LIBERAL ARTS NOW by Tiernan Dunagan

 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xfZv7-eYk6jpFljly1KXAUFOo-1pVRw-/view?usp=sharing

In this parody of the opening sequence of Apocalypse Now (1979),

Tiernan reflects on her experience with Fordham University

at Lincoln Center.

Following in Jesus' Footsteps

Following in Jesus’ Footsteps  The Church of St. Paul the Apostle’s commitment to inclusivity  By Ava Miranda

    In light of recent class discussions about writer and civil rights activist, James Baldwin, I wanted to locate inclusive Christian spaces within New York City. As a Catholic woman of color, this outreach plan also stemmed from a desire to resolve my recent crisis of faith. While there are many factors behind my current religious dilemma, I predominantly struggle with the manipulation of Catholic doctrine to justify bigotry and racism. Over the past few years, I have noticed ongoing strides among particular congregations and church groups to exclude and condemn marginalized communities. The resulting revision of Christian dogma to support a white, cisgender male demographic is not a new phenomenon, however. 

As James Baldwin describes in his essay “Everybody’s Protest Novel,” a theological terror pervaded white consciousness during the 19th century. Following the Christian assertion that Black people were inherently evil and estranged from God, white slaveholders believed it was their religious duty to “purify” them through subjugation. As he notes, during this time, the color “black was equated with evil and white with grace” (17). For this reason, Black people needed to be “robed” in white by their white counterparts to achieve salvation. This theory was not factual however, but manufactured by the white majority in power to uphold slavery. At this time, religion was utilized as an instrument of oppression to gaslight Black Christians into believing that their subjugation was warranted. 

As Baldwin further explains, Black people were expected to worship a God “who had made him, but not in His image.” This contradiction became an inescapable facet of Black identity as it was deeply embedded in the Black psyche upon birth. Baldwin concludes his essay by urging his readers to divest themselves from this falsehood. He calls for his Black audience to overcome this narrative by subscribing to a different theology–one that does not require them to fight for their innate humanity. 

After reading “Everybody’s Protest Novel,” I wanted to adopt this mindset in relation to my own religious experience. My goal was to unearth pieces of media that followed a similar ideology, and departed from the white Catholic narrative. 

In researching different works, I discovered a previous exhibit titled “God is trans,” that portrayed God as a black, queer male and was showcased in a New York City Catholic Church. As you can imagine, these pieces led to a great deal of uproar among white Christians who claimed it was blasphemous for God to be depicted as a transgender Black man. If Catholic doctrine claims however, as Baldwin states, that all people were made in God’s image and likeness, God is inherently black and queer as he reflects his creation. While biblically accurate, this portrayal was condemned because it did not align with the white supremacist narrative. 

Inspired by the message behind “God is trans,” I visited the church that displayed this piece: the Church of St. Paul the Apostle. Located next to Fordham University’s Lincoln Center campus, this place of worship is known for its beautiful sculptures and stained glass windows. In examining its art during my visit, I noticed a genuine effort towards racial inclusivity. While most churches portray Jesus and the Saints as fair-skinned or clothed in white, St. Paul the Apostle’s Church flaunted paintings of deeper complexions and statues constructed from darker mediums. For example, a replica of the famous Madonna of Bruges sculpture by Michelangelo, lies at the front of the Church, and depicts the Virgin Mary and infant Jesus. While the original, located in Belgium, is made of marble, the replica showcased at St. Paul’s Church is completely bronze. Similarly, in another painting (pictured below), of the Crucifixion, the two kneeling angels’ faces are white; however, in contrast, Jesus’ face is shaded much darker. This change to his traditional complexion is also present on the parishioner missalettes. 

When placed in conversation with Baldwin’s essay, St. Paul the Apostle’s Church debunks the nineteenth century claim that black skin is inherently evil and requires purification as they display darker toned art as sacred and holy. At a time when marginalized individuals are being religiously displaced, this step towards inclusivity feels incredibly reassuring and meaningful. 

The Power of Perspective in Narrative Nonfiction: Killers of the Flower Moon and Malcolm X - Kendall Tubbs

If I had a nickel for each time I watched a 3.5-hour-long epic about racial violence this semester, I’d have two nickels, which isn’t a lot, but it’s weird that it happened twice.

