Occupy Columbia University hosted its own fireside chat opposite University President Lee Bollinger’s on Tuesday night, with students gathering outside of Bollinger’s house to reflect on the Occupy movement’s place at Columbia and on the University as a whole.
About 20 students attended the event, which was billed as an alternative to Bollinger’s more exclusive fireside chat. They huddled around hot chocolate at 116th Street and Morningside Drive—watched by as many as five Columbia security guards at a time—and discussed issues ranging from students’ financial problems, to Columbia’s relationship with the community, to the University’s Manhattanville expansion.
“At a time when … there’s increasing emphasis on administration rather than education, we wanted to discuss this stuff,” Theo Di Castri, CC ’12, said.
About 50 students chosen by lottery attended Bollinger’s fireside chat. Yoni Golijov, CC ’12, called the Occupy event “a statement about transparency and democracy and government.”
“The point of today is to have an open-ended discussion ... [At Bollinger’s fireside chat], the questions are screened, there’s not a lot of democratic discussion or transparent discussion.”
Security guards occasionally interrupted the meeting to ask why Occupy Columbia was there. The most interesting interruption, though, came when Shawn Lonsfjord, an event assistant to Bollinger, asked the students if they had any questions for Bollinger.
Lonsfjord, who dubbed the Occupy event a “satellite fireside chat,” offered to give those questions to Bollinger’s assistant, who would in turn pass them on to Bollinger himself.
Not everyone liked the idea at first. Several students were unsure the group was prepared to present formal questions, and others questioned what sending Bollinger questions would accomplish.
“The process is the point. It’s not just about … individual questions to Bollinger,” Chelsea Schieder, GSAS, said. “It’s about access to the hierarchies embedded in Columbia.”
For some attendees, though, it was important to make progress with the administration directly. Elliott Grieco, CC ’12, said the Occupy movement has faced opposition from administrators, citing a November incident in which Barnard put severe restrictions on access to campus when Occupy CU tried to hold an event there.
“We ended up in the basement of the Diana,” Grieco said. “I don’t know why they did that. We just wanted to meet.”
Ultimately, attendees wrote questions, letters, and notes to Bollinger, giving them to Lonsfjord.
Several students said that the security guards and Lonsfjord treated than much better than others had at past events.
“The symbol of us being treated respectfully is more important than a question-and-answer,” Josh Faber, GS, said.
Some students at the event said they were inspired by a resurgence of activism at Columbia last semester, and hoped that that trend would continue. Others said they were curious about the Occupy movement and were interested in participating.
“I’m here because I want to explore this as an avenue for activism on campus. That can be an awkward battle,” Di Castri said. “I don’t know if this is the format that’s effective, but the most important thing is to start a platform.”
Daphne Chen contributed reporting.
COMMENTS
Comments will be moderated in accordance with our comment policy