by Aliza Rosenfeld
F+L caught up with Hannah Scharlin-Pettee ’13, an SIC staffer who directed the Oberlin Has Sex video as a protest against the threat of federal defunding for Planned Parenthood.
by Sybil Levine
Attention all party people of Oberlin: Break out your rave shorts and LED gloves, glitter and day-glow body paint, and prepare to have the night of your life! Continue reading
by Peter O’Malley
by Aliza Rosenfeld
This Is Our Youth, directed by Theater major and Honors Candidate Philip Waller ’11, opened Wednesday, March 2 with the warning: “This Is Our Youth contains profanity, drug use, and pornographic imagery.” This statement coupled with edgy publicity posters displaying toy action figures, cards, a lighter, and weed…what a great way to get Oberlin students intrigued.
by Tony Wack
The Property Known as Garland directed by Kristopher Fraser ’13 tells the story of former child-star and singer Judy Garland. Well, “tells the story” might be pushing it just a bit.
The fact of the matter is that Judy Garland, played by Rachel Smith-Weinstein ’13, spends the entirety of the play complaining about her childhood, her home-life, her mother, MGM, her career and her rise to stardom. She essentially criticizes every single thing that brought her to where she is now. There is a time and a place for that, which has hourly rates, but it’s not on the stage.
What I find most peculiar about the show is that I am not entirely certain what it was going for or what it wanted to do. Based on the sad tale of woe that Garland weaves, you would think that she is either trying to invoke sympathy and sadness within the audience, with the highest honor being able to reduce them to tears.
However, in between complaints, aggressive rants, maniacal laughter and bouts of melancholy, one cannot hope but feel depressed and uncomfortable. By the end of the show, there was a sense of relief among the audience members as if they felt they had finally been let off the hook after being yelled at for something they had nothing to do with in the first place.
The main problem with Garland as a whole is that it is essentially a monologue and the way that she so easily breaks the fourth wall to speak to the audience gives the impression that she is having a nervous break-down, but if that was the intended affect then it was not made clear. The play is Judy Garland giving a speech with her being interrupted every now and then. When the humbly assistant Ed, played by James Kriz ’12, it is usually to check up on Judy or see to her needs and I feel not concern for how she will react to will react to him but rather relief that all her bitter anguish will finally be directed towards somebody else.
The concept of flashbacks is prominent with Kriz playing all of the male roles and Lyz Glickman ’13 playing all of the female — her most prominent being that of Garland’s witch-like mother. I have no problems with flashbacks, however, when they are brought into a soloist context they create awkwardness in place of depth. In truth they do help explain Garland’s attitude, but are forgotten within the next few minutes when the complaining resumes.
Despite these criticisms, Garland actually did possess some shining qualities which are mainly seen within the acting. Smith-Weinstein comes off as determined, confident and strong with a lovely voice and speech. Kriz’s innocent and almost childish portrayal of Ed makes him likable and relatable as if a member of the audience has decided to interact with Judy on a regular basis. Glickman provides excellent support and maintains a stern attitude that lingers and is made stronger with each flashback. The set is simple but believable with decent costumes that add the extra touch to each character and skillful production team.
Basically, my major issue is with the play itself since I do not see why anyone would find it entertaining (unless you would like to see the Roast of Marlene Dietrich). I believe that director Kristopher Fraser has much potential; he just needs to be more selective about his productions.
by Aliza Rosenfeld
OSTA kicked off the spring semester on Thursday, February 10th with a commendable choice - Edward Albee’s The Zoo Story.
The entirety of this one-act drama takes place on a simple bench in Central Park, New York City. Director Phil Wong ’13 played Peter, a well-off family-man reading at his usual park bench. On this particular day he is interrupted by a scrounge-y man, Jerry, played by Nate Krasner ’13, who strikes up conversation in a futile attempt to connect with humanity.
by David Edward Clark
Shayne Wells ’11 first met his councilmember Adrian Fenty ’92 when he was 16. Since then, he has volunteered for, interned with, and has acted as special assistant to the mayor of Washington, DC.
Adrian Fenty '92 with Shayne Wells '11 close behind (left).
By Shane Hisner
To me, it seems odd that I would even have to make a case for this. Tickets to most good orchestras cost more than any of us would be willing to pay, yet, about once a month in Finney Chapel, a fleet of musicians that could be appropriately called the future of American classical music plays for free. This post comes a little late for those hoping to catch them this semester; they played just last week. Listed below are a few reasons you should go see them every time they play:
By David Edward Clark
Patrick Doherty '11
Patrick Doherty ‘11 stepped down from his position as Student Senate Liaison on Sunday. Former Outreach Coordinator Marlo Barrera ’12 has taken his place as Liaison.
