ACDC sponsors discussion to evaluate theme housing
By Richa Bhala, Staff Writer
The Amherst College Diversity Coalition (ACDC) hosted a forum on theme houses last night. Over 60 students, most of whom live or have lived in theme houses, attended the event, which was intended to foster discussion on the divisive issue.

"We just wanted to talk about issues that people think about, but don't ever constructively discuss," said Pem Brown '06, co-sponsor of the event and a member of the ACDC executive board. Brown and Ava Jones '06 researched the history of theme houses on campus and selected a group of house presidents and students to participate in a panel discussion.

Brown said the discussion was prompted by a variety of sources-students, Daily Jolt posts and alumni. "There's been a lot of pressure from alumni," said Jones, explaining that theme houses are concerned with maintaining alumni approval. "Especially for Themes of Amherst there seemed to be a lot of pressure within [Charles Drew] house to satisfy the alumni." Jones is a member of Charles Drew House, while Brown does not live in a theme house.

The discussion focused on the positive attributes of theme houses and the educational and programming value they bring to the College. Several panelists addressed the editorial that ran in The Amherst Student on Oct. 15, which suggested that theme houses lead to self-segregation rather than diversity.

Shannon Dobson '06, co-president of the French House, emphasized the unique role of the language houses. "I think our campus would be impoverished if we didn't have some group exploring Francophone culture," Dobson said. "We basically practice French as if we [were] in France ... It's a supplement to our lessons here."

French teaching assistants who live in the house encourage an environment where everyone speaks French, according to Dobson.

Graham Dumas '04, president of Marsh House, which focuses on the fine arts, spoke of the role of the theme houses within the whole College community. "Theme houses are not just beneficial to the residents, but to the campus as a whole," Dumas said. "It's a critical mass of people in a theme house. It's an established institution, bigger than any club, with more power on campus. We are able to do more and attract more in terms of programming."

Panel members refuted the idea of self-segregation within the houses by focusing on diversity within each house.

"I never would have lived with this group of people and learned what I've learned from them," said Diana Cappiello '05, president of the Russian House. "It's really about meeting new people. It's an opportunity for depth as well as breadth, to go deeper in exploring your academic field."

Though the discussion following the panel was dominated by those in favor of theme housing, several students discussed its flaws. Matt Vanneman '06 questioned the need for a physical space to organize programming. Courtney Dowd '04, a member of the panel who has never lived in a theme house, also had some concerns.

"I have a problem with having students that are all very interested in cultural programming put together," Dowd said. "It takes away their ability to live their daily lives with students of all kinds." Dowd also spoke of the inequity in how certain groups have theme houses and others do not.

The issue of self-segregation was repeatedly addressed by members of theme houses. Elan Ghazal '05 spoke of the natural inclination towards self-segregation in Valentine and created by administrators who divide freshmen housing into smoke and substance- free as far more of a problem than any perceived imbalance in the theme houses.

Chris Sorrentino '06, a Pride Alliance board member, also spoke on the panel. LGBTQ students do not currently have a theme house because no department is willing to fund them. He spoke in favor of a safe and comfortable place for student minority groups.

"ACH (Asian Culture House) was able to use their space to combat what was said on the Jolt and make something positive out of that," Sorrentino said. He also mentioned how LGBTQ students are further in need of a supportive living environment because they often have not lived in a community distinctly their own.

Ghazal suggested that the dialogue was becoming repetitive, as there was little opposition to the theme houses present at the meeting. He advised students with concerns to contact their class representative to the College Council, which conducts a semi-annual review of the efficacy of theme houses.

Students suggested alternatives to the current system, such as more single-floor theme houses integrated into other dorms. Dean of Residential Life Charri Boykin-East acknowledged problems in the system, including a lack of upperclassmen living in the houses.

"In 1990, there used to be a more even distribution of all the classes in theme houses," Boykin-East said prior to the discussion. She cited the added restrictions on theme houses, which were imposed in an attempt to make the application process more rigorous, as intimidating to seniors who don't want to put in the time.

"I would hope that the dialogue would create some common ground," Boykin-East said. "Recommendations should be made that are more inclusive. It doesn't have to be 'us versus them.'"

Issue 09, Submitted 2003-10-29 12:03:01