COLUMN: Penn: Anti-activist, and proud of it

From Miranda Salomon's, "Notes From the Lilypad," Fall '96 From Miranda Salomon's, "Notes From the Lilypad," Fall '96 From what I've seen, Penn students are not apathetic. Our approach to strong or passionate views isn't indifference, it's anger. Consider the reaction last November, when a group of undergraduates staged a demonstration. They protested The Book Store's then-new Clinique counter and expanded Revlon section which, the activists felt, were an inappropriate use of space that should contain books. The demonstration didn't cause the make-up department to close, but it did make Penn students think about the issue -- and about demonstrations in general. Some students told the demonstrators that no one was paying any attention to them, and that the whole idea of the protest was just stupid. Whether that's true or not, the backlash against "Books not Blush" was far more violent and negative than the original demonstration was ever intended to be. The harsh reaction to this harmless protest shows that the Penn community does not respond positively to gentle satire or relatively inoffensive attempts to prove a point. We demand more dramatic displays of conviction. Kathy Change was a fixture on campus for well over a decade, and her intention was to draw attention to a political cause: the platform of "Transformation Party" that she founded. Since dancing, playing audio tapes and screaming all failed to hold the interest of more than a few people, Change followed the example of another woman who burned herself alive to prove a political point. We responded to her self-immolation by finally listening to what Change had to say. For a week, the Peace Sign was covered with flowers, and vigils and processions were held in remembrance of this woman and her life. Individuals consumed by guilt are sorry they never listened to her while she was alive, and articles about her life and death have appeared in newspapers across the country, from the DP to The New York Times. Change has become a legend; she has immortalized herself and forever changed our perception of College Green. Why are Change's views important to so many now, when just two weeks ago they weren't? Why do we legitimize her suicide by paying attention to political ideas that didn't appeal to us until now? Change's suicide was a selfish, attention-grabbing act that worked. The traditional methods of attracting large numbers of people to a common cause are simply unsuccessful here, no matter how well-publicized the events or how earnest the organizers. Marching with signs, speeches on the Green and benefit events -- with the possible exception of the perennially successful Cancer Ball -- meet with annoyance that often becomes hostility. Change's protest in front of the Peace Sign was different. A combination of shock, horror and guilt has motivated the Penn community to react to one demonstration we should not sanction. If we didn't listen to Change's ideas, she should have tried another method to reach us. Suicide is not a legitimate way to publicize a political belief. Change put the life of a police officer in danger with her act, which has traumatized an uncounted number of people who saw the event or knew her personally. Her death and subsequent fame only encourages others who feel underappreciated to imitate her successful attempt to find an audience. The Penn community should stop feeling guilty about Change's suicide. We should concentrate instead on celebrating the living -- letting people express their views, however unusual, and treating those who don't fit into our personal preconceptions of what is normal with a degree of respect. I would rather read about the police officer who tried to smother the flames than about the woman who caused him to risk his life. We should acknowledge her death without giving her more value as a corpse than we did when she was alive.