The School Responds
The Day After
By Heidi Broadhead and Joanne Hinkel
9.12 Wednesday, September 12, 2001, Student Government and Student Affairs sponsored a panel discussion and open forum for students, faculty and staff to come together and have an opportunity to speak about concerns and feelings radiating from the previous day's devastation. Compared to previous panel discussions, this was a heavily attended event as well over 100 people turned up in the Grand Ballroom.
Panel members included George Roeder, chair of Visual Studies; moderator Ethan Roeder, Student Government president; Lynsia Wade, Student Government president; Susanne Doremus, Graduate Division Chair; Lisa Norton, Head of Graduate Studies; and Chris Bratton, Film, Video and New Media.
The discussion started off with each panel member sharing their reactions and ideas about what happened. George Roeder opened by saying that he felt "thankful to be part of an arts community at a time like this." Lynsia Wade recalled how when she was living in L.A. during the riots she would try to do things to raise spirits in her neighborhood, things like placing flowers on corners. Wade said that even these small acts made a spiritual difference to her community and urged everyone to ask themselves, "What can I do even on a smaller level?" Other panelists spoke about how to come to terms with the political implications of Tuesday's horror.
After the panelists spoke and everyone joined in a moment of silence, George Roeder opened it up to the floor. Faculty, graduate and undergraduate students and school faculty stepped up to the microphone to express feelings of anger, grief, caution and contemplation.
Student responses ranged from political comments to individual stories about friends and loved ones, to general grief and fear about the events. Some reminded us to be careful with the language we use in discussing the event, because not everyone is coming from the same perspective.
"In America, when you say 'we' who do you mean?" asked undergraduate Russell Watson. "When someone says 'We have to respond,' who is defining that power structure?"
"We know there's a reason why many people in the world [hate] the American government," one unidentified speaker said. "The major exporter of terror has been the CIA and our own government."
Other students expressed a different viewpoint, focusing more on the tragedy of lives lost and also on
the freedoms we do enjoy under capitalism and how those are being questioned:
"I look at the life I have," said Wade. "I have benefited from capitalism. I have to ask: What am I willing to give up to right or change [things]? Am I willing to change my life?"
Student Stacy Goldate talkedabout how we all have different identities and we're all being affected in different ways. She also pointed out that an event like this can be an opportunity for people to project their issues and their political [agenda]. "We have a heightened nationalism," she said referring to the media messages and talk of good vs. evil "as if there is such a thing as an all good place or an all evil place."
Faculty members contributed historical and philosophical perspectives. Mary Patten, from Film, Video and New Media, spoke about the choices presented to us by the media. "It's important to acknowledge the hugely conflicting pieces of information ... you don't have to choose between horror and nothing. [We need] a critical mindset ... to step back and provide a context for ourselves, which requires courage and self discipline."
Dick Pallatto, SAIC Operations Building Manager for the residence halls, had a difficult time speaking and was visibly affected emotionally by Tuesday's violence. He talked about how we are in our "little tower." "We joked about being at ground zero at State and Madison... [but] I'm concerned. This is not over."
After 90 minutes of open mic responses, Maria Benfield, Art Education faculty member, ended the discussion on a positive note.
"As people who are committed to making culture, we have a tremendous amount of power. We have to take it seriously," she said, reminding us that interpreting this moment in history is important. "We need to give blood to public discourse, to make [these discussions] happen if we feel like they're not. It's our job to be confused. It's our job to continue to fragment and to inquire more until we do reach a place where we are... doing what we need to be doing."
|
