Opinion
OTHER VIEWS
Redeeming The Wayward University
Philadelphia
S
hould outsiders try to
influence the hiring or
tenuring of university
faculty?
The question arises because,
with the radicalization of the
American universities, moderate
voices have jumped into academic
personnel issues. For example,
note some controversies just in
Middle East studies in 2006:
• Joseph Massad at Columbia:
His promotion to associate profes-
sor met with public opposition;
the forthcoming decision over his
tenure will likely spark even more
contention.
• Juan Cole at Yale: The
University of Michigan histo-
rian was on track to New Haven
until columnists John Fund, Joel
Mowbray and others brought
attention to Mr. Cole's writings,
prompting key Yale professors to
reject his appointment.
CC
• Kevin Barrett
would dilute academic
at the University of
standards, be detrimen-
Wisconsin-Madison:
tal in the classroom and
When it became
exacerbate problems on
known that he
campus." Other non-aca-
believes the Bush
demics support Mr. Said's
administration per-
appointment.
petrated the 9-11
In addition, Joel
attacks, his teaching
Beinin's
relocation to the
Daniel Pipes
of "Islam: Religion
American
University in
Spec ial
and Culture" spurred
Cairo
from
his tenured
Comme ntary
a statewide debate.
position in history at
• Nadia Abu El-Haj
Stanford (an unusual
at Barnard: As the anthropologist
career move) may be related to
faces a tenure decision, her 2001
the wide criticism of his work.
book Facts on the Ground has
These developments raise two
been criticized by alumnae and
questions. Firstly, do outsiders
archaeologists (William Dever of
have a legitimate role influencing
the University of Arizona calls her academic personnel decisions?
scholarship "faulty, misleading
The American Association of
and dangerous"; James Davila of
University Professors general
St. Andrew's University deems it
secretary, Roger Bowen, says abso-
"daft").
lutely not: "Non-academics and
•Wadie Said at Wayne State:
external advocacy groups should
Led by StandWithUs.com, crit-
not be permitted to intrude in
ics argue that his appointment
hiring and tenure cases in the
to the Detroit-based law school
academy."
I beg to differ. Educational insti-
tutions may appoint whomever
they wish, but they cannot expect
immunity from public criticism.
Precisely because academe offers
unique job security, public evalu-
ation of untenured academics has
a potentially vital role. The more
pre-tenure scrutiny, the better.
Organizations like Campus Watch
focus precisely on those areas that
tenure committees typically miss.
As for tenured faculty, robust
public criticism can keep them in
line by embarrassing them and
hurting their credibility. Juan Cole
characterizes senior professors
as "sort of like baseball players"
whom other teams look at "from
time to time, as recruitment
prospects." In response, Martin
Kramer of the Shalem Center in
Jerusalem notes that "We don't put
baseball players on pedestals, and
a whole section of the newspaper
relentlessly criticizes their perfor-
mance. Academics want to have
it both ways: lifetime job security,
sports-like celebrity, lots of vaca-
tion time and no accountability'
In their insistence on squelch-
ing dissent, ironically, Middle
East studies academics repli-
cate Middle East dictators, who
demand that their regimes be
exempt from judgment. But while
dictators can lose their jobs, ten-
ured academics effectively cannot,
making their errors uniquely con-
sequence-free.
Second, how effective are
outside efforts to influence the
process? Frank H. Wu, law school
dean at Wayne State, predicts
that lobbying professors against
Wadie Said's appointment could
well backfire. Some faculty mem-
bers, he says,"might be so turned
off by the e-mail coming in that
they may be persuaded to take a
position that they might not have
otherwise."
Other than exposing the imma-
turity of professors who would
approached real people pretend-
ing to be an uncultured Central
Asian reporter filming a docu-
mentary. By doing so, he exposed
the real attitudes and opinions
of many Americans. He revealed
unabashed racism and hatred,
prejudice and discrimination,
sexism, classism and, above all,
raging anti-Semitism.
