Search News


Browse Archives

News

'The Dionysian End to Summer'

September 30, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Smith College rings in the new academic year in a most revealing way. Still, administrators worry that its students may not be putting their best foot forward. As a result, the institution has curbed what some consider lewd student behavior at a popular academic event.

The college’s annual opening convocation -- attended by nearly the entire study body and a smattering of faculty -- is more rock concert than it is somber academic ceremony. Students shout and scream at the acknowledgement of their year or residence by invited speakers, who often strain to be heard above the roar of the audience. Although some faculty still choose to wear formal academic regalia to the festivity, it is safe to say that some students leave the college’s dress code behind for this time-honored celebration of the new academic year.

Of the more interesting traditions at the women’s college, some students have taken to attending the event in somewhat, if not fully, revealing attire. While some students and faculty at Smith consider this an outward expression of the college’s free and welcoming nature, others are less than thrilled about being subjected to the nudity of their fellow classmates or pupils. The growing exhibitionism of students at convocation in recent years and a mounting number of complaints from both students and faculty led administrators to curb this year’s event. Now, following this year’s more subdued convocation, debate simmers among the college as to how and if this tradition should continue.

By most accounts, Smith’s opening convocation was, for most of its history, a formal academic ceremony not unlike many events held at most institutions near the beginning of the academic year. The event, however, became a more student-oriented and overtly celebratory event following the introduction of the college’s first female president, Jill Ker Conway, in 1975, according to Maureen A. Mahoney, dean of the college.

“It has evolved appropriately since,” said Mahoney, who sent a note to students before the event encouraging them to act responsibly. “But, the limits have been pushed so that students are coming with less clothing than we would like, partially because of the feeling of freedom being at a women’s college and it being a place where women can be themselves. Still, I don’t think students think of it as a public display. It’s not the best publicity for Smith outside of our confines. Now that images are so readily available on YouTube and other places, we don’t want people to get the wrong impression of Smith.”

In her note to students regarding proper behavior at the event, Mahoney stated that last year only 27 faculty members of some 275 attended convocation. She said some have expressed to her that they find student behavior and the partial nudity at the event embarrassing. In addition, a number of students have expressed a similar displeasure in recent years.

One of the more pointed criticisms of the event came in a spring editorial in the student newspaper, The Smith College Sophian, from a graduating senior. In it, she argues that the intimidating environment of the event is tantamount to sexual harassment.

“Upon actually arriving at Convocation, I found myself behind a topless girl with painful-looking nipple piercings; when I turned around to look for a clock, I realized I was face-to-face with the sheer-fabric-covered crotch of the girl behind me,” Anna Sauber Kuntz wrote in the editorial about her experience as a first year. “I left and I’ve never been back to Convocation since.… I signed up to go to a nationally renowned school and get a good education. I didn’t sign up to see naked strangers. It isn’t as though they warn you in Smith brochures or on campus visits.”

Others at the institution, including some faculty, view the event and the student shenanigans in an entirely different light. Jay Garfield, philosophy professor and this year’s faculty speaker, said he has attended every convocation in his time at Smith and appreciates the spirit of the event. This year, in the opening to his speech, he even acknowledged the student tradition by welcoming both “the naked and the clothed.”

“It’s often a bit of a shock to first-year students and faculty members who have never gone before,” said Garfield, who views the event as a pep rally for the academic year. “Unless you’re excessively prudish or want decorum for its own sake, you want students to be excited about academics. There’s no reason to put a damper on that. I wish the people who had problems with it would get over it.”

In defense of the tradition, some students expressed a similar sentiment. These students place great importance on the spirited event and consider the partial nudity of some of their fellow students as something akin to an act of community or solidarity.

“I think it’s a compelling, important and fun tradition,” said Sophie Ragone, a Smith senior. “It’s important that in this beginning part of the school year we celebrate the mind and the body together. It says something about us as a school that these are women who are smart and also beautiful in their many different ways. I don’t think it’s acting out. I don’t see it as us versus them. It’s unfortunate that people see it that way. For me, it is the Dionysian end to summer before the school year begins.”

According to both students and administrators, this year’s convocation was a bit more subdued than it has been in years past. Ragone said that, in response to common student complaints, organizers reduced the number of speakers at the event and allowed students to comfortably contain their rowdiness to certain moments. Additionally, heeding the call from Mahoney and the administration that students act more respectably, Ragone also said she was a bit more clothed this year.

When the tenor of events encourage inappropriate behavior at other institutions, Mahoney wrote in a note to students, administrators often change those events entirely or cancel them altogether. As for the future of Smith’s opening convocation and the tradition of students attending it in their skivvies, Mahoney said students and administrators are discussing ways to ensure that everyone feels welcome and that it continues to be a defining moment for students and faculty each year.

