April 2011

t n i r P e Blu S U P M A C

1 APRIL 201

April 2011 | 01

FROM THE EDITOR

CONTENTS

10

DECISION 2012

13

THE WOMAN IN THE MONOLOGUE

22

02 | APRIL 2011

ART BY NADINE PAU

W

hen I heard Sarah-June Benjamin’s presentation at the English department’s SOUL Conference, I was inspired. Her take on Ensler’s Vagina Monologues is one that’s often overlooked by a largely white feminist movement.

As a white woman listening to Sarah-June’s speech, I quickly understood that not all women share the same fight. As SarahJune points out, white feminists often use the imagery of a “strong black female” to advance the cause of feminism while ignoring material needs and concerns of black women, like issues of racism and representation, welfare reform, and workplace childcare.

I asked Sarah-June to let us print her work because part of Campus BluePrint’s mission is to challenge the way we traditionally view textbook issues like “feminism” and “civil rights.” Sarah-June’s monologues shed a new perspective on an important progressive issue.

We can work together when we have a common goal and understand the needs of others.

Read her presentation, found on page 13, with an open heart and mind. I guarantee you will find a refreshing and inspirational interpretation of black feminism, and how important it is to recognize the duality of black + female.

Sally Fry Editor-in-Chief

INTERVIEW WITH DR. ORESKES Wisconsin Protests Gun Control A Letter from Istanbul Shakespearean Romance Radioactive Aftermath Politics of Disaster A Case for Nuclear Energy

04 08 20 24 26 28 30

STAFF sally fry editor-in-chief erin becker david gilmore saurav sethia managing editors jasmine lamb creative director tyler tran photo editor stewart boss, carey hanlin, troy homesley, zak mathews, luda shtessel, brandon wiggins, kara williams staff writers sally fry, carey hanlin, cassie mcmillan, sofia morales, tyler tran design staff anne brenneman copy editors caitlin graham, tyler tran photographers

On the cover:

By Anwuli Chukwurah CBP’s featured artist.

Read more, page 31

APRIL 2011 | 03

WISCONSIN EMPLOYEES TAKE A STAND Erin Becker interviews Jeff, a Wisconsin state employee who has been protesting Governor Walker’s signing of the Budget Repair Bill. The bill has been called one of the most anti-union pieces of legislation ever passed. Among a host of other anti-worker measures, it forces collective bargaining units to maintain certification by an annual vote and prohibits them from requiring members to pay dues. Jeff’s wife is also a Wisconsin state employee. He requested their last names not be used due to concerns about angering his employers. In this interview, he describes his experience as a protestor and expresses some hope about the power of the public voice and the future of collective bargaining rights in Wisconsin.

04 | APRIL 2011

APRIL 2011 | 05

WISCONSIN EMPLOYEES

“

BY ERIN BECKER

Protesting is exhilarating and exhausting.

The energy, solidarity and good will shown by the protesters was uplifting, but at the same time there was a sense of a political machine ready to trample the people.”

EB: First off, what has protesting been like?

J: Protesting is exhilarating and exhausting.

The energy, solidarity and good will shown by the protesters was uplifting, but at the same time there was a sense of a political machine ready to trample the people. I was constantly grasping for optimism and warding off concerns of a non-representative government.

For three weeks, I went to the Capitol during the week, alone or with colleagues, as well as on the weekends, totaling at least 12 times and more than 30 hours. The tone was one of righteous anger, but still with peaceful demonstrations and with a great sense of unity.

The atmosphere did not change much over time, but the protests became more massive.

Suspicions about corporate influence were borne out as more facts emerged.

My involvement has been in showing solidarity, sharing information, and educating myself about the political process. I have been fortunate to have friends that are very active.

They kept me informed about the legislation, told me about upcoming events, and have been a great source of inspiration.

There were impressive speeches by activists like Jesse Jackson, Michael Moore, Tammy Baldwin, Dennis Kucinich, and Jim Hightower.

The Nightwatchman (Tom Morello) and others put on a free concert at the Monona Terrace in support of the protests, and that was very powerful. Wisconsin’s own Tony Shalhoub (of Monk) came to the Capitol in support of workers and especially his sister, a teacher in Green Bay. The energy and well-thought-out logic of these great people made it seem impossible that our cause could fail.

There were many powerful and unbelievable political moments. I heard a Democratic legislator describe how he had to crawl through a window of the Capitol to get inside and

06 | APRIL 2011

do his job. Assemblywoman Tamara Grigsby of Milwaukee gave remarks that rivaled the great civil rights speeches. I watched as assembly testimony was arbitrarily cut-off, denying about ten of the peoples’ representatives a chance to speak on the legislation. Then, the modified bill went through in an instant. Seconds later, thousands of protesters inside the Capitol were yelling, “shame, shame, shame.”

The mainstream media coverage, or lack thereof, was and is frustrating. Fortunately, there are other good outlets for accurate information. Many websites offer critical analyses of the bill, making the implications of the legislation obvious for those who seek the facts.

Sites like whatdemocracylookslike.com and defendwisconsin.org are maintaining the spirit. The energy is currently focused on recalls of many of the Republican senators, which is happening in other parts of the State.

My newsfeed is still buzzing with discontent about the likely effects of the bill. As in other parts of the world, social media is a great source of hope and information.

EB: In my understanding, Governor Walker seems to be proposing this as an economic issue, while protesters see it more as a partisan move. Would you agree with this characterization, or do you think Walker really does feel backed into a corner where the budget is concerned?

J: The union busting was framed as a budget issue, but was then stripped from the “budget repair” bill and rammed through on March 9 and 10 as a non-fiscal measure. That belies the fiscal argument. Rhetoric about taxpayer dollars funding the Democrats via union dues is another indication that this was a move to de-fund the Democrats. But union busting was the sole objective.

There is also the no-bid sale of state owned power plants, and the drastic cuts to Badger (health) Care, both of which got little attention due to the divisiveness of the union busting issue.

EB: Can you talk a little bit about the role the Tea Party is playing in this, if you think it's significant?

started by David Koch.

EB: Let’s talk about the unions themselves.

How important were the unions before the legislation was passed? What do you think will happen if this legislation is allowed to go into effect?

J: I would characterize the unions as functional, but not too powerful. They increase job

J: I don’t view the Tea Party as a true force of security and help maintain reasonable work-

its own; it is mainly a pseudo-public face for the corporate interests. I looked for the Tea Partiers and saw only a few that were obviously of that mindset, maybe 20 in my whole time at the rallies. I talked to a few of them and it sounded like most of them were there for just a few hours one day. I perceived the brief turnout as a photo opportunity for Fox News.

EB: Speaking of outside forces getting involved, how much do you think Walker’s election and his decision to sign the legislation has to do with the Koch brothers?

J: The Koch Brothers contributed greatly to Walker’s election campaign and I would not be surprised if many state-owned power plants are sold to them or their subsidiaries.

As for the actual influence, the prank phone call by the Buffalo Beast to Scott Walker answers this question [Editor’s Note: check out the transcript and a recording of the phone call at http://www.buffalobeast.com/?p=5045]. As the rallies progressed, there were more signs denouncing the Koch Brothers and Walker’s connection to them. Also, during the protests, there was a campaign-season-like amount of advertising in support of the repair bill from Americans For Prosperity, which I believe was

ing conditions, but are not highly effective at increasing compensation. Without unions there can be repeated cuts, punishment of regulators deemed overzealous by well-connected businesses, and continued downward pressure on wages, as there is usually someone who will do that same job for less. A big concern is the loss of competent, intelligent public servants that believe in making a positive difference in the world. Uncertainty about benefits has already caused early retirement of scores of veteran state workers and teachers, which has decreased the State’s ability to regulate business and will downgrade education. If the public unions are dismantled, many more people will have to leave their careers in public service.

EB: What do you think the effect of this legislation and the protest response will be for other states and the U.S. nationally?

“A big concern is the loss of competent, J: This is an opportunity to examine what pol- intelligent public iticians say versus what they do. My hope is servants that believe that others will wake up and get active in their politics. We can no longer sit by and hope that in making a positive people will be properly informed through the difference in the old media outlets. We have to engage each world.” other in a positive way that nurtures critical thinking. •

APRIL 2011 | 07

UP IN ARMS An outside perspective on the debate over American gun laws

By Kara Williams

The right to bear arms is a right of any U.S. citizen, but the human right to health care is not?

08 | APRIL 2011

G

uns don’t kill people. People kill people. But a gun makes it a lot easier.

The New York Times reports that there are around 30,000 gunshot deaths in the United States annually. And gun deaths are not the only issue. Many more gun-related crimes result in serious injuries, often including injuries to uninvolved bystanders.

