Issue 1

THE

Ventriloquist

Issue 1, Winter 2009

Letting our voice be heard and not seen.

ventriloquistpaper@gmail.com

Here is a brief introduction...

O

ur staff defines a university as an institution committed to collective learning. We believe this commitment should extend past the institutional level and include the university community. When members of the community strive to cultivate creativity, critical thinking and growth, richer education and character formation result. We believe healthy intellectual pursuit leads to more authentic followers of faith, the goal of any religiously-affiliated school.

We believe a journal or similar publication involved with the university community should aim to accomplish the following: • provide a platform for individuals to adequately represent themselves and engage one another in conversation • expose the community to a wide range of significant ideas and issues -inform the community of these significant ideas and issues without fear of censorship • provoke critical thinking non-antagonistically • encourage creativity through interdiciplinary fellowship • regard the institution as a community member i.e.challenge its conduct and hold it accountable so that it may become a better institution.

Article: Likely Administration Mouthpiece A typical Newspaper article usually starts with a hard news lead, something with commas, in wrong places, and unimportant details leading the way into what seems to be a blisteringly meaningless story.

The subject, followed by a comma and short description, continues to prove dull as nails. That’s because the flaccid topic was introduced with 3-4 dull facts and possibly some numbers with little to no context, in an attempt to lend legitimacy to the writer’s work. In fact that writer didn’t leave his or her office chair all week.

“Here’s a quote because, with all that important— cough—information up there, surely we’ll be needing some color by now,” said Fake Person, Insert Excruciatingly Long Official Title Here. Unfortunately the quote was far from colorful.

Also, there’s no way Person makes less than $70,000 a year and has less than five people working under him.

Power means awesomeness.

“This quote is generally either spoken in industry jargon or so hidden behind layers of public relations debriefings that its presence actually creates a void of meaning, a black hole in the page,” Person said.

And we continue on with platitudes from officials at Another Public Bureaucracy or Nepotistic School Office, which lets readers know that Newspaper doesn’t ask the tough questions, let alone answer them. This graph is a paraphrase of a phone interview, but not a good one since the same euphemisms for unpopular actions are regurgitated forth for the readers.

Oh, here—here we have a tidbit of information that’s truly newsworthy, something on which a proper story could have hung. But for some reason it was buried in graph seven. Don’t count on it actually being discussed at length in the rest of the story, either.

Now would be the perfect time to feature comment from someone who might be affected by the new developments. Instead, the writer interviews the easy, so-called other-side-of-the-story. Unfortunately, an issue is nearly never made up of just two sides.

Our staff ’s objective is to become CU’s premier independently-run student journal. In essence, we hope to create an underground publication which both celebrates the creative mind and informs our community about events, opinion and people related to or dealing with CU. Logistically, we hope to recruit new writers as we work to establish the journal at CU. Those willing to offer their abilities to the journal, whether as writer, copy editor, layout designer, etc. will meet together once a month to discuss collectively: article assignment, advertising, assignment deadlines, publication dates, external grants, etc. Articles written by CU alumni will also be included.

Although much of the paper’s structure depends on finance, we hope to publish two issues per semester. Our only ideological prerequisite is that those hoping to work for the paper desire to meet the above-listed standards of scholastic literary pursuit through this publication.

“Without openness, a conversation simply cannot be, in any full sense, genuine.” – Michael A. King |

“Here’s a quote from me,” said Other Side, “even though my quotes should have been paraphrased—they’re straight facts that the writer could have checked elsewhere and simply attributed to me.”

If anyone is still reading at this point—and no, you can’t write them off because ‘they don’t trust the media anyway!’”—here’s some information that doesn’t seem researched, or to mesh with how things actually work.

Maybe the writer is new to the town, or academia. Or maybe he hasn’t previously been exposed to the stuff he’s covering. Fair enough, but that’s why we ask every possible question. In fact, that’s what we’re paid to do.

Buried even further down are excruciatingly powerful details that, although described poorly, demonstrate something complex, emotional and human. Such details are kept out of the lead possibly because this needs to sound like a harmless newspaper, not some student-run, subjective, liberal nonsense.

In the Newspaper’s attempt to sound more objective, it actually becomes less objective: the more officials it gives a voice to at the top, the less people who are not officials get to speak. The less emotion in the presentation, the less the public’s emotion is heard. And there’s a lot of emotion in this school.

