Students “March to Arch” to Demolish Sit-Down Lunches
By Corey Sherman ’07
Editor
I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Messers Hillbrand and Pascale for their time and effort in organizing and executing Tuesday’s “March to Arch.” Headmaster Shanahan summed it up perfectly when he cited not only the march but also the efforts of Rachel Kauder-Nalebauff ’08 and the rest of the “Divest Darfur” Campaign as forms of action seldom taken with our generation.
The march’s repercussions, I feel, will not be as strongly felt in days, weeks, months or perhaps years to come, however. As my News colleagues and I suggested in our winter term editorial which dovetailed with our published referendum on sit-down lunches, the administration has said openly that they have no intentions on making any sort of “major modifications” to sit down lunches. The vague wording allows the students to have hope, and the administration to have the ability to do nothing—an ideal situation considering these lunches were implemented without consulting either the faculty or students. Therefore, the problem ahead of the Choate community is this: How can we change a policy that cannot be changed? A situation that is seemingly impossible lies before us. I, like Hillbrand, Pascale and the 5th form student council, believe, however, that student action can, and if done right, will change this policy.
The point of protesting is to show whomever you are protesting against that you are willing to sacrifice something for the greater good of your cause. From Tuesday’s demonstration, it shows that no more than 125 (a very generous number considering no formal body-count was done) sacrificed 20 minutes of non-committed time of their day to make a change. However, when The News conducted its referendum, only 26 students said they were outright “in favor of the current policy.” The math just doesn’t check out.
Does that mean, then, that our student body is all talk? No, I don’t think that is the case. Our fifth form student leaders showed over the past few weeks that we DO want to take action and we CAN.
Here is what I propose: When the proposal that Hillbrand presented to Shanahan is not heeded in a manner that seems responsive, a more potent protest must commence-- walking-out on Sit-Down lunches. Those people who would not even give up their free time during conference period today would inevitably be skeptical in light of the threatening Sunday detention. But until anyone from Judy Donald, the school archivists, to one of the deans to Mr. Shanahan himself could point out a time where 850 students all had Sunday-D, then I say to-hell with that fear.
Did the freedom riders in Jim Crow South decide to not board their buses because jail-time or violence was at risk? Did Gandhi give up his hunger strikes because he thought he may crave a nice meal? While our cause is nowhere near the political importance of those two protests, what is behind our protest is important. We need to show that the voices of the students matter and that by our working together on THIS protest we show that our community is already a community in need of no forced interaction.
Was I in the front of the line today on the march? No, I was not. Were many of my classmates even there? No, I am afraid they, like most of the student body opted to hang-out during conference period instead. But I pledge that if further action is taken in a more serious fashion that shows that we, as a student body, care about change and care about giving up luxuries such as sleeping in on Sunday morning, then I will give my all to participating, organizing and carrying out that action-- hopefully with the class of 2007 behind me.
