Rock Throwing Raises Hackles
Haym Benaroya, Don Lichtenberg, Edward S. Boylan, David L. Travis, Joan Wallach Scott
Editor’s Note:
Academe received several responses to "Edward Said’s Action Protected, Says Columbia," published on page 3 of the January–February issue. Excerpts from the letters appear below, followed by a reply by Joan Wallach Scott, chair of the AAUP’s Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure.
To the Editor:
If the report in the January–February issue about the "controversy" over Edward Said is complete and correct, Columbia has supported the right of one of its "distinguished" professors to perform violent acts, that is, throwing stones across the border from Lebanon into Israel, as part of the "protection of free discourse of individuals who should feel free to express their views without any fear of the chilling effect of a politically dominant ideology." While this view that tenure protects violent acts is very sad and troubling, equally so is the motion of the AAUP’s Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure that commended Columbia’s action.
Would Columbia or the AAUP support a racist faculty member’s throwing a stone through the window of the black newspaper on campus, or a faculty member’s throwing a stone through a dean’s office window because his views demand such action?
What would Columbia have said if one of its Jewish faculty members threw a stone at Moslems in Jerusalem? Does the university’s support carry there as well? I very much doubt it, and, yes, these are all in the same category of violent action.
I disassociate myself from Columbia’s words and from their endorsement by the AAUP. I maintain that violence is not part of academic freedom, neither in the United States nor overseas.
Haym Benaroya
(Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering)
Rutgers University
To the Editor:
The January–February article on Columbia University professor Edward Said quotes Jonathan Cole, provost and dean of faculties at Columbia University, as follows: "There is nothing more fundamental to a university than the protection of the free discourse of individuals who should feel free to express their views without any fear of the chilling effect of a politically dominant ideology." The AAUP’s associate secretary Jonathan Knight is quoted as saying, "Cole’s . . . affirmation of the importance of the university’s judging a professor’s speech and conduct according to its standards and not those of the external community, [is] laudable." The article also states that the AAUP’s Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure commended Cole’s action.
My dictionary defines discourse as "verbal expression in speech or writing." Since when is throwing a rock "free discourse"? Or to put it another way, Columbia and the AAUP ought to protect my right to picket in front of their administration buildings, even if my sign told lies. However, I would be surprised if either Columbia or the AAUP would protect my right to throw rocks at its administration building. There is a difference between free speech and violent acts, although, in the case of Edward Said, neither Columbia University nor the AAUP seems to recognize that difference.
I do not think that Columbia should take disciplinary action against Said for what he did in Lebanon. If Said violated Israeli law, it is up to Israel to try him for it (if the Israelis can catch him) and to punish him if he is found guilty. Even if Said threw a hand grenade or participated in a war against Israel, it is not up to Columbia or the AAUP to punish him. But Columbia and the AAUP should not call throwing rocks free speech.
Don Lichtenberg
(Physics), Emeritus
Indiana University
To the Editor:
The latest issue of Academe shows a picture of Edward Said with the misleading caption, "Edward Said throwing a rock from the Lebanese border into Israel in July 2000." The distinguished professor’s target was not a geographic location but some Israeli soldier.
The distinction is important, because the AAUP has sadly endorsed Columbia University’s refusal to distance itself from Said’s actions. As Academe informed us, the November meeting of Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure commended Jonathan Cole, Columbia’s provost and dean of faculties, who defended Said’s right "to express [himself] . . . without any fear of the chilling effect of a politically dominant ideology."
Academe quotes associate secretary Jonathan Knight as stating, "Universities face strong pressures when freedom of expression is attacked." He argues that Cole’s action is laudable because it is a "defense of a professor’s right to hold forth on issues outside the classroom . . . and [an] affirmation of the importance of the university’s judging a professor’s . . . conduct according to its standards and not those of the external community."
In other words, throwing rocks at individuals is now considered protected "freedom of expression." Of course, when New York Times reporter Clyde Haberman went to the Columbia campus and began throwing stones, security guards stopped him very quickly. One presumes that only professors have such expanded rights.
Since I am indeed a professor, could I go and throw rocks at Mr. Knight or the AAUP’s distinguished general secretary, Mary Burgan? Will the AAUP promise not to press charges if I do so? Surely the AAUP would not want me to be chilled by any politically dominant ideology that holds that attempting to inflict bodily harm on individuals is improper behavior.
Edward S. Boylan
Treasurer
Rutgers Chapters of AAUP
To the Editor:
I am deeply disturbed by the report in the January–February issue on Edward Said and the picture of him throwing a rock "into Israel." Suppose he had been throwing a hand grenade or using a rocket launcher. Would this still have been "free discourse" or "hold[ing] forth on issues outside the classroom"?
Even if the "gesture" was entirely symbolic, that is, if there was no one on or near the other end of the throw, Said explicitly encourages rock throwing by Palestinian twelve-year-olds, and that is completely irresponsible.
I am embarrassed for Columbia University and ashamed of the AAUP.
David L. Travis
(Mathematics), Emeritus
Rowan University of New Jersey
Joan Scott Responds:
Committee A was impressed by Jonathan Cole’s letter for a number of reasons. First, Cole refused to yield to threats to Edward Said’s tenure made by members of the Columbia University community on the basis of their political disagreements with him. Second, he made a clear distinction between Said’s political behavior outside the classroom and his responsibilities and duties as a teacher. Third, Cole took the action for what it was: a protest against Israeli treatment of Palestinians and a gesture of solidarity with those who oppose it.
Said’s action was not itself violent; he threw the stone "at Israel," not at an Israeli soldier, not at an Israeli building, not at a window in an Israeli-owned building. No blood was spilled, no windows broken. The geopolitical entity, the nation-state, was his target; he threw the stone at, and it fell on, the land called Israel. In the view of Committee A, Cole made a subtle and important distinction between the expression of a political view (which this was) and engagement in a violent or criminal action (which this wasn’t). It is rare that administrators display this kind of intelligent dispassion and commendable when it occurs.
Joan Wallach Scott
(History)
Institute for Advanced Study, and chair, Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure
|