viewerfromnihil
Vein-Marbled Tower
I agree with the sentiment that under no circumstances should Baldwin be censored, but that's not the problem here. The problem isn't whether they should be read; it's whether or not n----- should be enunciated--note, enunciated, not communicated-- by non-black students/professors in a classroom discussion involving direct quotes from the text. There is a quandary on multiple levels here. I got into debate with my girlfriend about this last night that was a bit more heated than I would have preferred, in part because Europeans have quite a different relationship (though increasingly similar) to race in society, culture, and academia, or at least they view it differently as it is more often an abstract affair than it is in the United States, and, admittedly, because our discussion wasn't in English and she judged my lack of precision in articulating my argument as calling her racist. I mention this latter point because it seems to generally be the sticking points of these debates where both sides get derailed and no progress is made.
The first is the practical consideration from the perspective of a white instructor, which is also the theme of the article and Ein's post: does enunciating it serve the intended purpose of fostering a pedagogical environment? The question here is, what are we trying to do in the classroom? If it's to provoke thought, then the shock value attached to the word and resulting visceral feelings it invokes can't be overlooked. Best case scenario, imo, the minimal effect might be to that of the classroom door catching hard when closed. Is that a move in the right direction? If the intent is to confront students with the word, is there a net benefit that is going to result? Does a black student in the classroom need to confront him with it? Will that help him or her know what it's like to be confronted with something racist? I think that's where abstract considerations of the benefits of enunciating it get lost and lose any potential value when put in practice.
Like Ein, I've faced this problem, though in quite a different setting and personal orientation thereto, which most here are quite aware of. I'm typically the smart-ass in seminar discussions who has a quote and answer for every question posed. In such discussions, however, I backed mostly out at my Bachelor's institution, with the exception of asking follow-up questions to the professor or classmates. Enunciating n------ was, of course, out of the question in any case. I didn't want to be the smart-ass white-boy who just convinced half the class I was a dumb-ass racist. But, more so, from the perspective of a student in a seminar, I saw the reason for me being there was to explore the text and learn more from it. I can elaborate in discussions on Heidegger my lived experience as Dasein, or on Nietzsche with the social construction of morality, etc., but can I elaborate on my lived experience of racism as a black man? No. Listening to my classmates did, on the other hand, provide me with insights which I otherwise wouldn't have heard.
The other consideration which comes to mind here, which wasn't raised in the article, is more of a philosophical one, and I'll be shorter here and leave it as an open question to you guys. The whole point of reading these texts and having classes such as these is to not only learn about these topics, but also to pay respect to them and to their purpose, i.e. intended audience and to what the text was intended to spur them to. As a white professor, does enunciating "n-----" in the sentence being quoted to students (with the foregoing in mind, of course) really pay respect to the text? I'll throw that out to you guys.
I just want to add that I feel bad for the professor in question and hope for his sake that this affair ends as undramatically for him as possible. He has, ironically, worked hard to make his place of work more inclusive for minority students. He made a mistake, and it's one that causes a lot more painful than a crappy argument or bad quote that found itself being published and harangued in the journals. This brings up the very solid question of, "why is the academic left jumping on him when they're doing little to counter far more consequential academic problems like the Dark Enlightenment or more pervasive, long-standing ideologies fundamentally cancerous to their world view like neoliberalism?," but that's a what-aboutism that misses the point here.
The first is the practical consideration from the perspective of a white instructor, which is also the theme of the article and Ein's post: does enunciating it serve the intended purpose of fostering a pedagogical environment? The question here is, what are we trying to do in the classroom? If it's to provoke thought, then the shock value attached to the word and resulting visceral feelings it invokes can't be overlooked. Best case scenario, imo, the minimal effect might be to that of the classroom door catching hard when closed. Is that a move in the right direction? If the intent is to confront students with the word, is there a net benefit that is going to result? Does a black student in the classroom need to confront him with it? Will that help him or her know what it's like to be confronted with something racist? I think that's where abstract considerations of the benefits of enunciating it get lost and lose any potential value when put in practice.
Like Ein, I've faced this problem, though in quite a different setting and personal orientation thereto, which most here are quite aware of. I'm typically the smart-ass in seminar discussions who has a quote and answer for every question posed. In such discussions, however, I backed mostly out at my Bachelor's institution, with the exception of asking follow-up questions to the professor or classmates. Enunciating n------ was, of course, out of the question in any case. I didn't want to be the smart-ass white-boy who just convinced half the class I was a dumb-ass racist. But, more so, from the perspective of a student in a seminar, I saw the reason for me being there was to explore the text and learn more from it. I can elaborate in discussions on Heidegger my lived experience as Dasein, or on Nietzsche with the social construction of morality, etc., but can I elaborate on my lived experience of racism as a black man? No. Listening to my classmates did, on the other hand, provide me with insights which I otherwise wouldn't have heard.
The other consideration which comes to mind here, which wasn't raised in the article, is more of a philosophical one, and I'll be shorter here and leave it as an open question to you guys. The whole point of reading these texts and having classes such as these is to not only learn about these topics, but also to pay respect to them and to their purpose, i.e. intended audience and to what the text was intended to spur them to. As a white professor, does enunciating "n-----" in the sentence being quoted to students (with the foregoing in mind, of course) really pay respect to the text? I'll throw that out to you guys.
I just want to add that I feel bad for the professor in question and hope for his sake that this affair ends as undramatically for him as possible. He has, ironically, worked hard to make his place of work more inclusive for minority students. He made a mistake, and it's one that causes a lot more painful than a crappy argument or bad quote that found itself being published and harangued in the journals. This brings up the very solid question of, "why is the academic left jumping on him when they're doing little to counter far more consequential academic problems like the Dark Enlightenment or more pervasive, long-standing ideologies fundamentally cancerous to their world view like neoliberalism?," but that's a what-aboutism that misses the point here.
