Editor's note: The following open letter to President Russell Osgood was submitted to the S&B this week. We're not printing any more issues this semester, so we've posted the letter here instead.
Dear President Osgood,
While making my travel plans to attend my daughter's upcoming graduation from Grinnell, I visited your website and was appalled to discover that the commencement address will be delivered by Angela Davis. I investigated on the Web to see if this could really be the Angela Davis of memory, whether she had undergone some type of inspirational change, and what she has been about since gaining notoriety. I listened to a recording made at one of her recent speeches.
I found that she's even worse than I had recalled. Hers was an appeal for an emotional response from those already convinced, certainly not a rational treatment aimed to educate or persuade.
Ms. Davis came to national attention decades ago because of lethal violence (murder, kidnapping at gunpoint) by associates all armed with weapons registered in her name. I find nothing from her indicating remorse over these acts, much less denial. Her legal acquittal is more sad commentary on our justice system than sign of her innocence. Since, she's apparently made a living as an academic professional victim, her trade racism, her scientific contribution nil. Her irrational rants masquerade as social science. Is this dishonest scholarship something Grinnell espouses? Why choose as speaker an unrepentant accessory to violence and pseudo-scholar? Why send off our graduating sons and daughters with a pep talk from a cartoon relic of 60's radicalism?
Colleges and universities surely should be places of unfettered free speech, of uninhibited airing of ideas. These should be subjected to withering but civil testing, cross examination, debate, and clarification. Blowing off the head of an intellectual opponent with a shotgun does not qualify.
Commencement addresses, on the other hand, should inspire, reassure, challenge, offer perspective, and admonish the graduates at a moment they're singularly receptive. I expect nothing positive in these areas from Angela Davis. I expect a call to emote in anger, resentment, and hate, not a call to think. While my daughter is sufficiently independent and critical of thought to escape damage from the sophomoric demagoguery of Angela Davis, it's sad her college graduation will not send her on her way with something other than sheepskin. I will attend commencement for the sake of my daughter, but I cannot sit through her address in quiet that might be mistaken for approval of Angela Davis.
I am offended at the choice of a commencement speaker. I resent having this unpleasantness imposed upon what's otherwise a happy occasion for my family. I am disappointed that Grinnell appears not to be the educational institution of integrity that I had been led to believe.
Sincerely,
Michael H. Denyer, MD
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
How anyone could disagree with the sentiments of Dr. Denyer is beyond me. His hard questions deserve a candid response.
However, having observed Grinnell for the last 40 years, I don't expect to see any straightforward answers. Let's just pretend that the emperor's clothes are the best ever.
Bingo. And the best part is that people will say "the more voices the better, even if you disagree with her, this is the marketplace of ideas, etc." And those people will be the same people who shouted down the ambassador last year and censored him by talking over him and not letting him answer questions in what was an embarrassment to the college. Or the same people who threw things at Horowitz. Or the same people who want the abortion protestors kicked off campus permanently.
Support free speech!*
*as long as we agree with it
Why are we judging the content of Davis' speech long before it has even been delievered?
I agree. Angela Davis is a poor choice. Thanks for speaking up.
Because she's so predictable.
Hear hear. Poor choice. Grinnell should have more integrity. I have a son who will attend next year and have many Grinnell alum in the family.
If Grinnell wants to be truly progressive, it will stop the stifling think-our-way-or-be-ostracized attitude.
The 60's are over. Learn from it and move on. Angela Davis hasn't.
Her speech was pretty lousy.
I'm curious to hear from people who did not agree with the choice of commencement speaker, now that we have heard the speech. Angela Davis' talk was pretty tame. Do you all still believe it should have been someone else? Was it the speaker, or the expected content of the speech that caused the most controversy?
I too, saw Angela Davis as a questionable choice for commencement speaker. After listening to her, however, I wonder what Dr. Denyer's thoughts are now?
"For you will never discover a scarcity of facts, and these facts will be presented in such a way as to veil the ways of thinking embedded in them. And so to reveal these hidden ways of thinking, to suggest alternate frameworks, to imagine better ways of living in evolving worlds, to imagine new human relations that are freed from persisting hierarchies, whether they be racial or sexual or geopolitical - yes, I think this is the work of educated beings." -- Angela Davis, May 21, 2007, Grinnell College
Well done, Ms. Davis.
I'm attending Grinnell starting in the fall, and I'm a bit relieved to see that there are people as miffed as I was at the choice for commencement speaker.
Dr. Denyer hit the nail on the head. As a (liberal) alum, I am disgusted and disappointed at the College's choice to honor this lightweight, former Communist (someone who only stopped being a Communist when the money from Moscow dried up).
How a great school like Grinnell can make such a stupid choice is beyond me. Sad, sad, sad.
Re what Angela Davis said or didn't say at commencement -- that is not the point. She was being honored by the College for her "life's work" and there are serious enough questions about that should have caused the Board of Trustee to refuse to grant her an honorary degree. That it failed to stop this is astounding.
The choice of Angela Davis for commencement speaker was a choice made by the class of 2007 at Grinnell. If people have a problem with that choice, then they should be criticizing the graduating seniors, not the administration or the institution.
In truth, though, the class of 2007 chose someone that they thought would be interesting and could provide a thoughtful and intelligent commencement speech. She certainly did a better job than Doughboy Vilsack, and if her politics are controversial, then so be it. It is a sad day when the students of Grinnell refuse to make a decision because it is controversial (something that the administration, trustees, and even some alums have apparently forgotten).
