From Rebecca Gilman's 2000 play, Spinning into Butter:

Dean 1: There's a problem.
Dean 2: What?
Dean 1: Someone's been leaving threatening ...well, racist notes on the door of one of our African American students.
Dean 2: Please tell me you're kidding.
Prof who used to sleep with Dean 1: Oh my God.
Dean 1: Maybe you should look at them. (She holds out two notes. They gather around and read, passing them among themselves. As they read) He said he was willing to ignore the first one, but then he found this one this afternoon and it was so ... graphic.
(Pause. They read, silenced. Then)
Prof: God
Dean 2: And you say somebody just left this on his door?
Dean 1: Yes. When he got the second one, he took them over to security and they called me.

Dean 3: ... we have to decide what to do. ... We have a dangerous racist in our midst.
Dean 2: I suppose someone from security could watch his dorm, or if he wants to--
Dean 3: (Interrupting, overlapping) No no no. The question is: How do we punish this racist?
Dean 1: Won't we expel him?
Prof: Or her?
Dean 3: (Overlapping) That's a defensive action. We have to be pro-active on this. We must make it known, loud and clear, that this sentiment, this trash, is not Belmont. That Belmont cannot be reduced to this outrageous action. We should issue some sort of statement right away, condemning this--
Dean 1: (Interrupting) I think we should try to find out who did it first, before we go around issuing statements.
Dean 2: Technically we should call President Garvey and ask him what to do.
Prof: Garvey won't know what to do. He's so out of touch. Burton's right. I think we should make a public gesture of some sort. We should call a campus-wide meeting so we can discuss what's going on.
Dean 3: Yes.
Dean 1: Don't you think we should talk to Simon [the student who received the notes] first?
Prof: Look, we pride ourselves on our inclusiveness. We claim to embrace cultural diversity. And yet some racist is running loose on campus, and I would wager that this idiot is very much like all our other students in appearance and manner and class, and that's what we need to reveal. That racism isn't somebody else's problem. It's our problem. If we handle this right, it could be a real learning experience for the students.
Dean 2: All right, then. Good. This seems like the sort of response we should have, doesn't it? If it leaks out to any of the parents and some irate mother calls me, I can say, 'We've already organized a campus meeting in order to reduce any stress or obviate any adverse reactions....' Something like that.
Dean 3: Obviate? Will that translate?
Dean 2: Whatever. I'll write it out so it sounds right. I always get fifteen or twenty calls on these sorts of things and it's better just to write down what you plan to say.
Dean 1: I thought you'd never seen anything like this before.
Dean 2: Not like this, no. So, shall I propose this campus forum thingee to President Garvey? I'll tell him everyone at the committee meeting thinks it's a good idea. He doesn't have to know that we're missing half the people.
Prof: I strongly recommend it. You can tell him that.
Dean 3: As do I.
Dean 2: Sarah?
Dean 1: I just ... I feel like we're moving too fast. We should talk to Simon first. What if he doesn't want us to talk about him this way?
Dean 3: Why wouldn't he?

Gilman's play would make a fabulous text for the freshman reading projects that so many colleges and universities build into new student orientation. There is a widespread tendency to turn these introductory reading assignments, which are often about race and racism, into occasions for "educating" new students in the ways of campus sensitivity. I don't love the proselytizing flavor of that intent, and I particularly object to the way targeted reading assignments and the carefully crafted, ideologically leading discussion guidelines that come with them exploit and cheapen what should be an enriching and inspiring collective intellectual experience. That said, I can imagine quite an excellent discussion emerging out of a collective reading of Gilman's play--not least because of the way the play connects its exploration of racial attitudes to its analysis of what happens when administrators try to dictate matters of conscience to students, faculty, and even one another.

I nominate Claremont McKenna College for Spinning into Butter's debut as a preferred text for incoming freshmen. I think that's one campus that is particularly well primed to think hard and well about the issues Gilman raises. After all, the administration there recently responded just as hamhandedly and prematurely to a faked hate crime as the make believe admins above did.

