Yale Committee on Renaming Report

The much-anticipated report of Yale's Committee to Establish Principles on Renaming has just been released.  It's a very thoughtful assessment of the factors to consider in renaming -- and also the situation on the ground in New Haven as it relates to Calhoun College, which is what set the whole debate in motion.  The committee, chaired by Yale Law Professor John Witt, established a set of principles to guide discussions about renaming.  The report begins with the important observation that "The central mission of a university is to discover and disseminate knowledge."  And after a discussion of renamings at other schools and the circumstances surrounding the naming of Calhoun College at Yale in the 1930s -- and the contemporary controversy over the name -- they turn to a set of principles to consider regarding renaming.  They start with a presumption against renaming -- and then use a series of factors to take into consideration the name's significance and meaning at the time of naming and today.  They conclude with the point that a decision to rename -- or to keep a name -- "come with obligations of nonerasure, contextualization, and process."  

Obviously this report and the factors they establish will be the center of discussions of renaming.   In addition to the report itself, those of us really into the issue of renaming will be interested in the supporting documents, especially this file of correspondence with the Committee for people far and wide.  

Jennifer Schuessler has a detailed article on this at the New York Times.

The illustration -- as Jason Mazzone could tell you -- is of Fort Hill, John C. Calhoun's mansion on the Clemson campus.  I remember when I visited Clemson a few years back being sort of shocked at how modest the house was -- and especially Calhoun's office behind the house.  There was something surprising, really anti-climactic, about confronting a place and a person who looms so large in our nation's history.  I'll be following what happens next.  The Report sets a thoughtful basis for future discussions, but it also leaves room for debate about how to weigh the values at stake in keeping a name or removing it.

Comments

[Captain Hruska Carswell, Continuance King]

Why not be the first joint to name something after Trump?

[concerned_citizen]

Good to see they considered your “The Law and Morality of Building Renaming” as part of their resource materials.