About Critical Mass [dot] Writing [dot] Reviews [dot] Contact
« previous entry | return home | next entry »

October 9, 2007 [feather]
How it is

There is a lot of denial and subterfuge surrounding the role race and sex play in academic hiring--but when you get right down to it, there are whole fields that come with assumptions about what the genetics should be of the person who gets hired. A frustrated English professor reflects on this at Inside Higher Ed this morning, with frankness--and with an anonymity that speaks volumes about how unspeakable is the truth he is telling.


Once more, the English department at my Southern liberal arts college will send a team to the Modern Language Association meeting to search for an African American. Oops, did I say that? I mean, an African-Americanist — someone who specializes in research and teaching African-American literature. This search, three years running, has become the most vexing aspect of departmental life, at least in part because of the department’s well-meaning but misguided goal of hiring a black candidate. When the applications come in, there is a more or less unspoken attempt to read the color of the candidate based on the colleges they attended, their names, or their committee work.

The MLA interview can occasionally feel like the dating game, as a series of previously promising candidates enter the room all too whitely. (Even more perplexing are non-white candidates of another race or ethnicity researching in African-American literature, but that’s another subject) However, a lot can happen in a 40-minute interview. After engaging with serious scholarship on African-American literature and culture, it is hard for the interview team to sustain emphasis on the candidate’s body over the candidate’s body of work. So, at the end of two days of intense discussions with ABD’s and newly-minted Ph.D.’s, the interview team comes up with a short list of four very bright, energetic, productive candidates with tremendous research and teaching potential. Odds are that the majority of them, like a majority of the pool, will not be black, and so the real work of the search begins: trying to convince the rest of the department to take these folks seriously.

The author goes on to note his department's political pride in its record of racial hiring--"fighting for the position as a means to diversify was a bold political move on a largely white campus, anchoring the English department's reputation for progressive politics." He also points out how racist this type of tokenism, in which "well-meaning liberals fight for the body of the African American," ultimately is: "At best, it is a naive strategy that still presumes the employers' market of the 70's and 80's; at worst, it's racist, prioritizing color while neglecting the significance of the position itself." It's also illegal at any school that claims not to discriminate on the basis of race; i.e., the vast majority of them. The first step toward a healthier campus climate--one that respects diversity of thought as well as background, and that does not lapse into racism in the name of progressivism--is columns like this that admit to the problem. If only the author had signed his real name.

posted on October 9, 2007 12:31 PM




Trackback Pings:

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.erinoconnor.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/1326






Comments:

Back then, fighting for the position as a means to diversify was a bold political move on a largely white campus, anchoring the English department’s reputation for progressive politics.
Isn't that really the elephant in the room? The author states plainly that
1) The faculty is openly and proudly "progressive", i.e. strongly politically biased.
2) The faculty puts validating that political bias above any concern for its teaching.
How is that not the right wing caricature of academia?
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at October 9, 2007 11:00 PM





Post a comment:




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)