“Smith is full of wonderful contradictions,” Mahoney said. “I think students here, truth be told, don’t understand this as a somber academic event.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on 'The Dionysian End to Summer'

  • REALLY??
  • Posted by Stephanie , Professor of History at ERAU - Prescott on September 30, 2008 at 1:50pm EDT
  • I am a female prof at a university where the student body is 80% male. I spend my days teaching history, and teaching by example to all my students of both genders that women are powerful, professional, intelligent, and capable. Part of this lesson is that women are more than their bodies, and that they don't need to use (or abuse) their bodies to be powerful. I am shocked and appalled that such a venerable institution has bought into the lie that flaunting one's body or objectifying one's self (even if only for the sight of other women) is liberation. I find this both disgusting and deeply upsetting, and am mortified that the article felt the need to link this descent into bacchanalia to the first female president's attempts to make convocation more student-focused and less somber.

    Enthusiasm for education does not require nudity. I have been to many pep rallies with all kinds of traditions, and never felt deprived because no one started to strip. I feel deeply for the young woman who was harassed - even assaulted - during the rally her freshman year. That behavior is not inclusive, open, or accepting. It is mob-ish, lude, and demeaning.

    End this wretched tradition, for the inherent dignity of all human beings, including the women Smith claims to serve.

  • Is this a joke?
  • Posted by Cicero on September 30, 2008 at 3:15pm EDT
  • Everyone associated with Smith should be ashamed (though I fear they are beyond shame). What has crude, uncivilized behavior to do with enthusiasm for academic life? Smith should be teaching these young women how to proudly contribute to the intellectual life of the nation - in a dignified and appropriate manner. The last thing this country needs is more half-or-fully-naked barbarians hooting and shouting.

  • The Dionysian End to Summer
  • Posted by Algen on October 1, 2008 at 8:20am EDT
  • Just another example of the double standards of elitist collages that have one standard for themselves and another for the rest of society.

  • Posted by Smithie 2007 on October 1, 2008 at 10:15am EDT
  • I graduated from Smith in 2007. I would like to think that I was educated to be a productive member of intellectual society, and that I am fullfilling my duty to bring my education into the world. However, I also paraded around at Convocation on three separate occassions wearing little more than duct tape, enjoying the chaos, and embracing my fellow women in a way that is both rare and invaluable. Smith has a reputation for being a heady, edgy kind of place, and we like it that way. Its certainly not for everyone, but it forms friendships and establishes bonds that I couldn't have found anywhere else. I can't imagine Smith any other way.

  • Posted by another smithie on October 1, 2008 at 10:45am EDT
  • The fact that Smithies have created a safe space to take off their shirts and reveal their body-paint covered torsos in the name of school spirit is a fact that should be applauded, not decried. When men do it, it's in honor of sports teams; here at Smith, we get more excited about our education.

  • Keep the tradition
  • Posted by gary wilson on October 1, 2008 at 11:25am EDT
  • My daughter graduated Smith and participated. I am most proud of her, and most pleased with who she became during her years at Smith. Let the tradition stand as is.

  • YEAH!
  • Posted by Paul on October 1, 2008 at 11:25am EDT
  • As guy I look forward to seeing the videos on YouTube when I get off work today!
    If I where a Father with LOTS of cash to spend on an education for my daughter, I would have to place Smith a bit lower on the list than I would have before reading this article.

    Go Girls! Shake that THANG!
    I promise to repsect your degree in the morning! LOL

  • Just let them be happy once
  • Posted by Tom on October 1, 2008 at 11:40am EDT
  • The Puritan mindset--"The nagging fear that somewhere, someone may be happy" (Mencken) is still alive an well, it seems. Can't you just let young people be free-spirited for once. No one is forced to undress at the convocation, after all. What's next, a muslim-feminist alliance for mandatory Burkah? That'll stop any
    "Bacchanalia" ideas, for sure.
    If only the Mayflower had sunk--we'll have that chip on our shoulder for a long time...

  • The True Meaning of Tolerance
  • Posted by Maureen on October 1, 2008 at 1:40pm EDT
  • I am an alum from Smith, class of 1998. This is NOT a tradition, at least not as little as ten years ago. We just wore funny hats to convocation and chanted our house names back then. I'm all for anti-puritan ideals; I was even the captain of my dorm's topless fire drill (a long story). But the difference here is choice; people in my dorm could choose to participate in or completely avoid that activity, whereas no one should have to miss opening convocation because they are uncomfortable with nudity. I especially feel sympathy for the first-year international students, some of whom come from very conservative cultures. They are already adjusting to a great deal of change, and to have people parading around naked in front of them during the first weeks of school might be a bit much to expect them to openly embrace. So, should they have to skip their opening convocation if they are not totally comfortable with the nudity? What about the Ada Comstock scholars who would like to bring their kids? If people want to let it all hang out, that is fine, but it should be at small events that are no big deal to miss for those who don't want to see it.