Martin Scorsese’s Killers of the Flower Moon, adapted from the 2017 nonfiction book of the same name by author David Grann, tells the story of the Osage people living in Oklahoma and the period known as the “Reign of Terror” in the early 1920s, in which the Osage began rapidly dying under mysterious circumstances following a sudden influx of wealth from the discovery of oil on their land. 

The central Osage family that we follow through the film is that of Mollie Burkhart (neé Kyle), portrayed by Lily Gladstone. Following Mollie’s marriage to newly returned World War 1 veteran Ernest Burkhart (Leonardo DiCaprio), her mother died of a strange illness, her three sisters were murdered under increasingly suspicious conditions, and Mollie herself became dangerously ill. Happening parallel to these events, not coincidentally, was Mollie’s growing interdependence on Ernest and his uncle William Hale (Robert DeNiro), who, under the guise of benevolence, was vying for the Kyle family’s immense fortune and claim to the oil-rich land. 

Where Scorsese’s adaptation departs the most from the book is the lens through which he chose to convey the story. Where Grann takes a more true-crime style approach, giving facts and details, building a mystery from the vantage point of the Osage themselves, Scorsese chooses to follow the plot through the vantage point of the oppressors, chiefly Ernest. This is visible even from the posters, which bring DiCaprio to the foreground. In doing so, little mystery as to the source of the murders is maintained for a large duration of the film, with the blame (unsurprisingly) landing on the shoulders of Ernest and Hale.

However, while we see the story largely from Ernest’s point of view, he is never painted as the protagonist. Rather, the audience is encouraged to distrust and dislike him from our first introduction, not insignificantly due to his presence as a white man on indigenous land, playing a role in an indigenous story. Instead, the moments where the vantage point shifts are some of the most compelling in the film, especially those in which we see Mollie’s experience. 

Mollie is undoubtedly the champion of the film, and for reasons far beyond her being the sole survivor of her generation in the family. It is through her efforts and advocacy that necessary outside attention is brought to the plight of the Osage, through her that we witness the brutal impacts of Ernest’s malice not only on her family but on herself as well, and on her that we pin our hope for the future of a people so continually wronged.

Perhaps reinforced by the perspective being that of the oppressor, one of the greatest shocks in the film was not when Osage deaths were revealed to be at the hands of white oppressors, but rather when Mollie’s appeal to the government for help and support for the Osage people is heard and answered. So much of our history is told in this way, through the lens of the oppressors and the group in power, that we anticipate the erasure of the voices of those impacted. 

Scorsese is acutely aware of this, and even more aware of who his audience is. I may have reached the message of implication even earlier than most moviegoers around me. You know what’s not fun? Watching a movie about years of genocide and hearing them mention the place where you went to prom. 

Even for those of us who didn’t grow up in proximity to the Oklahoma border, he makes it abundantly clear at the end of the movie that the perpetual erasure of indigenous voices is something that a white American majority willingly contributes to. In showing the narration of Mollie Burkhart’s story as a radio spectacle to a, you guessed it, entirely white upper-class audience, viewers are urged to reflect on to what extent they engage with stories like this as spectacle, and the complicity they have in similarly sitting and experiencing a retelling of this tragedy. While both Scorsese and Grann worked closely with the Osage people to tell their stories truthfully and honor their experiences and culture, it calls on audiences to reflect upon the ways in which we receive stories and who controls how they are told.

When watching Malcolm X, I couldn’t help but reflect on the apparent similarities between the two movies. Both were adapted from narrative nonfiction, both have a daunting run-time, and both are centered around experiences of racial prejudice and violence. Where Malcolm X differs, however, is in the framework through which the events of the film unfold. We follow Malcolm through this life, experiencing everything through and alongside him. 

It may appear at first glance that this is the “correct” way to adapt a historical drama to film, after all, the voices that are too often silenced are the ones that should be amplified and given a platform in order to gain a thorough knowledge and reveal the truths of history. However, Killers of the Flower Moon takes a stance of making a movie, not for those impacted most directly, but rather for those who need to hear it the most. If that’s the case, it succeeded, with the Reign of Terror and the Osage people being brought into the foreground of conversations in a way it has never been before. It seems that there is no one right way to bring these stories into a collective consciousness, but their existing there at all is imperative.