Commencement is intended to be a celebration of the completion of four years of intensely hard work, and should honor the graduating class. For the most part, the seniors who actually graduated - who were, in fact, the only people on graduation day that really mattered - were pleased with the choice of Davis as commencement speaker. Moreover, Davis reminded everyone in her speech that graduation day is about the students, not her or any of the other speakers - something that the rest of you who spent too much time attacking Davis forgot.
What on wide earth? How has Grinnell become a school for conservatives and their families? And you critics are conservatives! Ooooh, Angela Davis doesn't believe in a free capitalist market. Murder! Ooooh, she wants to set prisoners free. Murder! Ooooh, she thinks sexism and racism still exist and are perpetuated in contemporary US politics and institutions. How dare she?! Murder!! GIVE ME A BREAK! Professor Davis is a woman of integrity, moral courage, intelligence, and great spirit. She is a resource in a time when most middle class citizens seem to have given up all critical thinking for the sake of leading comfortable lives as members of the herd. You accuse her of violence and of being a "lightweight". I ask you, have you had the courage of your convictions? Courage that led you to stand up for what is right, even when that meant prosecution and jail?
Ms. Davis is hardly some rebel for the sake of it. She was a brilliant student who then became a brilliant intellectual and teacher. For her non-conformist thinking (revolutionary in her day, and apparently still so), she was suspended from her professorship at UCLA. And you know what, those accusations of her being some violent murderer are just ridiculous. She had guns registered under her name because her life was being threatened. She never shot at yet alone killed anyone. There is no proof that she was involved in the shootout. Hello, she was declared not guilty, remember? You idiots should be sued for libel! Read up on the facts, fools!
Angela Davis is famous worldwide. She is a source of inspiration for labour rights activists, prison reformers, feminists, anti-racists, activists for economic justice, and so on. She's been a source of inspiration for me, in my own desire to bring about revolutionary change in my semi-democratic home country. Instead of assuming what the powers that be have to say about people like Angela Davis, you should learn to make your own informed judgements. Too easy to claim disgust at the choice of speaker. Much harder to listen to her challenge. Or wait, is it that you are all so very stupid and have trouble understanding what her speech was saying? Understandable, conservatives tend to be of the stupid kind. You deserve the stupid administration you have. If not for people like Angela Davis, this country would be well on its way towards the same semi-democratic situation in my own country. Yet, you find her deplorable, not your president, not USA-PATRIOT, not Guantanamo, not Iraq. What poor taste, I say!
Angela Davis should be canonized! May she continue to inspire revolutionaries until the demise of capitalism!!
Thank God we have the First Amendment in this country to protect ill-tempered and ill-informed diatribes like that from Smita. We may deserve the pathetic President we have. He is no good. But why are you making that the question? Apparently because even you realize that Davis is a lightweight and you have to try and give substance to your argument by suggesting dissent regarding this choice must come from the right wing.
Again, extremism is extremism -- whether from the right (Bush) or the left (Davis). The College should have speakers of this kind, without a doubt. But the College should think long and hard before honoring them -- it should not have effectively said that we think she is worthy of honor. She is not. Nor is Bush.
Re the previous comment that Commencement is about the students. True. But honorary degrees are about the institution and all of us that are affiliated with it -- not just the current-and-soon-to-be-gone graduates and their desire for an interesting speaker.
Angela Davis provided the shotgun that was used to blow the head off a sitting judge. Instead of collecting an honorary degree from Grinnell, she should be doing life behind bars.
But then the only standards leftists have are double standards.
Not that this issue is of interest to anyone anymore, but I felt compelled to post a few links--and make a few comments.
First, anyone who believes that Angela Davis is a violent criminal would be well off reading this bit from the New York Times. Without any evidence one way or another, Dr. Denyer discounts Ms. Davis' declared innocence as a "sad commentary on our justice system," which must suggest that he believes retaliation against political opponents (e.g. Communists such as Ms. Davis) takes priority over trial-by-jury. He may feel content that he is not alone in this belief to be sure--that is, if one's preferred company is the likes of Joseph McCarthy and the Burmese government.
One truly sad commentary on the American justice system--to use an example related to Ms. Davis' social activism--is the fact that 123 people, since 1973, have been sent to death row under wrongful convictions. That is, 123 whom we know of. (Source: IPS) In US legal cases, I might remind the author of this letter, our sympathies lie with the defendant until proven otherwise. (Source: The Bill of Rights)
Second, I would like to second Kurt's note: Ms. Davis delivered an excellent speech at the college--and hardly a controversial one at that. It is eloquent, thought-provoking and inspirational.
Finally:
Smita--one of only two people to identify herself among the posts here--right noted that Ms. Davis is a respected academic, a moral figure (in basic values at the very least) and someone willing to stick her head into the fray of public opinion in order to stand her ground. Any speaker chosen would surely have had his/her faults--so do all of us--but I feel very proud to attend a school who would dare to invite and honor a notable figure such as Ms. Davis at its graduation, whether her public image is controversial or not. She is a woman of action, and her values match well with what Grinnell teaches its students: independence, enlightenment, critical thought and social justice. She was a good fit for the college community, its liberal and conservative members both.
When I graduate this spring, I hope to listen to an equally Grinnell-appropriate speaker as Ms. Davis. And I would like to extend a big, preemptive "thank you" to the Commencement Committee for all of its work to this end.
Post a Comment