Many other countries around the world would consider the mere idea of “the right to bear arms” ludicrous. Australia, the United Kingdom and many countries in the European Union all have extremely strict gun laws. In Australia, these strict laws concerning gun control were even put in place by the conservative party. Many citizens and the governments of these countries would argue that the right to bear arms is an infringement of other people’s rights to a safe, non-threatening livelihood.

The U.S. is the only Western industrialized nation that has such loose restrictions on gun ownership and operation. But what if the Second Amendment wasn’t a license for citizens to go out and buy an assortment of arms of their choice, but a right that could be exercised in extreme cases of self defense?

The social and historical context surrounding the authorship of this Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is vitally important to this debate. The Second Amendment states that, “a well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” The interpretation of this amendment has traditionally divided liberals and conservatives, with liberals literally interpreting the amendment to mean that the state can maintain an armed militia, and conservatives interpreting the amendment as an individual’s right to defend their private property.

Gun rights advocates also tend to oppose restrictions on buying and carrying a gun as an impediment of individual rights.

They tend to cite self defense, the right to protect property and hunting as legitimate reasons for gun ownership.

However, these individual rights should

only extend to the point that they don’t infringe on the safety and individual rights of other members of society. Additionally, the conservative interpretation leads to an interesting dichotomy: the right to bear arms is a right of any U.S. citizen, but the human right to health care (as outlined in Article 25 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights) is not a universal right for U.S. citizens. That seems a bit strange.

One of the most reasonable points in the debate about gun control is that fewer guns equates to fewer shootings. In the U.S., guns are associated with the majority of homicides and suicides. The mere availability of firearms leads to an increase in gun-related crime. Obviously, tighter gun control laws will not make the guns currently circulating in the states instantly vaporize into thin air, but they will decrease the overall accessibility of guns and thus decrease the risk of both intentional and accidental gun violence. The claim that lawbreakers do not register their weapons is almost irrelevant because restricting availability of guns by law also reduces accessibility. However, stricter laws to track gun ownership would ensure that if a crime is committed, the gun can be better traced by law enforcement officials. This upholds citizens’ rights.

To answer another common argument against tighter gun laws: yes, knives can kill people too. But you have to be in incredibly close proximity to someone to stab them, whereas almost anyone can use a gun to kill someone from a much greater distance.

Guns are made to kill, whether it be hunting a deer or shooting a person.

In North Carolina, we’ve recently been asking the question ‘do guns have a place on a college campuses in United States?’

The easy and obvious answer is no.

Yet with 15 other states debating whether to allow concealed weapons on college campuses, it is clear that some cannot see this obvious truth.

Marc Seelinger, co-president of the Tar Heel Rifle and Pistol Club, argues that “gun control laws do not work” and that “simply knowing that a student is armed will be

enough of a deterrent to potential criminals.”

Seelinger outlines that there have been cases where guns held by bystanders or “victims” have been used to alleviate criminal acts. But these instances are few and far between, and the potential for accidents is huge. Additionally, reducing gun accessibility would decrease the incidence of the original crime being perpetrated with a gun. Moreover, it is far more likely that any potential criminal on campus would be looking to steal a laptop, a cell phone or the latest Apple technological innovation (as demonstrated recently in Morrison Residence Hall) – hardly an act that warrants the use of deadly force.

Seelinger asserts that enforcing gun control on college campuses would result in “a situation where all of the bad people have guns, while all the good people have none.” But how do we know who the bad guys are?

Take the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre, which resulted in 32 student deaths, numerous injuries and the suicide of SeungHui Cho. Students being armed would not have prevented this incident. In fact, more accidents involving gun deaths and injuries may have occurred. In chaotic, frantic situations with so many people hypothetically armed, the potential for error and misjudging the identity of the shooter would be huge. And attackers who are suicidal are hardly going to be deterred by a potential threat to their life.

Guns do not have a place on college campuses. Arming students will not make college campuses safer; it will make campuses more dangerous and prone to serious gun-related accidents.

For example, binge drinking is a phenomenon not limited to, but often prevalent on college campuses. What happens when your roommate comes home drunk and decides to show off his or her gun(s)? Clearly, this is high-risk behavior with potentially catastrophic consequences – all of which could be avoided by enforcing strict gun control on campuses. If even one life is spared by enforcing strict gun control, isn’t

that worth it? Surely the only humane answer is yes.

Furthermore, colleges and universities have a duty to protect their students. Arming the entire student population is hardly going to achieve this as gun owners would then be accountable only to themselves, which is ridiculous considering the collective student bodies of university campuses.

Even if the Second Amendment had general value in U.S. society, the rights of students to a safe learning environment takes precedence over the individual’s right to carry a gun.

Additionally, academic debate over controversial issues can hardly flourish in a “room full of guns.” The whole idea behind the University is to challenge conventional thought and for both students and teachers to be able to express their views freely, without the threat of having a gun pulled on them simply because someone else in the classroom didn’t like what they said. In this way, universities can lead by example to encourage students to think about solving disagreements and conflicts in a respectful, non-violent way – not only within the classroom, but as a learning tool for their future careers and lives in general.

A gun does not guarantee your safety in the community or on campus, and in most cases, it will not protect you from a criminal act. Just because the Second Amendment justifies the right to bear arms doesn’t mean that this is appropriate for college campuses where student safety will be compromised.

Guns don’t solve problems. People do.

Universities have a role to play in discouraging the possession and use of guns to settle disputes and, instead, encouraging peaceful resolutions.

For more information about gun control on college campuses nationwide, check out this website:

Academic debate over controversial issues can hardly flourish in a “room full of guns.”

www.keepgunsoffcampus.org •

APRIL 2011 | 09

A LOOK AHEAD DECISION 2012 Have Expressed Interest

A poll released by Public Policy Polling on March 16 has Barack Obama leading all major Republican candidates in a head to head general election matchup. Obama’s closest head to head competitors are Mitt Romney, who trails Obama 47-42 %, and Huckabee, who trails 48-43 %.

donald trump There has been media speculation that he could run for president. Has made news by saying he does not believe Obama’s birth certificate.

Speculative Candidates PHOTO: GAGE SKIDMORE

Tim Pawlenty

SARAH PALIN

MIKE huckabee

Former governor of Minnesota from 2003 to 2011, Pawlenty has already formed an exploratory committee, the first step in a presidential run.

Former Alaska governor and John McCain’s running mate. Widespread media speculation that she will run, however, she has not given a definitive statement.

Former governor of Arkansas from 1996 to 2007. Ran in 2008, has remained on the national stage with a Fox News TV show. Has been listed as a possible candidate in early polls.

NEWT GINGRICH

Herman CAIN

mitt romney

RON PAUL/rAnD paul

Former Speaker of the House, who led the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994. Says he is “testing the waters” of a presidential run.

Host of “The Hermain Cain Show” on Atlanta’s WSB 750 AM/ 95.5 FM. Like Pawlenty, he has formed an exploratory committee.

Has not made any official announcements, but ran in 2008 and has appeared in most early polls far. **Widely expected to run according to the Washington Post.

Ron Paul is a Texas congressman who ran in 2008, and has appeared in some early polls. An article in the Washington Post claims his son Rand, a Kentucky Senator popular with the Tea Party, would be heavily tempted to run if his father doesn’t.

hayler barbour

gary johnson

mitch daniels

michele bachmann

Governor of Mississippi, hasn’t officially declared, but has set an April deadline for himself to make a decision on whether or not to run.

Governor of New Mexico from 1995 to 2003. Will formally announce his candidacy on April 21st according to Politico.

Governor of Indiana. Says he is not running for President but has signed a deal to release a book in September. Releasing a book is commonly seen as a precursor to running for President.

Minnesota congresswoman, and potential dark horse candidate who is popular with the Tea Party. As of March 30th, she hasn’t made up her mind.

By Brandon Wiggins

PHOTO: GAGE SKIDMORE

10 | APRIL 2011

**Editor’s Note: As of 04/12, Romney has formed an exploratory committee.

APRIL 2011 | 11

By Sarah-June Benjamin This is an edited transcription of a speech undergraduate Sarah-June Benjamin was selected to deliver at the UNC English Department’s SOUL conference of undergraduate literature. This speech comes from a larger body of work that Benjamin has pursued in her undergraduate career concerning the representation of black women in feminist literature.

PHOTO: TYLER TRAN

B

12 | APRIL 2011

efore I begin I would like to take a quick moment to acknowledge my beautiful mother and the women who inspired me to write this speech: my three courageous sisters, my closest colleagues, and my inspiring professor, friend, and mentor Dr. Mae Gwendolyn Henderson.

