![]() |
| From adelinanthony.com. Used with permission. |
by Adelina Anthony
When I applied for
admission to the doctoral program of the Department of Drama at Stanford
University ten years ago, I included a clearly written statement about my politics
as a self-identified working class Xicana lesbian theatre artist. (I also had
stated as much in my application to the UCLA MFA in Directing. I cite UCLA
because institutional violence is endemic and I had experienced a similar
situation there three years prior to attending Stanford.) It mattered to me to
acknowledge what kind of graduate student the department might be accepting,
because my artistic/ intellectual/ activist pursuits root themselves in this
self-same Xicana body.
For two years—while I successfully
completed required courses in the department and maintained a 4.0 G.P.A.—I
was mentored by Cherríe Moraga which resulted in my exposure to a rich and
emerging area of study: Xicana-Indigeneity. Under Moraga’s guidance I examined
assumptive notions around hybridity, nation, mestizaje, Native American
diaspora, and performance. But much transpired, including my mother’s death,
before I found myself sitting in a Shakespearean class I took to appease my
department. For the first time my GPA dropped down to a 3.9 (gasp!), because I
was contending with real life issues, including the antagonisms Moraga and I
were facing. We might have thought ourselves “crazy,” if she hadn’t confirmed
our suspicions with the Chair at the time. She asked him point-blank if
colleagues in the Department were talking about us.
To
make a long story short, eventually I made one of the most difficult decisions
of my life and wrote a twenty-page letter documenting my choice to leave
Stanford. Here is an amended excerpt:
“On the afternoon of Oct. 5,
2005, the administrator of the department informed me about an upcoming meeting
with the Graduate Studies Committee (GSC) in which we would discuss the
deadline for completing the last two of my second year exams. To my shock this
administrator nonchalantly relayed the GSC’s concern around my mentorship with
Moraga. Holding a copy of my transcript in hand, it was stated I should
discontinue taking courses with her. My classes with Moraga were framed as
something negative on my transcript, a characterization to which I object. To
be fair, the administrator did say I could continue to have a mentorship with
her on my own free time. Underlying this dismissive statement comes the mandate
most students of color deal with perennially when working within the confines
of historically Eurocentric departments like Drama or Literature.
To achieve what we need,
we are expected to work double-time, over-extend ourselves, and create “unofficial”
relationships with mentors of color. If I had known such objections would be
made to working with Moraga, I would not have applied to the Department of
Drama. In hindsight, I realize now I might have been better off in a department
where my ethnic identity and the interests related to this identity would not
be viewed as a hindrance to my scholarship, but rather valued as a part of what
I bring to these studies.
While I was taken aback by the administrator’s message from the GSC, it made
perfect sense in light of the blatant antagonism and tactical aggression
displayed toward Moraga and me during the 2005 Spring quarter when we
co-directed the production of her play, The Hungry Woman: A Mexican Medea.
I could easily fill chapters with issues ranging from the historical lack of
access to means of production; to willful ignorance and insensitivity toward
Xicana-Indígena aesthetics; to the paternalistic, patronizing, “tactless”
patterns of whiteness in academia. Suffice it to say the resentment towards us
during and after this process—because we confronted the department on these
very real issues—was palpable. Moraga and I were perceived as threats to the
department. This is why I believe my mentorship with her was attacked. What
else to call it?
For all intended
purposes, the GSC (on some level) acted out of a genuine interest in my growth
as an emergent scholar. It was not always awful at Stanford, or I would have
left much sooner. On the contrary, most members of the GSC are very kind and
polite. Yet the unexamined politics and the sheer resistance to hearing us
respectfully as Xicanas, obscures fundamental change and paradigmatic shift
away from the privileging of Eurocentric scholarship and methodologies. It
means going beyond niceties.
What makes all of this
writing complex, aside from the themes already touched upon, is the fact that
the department did accept a working class Xicana lesbian, which implies the
following: You cannot separate me from my personal and communal struggles.
