Risk is defined as the “possibility of loss or injury” and, at some point, everyone will face a risk in their lives. These possibilities of peril may present themselves in different guises. It may be a physical risk, like undertaking a dangerous task, or an emotional risk, like getting attached to a certain people. The most often discussed emotional risk is a relationship. By that same token, relationships are frequently seen as romantic endeavors. But one type of relationship not usually regarded is the academic partnership, particularly between college students and the faculty, staff, and other administration of the institution. Octavia Butler’s short story “Bloodchild” broaches several forms of risk and summarily explains the inherent risk of a relationship through the protagonist, Gan. In dialogue that is also our course epigraph, Gan tells T’Gatoi, “If we’re not your animals, if these are adult things, accept the risk. There is risk, Gatoi, in dealing with a partner.” Each phrase from these two sentences carries meaning for all relationships, but particularly an academic partnership. Thus, the course epigraph will be separated into segments and analyzed in context with the course syllabus and other materials.
Gan’s first sentence is a conditional ultimatum, “If we’re not your animals, if these are adult things, accept the risk.” Of particular importance now is the phrase, “If we’re not your animals.” While this may seem extraneous—simply a part of the story—to a college writing course, as it appeared to me at first, it can be applied to that very institution. Being a college student in the U.S., or simply in the age range of a traditional college student, is peculiar because many are legal adults but must still endure limitations that may not be present in other countries, and a class discussion recently highlighted this exact contradiction. The concept of adulthood will be discussed later, but the limbo that traditionally aged college students inhabit can sometimes make them feel as though they are animals, penned in, all the same, and with little ability to may their own choices. This captive state is very similar to how Terrans are kept on a Preserve, and also harkens to Cathy Birkenstein and Gerald Graff’s book They Say/ I Say. In the introduction, the authors bring up a frequently received concern that using the templates that populate the book stifles creativity, boxing students in. While Birkenstein and Graff argue that it is quite the opposite for the templates, that they increase creativity, the same cannot always be said of the colleges and universities students attend. That is why it is extremely interesting that the SUNY Geneseo mission statement, as proffered at the beginning of the syllabus, includes a section for “Inclusivity” that seeks “respect for the unique talents and contributions of each individual.” The focus on individualism indicates the college’s desire to combat the sense of sameness that students can feel in a large campus; that, in turn, can lead to parallels between students and animals.
The next conditional phrase in the epigraph is “if these are adult things,” and this applies more directly to the experience of a college student. The discussion of adulthood, or lack thereof, on a college campus is impacted literally by the age of the students, many of whom are between 18 and 21, but also metaphorically. Most, but not all, traditionally aged college students are living away from home and making significant life choices for the first time. Cognizant of that, institutions sometimes implement the in loco parentis principle, wherein they act as parental figures. Phillip Leeinvestigated the history of in loco parentis, which was a major doctrine used by colleges to have a hand in students’ private lives (p. 66) until the 1960s, regardless of their consent. This practice fell out of use due to several court cases, heralded by Dixon v. Alabama (1961), and despite nearly sixty years between that ruling and today, it can sometimes feel like in loco parentis is very much still alive in higher education institutions. As such, it is particularly interesting that there are several visits scheduled on the syllabus by prominent figures in SUNY Geneseo to discuss their work in the lens of “forms of consent”. Such language begs the question of how in loco parentis is, or is not, implemented on campus and in each individual’s respective positions.
The final phrase of the first sentence and much of the next have to deal with risk. Gan tells T’Gatoi, “accept the risk. There is risk, Gatoi, in dealing with a partner.” This gets to the heart of the matter, the inherent risk of an academic partnership. Students are putting trust in an institution to teach them and fulfill the role of higher education, a faith that is both sentimental and in the form of tuition. Meanwhile, institutions rely on students to uphold certain standards, of grades and livelihood. On both sides, these hopes may not be fulfilled and even the exact opposite can happen. Yet, both continue to place at least some faith in the other. This brings about several questions. How do institutions evaluate risks and attempt to mitigate them? What detriment to the student population does this incur? This was displayed in a recent event reported in Business Insider, wherein a student maintained a Twitter account parodying the SUNY Geneseo official account. The school noticed this, evaluated the risk of misinformation, and ultimately asked Twitter to take down the account. This demonstrates the risks of academic partnership but also brings forth possible issues that can arise.
While risk is inevitable, different beings react differently to potential peril. In an academic partnership, both sides must face the risks to get a reward, and Octavia Butler’s short story “Bloodchild” echoes this. The novella includes our course epigraph, “If we’re not your animals, if these are adult things, accept the risk. There is risk, Gatoi, in dealing with a partner,” which relates to the state of the traditional college student, both as an animal and in the limbo of adulthood, and to the inherent, unavoidable risks of having a partner.