The Newspaper plans to prepare students for the real world—supposedly more so than coursework in the journalism department does. The problem is that in the real world, you have to write about humans, about humanity. And institutions only in so far as they affect humanity.

Just as important, your readers have to like reading it.

That doesn’t mean they “have fun” reading a piece, say, about poverty. But they have to feel like the writing is worthy of their time. It should also teach them something.

Last but not least in a typical Newspaper story, a response is allowed to be given by a representative of the academic or government bureaucracy who’s getting a high-dollar break on PR today. The response makes it seem like said bureaucracy is doing something, that some positive change is in the works. But not too precisely—because they’re saving money in that department as well.

Hell, they ought to pay the staff of the Newspaper. Oh wait, they do. |

The Magic of Autism: Fascination, Fears, and Our Failure to Respond John 9: Jesus Heals a Man Born Blind 1As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. 2 His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”

“Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life.

Eric does not drink water. In fact, Eric’s family has finally resorted to allowing him 12-14 cans of root beer a day in order to meet the most basic needs of water consumption for a 6 foot, 18 year old boy. Thad spends at least 5 minutes every day meticulously preparing for the swimming pool, putting on his secondhand trunks with care and flapping his hands wildly as he approaches the ramp and railing. Today is like every other: Thad will spend his 45 minutes of allotted pool time running around the edges of the pool, refusing to immerse himself and simultaneously refusing to change back into street clothes. If one listens closely enough, one can hear Thad having entire conversations in hurried mumbles beneath his breath, entire movie scripts, specifically “Toy Story” –each scene and soliloquy delivered with an iconic southern accent to a remarkably small audience. Molly has hated organized sports for years-she speaks to herself angrily as the kickball rolls to a stop inches from her immobile feet. Her teammates’ verbal encouragement puts her into the world her parents are all too familiar with-eyes glazed over, mouth hanging open slightly, fists clenched tightly enough to turn her knuckles a creamy white.

All of these individuals share one common trait. They are clinically diagnosed as autistic.

In discussing autism, it is perhaps best to use the definition provided by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. “Autism is a developmental disability significantly affecting verbal and nonverbal communication and social interaction, generally evident before age 3, that adversely affects a child’s educational performance. Other characteristics often associated with autism are engagement in repetitive activities and stereotyped movements, resistance to environmental change or change in daily routines, and unusual responses to sensory experiences (in Cohen, Spencer 2006).

This definition provides a simple framework from which many other disorders are diagnosed. Autism falls with a range of disorders on the “Autism Spectrum”: a description of neurological disorders affecting social behavior, all the way from Schizophrenia to Aspberger’s Syndrome.

Our society has developed a recent and rather overwhelming fascination with this range of disorders, more specifically, a fascination with the diagnosed individuals themselves.

The craze began with journalistic endeavors to describe and understand the steady rise in diagnosis and identification of children as young as 6 months. This quickly led to a global debate on its causes and possible treatments.

Many foregone and valid questions still remain. The question I will focus is in some ways, more foundational than many of the scientific inquiries raised in recent years. How do we respond to a disorder that is incurable, and appears to overwhelmingly limit genuine human interaction and inhibit what is considered to be a quality existence in our Judeo-Christian, American society?

Let us begin by warranting the fears and confusion many people face when working alongside individuals with autism.

As described in the above sketches, the one universal factor in autism is a seeming disregard for the immediate world, or more aptly a strong desire to refuse communication with it. We naturally raise eyebrows and feel pity; we cannot help feeling sorry for those clinically shown to avoid phrases like “I love you,” physical touch, appropriate nutrition, and appropriate relationships with their peers and families. Again, here lies the crux of our crisis as Christians considerate of both scientific discovery and consistent advances in behavioral management.

What is the appropriate response to individuals who seem to lack vital elements of what we consider a full Christian life?

The Biblical reference above raises several questions not easily answered by reassuring hermeneutics or five-point sermons on how to treat individuals with “special needs. ........

Continued on back

Are We Failing our Students?

There is a word that has gained notoriety among Christians, and a word that has simultaneously been demonized by the secular world: modesty. It is a word that crops up in almost every gathering of Christian women and one that has been discussed earnestly about the campus of Cedarville University. While I have often wondered as to the effectiveness of adding yet another voice to the discussion, I feel it is my responsibility as a student, Christian, and (let’s face it) a woman with some stock in the outcome of such a conversation and therefore I find myself touching on the subject of modesty.

