791 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(01/30/02 12:00am)
Author: Kate DeForest This year's offering from the Dance Company of Middlebury is the strongest I have seen in the three years I have been attending their performances. Previewed late last year, and performed in Jan. 18 and 19, "Path" is a journey in dance through the external elements that shape our awareness: earth, wood, sun and moon, water, wind and fire — each element comprising one segment of the performance. Far from distancing the body from these elements, "Path" translates those elements and impressions originating in them through the dancers to the audience. In marrying the conscious body and movement of dance to the unthinking elements "Path" created a didactic program of movement with meaning in relation to ourselves and our environment. The program opened to the sound of gravel crunching, as the company walked across the stage, clad in earthen tones and flowing neutral pants, wrapping around their fronts, slit up to the thigh on the sides. Much care was taken with the set itself, which included sculpture and paintings by Herb Ferris. The paintings were suspended above the middle of the studio in three panels, the first and third depicted dragons, the second waves. Wooden poles were also suspended in two semi-circular curves, one around a large, flower-like sculpture, another cupping a roughly hewn bench. In the foreground there was a stone basin upon a pedestal and a large, loosely constructed pitcher. The way in which the dancers interacted with the set placed special emphasis in the natural quality of the materials, and the seamlessness with which they moved and used the objects paralleled the meaning of the movements.The phrasing of each segment was not particularly surprising — "Earth" had heavier motion, accepting rather than denying gravity, "Water" was fluid, "Fire" more seductive and volatile — but each segment was so well-executed that the emphasis shifted to the more subtle innovations, a certain motion of the hand, a tilt of the head or the repetition of a gesture. The dance was cyclic in nature, the path from the most to least tangible, as the elements shifted from solid and earthbound to celestial, to liquid, to air and fire, and back to earth with the discovery, as noted in the program under the "Return" segment, "We are of the earth, not separate but same." The first soloist, Sean Hoskins '02, displayed admirable control and precision, while the next duet of Meg Hamilton '02 and Benjamin Calvi '02, with soloist Shruthi Mahalingaiah '98, who exuded both strength and grace, presented an image very aware of their respective sexes. Throughout "Path," male and female dancers were utilized with specificity in both their motion and emotion, creating and breaking relationships with each other and the spaces they inhabited. Perhaps the most striking feminine solo belonged to Katie MacDonald '03, as she danced the role of fire. She embodied the seductive and powerful nature of the element, seeming to induce the other dancers to follow her lead as she swept slowly among them, gathering them up behind her as she led them in a snake-like spiral across the floor. The athleticism of Jareb Keltz '01 was challenged in his solo during "Wind," which demanded the strength of an elephant and the endurance of a marathon runner. Keltz prevailed, however, even against the gale generated by the other dancers' pounding hands, pursed lips and puffed cheeks."Path" is a celebration of how humans can connect, through body and spirit and the art the combination can produce, to the earth from which we grow. The combination of strong percussion and haunting flutes, the environmental set and the dancers and their motion, created a finished piece that was refined and deliberate, yet managed to retain the drive and pulse of an ancient and ageless energy.
(01/30/02 12:00am)
Author: Cara Lovell Even Dr. Deborah Tannen herself was surprised at the number of students, faculty and community members who braved the blowing snow last Thursday night to hear her popular lecture, "She Said/ He Said/ They Said: Communication Across Genders and Cultures." Within seconds, all seemed to find it worth the effort as Mead Chapel resounded with frequent outbursts of laughter and applause. Tannen, author of numerous bestsellers like "You Just Don't Understand" and "Talking from 9 to 5: Women and Men in the Workplace: Language, Sex, and Power," was invited from Georgetown University for the annual John Hamilton Fulton Memorial Lecture in the Liberal Arts and in benefit of the emergency team of the Counseling Service of Addison County.For all of the times women have cried, "Why can't men just stop and ask for directions?" men have sighed, "Why do women demand lengthy apologies when they know I'm sorry?" and both have asked, "Why does it feel as if I'm talking to someone in a different world?" Tannen had an explanation. She said that young girls and boys grow and interact mostly in single-sex groups that cause them to develop different "conversational styles." As she illustrated in entertaining videos of children's everyday play, girls tend to share secrets in exclusive pairs or small clusters, while boys often play in active groups with obvious hierarchies. This creates different dynamics for each gender group: girls like to be similar, are critical of domineering friends and are most afraid of being left out, while boys are "cooperative in being competitive," respectful of their leaders and most afraid of being pushed around, Tannen said.She suggested that these backgrounds greatly affect how men's and women's methods of interaction develop. Buttheir overarching, unspoken messages about their relationships, which she called "meta-messages," remain the same. She responded to the question, "Wouldn't this be a better world if we all just said what we mean?" with "We do say what we mean, just in our own style." She gives three examples of this: making suggestions, recounting one's day and apologizing.Women tend to make suggestions indirectly by calling attention to the issue or vaguely expressing their preferences (Tannen used the example of asking, "Would you like to stop for a drink?"), while men often throw out their ideas and assume others will contradict them at will. Similarly, when a woman recounts her day she describes every detail, while a man feels that explaining a problem is asking for a solution and is more likely to share, or boast about, his stories with a large group. Apologies usually cause more fights than the event being apologized for because a true apology, which Tannen said should include admission of guilt and the amount of harm done, regret and the intention not to do it again, seems to make men feel weakened.According to Tannen, each gender often gets frustrated with the other because we naturally want others to explain themselves in our own familiar style. She cautioned, "Women can be fairly critical of men because we want them to be like us." For example, women often feel that men are not paying attention when they face away from the speaker and do not make eye contact because these signs usually mean women are disengaged. Men can have very personal and self-revealing conversations in this manner.As many students may have experienced when coming to Middlebury, there are also regional and cultural differences in conversational styles within the United States. Tannen gave the example of a New Yorker talking to a