Oct 26 2008
Pointing fingers and pie in the face
Melissa Hill
23 October 2008
Today Melissa Hill spoke at Bethany/ESR Peace Forum about third party politics.
Three-and-a-half years ago, Bill Kristol spoke at Earlham College.
Melissa is a volunteer coordinator for Ralph Nader/Matt Gonzalez in Indiana, and Florida, 2000 was bound to come up. When it did, tension filled the room and the decibels jumped. Quickly, the energy focused on the center of the room, on one person shouting at Melissa about Nader’s 2000 campaign.
Halfway through Bill Kristol’s speech, a student climbed onto the stage and threw a pie in his face, then ran out of the building. Bill (and Earlham president Doug Bennett) wiped the pie off his face and continued his speech, to a standing ovation.
I found the forementioned part of Peace Forum to be inhospitable. I found the pieing of Bill to be provocative. When I look at Bill’s experience at Earlham through the lens of Melissa’s presentation, I am humbled. If shouting and pointing fingers at a speaker feels inhospitable to me, how can throwing a pie at a speaker be anything else?
Sure, there are some key differences: Melissa is young, a woman, and not part of the seminary community hosting Peace Forum, while the person who shouted at her is older, male and has contextual status as a professor. And though he was sitting, he is much taller and larger than Melissa.
Bill Kristol and Doug Bennett
Bill is rich, middle-aged, white, male, an advisor to the Bush administration, editor of a national weekly magazine, while the student who pied him is young, short, small, Asian-American and held little weight at the college.
Oh, and Bill was paid about 100 times as much as Melissa for his presentation.
These power dynamics are important to perceived and real threat and comfort. They heighten my discomfort with this Peace Forum, perhaps in part because I have an uncomfortable memory of being called “f*cking arrogant” by another male, older, seminary professor when I, as an Earlham student, spoke at Peace Forum (ah, how fitting, I was speaking about the pieing). But I can’t let myself off the hook after pointing these dynamics out.
When we invite someone into our home, school, church or other community, we are responsible for hospitality. While I still appreciate the political and cultural message made with a whipped cream, ketchup and chocolate syrup pie, I must admit that my acquiescence with that act was inhospitable to Bill.
So how do we disagree and express strong emotion when interacting with guests? It’s one thing to argue vehenmently with our own families and communities – can we be similarly authentic with guests, and also hospitable?
Good questions you are pondering.
I think another difference between the two settings is that Peace Forum is a more intimate setting than the public event where Kristol spoke. Presumably those attending Peace Forum would comprise a more homogeneous group than those attending a public event (even though Peace Forum is considered public, I’m sure). And although the pie-r was someone very committed to nonviolent change, and still chose what was definitely a provocative act, it seems like Peace Forum attendees could be presumed to be persons with a commitment to congenial conversation and discussion.
Maybe I have a bias because I voted for Nader in 2000 and 2004, but it seems like “fighting” over what happened in 2000 is a sure sign that the Enemy is winning.
Thanks for the write-up.
I came prepared for that and have witnessed and learned a great deal about political systems, beliefs and steadfastness this election year. I was not shaken or afraid and I feel what that gentleman said was out of ignorance and fear. I actually feel sorry for people who either refuse to hear the truth or refuse to see it — or acknowledge that fear as a form of political bigotry.
I can sympathize with the pie-thrower in that wanting to shake people out of the matrix — but because of the setting of the pie event (an Earlham College event), I can see how it could have been construed as hostility (Kristol was a minority in political alignment, for example). I was working at the Palladium-Item at the time, and the whole fiasco was regarded as a big joke among the staff — so perhaps throwing the pie didn’t do much good outside the Earlham bubble.
Of course, pointing fingers and yelling at me obviously doesn’t do much good either.
So what would be a more effective way for these people to communicate their frustrations? And how can a host facilitate and ease dissent in the audience?
But yeah, dang. Next time I’ll ask for more moolah.