Last week, Towson University professor Allen Zaruba was dismissed from the school after characterizing himself as a “nigger on the corporate plantation” during classroom discussion.
His firing stirred intense debate about whether the use of the word – self-referentially, by a white man in an academic setting – was right. But all the attention on the word Zaruba used is distracting attention from his only meaningful offense: the glib analogy he was making.
What Zaruba said came during a discussion of representations of power in contemporary art, part of Zaruba’s Visual Concepts class. An artist who taught at Towson for 12 years as an adjunct professor, Zaruba used the term to describe himself during a discussion about identity and the body.
Zaruba was right to acknowledge that his word choice was inappropriate: the good professor admitted that he was deeply apologetic once the words escaped his lips.
But, the inappropriate nature of his phrasing has nothing to do with the offensive use of the term “nigger”—which is in and of itself up for debate—nor does it have any relation to the “political incorrectness” of the statement.
Zaruba’s real offense was inaccurately analogizing the struggle of white-collar workers—in this case, adjunct university professors—with that of exploited slave labor.
Certainly, it can be expected that even academia has a place for shock value, but Zaruba’s commentary is transgressive not because of any malicious intent, but because of intellectual impropriety. Likening the status and stature of a university professor to that of an antebellum slave is an act of intellectual immaturity at best—dishonesty at worst.
Still, my reaction to Zaruba’s commentary does not amount to outrage. As an African American male, my ire is better directed towards blatant acts of racial malice and manipulation—for example, the so-called “black genocide” campaigns executed by anti-choice advocacy groups such as Bound for Life.
In Zaruba’s case, we simply have nothing more than a lifelong professional artist who misspoke—and also had a bout of intellectually lethargy. Unfortunately, Zaruba will continue to face accusations of racist behavior, when, in actuality, his statement was meant not as a slur but to refer to his own marginalized position.
Of course, this is an ironic twist: Towson University’s quick-handed reaction only reinforces Zaruba’s assertion that he held no rights at the public institution. He was fired without recourse.
It has been suggested that if an African American professor used the same language to articulate Zaruba’s point, he would not have been fired, and this is evidence that Towson University’s decision is an unfair one, and perhaps, racist on its own merits.
That Zaruba—or any other professor— is able to be fired under these circumstances is unfair and unjust, and again, circles back to Zaruba’s initial assertion. Rather than debating Towson University’s dismissal policy—as well as its treatment of employees—we have instead opted to focus upon the salacious story of a white man using the word “nigger.”
In an environment in which we presumably encourage intellectual fluidity and independence of thought, a professor ought to have the right to express his thoughts—unfortunately, Zaruba did so inarticulately, but this should not be grounds for dismissal.
Additional reading
The Towerlight. (3/1/10)
Huffington Post (3/2/10)
The Baltimore Sun (3/3/10)
The Towerlight (3/3/10)
