2_________
WEÓNEsdAy, FebRUARy 16, 2000
Opinion
TI he CI ac I camas PRiNT
Note to instructors: Letter to the Editor...
Don't tone it down Class is an arranged marriage
As the Epstein controversy
began to unfold many issues
came to light, but my biggest
concern was that instructors
would tone down their teaching
to avoid unnecessary problems.
Editor-in-Chief:
John Thorbum (x2447)
Managing Editor:
Megan Oldenstadt
Design Editor:
Timothy A. Bell
Feature Editor:
Shelbi Wescott
A & E Editor:
Angie Daschel
News Editor:
Sandy Lupo
Associate News Editor:
Diana Scrivner
Sports Editor:
Mandy Good
Opinion Editor:
Salena De La Cruz
Business Manager:
Karl Katzke (x2578)
Photo Editor:
Sarah Welch
Cartoonist:
Joel Gunderson
Chris Lundgren
Staff:
Kristen Wiser
Toni McMichael
Jason Lingel
Maggie Jirasek
Matt Shempert
Secretary:
JoAnne Gale
Advisor:
Linda Vogt (x2310)
Goals:
The Clackamas Print aims to
report the news in an honest,
unbiased, professional manner.
The opinions expressed in The
Clackamas Print do not neces
sarily reflect those of the stu
dent body, college administra
tion, its faculty, or The Clacka
mas Print advertisers. Products
and services advertised in The
Clackamas Print are not neces
sarily endorsed by anyone as
sociated with The Clackamas
Print.
The Clackamas Print is a
weekly publication and is dis
tributed every Wednesday ex
cept during Finals week. The
Clackamas Print Copyright
2000.
Advertising:
The advertising rate is $4.75
per column inch.
Letters to the Editor:
All signed letters to the editor
should be 500 words or less and
will be considered for publica
tion if submitted by 1 pm the
Friday prior to publication. Let
ters to the Editor are subject to
editing.
19600 S.M o L a U a A ve .
O reqon CiTy, O regon
97045
(505) 657-6958 ext 2509
CC C p R i N T@ c I AC k AM AS . C C . O R . U S
you for your hard work and dedi
cation in giving us what we
want—a more diverse education.
I am inspired by Jeff Knorr; for
his energy in Drama, “To be or
not to be.” I am
amazed By
Loren Ford’s
ability
to
pull us out of
our behav
ioral slump.
Salena De La Cruz
I
admire
Opinion Editor
Kelly
Brennan for
his ability to
This is a note to instructors, grab attention in class. Linda
Don’t Do It! I know things may Vogt, I hold you in high regard
seem a little strained and stressed for putting up with the Print
on campus, but really there are staff during our most conflicting
thousands of us here who enjoy discussions. But most of all I
your techniques, your skills, and have the utmost respect for Dr.
even your offensiveness. I have Donald Epstein for keeping me
been at this school for a little enthralled during History of
over a year and I have never been Western Civilization class. He
more challenged.
may be retiring, but he will never
Though I commend Joshua be FORGOTTEN.
Alexander for his ability to step
So, what I’m trying to tell in
forward because he felt offended structors is that I appreciate ev
by the material in class, I want erything you’ve done in teaching
people to know his opinion and me that there is a more varied way
concerns are not those of every to learn; that Cleopatra was a bitch;
body on campus. He felt the ma that 'I have no feelings' is bullshit;
terial was offensive and he had that my delivery of speech is as
every right as a student to come important as the speech.
forward with those concerns be
I am leaving you with a note,
cause as a student he has a right Don’t tone it down! By doing that
to feel comfortable in class.
you will be toning down our abil
However, there is also the right ity to learn. Challenge the cam
of the instructors; the right to pus, enthrall us, and immerse us
teach, the right to be opinion
in learning—that’s what you are
ated, and the right to make learn
great at. I commend you, I thank
ing fun. Instructors, I applaud you, and I appreciate you.
Make a
statement,
be heard...
A class is an arranged marriage.
Someone with a degree (more or less)
and thirty someones without (more
or less) are stuck in a relationship
for at least a quarter. If teacher and
student are lucky, their styles will
fit, and the marriage is compatible.
If they’re not, you hear something
like the following:
Student (among his peers): That
Ms. Whozit is an arrogant jerk.
Teacher (among her peers): I’ve
got this one student who refuses to
respond.
In other words, each judges the
other harshly because the styles of
each are not compatible. The stu
dent feels he loses because his goals
won’t allow him to get a divorce;
the teacher feels she loses because
she knows how just a few unrespon
sive students can muck up an entire
class. And they’re both right; they
do both lose.
Don Epstein’s style clearly of
fends a great many. Just as clearly,
many students admire him. People
like Angie Daschel and Jeremy
VanKeuran were, it seems, the lucky
ones—compatible. People like
Joshua Alexander weren’t. But in
her defense of Epstein, Daschel fails
to realize that a teaching style that’s
compatible with her learning style,
that makes her think, is precisely
what keeps many others from being
able to think.