In February, the University participated in the widely celebrated V-day movement by performing Eve Ensler’s episodic plays, The Vagina Monologues. Ensler began writing her piece as a way to celebrate the female body in the same fashion of women in the seventies who felt the need to reclaim the “Vagina” or as Richard Dyer explains in his work Heavenly Bodies, to “attempt to claim a part of women's bodies for women's own consciousness, to wrest it from its definition as a function of male sexuality.” The purpose of this presentation today is to examine whether Ensler accomplishes this resolution for black women in her monologues.

While reading The Vagina Monologues I kept wondering why, while I was moved by the

piece, I wasn’t having the same cathartic response as other girls in my class. I kept waiting to read the monologue which I could associate with the most, yet sadly I was finally met with the disappointing phrase: Southern woman of color. This is the term Ensler uses to describe the only presumably American black woman’s account of violation and oppression within her monologues. I say presumably because what is a Southern woman of color? Is she black, Hispanic, African-American, African?

It was during this moment of disappointment that brought me to my thesis: The sexual oppression of black women cannot be fully represented without the incorporation of factors that shape and reflect that identity such as race and class.

While I am a black woman whose interest is invested in the representation of other black women, I would like to point out what Barbara Smith relates in her piece “Racism and Women’s Studies”: that white women should understand that “racism affects your chances for survival, too, and that it is definitely your APRIL 2011 | 13

The Woman in the Monoglogue By sarah-june benjamin

issue.” In reflection of Smith’s words I would like to stress that the goal of feminism is total emancipation.

Today, I’m going to use supported research like Smith’s work to illustrate three main ideas within the framework of my own monologue.

I have created this monologue in an attempt to stress the importance of these ideas:

1) Ensler follows in a tradition of white

feminists before her that treats elements such as race and class as secondary to the oppression a black woman experiences

2) To depict the duality in the identity of

“black woman” that illustrates why a mutual examination of both race and gender must be used to discuss the sexual oppression black women have endured

3) Using the groundwork of black feminist pioneers such as Barbara Smith and professor of women’s studies Phyllis Palmer, to explain why this flattened representation of black women is an impediment to the goal of feminism

After presenting to you my conclusion of this research I will present to you my own constructed Vagina Monologue.

Race: The Missing Element To begin this discourse we can examine how Ensler fails to incorporate the element of race when discussing the female oppression of a black woman. I will discuss this in the context of the monologues I have created. Within my monologue, which I have titled “My Second Vagina,” the woman in the monologue believes she has a primary and secondary vagina. Her primary vagina is representative of her gender and the oppression associated with being a female. This vagina has the general physical attributes of most vaginas: labia, pink inside, clitoris and hair. These generalized attributes are reflective of the way women can be represented in a collective manner. This vagina mimics the way Ensler describes the oppression of women in The Vagina Monologues because there is no race or class distinction in the physical representation of her first vagina.

To further clarify the importance of incorporating race and class I will explain the ways in which Ensler fails to do so and why this exclu14 | APRIL 2011

sion cannot fully represent black women. Ensler illustrates a flattened representation of black women’s experience within her monologues. The absence of the discussion on race is exemplified with the supposedly “woman of color” represented in Ensler’s monologue “The Little Coochie Snorcher That Could.” Within the monologue the woman neither alludes to nor gives specified experiences concerning her race, culture, or class that are central to the discussion of feminism. Even the term “woman of color” glosses over and flattens out the experience of a black woman by denying her a specified identity.

While Ensler’s approach does create the effect that most women will be able to relate to the experiences depicted in The Vagina Monologues, it also cannot portray the struggle of black women and the sexual violence and oppression associated with that identity. The problem is that for black women, the issues surrounding being black cannot be separated from the issues surrounding being a woman.

Just as Ensler points out that women are constantly aware of their vagina, black women are constantly just as aware of the blackness of it. This awareness evinces the notion that black women carry a “double consciousness” of their identity.

The “Black Woman”: Twoness To illustrate why black women and their experiences cannot be fully represented without the incorporation of factors such as race and class, we must first examine the duality created within the identity of “black woman” caused by those same factors.

Within my monologue “My Second Vagina,” the young woman, as you may expect, has a second vagina. Her second vagina is distinguished by her race in both her experiences as well as her physical attributes. Her second vagina has coarse hair and dark plump lips which serve as a representation of the black female. The personified testimony of this black vagina demonstrates the difference in the plight of being a female and being a black female. For example, the black vagina attests that her degradation does not result from the loss of the “cult of true womanhood,” but because she was never considered to have been a part of this cult.

The imaginary belief this young woman has that she actually has two vaginas is reflective

of the duality associated with the identity of being black and being woman. Her imaginary creation of a “second vagina” is representative of the “double-consciousness” a black woman carries as part of her identity. This notion of a “double-consciousness” is a re-voicing and revising of what W. E. B. DuBois applies to black men in his classic The Souls of Black Folk. DuBois asserts that “one ever feels his twoness,An American, a Negro; two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings; two warring ideals in one dark body, whose dogged strength alone keeps it from being torn asunder.”

While DuBois attests that the black man feels a constant “twoness” as citizen and as black man, it can be asserted that black women also experience a “twoness” or two struggling and oppressed ideals in the same being: black and female. This duality is important to consider when exploring sexual violence and oppression committed against black women. For a black woman, crimes committed against her race and her gender must both be mutually examined and represented to understand the violation of her “one dark body.”

To further expand upon this concept, the young woman in my monologue projects that “warring” twoness within her. This projection is split between what her health teacher tells her a woman’s vagina should look like--usually taught to us in the characteristics of a white woman’s vagina--and the difference in what she sees. By the end of the monologue, we see a resolution between those two ideals.

Keeping in mind that this woman does have a second vagina that represents the “black” part of her dual identity, I would now like to explain to you the social and literary importance of representing black women in a specified way in feminist literature.

Ain’t I a Woman?

Within my monologue the woman’s second vagina gives her own soliloquy. In this included text, the young woman’s second vagina voices her anger with being de-feminized and associated as a man. In her soliloquy the “second vagina” recreates and readdresses Sojourner Truth’s famous speech “Ain’t I a Woman” to white women instead of white men.

Sojourner Truth originally gave this speech in order to demonstrate that women in general are the equals of men, claiming: “Look at me! Look at my arm! I have plowed,

and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could head me—and ain’t I a woman? I could work as much as any man (when I could get it), and bear de lash as well—and ain’t I a woman? I have borne five children and I seen ‘em mos all sold off into slavery, and when I cried out with a mother’s grief, none but Jesus hear—and ain’t I a woman?”

Using the last part of Sojourner’s speech, I have recreated a monologue within the monologue that addresses white feminists who have used strong black women such as Sojourner as symbols to advance the cause of feminism yet continue to ignore the specific material needs and concerns of black women such as “reform of the welfare system, increase in Aid to Family with Dependent Care, increase in job training programs, and development of work-related child care.”

In order to better understand and visualize the anomaly of white feminists who “use” the image of the “strong black female” to support the cause of feminism, we can examine an example in which Sojourner Truth herself is symbolically used to support a feminist cause and yet was still barred from the same recognition that other feminists have received.

Feminist Judy Chicago has been criticized by African American feminists for appropriating Sojourner Truth as a symbol of feminism while, in effect, de-feminizing the black female body. In the main component of her arts project, “The Dinner Party,” Chicago seeks to commemorate decades of women who have contributed both directly and indirectly to the development of feminism by creating plates in the shapes of vulvas that are specifically inspired by her “Guests of Honor.” Surprisingly, however, as the only black woman invited to the place setting Sojourner Truth’s plate is one of the few not modeled after the vulvar image.

In her work “Guess Who’s Not Coming to Dinner: A Feminist Reconsideration of “The Dinner Party”’ feminist Carolyn Gage explains: “This refusal to ascribe a vulva design to Sojourner Truth has been read as a racist denial of, or discomfort with, the African American woman's sexuality, a flip-side—or perhaps overreaction—to the traditional stereotype of Black women as oversexed.” She further points out, citing Toni Morrison’s Playing in the Dark, that what Judy Chicago’s piece shows is the construction of the artist herself. Continuing, Gage writes, “The absence of women of color APRIL 2011 | 15

The Woman in the Monoglogue By sarah-june benjamin

at the table is more than an unintentional oversight. It is a necessity for a feminist identity that informed and defined the entire guest list. Sojourner Truth's position at that table, according to Morrison's theory, provides the key to understanding the myths, the terrors, the denials, the strengths, the failures of that early feminist movement. The artist's unwillingness to grant, or inability to conceive, a symbolic vulva for a Black woman may be central to an entire definition of Western sexuality, of white women's sexual identity.”

What I find interesting to note about Chicago’s work is that according to the Brooklyn Museum’s (where “The Dinner Party” is permanently showcased) website, Sojourner’s piece has a woman’s breast incorporated in it which is intended to “reference a story in which a male member of the church congregation where Truth was speaking requested that her body be examined, not believing that a woman could be so powerful.” My response to Chicago’s intentions is: what better way to prove a woman is a woman, than by portraying her vagina?