Power and Control: The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes by Ricardo Alanis

 “Absolute power corrupts absolutely” these words flew around my mind as I watched the latest installment of the celebrated Hunger Games series, The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes. The story revolves around the rise to power of a young Coriolanus Snow, played by Tom Blyth, as he mentors District 12’s Lucy Gray Baird, portrayed by Rachel Zegler, through the 10^th annual Hunger Games. Throughout the nearly 3-hour runtime of The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, the themes of authority and exploitation are incredibly evident. We are transported to the world where, after a bloody civil war, the Capital, the victor, institutes the annual hunger games, taking two tributes from every district. The 10^th Hunger Games showcases the shift from a routine showcase of power to the commodification of human life. Coriolanus does everything in his power to better the Hunger Games’ ratings and keep Lucy Gray alive in order to win the coveted Plinth prize. An unexpected romance flourishes between the two due to Coriolanus’s tricks. However, a question asked by Lucy Gray, “Are you helping me because you care or because you have something to win?” hints towards a more sinister side. This sinister side of Coriolanus is confirmed in the latter third of the movie as he moves in the ranks from his exile due to his cheats to his glorious return to the Capital. This return comes off from the backs of the betrayal of his anti-hunger games best friend Sejanus, portrayed by Josh Andres Rivera, and Lucy Gray.

As I sat in that packed movie theater, I contemplated how similar his arc is to that of Marlow from Heart of Darkness. These are two ambitious young men who pave their way through the exploitation and commodification of human life. Throughout Heart of Darkness and  The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, both characters initially start by having quite a naïve and quite simple view of the world. Marlow believes that his trip to the Congo will simply bring him riches and fame. Coriolanus believes that if his tribute wins the Hunger Games, it will lift him from poverty. Throughout both stories, the characters slowly become more familiar with the people they exploit, with Marlow going deeper into the Congo and Coriolanus becoming closer to Lucy Gray and getting exiled to District 12. However, their conclusion is where these characters deviate completely. Marlow becomes much more philosophical and numb to the atrocities he experienced, and he tries to be a cautionary example to the sailors who hear his story. Coriolanus, however, finds a way to get back to the Capital and return with fortunes off the backs of betrayals and his charming personality. Coriolanus serves as an example of who Marlow could have been had he gone even further in the company, whilst also serving as a much more successful Kurtz, giving into his evil need for power.

Fans of The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes may be disappointed by how the movie portrayed Coriolanus as much more sympathetic and morally gray compared to his literary counterpart. The reason for this is Coriolanus's lack of inner dialogue, where his dark desires are more thoroughly explored. A notable exchange between Coriolanus and his cousin Tigris, portrayed by Hunter Schafer, denotes his character arc. Throughout the movie, Tigris refers to Coriolanus as affectionately as Corio. However, after all his betrayals and his triumphant return to the Capital, she simply states, “You look just like your father, Coriolanus.” This is significant since Coriolanus’s father is revealed to have been the bloodthirsty creator of the Hunger Games. 

Reflections of an Assassination: A Malcolm X Poetic Adaptation

By: Alborz Etemadi      

Once upon a time, not long ago, before,

Past Kennedy’s death, much violence in store,

Voices shrill filled conference halls galore,

Silences stilled till Malcolm X they met no more,

The chickens have come home to roost for sure,

A man of steel, fighting racism's hateful bore,

His fiery-eyed zeal, words of equality he'd pour,

Race relations, please! Can we not ignore?

A revolutionary was he, fighting for transformation,

A missionary extraordinarily, urging for reformation,

His racial heredity serving his cause with affirmation,

Protests so feverishly, misunderstood sets a conflagration,

The Nation and he part ways, explanations seem a distortion,

Tension accentuated, his life takes a turn causing an escalation,

A pilgrimage undertaken, Malcolm returns with a realization,

Muslim solidarity replaces separation,

Car bombs try, fear creeps, threats of assassination resonate,

Faces pry, followers weep, plots of devastation consolidate,

Looming end nigh, yet he knew he had to participate,

The night's sky echoed the question, seeking to recalibrate,

A conscious sigh, confronting the deadly bait,

His conviction lies, gives voice to invigorate,

Adversity spies, Malcolm continues to communicate,

A leader's cry, to his followers, he'd never abdicate,

In fear they lie, his words bring strength to reciprocate,

Against violence, he defies, his moral compass to reinstate, 

The uncertain multiply, his voice like armor, their only advocate,

Even as the enemy spies, his commitment, fear could never dominate.

