ARTS P. 9 Dover Quartet dazzles in Brooks-Rogers
SPORTS P. 12 The Independent Student Newspaper at Williams College Since 1887 VOL. CXXXIII, NO. 8
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2018
Football team falls short at homecoming
Theatre department cancels Beast Thing By SAMUEL WOLF NEWS EDITOR On Thursday, the theatre department announced the cancellation of its production of the play Beast Thing. The show, written by Aleshea Harris and described by the department as a “play-inprogress,” contained controversial and potentially traumatizing content and was directed in a manner that consistently left many participants feeling uncomfortable, leading to its cancellation. The play was directed by Visiting Assistant Professor in Theatre Shayok Misha Chowdhury, who previously directed The Wolves in the fall of 2017. The play centered on the burdens and consequences experienced by a town that hid away its sins; it was also intended as a platform for actors of color to express themselves outside of a white-dominated theatrical framework. “I wanted to bring Beast Thing to campus because Aleshea Harris’ work pushes back against that internal and external censorship, which artists of color are constantly navigating,” said Chowdhury. The performance would have involved copious violence, including “gun violence, self-harm, nooses and hanging, animal cruelty, silhouetted nudity/sex acts and infant death,” according to the event description. Students involved in the production felt disconcerted with many aspects of the play. One of the actors in the show, Liliana Bierer ’19, emphasized that everyone involved came away with different reactions. “There is no single narrative of how or
PHOTO COURTESY OF WILLIAMS COLLEGE. The theatre department hung posters around campus last week announcing the last-minute cancellation of its production of the play Beast Thing. why [the cancellation] happened, no monolithic experience or conflict with clear sides,” she said. Of the 12 students initially cast, six quit the show within the first few weeks due to issues with the content. “Beast Thing, from the very beginning, was a play fraught with issues,” Onyeka Obi ’21, one of the actors who chose to remain in the show, said. “It was a cast[ing] that aimed to seek out PoC [people of color] from the community and yet ended up a majority white [cast]. This concern … led to a fissure that resulted in an exodus of most of the remaining people of color [in] the cast.” Kester Messan-Hilla ’21, an actor who left the performance, explained his complicated relationship with the show. “My involvement in
Beast Thing mandated the suppression of the self,” he said. This suppression, Messan-Hilla felt, made his continued involvement in Beast Thing untenable. Bret Hairston ’21, another actor who did not continue with the show, described her problems with the theatre department. “Williams College, and by extension the Williams theatre department, is not an institution that holds and supports students throughout the process of creating and displaying this emotionally and historically difficult work that we want here,” she explained. “I quit very early in the process of Beast Thing because of this lack of support I felt. I remember feeling so incredibly gross in my own body because of the work,” she said. For the remaining actors, concerns intensified through-
out the rehearsal process. “Students were expected to commit 20 hours a week, 6-10 p.m., Monday-Friday,” Obi said. “We were involuntarily forced to prioritize this play over all else: our friends, our GPAs, our well-being... I was asked to refrain from attending my grandmother’s funeral in California because I would miss tech [week] the following morning. I had numbed myself significantly to her death and to this play, and hence did not realize what a horrific harm had been committed towards me until I cried in the arms of my friends in the middle of Baxter. I will never, ever forgive myself for placing this show over my family.” Those involved also raised increasing concerns about the heavily violent nature of the performance. “The violence
in this play was unnecessary,” Abigail Stark-Murray ’22, assistant stage manager, said. “When the purpose of the violence was questioned, no one, not even the director, had an answer. Violence without a purpose should not have to be performed by anyone and should not have to be experienced by anyone.” Obi described her concerns about particularly violent scenes. “In one of the technological window facades, a silhouetted depiction of a black actor is hanged in what is supposed to be a reference to an earlier line. But I was filled with a deep sickness that I could not shake off for days.” Bierer was also wary of performing the difficult content of the show. “I could not trust that this audience – a room of my peers, my loved ones, my acquaintances, my community
members – was being considered with care for the multiplicity of potential traumas they hold,” she said. “And it is we, the actors, who would have been held accountable for the harm of the show.” Throughout rehearsals, students felt like they were being continually and toxically cut out of the show’s creative process. “Much of the time, I felt like we were lab rats,” StarkMurray said. “We were told that this play was an experiment, but instead of conducting the experiment alongside the director and the artistic team, I watched the actors being experimented on.” Distress about the performance culminated on Wednesday, Oct. 31, the day before the first performance was scheduled. “After a conversation with the designers and creative team that resulted in various members of the cast exhibiting intense emotional distress, the cast talked privately for almost two hours before [Chair and Associate Professor of Theatre Amy Holzapfel], arrived,” Caroline Fairweather ’20, an actor in the show, said. “She told us to email her and simply state whether we wanted to move forward with the process. We did, and thus the piece was cancelled.” On Thursday, the day that the first performance was supposed to take place, the actors received an email from Holzapfel, responding to a multiplicity of concerns that they had brought up with her. “Having assembled and gone through these responses collectively … I’ve made the decision, with input from faculty and staff as well, to cancel the performances of the show, due in large part to
SEE BEAST THING, PAGE 4
Ballot Questions 2 MinCo advocates for increased funding and 3 pass, 1 fails, incumbents reelected By RACHEL SCHARF MANAGING EDITOR
By SAMUEL WOLF NEWS EDITOR