Vermonter. The Vermonter would wait for gaps in the conversation to begin talking. On the other hand, the New Yorker would be used to people strategically interjecting and therefore would assume that the Vermonter has nothing to say and cover the lapses the Vermonter is waiting for even more quickly.Tannen generously allowed time for questions after her lecture, and one of the most interesting was whether the anonymity of online communication wipes out gender differences in conversation. Interestingly enough, men who pose as females in chat rooms are often caught because their traditional male argumentative style contrasts so obviously to the female tendency towards agreement. Tannen related this to coed classrooms, saying that males are more likely to debate and demand negative attention, while females are more likely to avoid criticism and ask questions.Tannen also addressed the stereotypes her research results often create. She admited that "there's great danger in generalizing" but also stuck to her goal to "describe the world the way it is" and raise awareness. She mentioned the many exceptions to gender-based differences, which most often occur when children are surrounded by siblings or neighbors of only the opposite sex and therefore learn the other style of interaction.It is comforting to validate reasons for why we sometimes feel as if we are "talking to someone in a different world" when communicating between genders. However, it is perhaps more important to remember that we do live on the same planet with the same goals and struggles and that the bonds of love and friendship are built upon a profound understanding. "Understanding is the first step towards change," said Tannen at the conclusion of her lecture. She expressed hope that her work "produces respect for people's differences, but at the same time acknowledges the ways we are all the same."
(01/16/02 12:00am)
Author: Yvonne ChenStaff Writer In our society men and women are continually talking about a so-called war of the sexes. Television shows such as "Men are From Mars/Women are from Venus" infiltrate their audiences with daily meditations of the gender differences that seem to divide us all into disparate and hopeless sex roles. Recently, the troubling issues of gender and inequality were confronted in Hepburn Zoo's "Dream of a Common Language," which played on the weekend of Dec. 6, 2001. "Although this play is set in a distant time and a distant place, it does not function as an example of the past, but rather as a reminder that our present struggles are steeped in centuries of history," read the director's notes. The play opens: it is 1874, a time when the Victorian edict flooded all aspects of social life, doling out the public sphere to men and the domestic sphere to women. The stage is ablaze with reddish lighting and a woman in shown in silhouette. One after another she throws canvases into a fire.What ensues is an anonymous day, which focuses on a circle of friends, who despite their love for each other and their love for art, are spited by the circumstances of their time. We learn the artist whose name is Clovis (Lindsay Haynes '02) is a broken woman. Something is missing in her life, and for this reason she experiences her "sad days" and she withdraws from the stresses of everyday life in this seemingly tranquil garden. In a scene in which her husband Victor (Assistant Professor of Dance, Peter Schmitz) paints her, Clovis fidgets in her place; she complains of problems of sadness, that she is sad about giving up her art for a domestic life, that she is unhappy with the choices she has made but is afraid to go back to her art. He tells her in a gentle voice, "You have to be serious about something." But she continues to lament about the responsibilities of her marriage, her child, her house and her garden. She stopped painting because she stopped hearing her own voice, ultimately "the only voice [she] could conjure was a male voice." Victor abruptly screams, "Stop being a woman!" Suddenly, Clovis appears lost and far away from the tranquil garden. Silence penetrates the chaos. She seems to yearn for an esoteric feeling, perhaps the feeling of power that only a man knows. She asks him to touch her. "Where?" he asks. She looks up at the warping colors of the sky. The scene fades into eerie tableau with the image of the man's fingers awkwardly groping over his wife's heart.A few scenes later we are introduced to Pola (Megan West '02), a spirited artist friend of the couple. With her bicycle, her bounty of stories from adventures in far-off lands, her eclectic costume of pantsuit and turban, her cheerful gestures and her humorous philosophies of the world like it is, Pola may appear at first to be the antithesis of Clovis. But we soon learn that all the women in this play are similar in one way or another. Pola hints at dissatisfaction with her rich lifestyle, for even though she has traveled far and lived a lot, life for her is riddled with irreconcilable oddities. She notes also that the women of the college were banned from the life drawing class. One remarkable line epitomizes Pola's sentiment as she remarks, "We were not allowed in class but it was acceptable for us to pose." She realizes how she has not totally been able to do as her grandmother had raised her to "develop a brain and a personality." We soon learn that Victor is holding a dinner for discussing the plans of an exhibit. However, the women of the house are not invited.Clovis, like Pola was unable to gain acceptance according to patriarchal artistic standards. As a result, we learn that Clovis' self-assurance about her own worth uprooted with that exhibit as she fooled her into thinking that she was not good enough and soon after burned her paintings. Much thought had gone into the world of "Dream." From staging to casting, "Dream" glimmers with the presence of something missing that is both beautiful and lost, something that one cannot describe in so many words or explain with the concreteness of science, but nonetheless rings with an unspoken contemplation on something lingering that is yet to be but screaming to be fulfilled. Soliloquies portray a modern world in which the women and men try to be heard by and to connect with one another, but their attempts go awry. The male actors, Schmitz and Alex Poe '03, who plays Marc, Pola's ex-lover, lent a redeeming quality to the characters of the older Victor and the more naive and sensitive Marc despite the haphazard comments that they made, as their subtle delivery and graceful actions suggested the innate humanity common among us all. West, who stole the show with her emphatic performance of the secondary character of Pola, is humorous and introspective. Her presence, which serves to complement Haynes' volatile and withdrawn portrayal of Clovis, was one of the play's stronger points. But much credit should be given to director Jennifer Driscoll '02's efforts for her choice of cast, her staging that creatively placed characters in symbolic relationships with one another and dissolves that linked the frustrating emotional barriers from one scene to the next. The play comes to an end as the actors repeat their worries into the audience. Clovis in a poignant moment draws her first nude, a mirror image of the opening scene in which Victor futilely retrieves her paintings, he rips open his shirt and in that same awkward silence poses for his wife with whom he is connecting in a volatile moment of confusion.
