In response to Dena Sloan's viewpoint, "The seven wonders of the world of Colin Powell," (11/9) we wanted to express our astonishment over how a bright Tufts student could miss the entire point behind General Powell's insightful lecture. In the past two weeks, we have heard plenty of criticisms around campus, similar to Sloan's, as to the supposedly empty, vague, non-specific, dumbed-down speech, as she considered it to be. We would like to clarify and explain the point behind Gen. Powell's lecture as we saw it, to those who may have misunderstood or misconstrued the point it.
Now, it is understandable that someone may not have enjoyed his overdone pomp and circumstance regarding his achievements and accolades. However, Gen. Powell was attempting to break the ice and wake up the audience after 45 minutes of anticipation of his speech. Perhaps he did not do this effectively, because as a result, people focused more on General Powell's self-congratulatory remarks than the actual substance of his lecture. Unfortunately, Sloan and others missed the fact that Gen. Powell did in fact address the conflict in the Middle East far beyond his brief direct references.
There seems to be a large portion of the attendees of the lecture who failed to recognize the metaphorical aspect of the speech. Yes, Gen. Powell spoke extensively about his participation in instrumenting the end of the Cold War, which superficially seemed irrelevant. However, Gen. Powell explained that most of his military career focused on the protection of his country and people, a nation dedicated to maintaining their belief system and ideals against all enemies. Many died defending their convictions. The opponents of this belief system held the same convictions and were willing to fight defending their own beliefs as well. Years of struggle, fear, and conflict between these sworn enemies made peace a seemingly impossible feat during the past years of turmoil. They seemed fated to remain locked in this conflict forever. Does this scenario sound familiar to anyone?
Gen. Powell, an academic in his own right, used the familiar technique of the metaphor to discuss the controversial topic of the Middle East, a place where two sworn enemies with opposing ideologies live in turmoil, defending their belief systems, ready to die to defend their convictions. Peace seems unattainable at this point in time, but not impossible, as Gen. Powell pointed out. Using the example of the Cold War, he reassured us that peace is possible between two sworn enemies despite the fact that these were enemies raised to hate each other. At first they were hesitant to make this compromise of peace. Gen. Powell felt this hesitation first-hand, when Mikhail Gorbachev first informed him he would need to find a new enemy, and the Iron Curtain began to fall.
In his lecture, Gen. Powell recognized the fact that he was speaking on a very controversial topic in front of an audience with varying emotional opinions. Illustrating his point with a metaphor served to subtly discuss the possibility of peace without offending his diverse audience. He very eloquently made his point that peace in the Middle East is possible. Gen. Powell did not offer a particular solution for peace. What he did offer was hope.
We feel saddened that certain members of the audience felt that this lecture was a waste of time. We feel fortunate to have heard the insights of one of the most important leaders in America, which were clearly not as empty and vague as many deemed them to be. Perhaps Colin Powell assumed that we as Tufts students could recognize an obvious metaphor and translate it to the pertinent topic. Unfortunately this was not the case for some, and it is too bad that people left the lecture disappointed and wishing for a refund of their wasted time. Perhaps after considering this view on the lecture, those members of our community can reevaluate the relevance of Gen. Powell's remarks on the crisis in the Middle East.
Heather Barondess is a junior majoring in child development. Elisa Martinez is a junior majoring in history.