    In addition, I am a high school teacher now, and I completely understand all the professors who skip the convocation. I would not want to see my students naked, either.

    People who argue in favor of this are doing so in the name of tolerance and open-mindedness. What they fail to see is that by insisting that the convocation be open to nudity, they are in fact barring many people from it, and that is not right. Tolerance means we also respect those who do not have the same comfort levels with public nudity, too. By hijacking convocation, the pro-nudity folks are ensuring that the only people that can now take part are the ones who share their philosophy. How open or tolerant is that?

  • The Dyonesian End of Summer
  • Posted by Victor Erimita on October 1, 2008 at 3:20pm EDT
  • According to Prof. Garfield, quoted in the article, one has two choices. You can either be excessively prudish or favor decorum "for its own sake," or you can have no problem with finding yourself subjected to a crowd of others who inisist on public nudity. Commenter Tom repeats the, "either you agree or you are a Puritan" meme. One assumes this is the way Prof. Garfield teaches philosophy at Smith, through the creation of false dichotomies and sophistry rather than through that absurdly obsolete notion of critical thought.

    For this portion of contemporary culture "excessive prudery" and "puritanism," simply mean any moral standards with which I disagree. I'm taking a wil guess that if someone decided to, say, smoke at the Convocation, Mssrs. Garfield and Tom would have no hesitation about visiting their moral judgment on such behavior, which judgment would in their view be neither puritanical nor excessively prudish. How about wearing a pro-life button? Or any other statement, fashion or behavior that would be considered beyond the pale of the groupthink norms that have taken over campuses?

    Decorum, Prof. Garfield, is not always merely "for its own sake," by which you simply mean decorum can have no other significance, only empty restriction. As a pohilosophy professor, you should know the intellectual history of how such silly notions have come to dominate our culture, but it sems you don't. Decorum is, among other things, a sign of respect. Respect for others in the crowd who do not share your affection for the libertine, and for the embarkation upon what used to be an exciting and sacred journey of intellectual discovery and work.

    But since no one believes in such things any longer, believing that "education" should consist of four years of narcissitic self-assertion, it is entirely fitting that the aggressive imposition of sexuality upon others, whether they like it or not, is either dignified as some high expression of "vitality," or just simple fun and exuberance. And if you disagree, you are a mere empty-headed "prude" or lover of restrictions "for their own sake," since no other sake is possible in the mids of the libertine.

  • Please Understand...
  • Posted by Concerned Alumnae on October 1, 2008 at 7:45pm EDT
  • This situation is not about prudishness. The situation was viewed by many students as sexual harassment and hazing and the environment was considered hostile by many. Students and professors no longer wanted to attend a time honored tradition. However the college responded and most agree that this year there was no problem.

  • Posted by A Current Smith Student on October 2, 2008 at 5:00am EDT
  • This year's convocation was much, much better than last year's. As a first year last year I was incredibly freaked out...but getting the email from Ms. Mahoney (excuse the spelling if it is incorrect) really made a difference for this year I think. It was not nearly as scary, and the clothing had much more coverage. I do want to note that there is not any peer pressure into dressing sparingly--I am totally covered each year and am not made fun of or bothered by anyone else because of this. There is an incredible sense of freedom that I do get from convocation that I enjoy greatly, although I do agree that nudity is not really necessary for this feeling to happen. I feel like convocation kicks off the year with a spirit that carries through for the whole school year--a sense of freedom, pride in being a woman, and excitement for the academic year.

    What did upset me at convocatioon was not the nudity, but rather the chanting of Obama's name during the speaker's speech. We are in John M. Greene Hall ranting and raving about our acceptance of ALL, and then the entire auditorium is chanting Obama's name. How does this display acceptance? Also, when the speaker said, "Welcome Democrats," *cheers ensuing from the crowds* "and welcome Republicans." Instead of cheers, came boos. This is intolerance at its best in my opinion. I was personally offended. This for me completely overrides concerns about what students are wearing, and questions my belief in Smith as a highly accepting community.

  • Another Smithee's Opinion
  • Posted by Zsuzsa on October 3, 2008 at 2:10pm EDT
  • As a former Smith student, I have three points I would like to make:

    1. Unless it has gotten significantly worse than it was when I graduated in 2003, I don't think that convocation is that big a deal. In all 4 years, I went to convocation dressed like a normal, rational human being, as did my friends. There was never any pressure on us to do differently. Would I have preferred to see fewer naked classmates? Yes, but...

