There has been significant controversy around campus lately concerning the impending evictions (or relocation) of Hill House residents by the college’s administration. Phrases like “economic stability for the college” and “expansion of the institution” seem to float in and out of conversations as possible reasons for these actions. Yet whatever the core explanation may be, the administration is attempting to paint a picture of a struggling educational body fighting to stay afloat in the midst of a serious economic crisis.
It seems that the student body, as a whole, is finding it difficult to choose a side on this issue. On the one hand, we all would like to see SLC thrive economically and substantially, and gaining more rooms seems to be an important step in that direction. Yet, on the other hand, it is difficult to look past the emotional realities behind evicting people from their homes, particularly during a national housing crisis.
I became a member of the Solidarity Club after hearing about this issue because I felt very strongly that the latter argument outweighs the former. I would like to dedicate this article to explaining why I feel this way, and I sincerely hope that the reader will take this time to reexamine his or her personal feelings towards the issue, whatever that may entail.
I transferred to SLC after spending two years at a private university, primarily for the writing program. However, as I explored other disciplines, I realized that what I really love about this college is its commitment to the individual. I know it may seem that this process often serves to isolate students from the “real world,” causing many students to bury themselves in art and research, thereby viewing the world and its problems from the outside looking in. Yet I think that this philosophy serves to unite the campus both inside and outside of the classroom. In general, we place importance here, at least theoretically, on social justice, art, and learning for the sake of itself, rather than on making money in the future. How, then, can we say that removing elderly tenants from their homes in the name of economic stability is a moral decision? Are the needs of this institution so desperate that we will put the emotional and financial stability of our neighbors on the back-burner?
To this, a lot of people might argue that the college has proposed a substantial cash incentive, and are working with local housing authorities to find alternative arrangements for the residents. After speaking with one of the residents myself, I was made aware that the “cash incentive” is not enough to compensate for the controlled rates that the tenants are currently paying and for the expenses involved in moving. Furthermore, the administration only began working with housing officials a couple weeks ago, when they realized that “concerned students” were doing background research on the issue.
In a recent article*, [Sadie Lou] Comment Editor Helen Goodman asks: “If we trust that the cash incentive is indeed substantial, isn’t the school putting these tenants in the best possible position in spite of the inevitable trouble they will have to go to, that we will all have to go to, in order to shift ourselves around and make room for growth?” I would like to answer this question with an affirmative “No.” “Shifting around” for a woman in her eighties is a highly emotional proposition; it is not the same thing as asking a twenty-something college student to do the same. The residents have formed a community of mutual support. How can we content ourselves with breaking up this community, banishing residents to unknown districts, in order to strengthen our own community? Is this what Sarah Lawrence College means when it brags about putting the individual first? “You are different, so are we,” we say, but only if you are different in the way that we approve of. Otherwise, move it or lose it!
There has been a great political awakening of the youth of this nation, and this includes SLC students. This shift in consciousness has become evident in the efforts many students here have been pouring into working on the Obama campaign, or in raising awareness and funds in support of hurricane survivors in New Orleans and the victims of genocide in Darfur. Personally, I do not see how this community can work so diligently for people in need halfway across the world and yet so easily overlook the struggles of those who live on our own campus! Stopping the administration from evicting our neighbors will send an important message to the world that Sarah Lawrence is not all talk. By dispelling the stark contrast between liberal theory and sincere action, we can realize true social justice.
*??Editor’s Note: Helen’s initial article on the eviction issue can be found here.