During a forum hosted by the Multicultural Affairs Advisory Board on Literature Humanities last semester, a student shared an experience with an audience of instructors and fellow students. This experience, she said, came to define her relationship to her Lit Hum class and to Core material in general.
During the week spent on Ovid’s “Metamorphoses,” the class was instructed to read the myths of Persephone and Daphne, both of which include vivid depictions of rape and sexual assault. As a survivor of sexual assault, the student described being triggered while reading such detailed accounts of rape throughout the work. However, the student said her professor focused on the beauty of the language and the splendor of the imagery when lecturing on the text. As a result, the student completely disengaged from the class discussion as a means of self-preservation. She did not feel safe in the class. When she approached her professor after class, the student said she was essentially dismissed, and her concerns were ignored.
Ovid’s “Metamorphoses” is a fixture of Lit Hum, but like so many texts in the Western canon, it contains triggering and offensive material that marginalizes student identities in the classroom. These texts, wrought with histories and narratives of exclusion and oppression, can be difficult to read and discuss as a survivor, a person of color, or a student from a low-income background.
The MAAB, an extension of the Office of Multicultural Affairs, is an advocacy group dedicated to ensuring that Columbia’s campus is welcoming and safe for students of all backgrounds. This year, we explored possible interventions in Core classrooms, where transgressions concerning student identities are common. Beyond the texts themselves, class discussions can disregard the impacts that the Western canon has had and continues to have on marginalized groups.
For example, another student who attended the forum shared that her Lit Hum professor gave her class the opportunity to choose their own text to add to their syllabus for the year. When she suggested the class read a Toni Morrison text, another student declared that texts by authors of the African Diaspora are a staple in most high school English classes, and therefore they did not need to reread them. Toni Morrison is a writer of both the African Diaspora and the Western world, and her novels—aside from being some of the most intellectually and emotionally compelling writing in the last century—should be valued as founding texts of the Western canon.
The student’s remark regarding Toni Morrison was not merely insensitive, but also revealing of larger ideological divides. This would have been an opportune moment for the professor to intervene.
The MAAB has held two forums in our On the Core series and had multiple meetings with professor Roosevelt Montás, the director of the Center for the Core Curriculum. The goal of the forums on Literature Humanities and Contemporary Civilization was to give students, professors, and faculty a space to hold a safe and open dialogue about experiences in the classroom that all too often traumatize and silence students. Repeatedly, we heard from students who demonstrated that having difficult experiences in a Lit Hum or Contemporary Civilization class may actually be part of the norm. Unfortunately, not all professors seem equipped to be effective facilitators in the classroom.
Students need to feel safe in the classroom, and that requires a learning environment that recognizes the multiplicity of their identities. The MAAB has been meeting with administration and faculty in the Center for the Core Curriculum to determine how to create such a space. The Board has recommended three measures: First, we proposed that the center issue a letter to faculty about potential trigger warnings and suggestions for how to support triggered students. Next, we noted that there should be a mechanism for students to communicate their concerns to professors anonymously, as well as a mediation mechanism for students who have identity-based disagreements with professors. Finally, the center should create a training program for all professors, including faculty and graduate instructors, which will enable them to constructively facilitate conversations that embrace all identities, share best practices, and think critically about how the Core Curriculum is framed for their students.
Our vision for this training is not to infringe upon the instructors’ academic freedom in teaching the material. Rather, it is a means of providing them with effective strategies to engage with potential conflicts and confrontations in the classroom, whether they are between students or in response to the material itself. Given these tools, professors will be able to aid in the inclusion of student voices which presently feel silenced.
Students at the forum expressed that they have felt that Literature Humanities and Contemporary Civilization’s curricula are often presented as a set of universal, venerated, incontestable principles and texts that have founded Western society. Such a presentation does not allow room for their experiences in the Western world or in class discussions. While these founding principles have been liberating in many ways, instructors should more consistently acknowledge during class discussions that many of these same principles have created an unjust, unequal, and oppressive existence for many, as Professor Montás has suggested during our forums.
One of the defining elements of a Columbia education is the Core. The Center for the Core Curriculum, professor Montás, and many instructors have been receptive to our feedback and expressed dedication to addressing these issues. Altering the Core Curriculum is another important discussion—one that would undoubtedly require the insight of the larger student body. In the meantime, we hope that our recommendations will enable students to have a more intellectually rewarding experience in their classrooms.
The authors are members of the Multicultural Affairs Advisory Board. Tracey Wang is a former news deputy for Spectator.
To respond to this op-ed, or to submit an op-ed, contact opinion@columbiaspectator.com.
Comments
"She did not feel safe in the class"
"Students need to feel safe in the classroom"
You people sound like 1980s Christian mothers talking about theirs kids being exposed to the evil influence of Madonna. Grow up, open up, care less about your identity and more about your passions, and please be passionate about anything... except your own identity. Such an insufferable breed of self-centered Care Bears.
