November 19, 2003
Urging compassion at Emory
Melvin Konner, an anthropologist at Emory, has written a passionate defense of his colleague Carol Worthman, whose use of the "n" word at a scholarly panel last September has drawn formal complaints, disciplinary proceedings, and a great deal of public censure. Konner acknowledges having heard Worthman say her professional subspecialty--biological anthropology--is the disciplinary equivalent of the proverbial "n----r in the woodpile," and reflects on why he did not speak up at the time:
I was trying to imagine what it may have been like to be an African-American hearing the news that an Emory professor had used the "n" word in an expression at a department meeting. I know I would have been very disturbed.I was present at that meeting, and I was not disturbed enough. I did not speak up, and I regret that very much. I did not take any action afterward either. When our department met with the representatives of the Office of Equal Opportunity Programs, I apologized clearly and publicly for that mistake. I also apologized in writing to the person who filed the complaint and asked that person to forgive me.
Why did I make that mistake? For one thing, it was not meant as a racial remark, and I knew that at the time. It was a horrible mistake, and I had trouble understanding it, but I knew it was not intended to hurt anyone. Race was not the subject of the discussion. The professor who made the remark was talking about the prejudices within anthropology toward her subfield, and she foolishly referred to it as "the 'n' in the woodpile." (The remark was not, as widely reported, "six 'n's' in the woodpile.")
There was another reason. I have known this professor, Carol Worthman, for 30 years. Not only is she not a racist, but I don't know another white person less deserving of that name. She was horrified by her own remark as soon as it left her lips but, like Jackson, did not admit her mistake immediately. When she realized that someone had been hurt, she apologized in person and in writing again and again.
She has been a vital part of our department's decade-long effort to recruit African-American students, faculty and staff and to create an atmosphere in which they would be treated like everyone else. We have succeeded in that as well as any department at Emory. And Emory itself has made this a top priority; the last administration was especially good at nurturing diversity, and the new president clearly wants to continue that tradition.
Konner's account of the comment is interesting for its well-meaning doublethink. On the one hand, he says he did not react to Worthman's comment because he knew it was not racist and he knows Worthman is not a racist. On the other hand, he condemns himself for not reacting to the statement as if it were racist and condemns Worthman for making a comment that could be construed as racist. In between the lines, one can read a troubling message: for Konner, Worthman's error was not racism, but making it possible for someone to convincingly accuse her of racism; his own error was not to condone racism, but to fail to condemn a comment that could, if taken out of context, be construed as racist by a would-be accuser. As a white witness to Worthman's comment, Konner accepts full responsibility for anticipating and protecting the sensibilities of the one black woman in the room; his mistake, as far as he is concerned, lies not in his understanding of Worthman's comment as essentially not racist, but in his failure to apprehend in the moment that of course a black person would see the comment in this way, and that of course, as a consequence, he ought to have spoken out in defense of black people's sensibilities. It's a strange and disturbing logic, part chivalric self-flagellation, part racial condescension. It's no less disturbing for being precisely the sort of logic that sensitivity training seeks to inculcate in its subjects.
Not surprisingly, then, Konner goes on to describe, with remarkable patience, the sensitivity training he and his colleagues have undergone as part of the departmental punishment for Worthman's comment: "They urged us to look into ourselves and every aspect of our department's life, and we are doing that." He concludes by urging that those who would condemn Worthman, the Emory anthropology department, and Emory University itself try to find within themselves a little bit of the compassionate sensitivity they claim is missing at Emory. All reservations about Konner's mode of modelling racial sensitivity aside, he's right about that.
Thanks to Ralph Luker for the link.
![[Critical Mass]](/archives/cmlogo.gif)