In my monologue, I give both voice and image to the re-feminization of Sojourner Truth’s female body. By making her the inner voice of a young woman whose original construction of sexuality is perhaps a replication of the same ideals that inspired Chicago’s work, I have attempted to re-ascribe and inscribe the vulvar image and the femininity of the black female body in order to restructure what the young woman in my monologue believes to be “woman” as well as what the audience believes to be “feminist.”

To clarify this anomaly of how white women can both support a feminist cause and simultaneously marginalize her black counterpart, we can examine the publication “White Women/Black Women: The Dualism of Female Identity and Experience in the United States,” in which author Phyllis Palmer, a professor of women’s studies and American Studies at George Washington University, relates “the disjunction between white women’s embracing black women as images of strength and pathos while ignoring the special interest and needs of these same black women.” This is based on white women’s ethnocentric ways of approaching female oppression. White feminist often try to look at the oppression of women from a universal standpoint and view all men as “equivalent oppressors.” This as16 | APRIL 2011

sumption proves to be untrue for two reasons; 1) All men are not equivalent oppressors. Black men have been historically emasculated in relation to white men. 2) Most importantly, the oppression of black women cannot be represented solely on this “common feminist ground,” because black women are the inheritors of an oppression derived from both sexism and racism.

The concept of white feminists using the elements of race and class as only secondary to the representation of female oppression is not a new one. Pioneers such as Barbara Smith have laid the groundwork for discourse upon this issue. In her work “Toward a Black Feminist Criticism,” Barbara Smith successfully breaks the silence engulfing the discourse between black women and black lesbian writers in relation to feminist literature. Within her exploration of this discourse she not only addresses that in fact black women writers are feminist writers (i.e. Alice Walker) but also that “Black women’s existence, experience, and culture” remain beneath and invisible to the “white/and or male consciousness.” This statement explains why the exclusion of a racially specific monologue within the Vagina Monologues is a necessity. As long as the fully-realized experience of black women remains “invisible” the goal of feminism (as Smith claims), “to free all women,” cannot be reached. Smith offers the resolution by suggesting that white women step outside of their comfort zones and embrace the struggle their “sisters” endure. Smith demands instead of white feminists using the struggles of black women to promote their cause, they must work for total emancipation for all women.

While I personally believe that Ensler’s work does accomplish the greater task at hand, which is to make a large impact on the fight against physical and sexual violence committed against all women, I would like to restress Smith’s point that as women we cannot reach the goal of feminism unless we are all equally waiting at the finish line.

With this in mind, I would like to depart from my research by stating:

“I am black, I am woman.

Here is my monologue:

I

always wanted to see it. Some say it’s ugly and others swear it’s beautiful, but no one will tell you what it really looks like. So I had to see for myself. I wanted to see what makes me woman. So one afternoon, when my mother was still at work and my sister left me alone to talk to Bobby Fletcher down the street, I looked.

There I was, legs spread as wide as they could with my knees pulled up to my chest in front of my mother’s big oak mirror. And there it was: pink, labia, clitoris, hair, vagina. All the parts my health teacher told me to look for and there they were. It didn’t look like beautiful “flower petals” to me, more like a monstrous mass of pink folded skin all used to protect one tiny little opening. And man were there layers!! I mean layers upon layers upon layers—too many in fact. I started to count the outer and inner labia to make sure I wasn’t seeing things. And that’s when I saw it.

Suddenly as I was peeling back my inner labia, an entire new vagina showed itself. I had to blink and blink and blink again before I finally forced myself to stare in silence. My second vagina looked quite different from my first— way different. In fact it looked more like me. The hair was coarse, the lips full and plump, and the color was a purpley brown all over—like chocolate raspberries.

Even though I stared in gaping silence, to my great surprise and utter bewilderment, my second vagina had a lot to say! Somewhere from deep inside of her darkness a voice called out to me. In a strong historical voice she told me her name was Truth and that she was the other part of me. When I asked her why her name was Truth she told me because just like truth no matter how much someone would beat her down and try to break her in, you always have to look Truth in the face when you’re done lying to yourself.

After looking at her several times and then looking back at myself in the mirror again I fi-

nally realized that I wasn’t lost in some lala land of imagination.

“What are you?” I said.

“A vagina of course,” she replied.

“No you can’t be, I already have a vagina,” I said while pointing to my pink most outer lips.

“Guuhhh,” she gasped and then said sarcastically in a white southern belle accent, “Oh! Mercy me, how could I ever have two vaginas.

I mean poor lil ole me, two vaginas, good heavens!”

Peeved as ever at her mocking me I became more direct with my accusations of her falsity: “You CAN’T be my vagina, women don’t have two vaginas!”

“Black women do,” she replied.

“Whaaaa!! That’s not true, besides even if they could you still couldn’t be my vagina; you’re so dark, so coarse….so…so…like a man!!!”

There. I said it. I didn’t really mean it, in fact she was quite beautiful. The darkness of her flesh was intriguing and her two plump lips looked like a ripe plum split in two. But still, she didn’t remind me of the usual descriptions of a vagina, she didn’t look like a tulip or smell like roses. In fact she smelled more like a Sunday afternoon. And the way she made me feel …it was like when Daddy brings flowers home for Mom and the whole room, that one room, feels lit up for the rest of the evening. That’s what my second vagina was like, not so feminine, more “womanly.”

But it was too late, the words “like a man!” had escaped my lips and with a fury that only a woman, no, a black woman, could possess she bellowed out from her innermost darkness: “You say I’m not a woman because I’m not pink and light and flowery?!!! Because I’m not dainty and my hair runs wild and natural? Because I don’t fit into your cult of true womanhood? Let me show you what a true woman is! Look at me! I’m just as beautiful as any APRIL 2011 | 17

The Woman in the Monoglogue By sarah-june benjamin

other, I’m dark and mysterious, ripe and fertile— and ain’t I a woman? I’m just as strong as any woman, I can give life and suffer the pains of labor to bring a beautiful child into this world— and ain’t I a woman? I come from a line of women who have been raped, beaten, and enslaved, and still had to watch their babies ripped from their arms and sold off like chattel. And when they cried out with a mother’s grief, no one but God heard— AND AIN’T I A WOMAN!!!”

While she was speaking I felt an orgasmic shiver crawl through my body. As if she had spoken words deep within me that I had longed to shout out to the world my whole life, that every black woman has longed to shout out to those who forget that her sufferings come from both a racial and sexual degradation. I wanted to shout those words “Ain’t I a Woman” to every girl who has gotten an A in class because my teacher thought her lily white skin equaled intelligence, to the white women who get fancy lawyers and lots of money when they get “sexually harassed”

while my sister sat at home bleeding in the bathtub when a cop told her it was “mutual.”

And I wanted to shout this out to all the black girls I ever met—to remind them that we are both: black and woman. And I wanted to shout this out to every white girl I ever met— to remind them that we are both: black and woman. So when they see our suffering they won’t leave us behind as they progress, so they won’t turn the other cheek when the ugly monster Racism is chewing us up and spitting us out.

As that orgasmic shiver crawled through my body it finally was released in a soft relieving moan that left me feeling winded. When I looked back up in the mirror I realized I was crying. I looked back down and saw only one vagina, one dark vagina. It was then that I realized I had only seen at first what my health teacher wanted me to see: pink, labia, clitoris, hair, vagina. I never saw her darkness, only the woman. And now I see her for what she is, for what I am: a Black woman.

Introduction to Songs to the Dark Virgin

T

his second monologue demonstrates how the sexual oppression of black women is interwoven with race. This monologue draws its influence from Langston Hughes’ poem Songs to the Dark Virgin, which has been composed and sung by Florence B. Price. Hughes’ poem offers a beautiful and contrasting deflowering of a black woman to the historical violent taking of black female virginity. In my monologue, the black woman is reflecting on her suffering from being raped by a white man. The woman’s focus is on the racial degradation that stems from the rape. It is not until she hears Florence Price singing Songs to the Dark Virgin that she realizes that she has been robbed of her womanhood and that the crime committed against her was just as sexually violating as it was racially degrading. From this realization she proceeds to cut off her hair because she feels her hair is representative of both her gender and race.

As a black woman I would like to clearly assert that these monologues do not represent all black women. My creation of these monologues is simply a step in the direction to represent the oppression of women in a more

18 | APRIL 2011

specified approach. My hope is that more dialogue concerning race and class specified accounts of oppression will surface. These monologues represent specific experiences of women in my family, neighbors, and black women who have shared their personal narratives with me. Through collected interviews as well as past memories of “girl talk” I have created two monologues that provide a discourse on common experiences and reactions between black women that I know.

