Last week, the usually tranquil sprawl of grass on the Plaza of the Americas was disrupted by a pile of cinder blocks more commonly known as the Writing on the Wall Project.
For those who didn't have the opportunity to view this annual exercise in futility, UF's Inter-Residence Hall Association-sponsored project is meant to symbolize the breaking down of obstacles in the way of a tolerant society.
Throughout the week, students wrote hateful things that have been said to them or about them on the concrete blocks and subsequently destroyed the wall Friday to raise awareness about the injustices of stereotypes.
Sounds like a good idea, if we lived in a perfect world.
But we don't.
And, unfortunately, the project's organizers refuse to acknowledge the fact that some bigots cannot be changed no matter how many metaphorical walls you break down.
Or maybe they have, but the event just makes such a good resume builder.
Either way, the main problem we have with the Writing on the Wall Project is that it encourages students to continue to identify themselves as victims.
By displaying the hate speech in such a public demonstration, the wall does little to combat the origins of hate and instead chooses to play on the sensationalistic nature of the language used to discriminate.
In a sense, the entire project revictimizes those who were former targets of the negative words.
Perhaps to justify its existence, students camp by the wall and try to educate passers-by about the project, but little is accomplished by erecting the symbolic wall in the first place.
Those who understand the power of their words or realize the impact hate has had on their lives participate in the project, and those who perpetuate ignorance are free to walk by without a second glance.
The project, for the most part, is preaching to an already politically correct choir.
And you would think that choir would be a little more concerned about the environment.
The Writing on the Wall Project uses hundreds of cement blocks, takes up a large portion of the plaza and leaves a huge mess in its wake. Not to mention a large amount of dust and debris is released after the unimpressive demolition is complete.
Also, because students camp out by the wall until its demise, the university must use large, energy-wasting lights to keep the area safe during the night.
Is seeing a few slurs written on a wall worth such an expenditure of resources?
We don't think so, especially because the wall is also sending the wrong message to the student body at-large.
In order for students to combat personal issues of hatred and discrimination on campus, they have to do more than these symbolic, sanctioned gestures between classes. They have to do more than give lip service to the cause of tolerance if campus-wide changes are to occur.
It would be more effective if IRHA used the funds allocated for the project to host multicultural forums with keynote speakers who would offer students an in-depth look at what stereotypes and injustices really mean.
Maybe then students could understand the actual stories behind the hateful words, rather than be shocked at what some student had the audacity to write on a concrete block.
