Jump to content
@lonelyone - I'm still not 100% convinced that we are wrong.
The story sure reads as though she was coerced into letting the play go on as planned. And I don't understand why she'd decline comment for the story if she really felt like this was a praiseworthy event.
The whole thing still feels very callous to me and this editorial feels like a justification for a story that fell flat.
Since this editorial is directed squarely at me, I have a couple points of clarification.
First - My comment was questioning whether or not the decision to hold the production in such close proximity to a tragedy is truly praiseworthy. The answer depends on Ms. Dahlberg's wishes. And it's not that 'I don't care' about a high school drama in general - it's that 'I don't care' as much about a drama as I do the loss of human life and the profound effect it has on loved ones. So I was trying to make the point that this article heaping praise on these kids/parents/administrators for their decision might be misplaced.
If Ms. Dahlberg truly wanted the show to go on as planned - then I stand corrected - her wishes are the only ones that matter during this difficult time.
The reason I left the comment was because I came away with the impression - from reading the story - that these decisions were largely being made by the principal and students (who didn't just lose two family members). Based on my understanding of the story, the headline could have just as easily read, "Community Pats Itself on Back as Teacher Grieves." That's why I took issue.
"Schnellinger said Dahlberg was not under any obligation to direct the play."
"The kids determined that … in the tradition of any theater, the show must go on."
Based on those two quotes I got the impression that the principal and the students decided to proceed with or without Dahlberg. It sort of felt like they went to Dahlberg and said "Hey, here is our plan, you don't have to participate. But the kids would like to proceed with the show." So, from my interpretation, it sounded as though Dahlberg had no choice but to go along with the plan and put on a happy face.
Now, based on this editorial and a couple of the comments directed at me, it's entirely possible that I am wrong. If this is truly what Dahlberg wanted, then good for her, good for the students, and shame on me for casting a negative light on them.
However, when the story says that Dahlberg declined to be quoted, and given the direct quotes that Bridget Manley selected, I came away from a seemingly "feel-good" story with an emptiness for Dahlberg. Instead of feeling triumph - I felt like a community missed an opportunity to postpone the play until Dahlberg could approach it with a clearer mind.
In any case - perhaps my feelings aren't representative of Dahlberg's. Or maybe they are. It's hard for me to know without her participation in the story.
Finally - I do take issue with the CDP cherry picking my OPINION from the comment section and then telling me why my views are "incorrect" in the editorial section. It's an opinion, not a fact, therefore I don't need you to affirm its validity. I have no problem debating it or having it printed on the front page - but to have the CDP editorial board publicly disparage my opinion seems awfully bush league and counterproductive to starting any kind of meaningful discussion.
I moved away from Craig and never looked back because of ignorant backwards thinkers like Rosemary Potter. This is a dangerous brand of stupidity.
@3canines - The article also says that the decision was left up to the kids and that she was under no obligation to direct... So I came away with the impression that the show was going on with or without Dahlberg... In which case she's obviously going to support her students rather than cause a stink. I just can't help but wonder if it would have been a better show of support to postpone the play... That's my point here.
@valleylocal - Of course it's a huge loss for Mrs. Dahlberg! That's my whole point. Go reread my post. My heart absolutely breaks for her and it just seems very insensitive to say "the show must go on" after she just lost her brother and mother.
My whole concern here is with Dahlberg. She didn't comment for the story. She was going through the biggest tragedy of her life... Why not delay the play a couple weeks? Life is much more important than a high school drama... If you find that insensitive, then I think you misunderstand.
I don't see this as being particularly praiseworthy.
I'm not going to criticize the kids either - but there isn't anything particularly admirable about conducting a high school play after the teacher suffers a monumental tragedy. I'm sorry for her loss and I don't particularly care about a (relatively) insignificant high school drama production.
Again, I'm not saying they shouldn't have done it... But they don't deserve praise solely for moving on with their lives after being unaffected by someone else's personal loss.
It's a combination of education and pregnancy... Dumb kids knocking up other dumb kids, perpetuating the Craig cycle. It's always the dopey parents who had their kids too young who end up having grankids too young too because they are unable, or unwilling to teach their own kids to learn from their parents mistakes. Those families never seem to have any money either-- coincidence I'm sure.
Bennika might have gone a bit off the deep end, but she (or he) was right to call out Rex for his ignorant comment. You don't have to like Obama, but to say he is not an American clearly is rooted in some sort of prejudice.
Grannyrett, maybe you mistook smugness for competence. Something our president has been lacking for 8 years now.
For someone who has made a career of being mean and nasty to students (I should know, I was one)... Mrs. Siminoe sure has pulled the wool over everyone's eyes. Though, I suppose removing her from the classroom and putting her in a more disciplinary role suits her nicely.
Last login: Thursday, December 12, 2013
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2013 Craig Daily Press. All rights reserved.