I was disappointed to see and hear about the reactions of some students to the "blackface" controversy that engulfed the campus over the past weekend. Indeed, I was disappointed in my own initial reaction. Pictures of USG president-elect Josh Weinstein '09 in black paint, reminiscent of the minstrel shows of old, drew a visceral reaction from many students on campus. Conversely, another group of students dismissed the photos (especially the timing), released by an anonymous individual, as slanderous and politically motivated.
As a supporter of Weinstein, whom I consider a friend, I definitely found myself a member of the latter group. Over private emails, I branded the hastily organized forum by the Black Student Union as "shit" and considered any hostile moves against Weinstein as character assassination. I told my fellow black men on campus in emails that this controversy was a matter of momentary "bad judgment" and that it had no bearing on Weinstein's ability to faithfully execute his USG presidential duties. I refused to attend the gathering.
But after a few of my close friends told me about the conversation that took place at the meeting, I began to think twice about the larger implications that I had only halfheartedly acknowledged. From what I'm told, the "forum" was far from perfect, and I was disgusted to hear about a great person with a great heart being brought to tears, but this gathering did at least hint at the consequences for the campus at large.
Once I gave it due consideration, I came to the conclusion that it was wrong for me or anyone else to lump attacks on Weinstein's character with the longstanding concerns of minorities on campus concerning racial insensitivity. They are two separate things that must be addressed individually. More than anything, the circumstances of the photos' release and my personal support for Weinstein's candidacy prevented my ability to distinguish between the two. This, in turn, inhibited my ability to gain a fuller understanding of what exactly happened.
At a school that so prizes diversity, what does it mean when members of the student body lack the ability to view the world through the prism of unlike people? The fact that some Princeton students have refused to truly consider this big question is a prime example of the one-sided thinking that some on campus embrace. There is so much ignorance to go around, and there are too many students who don't see it. In particular, many students on campus view discussions surrounding race, sex, sexual orientation and ethnicity as a one-way street, involving little more than their individual perceptions. A past column by my fellow columnist Ben Chen '09 represents this harmful point of view well: "The reasons that people cite for being offended are legion. Whatever they say, I'm still not quite sure why they're doing what they're doing or what their goals are."
The idea that we can tell people when and when not to be offended is wishful thinking at its best and a disaster of human relations at its worst. For example, when the Princeton Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) dismissed black student opposition to a display that compared black enslavement with the maltreatment of animals, its decision to continue with the display represented a mindset that serves to damage relationships across political, racial and ethnic lines. This is especially true when there are alternative means of communication that can transmit the same message without insulting the history and the standing of particular groups of people. In the case of PAWS, its student leaders could have been more sensitive to the concerns of blacks (as PETA was to Jews with making comparisons to the Holocaust) that embraced efforts to foster a dialogue.
A chief criticism of the University's administration is that it often fail to take student opinion fully into account. Many believe that hearing about policies when they are decided, with a question-and-answer session for students, is not enough. When we or our elected representatives complain, they respond with a quiet confidence that our grievances are largely unsubstantiated. They cannot fathom the source of our discontent. Can we really chide the administration for its unacceptable behavior without looking at the insensitive way some students treat the views of our black, brown, female and LGBT peers? If we do, how can we avoid calling ourselves hypocrites?
If we as students are fed up with the mannerisms adopted by our superiors within the administration, we have to be willing to personally adopt habits that honor a new campus standard. Making such changes will not occur overnight, but simply taking the time to think again about the significance of last weekend's events is a good start. Some may deride this step as insignificant, but everything has to suffer through the growing pains of a developing stage. It's the only way we can grow as a campus community, and it's the only way that past grievances can ever be addressed. David Smart is a history major from Los Angeles, Calif. He can be reached at dsmart@princeton.edu.
Read More
Why can’t lecturers win the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching?
Jerry ZhuLet’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Let’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Princeton’s administration of justice is Trumpian
Frances BroganThe disparity between the University’s approach to Giberson and its approach to pro-Palestinian protestors reflects a concerning trend of appeasing an increasingly emboldened right rather than resisting the threat it poses to academic freedom and the wellbeing of Princeton students.
Secular Opening Exercises? Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water
Frank StrasburgerThe secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
The secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
