Dissolving AWARE is Not the Answer

To the Editors of The Crimson:

First of all, I would like to acknowledge the importance of your four-part piece, "Dealing With Difference," which ran from December 2 to December 5. It was an article long overdue, on an issue which is given painfully little thorough attention on campus.

In the piece, The Crimson puts forth "concerns about...the relative anonymity of a group--such as AWARE--that is supposed to be dedicated to communication and outreach." Evidence for the anonymity of AWARE (Actively Working Against Racism and Ethnocentrism) is provided in the form of Olivia D.A. Fields '93, whose quote, "I don't know what AWARE Week is, and I didn't go" is inexplicably enlarged and set off to hold a prominent place in the article.

While I was sorry that AWARE's publicity and outreach has not reached Ms. Fields, I would venture to say that there are also students on campus who were similarly unaware of The Crimson's "Dealing With Difference" piece: That, too, is a shame, but it is not cause to belittle the content or the significance of your article; nor would a random student's revelation of his or her ignorance of the piece necessarily deserve attention.

The Crimson makes note of a frequent criticism of AWARE, that many events represent simply "preaching to the converted." However, I have yet to meet an omniscient "convert" who knows all there is to know and feel about race relations. If I do, I will certainly go to his or her church.

If what is meant by "converted" is that most of the people who attend AWARE events hold some previous interest in how people of certain races or ethnicities relate to and deal with each other, well, I would hope that by this definition almost everybody on campus would call themselves a convert, and would come participate in the forums AWARE works to provide. But everybody doesn't; The Crimson very enthusiastically points out that some AWARE events are not very well attended.

Incidentally, it is regrettable that, although The Crimson managed to seek out a recent, routine intra-office meeting of Dean Hilda Hernandez-Gravelle with the designated race relations tutors, the paper displayed no interest in the widely publicized Minority Students Association/AWARE multicultural study break (attended by representatives of the Asian American Students Association, Hillel, the Black Students Association, the Black Men's Forum, Raza and about 60 others).

Even if some other AWARE events are not as crowded, does that really indicate "a fundamental flaw in [AWARE's] conception," as The Crimson suggests? Should a program which creates open discussions of what The Crimson itself calls crucial issues be cancelled if attendance is not what one would hope?

I don't think that forcing AWARE--or, especially, forcing the entire Office of Race Relations and Minority Affairs--to drastically chance its nature or disappear would serve any productive purpose except perhaps to further the perception you mention in your articles, that race relations on the Harvard campus are "just fine."

The Crimson, I believe, did well in its articles to contrast the paucity of Harvard's facilities for addressing issues of race relations with the many at other schools such as Yale, Princeton, Boston College, Oberlin and the University of California at Santa Barbara and Berkeley. The implication, one I whole-heartedly agree with, is that we, and our administration, should work to create and do more.

Criticism of AWARE is gladly accepted--from The Crimson and from anybody who comes to AWARE events--as we are looking to improve, increase and broaden our program and its effectiveness. Yet even the suggestion that the Office of Race Relations and Minority Affairs and its programs (such as AWARE) are not worthwhile represents an effort to do less, not more. I feel that this is unproductive, and unacceptable by any who seek to better understand and hopefully improve race relations on our campus and beyond. Nicholas C.D. Weinstock '91-'92   Coordinator, AWARE