Heller starts by recounting the happenings at Oberlin College where student activism is threatening the established “liberal matrix”. Recently, Oberlin College has seen a whole host of student backlash; including food fights, and student letters protesting faculty. He goes on to mention several significant liberal – arts schools who are struggling to cope. Over the course of the article, Heller interviews many involved in academia on both sides of the debate. It must be said that debates of this kind are often a slippery slope. Therefore, you’ll notice, Heller largely refrains from giving his own opinion. And instead opts to consider as many view points as possible.
This article was quite hard to digest, considering the range of points of view from individuals qualified to weigh in on the topic. I am left, in a sense, wondering about the state of self-expression. If we continue to suppress and nit-pick for inconsistencies who will be left to speak? Who will be willing to risk sharing their opinion in this climate?
Wasn’t free self-expression the whole point of social progressivism? Wasn’t liberal academe a way for ideas, good and bad, to be subjected to enlightened reason? Generations of professors and students imagined the university to be a temple for productive challenge and perpetually questioned certainties. Now, some feared, schools were being reimagined as safe spaces for coddled youths and the self-defined, untested truths that they held dear.
E367: Writing and Diversity 
John,
I understand your sense that there is too much going on here for you to feel that you can really get a handle on things. I think that’s exactly the problem that Heller, and Oberlin faculty and students, and the rest of us are facing. When everyone is “Super Mad at Everything All the Time” (the title of a book I admire by Alison Dagnes), it’s hard to move the conversation forward.
So I wonder if we might think about Oberlin as kind of test case in writing across differences? What would help this situation? The strategies for talking with Uncle Bot at Thanksgiving? Thinking of the college as a “contact zone”? considering what sort of liberalism (and/or identity) colleges like Oberlin “sponsor”?
Thanks for this thoughtful response,
Joe
LikeLiked by 1 person
Josh,
I love what you’ve written.
I definitely agree with the point you brought up about removing yourself from ideas and opinions different than you. I think that in order to remain an activist, you need to surround yourself with people whose thoughts and feelings differ from the ones you have because if you aren’t exposed to differing points of view, how will you debate them and discuss them and try to change them if you don’t agree with them? I understand that Bautista was probably just fed up with the years and years she spent dealing with people with contrasting opinions who were rude or inconsiderate towards her, but it doesn’t seem like a smart plan to follow through with, especially since the real world doesn’t work like that. You cannot just turn the other cheek when people try to discuss things with you that you don’t agree with. Debate, discussion, and education come from the clashing of ideas and viewpoints and the ability to listen to one another and work things out in an orderly fashion.
I’m also glad that you asked “who will be willing to risk sharing their opinion in this climate?” because I often think about how no matter who you are and what you believe in, there will be people coming at your throat no matter what. It seems as though the political climate in America has risen to levels we have never seen before and it terrifies me to think that we can barely get things passed in Congress or even have rational discussions all because we refuse to see the other person’s point of view as valid or even worth our time. (The “we” and “us” meaning not all Americans, but a vast majority)
LikeLike
*John
Sorry!
LikeLike
Hi John!
I really liked that you commented on the difficulty you had when reading Heller’s article based on the different viewpoints. I felt the same way when reading this and it really made me stop and think about why he has written this article in such a way. I feel that by having so many issues and viewpoints, you become a part of these issues and the chaos that they bring about in an environment. I definitely agree with your point that activism can not be what it is without submerging yourself in different ideas and viewpoints that you disagree or are unfamiliar with. He opens up the piece by writing about different forms of activism taken at Oberlin and then goes on to discuss the many different issues that have been present. Each person interviewed has a different way of touching upon these issues, however they are all discussed and brought to light, highlighting the main point of activism in Heller’s piece.
LikeLike
John,
I feel that this was a great analysis and reflection on the piece. I was most interested in the questions at the end of your second paragraph. I feel that either nobody will be able to speak and the people that do will not express all of the differing opinions on the issue at hand. Over-analyzation will be the downfall of this type of speech and it will be a terrible loss for something as simple as expressing an opinion about a topic.
LikeLike