(11/14/01 12:00am)
Author: Rose Boyer Staff Writer "The number of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) treated at Parton Health Center has fallen very significantly over the last eight years," said Yonna McShane, director of Health and Wellness Education at Middlebury. Eight years ago, the Parton Health Center was treating 77 cases of various STDs; however, now they are now down to 29 patients. McShane noted that this success in infection prevention can be attributed to a few factors. First, surveys conducted by the College show that the number of students engaging in unprotected sex is dropping significantly. Other statistics suggest a decline in binge drinking, which can lead to irresponsible sexual behavior. Parton Health Center also deserves credit for this success because of its generous distribution of free condoms and oral dams in promotion of safer sex. Whatever the cause, McShane feels that "we're doing better, and students should be really proud of themselves." Nevertheless, she warns that despite this significant decline, STDs are still a threat to Middlebury students and college students in general, and should be taken very seriously.The encouraging numbers provided by McShane only represent students who have detected and are presently seeking treatment for STDs. Many of the conditions that are most commonly found on college campuses, such as auto-immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), chlamydia, herpes and the human papilloma virus (HPV), often go undetected and unreported for considerable amounts of time because of their asymptomatic nature. HIV, the virus that causes AIDS, for example, which recent studies claim has infected one in every 500 college students, can be present for many years with no symptoms. The disease, which suppresses the body's immune system, is most often spread through the exchange of semen, vaginal secretions and blood that can occur during sexual behavior.Chlamydia, which is caused by parasitic microorganisms and can be cured with appropriate medication, is one of the most common STDs treated at Middlebury. The disease sometimes shows symptoms, but often does not. As a result, infected students who do not realize that they are carriers can unknowingly spread the disease. It is also possible for women with asymptomatic chlamydia to develop pelvic inflammatory disease, which can result in sterility if not treated in time.Human papilloma virus, also called genital warts, is another STD that often goes undetected and unreported. This incurable condition, which is linked to an increased risk of cervical cancer in women and penile cancer in men, often has only flu-like symptoms, which often allow it to go unnoticed. Another frightening fact about HPV is that condoms are not always effective in preventing its transmission. HPV is spread through skin-to-skin contact, so if an infected area is not covered by a condom or latex barrier, it is possible for transmission to take place.Herpes is a more noticeable STD, as it causes multiple blisters to develop on the genitals. These blisters, however, misleadingly heal after about 12 days, while the infection and potential for transmission still exists. Gonorrhea, like chlamydia, only less common among college-aged students, is an STD that can have very subtle symptoms and can be difficult to detect.In order for a student to be certain that they are not infected with one of the less symptomatic STDs that frequent college campuses, they must be tested. Testing for STDs at the Health Center is free, and it is actually quite a painless procedure. The tests for chlamydia and gonorrhea, which used to be dreaded processes for men, can now be done with only a urine sample. A full sexual exam demands only a 45-minute visit and all test results are strictly confidential. Students who are not sure of their sexual health are strongly encouraged to make an appointment with Parton Health Center for the sake of both themselves and any possible future partners.