The particular scene where the woman cuts her hair in my monologue Songs to the Dark Virgin derives from an interview of a family friend who had been raped by a white man.

When I asked her what she did after he had raped her she replied, “I cut off all my hair, my beautiful black woman hair.” She had felt that her rape signified a desecration of both her black and female identity and she could no longer stand to look at her hair which she felt embodied that now ruined identity. The significance of the effects of her rape is that black women can feel the effects of both sexual and racial degradation in one act of violence.

I

remember my hair Dark, thick, curly— it would always bounce as I walked It was my pride and joy, the main symbol of my womanhood It had taken me five years to grow it out since I went natural, but it was almost waist length by then Alex always liked it He used to say that my hair was what attracted him to me while he twirled his fingers in my curls I remember when I first met him Tall, pale, and bound for all the success and opportunities America lays out for a white man He took me to a garden shop the day he proposed He bought me this oak sapling to plant in my yard, he said that the little sapling represented his love for me and when we were married and were building our lives together our oak tree would be growing alongside our family.

I remember feeling so overjoyed. Feeling that despite the prejudice of others we would dismiss the stigmas associated with our “amalgamation.” I thought that with this oak sapling we would start a new generation that dispelled the legacy of racial hatred behind us.

But then I remember the night he raped me He told me now that we were engaged I was his property That he owned me, he owned me, even before God did That I was going to give him my virginity not on our wedding day but on the day he demanded it And that day had arrived I remember the next day cutting up that oak sapling This white man had told me he owned me, he owned me Owned me? The way his forefathers owned my great grandmothers?

I started cutting through the veins of that oak sapling and I remember that each vein started from a thick one that branched off into neat parallel lines I remember that I thought if I cut through those veins the way he cut through mines He and I would never carry on the legacy of racial degradation that we were descendent of I wondered why he had given me an oak It was a tree that marked a place where slaves learned to read, branches from which they were hung for doing so and leaves that shaded the grounds and roots that marked the graves where they were buried I remember cutting through all those veins on that oak, trying to prevent it from ever growing, to nip the legacy before it cultivated And then I remember Florence B. Price singing on an old record She was singing that Langston Hughes Poem: Songs to the Dark Virgin I wished someone was singing me that song But virginity is like a bubble, one prick and it’s all gone I remember realizing something when she sung that song Something about my virginity and that it was now taken, stolen I remember remembering that I was a woman That he had not just objectified me as a black, but he had also desecrated my womanhood And then I remembered my hair Dark, thick, curly—it would always bounce as I walked And I wanted it to stop bouncing, There was nothing for it to be happy about, No pride or joy for it to show And I cut my hair, my beautiful black woman hair. • APRIL 2011 | 19

PHOTOS BY CHELSEA PHIPPS

A LETTER FROM ISTANBUL

By Kelly Yahner

“

Istanbul? Is that in Egypt?”

“Will you have to travel by camel?”

“Are you going to be living in a tent?”

Prior to departing for a semester abroad in Istanbul, the myriad of questions I faced from fellow Americans, while misinformed, were eye-opening experiences in themselves. There were those who had no idea where Istanbul was, those who had no idea it was the third largest city in the world and those who put a little too much faith in my love of the outdoors.

There were also those who seemed to think Turkey is a backward, underdeveloped, extremist-controlled nation. And, to those people, here is my answer:

Just once, I want to feel like a fish out of water here for not publicly displaying my religion. But nope, not in Turkey.

20 | APRIL 2011

Wow, yes, studying in Istanbul is totally awful. My three-day school week is just so full of breathtaking views of the Bosphorus, where I am forced to look across and see Asia. I really just hate being so close to the continental divide. What’s worse? Baklava is 75 cents and virtually on every street corner. Like most people, I absolutely can’t stand delicious desserts.

You see, when I decided to study abroad in Istanbul, I thought I’d be getting the real Turkish experience many of you conceive of: living in a straw hut (or a tent, if I was unlucky), tending to sheep and other livestock and riding my family’s pet camel to school everyday.

Now, I’m unavoidably stuck with boring (old) Aya Sofya, Blue Mosque and (yawn) Topkapı Palace. Yawn.

That’s not even the worst part, though. The Turkish people are entirely welcoming, hospitable to a fault, even. How can they be so nice all the time?! I’m simply dying to get dirty looks for my obviously non-Turkish heritage and inability to string together an entire sentence in Turkish. Just once, I want to hear the words “stupid American” spill from the lips of a Turk rather than the typical, “You look lost.

Can I help you?” Just once, I want to have to trudge through some dirty Turkish street, rather than the immaculate ones through which

I forage on a daily basis. This whole “cleanliness as a part of honor” thing is really cramping my style.

Still worse is the religious situation in Turkey (“Wait…aren’t they Muslim there? How will you adjust to wearing the burqa?” you all have asked). I mean, barely hearing the call to prayer is just awful enough, but sometimes seeing people quietly go and practice their religion? Totally unacceptable. Really, no one in the U.S. is so public about their religion...not at sporting events...inaugurations...or our pledge of allegiance. It’s times like these where I really miss the Pit Preacher telling me I’m going to hell for my religious beliefs and believing in the separation of church and state. Just once, I want to feel like a fish out of water here for not publicly displaying my religion. But nope, not in Turkey.

The absolute worst part of Turkey is their approach to life. The concept of hurrying anywhere has no part in Turkish society. Instead, “Turkish time” reigns supreme, meaning you show up somewhere whenever you want without fearing the consequences of being tardy. Not only are the Turkish on their own time, they actually use that time to stop and enjoy their lives and--let me tell you--I am sick and tired of stopping to smell the proverbial roses. Just once, I want the Turkish to realize that all of those proverbial roses smell exactly the same. Just once, I would like to have a Turkish student on a bike run me over while trying to make it to class on time, something I get to thoroughly enjoy on a regular basis at UNC. I guess when you add it all up, I’m really just craving all that is America. I crave our polluted cities, our overpriced desserts, our unwelcoming nature to foreigners, our overall sense of tolerance for all (read: some) people of all (read: some) beliefs and backgrounds and our refusal to put our busy lives on pause for a few minutes to just enjoy them. I even crave hearing good music from such musical sensations as Rebecca Black and Justin Bieber. Turkey has so much to learn from America. • APRIL 2011 | 21

undermine the science, because lots of studies showed, and they did market research to support this, that if people thought the science was unsettled, then people would think it would be premature for the government to regulate the product. So the whole strategy was to challenge the science in order to avoid regulation.

Interview with

Dr. Naomi Oreskes

SB: In your book you quote one tobacco executive saying, “Doubt is our product.” What are the implications for the role that science plays in our democracy?

One of the world’s leading historians of science PHOTO: SAGE ROSS

Dr. O: That’s part of the whole point of the

By Stewart Boss

D

r. Naomi Oreskes, Professor of History and Science Studies at UC San Diego, is one of the world’s leading historians of science. Her research focuses on consensus and dissent in science, highlighting the disconnect between the state of scientific debate and the way it is presented in mass media and perceived by the American people.

Her 2004 essay “The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change” was a landmark in the public debate on global warming. In their new book, Merchants of Doubt, Oreskes and fellow historian Erik Conway explain how a loose–knit group of high-level scientists with extensive political connections have run effective campaigns to mislead the public and deny well-established scientific knowledge over the past four decades. Addressing the dangers posed by tobacco, DDT, the ozone hole, acid rain and global warming, Oreskes uncovers a dark corner of the American scientific community that has skewed public understanding of some of the most pressing issues of our era.

Before delivering the Michael Polanyi Lecture in the History and Philosophy of Natural Science at UNC on March 30, Campus BluePrint writer Stewart Boss sat down with Oreskes to discuss her new book and the significance of scientists who manufacture doubt to manipulate American politics.

SB: How are the dangers of tobacco, DDT, the ozone hole, acid rain and global climate 22 | APRIL 2011

change all related? How did this group of dissenting scientists evolve into what it is today?

Dr. O: Well that was, in a way, the question we posed when we first discovered this. We thought it seemed in a way strange because on the face of it these are really different issues, especially like tobacco versus global warming – totally different science, totally different scientific expertise that you would need to be able to understand these issues.

What we came to understand through the research was that it was really about regulation and the role of government. In every single case, the issue at stake was really whether or not the government should intervene to regulate dangerous products. In each case, these people thought the answer to that question was “no,” that if we allowed government to intervene then it would lead to expansion of tyrannical and oppressive government, and therefore they opposed regulation.

