While many are rightly upset over the choice of Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson for commencement speaker due to his controversial comments and arguments about American detention policies following September 11, 2001, and racial diversity, the saddest thing is that prior to the announcement of Wilkinson as the commencement speaker, I had never heard of him. As a fourth-year student on the cusp of graduation, it would be nice to have a memorable speaker at commencement, one who is well-known, whether it be for political or entertainment reasons.
Choosing speakers for graduation should be less about inspirational words or good advice and far more about having a notable individual speak, whether they are funny or serious. Honestly, very few people remember who spoke at their graduation because the person likely bored them to sleep in the heat of a hot day in May. It is not difficult to fathom that students would much prefer having a prominent individual as the graduation speaker. Texas A&M had George W. Bush speak a couple years ago; while I disagree vehemently with his politics, at least he would certainly be considered a notable person. Having some judge speak who no one knows is begging for a communal nap-time on the Lawn on May 17. His controversial positions aside (there are perfectly legitimate arguments based on those to not have him speak, either), Wilkinson does absolutely nothing to excite the class of 2009 — he just irritates a good part of it.
Many will recall that during the fall semester, a petition was started with the goal of asking Stephen Colbert to come speak at graduation. Anyone who has seen YouTube videos of him doing this at Knox College in Illinois in 2006 or read the transcript knows that it was absolutely hilarious and memorable. Somehow that class of students at that small liberal arts school will have a far better commencement speaker than my class at a far bigger and more noteworthy school (That school also had Barack Obama speak in 2005, Bill Clinton in 2007, Madeleine Albright in 2008 — what gives?). How this is possible, I do not know. The Special Events Committee, which is in charge of finding the speaker, thought Colbert was “not in line with the tradition of U.Va.” commencement guests, said Will Eden, one of the Colbert Commences Commencement group’s founders. However, Eden cited the fact that Tiki Barber, John Grisham, and Dave Matthews had been a part of the ceremony in the past, making the “tradition” argument as the basis for excluding of Colbert contradictory. Moreover, the committee failed to even inquire about having Colbert come despite the University’s policy of not paying speakers. “To not even ask seemed odd since his wife went here. That’s the most upsetting thing,” added Eden. Though Colbert was not even invited, this school has plenty of famous and interesting alumni who might speak pro bono instead of a controversial judge who happens to be an alumnus. Tina Fey would be fabulous, I’m sure, for a smart comedic performance. Katie Couric presents the news to the country every night on CBS; something tells me she would have little trouble holding the attention of her audience. But no, rather than invite an alumnus who students have actually heard of, President John T. Casteen III invites a judge to impart words of wisdom. This is not to disrespect the judiciary but consider the audience here: a bunch of twenty-somethings, all of whom would probably like to remember the name of their commencement speaker.
If someone serious is the preferred choice for the committee and Casteen, why not get a well-known politician or businessman to come and speak? Virginia has several impressive current and former senators or governors that could come. Businessmen like Ralph Wilson, who went here and happens to own the Buffalo Bills, might be an interesting choice to pursue. The point is, there are lots of notable individuals or alumni that the Special Events Committee could have tried to have come and speak. Instead, they left individuals like Wilkinson on the list they gave to Casteen, someone who they should have known was not exciting for any fourth year.
In the future, I suggest that fourth year classes make more noise about having someone memorable speak at commencement. A portion of the current crop of fourth-years signed a petition en masse but to little effect. More scrutiny ought to be placed on the student positions on the Special Events Committee which gets to whittle down the candidates Casteen chooses from. Perhaps a change in the methodology of choosing a speaker is in order or at least the committee should be encouraged to actually take popular student desires into account when making a final list of options. By committing to some of these actions, I’m sure future classes will have a better chance to hear someone noteworthy speak at their commencement, someone they will remember decades later rather than a controversial judge who, if the 2009 graduates do remember him, will be remembered solely because of the outcry over his selection as Commencement speaker.
Geoff Skelley’s column usually appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at g.skelley@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Upholding medical amnesty is a collective effort
By Editorial Board | 13 hours agoUniversity leadership, Greek life organizations and students themselves must recommit to the safety provided by an effective and knowledgeable use of medical amnesty.
KURTZWEIL: Dockworkers’ unions cannot avoid the threat of automation
By Paul Kurtzweil | YesterdayInstead of continuing to demand decreased automation, the union should work with the legislature in the hopes of driving investment into the reorganization of the current workforce.
RASHID: Noncitizen students are under attack, and the University must act
By Muhammad Ali Rashid | 2 days agoNow is the time to act, proving our commitment by protecting and expanding programs that keep the University open and accessible to all.
