As the last pockets of indistinguishable chatter dwindle with the flow of 600 students filing out of the dining hall, a silent lull encases the room. Dean of Ethical and Spiritual Life Jan Flaska takes a seat—the Open Table commences. The hall is soon filled again with voices.
After each Sunday sit down, teachers and students alike gather to engage in an informal round-table discussion in the heart of Deerfield’s campus: the Dining Hall. Open Table leaders conjoin two tables to create space for members of the community that have chosen to attend that week’s discussion.
After the success of the first unofficial discussion, which focused on the Gaza-Israel conflict, Mr. Flaska aimed to formalize the meetings. “We were like…let’s call this something, and let’s do it somewhere,” he said. Consequently, he coined the term “Open Table.” Subsequent discussion topics included immigration and ableism, and the upcoming discussion which will take place after Long Winter Weekend will be about moderation—from substance use to social media.
As an independent and open environment for civic discourse, the Open Table stands in contrast to other settings where similar discussions occur—such as in the classroom or at compulsory events—because the Open Table is something that people choose to attend. “We always want to invite spaces for good conversations, but the open table is different from events like MLK day, which are mandated,” Mr. Flaska said. “These discussions are something you can opt into, you can ignore, you can just listen in, or you can talk in. You can stay for 2 minutes or stay for the duration, there are no pressures intended,” he added. In this low-pressure environment, Mr. Flaska’s vision is clear: to nurture a space that is comfortable, respectful, and informal for the hard, but important, conversations.
Reagan Warren ’27, a student host and leader to an Open Table discussion, shared her view of the Open Table not only as a discussion space, but also as a community space. Reflecting on the opportunities it provides, she talked about how it gave her a setting to discuss the frequently glossed-over topic: ableism. In search of a platform to have these hard conversations, she found the Open Table particularly suitable. “It was a very comfortable and relaxed setting, unburdened by expectations or fear of judgment,” she said. “The round table discussion just brought a sense of community and willingness to listen that you don’t see in settings where people may not be as interested in or engaged with the material,” she added. Warren took the initiative to propose the topic to Mr. Flaska, who “said yes almost immediately,” Warren shared. With the support of the Student Life Office, Mr. Flaska constructed a platform for overlooked topics and meaningful dialogues.
Ellie Maeda ’27 reflected on these discussions, expressing that her experience at the Open Table was educational and enlightening. For the majority of the conversation, she opted to be a listener. After her first experience, she “came out of that with more knowledge, understanding, and empathy,” she said, highlighting the effectiveness of hearing real-life stories or fresh first-person perspectives in boosting understanding and engagement. She said, “I feel like we are all better off having this knowledge and greater awareness—we are now better equipped to be more inclusive and open-minded.” Maeda and Warren’s takeaways illuminate the high impact and importance of this unique space, which reflect the motivations behind Mr. Flaska’s Open Table concept.
Mr. Flaska attributed his inspiration to a New York Times article titled “The Discourse Is Toxic. Universities Can Help” by Amaney Jamal and Keren Yarhi-Milo, deans at Princeton and Columbia. In light of the conflict in Israel and Palestine, Jamal and Yarhi-Milo emphasize that “universities should state hard truths and clarify critical issues” because of the vital role educational institutes play in shaping important conversations.
In response to recent headlines about the resignation or dismissal of many college presidents due to their failure in hosting difficult conversations, Mr. Flaska reflected, “The Open Table emerged as a result of our seeing a lot of conversations that went wrong, elsewhere, and we wanted to get ahead of it and try to create a space where conversations can go right…where students who know very little or know a lot, have convictions or are indifferent, could come together and speak about a topic that is important to somebody.”