I know, I know: not only have I already written several columns about the case of Yale and the Danish Cartoons, I’ve even bid adieu with a footnote to the subject and, just a week or so ago, a piece I announced as my final word on this sordid case of cravenness, misrepresentation, and academic betrayal. By now, all the world knows that the President’s office at Yale intervened at the last moment to censor a scholarly book about the wave of violence that followed publication of some caricatures of Mohammed in a Danish newspaper in 2005. Thus we will have the absurd situation that The Cartoons that Shook the World, a rigorously vetted study of the controversy by the Danish-born Brandeis professor Jytte Klausen, will be published without the cartoons that are the subject of the book. And that’s not all. Since any representation of Mohammed is offensive to many Muslims, Yale also insisted that Professor Klausen omit the other images of Mohammed, e.g., by Gustave Doré, that she had intended to include in the book.
I at first described this as an act of “pre-emptive capitulation” on the part of Yale University Press and its spineless director, John Donatich. It certainly is that. But a little scratching revealed that greed was competing with cowardice. Yale, it transpired, was cultivating various sources of support in the Muslim world. Martin Kramer and Diana West (and here) dug a little deeper and showed how Yale had been vying for millions of dollars in grants from a foundation established by Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, a Saudi billionaire.
A former university president wrote me to say that, while he certainly thought Yale had disgraced itself, he doubted money was the issue: Notwithstanding its big losses in the stock market last year, Yale still had an endowment in the billions: it wouldn’t, he said, prostitute itself for a mere $20 million.
Maybe not. But as Martin Kramer noted, Yale has appointed Muna Abu Sulayman, executive director of the Alwaleed Bin Talal Foundation (which reportedly has earmarked $100 million for compliant Western institutions), a “Yale World Fellow” for 2009. I’d say that Richard Levin, Yale’s president, takes an aggressive approach to cultivating a prospective donor: he arranges a fellowship and has his quarry living close by in New Haven. Who knows, maybe John Donatich will also be able to interest Sulayman in forking over the several million dollars he needs to embark on his on-line Koran project at the Yale University Press?
In any event, I am willing to concede that cowardice and the desire to be politically correct weighed heavily with Yale and the Yale University Press. Like many right-thinking (which means left-leaning) institutions these days, Yale is afflicted with a bad case of Islamophobia-phobia — that is, a pusillanimous fear of being labeled “Islamophobic” by one’s politically correct peers. (“Islamophobia,” I am fond of pointing out, is a misnomer. A phobia is an ungrounded or irrational fear, but what could be more solidly grounded or rational than a fear of radical Islam?) Still, I suspect that a large element of financial calculation entered into Yale’s decision to step into the YUP’s publishing process at the last minute and bowdlerize a scholar’s work. The official Yale press release spoke ominously of a concern about possible violence should they publish the images of Mohammed. But I suspect that the operative question was: what can Jytte Klausen do for us in comparison with our rich friends in Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Abu Dhabi?
Please Roger, you needn’t apologize for writing again about this deplorable affair.
This incident is just the type of the iceberg. Generally speaking, our colleges and universities are rotting from within. Students know very well where to stand on such pseudo-issues as “diversity,” but can’t spell the word.
Who couldn’t see this coming? Wasn’t the execrable Richard Broadhead, who presides over another previously great university, Duke, the stand-up guy who has yet to understand what happened to him and to Duke in the lacrosse hockey team debacle, the former Dean of Students or something at Yale?
The Ivy League universities offer first-rate hard science courses. You can take for granted that a medical doctor or a mathematician who received a credential from any of these academic institutions is among the very best in the entire world. Unfortunately, this is usually not the case regarding the softer sciences. These graduates are often nothing more than second-rate intellectual whores. They are not worthy of respect. It is very fair to treat all liberal arts graduates from any school of “higher learning” within the United States as an idiot until proven otherwise. At this moment, the emphasis has been placed on marginalizing the MSM. The next target must be the Ivy League institutions. They have done enormous damage. This recent incident that occurred at Yale is only the tip of the iceberg.
Why does not the author of the book shop it to someone more courageous – Yale cannot insist on the contract after its behavior ??!!
Why not try tracinski at theintellectualactivist
whose article at the time of the cartoons is here
http://www.intellectualactivist.com/php-bin/news/showArticle.php?id=1069
Roger, Harris is right. I’ve read every piece you’ve written on this topic,and have learned from each one.
Men and women of courage must speak up, while we still can. Our freedom is at stake.
With egg all over face: I meant to write “tip of the iceberg.”
I once submitted a manuscript to YUP for publication. They declined and it was published elsewhere, still selling pretty well five years later. What was remarkable, aside from the six months it took for me to get a decision from them, was the amazing ignorance of the readers who submitted reports. The book was medical history and they showed a very poor understanding of general history, let alone medical. For example, the reader had no idea why Napoleon invaded Egypt and, when I posed the theory in the manuscript that it had to do with designs on British India, the reader (mercifully anonymous) huffed that the Suez Canal had not yet been dug! Such was the brilliance of YUP readers. It’s a wonder the manuscript was published at all.