The threats increase, looming doomsday atop,

Shift sets, his release seems to abruptly stop,

A speaker espoused peace, his wisdom nonstop,

On the lookout, police, assassination plots nonstop,

A disturbance assembled, drawing everyone’s scope,

Silence scrambled, echoes of gunfire pop,

His body crumbled, as bullets pierced the top,

A leader toppled, death having its final drop,

His daughters and wife amidst a panic-stricken crowd,

Charlatans on life, whose violent actions were avowed,

News of strife, stands the world unbowed,

Echoes rife, reality hitting as soft as a cloud,

Yet in this chaotic drive, their dignity never allowed,

Innocence to dive, away from the mourning crowd,

Their loss went live, as Malcolm’s body shrouded,

In torment, they thrive, their resilience loudly vowed.

Then in the aftermath, as grief seized the community,

Casting shadows in the path, shook the core of unity,

Mourning Malcolm’s bloodbath with an unusual impunity,

Feeling the unspoken wrath, awash in an sea of opportunity,

A symbol of a struggle, his life encapsulating humane beauty,

Emblem of a bugle, his voice echoing beyond acute scrutiny,

His story a muddle, his death unlocking a fatal beauty,

The curious huddle, trapped in a whirlwind of grave obscurity.

The assassin’s face unknown, blending into the throng,

An action misplaced, echoing no form of belong,

Fatal embrace in the space, a final wrong,

Ticket to trace, hate's game in the long,

The aftermath in haste, determining right from wrong,

A story interlaced, Malcolm X’s song,

Both embrace and disgrace, all part of the ongoing throng,

His death places a brace, righting many a societal wrong.

Decades later, his voice resonates across galaxies,

His death’s crater, fills with commemorative rallies,

A determined agitator, against life’s unjust follies,

His faith was greater, inspiring us through morality,

His loss much greater, a blow against humanity,

A debate creator, stirring thoughts of equality,

Cementing El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, a poignant reality,

Now and later, his wisdom defies mortality, his fight against casual brutality.

Footnote:

This poetic adaptation of Malcolm X focuses on two sources. First, the Malcolm X biographical drama, and Second, Anthony Davis’s X: The Life and Times of Malcom X. I wanted to utilize descriptive language to produce a text-based adaptation of the assassination scene, it serves as the perfect climactic point in the Malcolm X story. A few stanzas of the poem address and draw on the events leading up to the assassination, and reflect on his impact post mortem. I tried to make certain lines more expressive and utilized moderate multisyllabic as well as internal rhymes in my rhyme scheme.

  

Olivia Stewart Blog Post

 

THE PLAYERS

MARTHA

A boisterous 50 year old white woman who works on Wall Street who comes from an upper-class background.

GEORGE

Her cohabitant, a 46 year old slender white man, a part of the 2024 Biden presidential campaign.

HONEY

A normative 26 year old blond white woman who comes from an upper-class background.

NICK

Her husband, a 30 year old good looking, up-and-coming black man, a part of the 2024 Biden presidential campaign. 

THE SCENE

The living room of Martha and George’s NYC townhouse. 

      

ACT 1, PART 2

HONEY (To GEORGE, brightly)

I didn’t know until just a minute ago that you are the vice president of J.P. Morgan!

GEORGE (Shocked)

WHAT?

HONEY

J.P. Morgan! I didn’t realize you held such a high ranking. You don’t post much on Facebook.

GEORGE (To HONEY, seriously)

Martha told you about it?

HONEY 

Well yes, she said you’ve been there for over twenty years!

NICK (To GEORGE, grinning) 

Wow, you must be living the dream. 

GEORGE 

Who wants another drink?

NICK (To GEORGE)

We better get going soon, it’s late.

GEORGE (Unknowingly nasty)

Why? It’s not like you have work tomorrow.

NICK (Almost a warning)

I told you I have to work overtime for my tech startup tomorrow. 

GEORGE (Ignoring, yells to MARTHA)

Alright Martha come back down now!

MARTHA (Entering)

What’s with all the yelling?

(MARTHA changed into tight fitting dress and she looks most voluptuous)

GEORGE

There’s my baby, in your gala dress!

NICK (Impressed) 

Wow, Martha…

MARTHA (To NICK, sitting close)

So you have made quite the name for yourself in this community already young man…now when did you get your doctorate?... Twelve?...Listen to this George.