But they didn’t just honestly oppose regulation and say, “Look, I’m worried about encroachment of the government on my personal rights.” Instead, they shifted the issue to the science, to say we really don’t know about the science, because what they knew and what they had learned through the tobacco industry was that the most effective way to avoid regulation was not to fight it head-on and say, “No, we don’t want to be regulated.” The most effective way was to

book, is to help people understand that. So the strategy was a conscious and deliberate strategy to sow doubt in order to make people think that we didn’t really know for sure and therefore it would be inappropriate for the government to regulate the product. And that’s the strategy that they use over and over again. So it’s really important for the public to understand this, to know that if you hear somebody saying, “Oh, well, we don’t really know, the science is not really settled, there’s a lot of questions about it,” then a little antenna should go up that this might be a doubtmongering campaign designed to undermine the science to avoid action.

SB: Who are the major players right now in this effort to deny scientific consensus?

Dr. O: In the book, we were trying to track the whole denial campaign to its origins, and we tracked a very significant part of the campaign to this one particular think tank, the George C. Marshall Institute, which was founded by three physicists in 1984: Robert Jastrow, William Nierenberg and Frederick Seitz. They created the Marshall Institute originally to defend “Star Wars,” the Strategic Defense Initiative, but then moved into these other areas. And of course, that was part of the story too — why would people who believed in a strong defense as part of the Cold War defense against the Soviet Union, why would those people become anti-environmentalists?

And so the answer to that question is that when the Cold War ended, they had to find a new enemy, and the new enemy were the “reds under the bed,” and those “reds” were environmentalists, who they saw as “watermelons” — green on the outside, red on the inside — and they thought that environmentalism was a kind of slippery slope to socialism that would lead to increasing gov-

ernment encroachment. And these are men, you have to realize, who have dedicated their whole lives to fighting the Cold War. These men were already in their 70s by the time this took place, and previous to that they had worked on all kinds of different Cold War weapons and rocketry and space programs.

So their whole life meaning is really tied up in fighting this Soviet threat and preserving Western democracy, and they can’t give that up, even after the Soviet Union is gone.

SB: Many politicians were firmly committed to seeing climate and energy legislation passed in the 111th Congress, but the failure to realize that goal in 2010 seems to have dissolved support for serious action on climate change. Did the environmental movement underestimate its opposition? In your opinion, what went wrong?

Dr. O: Everything. One of the things Bill McKibben said about our book is that it explains the paradox that is the science has gotten stronger, but the opposition has gotten stronger too. But I actually don’t think it’s a paradox, I think it’s actually what we should have expected because so much is at stake. I don’t know if environmentalists were naïve, but I think scientists were really naïve. Scientists thought if they just explained it clearly and they just got politicians to understand what was at stake, then of course politicians would act. They could have taken Political Science 101 and known that wasn’t true.

This is a huge issue, right? The entire economy of the world rests on burning fossil fuels, so we have to take that very seriously and realize there’s going to be enormous opposition. I think we have underestimated the power and the strength of the opposition.

And then combine that with the general inertia of people. This story isn’t just about the fossil fuel industry, although of course they play an important role, but it’s also about all of us, about how none of us want to be told that the way we live is bad, nobody wants to be told, “You’re a bad, evil person because you drive a car.”

We need an exit strategy, we need a plan for what it looks like going forward, and I don’t think we’ve been very effective in that. I think we’ve spent too much time focusing on the science and fighting back against these doubt-mongering campaigns when what we should have just said is: “Look, we know the science. The real question is, what does the energy profile for the future look like, and how do we get there?” •

This story isn’t just about the fossil fuel industry... it’s also about all of us, about how none of us want to be told that the way we live is bad.

APRIL 2011 | 23

Art for Life’s Sake A study of Shakesperean romances

By Erin Becker

A

rt versus life or art as life?

In A Winter’s Tale, Leontes says, “no settled senses of the world can match / The pleasure of that madness” (5.3.72-3). If art is madness and the “settled senses” are reality, does this mean life will never be as pleasing, as beautiful, as it is in music, or in a play? In two of Shakespeare’s romances, The Tempest and A Winter’s Tale, unbelievable plots work as a meditation on the relationship between life and art. Using them as a model for the way art interacts with “real life,” we can begin to see that perhaps the distinction between the two may be less clear than we believe.

Thunderous music & musical dreams On the deserted island of The Tempest, Shakespeare consistently conflates music and the elements. For the island’s inhabitants, as well as the shipwrecked travelers, it is difficult to separate the thunder, wind and rain from the melodies created by Prospero’s “art.” As the travelers pass more time on the island, they begin to describe terms of music more and more often. Ariel calls the earthly world the “instrument” of the travelers: “You are three men of sin, […] / That hath to instrument the lower world” (3.3.53-4). At the end of that same scene, Alonso confuses Ariel’s speech for the sounds of the elements, and describes those sounds as though they are music: “The winds did sing it to me; and the thunder, / That deep and dreadful organ-pipe, pronounc’d the name of Prosper: it did bass my trespass” (3.3.97-9).

It is not just the travelers who merge the world with music and stand in melodic awe at Prospero’s art. Caliban, the island dweller perceived by the other characters as something between a human and a monster, describes an existence surrounded by Prospero’s constructs, where music is woven into the fabric of nature and he doesn’t 24 | APRIL 2011

know what is real and what is artifice. His vivid speech about music and nature is lyrical itself. This is significant for a man who says his only benefit from learning to speak was learning to curse (1.2.365-6). Art is valuable not just to the powerful but also—and perhaps especially—to the lowly. Here is the oft-quoted passage: Be not afeard; the isle is full of noises, Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight, and hurt not.

Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments Will hum about mine ears; and sometime voices, That, if I then had wak’d after long sleep, Will make me sleep again: and then, in dreaming, The clouds methought would open, and show riches Ready to drop upon me; that, when I wak’d I cried to dream again. (3.2.133-141)

The sounds fill the island and mix with the forces of nature in Caliban’s vision of a dream. And it is pleasurable. Caliban prefers the dream world of lulling voices and treasure-filled clouds to the reality of the deserted island and, upon waking, cries for the gratification of the artificial world.

In addition to characterizing one aspect of art on the island, the speech also self-referentially comments on the nature of acting itself. Remember, Shakespeare tells us: this is a play, after all. The striking, sudden lyricism of this character, otherwise mostly crass and ineloquent, heightens our awareness of Caliban as a construct. It suspends our suspension of disbelief just as we are pushed to meditate on the limits of the play itself. Like the Prospero-created music, their artificiality doesn’t diminish the beauty of these lines. It just makes us painfully sentient that, like all performances, it will inevitably end.

Human as statue as human A play may end, but “art” itself may be as eternal as life, or perhaps more so. Shakespeare alludes to the shaky barrier be-

tween art and life as Leontes sees the statue of his wife become his wife in A Winter’s Tale. Paulina introduces him to the scene she has constructed, where Hermione will stand perfectly still on a pedestal while Leontes mourns her death and considers the artistry. She instructs him: […] But here it is; prepare To see the life as lively mocked, as ever Still sleep mocked death: behold, and say ‘tis well.

(5.3.18-20) From a distance, a sleeper appears as one dead; up close, however, the two states have little in common: one sees the rising of the chest, the small movements of the limbs and eyes. By using the verb “mock” and by comparing the relationship of art to life to the relationship between sleep and death, Paulina makes art less than life. Art, here, is “life lite.”

Leontes thinks he is seeing one man’s rendering of his dead wife. Indeed, later in the scene he echoes Paulina, saying the life-like veins mock him with art. Paulina hopes the statue will please him, but puts little stock in the idea that a statue could ever truly mime Hermione’s beauty.

But of course, what Leontes sees is not a statue, but rather his living, breathing wife.

The “perfect” statue would be a perfect rendering of his wife, which would evoke in him the same emotions his wife did. And here, the “statue” is capable of eliciting remorse: I am ashamed: does not the stone rebuke me, For being more stone than it? O royal piece!

There’s magic in thy majesty, which has My evils conjured to remembrance, and From thy admiring daughter took the spirits, Standing like stone with thee.

It is only through personifying what he believes is art that he can apprehend it.

And in mind-bending fashion, here the personified art is, in fact, a person. It “rebukes” him; he feels it is more alive and emotional than he is. Of course, soon after this description, Hermione will in fact step down from the pedestal and reveal herself as a not art but human. Paralleling its importance in The Tempest, it is music that wakes Hermione from her stony pose. In a remarkably complex meditation on the relationship of life to art, we see a play where an actor pretends to be a woman pretending to be a statue, awakened to her husband by music another character cues. Art and life, if not one and the same, are inseparably intertwined.

Reality and fantasy: a porous border This questions the implications of human creative activity. What does it mean for Caliban to live in a world where he doesn’t know what is real and what is constructed?

