Shots In The Dark
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
  The Death Of Free Speech, Apparently
In his New Republic blog, Marty Peretz rips into J. Lorand Matory's motion regarding free speech on the Harvard campus.

(Imagine...if any humanists in FAS blogged, they could stick up for Matory! Or criticize him. Whichever.)

Peretz argues that Matory is really gunning for Larry Summers, and after Summers, Israel.

I know Matory's reputation, especially among his colleagues, one of whom dismissed him as "simply a crackpot."

He's also an obsessive. And one of the people with whom he is obsessed is Larry Summers. This obsession, one would think, had reached its satisfying fruition when a prior resolution introduced by Matory, a withdrawal of confidence from Summers as the president of Harvard, passed and resulted in the latter's resignation. There are four direct references (and at least two indirect allusions) to Summers in the Crimson piece. If it is aimed against anybody in particular the person in the cross-hairs is Summers. If anybody's right to "express their reasoned and evidence-based ideas" has been violated it has been Summers. First, in a resolution introduced by Matory himself and passed by the F.A.S. that directly made a certain view of things verboten and pushed Summers out of his job. Second, in the scandal perpetrated by the Board of Regents at the University of California by withdrawing an invitation for Summers to speak at one of its meetings.

But for Matory, it appears, that Summers's primal sin is defense of Israel....

There's more—and it doesn't get any nicer. But it appears that Marty Peretz (who, full disclosure, hired me as an intern long ago at TNR, and with whom I've had occasional contact since then) will not have to worry; Matory's motion was apparently roundly rejected.
 
Comments:
Peretz is a joke. He deserves no attention.

(Dollars to doughnuts his source for the 'crackpot' quote is Ruth Wisse herself.)

None of which is to defend Matory, precisely.


To sum up:

Peretz is a joke.

SE
 
The motion was tabled. FAS already has an excellent set of guidelines on free speech that were enacted in 1990.
 
A particularly good moment in the meeting was when one professor compared Matory's motion to the loyalty oaths of the 1950s --- which were also benign statements on the surface.

It's hard to remember another occasion when Ruth Wisse has made a speech (she spoke right after Matory) and then the faculty voted her way.
 
The vote may have seemed to go Professor Wisse's way, but I for one voted against Professor Matory's motion because (1) it contained wording I find problematic ("feel safe"; "reasoned and evidence-based opinions") and
(2) I agreed with Professor Rabin that the motion "did not enhance" the detailed 1990 free speech document.
 
Judith,
I take it you mean you voted to table the motion, since we didn't actually vote on the Matory motion (and didn't have a quorum for that matter).

I voted not to table, since I thought tabling at that point (with 30 minutes remaining) prematurely curtailed discussion, though in due course it would have been/was the least bad outcome, for the reasons you give.

Quite so, SE!
 
Did Prof. Wisse admit that she is Shannon?
 
Do you think Marty Peretz goes around his Cambridge soirees saying Standing Eagle is a joke?
 
"Do you think Marty Peretz goes around his Cambridge soirees saying Standing Eagle is a joke?"

Not in my hearing.

(That's right, MP! I'm watching your sorry ass!)


I actually do have a non-jokey problem with MP, which has to do with his crypto-racism. But there are many, many, many others (among them Eric Alterman) who have made this case, so no need to sketch it.
 
Yes, I meant "voted to table" rather than "voted against." You're quite right on this, Richard. I was concerned about the same thing you were, and hesitated before deciding to vote with the pro-tabling group. Professor Matory was understandably upset that his motion hadn't received as much discussion as it might have if Professor Rabin hadn't made his remarks when he did.
In general, I wish Professor Matory hadn't put several (or atleast two) concerns that are not necessariyl connected into the speech he gave to explain his motion.
Finally: does anyone know if an invitation to an outside speaker was, in fact, rescinded this year, as Professor Matory claimed? Did he mean this academic year, or this calendar year? At least one example he mentioned happened under former President Summers, not under either Bok or Faust.
 
Oops, excuse the typos above.
 
Post a Comment



<< Home
Politics, Media, Academia, Pop Culture, and More

Name: Richard Bradley
Location: New York, New York
ARCHIVES
2/1/05 - 3/1/05 / 3/1/05 - 4/1/05 / 4/1/05 - 5/1/05 / 5/1/05 - 6/1/05 / 6/1/05 - 7/1/05 / 7/1/05 - 8/1/05 / 8/1/05 - 9/1/05 / 9/1/05 - 10/1/05 / 10/1/05 - 11/1/05 / 11/1/05 - 12/1/05 / 12/1/05 - 1/1/06 / 1/1/06 - 2/1/06 / 2/1/06 - 3/1/06 / 3/1/06 - 4/1/06 / 4/1/06 - 5/1/06 / 5/1/06 - 6/1/06 / 6/1/06 - 7/1/06 / 7/1/06 - 8/1/06 / 8/1/06 - 9/1/06 / 9/1/06 - 10/1/06 / 10/1/06 - 11/1/06 / 11/1/06 - 12/1/06 / 12/1/06 - 1/1/07 / 1/1/07 - 2/1/07 / 2/1/07 - 3/1/07 / 3/1/07 - 4/1/07 / 4/1/07 - 5/1/07 / 5/1/07 - 6/1/07 / 6/1/07 - 7/1/07 / 7/1/07 - 8/1/07 / 8/1/07 - 9/1/07 / 9/1/07 - 10/1/07 / 10/1/07 - 11/1/07 / 11/1/07 - 12/1/07 /


Powered by Blogger