continuous products and the desire for these products, ironically targeting the wealthier first-world counterparts to those children that were exploited producing these products. What was not apparently discussed was the tragedy that although Taymor's art is exceeding beautiful and imaginative, it remains unconnected to anything that has to do with anyone's reality of living. That Theater Art can be beautiful and evocative as well as socially engaged is clear in the work of, for example, the Bread and Puppet Theater, one of the United States' oldest, self-supporting radical theaters. Under the direction of Peter Schumann, Bread and Puppet creates epic theatrical landscapes, jarring and transcendent visual languages, works performed outdoors and in non-traditional venues usually seen for free or at no more than the cost of a movie theater ticket. The Bread and Puppet shows are about current events, issues of injustice, questions of the struggles of everyday life, reminders of the living conditions of people many of us do not normally see or hear about.

There are many other young, talented puppet theater artists creating work that is beautiful and irreverent, often representing the demons of our society and definitely not its institutions, often with puppets made from junk, found objects, scavenged castoffs. The shows of these artists play on Coney Island or in the streets or in obscure venues for short runs. A piss in the bucket and of questionable breadth and influence compared to Ms. Taymor's work, some of whose puppets cost thousands of dollars each to make, and whose Lion King, is destined to a long run in major theaters around the country. Which is why I mention the Bread and Puppet Theater, because they offer a vision of what long-lasting, far-reaching, international, innovative object theater can be, apart (or at least pretty darn far) from the Disney world of Capital and influence.

I hope it is clear here that I am not calling for a pedantic, blue-blouse kind of issue-only theater, rather that I am concerned with the "invisible hand" of capital and corporate influence; the growing embrace of spectacle and beauty for its own sake; the pernicious way alternative, critical visions remain firmly in the margins (and perhaps wish to stay there?); and the seemingly unquestioned production-value standards which call for million-dollar budgets and state-of-the art technology, rather than rely on the ingenuity and persuasiveness that is the essential (and loveliest) part of the human mind. That the students of Oberlin, and such an esteemed professor as yourself, should fail to discuss these contradictions and urgencies that are the most important questions in American theater today, is disheartening to me. In The Radicality of tbe Puppet Theater Peter Schumann asks us: "Does the idea of doing with art more than art still exist? Are the arts interested in more than themselves? Can puppet theater be more than puppet theater by giving purpose and aggressivity back to the arts and make the gods' voices yell as loud as they should yell?"

I hope you talk more about this in classes to come.

-Clare Dolan is an Oberlin alum, class of '88