Doherty’s letter of resignation, which he posted on the Student Senate website, contained accusations against fellow senators and came as a surprise to many on Senate.
The letter contained critiques of Student Senate. “Once elected, many of you cease to put effort into accomplishing anything meaningful,” wrote Doherty. “Many of you are more concerned with superficial, pointless projects that would do nothing to benefit the student body as a whole. You whine, complain, and demonize the administration, yet you are unwilling to recognize that the most effective way to change Oberlin is to work with the administration.”
Senators commented on Doherty’s letter for 25 minutes during Sunday night’s plenary meeting. Barrera was the first to speak. “First off, I’d like to say that this email was like one of the shittiest things I’ve ever read in regards to anything any of us have worked on,” said Barrera. “I think Patrick was really off the mark in saying that we’re working on petty, petty things because he just didn’t really seem to be interested in any of the things we were working on–especially because the only thing I can think of that he did on Student Senate was revise the bylaws.”
Doherty’s use of the Senate website was quickly called into question. Outreach Coordinator Pete Sabo ’11 called for a vote, which never materialized, to take it off the website. Chartering Liaison Jin Wong ’12 asked whether Doherty broke the Senate bylaws by posting the letter on the website. “I think he’s misusing his access to the website,” said Wong.
Committee Appointments Coordinator Savi Sedlacek ’12 responded to Sabo and Wong. “First of all, I’m glad it’s on the website; it’s public information and people should know why he resigned.”
Sedlacek expressed regret over Doherty’s resignation and pointed out that, although criticizing some senators, he retained that some members are doing good work. Sedlacek then suggested that the discussion over Doherty’s resignation be tabled for a later date. “I think we should keep this open. I think it’s our responsibility to respond to the press,” said Operations Manager Alex Posa ’11.
Posa largely disagreed with what Doherty wrote in the letter. “I’ve actually seen this semester’s Senate do a lot more than I’ve seen in the past.”
Wong expressed many senators’ feelings when he discussed his shock over the resignation. “I feel like this really came as a surprise to us. I feel like we never had any discussions about this before. He didn’t tell us his opinions, he didn’t tell us how he felt, and it’s just like a sudden outbreak,” said Wong.
Some senators could see the position Doherty was coming from. “I agree with what he’s arguing in principle, that it’s better to work with the administration instead of having this ‘us vs. them’ mentality, but I do think it could have been phrased a little bit better,” said Associate Liaison Gavin Palmer ’12.
Committee Appointments Coordinator Alex Hohauser ’13 was also disappointed with Doherty’s tone although she saw his resignation as a chance rally. “I think this is a tremendous opportunity for us, not that we necessarily needed to step it up, but maybe we do a little bit and really get things done and just take this and let it reenergize us and just really make a huge push and do so many great things for the rest of the semester,” said Hohauser.
Sabo disagreed with the allegation that the current Senate alienates the administration and builds an “us vs. them” mentality. He asked Associate Dean of Community Life Shozo Kawaguchi his thoughts on Doherty’s claims. Kawaguchi declined to comment directly on Doherty’s resignation, but he said that he felt no alienation from Senate.
Sabo then expressed his feelings toward the letter. “I pretty much refute a lot of his statements and his little whiney letter,” said Sabo. “I felt that his email was a lot of kiss assery. I thought it was really unnecessary a number of times, and, what is he, asking for a recommendation letter from them or something?”
Student Finance Committee elected Co-Chair Ted Waddelow ’11 recognized merit in some aspects of Doherty’s letter. “I think it does speak in a lot of ways to the core of the concerns that a lot of students have about Student Senate and how they proceed,” said Waddelow. “People don’t see Senate acting as a united body to pursue common goals. They see people using this position to pursue stuff they are already interested in.”
“How Senate picks the things that it discusses and pursues them very often seems to be reactive. Some sort of situation arises and another working group pops up—they proliferate like mushrooms—rather than Senate setting out two or three objectives that it has for itself as an institution to pursue over the course of the semester or year. I think maybe if Senate took that sort of approach, it might lead to better, clearer results that you could communicate to the student body. The tradeoff there is that some people may have to sacrifice their interests,” said Waddelow.
Green Liaison Mary-Clare Erskine ’13 responded to Waddelow. “I think it’s really worthwhile to have people working on all of these small issues that they’re passionate about. If I cut what I’m passionate about then I’d leave Senate like that,” Erskine said, snapping her finger. “I’m on Senate so that I can change things that I think need to be changed.”
Though stepping down, Doherty wrote in his resignation letter that he will “continue to act as a resource for anyone who has questions about Senate.”