I really, really, really distrust people who write pieces like this. As an Hispanic former student, I really don't trust people who merely invoke minority struggles as a cudgel in order to dictate what can and can't be taught in a classroom and how it can or can't be taught.
"Toni Morrison is a writer of both the African Diaspora and the Western world, and her novels—aside from being some of the most intellectually and emotionally compelling writing in the last century—should be valued as founding texts of the Western canon.
The student’s remark regarding Toni Morrison was not merely insensitive, but also revealing of larger ideological divides. This would have been an opportune moment for the professor to intervene."
"Intervene" being code for "shut down the conversation".Merely disagreeing with another student about whether or not Beloved should be in the Core b/c people likely already read it in high school IS NOT an opportunity to 'intervene,' but to argue. THIS is where intellectual (and believe it or not, emotional) growth happens for both students. You don't get to unilaterally decide what texts should be in the Core over FEELINGS of safety. Although it no longer amazes me people fall for this sort of emotional manipulation, I still find it disgusting. I also find it disgusting that half the people reading this will be inclined to pay attention to it (at first) because I labeled myself as Hispanic (as if that lent me any authority on the subject).
As much as I'd like for Beloved and 100 Years of Solitude to be in the Core, I have to recognize that I need to make a case for it. I don't want a Disaffected People's Feelings Committee representing me. They're censors and manipulative busybodies invoking others' struggles in order to make themselves feel important/relevant.
" I don't want a Disaffected People's Feelings Committee representing me. "
I'm sorry, but I think your argument about people who "invoke minority struggles as a cudgel" and implications that these women (I am assuming by the names; I apologize for any mistake) who are writing this op-ed are "disaffected" by minority struggles is incredibly rude. A quick Facebook search would show you that that is not the case and that, in fact, all four authors of this piece are women of color. Debasing their arguments because of an (incorrect) assumption that they are merely appropriating minority struggles in order to work some other agenda is incredibly unhelpful to the conversation.
Also, thanks for assuming that Beloved is the only Toni Morrison book, or the only Toni Morrison book worth reading? My Lit Hum class read A Mercy, a very underappreciated Toni Morrison book, and we had an incredibly fruitful conversation about it. And my professor was the chair of Lit Hum, so I don't think it was an absurd addition.
Look up the word "disaffected."
But you're right about A Mercy.
At no point in my post did I mention or imply that Toni Morrison's Beloved is the only book of hers worth reading. My favorite book of hers is Song of Solomon, actually. I took a wild guess as to the identity of the book given how often Beloved comes up in conversation, in my experience (shrug), so sue me.
It's funny how your response shows traces of the kind of annoying tendencies I mentioned in my post. You're free to dismiss my argument as 'rude,' but keep in mind this is mere dismissal, not refutation - I can be a big meanie, but that's not going to automatically make your suggestions for the Core any more legitimate. Neither is appealing to authority via your LitHum prof. {{pathetic}} Which is a shame, because there are a handful of cases to be made for changing the Core and including a Toni Morrison book. What I'm railing against isn't the book, but the authors' arrogant insistence that an 'intervention' was due when a student disagreed with the idea.
I'm struck by the phrase "unhelpful to the conversation." ... are you sure you don't just mean "doesn't support the authors' argument" ? How much of a "conversation" is it if 'playing nice,' so to speak, is conflated with agreeing with the people who intend to change the Core?
1.
2. Nobody is trying to dictate what should and should not belong in the core. A dialogue is being had in which both parties are figuring out the best way to make Core Classrooms more inclusive of marginalized groups. Once again, a DIALOGUE, is being had. Much different than dictating. This dialogue is being had because at the present moment, students of marginalized groups generally have bad experiences with the core. The 4 women of color writing this op-ed are advocating for marginalized students.
3. Whether you want to admit it or not, one of the reasons that Toni Morrison is not included in the core is because the writings of women of color are not valued in this Eurocentric western world. However, the truth is that to understand the western world, you need to analyze it from the perspective of the ones being oppressed by the Western world. At the moment, we are only getting the perspective and narrative of White Europeans.
4. "Intervene" does not mean, shut the conversation down. If anybody is trying to shut the conversation down, it is people like you who do not want to hear and consider the grievances of marginalized students. On the contrary, WE want conversations like this to be had until the problem is solved. Once again, this is why the four women of color wrote this op-ed; not to shut down the conversation, but to spark it.
5. The people who are unilaterally deciding what texts are in the core, is Columbia. These four women are not unilaterally doing anything. They are simply advocating for more balance and inclusion of the narrative of marginalized peoples in the experience of Columbia's Core.