Yesterday, Massachusetts voters decided on three ballot initiatives that appeared on their ballots alongside candidates for governor, senator and congressperson, among other offices. With 27 percent reporting, results showed voters overwhelmingly in favor of Question 2, which created a Citizens Commission to address the Citizens United Supreme Court case, and Question 3, which reaffirmed an anti-discrimination ordinance for transgender individuals. A large majority voted no on Question 1, which proposed establishing limits on the number of patients that can be assigned to any one nurse. The vote against Question 1, by the margin of 71 percent opposed to 29 percent in favor, prevented a change in nursing practices in Massachusetts. Both Massachusetts senators, Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey, were in favor of the initiative, whereas Governor Charlie Baker was opposed. Proponents argued that the change would lead to a more manageable workload for nurses and safer conditions for patients. Those against worried about costs that would come from these limits, as well as an overreliance on one-size-fits-all models. Following the results, Donna Kelly-Williams of the Massachusetts Nurses Association expressed concern with the outcome. "I'm very disappointed by tonight's results and the impact that this will have on our patients," she said. The approval of Question 2, by a margin of 71 percent to 29 percent, will result in the creation of a citizen commission of 15 people that will ultimately propose several progressive amendments to the U.S. limiting campaign contributions
and reversing the acceptance of corporations as people. The commission will form on Jan. 1, 2019, and will issue a report at the end of 2019. Most major political figures in Massachusetts had previously endorsed the initiative. Question 3’s 68 percent to 32 percent approval reaffirms a 2016 law, called SB 2407, that prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender identity in public places. Its reversal could have endangered the ability of transgender people to use public restrooms and other facilities. This measure was the first statewide referendum on transgender rights in United States history, and represents a substantial victory for LGBTQ+ people and allies. Approximately $4 million was spent in favor of the initiative. However, the initiative also faced vocal opposition, particularly from the Massachusetts Family Institute and a group called Keep MA Safe. Yesterday, incumbents also won reelection for the governorship and a senate seats. Republican Governor Charlie Baker handily defeated Democrat Jay Gonzalez by a margin of 67 percent to 33 percent, and Warren, the Democratic candidate, defeated Republican Geoff Diehl with 61 percent to 36 percent, with three percent voting for a third party. Massachusetts voters also elected Maura Healey as attorney general, William Galvin as secretary of the commonwealth, Suzanne Bump as auditor and Deborah Goldberg as treasurer. Locally, Berkshire voters reelected Congressman Richard Neal to represent Massachusetts’ first district, Adam Hinds to represent Berkshire, Hampshire, Franklin and Hamden in the State Senate, and John Barrett to represent the First Berkshire District as state representative.
This weekend, a document written by the Minority Coalition (MinCo) Steering Committee began circulating, which explained MinCo’s plans to request that $34,000 of College Council’s (CC’s) remaining supplemental funding be allocated towards the MinCo supplemental fund. The fund, which currently consists of $6000, would be distributed to MinCo groups and other groups of underrepresented identities on campus, largely for Heritage Month events. Despite many students’ misconceptions, this document was not intended to be circulated and has brought about several concerns. Last spring, CC passed a resolution and bylaw opening its General Fund (GenFund) to requests from MinCo (“College Council makes more funding available for MinCo groups,” April 11, 2018). However, many
MinCo group leaders have perceived obstacles in their requests to obtain money from this newly available pool through CC’s Finance Committee (FinCom). “Though CC has opened their supplemental funding to MinCo groups,” the document reads, “they have consistently shown an unwillingness to distribute funding to communities on campus that do not adhere to harmfully strict funding policies, in particular affecting underrepresented communities of color that largely cannot afford, emotionally and/or physically, the immense institutional knowledge needed to navigate CC procedures.” The document proposes that, if CC rejects this proposal at its Nov. 13 meeting, the study body overturn the decision by an in-person vote on Nov. 27. According to Article VI of CC’s constitution, a student assembly of 250 in-person votes and the support of one-third of the CC
executive board can overturn a CC rejection of a proposal. The document then requests student signatures of support and commitment to attending the Nov. 27 meeting to participate in an overturning vote. As of press time, this document had 112 signatures of support. While many have assumed that the MinCo Steering Committee purposely began disseminating the document with negative intent towards CC, Min-Co Co-Chairs Rodsy Modhurima ’19 and Tyler Tsay ’19 explained that the document was written in case the situation arose that they would need it, and they did not intend for it to spread. In fact, MinCo has been working closely and productively with CC in advance of the Nov. 13 meeting. “This is something we’ve been collaborating on with CC for awhile, and it’s very much a coalitionbuilding goal that we have together,” Modhurima said.
CHAPTER TWO BOOKS OPENS ON SPRING STREET, REPLACING SUBWAY AND RUBY SPARKS
CC Co-President Lizzy Hibbard ’19 confirmed this, dispelling the misconception that this petition reflects animosity between CC and MinCo. “Because this petition got out, optically [it looks like] it’s CC versus MinCo right now,” Hibbard said. “But we’d already been planning to devote our entire Nov. 13 meeting to CC-MinCo relations and discuss this budget request. We’d already been talking about ways to bring CC and MinCo closer together.” While the petition does not reflect hostility between CC and MinCo, the impetus behind its creation, as well as its reception, do demonstrate genuine concerns about the FinCom process. Tsay and Modhurima explained
SEE FUNDING, PAGE 4
WHAT’S INSIDE 3 OPINIONS Critiquing campus accessibility 5 NEWS Students hold vigil for those killed in recent shootings 7 FEATURES Senior creates student-run opinion platform 8 ARTS Recent WCMA purchases thrill the senses 12 SPORTS Women's soccer finishes second in NESCAC
KATIE BRULE/PHOTO EDITOR
USPS 684-6801 | 1ST CLASS MAIL U.S. POSTAGE PAID WILLIAMSTOWN, MA PERMIT NO. 25