Transcript of key episode in SCS panel

I forgot that Classics-L won't accept attachments.  So here
is the transcript of the key episode in the 5 January 2019
panel, "The Future of Classics", at the annual conference of
the Society for Classical Studies.  The transcript was
prepared by Mark Miner, a classics scholar.  I have edited
it slightly, mostly by adding my own comments, which are
in curly brackets { }; Miner's comments are in square
brackets [ ].  -- John Lauritsen, Independent Scholar.


TRANSCRIPT

On 5 January 2019, the SCS had a panel on the Future of
the Classics.  This was billed as an "open and free-form
large-room discussion" and the discussion proved to be
lively indeed.

This comment transcribes 45:00-51:00 of this video, in
which Mary Frances Williams engages the audience, before
being removed from the convention for an allegedly racist
comment.

The question of the economics of teaching languages had
been touched on several times already, and the first
discussion speaker  asked the room:

"How many teach [Greek & Latin]  languages as an
overload, unpaid?" (Many hands.)

Dr. Joy Connolly responded to the first discussion speaker
with:

"The choice is not entirely ours.  Because unless we want
to continue the economy of teaching overloads that are
unpaid.... we won't have choices in the matter, I think, in
10-20 years. Because those classes just won't be offered,
and it won't be our choice not to offer them.
Unless we do things differently."

MFW then takes the mike at about 45:00, as the second
discussion speaker.

MFW:   "OK. I'll probably offend all of you. . . .

"I had three main things that I wanted to say,"

"Actually, to preface that, I'll add a fourth.

"I don't think you should abandon the languages.
"If you abandon the languages, we don't have anything left.
You're just destroying the entire discipline.
You can't teach History without knowing something of the
languages;
You can't teach Literature without knowing something of
the languages,
or we don't have Classics.

"So, to say it's inevitable is a real problem.

"And so that brings me to my first point, which is: for
thirty years I've heard you talk about the need for diversity
and inclusiveness, and reaching out, doing "Women in
Ancient Rome," and all sorts of other areas, which is fine,
it's interesting, it's important. and people who can do that
well, should do it . . .?

"But, maybe, we should start defending our discipline in-
and-of-itself, and saying,  it's Western Civilization and it
matters...because it's the West."

{At this point MFW has spoken for a little over one
minute.  She is the recognized speaker and still has the
floor.  But SARAH BOND [SB], a panelist, decides to
interrupt MFW, thus preventing her from making a
coherent statement.}

SB {interrupting}: "Western Civilization is a construct.
That's a complete construction."

MFW "It's everything!  It matters! It's important,
particularly in its focus on Liberty, Democracy and
Freedom. OK?  We need to stand up for it and say "We are
Western Civ."  Up until 100 years ago we...."

SB {interrupting again}: "We AREN'T Western Civ!"


MFW: "We're not? [Tone of shock and despair.] Then we
might as well just shut down."

SB {interrupting still again}: "I taught Western Civ for
many, many years, as a historian...."

MFW: "My point is . . .  can I just finish my point? I know
you're very important.  You're all very important, but....
We should defend our discipline to the administration, to
whoever is giving money,  to whoever is doing the hiring.
and say, Look we have value.  We don't have to only do
Women's Studies, only do Ethnic Studies, only do the
Balkanization of our field.  We have value in-and-of-itself."

[I'm guessing at MFW's thought here.  "We traditionalist
Classicists are engaged in a field that has value in-and-of-
itself."]

"And secondly I think that you shouldþI know,
shockingþmaybe try doing the Classics as Classics?"

[I'm open to other interpretations of MFW's words here.]

"To Professor Hinds's point, which is really important: The
kids that come in don't know anything.  They don't know
what's available.  They don't what Classics is. They don't
know anything about anything.

"And if you can give them a survey course, you can give
them a Freshman Great Books course, and incorporate
Classics in that, you can expose them to the Greats, that's
really, really important, OK?

"We donþt teach Homer.

"We donþt teach Cicero."

SB {interrupting still again}: "I teach them every
semester!"

{At this point MFW has been run off the rails by SBþs
continued interruptions, and makes the mistake of speaking
directly to SB.}

MFW: "In English?  As a survey?  As Undergraduate
English?"

SB: "Yes, I do!  I have a History Ph.D. . . . ."

MFW: "Most departments don't, OK?"

SB: "OK, alright, so. . . .  I would like to respond.  I
would really...."

MFW: "I looked it up..."

SB: "I think it's time that we get to respond.  Because I
think you are spreading a lot of falsities, that I've..."

MFW: "It's a falsity to say, Why don't we teach
Thucydides and Herodotus. . . . ?  Why don't we teach....?"