(11/14/01 12:00am)
Author: Raam Wong Opinions Editor Trying to write something about sex that hasn't been said countless times before is a daunting task. Like sex, I wouldn't know where to begin. What could I possibly say about sex that people haven't already learned from episodes of "Real Sex," high school health classes and eight years of having a democrat in the White House? Instead, I'll offer a different, more intellectual perspective on sex. As a psychology major here at the College for the last six years, I thought I'd tackle the issue by describing how individuals in our society come to learn about what sex is. So join me friends, as Dr. Wong elucidates on the construct of sex.We begin our exploration with the carefree and innocent prepubescent years (to be clear, I'm defining "prepubescent" as kids who are before the age of 11 for girls, 13 for boys and 19 for me). For many in our western culture, the first experience with the opposite sex happens when a boy and a girl play doctor together. I was quite fond of this game, but I think I misunderstood its purpose, as playing doctor for me usually entailed pretending to check my friend's temperature, giving her imaginary medicine and helping her determine if her insurance was an HMO or a PPO. The youth of today can learn about sex much faster by using the Internet. But this is a cause for concern. Using an Internet search engine, kids can find hundreds of adult Websites by simply typing in seemingly-innocent keywords like, "anatomy," "teenager" and "hot jungle sex."Similarly, kids can learn a little about sex by looking up dirty words in the dictionary. I used to do this all the time. (Used to? Hell, who am I kidding? My dictionary is open to the word "boob" as I write this.) The downside of this, however, was that my mom more than once caught me looking up dirty words. I'd have to lie by saying I was actually looking up words like, "condominium," "peninsula" and "vaginadoon." A child's exploration of the opposite sex remains innocent and playful throughout these early years until one fateful day when the child's whole, happy-go-lucky life is shattered. This day of course is when he walks in on his parents having sex. I would like to pause for a moment and ask you, the reader, to reflect on this horrendous day. Think back on the utter shock, disgust and fear you felt and have continued to carry with you ever since that day. OK, come back to me. Dry your eyes, Sissy. This ain't Oprah. If you're like most people, your experience probably went something like this: the parents, thinking the kids are asleep, forget to lock the bedroom door. After they begin to get it on — and consequently reflect on just how long 10 years of marriage to the same person has been — the groggy three-year-old child in flannel pajamas stumbles in and witnesses the most disturbing thing he's ever seen. The traumatized child is left with many questions about what his parents were doing and why mommy and daddy were wearing costumes when it wasn't even Halloween. Scarred for life, this leads the child to a life of weekly therapy, hallucinogenic drugs and a newspaper column.Why don't we put that messiness behind us, shall we? Youths may also learn a lesson in sex in the classroom. For instance, my fourth-grade class watched the cartoon "Where Do I Come From?" After watching the rather skewed cartoon depictions of sex, most of us were left with the impression that where we "came from" was blue Smurfs playing hopscotch. Soon enough, the youth hits puberty and his hormones begin pumping like crazy. But just as the adolescent feels like he is reaching his sexual peak and feel like he's about to burst, God plays a cruel joke on him. Alas, the physical signs of puberty begin to show. The adolescent instantaneously becomes positively the single ugliest specimen on the face of the earth. Pimples cover his face and his chicken legs grow out of proportion with the rest of his body. The awkward beast is then forced to look at his lanky, disgusting giraffe-of-a-body and realize no person is ever going to want to date him. It's God's cruel way of saying, "Not just yet, chief."The adolescent's sexual revolution is further stunted by the high school health class. If nothing else will send a teen into a life of celibacy, the textbooks full of nasty pictures of people afflicted with rashes and STDs will. The student leaves the class believing sex inevitably leads to a life of STDs, illegitimate children and, consequently, membership in the Kennedy family.Thus, once the adolescent has a sufficient amount of hang-ups and concerns about sex, he is well-prepared for the next step in his sexual development: college. College is a whole different beast all together, which I think The Campus sex poll does a good job of illuminating. So, therefore, I guess I'll skip the subject of sex on campus for now. And you were just getting into it, weren't you? Too bad. As a consequence, I guess this column will be shorter than previous weeks, and I'll end prematurely. Feel free to make up your own punch line here.www.middlebury.edu/~rwong
(11/14/01 12:00am)
Author: Jen LaRosa Staff Writer "Hooking up" or "going out": what exactly happened to dating? Isn't that the thing you do between these two extremes? You know, where customarily the guy takes the girl to dinner and conversation ensues. Then, after a lovely evening of good old-fashioned fun, they drive or walk home and a goodnight kiss (or more if it went especially well) ends the evening. This concept seems foreign to students at Middlebury College, and at all colleges for that matter. But let's not limit this analysis to just dating; what about all aspects of the college relationship scene (or hook-up scene, as the case may be)? Here is a little inside scoop as to how women at Middlebury view the situation (men, get out your notepads).After discussing a number of issues with female students around campus, I've found that a general consensus (or at least agreeable conclusion) can be drawn that accurately represents the female perspective of the college dating scene. When it comes to random hook-ups on campus, no one doubts their origins. Guys and girls can all say thanks to the source of their instant gratification: beer. After throwing around the issue of random, drunken hook-ups with some innocent female bystanders who didn't know what was coming to them, I've concluded that no one seems to have a definitive stance on whether or not they are wholly good or bad. The majority of females believe that they do promote the idea that sexual satisfaction without emotional involvement is commonplace and acceptable but sometimes a young and willing students just need a night where they can indulge themselves without any repercussions. But, how far is too far? Can anything real and successful ever result from a random night with a stranger? Most female students believe it is difficult to build a good relationship if its origins are based solely on sexual attraction. The problem at Middlebury, and most likely at all colleges nowadays, is that this is the way it is done. No one courts anymore or calls that someone they have their eye on in the middle of the week to take a drive to Burlington to see a movie. People wait for the weekend to call that someone they want to hook up with. There seems to be two extremes: long-term relationships and drunken one-nighters. Many women wonder whatever happened to casual dating as a means to get to know someone. Random hook-ups occur more often than not with practical She Still Says...strangers, while getting together with a guy friend would just be weird. The best solution seems to be a happy medium that has unfortunately become obsolete in these momentous college years. Then of course there is always that ever-popular, notorious solution that combines the best of both worlds: 'friends with benefits.' Here's the problem: some men are able to separate sex and emotion whereas women will inevitably combine the two, even though terms of the contract may have been predetermined. This, in turn, leads to the inevitable discussions we girls tend to have with a few of our closest peer psychiatrists, in which we analyze every move and intonation of our "special friend."So, once our psychiatrists determine our illnesses, diagnose us and send us on your way with a clean bill of health, why do so many of us relapse? After a clean break with a hook-up buddy, an ex-boyfriend or that "special friend," many female students acknowledge that it is extremely common to fall right back into their old routine with their old partner. This seems to happen either due to hope of rekindling that so-called old flame or perhaps simply for the instant satisfaction. Whether one can handle this relapse is the determining factor in whether or not it is a healthy mode of action.Relationships among students within a college campus are a very specific, complex and emotionally exhausting experience. While both men and women do find momentary contentment in random hook-ups, female college students do express the desire for more in the long run. The college experience nowadays is very spontaneous and very fleeting, which may be adequate and satisfactory, but many wonder what ever happened to exceptional.