Do teachers have to be contro
versial and outspoken in order to
do their jobs—to make students
think? Of course not; there are other
methods. Epstein has created for
himself a teaching style that
works—for some. It also turns off
plenty. That’s the gamble he takes.
I prefer this course of action: main
tain “fervor and enthusiasm,” as
Daschel put it, without alienating
any of the people I want to reach
with my fervor and enthusiasm.
That’s hard work. Occasionally I’m
tempted to say something like, “If
you don’t see the importance of
William Blake’s condemnation of
Lockeian epistemology, you’ve got
the brains of a toad!” But I don’t
say that. I censor myself, I deny
myself my own freedom of speech
because my goal is not merely to
express my fervor and enthusiasm,
but also to communicate. Merely
spouting my opinions does not en
hance communication, especially
when I have a certain amount of in
stitutionalized power (i.e., I give out
the grades). If a student proposes
an unjustifiable interpretation of
Blake, I could flip her off, but I’d be
far more effective if I pointed to the
passages in Blake’s works which
contradict the student’s view.
Epstein’s defenders are focusing
on freedom of speech and his en
thusiasm for his subject. Those are
important points, but there are other
issues. Enthusiasm for one’s sub
ject and enthusiasm for teaching—
for reaching people, for being as ef
fective as one possibly can—are
two different things. And wise
people know when spouting off is
appropriate and when self-censor-
ship is appropriate, as measured by
the goal they’re after—or by the
goal other people are paying them
to achieve.
James Bryant-Trerise
English Instructor
The death of meaning: the power of the word
The “Epstein Controversy”
has been, for lack of a better
word, resolved, and a look at the
issues this dispute encompassed
is in order. I believe one key ele
ment in all this clamor is consis-
Altar of an
Unknown God
tently overlooked: the impor
tance of the meaning of words.
Words are central to this de
bate. As St. James states, “If
anyone does not stumble in
word, he is a perfect man.”
I have witnessed, during my
five years and counting at
Clackamas, a frequent glossing
over of word meaning in what I
can only regard as an avoidance
of thought. Many readers do not
think, do not analyze, do not
ponder—rather, they react. And
this pattern holds predictably
true in the conflict between
Joshua Alexander and Donald
Epstein.
Now, on the face of it, it may
seem Dr. Epstein is the one who
should take care with words; af
ter all, his ill-advised and impoli
tic words led to his downfall, did
they not?
A closer look reveals a differ
ent condition. Dr. Epstein is a
master of words, and whether his
expressed views are “accept
able” or not,
they are at
least clear.
Epstein
has
not
been
forced to
retract,
change, or
excuse his
statements. Even his vaunted
“letter of apology” to Mr.
Alexander simply states that his
comments were misunderstood.
French theologian Jaques Ellul
charges in his book The Humili
ation of the Word that “if a per
son is not behind his word, it is
mere noise. In the Bible the word
is an integral part of a person. It
is true if the person is true.” By
separation—the word from the
person, meaning from the word—
we have, argues Ellul, lost the
ability to proclaim and recognize
truth.
Some examples from the recent
debate may be edifying.
Clackamas instructor Kate Gray
affirmed in an Oregonian article,
“I think there is a whole level of
awareness that’s been raised,
and I think that communication
lines are open now.” A bitter for a dissenting voice!
irony, since Epstein’s retirement
An understanding of Dr. Epstein’s
represents the closing of a com
initial statement may be facilitated
munication line. The speaker and
through analogy. If an instructor were
the word are sundered, creating to tell me, “You’re better off dead than
a dichotomy between statement to be a Christian,” I would be amiss to
and action.
react in outrage. The statement could
Salena De La Cruz, opinion
mean, “Christians are better off dead,”
editor, has cast this issue in her which the Apostle Paul himself would
column as a conflict of “aca
affirm: “absent from the body, present
demic freedom vs. prejudiced with the Lord.” Or in a historical con
opinion.” However, as I have of- text, i.e. that in certain historical peri-
ten pointed put,
ods Christians
these are not
were subject to
diametric oppo
torture and death,
sites in any
could be implied.
Words
sense. In fact,
Even if it meant
academic free
let us not
“Christianity is a
dom
encom
fate worse than
weapons
passes the right
death,” my re
rashly.
Joe] P.
to give a preju
sponse would be
diced opinion.
Shempert
to challenge such
The question is
Contributing
an assertion—
rather like ask
Writer
not to silence toe
ing, “is it black or
speaker. I would
is it wet?” The W!
rather open a de
word is now sev
bate than close it.
ered from meaning.
The kernel of this position is amoral
How unfortunate, then, that one: words matter—so use them care
these careless words have come
fully, use them wisely, and, when there
to represent this controversy!
is no other just course, don’t use them
How tragic that through the saw
at all. The word is a primal force in
ing of empty verbiage and re
human existence, and by its use, men
peated phrases, we have broken rise and men fall. Thus, James warns,
the spirit of a brilliant and pas
“see how a great a forest a little fire
sionate man! And how woeful
kindles!” Words can hurt—so let us
that through the fostering of tol
not wield our weapons so rashly. /
erance we have closed the door show you a more excellent way.
so
our
can hurt—
wield
so