The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
the b-side
 
 
 
 
 Thursday, February 2, 2017 — 5B

Our problem is that we really 

don’t listen to one another.

We are in stuck in a period 

of tension, conflicting views, 
fear, confusion — a product of 
merging different perspectives 
and different struggles, all while 
trying to find some common 
ground. Yet, so often we choose 
not to listen. It is not only in the 
form of ignoring the collective 
plea surrounding the major 
problems facing our world, but 
it is that most of us are aware 
of the weight of those topics. 
This inability to listen emerges 
in our everyday interactions 
with one another. That is, not 
solely in the topics evoking high 
levels of sensitivity that are 
covered on the news, but almost 
anything that could possible 
cause a differing of opinion.

A conversation that begins 

something like this:

“I love the winter so much, 

the snow is beautiful,” says the 
girl sitting next to me in lecture, 
while she looks out the window.

I’ve 
instantly 
stopped 

listening. I don’t agree. I hate 
the winter with all my heart 
and constantly ask myself how 

I’ve survived living in Michigan 
my entire life. Her opinion has 
not only provoked me to want 
to express my own, but also, 
has encouraged me to ignore 
whatever she has said about 
the “beauty” of the snow. I’m 
aware she’s speaking about why 
she loves the winter, but I have 
drowned the sound of her voice 
with the booming sound of my 
own thoughts about just how 
wrong I think she is.

I have purposely chosen quite 

a superficial example, not for 
the sake of belittling my point, 
but instead to display that our 
tendencies to avoid listening 
to one another transfer into all 
facets of life, whether important 
or not.

We listen for maybe a few 

words in, but the minute we 
hear something that sounds 
just a little off from what we 
think, we rarely keep listening. 
This happens all the time. The 
professor raises a question, 
hands go up in response and 
someone takes it upon himself 
or herself to share something 
that opposes the thoughts I 
have.Our inability to listen has 

actually become the reason as 
to why conflicting views cannot 
be bridged in some way and 
why we’ve left very little room 
for compromise within our 
community. Our instinct is to 
say: “I have found the fault” or 
“I don’t agree.” The girl sitting 
next to me loves the winter and 
I hate it, so we cannot go on to 
speak about things 
in 
the 
same 
way. 

Because 
we 
don’t 

think the same way.

Well, we’re going 

to spend our entire 
lives trying to find 
people who do.

If 
my 
mind 

could 
stay 
in 
the 

conversation just a 
bit longer to listen, 
I might realize that 
the girl who loves the winter 
might have a memory attached 
to this season or maybe has 
never experienced snow before 
college or maybe doesn’t easily 
feel cold, like I do all months of 
the year.

Don’t get me wrong, the 

problem is not that we have 
different 
opinions 
from 

one another. That’s entirely 
inevitable, and if you’re just 
realizing that now, maybe you 
need to become more observant 
of the way the world functions. 
If 
differing 
opinions 
won’t 

change in our lifetimes, what 
will is our response to them.

Ingrained in me is a habit of 

shutting out others’ thoughts 

simply 
because 
I 

want to respond with 
an 
objection 
that 

reflects my personal 
opinion, convincing 
everyone that I am, 
in fact, right.

My parents have 

always 
told 
me: 

“Bailey, 
you 
have 

to 
start 
listening 

to 
people 
around 

you. You will miss 

so much if you don’t.” For 
the amount of time I spend 
defending myself in opposition 
to 
a 
point 
someone 
raises 

against me, I could spend the 
time listening to what someone 
had said. If I let the girl who 
loves winter tell me why, I could 
have waited to explain to her 
why I hate it.

Mutual 
understanding 
— 

it’s something rare I think 
we’ve lost. Instead of trying to 
consider what position people 
may be coming from, I am so 
fixated on my own. That doesn’t 
mean someone’s opinion has to 
sway you to the “other” side. 
It is more a way of developing 
confirmation 
toward 
why 

you have come to your own 
conclusion, while also making 
an effort to meet the other 
person halfway.

Winter is the worst season 

according to me and maybe 
many others. I could probably 
find and present research on 
the multitude of health benefits 
attached to other seasons or 
attack the amount of illnesses 
that circulate in the winter 
compared to other times of year. 
There are various ways to prove 
a point is correct, but that’s not 
my objective.

It’s the process of getting 

there that matters. I always tell 
people: “We all only listen to 
what we want to hear.”

Justice 
Sonia 
Sotomayor 

spoke at Hill Auditorium this 
past Monday and she shared 

that during her first year as 
an undergraduate student at 
Princeton, she listened. She 
met many people, with many 
backgrounds that were entirely 
different than her own. And 
she listened. Beyond just being 
attentive, she really heard them. 
Today, she is so influential in 
the public sphere and can use 
her voice to project her beliefs 
to the public. She took the time 
early on to listen in order to 
develop a voice that projects 
such value and wisdom.