(11/14/01 12:00am)
Author: Philippe Danielides Staff Writer What do the words skeevy, shifty, sketchy, dirty, horny, easy and unfaithful have in common? No, they are not Hugh Hefner's version of the seven dwarfs (although that would be funny), but rather adjectives used to typify a minority group constantly berated and victimized in American society. And as a member of this unfairly persecuted social group, I feel compelled to defend the honor of "college guys" everywhere. Even on a campus as enlightened and educated as Middlebury's, myths still persist as to underhanded nature in which we deal with women. Although I feel there are certain aspects I would like to set the record straight on, there are others that men should take responsibility for.Most people, especially females, are under the impression that the paramount goal of any Middlebury boy is the casual hook-up. What women consistently overlook is the fact that some guys are actually equipped with this innate mechanism known as "emotion." I would never claim that all guys are alike, and in fact, this variance in sexual behavior definitely extends to female race as well. On the whole, however, I believe men recognize that emotional involvement enhances the quality of whatever relationship you find yourself in (if you are in the minority that does not appreciate emotional involvement, I wish you well in your endeavors toward anonymous, meaningless, one night-stands).Recent trends in students' "sex lives" definitely point to the continuing unpopularity of emotional investment in relationships, however brief and alcohol induced as they might be. It is the misnomer that this is due to men's philosophies on college relationships that I have trouble believing. This condition is the result of mutually held expectations as to how hook ups should go, and these "parameters" have become more rigid every semester. There is no other way to explain the disparity between the frequency of high school and college relationships other than citing our new environment. As Kate Strovink '04 said, "College boys are only high school boys brought up a year." It isn't as if we all attend pre-frosh summer seminars on how to have meaningless casual sex, or on how force girls into awkward situations.He Still Says...In defense of my simple minded, good-natured gender, the phrase "it takes two to tango" pops into my mind. Ladies, a word of advice if I may. Expect a guy to get the impression that you want something to happen if you flirt with him enough. How often have I seen my comrades subjected to the almighty tease? If you do not want a guy hitting on you, make sure that you physically assert yourself. By that, I don't mean a swift kick to the groin. I also don't condone the old keep-your-friend-with-you-at-all-times-till-the-guy-gets-frustrated-and-leaves routine. He may get frustrated, but he sure won't get the point, he'll just dislike your friend. Just be aware of your physical actions and how your little admirer might interpret them.Lastly, one of the reasons why college boys are subjected to such cruelty is because we are consistently in the dark as to what our nice-smelling counterparts are thinking. Many problems arise because women assume men will be receptive to their subtle hints. This isn't baseball!! If college guys are expected to get the hint that you aren't interested when you twitch your nose and brush off your shoulders, chances are, they will continue to pester you all night. Instead, speak loud and clear, use hand signals if necessary to further illustrate your point, but most importantly, be gentle. We Middlebury boys may look rough, tough, handsome, debonair, charming, confident, ripped, and intelligent, but the fact is, ladies, if you don't lend us a clue, who will?
