Ruth M.
Adams, ninth president of Wellesley College, introduced Hillary D. Rodham '69,
at the 91st commencement exercises. Listen to audio excerpts of Hillary D.
Rodham's speech.
Introduction
Remarks of Hillary
D. Rodham
I am
very glad that Miss Adams made it clear that what I am speaking for today is
all of us—the 400 of us—and I find myself in a familiar position, that of
reacting, something that our generation has been doing for quite a while now.
We're not in the positions yet of leadership and power, but we do have that
indispensable element of criticizing and constructive protest and I find myself
reacting just briefly to some of the things that Senator Brooke said. This has
to be quick because I do have a little speech to give.
Part of
the problem with just empathy with professed goals is that empathy doesn't do
us anything. We've had lots of empathy; we've had lots of sympathy, but we feel
that for too long our leaders have viewed politics as the art of the possible.
And the challenge now is to practice politics as the art of making what appears
to be impossible possible. What does it mean to hear that 13.3 percent of the
people in this country are below the poverty line? That's a percentage. We're
not interested in social reconstruction; it's human reconstruction. How can we
talk about percentages and trends? The complexities are not lost in our
analyses, but perhaps they're just put into what we consider a more human and
eventually a more progressive perspective.
The
question about possible and impossible was one that we brought with us to
Wellesley four years ago. We arrived not yet knowing what was not possible.
Consequently, we expected a lot. Our attitudes are easily understood having
grown up, having come to consciousness in the first five years of this
decade—years dominated by men with dreams, men in the civil rights movement,
the Peace Corps, the space program—so we arrived at Wellesley and we found, as
all of us have found, that there was a gap between expectation and realities.
But it wasn't a discouraging gap and it didn't turn us into cynical, bitter old
women at the age of 18. It just inspired us to do something about that gap.
What we did is often difficult for some people to understand. They ask us quite
often: "Why, if you're dissatisfied, do you stay in a place?" Well,
if you didn't care a lot about it you wouldn't stay. It's almost as though my
mother used to say, "You know I'll always love you but there are times
when I certainly won't like you." Our love for this place, this particular
place, Wellesley College, coupled with our freedom from the burden of an
inauthentic reality allowed us to question basic assumptions underlying our
education.
Before
the days of the media orchestrated demonstrations, we had our own gathering
over in Founder's parking lot. We protested against the rigid academic
distribution requirement. We worked for a pass-fail system. We worked for a say
in some of the process of academic decision making. And luckily we were at a
place where, when we questioned the meaning of a liberal arts education there
were people with enough imagination to respond to that questioning. So we have
made progress. We have achieved some of the things that we initially saw as
lacking in that gap between expectation and reality. Our concerns were not, of
course, solely academic as all of us know. We worried about inside Wellesley
questions of admissions, the kind of people that were coming to Wellesley, the
kind of people that should be coming to Wellesley, the process for getting them
here. We questioned about what responsibility we should have both for our lives
as individuals and for our lives as members of a collective group.
Coupled
with our concerns for the Wellesley inside here in the community were our
concerns for what happened beyond Hathaway House. We wanted to know what
relationship Wellesley was going to have to the outer world. We were lucky in
that Miss Adams, one of the first things she did was set up a
cross-registration with MIT because everyone knows that education just can't
have any parochial bounds anymore. One of the other things that we did was the
Upward Bound program. There are so many other things that we could talk about;
so many attempts to kind of - at least the way we saw it - pull ourselves into
the world outside. And I think we've succeeded. There will be an Upward Bound
program, just for one example, on the campus this summer.
Many of
the issues that I've mentioned—those of sharing power and responsibility, those
of assuming power and responsibility—have been general concerns on campuses
throughout the world. But underlying those concerns there is a theme, a theme
which is so trite and so old because the words are so familiar. It talks about
integrity and trust and respect. Words have a funny way of trapping our minds
on the way to our tongues but there are necessary means even in this multimedia
age for attempting to come to grasps with some of the inarticulate maybe even
inarticulable things that we're feeling.
We are,
all of us, exploring a world that none of us even understands and attempting to
create within that uncertainty. But there are some things we feel, feelings
that our prevailing, acquisitive, and competitive corporate life, including
tragically the universities, is not the way of life for us. We're searching for
more immediate, ecstatic, and penetrating modes of living. And so our
questions, our questions about our institutions, about our colleges, about our
churches, about our government continue. The questions about those institutions
are familiar to all of us. We have seen them heralded across the newspapers.
