Well, the Festival of New has come and gone (and the "In the historical present" exhibition with it). One aim of the organizers evidently was to put on something like the New Yorker Festival, and that seems to have been achieved. We hosted panels and performances with all sorts of luminaries and change-makers, New School-connected and not, from Ruth Westheimer to Andrew McCabe, Tarana Burke to Adam Michnik, Laurie Anderson to Ibram Xendi. More inward-looking efforts to retell and interrogate New School history on issues of race, colonialism and gender generated useful energy - in the case of "Women's Legacy" spectacularly. The effort to get classes to open up to the public and engage New School history was rather less successful.On balance, though, I'd have to say it was a missed opportunity. Students I've asked about it were oblivious or disengaged. The few who tried to register for events (beyond those required to attend some as part of a class) found they were sold out. Worse, some wondered what the point was. Reactions ranged from "is this where my tuition dollars go?" to "what's the big deal about an anniversary anyway?" It's a little discouraging for someone who thinks knowing where you are helps you know what you can do and be, and knowing where you are means knowing what else happened there and how.
Perhaps the lesson is that you can't leave serious inquiry on these questions to marketers and event planners, to administrators who are concerned the focus be on "the next hundred years," or even to well-intentioned faculty members showing off what exciting things they're up to just now. (The interference patterns of the category of "the new" didn't help either.) Attendees at the Festival may have got the impression that exciting things happen here, and intriguing people have long done intriguing things here (though research was overshadowed by celebrity), but no more. The what and who, but not the how or the why. I guess there's still work for us to do. Gotta keep movin'!
