Radical theater deserves rigorous critique

To the Editors:

Yes, I went to see the Vagina Monologues. Yes, I felt the ebullience and electricity of the performers and the audience, like crashes, like waves. Yes, I was touched by the poignancy and materiality of the narratives, and felt myself moved to laugh with those around me, fall silent when they did, whoop and cheer, applaud violently and earnestly at the close of the performance. And yes, the boldness and rapture of the piece impressed me.

This doesn't mean I LIKED it.

Yes, I am a woman and yes, I have a vagina. Yes, I understand that the eradication of silence around that "secret place" is long since due. Yes, I understand that women's sexuality need be recognized as both full and fluid, multiple and magnificent. And yes, I understand and sincerely believe that women of all colors, ethnicities, sexualities, religions, and nationalities deserve full right to embrace and love their bodies, and I know that there is much work to be done before that belief is actualized.

Still, I found that the Vagina Monologues drew too easy of links between women's experiences. The equation between womanhood and vaginas does not mean that all womanhood reacts in the same way to that vagina, does not signify that the bonds of vaginal sisterhood will always permeate our differences.

I do not believe that those differences foreclose us from relating, but merely noting differences by juxtaposition does little to critique and transform the structures that inscribe us into those differences.

Present was a diversity of narratives and understandings, but lacking was how those narratives can confine us, separate us, pit us against one another. Perhaps that task isn't within the confines of the piece; nonetheless, any work that claims itself to be radical or feminist theater need also claim the difficulty of being radical and feminist.

Merely talking about vaginas or recognizing that most women can give birth does not mean that a diverse audience of women will leave the performance enchanted into the throes of sisterhood. Just because the narratives came from many types of women does not mean that a cast of white women can represent that diversity, or that the research of a white American woman can necessarily be just to those varying experiences without consciously and actively acknowledging that privileged positioning.

Women's theater and feminist theater cannot be conflated. That which celebrates the experiences of women without critique is useful but limited; that which opens up space for women's voices may hear us but may only go so far to help us. I am disappointed that the weaknesses of the piece have not been brought to light in either the general audience response nor the Review article. Radical theater deserves rigorous critique. If we are ready to transcend additive and recuperative models of multiculturalism, in and outside of the theater, it is high time that we leave outmoded and alienating feminist diatribes back in the 1970s.

-Devon Powers, College senior

Former senator calls for a leader in the ranks

As last year's liaison for Student Senate I had two important objectives. They were 1) to create a Senate worthy of the student body, administration, and faculty, one capable of authentically having responsibility for college governance, and 2) to ensure that the systems were in place to perpetuate such quality in the future. In following the progress of the Senate this year, I have realized how poorly I fulfilled that second goal.

Despite the efforts of some excellent Senators, it appears that we have failed to realize the Senate we hoped for. Given that the Senate now, once again, is in many ways an open book, I wanted to take this opportunity to urge qualified students to run for Senate.

I speak both from my own experience and from conversations I've had with other ex-Senators when I say that despite whatever mistakes we made while "in office," we learned and practiced truly valuable skills. Many of us have felt our experiences prepared us in ways unforeseen to be effective, meaningful leaders in our post-Senate and post-Oberlin experiences. At the same time, we have all felt the satisfaction of contributing to the betterment of Oberlin.

Senate desperately needs students who are prepared to approach their posts professionally. A want ad might include the following:

WANTED - Oberlin students to protect student interests, facilitate student involvement in college governance, solve student problems and create policies/programs to support students.

Responsibilities include learning the Oberlin system of governance and educating students about it, abiding by Senate bylaws/procedures, representing the student body to faculty/staff and ensuring effective and professional student representation.

Duties to include writing and consulting on legislation, constructive participation in meetings, action-oriented coalition-building, collaborative teamwork, support activities to enable vital student functions (such as budget allocation, committee appointment, etc.), and assorted organizational tasks.

Senators must be prepared to treat each other, their constituents, and all other members of the Oberlin community with professionalism and respect. A number of ex-Senators will be making themselves available to help out.

Hope to see you on the new Senate!

-Joshua Kaye, OC '98

Clarifications about LGBTQ Program Hall

To the Editors:

Thank you very much for your extensive coverage of the proposed LGBTQ/Allies Program Hall for next year. It was wonderfully thorough, and comprehensive of potential obstacles and solutions. However, there are just a few corrections and expansions I would like to add.

The LGBTQ/Allies Program Hall is not for or about the LGBTU. Yes, I am a Co-Chair, and yes, the proposal for the Hall was worked on by members of that organization. The Hall itself, however, is designed as a space for anyone who identifies as LGBTQ or an Ally; membership in the LGBTU is not required. Nor will programming be limited to LGBTU issues, or be tied to the goals of the organization. Program Houses do not represent any given student organization, but a community of people, regardless of their organizational affiliation.

Moreover, LGBTU will not be overseeing the entire first year of the proposed Hall. In fact, while the LGBTU wants to be as helpful as possible, the Hall will be independent in its programming and discussion. LGBTU will be reading the initial applications, but only because there are no current LGBTQ/Allied residents to do so.

Lastly, the need for safety inside the Program Hall cannot be brushed aside lightly, and if I gave that impression, I am sorry. While ideally the Hall will be involved in significant community outreach and educational activities, it also needs to act as an ideological "safe space" (yes, I'm aware it's a buzzword) for people who want to live in a homophobia-free environment.

While no one will be limited as to where they can walk or hang out in the Hall, respect for the homophobia-free environment must be present. It is also vastly important that this Hall be given the full support of the administration and the office of Security. Oberlin is not as safe as most of us think, nor is queer-bashing as uncommon as is usually thought. It is only through serious cooperation and support that we can hope to achieve a truly supportive living space for LGBTQ/Allied students.

-Alexis Eastman, Co-chair, LGBTU