I can understand how tending this story might have begun to feel like an unwelcome chore, but I don’t think it’s possible to revisit it too often. Inattention is a transgressor’s best friend! On top of the dangerous political precedent here, Yale’s hypocrisy is exceeded only by the betrayal of its own author.
Given the Saudi connection, and the deus ex machina administrative intervention, I never believed the overwrought “blood on my hands” claim for a second. Yale’s apparent rush to profit from the very controversy they used to excuse their blatant censorship, makes their priorities glaringly clear.
The arbitrary, unwarranted burden Yale has placed upon Professor Clausen, personally, however, is as perfidious as its disservice to scholars generally, to the public, and to its own putative standards:
• A presumed thousand word ex post facto detour for every missing picture, no matter how well written, is a paltry, tedious substitute for the images her readers will be forced to imagine, in what will surely be inaccurate ways. When the visual impact of graphic representations is the very subject of discussion, Yale’s constraints are an indefensible perversion of the author’s work.
• Describing imagery is not just dauntingly complex, especially if your expertise lies elsewhere, it is a stylistic impediment to the clarity and crispness of your text.
• How can reviewers and Professor Clausen’s academic peers possibly assess the quality of her analysis? They can hardly be expected to ferret out the images under examination themselves. A book which might otherwise have advanced her reputation, will garner attention for the circumstances surrounding its publication instead.
• And what of the quandary now facing anyone who is aware of the controversy which Yale suddenly sees as a marketing bonanza? I know I’m torn between a compelling desire to support Professor Clausen by buying her book and my revulsion at rewarding Yale for its egregious assault on scholastic honesty and an unencumbered press.
In an ideal world, this controversy would enable Professor Clausen to take advantage of another likely publisher ready to do her book justice. In this world, alas, it would be entirely unfair to expect her to undertake an expensive, nerve wracking, career wasting contractual dispute with a financial octopus like Yale. It is an institution which will drag untold others down a slippery slope of its own outrageous devising.
what is difficult to understand is how/why Yale would have proceeded with a book that was obviously fraught with danger to the PC world.
The absurd thing is that, instead of biting the bullet and canceling the book with the same reasons as those given later, they should continue with the book, and then remove all the point of the book. Surely the worst of both worlds?
This has been a good series; the point can’t be made often enough.
Pardon the nitpick, but I’m sure you meant “vying for millions,” not “vying millions.”
The amount of credibility that Yale, Harvard and other infected centres of indoctrination should be downgraded, like financial securities that were rated as premium deserve to be categorized as junk.
# 10: You’re absolutely right. Now fixed.
Yes, the criticism of Yale’s deep and shameful bow to Islamic thugs is indeed Conservative. That’s of course because liberals are too cowardly and foolish to ever find fault with the folks who hope to behead them. To find out that Yale acted out of greed rather than just stupidity and cowardice is indeed a disturbing trend for so-called “Academia.” Disgusting and I don’t think you’ve written overmuch about this disgraceful episode. I only wish others would start warning free people about the slavery Islam intends for us all. Thanks, Lee, Houston
In one of his pieces, Roger may have mentioned the almost-certain erosion of credibility in Yale UP that will result from this episode (whatever the motives may have been). But it bears repeating that risking Yale UP’s reputation in this way was foolish.
I just want to echo #1. I too have run into this buzz saw at Marywood University.
Final words? I hope not Roger.
#8. As your points show, the depth of this insidious rot knows no bounds. Every side of the coin is played except that of integrity. I do believe this book must unfortunately not warrant a purchase by anyone who still upholds such a virtue and will not allow Yale to profit by it. If it looks like, feels like, and smells like a sewer, it probably is.
“But it bears repeating that risking Yale UP’s reputation in this way was foolish.”
Let’s get real. How many well-educated liberal arts students actually graduate from Yale? This is the same academic institution that once employed the late Paul de Man. The Ivy leagues are mostly a con job. Wealthy parents spend enormous amounts of money to essentially bribe the schools to provide their sons and daughters with a phony soft science degree. This is a major reason why these intellectual second raters are inclined toward the big government policies of the Democrats and “moderate” Republicans. Does anyone actually think they could make it in a genuinely free market economy? Try to imagine Caroline “you know, you know” Kennedy having to earn their way in life. Nope, these spoiled brats have to game the system in their favor.
Harvard’s Harvey Mansfield candidly admits that even he gives his student unearned grades. Other professors at this academic whorehouse will concede that it is the norm. The children of the affluent Yuppies are going to be taken care of! This could also be a reason why they are usually so pro-Obama. They know on a gut level, if not even consciously, that their degrees are fraudulent. It makes them feel guilty—as it should. Supporting Obama allows them to feel better about their ill educated selves.
There are control freaks on the left and control freaks on the right. Yale cannot decide which category they fall into, but they like control.
Thank you for arguing for freedom and opposing censorship.