Commencement Route Dodges Arch, Krislov Blames Sun

by MENGLLING GAO Arch Enemies? Often at the center of controversy, the Memorial Arch will not be a part of Commencement this year.

Students reading The Source two weeks ago learned that this year's commencement ceremonies would not include the Memorial Arch as part of the procession. This year's commencing students will line up on Professor Street between King and Peters, and students will enter Tappan Square at the intersection of Professor and Lorain Streets.

Executive Director of the Alumni Association Danielle Young cited logistical and policy reasons for the Committee's decision to change the procession route: "Changes to the procession lineup and route were made due to crowding in Peters Hall and to acknowledge the concerns many students and alumni have had over the years regarding the inclusion of the Memorial Arch in the procession."

"There were a number of reasons," said President Krislov, "including those two, and also just the positioning vis-a-vis the sun."

Young said that students are still free to walk under the Arch if they wish to do so -- but at the risk of getting the wrong diploma if they walk out of order.

The Memorial Arch has been a controversial monument for the past 40 years. Shansi argues that the Arch tells just one side of the story because it honors only the deaths of the American missionaries -- 10 of whom were from Oberlin -- during the Boxer Rebellion and does not take the Chinese casualties into account.

"Inscribed with the language and ideology of martyrdom, this tribute serves to underline the 'other,' to emphasize the barbarity of those who 'massacred,'" Shansi's Board of Trustees wrote in a statement. "It does not inquire about motives or circumstances. Nor does it speak to the Chinese as victims, in far larger numbers than Westerners."

As a result of peaceful student protests beginning in the 1970s, two plaques were added in the 1993 in an attempt to represent the Chinese involved. In spite of the plaques, some students have continued to take an alternate route around the Arch as a form of peaceful protest.

Though the Committee made the decision to change the route last year, The Source's announcement was the first that students heard of the change. The news has been met with mixed feelings on campus.

In a recent letter to the Review, the Asian American Alliance praised the change in the commencement procession route: "AAA is grateful for the administration's decision and the work of all others involved because it finally recognizes nearly 40 years of student activism."

Professor Carl Jacobson, executive director of Oberlin Shansi, says he can understand the AAA's point of view.

"I'm not Asian-American, so I can't speak from the heart about it," said Jacobson. "[The way] someone on the Board of Trustees expressed it is it's really a pity that a day that should be so happy and gleeful for everyone ... [and] all of a sudden, there is this issue of conscience that hits you as you decide how you're going to participate in Commencement."

But members of the AAA are not the only ones who feel strongly about the change in the procession's route. College senior Emelio DiSabato is unhappy about the change but understands the administration's point of view on the matter.

"I feel like the administration had their heart in the right place," said DiSabato. "But I really hope that this decision can be altered to allow the campus to continue an important debate."

DiSabato, for his part, wishes to keep the traditional procession route, as he feels the Arch poses important moral and intellectual issues for consideration.

"I think that the problems that the Arch presents won't be 'solved,' either by the addition of new plaques or by diverting the seniors' procession," said DiSabato. "That's not what the protest was about. It is about continuing a dialogue and a debate. ... Questions of colonialism, oppression and morality stay alive when we are allowed to wonder about what that Arch means."

Because of the change in the procession's route, DiSabato fears that students will lose an important debate that is central to Oberlin's character. "After four years of wondering about this, I still don't know what [the Arch] means to me -- and that's great!" said DiSabato. "I feel slighted that I can't continue this discussion during the spring and make a choice in May."

Krislov believes that Obies will continue to debate whether or not the Arch is part of Commencement: "I think if people want to talk about a monument or a symbol, they certainly can do that, and I don't think this prevents people from having that discussion," he said.

College senior Rebecca Eiseman was surprised to hear about the change to Commencement: "It's good that Krislov is acknowledging 40-something years of activism. ... It's kind of extreme just for aesthetics but I really respect the decision."

Jacobson personally feels that the Arch has been the linchpin of many issues for far too long, and is happy the College and its students are getting beyond it, at least with respect to Commencement.

"I think that it serves a good purpose. ... I think it's been a good thing," said Jacobson. "[But] I think it's probably time for us to move on."