Unlike other kinds of students, I do not have the privilege to study
race/ethnicity and perhaps, someday, theorize it away. I don’t have that choice
(unless I turn my back on the people I love). I live the effects of
discrimination. My family does, too. And so do my overwhelmingly
disenfranchised communities. So, yes, while I can enjoy the linguistic Olympics
of theorists such as Blau, Frye, Barthes, etc., when it comes to my own
intellectual pursuits—I’m looking for a theory, an ideological position—that
saves my life. My family’s life. And that of my communities.
For now, I refuse to put
my Xicana body in such an embattled position. I refuse to be one more Xicana
who has to suffer the racism and eurocentrism of any department of higher
education. The costs are too high. I choose to walk away, and in this act of
agency and this letter, put the responsibility back onto a department that
advertises diversity.”
When I
am asked, “What happened at Stanford?” this letter, either in its entirety or
amended, is always part of my response. I made the grave mistake of assuming it
would be different at Stanford University, precisely because they house Moraga
as an artist-in-residence. During my time there I witnessed many interactions
that demonstrated lack of respect for Moraga's academic contributions. Often as
students we assume that the one person of color supporting us in our
departments can come to our rescue. Often we learn they are trying to survive
the institutional violence lobbied at them, especially if they are truly the
only person of color, mujer and/or queer there. If they do not have tenure,
they risk everything—which puts both of you on precarious ground. This is part
of the power of institutions and those who benefit from it.
Ironically, almost two years ago, I felt it was time to return; not to
Stanford, but somewhere where I could pursue my academic leanings. Every
department has its issues, but this time around I researched interdisciplinary
departments with diverse faculty of color, womyn and queers. But if in 2003 the
best thing Moraga did was recruit me to Stanford, the second best thing she did
in 2011 was to passionately dissuade me from returning to the academy. I do not
write this to invalidate the value of a higher education or the sheer tenacity
and survivorhood of my academic comadres. I too was first taken aback by Moraga’s
position. But I understood it.
Please
keep making art. I’m afraid we will lose you.
I knew what she was
afraid of—that I would be academically “trained” away from my artist
voice. Ultimately, the decision was mine to make. After much
pondering, I realized returning to the academy was related to my desire to
teach there. Yet teaching at the university level, if it ever presented
itself, would have to come into my life because I honored the art first. I
don’t elude myself since my own academic friends of color are hard-pressed to
find jobs within the academy, let alone tenure track positions.
Institutional violence
will try to take away your mind, your spirit, your body… your artistic voice. I
do have my art. It’s something UCLA or Stanford could never take or claim as
theirs, because it is my Xicana lesbian arte. If it makes one academic comadre
or student feel less crazy, then I have done my job to help heal what
institutions and their players inflict upon us. Yes, we are “angry” mujeres,
pero locas… no creo yo.
Adelina Anthony is
an award winning queer Xicana lesbian multi-genre cultural activist, teacher,
artist, director and producer. Her work addresses colonization, feminism,
trauma, ancestral memory, gender, health, race & ethnicity,
immigration, sexuality, land & environment, institutional violence and
issues generally affecting the lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgender/two-spirited
communities. She is the creator of La Angry Xicana?! which is part
of her triptych La Hocicona Series.

I'm not a working class Xicana but as a Chapina-Gringa jota I still identify so much. I have always been a seeker (and creator) of knowledge but was never a "good" student in the graduate school setting, so I thought I had no reason to complain because I should just be grateful for the opportunity (to loose my mind). I eventually made it through an MFA program, barely, by reaching outside to family, community and just continuing to do art in the most painful times. I am so grateful to those that fed me, loved me, played with me, rehearsed with me, reflected my truth back to me, read my work in the middle of the night, invited me to read and perform, and helped me in my darkest. I am no picture of perfection or superwoman, nor do I want to be. Mis respetos a la Adelina for continuing to do art and write her truth. Me inspira.
ReplyDeletenot even tenure protects women of color from institutionalized violence.
ReplyDeleteThank you. A friend sent me this link because I just went through a very similar experience based on having a hearing impairment. I needed this.
ReplyDelete