Modesty is a beautiful thing, the outward expression of one’s humility, attempting to draw focus away from one’s self and turning it to God. While modesty is a matter related to all aspects of a believer’s life it is most commonly restricted to the aspect of appearance. By taking such a vast theological principle and reducing it to a matter of physical appearance we are diving head-first into new dangers that pose an equal, if not greater, threat to our Christian community as well as the campus of Cedarville University.

One danger from the reduction of modesty to a physical principle is the pressure this places on Christian women.

Women in churches, retreats, and Bible studies around the country are constantly reminded to pull down their skirt, pull up their shirt, lengthen their dress, shorten their heels, lighten their make-up, tone down their jewelry, etc. At first glance these statements seem innocuous, an attempt by another to help the woman maintain a modest appearance so that she will not distract another’s attention from God, but what is the real result of such comments? Obsession. It is easy for women to become so concerned that their appearance is causing their brother to fall into temptation that the woman falls instead, becoming consumed with how she looks at all time; if the woman’s focus is consistently on her appearance it is clearly not focused on God. Furthermore, many women begin to feel condemned by the idea of modesty, with men—and indeed other women!—frequently reminding them of the standard “Christian” dress codes. Take for an example Cedarville University’s own modesty panel. This panel, I believe (and sincerely hope that my belief is correct) was created in an honest effort to help the women on Cedarville’s campus and educate them about the male perception. While this may be a noble goal, it is not often realized. Instead women are sitting before a panel of men who appeal to their sense of guilt with the underlying question “don’t you want to help protect your Christian brothers and help them from falling into lust?” Of course women respond that they would be willing to change if it would help the men around them maintain their mental purity, but this response is problematic for three main reasons: the women would be changing for the men and not because God convicted them, the women willing to attend such a modesty panel are rarely the ones who dress immodestly, and the change places the brunt of the responsibility on the women.

While many see it as the Christian woman’s responsibility to discourage men’s lust by dressing conservatively, placing such heavy responsibility on the women is not only unfair to the women but emasculating to the men. Such frequent reminders to the women to “cover up” subconsciously tells the men that it is the woman’s primary responsibility to look modest, thus if she doesn’t look modest he cannot help but to objectify her. This is shameful. Men were created by God, just as women were, with conscience and self-control; if a woman walks past a Christian man and she is dressed provocatively it is his responsibility to look away and turn his thoughts to pure and Godly things. Men place themselves in positions of authority as our pastors, preachers, deacons, etc. if they cannot control their own thoughts how can we be expected to follow them as strong leaders? When a woman sees a shirtless man out jogging he is not told to cover up, instead it is expected that she will look away. Do we believe women to have a firmer control over their thoughts? Are men incapable of such control? I do not believe so. Men and women are equally tempted by the flesh, equally called to modesty, and equally gifted with God’s strength to bear temptation without succumbing to it.

Therefore I would like to propose a new approach to modesty within the Christian community. Men, if you see a woman who tempts your lust look away. It may also help to quote scripture that you have memorized, or to

simply pray to God, asking Him to remove temptation from you and strengthen you in the Spirit. Women, there are more important issues to focus on than your appearance. Wear clothes that fit, clothes that draw attention away from you and direct it towards God. As members of a fallen race we are obsessed with the physical world, but I would encourage you to try and look past this and keep your eyes trained on Christ.

Modesty is not just an issue of how we dress, but of how we eat, sleep, pray, worship, work, etc. We do not do anything unto ourselves, but in all things we give glory to God: this is Christian modesty. |

continued from The Magic of Autism...

It does, however, present a Biblical context in which Jesus heals a person who would be considered sub-human and entirely pitiful in the eyes of his historical society. Yet Jesus also makes clear that there is no sin inherent in the blind man’s disability, and that his healing is simply a demonstration of God’s power, not a removal of sin. Why then, we wonder, has God failed to heal or demonstrate his power in frustrating cases like Eric’s?

There is no documented “cure” for autism itself; even the most intense modifications seem to gain minimal changes in symptoms presented. The question becomes what lengths we should go to minimize, eliminate or “heal” the behaviors and symptoms associated with autism spectrum disorders.