Here we go again with the indoctrinating "introductory" reading assignments.

I still don't understand this concept. When I attended the UW-Madison (entering 10 years ago), there was a "mandatory" sensitivity/sex/date-rape/racial consciousness session as part of orientation. As with other parts of the orientation (how to use the library, etc), I simply skipped it.

What are they going to do to the student who skips out? It's not like they took attendance. It's not a class. It's nothing.

I'm mystified by all these legal adults who complain about participating in something that's completely voluntary.

I do think the sensitivity training is stupid, but so are many TV shows. Don't go and don't watch them if you don't want to.

David

Somebody probably already mentioned this and I missed it. But what does "spinning into butter" mean - is it an allusion to Little Black Sambo and the tigers?

Well, as a student, I do sort of take offense to the fact that the school is using my money to push BS down people's throats. I personally, skip that kind of trash, but ignoring it doesn't solve the problem that my money is being spent on seriously questionable things, and that people who are weaker of will than I am, or just more sociable, will go to things like this and be influenced.

By the way, the play sounds absolutely brilliant. Thanks for the plug, definitely got to pick that up.

Laura:

Yes, that's what the title refers to. So on the one hand, it's a nice allusion to a children's story with its own ambiguous racial meanings (witness the recent controversy about a new edition of the story). And at the same time a reference to the end of the tale, wherein the tigers' aimless and frantic running around in circles converts them into a pool of harmless butter. Yum yum for Sambo!

True, it is wasting money.

Perhaps yet another reason to cut administrators' salaries.
(another story about the UC system jacking up the Chancellor's salary to $350K). I'm still mystified as to what all these deans do that's worth it--hire faculty? set up speech codes? I'll do the job for $100K. Today.

I wonder...if you removed 90% of the top administration, would anybody notice?

David

I wonder...if you removed 90% of the top administration, would anybody notice?

David, that is exactly what I thought when the federal government shut down during a budget dispute betewen Clinton and Congress. Seemed to me the country did much better without all the 'non-essential' federal employees. :) or was that wishful thinking on my part.

http://www.complete-review.com/reviews/gilmanr/spintob.htm

Here is a link to a review of the play.

David,

I'm currently a college junior. When I had orientation freshman year this was mandatory. We all had to sign in and sit together as halls. If they found out you skipped it they'd reschedule it just for you. I had to sit through it whether I liked it or not. That's part of the problem - now it's mandatory in a lot of colleges.

Oy. That's ridiculous, Viv. I'm sad to hear that the thought police are once again running the show. Of course, being devilish, I might just skip each rescheduling. I mean, what are the consequences? Are they going to kick you out of the dorm? Are they going to lock you in your room until you give up? Expel you from school?

Another reason to live off campus too. Although I know some campuses somehow forbid that too (I guess private schools can). I wonder if a public school can do all that legally. I know the UW could not require you to live on campus. I wonder about the sensitivity classes too...although presumably by living in the dorms, you're agreeing to the indoctrination or something. hmm.

something for a lawyer to ponder

Erin,
You don't like it when tendentious literature is assigned, so you suggest that tendentious literature with a different point of view is assigned instead?

Nothing wrong with tendentiousness. Writing that is not tendentious in some way is horribly dull. What I don't like is the doctrinaire intent of some of these freshman reading programs--the ones that assign works like Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Alone in the Cafeteria?. My point--semi-facetious, semi-serious, made with the full knowledge that it would never happen--is that given the mindset operating behind these programs, it would be interesting to see a reading assignment that actually deals with the phenomenon of schools trying to stage discussions of racial sensitivity.

I see now. What mislead me was your implying that the play should be assigned because students should "think hard and well about the issues Gilman raises", which is roughly the same argument as the one that is used when assigning "Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Alone in the Cafeteria?"

But like I said, I see your point now, thanks for the clarification.