How dangerous is a human mind that can create a reality from emotion and believe its own creation against the advice of all others? (See Othello.) Is art intrinsically better than nature, intrinsically worse, or something in between? The artificiality of Shakespeare’s romances enables them to explore these ideas. As Prospero destroys his books at the end of The Tempest, we know it is the right thing for him to do, but we are still—at some visceral level of curious fascination— a little sad to see the magic end. •

A play may end, but “art” itself may be as eternal as life, or perhaps more so.

(5.3.37-42) Written under the direction of Dr. Edward Clarke, Saint Catherine’s College, Oxford University

APRIL 2011 | 25

Aftermath of Japan’s

Radioactive Leak Potassium iodide pills not necessary in the U.S.

By Luda Shtessel

Even though Japan itself directs that only people residing close to the nuclear reactor should take KI tablets, Americans insist on ingesting them for a false sense of security.

26 | APRIL 2011

T

he radioactive isotopes spewing out of Japan’s damaged nuclear reactors present a grave scenario for the residents of Fukushima and the surrounding prefectures. These isotopes, atoms with the same number of protons but different numbers of neutrons (i.e., cesium-134 and cesium-136) pose a health risk in two ways.

Decay of the nuclear fuel source releases particles into the immediate vicinity, collectively known as ionizing radiation, particles that can penetrate human tissues and directly damage DNA. Additionally, some of these radioactive isotopes, such as iodine-131 and cesium-137, are watersoluble and can be incorporated into the human body. Their incorporation can result in prolonged exposure for the individuals affected and the spread of the radioactive isotopes to other geographical areas.

The Japan Times reported that between March 18 and March 19, residents living within 100 km of the Fukushima Daiichi plant were exposed to about 500 microsieverts (µSv) in one day, or about 1/7th the yearly amount Americans are exposed to from natural sources of radiation. However, American radiation workers are permitted to be exposed to 50 times more radiation than the general public, and the lowest radiation dose linked to elevated cancer incidence is twice that. Tokyo residents, who live about 300 km away from the plant, ex-

perienced 0.6 µSv between March 18 and 19, which is less than the American yearly average if residents continue to be exposed to similar levels for one year. The lower exposure levels in Tokyo indicate that radiation levels are dissipating relatively quickly as the radioactivity moves away from the Daiichi nuclear reactor site.

The radioactivity released from the plant has contaminated milk, spinach and water, prompting a halt to their distribution from Fukushima and the surrounding prefectures to the rest of the country. As reported in the Japan Times, Chief Cabinet Secretary Yukio Edano revealed that the radioactive iodine levels found in milk were five times the federal limit and seven times the limit in spinach. Despite these levels, he explained that average yearly Japanese milk consumption would expose residents to a radiation dose equivalent to only one CT scan, a multi-dimensional X-ray scan that is received by about 70 million Americans annually. Additionally, eating spinach daily for a year would result in the absorption of a radiation dose 1/5th of a CT scan. While the radioactive isotope cesium-137 was barely elevated over the federal limit in spinach, its 30-year half-life makes it a long-term hazard.

Even though the radioactive isotope iodine-131 has a half-life of only 8 days, which means half of the remaining iodine decays

away about once a week, it threatens the health of children because their thyroids actively take up and incorporate the radioactive iodine. After the explosion of a nuclear plant in Chernobyl in 1986, there was a severe rise in thyroid cancer incidence, where about 6,800 people under 18 years of age at the time of the accident were later diagnosed. Currently, the Japanese government is urging infants within a 30 km radius of the Daiichi plant, as well as anyone that has been exposed to over 100 mSv—about 20 times the EPA’s recommended yearly cap for the general American public, to take potassium iodide(KI) tablets. Potassium iodide is incorporated by the thyroid, which saturates the thyroid with iodine. The need for more iodine is negated, preventing the subsequent incorporation of radioactive iodine-131. Shunichi Yamashita, a professor at Nagasaki University, also maintains that residents further than 20 km away from the nuclear plant have no need for potassium iodide tablets, reports Natsuko Fukue of the Japan Times.

Even though Japan itself instructs that only people residing close to the nuclear reactor should take KI tablets, Americans insist on ingesting them for a false sense of security. MSNBC reported that “all three manufacturers and suppliers of federally approved potassium iodide in the United States sold out of the drug earlier this

week.” The consumer package insert of ThyroShield, a potassium iodide solution, explicitly states to “use only as directed by public officials if a nuclear radiation emergency happens” not once but four times throughout the text. Unnecessarily taking potassium iodide exposes people to a range of side-effects, such as gastrointestinal, skin and salivary gland irritation, and to more severe allergic reactions. In an interview with CNN, Nolan Hertel, a nuclear engineering researcher at the Georgia Institute of Technology, explained that radioactive material is rapidly diluted as it dissipates in the air. “The amount that will reach the United States will be too little to cause health problems,” Hertel said.

North Carolina’s own Troy Jones runs the website www.nukepills.com, which has experienced a spike in the sales of potassium iodide since the start of Japan’s nuclear plant maladies. As for the response to the traces of radioactive elements picked up by air filters in California and Colorado, Elizabeth Landau of CNN retorts that “Americans [are] typically exposed to radiation from natural sources such as the sun, bricks and rocks that are about 100,000 times higher than what has been detected in the United States.” Currently, it appears that donating to Japan relief efforts may be a better investment than purchasing potassium iodide. •

All three manufacturers and suppliers of federally approved potassium iodide in the United States sold out of the drug earlier this week.

APRIL 2011 | 27

POLITICS OF DISASTER

By Troy Homesley

By the end of the century, global losses to due natural disasters will reach $185 billion.

28 | APRIL 2011

O

n the afternoon of March 11, a new wave washed over Japan. With this natural disaster comes a new situation. Japan is the world's third largest economy, an economy that’s key to U.S. foreign relations in East Asia. Japan is also the world's third largest producer of energy and currently has 54 nuclear reactors.

The bulk of recent natural disasters have affected developing countries. The earthquake in Haiti, the Indian Ocean tsunami, and the floods in Pakistan all impacted impoverished and developing areas of the world. The international community has adapted its humanitarian assistance to help these types of countries, but rarely does this call for assistance come from a rich country such as Japan.

The Chilean earthquake last year showed the world that even the most well-prepared and experienced countries see devastation after natural disasters, as Hurricane Katrina demonstrated in our own country before that. The aftereffects of this event will be magnified because of Japan's position in world diplomatic affairs.

This call for assistance from a country like Japan means that the U.S. and other countries will be adapting the way they choose to aid other nations. When an industrialized country receives aid, it creates an entirely new dynamic. This dynamic is characterized by ulterior motives, economic red tape, and egotistical mentalities. In addition, issues such as nuclear energy and geographical location complicate the situation.

First, it is important to look at Japan from a foreign aid perspective. Following WWII, the U.S. took extensive measures to ensure the economic development of Japan and solidify the country as an ally. By 1968, after receiving two billion dollars in foreign aid from the U.S., Japan's economy was second in the world. By investing in Japan and offering them aid, the U.S. was able to rescue a failing country and pull it into prosperity.

During this process, the U.S. encouraged the country to put specific safeguards in place that would minimize the risk that a disaster would bring the country to its knees. By investing a relatively small amount, the U.S. created an incentive for preventive measures. Today, an earthquake 500 times stronger than the one that struck Haiti had only 10% of the casualties of Haiti's disaster. This proves the importance of U.S. foreign aid in preventive rather

than responsive measures.

This is something the current Republican majority in the House of Representatives seems to be overlooking. In last month's budget, the Republicans slashed several foreign-aid ventures aimed at the development of infrastructures in many poor and developing countries.

This move is especially heart-wrenching due to the fact that less than 1% of the budget is devoted to foreign aid in the first place.

This action will undoubtedly have adverse effects in the future. By failing to provide for development and preventive measure in poor countries, the U.S. will end up having to pay for much greater damage in areas such as Haiti where clean-up continues to this day. A bank study published last fall projected that, by the end of the century, global losses due to natural disasters will reach $185 billion. The only way to combat this is to minimize the impact by putting in place strong infrastructures and safeguards. We can't afford to do otherwise.

We can also see this through an economic lens. The "Group of Seven" or "G-7" has already met to discuss the consequences of the recent disaster in Japan. Japan is being careful not to allow the appreciation of the Yen following this disaster, and the G-7 is attempting to aid in that effort.

Because of Japan’s economic importance, many actors have a stake in its outcome. Japan now sends 17% of its total exports to the U.S. and takes in 11% of its imports from the U.S. This trade relationship is important because all other major Japanese export and import partners are in East Asia. As the U.S. begins its mission to help Japan recover, bolstering this relationship will be crucial.

From an aid perspective, the current donations from Americans are only a third of those donations received at this point following the Haitian disaster. This points to an interesting dynamic that has many possible causes.