NICK

When I was twenty-two actually…I don’t usually mention it, but I was able to take classes online 

while I developed my company. 

GEORGE (Sadly)

That’s very…impressive.

MARTHA (Aggressively)

Of course it is! You worked to make a name for yourself despite limitations.

GEORGE (To NICK)

I wouldn’t be surprised if you take over the Financial Department one of these days.

NICK

The Digital Department.

GEORGE 

The Digital Department…right. I seem preoccupied with finance.

MARTHA

HA! George is more preoccupied with the Financial Department because…

GEORGE 

…because he is not the Financial Department but only in the department as a consultant. We know this Martha…they can google it we don’t have to go through it again.

MARTHA 

That’s right baby. (To the others) George is stuck in the mud in the financial department. Hey, sleepy Joe, come light my joint, won’t you. 

GEORGE 

No, Martha. There’s only so much a man can take. I will hold your hand in the dark but I will not 

light your joint. That’s that. 

MARTHA (To NICK)

Oh my god! Anyways, hey I heard you played football, huh?

NICK

Oh, yes! I was a…quarterback…but I was much more skilled in the weightroom.

MARTHA (With great enthusiasm)

Weightlifting! You hear that, George?

GEORGE (Meekly)

Yes, Martha.

MARTHA (Staring at NICK, smiling)

You must workout, you still have a very nice body, very nice…

GEORGE  

Martha, you are out of line…

MARTHA

Beer Belly over there doesn’t like when the conversation moves to muscle. (Whips around) Hey, 

George, why don’t you tell them about the lifting competition we had. 

GEORGE  (Slamming his drink down)

Christ! Why don’t you tell them the story Martha, you do it best.

(EXITS)

HONEY

Is he good?

MARTHA (Laughs)

Yeah, sure. George and I had this lifting competition a few years after we got married…about twenty years ago.

HONEY

Just you two? I can’t imagine…

MARTHA 

Well it wasn’t official or anything. This was back in the early 2000’s, when the murder rates were increasing in Manhattan. Daddy was on a physical fitness kick…said men have the responsibility to keep up their body, not only their brain. He thought that men should learn how to build muscle and strength for self defense. So one Sunday Daddy had us over and went down to his home gym. Daddy set up his own weights, he’s very strong as you know.

NICK

Right, yes. 

MARTHA

And he asked George to get the same weight, so they can compete for the deadlifting record. Anddddd George didn’t want to…probably thinking he would emasculate his meal ticket. Daddy was saying “Come on son what type of man are you?”...stuff like that

NICK

Mhmm.

MARTHA

While they went back and forth, I don’t know why…but I picked up the weight to give to George…it wasn’t too heavy…and yelled “Hey George!” and jokingly shoved the barbell in his hands…and well when he tried to hold up…well he couldn’t…hold up the bar…POW! He immediately fell backwards and then, CRASH, hit his head on the bar. 

(NICK laughs. MARTHA lets out a laugh)

It was awful really, awfully funny…but awful. I think it’s impacted our entire life together. I do!

He uses it as an excuse for treading water for so long, unable to advance.

(GEORGE enters now, his hands behind his back)

MARTHA

But it was innocent…a real, goddamn accident!

(GEORGE takes up from behind his back a large empty liquor bottle and gently raises it                           

                 up right above MARTHA’S head. HONEY screams…rises. NICK rises, and MARTHA

  turns to face GEORGE. GEORGE slams the bottle into her head.)

GEORGE

POW!!!

                (Crash! The breakaway glass shatters everywhere and MARTHA doesn’t move, 

    unaffected.)

You’re dead! Pow!

(Everyone laughs)

I have adapted the original scene of the events leading up to George shooting Martha with a prank gun from Albee’s Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf? into modern American society. The 21st century illusion of the American Dream focuses more on financial stability than the nuclear family; so here I focus on the fantasy career rather than the fantasy child. I reference modern technology, language, as well as political and cultural events. George lost his job on Wall Street after the 2008 recession and Martha is the breadwinner. The couples are connected because they are working on the same political campaign. I diversify the cast by placing the ‘perfect’ couple as interracial to reflect changing family structures. At its root the play is a couple story that can be applied universally, and can represent the ever changing facade of the ‘American Dream.’