In my opinion, these are not
laughing matters. I share the view
of the Anti-Defamation League,
which officially stated, "... the
audience may not always be
sophisticated enough to get the
joke, and that some may even
find it reinforcing their bigotry."
I know it is ridiculous to think
that Jews can turn themselves
into cockroaches. I know it is
absurd to shop for cars on the
basis of how effective they are at
running over Jews.
But I also know that there
are people in this world — real
people, successful people, pow-
erful people — who believe
terrible, hateful lies about Jews.
They believe the Holocaust never
happened. They believe that Jews
perpetrated 9-11. They believe
that Jews conspire to rule the
world.
I don't find that funny in the
least. And until anti-Semitism
becomes part of the past instead
of part of the present, I don't
know how hard I can laugh at
ignorant people who scapegoat
Jews. History has shown how
they can become ignorant people
who kill Jews.
Maybe Borat is precisely the
wake-up call the world needs.
Or maybe Borat is nothing more
than a dangerous experiment.
Either way, let us pray for a world
that rejects all forms of anti-
Semitism. And let us pray for a
world that knows that real hatred
and real bigotry are nothing to
smile about. 12
Borat: No Laughing Matter
A
t first, I was not sure
how to react to the
film Borat: Cultural
Learnings of America for Make
Benefit Glorious Nation of
Kazakhstan. I was, however, sure
of one thing. I may be young,
but I no longer have a teenager's
sense of humor.
Borat is a movie that is one
part fantasy and one part reality
television. The fantasy is that "a
deeply accented television report-
er from Kazakhstan" named
Borat Sagdiyev is traveling across
the United States to learn cul-
tural lessons from Americans.
The reality is that real people are
duped into being themselves; and
they are caught on tape either
expressing or condoning bigotry,
racism, misogyny and anti-
Semitism.
In the words of Robert
Wistrich, head of the Center for
the Study of Anti-Semitism at
Hebrew University, Borat is a film
whose "purpose ... is to show
how ridiculous prejudices and
stereotypes are." It is an often-
34
December 7 2006
vulgar comedy that sati-
flowing payot and a
rizes American culture
hooked nose, and one
and "forces Americans
of a woman wielding
to confront the worst in
a challah and a meat
themselves." The kicker
cleaver. When the
is that the star of the
female Jew pauses to
film and the creator of
lay an egg, the local
the outrageous character
children rush in,
Rabbi
of Borat is British-born
urged on by Borat
Jonathan
comedian Sacha Baron
who says, "Go kids!
Berkun
Cohen.
Crush that Jew egg
Community
The actor who por-
before it hatches!"
View
trays the most despicable
In America, Borat
anti-Semite I have ever
tries to purchase a
seen on the big screen is not only
gun and asks, "Which gun is the
Jewish; but he reportedly keeps
best one for hunting Jews?" In
kosher, observes the Sabbath and
another. scene, he is purchasing
speaks fluent Hebrew.
a car and asks, "How fast would
On film, Borat believes that
you have to go in this car to run
his Jewish host and hostess are
down Jews?" What is most dis-
trying to poison him. He believes turbing, is that the real salesmen
all they want is his money. He
do not miss a beat. They answer
believes they have hidden their
Borat's questions without flinch-
horns. He believes they are cock-
ing or recoiling in disgust.
roaches.
I have no doubt that Sacha
He proudly describes the annu- Cohen is not an anti-Semite.
al festival of the "Running of the
But I wonder what he is trying
Jew" in his village in Kazakhstan.
to accomplish with this movie.
Locals flee from enormous pup-
There are those who argue that
pet Jews, one of a man with
Cohen was not immoral when he
Jonathan Berkun is a rabbi at
Congregation Shaarey Zedek in
Oakland County. This commentary is
adapted from a Shabbat sermon he
gave on Nov. 25.