Many believe that because Japan is a wealthy, industrialized country, much like ourselves, they will be able to rebound quickly from the disaster.

Others point to the fact that there are fewer Japanese-Americans than Americans who descend from Haiti or the Caribbean. This could be the reason for slower donations to aid recovery from the disaster. Still others point to the well-known stoicism and pride that is found in Japan. Some hint that Japan does

not want our aid, and that if they do want our aid they must ask for it.

Regardless of private donations to the Japanese relief effort, the U.S. government has been extremely helpful. The aircraft carrier USS Ronald Reagan and three U.S. Navy warships were sent to Japan in the name of humanitarian assistance. President Obama clarified this position in a speech on the disaster when he said, "Across the Pacific, they will find a hand of support extended from the United States as they get back on their feet. After all, we have an alliance that was forged more than a half century ago, and strengthened by shared interests and democratic values."

President Obama's language clearly shows that the U.S. is prepared to help Japan. However, his language also seems to hint at a close and unbreakable tie between the U.S. and Japan. He points out that the U.S. "hand of support" will stretch "across the Pacific."

This over arching hand of support seems to allude to China, which has recently found itself in heated disagreement with both the U.S. and Japan.

Clearly, the U.S. has a vested interest in finding a way to get into Japan, under the guise of disaster relief. By moving warships into the Sea of Japan and asserting our "hand of support" throughout the region, we are attempting to do more than merely aid.

The strategic implications involved are even more complicated by the nuclear aspect of Japan. Japan relies on nuclear energy for 30% of its immense power usage. These nuclear reactors took heavy blows during the earthquake and ensuing tsunami, and have caused an uproar in the international community.

The meddling of U.S. forces in Japan regarding nuclear complications has already created a rift between two countries that have been proven allies in the past. The U.S. government advised an evacuation zone much larger that the one advised by Japan. The Japanese government advised evacuation within 12 square miles of the Fukushima Nuclear Plant, while the U.S. advised evacuation within 50 square miles of that plant.

This disagreement took a hit upon the deep pride and nationalism that characterizes Japanese culture. To Japan, the differing numbers create a sense of incompetence and low intelligence within the government and imply a bad image of the country. Some American officials are beginning to talk down to the

Japanese. One official who chose to remain anonymous said, "Everything in their system is built to build consensus slowly, and everything in this crisis is moving quickly. It's not working."

Action taken by the U.S. Air Force a few days after the disaster signaled even greater U.S. involvement. Officials sent a Global Hawk remotely piloted surveillance plane on missions over Japan to "help the government assess damage from the earthquake." Actions such as these, coupled with statements by the U.S. that seem to subvert the opinions and systems of the Japanese people and their experts, can have drastic effects in a country that is pivotal in U.S. economic and political success.

China, too, sees an opportunity for strategic movements in this disaster. They have dispatched a 15-man rescue team and pledged $150,000, a small but symbolic sum, to Japan to fight this disaster. After years of rocky relations between South Korea, Japan and China, it seems this may be an opportunity for healing.

Only about a week after the earthquake, a pre-arranged meeting between South Korea, China and Japan went off without a hitch. This meeting involved scarce discussion of international affairs, but focused more on discussion of how to react to the recent disaster. It seems that China understands the implications of having Japan on their side, and see's a chance to seize that relationship at hand.

At this point, it is nearly impossible to tell how this disaster will affect international relationships and the international economy.

However, it is clear that this natural disaster calls for a much different response than those disasters in recent memory. Politics are invlved, rather than the all-encompassing label of "humanitarian assistance" which prevails in countries likes Haiti.

This disaster invites less monetary assistance and more personnel presence. An unmanned drone, U.S. warships and U.S. soldiers are all part of proving that our hand can easily reach "across the Pacific." All the while, China shows its presence with a small stretch across the East China Sea. This disaster has brought attention to the East, and depending upon what unravels in the near future, this attention could be enduring. •

Clearly, the U.S. has a vested interest in finding a way to get into Japan, under the guise of disaster relief.

APRIL 2011 | 29

A REFLECTION ON

By Carey Hanlin

30 | APRIL 2011

J

NUCLEAR ENERGY

apan. Birthplace of Honda, Sony, and Nintendo, and home to over 100 million people, 55 nuclear reactors, and an average of 1500 earthquakes per year. How does the nation that created the word “tsunami” deal with its frequent earthquakes and constant threat of giant waves? It constructs buildings with deep foundations and advanced shock absorbers, makes its trains stop automatically when a quake strikes, and utilizes a nationwide earthquake warning system. But even a nation with a long history of dealing with earthquakes and tsunamis is not invulnerable to those forces of nature. When Japan was hit by a 9.0 earthquake this March – a quake that ties for fourth among the most intense on record – the nation did not escape unscathed.

The most significant threat created by the earthquake and ensuing tsunami was posed by damage inflicted on the cooling systems of several of Japan’s nuclear reactors. While all of Japan’s 55 nuclear reactors shut down as soon as the earthquake hit, Japan’s prime minster was forced to declare a nuclear emergency when the emergency generators supporting two major reactors failed, leaving the reactors without a cooling system. When pressure from radioactive steam became too great, it was released into the air, causing the evacuation of residents within a six-mile radius.

The obvious question that comes out of Japan’s nuclear accident is whether the U.S. should continue operating its own nuclear power plants.

Most coal-generated power plants and nuclear-generated power plants produce electricity in the same fashion: by generating enough heat to turn water into vapor that can turn turbines. The central differences arise in how this heat is created and what products are left behind. Since the unfortunate events surrounding Japan’s reactors, opponents to nuclear energy have been coming out of the woodwork to condemn it as far more dangerous than it is beneficial. But before we shut down our reactors and bury them beneath 15 feet of cement, let’s examine some evidence.

The most common example used against nuclear power always seem to be the incident that occurred at Chernobyl in 1986. After all, the accident is purported to have been ultimately responsible for deaths numbering

in the thousands. What most do not realize, however, is that Chernobyl can hardly be applied to modern day nuclear safety standards.

Technology and safety standards have both risen since the 1980s, and organizations like the International Atomic Energy Agency have ensured that nuclear safety precautions are kept high. For that reason, the U.S. has never had a nuclear emergency on any level close to that of Chernobyl.

Now, many are bound to attack that last assertion, using the 1979 accident at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania, as an example. In reality though, the most unfortunate result of that accident was the fear that it caused. The Three Mile Island accident did not result in any deaths, and ultimately led to a nationwide rise in nuclear safety standards. In the end, it served as more of a lesson than a horrific disaster.

But then comes the issue about nuclear waste and its disposal. This issue does require more attention because nuclear waste will be around for a very long time - the half-life of Uranium 245, the most common isotope used in nuclear fission, is 700 million years. But while fossil fuel waste immediately enters the atmosphere and leabes our control, nuclear waste can be moved, stored, and contained indefinitely. In the U.S., Yucca Mountain has been proposed as a long-term storage site for nuclear waste, but while this stalls the issue, it ultimately does not solve it.

In the end, nuclear fission probably will not be our planet’s ultimate source of energy. As technology rises and science presses forward, new methods of energy production are bound to merge forth – methods that are both safer and more efficient. But for now, nuclear energy is proving far more efficient than either coal or oil. It has some obvious drawbacks, but as nuclear safety continues to improve, coal mine conditions remain stagnant. And while Japanese officials are working hard to prevent a nuclear meltdown, BP was powerless for weeks to stop 4.9 million barrels of oil from gushing into the Gulf of Mexico. No energy source is perfect. Nuclear energy is not without its problems, but it cannot be abandoned in these economic times when efficiency is so crucial. •

ABOUT THE COVER ART

A

nwuli Chukwurah, worked with featured authr Sarah-June Benjamin to create an image that represents Sojourner Truth in the style of Judy Chicago’s The Dinner Party, exhibited in 1979. The Dinner Party depicts place settings for 39 mythical and historial women. While sometimes criticized as being disrespectful, Chicago’s work was meant, in her own words, to “end the ongoing cycle of omission in which women were written out of the historical record.”

In Sarah-June Benjamin’s presentation, she explains that Chicago’s depiction of Sojourner Truth is discriminatory against black women since it depicts African masks and a hint of breasts instead of the usual, stylized vaginas found on Chicago’s other place settings that represent white women.

Chukwurah’s art is meant to revitalize the representation of Sojourner Truth as a feminine, stylized vagina.

Judy Chicago (American, b. 1939). The Dinner Party (Sojourner Truth place setting), 1974–79. Mixed media: ceramic, porcelain, textile. Brooklyn Museum, Gift of the Elizabeth A. Sackler Foundation, 2002.10. © Judy Chicago.

Photograph by Jook Leung Photography

APRIL 2011 | 31

This publication was paid for at least in part by UNC student fees