Words have power. That’s an unavoidable truth.
For better or for worse, words can make or break a person. The old adage about sticks and stones is unfortunately false.
The power of words was put on display last weekend, when an event surrounded by controversy brought 1,200 students to Renaissance Coliseum.
The title of this event contains words so powerful we chose not to fully print them.
“N*gger Wetb*ck Ch*nk,” or N*W*C*, is a “comedic play,” as described by the actors and original writers. At Bradley, N*W*C* was promoted as an educational experience for students to reconsider their thoughts on racism and stereotypes, and part of its intent was to spark conversations about these issues.
Although conversations may have occurred, N*W*C* did not leave the meaningful impact that was expected. Many people left the play without a major takeaway, feeling like they learned nothing new and as if no important message was reinforced.
But that’s a pretty general statement for us to make, right? Don’t you think this must be a misinformed, biased judgment made by just a couple people with the opportunity to write an unsigned editorial?
We disagree.
Those conversations that this program sparked – we’ve had a lot of them. We’ve had them among our staff, with our roommates, our other organizations, our advisers, our professors and people we barely know. There have been surveys, social media comments and phone calls reinforcing this lack of confidence in the meaningfulness of this play.
What we’ve found comes back to the power of words, specifically those words that comprise the title of N*W*C*.
There is a shock value to the inclusion of these words in the actual title of the play. Beyond the negative connotations of these words, this shock value – the power of the words – was one that clouded the entire performance for many students.
Nearly every person who attended the event took their seats with preconceived notions about what they were about to watch.
For some people, there was already established anger and outrage at poorly executed promotions, at the overall handling of the event and at the audacity of its name. For others, there was hope for interaction and discussion to address race-related issues. Still others, specifically the significant amount of students that were there for a class requirement, felt indifferent.
For the majority of attendees, those preconceived notions were not changed during the hour-and-a-half play.
Anger was not dissipated and indifference was not transformed to interest. Perhaps the only attendees who left the Coliseum feeling any different than they did when they entered were those who had hoped for a discussion and were instead met with a disappointing post-event meet-and-greet.
So, what was the point of the event?
If we were all so focused on the name of the play that we could not see past it to accept its messages, then the event did nothing more than reinforce the beliefs we already have and the feelings we had already established toward the program.
It may have generated a few beneficial conversations, but many were only a debate about whether the event was even worth the money or the time spent.
But no matter what we thought about the event – whether we were angered, disappointed or just didn’t care ¬– it’s up to us now to continue having those discussions about racism, stereotypes and oppressive systems, and how to dismantle them.
