April 15, 2008
Don't mess with the sacred cows
Academia is unkind to those who question its norms--and it also tends to deny the truth of this observation. It's one of academia's classic bait-and-switches to say that what academics do is challenge repressive norms beyond the academy, and that they are thus immune to the charge that they are not themselves always entirely respectful of free inquiry or academic freedom. We see it all the time. And the consequences, for ideas and for individuals, can be severe.
One example may be found in retired Wellesley classics professor Mary Lefkowitz. In the early 1990s, Lefkowitz made the mistake of challenging some of the more factually dubious aspects of Afrocentric thought--and paid for it very dearly. She writes about her experiences on the wrong side of the politically correct academic cabal in her new book, History Lesson, summarized this morning in a WSJ review by John Leo:
In 1994, Home Box Office and Pepsico celebrated Black History Month by producing a poster that was intended to show black achievement: It featured a large picture of the pyramids and many smaller images, including one of the Sphinx. Worse, the companies sent 20,000 copies of the poster to predominantly black schools. Honest teachers in those schools had to explain why a corporate seal of approval had been given to a historical claim that just isn't true.This "celebration" marked the high-water mark of Afrocentrism, a movement that had begun in the academy in the 1980s and gained astonishing momentum with the publication of Martin Bernal's "Black Athena: The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization" (1989). According to various Afrocentric books and popular assertions, ancient Egypt invaded ancient Greece, Plato and Herodotus somehow picked up their ideas in travels along the Nile, and Aristotle stole his philosophy from the library at Alexandria. Though the arguments were contradictory and scattered, the point was that Western civilization had been founded on materials and discoveries borrowed or stolen from black Egyptians.
During this whirlwind of dubious scholarship, the academic world mostly remained mum, hiding behind the curtain of academic freedom and withholding its criticism lest a statement of simple truth be branded "racist." For a 1991 column in U.S. News & World Report, I phoned seven Egyptologists and asked whether the ancient Egyptian population had been "black." Of course not, they all responded, but not for attribution, since, as one said, "this subject is just too hot."
The scholar who did the most to break this silence was Mary Lefkowitz, a mild-mannered classicist at Wellesley College. Without fully understanding the abuse she would invite by speaking out against Afrocentrism, she accepted an assignment in the fall of 1991 to write a long review of the second volume of Martin Bernal's "Black Athena" for the New Republic magazine. She was shocked to discover that the Bernal volume, and a stack of other nearly fact-free books on Afrocentrism, had made headway in the schools and even in the universities.
She concluded that the Afrocentric authors regarded history as a form of advocacy: Like other postmodernists, they believed that truth is impossible to know -- that all "narratives" are socially constructed and thus possess an equal claim to legitimacy. At the time, traditional scholarship was generally under assault, but the classics were particularly vulnerable, because they purported to study the foundational texts of the West. Attacking the classics as a complex system of lies was emotionally important to those who wanted to take Western culture down a peg. Feelings and politics mattered, not scholarship. As Ms. Lefkowitz puts it: "[Bernal] seemed to be saying that the most persuasive narrative was the one with the most desirable result. In effect, he was preaching a kind of affirmative action program for the rewriting of history."
"History Lesson" is Ms. Lefkowitz's personal account of what she experienced as a result of questioning the veracity of Afrocentrism and the motives of its advocates. She has advanced the intellectual case against Afrocentrism before, in "Not Out of Africa" (1997); here she takes a more personal approach, at one point mentioning the strain of the controversy as she battled breast cancer.
Outraged by the nonscholarly approach of Afrocentric writers, she somewhat naively imagined that facts would put their extreme theories to rest. She noted, for instance, that Socrates couldn't have been black, as alleged, because his parents were Athenian citizens and blacks, in classical Athens, were not eligible for citizenship. She noted, as well, that Aristotle would have had a tough time stealing his philosophy from the library at Alexandria, since he died before the library was built. Such arguments went nowhere, Ms. Lefkowitz writes, with those who saw Greek philosophy "as yet another case of a colonialist European plundering of Africa."
While Ms. Lefkowitz was being targeted by Afrocentrists nationally, she fell into a war on her own campus with Anthony Martin, a vituperative and litigious tenured professor of "Africana studies." It was an odd battle. Ms. Lefkowitz kept trying to make it a debate about evidence and truth. Mr. Martin made it personal and added a large helping of anti-Semitism. Eventually he turned out a book titled "The Jewish Onslaught," endorsed the crackpot theory that Jews had dominated the slave trade and demanded Jewish reparations to blacks.
When Mr. Martin sued Ms. Lefkowitz for libel -- claiming that she had misreported an incident involving him -- the dean of the college, Nancy Kolodny, declined to indemnify her. "It's your problem, she said to Ms. Lefkowitz. "The college can't help you." Some turned on Ms. Lefkowitz for dividing the campus. Others shrank from criticizing a black professor or were simply intimidated by the explosive Mr. Martin. Nan Keohane, Wellesley's president (soon to become the president of Duke University), offered little help. She urged one pro-Lefkowitz group to consider Mr. Martin's feelings and introduced an extreme Afrocentrist speaker as "a distinguished Egyptologist."
In the end, Wellesley behaved well. The history department refused to give credit toward a history major for courses in the Africana Studies Department, and Mr. Martin was denied a salary increase. The Anti-Defamation League found a law firm willing to defend Ms. Lefkowitz. After six years of legal wrangling, she won the case. Both Ms. Lefkowitz and Mr. Martin are now retired.