SB: "I just finished teaching Thucydides in Greek for the
Greek survey, and then I taught him in English.  And you
can not sayþacross the boardþthat we aren't teaching
Thucydides...."

MFW: "I'm not saying `across the board.þ  The university
of CA DavisþProfessor Hexter isn't hereþthe Classics-in-
English courses consist of Mythology and Vocabulary, and
that's it, OK?"

SB: "OK."

MFW: "So I'm saying: Cicero has value.  Homer has value.
Demosthenes has value, because it will teach you about
defending Democracy.  But people don't want that, OK?"

SB: "You've listed ALL MEN, the authors you would
prefer us to read, by the way. . . ."

MFW {raising her voice}: "I am not a socialist OK!  I
believe in MERIT!  I believe that the journals have articles
on the basis of merit, I don't look at the color of the
authors."

SB: "And you don't think Sappho has merit?"  [Giggles
smugly.]

MFW: {Pointing at Dan-el Padilla Peralta (DPP)}   "You
may have got your job because you're black, but I'd prefer
to think you got your job because of merit."

{NB: this sentence, invidiously recalled, was the basis for
expelling MFW from the conference and for vilifying her
in the initial/official "reports" and position statements.  And
yet, her comment is a perfectly reasonable response to the
talk given by DPP.  None of the various condemnations of
MFW mentioned the second half of her sentence.}

DPP:  [Gives a sort of war-whoop.]

SB: "Yeah. We saw that coming."


[49:00 SB hands the microphone to DPP {although MFW
still ought to have the floor.}]

DPP: "I mean, as far as I'm concernedþand I think we
should allow other people to participate in this
conversation, at the risk of having this conversation
hijackedþBut I'll say simply, that if this vision of the
classics is the vision that you find as affirming. . . "

MFW: "You're saying that people of color, black people,
Hispanic people can't do...."

DPP: "Let me finish.  I let you finish..."

MFW: "...that they're not capable . . . ."
DPP: "I did not interrupt you once, so you are going to let
me talk.  You are going to let someone who has been
historically marginalized from the production of knowledge
in the Classics, TALK.

"And here's what I have to say about the vision of classics
that you've outlined:  If that is in fact a vision that affirms
you in your white supremacy, I want nothing to do with it.
I hope the field dies, that you've outlined, dies, and that it
dies as swiftly as possible!"

"And I hopeþI fervently hopeþthat those of you in the
room will take stock and consideration of what has
happened here. That the very . . .

MFW: "I thought that I would be able to speak. (Applause)

"I  thought that I would be able to speak, rather than be
marginalized."

DPP: "In the interests of equity. . . you should let others
speak. . . ."

MFW: "But obviously your field has decided  . . . that
there is only a certain point of view . . . ."

DPP: "Go for it.  Go for it."

50:30 {Another speaker takes the floor microphone.  MFW
leaves.}


Transcribed by MRM, 2/15/19.  My apologies if I didn't
get the words or order down perfectly.  Other drafts will
follow as people identify improvements.  If someone could
supply the identity of the questioners, that would be very
helpful. My interpolations in [brackets.]  Punctuation,
italics, interpretations of tones of voice, capitalizations, etc,
are my own contribution.  I'm a poet.  My concern is to
represent the intensity of the dialogue, and distinguish
between the completely different points of view,
vocabulary, etc, of the two speakers.  I find the lack of
overlap in world-view striking.  It's all I can do not to keep
score of SJW {social justice warrior} points and
Conservative points scored by each side.

 From the program:
Society for Classical Studies,
10:45 AM to 12:45 PM Marriott Grand Ballroom 9 Session
#45
5 January, San Diego.
Special 150th Panel þ
The Future of Classics Sesquicentennial Workshop
Stephen Hinds, University of Washington, Organizer
This workshop is an open and free-form large-room
discussion of what we think the trajectories of our field,
broadly defined, will and/or should be, not just in the
immediate future but for the next 150 years; this does not
of course exclude narratives of how we got where we now
are. We cannot cover everything in one SCS meeting
session, but the idea is to have the kind of discussion that
people will continue to
pursue among themselves during the rest of the meeting.
Speakers will lead off a general all-room discussion by
offering five to six minutes each of lively, thoughtful and
provocative remarks.
1. Stephen Hinds, University of Washington, Introduction
2. Sarah E. Bond, University of Iowa. Panelist
3. Joy Connolly, The Graduate Center, CUNY, Panelist
4. Ralph J. Hexter, University of California, Davis, Panelist
5. Dan-el Padilla Peralta, Princeton University, Panelist