(11/14/01 12:00am)
Author: Andrew Brooks Staff Writer On Sunday night, Tim Miller's spectacular performance piece "Glory Box" was unleashed upon audiences in the McCullough social space. Movement and narrative became intertwined to form Miller's experience as a homosexual man in the United States and his fight for equal rights in the political recognition of his long-term relationship.As Miller moved through McCullough narrating his journey, the audience was guided through the past, present and future in the experience of being gay and living in the United States, Miller had the uncanny ability to create vivid imagery and emotions through spoken words and body movement.Miller, who is a professor of Performance Art at the University of California at Los Angeles, has been writing and performing pieces for over 20 years. As a vocal member of the gay community, Miller has constantly had to fight an uphill battle in his quest for equal rights. One of the "National Endowment of the Arts Four", Miller had received a federal grant in 1990, but later had it overturned due to the gay themes and imagery of his pieces. Most recently, he and his Australian partner Alistair have had to deal with the United State's non-recognition of their relationship and subsequent separation due to immigration laws. This experience sits at the center of "Glory Box."Miller's story begins as he introduces his relationship with Alistair, to whom the performance was dedicated. The performance was structured to build a viable base on which Miller could then present his and Alistair's, and ostensibly all gay and lesbian couples', inability to live in the United States with the same rights as heterosexual couples, and the emotional and spiritual strain that this lack of rights causes. The first of many vignettes centered on Miller's first contact with the idea of a hope chest. As he morphed into his five year old self, the audience was told of his mother's hope chest and what it meant to her. Its initial description in the performance was that of a place where a young girl puts items for when she later marries a man. However, this description does not hold true for long.As Miller vividly described the scene as a young boy getting naked in his mother's hope chest, he too got naked in the chest on stage. He seemed to subvert the traditional values that his mother had associated with the box, describing how as a boy he, "laid there and felt safe, full of hope." Gliding to the other side of the performance space, he took the audience with him through time to when he and Alistair were moving the chest from his mother's home to their own. Through the story, the audience is told of how in Australia the chest is not called a hope chest, but a glory box. The idea of a hope chest begins to further metamorphose into a glory box, transforming into something more exotic, outside of the confines of this country's socio-political value system. It becomes a place where we can put our hopes, dreams and experiences, those things that have shaped who we are today and dictate where we are going in the future, irrespective of hetero- or homosexuality. It is thus that Miller reaches into his own glory box in order to continue telling his story.What he creates is a moving love story that deals with trying to evade the misguided laws of a nation, all the while painting a picture about himself and his life experience. He tells of the present and having to deal with the fact that U.S. Immigration laws do not acknowledge his and Alistair's relationship. However, he does not get lost in his political message, as he again quickly transports the audience back to his childhood, this time to his nine year old self who gets "judgmental Twinkies smashed in my face." Miller is able to interject vivid moving images and a sharp political message with humor and jokes, allowing the piece to keep from stagnating in any one place, but continually progressing to its intended and carefully crafted end.He recounts learning to say the words "I love you" to Alistair and comments on always getting his hand literally and figuratively slapped by the trials that he has had to face. Yet, despite all of the facets of the story, the audience is constantly being brought back to the scene where he and Alistair are slowly approaching the reality of having to face the immigration officials in the airport, by virtue of which, they have to put their love on trial in front of the government. In his narration, Miller takes on the roles of others, but the audience is always aware that it is Tim Miller pretending to be someone else and not Miller taking on a separate character altogether. The performance is not one that necessitates different characters; instead, the performance is his life and the story of his love. His experience is made the spectacle, but the spectacle is such that the audience has the ability to relate to it and learn from it. His performance becomes an ode to the strength of the lesbian and gay community and a testament to his and Alistair's experience.The dénouement of the performance came as the audience was transported back to U.S. Customs, this time as Alistair is about to be called to the Customs official. It is here that everything that has come before in the story seems to come to a sharp point in the narrative. Will their love prevail over socio-political injustice?It does not.Alistair is not allowed through customs. In his recounting of the seen, Miller's emotion could be felt and scene through his raw and rough actions, his large gestures and the expression on his face. The audience is reminded that this is not a play and not a fabrication, but that it is Miller's life. It is an experience that his body and mind had gone through and will continue to go through with each performance.The last item in the glory box, full of hopes and experiences, is a compass.Bathed in warm orange lights and backed by blue, Miller tells of the compass that he has in his corporeal glory box. It is the compass in his chest, next to his heart, that will lead him and Alistair to a better place, a place where they can be accepted. The lighting served as a foil for his emotions, as his sonorous voice detailed the fact that in order to be together, he and Alistair would have to leave the country.It was at this point that Miller's final message became painfully evident, that by association, his country was rejecting him based on his homosexuality and his same-sex partner Alistair.
(11/07/01 12:00am)
Author: Laura Rockefeller Staff Writer Four couples stood in the spotlight this weekend in the Hepburn Zoo at the opening of "Getting To Know You," the sixth annual First- Year Production. Through movement, the words of the ensemble, the works of Mary Gallagher, Andy Mitton '01, Harold Pinter and others, Director Sam Elmore '00.5 created a collage piece about the many faces of relationships. As he wrote in the director's notes, the piece explores the stages of a relationship, from flirtation through to the break-up, while asking the question, "Who are we when we do these things?" What lengths will we go to in order to appear attractive to that particular member of the opposite sex?The whole gamut of intrigues and machinations that humans go through to draw each other into a relationship was put into perspective by an explanation early on in the production of the mating habits of other types of animals, from ostrich to alligator. Individual actors demonstrated the various cries and dances that animals perform to attract a mate. Then, the ensemble came to a realization: "And I have trouble just saying 'hi'."The set was very simple — eight stools sat facing each other — but complicated antics soon began as the people occupying the stools, in true-to-life fashion, began over-analyzing their relationships from every perspective possible. One of the most memorable pieces in the first half of the show was a monologue by Liam Aiello '05 where he talked through all of the agonizing deliberations leading up to speaking to the object of his affections. His simplicity and sincerity completely drew the audience in to his all too familiar dilemma while the girl causing all the problems was alternately hidden by the crowd of her friends and displayed to him from across the room, at what seemed like an immeasurable distance.The following series of individual scenes was interspersed with brief ensemble pieces that used movement and choral speaking to display many of the points one hits on the emotional roller coaster. One montage displayed, through a