Senator Brooke has suggested some of them this morning. But along with using
these words—integrity, trust, and respect—in regard to institutions and
leaders, we're perhaps harshest with them in regard to ourselves.
Every
protest, every dissent, whether it's an individual academic paper or Founder's
parking lot demonstration, is unabashedly an attempt to forge an identity in
this particular age. That attempt at forging for many of us over the past four
years has meant coming to terms with our humanness. Within the context of a
society that we perceive—now we can talk about reality, and I would like to
talk about reality sometime, authentic reality, inauthentic reality, and what
we have to accept of what we see—but our perception of it is that it hovers
often between the possibility of disaster and the potentiality for imaginatively
responding to men's needs. There's a very strange conservative strain that goes
through a lot of New Left, collegiate protests that I find very intriguing
because it harkens back to a lot of the old virtues, to the fulfillment of
original ideas. And it's also a very unique American experience. It's such a
great adventure. If the experiment in human living doesn't work in this
country, in this age, it's not going to work anywhere.
But we
also know that to be educated, the goal of it must be human liberation. A
liberation enabling each of us to fulfill our capacity so as to be free to
create within and around ourselves. To be educated to freedom must be evidenced
in action, and here again is where we ask ourselves, as we have asked our
parents and our teachers, questions about integrity, trust, and respect. Those
three words mean different things to all of us. Some of the things they can
mean, for instance: Integrity, the courage to be whole, to try to mold an
entire person in this particular context, living in relation to one another in
the full poetry of existence. If the only tool we have ultimately to use is our
lives, so we use it in the way we can by choosing a way to live that will
demonstrate the way we feel and the way we know. Integrity—a man like Paul
Santmire. Trust. This is one word that when I asked the class at our rehearsal
what it was they wanted me to say for them, everyone came up to me and said
"Talk about trust, talk about the lack of trust both for us and the way we
feel about others. Talk about the trust bust." What can you say about it?
What can you say about a feeling that permeates a generation and that perhaps
is not even understood by those who are distrusted? All we can do is keep
trying again and again and again. There's that wonderful line in "East
Coker" by Eliot about there's only the trying, again and again and again;
to win again what we've lost before.
And
then respect. There's that mutuality of respect between people where you don't
see people as percentage points. Where you don't manipulate people. Where
you're not interested in social engineering for people. The struggle for an
integrated life existing in an atmosphere of communal trust and respect is one
with desperately important political and social consequences. And the word
consequences of course catapults us into the future. One of the most tragic
things that happened yesterday, a beautiful day, was that I was talking to a
woman who said that she wouldn't want to be me for anything in the world. She
wouldn't want to live today and look ahead to what it is she sees because she's
afraid. Fear is always with us but we just don't have time for it. Not now.
There are two people that I would like to thank before
concluding. That's Ellie Acheson, who is the spearhead for this, and also Nancy
Scheibner who wrote this poem which is the last thing that I would like to
read:
My
entrance into the world of so-called "social problems"
Must be
with quiet laughter, or not at all.
The hollow men of anger and bitterness
The hollow men of anger and bitterness
The
bountiful ladies of righteous degradation
All must be left to a bygone age.
And the purpose of history is to provide a receptacle
For all those myths and oddments
Which oddly we have acquired
And from which we would become unburdened
To create a newer world
To translate the future into the past.
We have no need of false revolutions
In a world where categories tend to tyrannize our minds
And hang our wills up on narrow pegs.
It is well at every given moment to seek the limits in our lives.
And once those limits are understood
To understand that limitations no longer exist.
Earth could be fair. And you and I must be free
Not to save the world in a glorious crusade
Not to kill ourselves with a nameless gnawing pain
But to practice with all the skill of our being
The art of making possible.
All must be left to a bygone age.
And the purpose of history is to provide a receptacle
For all those myths and oddments
Which oddly we have acquired
And from which we would become unburdened
To create a newer world
To translate the future into the past.
We have no need of false revolutions
In a world where categories tend to tyrannize our minds
And hang our wills up on narrow pegs.
It is well at every given moment to seek the limits in our lives.
And once those limits are understood
To understand that limitations no longer exist.
Earth could be fair. And you and I must be free
Not to save the world in a glorious crusade
Not to kill ourselves with a nameless gnawing pain
But to practice with all the skill of our being
The art of making possible.
Thanks.