Looking Back on Last Semester: Professor Richard Landes Lectures on the Spring of 2015

On Nov. 12 at 4:30 p.m., Boston University Associate Professor of History Richard Landes visited Connecticut College to deliver a lecture in Blaustein 210 titled “Threats to Academic Freedom in the Early 21st Century: Case Study of Connecticut College, Spring 2015.” Professor Landes spoke on the events last semester, in which a Facebook post concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by Connecticut College Professor of Philosophy Andrew Pessin sparked debate over racist language at the College. Professor Landes, the father of a recent Connecticut College graduate, observed the discussion from off-campus and blogged about it on his personal website throughout the semester.

Blaustein 210, a lecture-style classroom, saw students, faculty and staff filling all of the available seats, as well as standing in the back of the room, against the side walls and crowding near the door. Connecticut College Professor of Economics Spencer Pack introduced Professor Landes, as well as the Connecticut College Chapter of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP), which sponsored the lecture. The AAUP works to “advance academic freedom and shared governance; to define fundamental professional values and standards for higher education; to promote the economic security of faculty, academic professionals, graduate students, post-doctoral fellows, and all those engaged in teaching and research in higher education,” among other goals, according to their website.

Early on in his lecture, Professor Landes discussed the importance of self-criticism, both towards the College and himself, saying, “Before I begin giving you a hard time, let me say that I am open to your rebuke, to your challenges to my reconstruction of these events.”

On the interpretation of the Facebook post, which many community members found to be racist, Professor Landes said that the “claim was based on two things, 1) the ambiguity of the post’s language, and 2) the spin given it by those who claimed deep injury at its meaning.” What should have happened, said Landes, was that “more mature members of the community … [would have] demand[ed] responses from those who so deliberately misrepresented Pessin in insisting, against all evidence they possessed and manipulated, that Pessin was a genocidal hater.” Professor Landes suggested a “vigorous exchange in the school paper – or even a moderated website for the community’s perusal,” which would have given a “win for a just, reasoning, empirically based scholarly community.” Continuing on, Professor Landes said, “The school paper would have passed on to hands more capable of professionalism and basic fairness; and the accusing students discredited for their attempted slander.”

Professor Landes called the treatment of Pessin a “moral failing,” saying, “There is not a faculty person on this campus who would want to be treated as you treated your colleague, Andrew Pessin.”

“The administration,” he said, “took a policy of appeasement [toward] the most radical [students].” Professor Landes called this a “scapegoat sacrifice,” a term coined by sociologist Richard Girard, during which a community “kill[s] an arbitrary, surrogate victim, a scapegoat, and create[s] solidarity among the guilty survivor-participants in that blood sacrifice.”

“Today,” Professor Landes said, “Connecticut College is just such a community.”

In closing, Professor Landes offered a few final suggestions: “Establish a website in which all the key documents from last semester … receive scrutiny.” He also suggested that Arthur Miller’s 1953 play The Crucible, an allegorical representation of the Salem Witch Trials that mirrored the era of McCarthyism, be performed on campus. He said that both SGA and the Voice should host a “searching (and possibly searing) discussion of what it means to run a responsible elected body or newspaper … Imagine the maturity of those who would have gone through that process.” 

The question and answer session that followed touched on multiple points, with listeners asking Professor Landes to clarify on points he addressed in his lecture, and others on areas people felt he had left out. Topics covered included questions of the definition of hate speech, the role of epistemic violence, the nature of private colleges and universities versus their public counterparts and the idea that last semester had an antagonist and a protagonist. One student, who said he had been called a sympathizer to Hamas by Professor Landes on his blog because of his criticism of the Facebook post, rebuked Professor Landes, saying that he is neither a terrorist supporter nor a supporter of Hamas. Professor Landes relented on this point.

By 6:30 p.m., the question and answer session had finished. Lindsay Boyle from the New London Day, which had covered the events of last semester in multiple articles, attended the talk. In Ms. Boyle’s coverage of the lecture, she reported a group of students (who chose to remain anonymous when speaking with the Day) saying that while they were happy Professor Landes came to speak to the community, they found him “condescending” and “surprised by their intelligence.”

Vladimir Chlouba ’16, who attended the lecture, told the Voice via email, “I have to say that to hear someone offer constructive criticism to our College was an opportunity to reflect on what happened last semester as well as on the entire conversation surrounding inclusive excellence. Having said that, I did not necessarily share Professor Landes’ analysis. In fact, I thought that the route he took — attempting to justify and re-explain the controversial post itself — was simply an ambition bound to fail.”

Chlouba added that, in his opinion, the most critical part of the lecture came when Professor Landes discussed issues of free speech. “He emphasized that an intellectually honest and critical discourse may stir emotions but if all of the involved parties remain committed to the virtues of of civility and self-criticism, we are likely to learn more about the issues we debate, our opponents and, often most importantly, ourselves.”