clearly structured dance, the tight connection between two people in a relationship, but then dissolved into chaotic movements as actors explained how lost they were before they fell in love. The segments like this, where all the actors worked through realizations as an ensemble, were interesting in that they reinforced how universal all of these struggles are. Each actor came to the realization in a different way and from a different experience, but they were all moving together.The second half of the piece moved on from the joy of coming together to the pain of breaking apart. Scenes dealt with many forms of separation, from simply deciding that the time had come, to murder. One scene dealing with issues of trust was played with particular sympathy by John Stokvis '05 and Shelia Seles '05. Their ability to find humor in the scene, even while trying to deal with the fact that each believed the other to have slept with another person, made it very real.All the different segments of the show came together to emphasize one thing. Through the course of a relationship people are constantly changing and adapting, intentionally or unintentionally. Each actor had a very individual and unique journey over the course of the play, but they all had to make similar choices to make their relationships work. The show began with the actors demonstrating that they all begin relationships by flirting, but each with their own style. By demonstrating their various flirting tactics to members of the audience, the ensemble drew the audience members into a special relationship with the actors they were watching.Throughout the piece, the audience continued to be involved in an unusual relationship with the scenes before them. The direct interactions that the actors had with the audience combined with the universality of the issues dealt to pull the audience into a close connection to the actors before them. Because of the alley seating, members of the audience also had an unusual relationship with each other. Behind each scene, members of the audience on one side of the theatre could see their counterparts on the other. In some instances it was the case that reactions to a piece came almost as much from the reactions of opposite audience members as from the piece itself.This connection between members of the audience emphasized one of the issues presented in the piece: that in relationships people tend to wait for cues from their partner before they take any decisive action. One does not simply react to a situation. People often wait for the reaction of their significant other before hazarding any comment themselves. Audience members may have found themselves doing this as they mimicked the laughter or silence of the other audience members. People were not only members of the audience, but were somewhat on display themselves as they were watched just as they watched other people.Although some inexperience was evident in a few performances, the honesty and commitment with which the company presented this piece was delightful. It was clear that each actor brought his or her own individual understanding to bear on their presentation of how we get to know each other. The scenes explored as many personalities and variations of relationships as were probably possible in one hour, and in many different ways. Through poetry, prose, movement and, in some cases, music, the production allowed the audience a look at all of the crazy things we will do in pursuit of love.
(11/07/01 12:00am)
Author: Becca Kaufman Staff Writer Christiane Bird is a freelance writer from New York. She writes about jazz and blues and makes travelogues on New York State. She is tall with a mop of blonde hair and when she came to speak at the Robert A. Jones '59 Conference Room on Friday, Nov. 2, to discuss the background of her new book "Neither East nor West: One Women's Journey through the Islamic Republic of Iran," she was stylishly wearing all black, looking very much like an artist from New York City.Just a handful of years ago, while in the early processes of creating her new book, she was also wearing all black and writing, but in a very different context. In 1998, Bird travelled to the Islamic Republic of Iran to write what they call in Persian a safarnameh, literally translated as a "travel letter." This was not an easy mission: Bird was an American and a woman, travelling alone in a nation known to be less than tolerant of these two qualities. Women, she had heard, were not even allowed to stay in hotels alone. Nevertheless, she wanted to understand this distant and unreachable place, which for her was important on a number of levels. In the first place, Bird was returning to the grounds of her first memories; her father worked as a doctor in Iran when she was very young. However, for years she had not been able to return to her early home because of the tight political restrictions against foreigners, especially Americans. The combination of these two factors plus our Western perspective of Iran as an oppressive, depressed, and sad nation added to her intrigue and her desire to better answer the question, "What is Iran?" As she writes in the first chapter of her new book, "I went to Iran to flirt with my childhood. I went to Iran to court the unknown. I went to Iran to see the effects of the Islamic Revolution for myself."The result of her inquiries was the basis of her presentation entitled "Public and Private Lives in Iran": what she sees as a large gap between the general perceptions of Iran and Iranians created from the strict religious and political rules under which they are theoretically obligated to live contrasted with their more personal spaces where their individual freedoms and opinions do exist. For the three months Bird traveled in Iran, she lived in this private world. Dressed as an Iranian women in the traditional hejab, communicating as best she could in the Farsi she learned before departing, moving in and out of peoples' homes in the cities and in the country, she found Iranians to be a colorful and complicated people who welcomed her into their home and their world with the same intense curiosity for her as she had for them.In her presentation Bird explained that the first lesson she learned was that "nothing there is what it seems at first." She gives numerous examples of her encounters with this phenomenon. For instance, women are required by law to wear the hejab, a large garment covering their entire body and head, or a head cloth and a larger robe, but, as Bird described, the women wear it differently. Some wear it sexy, she said, some like a school girl, some with a flare, some very dowdy. The bottom line was that, even though it is a regulation and a uniform intended to ameliorate individuality, it does not totally succeed. She also made reference to music, which the government attempts to regulate, which is not always successful, Bird says. In taxis, she heard Michael Jackson and the Backstreet Boys blaring from the radios.Perhaps Bird found the greatest disparity when she entered the homes of Iranians where she ate, conversed, listened and observed. She called the home the threshold: the outside colorless and plain and the inside brightly and creatively decorated. Even in the modest homes, she says, Iranians use artistic liberty to make their homes comfortable and pretty. The biggest shock for Bird was how the women dressed within the home. Instead of black robes she saw tight black pants and tube tops, long black hair and as much make up as they wanted. Here both the men and the women were free to talk about subjects taboo on the streets from sex, drugs and alcohol to politics, literature and music. Her experiences often followed these lines. She would meet men and women and her initial perception of who they were was not completely accurate. At one point, she was at daily prayers with a group of women, when over the loud speakers she heard "Death to America, Death to Israel" and then the women repeated the words. Realizing that Bird, an American, was standing at their side, the women made sure she understood the message: it is not the American people they are protesting; in fact, they like Americans. It is the American government. Discovering these contradictions was the heart of Bird's journey. Reconciling them was another task, but Bird was able to keep a perspective. She found many things that she grew to love and now misses back at home in New York. When asked what, she responded, "having time to enjoy people and enjoy your friends, the sense of quietude."
