The Observer, March 23, 2007
Volume XXXIX, Issue 21
Speakeasy-Solstice collective formed for financial purposes, still independent groups
Letter to the Editor
To the Editor:
I currently serve as co-music director of Solstice, the all-female a cappella group here at CWRU. I'm writing with regard to the staff editorial "Pros and cons present in student group collaborations" (March 9 issue). In that piece, I was concerned to see the Speakeasy-Solstice Collective referenced as an example of a "consolidation" of student groups. That assertion is misleading at best.
The Speakeasy-Solstice collective does indeed serve the financial interests of Solstice and of Speakeasy, one of CWRU's all-male a cappella groups. This alliance, however, is not due to any consolidation. It came about because, as vocal ensembles that (for artistic reasons) are made up of only men or only women, both groups were ineligible for USG funding under its antidiscrimination policy – we "discriminate on the basis of sex."
We may be "one money-requesting entity," but we are fully independent of each other. We submit funding requests as a unit, but do so for group-specific line items and do not share individual allocations or money earned through gigs and other events.
Don't get me wrong – we're each other's biggest fans, and deeply value our common mission to promote a cappella here at CWRU. I applaud the spirit of the editorial (any decrease in bureaucracy seems a noble goal indeed!), but please do not cite the Solstice-Speakeasy Collective as a successful consolidation. If anything, our little duo complicates the funding process even more, and by joining forces on paper we simply added to the list of student groups clamoring for funding.
Catherine Vermeersch
Co-Music Director
Solstice: Case Women's A Cappella
