Phaedrus is meant to be one of Parker’s most creative and collaborative spaces. A committee where student-artists can express themselves freely and see their work showcased in a polished, student-run publication. However, I’ve found working with this committee to be confusing and frustrating. Between unclear communication, inconsistent selection processes, and proposals that would give more decision-making power to the current leaders, Phaedrus risks becoming a committee that uplifts only a narrow circle of students rather than the wider Parker art community it claims to represent.
My first experience with “Phaedrus” was when the committee said they were in desperate need of submissions. With my core belief that “everyone is an artist,” I contributed a digital pumpkin illustration I was proud of. When the magazine came out, I eagerly flipped through the pages only to find my work missing. What confused me most was the silence: no explanation, no feedback, not even a quick message saying my piece hadn’t been selected. For a committee that encourages students to take creative risks, the absence of communication was discouraging. Though eventually I had some pieces accepted, that initial lack of transparency stayed with me.
My concerns about the openness of the committee surfaced again last year, when the “Phaedrus” heads introduced a proposal allowing current Editors-in-Chief (EIC’s) to select the following year’s Editors-in-Chief, a system similar to “The Weekly.” While the proposal had some logic behind it, many students and faculty felt it could make the process more exclusive. This system, in which you apply, and the current leaders choose the next ones, might not work as well for an arts publication since it can narrow whose artistic voices shape the magazine. Leadership decisions impact the entire magazine, yet the proposal reinforced the perception that “Phaedrus” is guided more by internal networks rather than by all of the community artists’ input.
My confusion only grew when, after years of mixed experiences, I received an email from “Pheadrus.” I was ready to put my grievances aside and be done with it, but the email was from the current EIC’s encouraging me to apply for positions like staff artist or social media manager. Their message emphasized that they believed I would be “a great fit,” and that they were prioritizing quality over quantity in the application process. Naturally, I was excited. It felt like a genuine invitation to become a part of the team. However, when the final selections were announced, and my name wasn’t on the list, I was left feeling both hurt and confused. After being personally asked to apply, the lack of follow-up or explanation made the process feel even more unclear and frustrating. When I brought up my feelings to one of the heads, they told me it was the faculty advisor’s executive decision, but that seemed odd to me, given that this is a student-run publication.
“Pheadrus” is now planning to accept submissions from student artists outside of Parker. Why expand beyond Parker’s own art community when the magazine’s purpose has always been to highlight student artists here? It seems that “Phaederus” EIC’s are not prioritizing artists at Parker who work hard to contribute. The magazine began as a Student-Government-run, student-centered publication, and it should continue to prioritize the voices and creativity within its own halls before turning elsewhere.
“Phaedrus” produces nice, put-together, proficient issues, and it’s nice to see most of Parker’s artists all combined in one place. My concern though, is that the committee could benefit from more transparency, clearer communication, and a more open selection process. Parker is full of talented, passionate creators who simply want a fair chance to share their work.
At its best, “Phaedrus” is a vibrant, welcoming community where student art is celebrated widely, not selectively. Strengthening communication, clarifying criteria, and keeping the focus on Parker artists would go a long way in rebuilding trust and ensuring the magazine truly reflects the creativity of the whole school.
