The tension was palpable. Groups in the crowd exchanged glances, shook their heads and muttered to one another.  

“Tonight, we gather for a difficult dialogue.” These were the opening words from Mark Ellis, keynote speaker of the Difficult Dialogues Symposium held Oct. 7 in Emerson Suites. The event, which focused on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, has elicited mixed reactions not only about the content of Ellis’s speech, but also about the format of the presentation and the choice for the respondent.

The event was structured as a 45-minute lecture from Ellis, Baylor University director of Jewish studies, a 10-minute response from Sanford Gutman, professor emeritus of Jewish history at SUNY Cortland, and a half-hour session of questions, which were submitted by the audience on cards and read randomly by Chip Gagnon, chair of the college’s department of politics.

Morgan Goldstein, public communications officer for Student Alliance for Israel, said she was disappointed with the format and that Gutman spent most of his time agreeing, rather than challenging, Ellis’s points.

“I felt that this was supposed to be a dialogue,” she said. “But a dialogue implies a conversation, a back-and-forth of two point of views being expressed, and there was really only one point of view expressed. It was a little upsetting.”

Associate Provost Bashar Hanna said the format followed a national model for similar difficult dialogue events at other colleges, and that the question-answer session was meant to allow more time for questions.

Michael Faber, Jewish chaplain, said Ellis was an appropriate speaker for this controversial topic, but he was disappointed with how Ellis and Sanford weren’t given equal time and that Ellis omitted historical facts from his argument.

“Every major speaker and event that has been presented by academic departments or now by the institution, the Provost’s office itself, are the kinds of programs that we’ve had on campus for a long, long time [and] consist of ultra-criticism of what Israel has done to the Palestinians,” he said.

Brooke Reynolds, president of Students for Justice in Palestine, said she thought the format was appropriate because it’s important for the college community to hear another view.

“While there’s a dominant discourse on this issue, the fact that he has a dissenting viewpoint [made it] appropriate that he got a large chunk of time because this isn’t a viewpoint we hear often, especially not sponsored by a college.”

Beth Harris, associate professor of politics, said Ellis was chosen by the committee among other speakers because President Emerita Peggy Williams was inspired by Ellis’s work. She said she hoped students walked away from the event with a better understanding of how we form “collective identities.”Freshman Marina Dubov is a former member of the Israeli army. She said Ellis’s use of the phrase “ethnic cleansing” was inaccurate and offensive to her, especially in Ellis’s comparison of Palestinian refugee camps to Jewish concentration camps.

“[Israel is] not exterminating [Palestinians] based on their race, color or religion –we’re not,” she said. “We don’t really like each other…but it’s not ethnic cleansing. [It’s] definitely not a genocide, and it cannot be compared to a Holocaust.”

Hanna said he’s received many positive and negative responses from students, faculty and parents, and he said he’s happy that Ellis’s provocative presentation has sparked further conversation on campus.

“To be an institution of higher learning that doesn’t encourage this kind of conversation that really is the hallmark of high ed, we wouldn’t be doing our students justice,” he said.