6. Your entire post is riddled with hyprocrisy. You are claiming that we are dictating and shutting down conversations, yet you are the one who is using backhanded arguments to defend your bigotry. Stop hiding behind the veil of impartiality and actually make a comprehensive rebuttal instead of painting people as "Disaffected" simply because they are bringing to light the complaints of the marginalized student body. Just as you don't want the "Disaffected People's Feelings Committee" representing you, I'm sure that these women are not out to represent snarky bigots like you.
I feel bad for people who feel like the fact they were born a certain race or sexual orientation is the most defining characteristic of their personality. You are a person, not a category.
Race and sexual orientation are more than just arbitrary categories in America. While it is a nice idea that we might be able to come together someday, ignoring that these categories exist and have been used to discriminate and to justify acts of violence against these communities aren't going to bring us any closer to that day. America was built on dehumanizing people because they fell into these categories. It continues to dehumanize people who fall into these categories every single day. Thus, race and/or sexual orientation does play a large role in the lives of people and any history book (or even current events) will tell you this. Denying the fact that these categories are important means completely ignoring American history and how institutions like Columbia came to be.
your remark screams ignorance. Maybe ask a patient person of color why, because lord knows you're gonna need someone patient & calm to explain to you & the other 1,000 ignorant folk why your lack of compassion is incredibly ignorant. If you ACTUALLY tried to put yourself in the shoes & everyday life of someone who has to undergo constant "accidentally" subtle racist remarks every day, you would see that the world would look just a little different when you don't live in your ivy tower.
Oh Precious! Precious? My precious little snowflake, speaking as a black man who has been around the block more than a few times, all of you need to grow up and get over it. You re not the center of the universe, none of us has a right to not be offended in a democracy and if you can’t handle it repair to your padded room with your lollipops, Valium and whatever other pacifier makes you happy or better still make an appointment with a shrink. We are all always going to be offended by something. Using ‘feeling safe’, ‘respect’, and ’trigger-warnings’ are just treads in a rope to lynch free speech.
A few questions for the authors that I think may help further explore possibilities:
What do you think is the PURPOSE of Lithum, at present? What are we supposed to walk away with? Do you think his is a "good" or "useful" purpose? If yes, which texts would you like to incorporate into that methodology and to those PARTICULAR ends? And if not, what do you think SHOULD be the function of the course, and how/with what texts do you propose to change it?
The article gestures toward some answers, but I think it's pedagogically important to come up with more concrete ones.
To clarify, I mean something beyond professor training. I'm with you 100% on the professor training part. I personally had one bizarrely insensitive professor who allowed lots of weird racist comments to go unchecked (like some girl who claimed that indigenous peoples of South America were "savage cannibals" I just could not believe that anyone had said it and that she let that go I just I can't oh my god sorry I'm having CC flashbacks). It's really really obvious that a lot of professors, especially in CC, are living in some strange Victorian universe. I'm more interested in the syllabus-oriented half of the authors' argument.
So many young people are just so pathetically weak these days. You say that sitting in a classroom reading a book makes you feel "unsafe" which makes me wonder if you've ever actually been in an unsafe situation in your life. A large number of students taking core classes have been in a fucking war being shot at and shooting people but cry babies like these can't even read a book without feeling unsafe. It's time to grow up kids.
Why do you think issues of sexual assault only exist in Western literature? There's something quietly racist (to non-Western cultures) about assuming that everything non-Western is perfect just by virtue of not being Western.
This op-ed is riddled with hypocrisies that I don't understand how the authors could not see when they wrote this. All you people are saying is that if someone disagrees with my opinion the teacher should shut them down, but my opinion should be heard. I read Morrison in LitHum, sure it was a decent read, but it came at the cost of Crime and Punishment because my teacher wanted to add in more diverse readings. While Morrison's works are decent, just because she is black does not make her books more worth reading than the books of someone of any other race. The fact that you are even implying this should be the case is incredibly racist and all the authors should look at themselves and ask if they are part of the problem because I think they are just as guilty as the people who say only whites should be read in the core. NO! The answer is that the best BOOKS should be read in the core regardless of author and if the case is that all authors are white then we should accept this as the case. No one here can make a real argument that "A Mercy" is a better text for LitHum than Crime and Punishment based off the book itself without bringing race into it
Just want to point out that it's quite disingenuous to categorize this as "Dialogue". For an individual to use his/her status as a survivor to justify the removal of "triggering" texts is just throwing one's weight around and putting an end to discussion. This is not making a good point, this is making it impossible for anyone with a hint of manners to respond (who wants to talk back to a survivor? ).
It's entirely possible to come up with good arguments against certain aspects of the Core, but if you want us to take you guys seriously, stop appealing to your own identity. If you make an argument as X/survivor/chicano/african-american, people will respond to your arguments as if they were made by an X/survivor/etc, instead of taking them seriously.
...is full of triggering events.
Like encountering liars and calumnists... those things trigger me. Yet Columbia celebrates those people and their slanders.