If we just spent a little more 

time listening to people and 
truly hearing what they have to 
say, our responses to divergent 
views would probably be more 
appropriate. If you really want 
to find a platform for your voice 
to be heard, you must first listen 
to others around you. We live in 
a world of opinionated people, 
who are passionate about many 
things. In order to express your 
view, especially if you’re trying 
to say it is “right,” you have to 
hear what the other side says. 
Otherwise, how do you really 
know they are wrong?

A long, long time ago – in 2012 

– Olivia Pope (Kerry Washington) 
was “handling” D.C.’s scandals 
in a white power suit, rigging a 
presidential election and having 
a secret, steamy affair with the 
President of the United States. 
Normal “Scandal” things. 2017, 
however, has proven to be no 
time for normal. With explosions, 
a murder (gasp!) and political 
inconsistencies galore, the sixth 
season premiere of the Shondaland 
drama 
returned 
without 
any 

intention 
of 
reining 
in 
the 

ridiculousness. 

“Scandal” made no attempt 

to hide its political leanings last 
season, as a parody of Donald 
Trump emerged in the form of 
sleazy oil-tycoon Hollis Doyle 
(Gregg Henry, “Gilmore Girls”). 
The stabs were anything but 
subtle, as the fictionalized nominee 
hopeful portrayed all-too-familiar 
characteristics of unsubstantiated 
candidness, 
an 
affinity 
for 

corruption and an unfortunate 
hair-do. Furthermore, the episode 
where fake-Trump is booted out 
of the running for the Republican 
nomination by ex-First Lady and 
senator Mellie Grant (Bellamy 
Young, “The Freebie”) is called 
“Trump Card,” just in case there 
was any ambiguity.

This agenda comes as no 

surprise. Creator Shonda Rhimes, 
along with her three TGIT leading 
ladies Kerry Washington, Viola 
Davis (“How To Get Away With 
Murder”) 
and 
Ellen 
Pompeo 

(“Grey’s Anatomy”), released a 
powerful endorsement for Hillary 
Clinton in the spring of 2016. But 
the “Scandal” cast claims to be 
leaving real-world politics behind 

as the sixth season promises to 
carry a different tune. With the first 
five episodes of the season filmed 
before the November elections, the 
narrative will be a counterpoint, 
rather than a parallel, to the 
current political outcome, Rhimes 
told the Hollywood Reporter.

Perhaps it’s better this way, 

for politics was never “Scandal” 
‘s 
strong 
suit. 
Instead, 
the 

series turns its focus to telling a 
compelling story and churning 
out some goddam entertaining 
drama. Season six opens in the 
final moments of the presidential 
election between Mellie Grant 

and the Democratic nominee 
Frankie Vargas (Ricardo Chavira, 
“Desperate Housewives”). The 
deciding state of the race – of all 
places – comes down to California.

Irritating political paradoxes 

aside, Rhimes is a master of 
building 
compelling 
female 

protagonists. Only a handful of 
shows in recent memory have 
been able to pull off a character 
arc as drastic and fulfilling as the 
one portrayed in Mellie Grant. 
The once-detestable, scorned First 
Lady bitterly standing in the way 
of Olivia and Fitz’s star-crossed 
love affair has gradually – and 
surprisingly – transformed into 
the most relatable character on the 
show. Earlier seasons chipped away 
at the ice queen with trauma: a tub 
of fried chicken and moonshine 
in hand, Mellie’s narrative as a 
mother mourning the loss of her 

son was heartbreaking and, for 
once, completely believable.

But, 
ultimately, 
building 

complexity through pity is not the 
Shondaland style. Rather, strong 
women are formed when they rise 
in spite of adversity, and Mellie is 
the ultimate badass. Facing the 
setbacks that come with being a 
woman in politics to dumping the 
POTUS for her own shot at the 
oval office is ballsy, to say the least. 
She’s strong, flawed and wildly 
interesting. In a landmark fifth-
season episode, Mellie filibusters 
against the defunding of Planned 
Parenthood (even though she’s a 
Republican, but we’ll let it slide). 
She, 
perhaps 
single-handedly, 

embodies the kind of optimistic, 
fictionalized politics that make 
“Scandal” different from the rest of 
T.V.’s D.C.-based dramas.

This season also promises a 

continuation of the unlikely – 
yet totally amazing – friendship 
blooming between Olivia and 
Mellie. Both screwed over by the 
same guy and willing to go to any 
lengths for control of the White 
House, the duo stole the best 
scene of the season six premiere: 
commiserating in style, they drink 
champagne in a marble bathtub.