It appears God has left us with either a) a terrible burden of discovering and curing the disorder itself, or b) a terrible burden of watching individuals live out what we determine to be inadequate lives of isolation and abnormality. I would suggest neither are ‘end all’ solutions, that while scientific inquiries are a legitimate pursuit, we are more immediately faced with the humbling realization that, like all other mental abnormalities and illnesses, we are left to live alongside these people in loving response to the Creation God has made.

Perhaps the most fascinating issue when encountering this question is, again, our consideration of what makes a life inherently human and valuable? If a person cannot seemingly fulfill the Biblical mandates of relationship, love, devotion and immediate concern for our neighbor, than to what life has God seemingly sentenced these individuals and their families?

And what about Eric? At seventeen, Eric has yet to make any utterances translatable into common English, and would be attending the most prestigious university according to his ACT scores were it not for his self-harming and daily violent outbursts. What is our response to this seemingly overwhelming injustice?

*In my humble opinion, we must begin by denying the assumptions that those with autism experience life at a lesser level of quality or enjoyment than that of the general population. We must realize our presuppositions and cultural biases and be willing to understand that this disability, in God’s eyes, is no different from those physical disabilities more easily dismissed as God’s work of glory and power in a world that values physical strength to complete the tasks that we determine as crucial. I would suggest that the most appropriate response to these individuals is one of loving acceptance and a commitment to discover and walk alongside the struggles that they and their families daily face.

I am compelled to believe that God desires nothing above our faithful obedience to stewardship and reconciliation mandates, treating Eric with mercy and forgiveness while working within acceptable educational and psychological frameworks to allow him a fulfilling and demanding life of discovery, creativity, and authentic human interaction. Even the most thorough catalogues of examples do not do justice to autism, one of the most complex disorders in the medical field.

Neither can we, unless we first abandon our assumptions regarding language, expression, and the necessity of tangible instances of love and affection.

I am no theologian, and am on the brink of diving headfirst into a career of educating children of all disability labels-but I am pained by the obsession our society demonstrates in converting these individuals into our own idols of perfect human Creation. More devastating still is the Christian response of fear, separation, and dismissal of those who we cannot reconcile as medical mysteries nor humans overwhelmed by a state of sin or demonic possession. I am confident that years will pass when autism is not on the cover of Time, Newsweek and Popular Science. I am confident that treatment for symptoms and medication schedules will become more regulated and readily accepted by educators and parents alike, but I am devastated by the continuing myth and magic surrounding the autism dialogue in film, books, and popular television.

Education, advocacy and role playing are an appropriate first step in our understanding of how best to interact with individuals with autism. The brink of our interactions with the autism dialogue (both scientific and personal) is the point at which we are willing to trust God’s design and honor the individuals’ awe-inspiring abilities and talents, especially when those abilities and talents fail to meet our standards of efficiency, social norms, and the American dream. Let we, as Christians, refuse the temptation to worship science or our cultural ideals, and rather be the first to ask and attempt to answer the holistic, ethical and scientific questions necessary for honoring individuals with autism in the way Jesus has modeled–and made a way for us to imitate with grace and faith. |

First First

1

2

3 4

5

6 7

8

9

Across

1 Capital of ACROSS Uraguay oftower Uraguay 1 Capital 8 Not so much the Sears anymore so amuch theHill Sears tower anymore 8 Not 9 Top chef who owns Capitol eatery

9 Top chef who owns a Capitol Hill eatery

Down

1 Author of one of President Obama’s favorite books, and recent Cedarville Guest

10

2 Won an award for her role as Kalinda 3 “Three DOWNgenerations of imbeciles is enough” 1 Author of one of President Obama's 4 Winner of Faculty favorite books,Jeopardy and recent Cedarville 5 JohnGuest Mayer will be safe til 6 Chancellor Germany for her role as Kalinda 2 Won anofaward 7 Shia Labeouf on Disney of imbeciles is 3 "Three generations 10 “The pregnancy hormone” enough"

4 Winner of Faculty Jeopardy 5 John Mayer will be safe til Dedicated to our friend Ben, who would have been a part of this. Revelations 21:4 Germany 6 Chancellor of 7 Shia Labeouf on Disney 10 "The pregnancy hormone"