    2. Just about everything at Smith was at least PG-13 when I was there, with some things heading for R or NC-17 territory. Everything, from convocation to the student newspaper to the chalk drawings on the sidewalk, had some sexual component to it. I knew that when I went, I went anyway, and I've never regretted it. But if I had a daughter, I wouldn't take her to visit my alma matter until she was at least in high school.

    3. It saddens me to see Smith making the news for all the wrong reasons. Whether you liked convocation or not, it's not what Smith should be about.

  • Challenging cultural norms & freedom of expression
  • Posted by Danielle on October 3, 2008 at 2:10pm EDT
  • As 1999 graduate of Smith, I am appalled at the way this Higher Education community criticizes opening convocation at Smith. Outsiders like you would have no knowledge of the incredibly unique culture at Smith. There are many traditions, new and old, that you simply would not even begin to understand, let alone appreciate. Opening convocation is one of them.

    Convocation is an incredibly passionate celebration. Smith is a lively community, a place where challenging normative behaviors is encouraged. Students express their opinions through speech, their bodies, writing and any other means within their power. As one commenter mentioned, Smithies are an edgy, creative, and zealous lot; and, yes, we do like it that way.
    When I was a student entering my first year at Smith, I could barely contain my excitement. As a leftist, lesbian, atheist, intellectual, I felt very isolated in my suburban high school. Convocation was to be my first introduction to an incredible community of Smith women who would value my opinions, a place where I finally felt like I belonged. I knew I would have just four short years in that safe haven, and I shouted my head off at convocation to express my joy just like everyone else.
    Perhaps the 1998 graduate who said convocation was more subdued in the past doesn’t have such a clear memory? I remember it being just as raucous as in the 2008 Convocation YouTube video that I watched. I know I was clad in my bathrobe and underwear, as were the rest of the women from my house. As I recall from 1995, there were a plethora of topless women chanting "we love you Ruth" to welcome Ruth Simmons, the first ever African American president of an ivy league or women’s college. I’m sure Ruth was overwhelmed at first, but I know she came to love our outspoken and often theatrical ways. I also remember she happily came outside to greet a house of naked women who stood outside her window one evening singing to ask her to ring the bells for Mountain Day.

    The nudity at convocation isn’t sexual; its point (much like the yelling, the costumes, and the banners) is to reclaim the many behaviors that society deems unfeminine or improper. In the world at large women are marginalized, objectified, overly sexualized, and stifled. At convocation, Smithies are revolting against these things. They are venerating their bodies, their voices, and their minds; reveling in their freedom and enjoying this once in a lifetime opportunity to be as bold and crazy as they want to be. Moreover, convocation and other similar events give Smithies a much needed chance to blow off steam – academics at Smith are incredibly rigorous.

    Smithies love their college to a degree that I don't believe is replicated by students and alumni of other institutions (unless sports are involved) and that passion comes through at convocation. As an alumna, I am proud of my alma mater and of the students who continue to push boundaries, who value freedom of expression, and who have an ardent love for education.

  • Posted by Kim on October 5, 2008 at 9:45pm EDT
  • I think the last line of the article said it best "it is an educational event" and to my knowledge I don't know of anyone who showed up to class naked. Granted, I graduated from Smith in 1996 but I think I would have heard if someone had done that. Being in a liberating and accepting environment is great because it allows students to be themselves and to also be challenged. Everyday is a teachable moment at Smith.
    However, I think where self expression goes wrong is when we refuse to think about how our behavior or actions affect others and futhermore when we let go of common sense. I am a Smithie and I have seen the in your face attitude some of my sister Smithies can have when they are questioned or confronted about their actions. But I do believe that when virtually the entire faculty and quite a few of your classmates decide they don't want to show up at an academic event, which used to be one of the great traditions of the college, it is clear showing up naked to isn't part of the "tradition" anymore (and I agree with Maureen that it wasn't a tradition in the first place). I think it makes a mockery of the institution, the event and disrespects the purpose of intelligent women coming together to be educated. I have on numerous occasions told my friends hilarious stories about how the women at Smith would dance around with their bras on at the all college picnic or had topless fire drills. Unfortunatly, this article did not leave me laughing. It made me feel sad to know that Smithies now feel like they have to literally let it all hang out to express themselves thereby alienating their faculty and classmates instead of bringing them together which is ultimately what convocation is about.
    And I was also on campus when the naked women welcomed Ruth Simmons the first Black president of an Ivy League institution. Personally, although I understand what they were TRYING to do and I am sure they had the best of intentions, I (and my friends) found it to be disrespectful given the historical significance of Ruth Simmons's moment. Most presidents stick around for at least 10 years. She left after 5 to become the president of Brown. Maybe she just got tired of naked women ringing her doorbell.