Once you get passed the fuzzy 

politics and the occasional bouts of 
cringe-y writing, the sixth season 
premiere of “Scandal” delivered 
on the over-the-top theatrics we 
all knew to expect. Although the 
episode was (unfortunately) devoid 
of angsty side-eyes and hot-and-
heavy make out sessions in White 
House closets, it was nevertheless 
entertaining. Olivia Pope is finally 
back, this time with a ginormous 
red prada bag covering up her the 
actress’s baby bump, handling 
business as usual.

DANIELLE YACOBSON
Daily TV/New Media Editor

Politics flop but show still 
shines in new ‘Scandal’ 

Scandal’s sixth season remains uncertain, but is deserting political roots

ABC

Kerry Washington as Olivia Pope in “Scandal”

She’s nobody’s ‘Fair 
Lady’ but her own lady

Daily Arts Writer Eli Rallo recounts her experience watching a 
reboot of the ‘Pygmalion’ classic through a modern feminist lens

Over the summer, I had 

the 
honor 
of 
seeing 
the 

musical “My Fair Lady” at the 
Baystreet Regional Theatre in 
Sag Harbor, N.Y. I brought a 
hesitancy with me as I went to 
see the golden age Broadway 
musical for the second time 
in my 18 years. I carried with 
me an aversion to the show’s 
portrayal of feminist issues, 
misogyny and the weak view 
of women it creates.

Eliza 
Doolittle, 
the 

protagonist, 
is 
a 
cockney 

flower girl taken in by the 
extravagant Henry Higgins, 
who bets he can turn Eliza 
into a “proper lady” in six 
months. Higgins successfully 
transforms 
Eliza 
through 

misogynistic and tiring tactics 
which diminish her personality 
and qualities, ladylike or not. 
Higgins celebrates his success 
selfishly, completely leaving 
Eliza out. This leads to the 
creation 
of 
her 
polemical 

argument against Higgins at 
the end of act two. Despite 
Eliza’s anger, the show ends 
with a reconciliation of sorts 
between the two. The end 
begs the audience to accept 
that Higgins is a decent guy, 
disregarding everything he 
did to Eliza throughout the 
musicaland poses her as rather 
weak.

Somehow, in the production 

I saw this summer, director 
Michael 
Arden 
(Director 

of the Broadway revival of 
“Spring 
Awakening” 
2015) 

was able to take the original 
text and completely transform 
its 
meaning. 
Through 

stylistic choices (the use of 
set, thrust style staging and 
mood blocking) and a tweak 
of 
that 
infamous 
ending 

scene, the show transformed 
from the story of a glorified 
misogynist 
being 
forgiven 

for his wrongdoings to that 

of a woman going through a 
terribly oppressive time and 
walking away from it stronger. 
The show ends with Higgins 
alone on the stage while the 
cast stripped his entire home 
away from him until the stage 
was bare. Eliza appears in the 
doorway, takes one look at him 
and defiantly turns the other 
way.

I wonder a lot about the 

implications of these classic 
golden 
age 
musicals 
on 

society. 
Pieces 
of 
theatre 

like “Oklahoma,” “Carousel,” 
“Kiss Me Kate,” “The King 

and I,” “Damn Yankees,” are 
all well-known, continuously 
produced pieces from that era. 
Yet they all harbor undertones 
of 
misogyny 
and 
aren’t 

successful in providing the 
view today’s female audience 
needs. Each miserably fail 
the “Bechdel Test”–– a test 
created 
by 
artist 
Alison 

Bechdel to monitor the role 
of women in film and theatre. 
A piece passes the test if it 
includes a scene between two 
women in which they discuss 
something other than a man. It 
is appalling that these pieces of 
theatre, and countless others, 
cannot include dynamic roles 
for women.

One could argue that the 

1950s, the time in which most 
golden age theatre premiered 
on the great white way, are 
to blame. Being a decade 
of 
massive 
oppression 
for 

minority groups and women, 
it is inevitable that the theatre 
of the time would reflect such 
injustices.

There is something very 

relevant and important about 
the material Arden adopted 
and how he was able to 
transform it into something 
strikingly 
different 
from 

the original piece without 
changing the text at all. The 
piece provided hope for the 
musical theatre I’d like to see 
in 2017: less reliant on the 
strong, central male figure 
and 
more 
poised 
to 
give 

women an empowering role in 
a time during which they were 
objectified and pushed down.

COMMUNITY CULTURE COLUMN

BAILEY 
KADIAN

If we only stopped to listen

BAY STREET THEATER

Modern adaptation of “My Fair Lady”

I wonder a lot about 
the implications of 
these classic golden 

age musicals on 

society

ELI RALLO

Daily Arts Writer

Opinions and ideas often lost to missing ears as Kadian describes in this week’s column

Building complexity 
through pity is not 
the Shondaland style