(11/07/01 12:00am)
Author: Ashley Elpern Editor-in-Chief For Middlebury students trying to make it big in the real world, one essential thing is needed to succeed: etiquette. For the 50 or so students who attended the Career Service Office's Etiquette Dinner last Thursday night, the world of etiquette came alive, courtesy of Jodi Smith, president of Mannersmith Etiquette Consulting. Starting with "mocktails" and finishing with a decadent dessert, those in attendance learned proper conversation and dining skills and left much more satisfied than those who had normal dining hall fare.Arriving at the Chateau Grand Salon at 5 p.m., in business casual dress of course, my friends and I encountered the cocktail party situation, with a full bar of mock piña colodas, martinis, bloody marys, rum and cokes and beer. We passed up the bar at first and gravitated towards other friends. This, we soon learned from etiquette guru Smith, decked out in a pink hounds tooth power suit, is the first cardinal sin of cocktail parties, as the point is to meet people who will become business and social contacts.After berating us for not mingling with strangers, Smith gave the basics of meeting new people at cocktail parties. Cardinal rule number two: never eat and drink at the same time, for then you cannot shake hands with the person you are meeting, and always hold your drink in your left hand because the right hand always does the shaking. Smith reminded us that when wearing nametags, they go below the right shoulder, as handshaking rules state that a person's eyes should move down the right arm, up to the shoulder area and finish at the other person's eyes.Before practicing introductions, Smith counseled us on proper first remarks, which include giving one's name and a "tag," one interesting thing about oneself that the person is comfortable talking about. For example: "Hi, I'm Ashley Elpern and I am the editor-in-chief of The Campus." My new friend would obviously be impressed, and the conversation would flow from there. If the discussion does not go so smoothly, topics such as sports, movies, books, travel, hometowns and the weather were a few suitable topics that Smith approved of. Sex, politics and religion are strictly verboten. Smith suggested that these conversations last five to eight minutes, ending with the collecting of personal information if the two parties would like to talk about business or pleasure in the future. After two "lightning rounds," we began our dinner instruction.Before sitting down, Smith instructed us on proper sitting techniques — enter the chair from the right and leaning into the table, pull the chair toward your place setting until you have reached a comfortable spot, then you may sit down. The hardest part of the meal was not diving into the food immediately. There were pre-plated Caesar salads and a basket of bread, but first we had to listen to the rules of dining. Folding the napkin in the lap came first, with Smith counseling us to fold it in half and place the crease at the knee. Next came locating one's utensils. Smith suggested using the "BMW" strategy, starting with the bread plates at one's upper left above the forks, moving to the meal plate in the middle and the water glass above the knives and spoons.After receiving permission to eat our salads, Smith recommended taking small bites to allow a business conversation to flow while eating. On that vein, Smith reminded us that at business lunches, the focus is the conversation and not the meal, so it is often a good idea to eat something beforehand.The soup course came with its own rules. Smith instructed us to tilt our bodies forward at the hips while bringing the soup to our mouths. Scooping the soup also has a procedure; one must scoop away from one's body so that the lip of the spoon will not collect soup that might spill on the table or one's clothing. With the main course, vegetable stew or chicken with green beans and potatoes au gratin, Smith gave us a break from etiquette lessons and allowed us to converse freely, mostly focusing on the quirky manner rules that we had learned throughout the night. Dessert was definitely the highpoint of the night, with a chocolate fudge cake that made us set aside all of our composure.Smith's interest in etiquette began in high school, as she was "a people watcher." She cites reading "Miss Manners" as one of her resources to learning the social graces. In college, she majored in motivational psychology with a focus in behavioral predictors of social situations and upon graduation created and delivered training on polishing people skills for the Federal Government. From training blue-collar workers to change their social behaviors to acting as a human resources line manager in the financial services market, Smith expanded her scope of influence and founded Mannersmith Etiquette Consulting in 1996. 'The process was challenging but well worth the effort," she said. "Being a business owner takes a lot of motivation and strong belief in self, even when others are telling you it will never work."Smith said that for years she had been giving presentations and workshops for fun, but realized that as so much of her time outside her job was taken up by etiquette that there was a viable business.Today, Smith holds a myriad of seminars and events, ranging from application help for high school seniors to dating and wedding preparation to business protocol. The business is 60 percent corporate and 40 percent university based, but she also creates customized programs for clients with special needs, such as a recent program on international etiquette for treasury management officials.Smith sees etiquette as a way to present oneself in a positive, composed way. "It is about having confidence in yourself and making those around you feel comfortable," she said. "It is my life's work because I truly enjoy it."