Though much of academia is still lost in postmodern theory and relativism, Ms. Lefkowitz insists on what we might call a counternarrative: Teachers owe it to themselves and their students to get as close as possible to the truth. The academy has still not firmly answered the central question of "History Lesson": What should the university do when a professor insists on teaching demonstrable untruths? No prattle about academic freedom, please.
That last question is a huge one. We have become such relativists when it comes to truth that we can't even begin to tackle the question in a meaningful way. "Academic freedom" has become synonymous with "freedom to say, do, and advocate whatever you want," as long as you are on the right side, and particularly if you are tenured. But the credibility problems academia presently labors under will not begin to be resolved until such questions can be meaningfully answered.
On a more individual level, we need more personal accounts of what happens to scholars who question academia's ideological norms. Most people who go through the sort of wringer Lefkowitz did don't want to relive it by writing about it. And it's hard to write about such immensely personal things without looking self-pitying or incurring dismissive responses. Still, this is a side of academic culture that we need to be able to see. It's vital information in the ongoing debate about how such concepts as academic freedom, intellectual diversity, and tolerance really operate within academe, and it has the power to help ground arguments that otherwise risk getting lost in abstract theorizing about what is and what should be.
Trackback Pings:
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.erinoconnor.org/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/1445
Comments:
"Academic freedom" has become synonymous with "freedom to say, do, and advocate whatever you want," particularly if you are tenured.But that's not true, as Lefkowitz's experience shows. It's not that kind of anarchy, which frankly might well be preferable, but a substitution of political values for academic ones.
AOG -- you are right; I left out the crucial qualifier: "as long as you are on the right side." I have amended the sentence accordingly.
I followed the Afrocentrism business several years ago and read some of Mary Lefkowitz on it at the time. I also read the John Leo piece in the Wall St. Journal with interest and sympathy.
However, I'm troubled with "What should the university do when a professor insists on teaching demonstrable untruths? No prattle about academic freedom, please."
Well, academic freedom is not just prattle to me. And suppose I want to say something in one of my classes, undergraduate classes say, expressing doubt about the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory (or hypothesis, as I prefer to call it). I don't teach a geoscience department, but some of what I teach is close enough to bring up AGW.
I guarantee, if it became publicly know that I was doing this, plenty of climate scientists, and maybe others, would be happy to tell you that I'm teaching "demostrable untruths", even if I were just explaining why there are, in my opinion, quite legitimate doubts about AGW. And some would be happy to have the university "do" something about it, i.e. put a stop to it, if they could.
So, the issue is not so easy or clear to me.
Mike wrote:
I guarantee, if it became publicly know that I was doing this, plenty of climate scientists, and maybe others, would be happy to tell you that I'm teaching "demostrable untruths", even if I were just explaining why there are, in my opinion, quite legitimate doubts about AGW. And some would be happy to have the university "do" something about it, i.e. put a stop to it, if they could.So, the issue is not so easy or clear to me.
[sarcasm]
I agree.
As someone who believes that the earth may not be round, I'm having a great deal of trouble denying the flat earth people their say . . .
[/sarcasm]
minerva that is just such a dumb thing to say, if you knew how dumb it is you would be embarrassed for yourself. It shows you don't know anything about science including the state of the science of the planetary climate.
Within the past week I have corresponded with two members of the National Academy of Sciences who are deeply skeptical of the standard global warming story.
Now please tell me two people in the National Academy of Sciences, or any scientist whatsoever, who entertains the belief that the earth is flat.
And please, don't make a fool of yourself by coming back with the comparison to the law of gravity.
Oh dear! I've revealed my dumbth and you missed my point!
I guess I was too obtuse; I'd better spell it out.
To liken the "controversy" of Afrocentrism to the controversy of AGW is like likening the "controversy" of whether or not the earth is flat to the controversy of AGW. At least to me.
I guess I just don't have a problem in dismissing both Afrocentrism and the notion that the earth is flat with equal verve, given the evidence.
Just an opinion. Feel free to disagree.
minerva, sorry if I misinterpreted what you said to mean that you consider AGW skepticsim to be akin to believing the earth is flat.
Even if you don't believe that, I can assure you, a good many people do, if one expresses skepticsim about AGW, one is likened to a flat-earther.
I'm not sure then, what point were you trying to make about someone who would teach that there is a skeptical side to the AGW question?
David Suzuki, a well-known Canadian tv science personality, has suggested--seriously, as far as I can tell--legal consequences for people who dispute the anthropogenic hypothesis for global warming.
As to Ms. Lefkowitz, it all came out all right...after six years of litigation, and she was fortunate to find someone who would defend her without bankrupting her. The opposing professor...didn't get a raise. But I rather think that anyone else contemplating critcizing him had second thoughts.
Meanwhile, some years ago I worked for a department of the City of Detroit and most of my colleagues were black. A number had a poster distributed by Budweiser, "Great Black African Rulers." One of the rulers was Cleopatra, who was depicted as dark-skinned, sporting a large afro, dressed in a leopard skin and sprawled on a zebra skin couch. And when, as occasionally happened, I heard someone talk about how Cleopatra was really black, I had enough sense to keep quiet.
This argument is akin to the plight of white men in the U.S. These poor guys have been taken advantage of by their own women first, who caused them to lose their manliness by pointing out their faults a bit too often. Then came the blacks who denigrated them for similar alleged transgressions. As a result, white men in America live such destitute lives becasue they have lost their identity and their livelihood has been stolen by Afirmative Actioned blacks. What a terrible life must theirs be!
Post a comment:
![[Critical Mass]](/archives/cmlogo.gif)