Hamline Faculty Fired - Muhammad Painting

[just]

I'm curious what this group think about this. 

I work in HE, and I feel that her actions seemed appropriate - in the syllabus, lots of notice, was happy for students to step out, etc. It wasn't a global religious art class, but it was a global art history class.

I'm also an atheist, and have feelings about any religion having this power over academia, but I know that islamophobia also needs to be called out. 

I trust y'all to tell me where my blind spots are ...

NYT: www.nytimes.com/2023/01/08/us/hamline-university-islam-prophet-muhammad.html But you can find it elsewhere too. 

[AJL]

I think the university wanted to CYA. After reading the article and reading all that the professor did to make not viewing the image an option for Muslim students, I think the university wanted to make sure a controversy didn't blow up and thought firing the professor was the right move. But it backfired.

I don't agree with the firing. I think it was cowardly. Showing an image of the prophet Muhammed in a global art history class seems completely appropriate. It was about showing style, method, reason for the artwork, purpose behind creating such a piece, the meaning for the artist and the recipient of the work, etc. It was not shown as a means of denigrating Islam.  

I also take major exception that one can compare showing the prophets image to teaching that "Hitler was good." Fuck off with that. There is no comparison. Those are completely different planets in terms of intellectual topics.

I also think that what happen was that students, rather than have a conversation with the professor, which she explicitly invited them to do, chose to create a firestorm about it. I see this now in my graduate program and I'm baffled by it. These are young, but presumably adults, but the dust up was very juvenile. 

This was not a case of islamophobia and I don't like that the university painted it as such. Unfortunately, as an adjunct, professor Lopez-Prater is essentially disposable in the eyes of Hamline. She never stood a chance, honestly.

[wildrice]

I read this article earlier today and was also curious what others thought.

I guess I don't know enough about Islam to be any authority on it, but based on what was presented in the article, I don't think the professor did anything wrong. It sounds like she actually went to a lot of trouble to be sensitive to how a Muslim student might feel about this, by giving them plenty of warning and opportunity to opt out and/or discuss with her ahead of time. It sounds like there was good reason to cover this in the course. Could the course have been just as impactful without using this image, though? I don't know - not my area of expertise at all. I suppose if the argument is that students could have learned just as much about this subject through another means and she chose to use a means that is specifically offensive to Muslim students, that's something to consider. I don't believe the intent was to be Islamaphobic, but as we all know, impact matters more than intent. 

As someone who has worked in higher ed and is actually an adjunct right now, I always am a little surprised when people say things like "was fired" in relation to an adjunct course, though. Adjuncts are not usually considered employees and their contracts are renewed at will each semester. There is never any promise that you'll be asked to teach again the following semester, for a wide range of reasons that may or may not have anything to do with performance. From that angle, I still don't agree with the decision but I'm not entirely shocked by it, either. I do think it sets a bad precedent in regards to academic freedom, but I am not sure that that precedent doesn't already exist for adjuncts. ETA: for this and a lot of other reason, I think the system of using adjuncts to teach college courses is very problematic, FWIW.

[Deleted]

I agree with [mention]mrsajl [/mention] , it seems like the professor was a scapegoat here. Full disclosure, I read a different article because the one linked was behind a paywall. It seems she did everything in her power to provide the proper context for the image, including content warnings, and the opportunity for students to opt out.

At the risk of screaming “cancel culture!”, I do feel based on what I read that the University may have acted too quickly when students complained, without examining all the facts. Having said that, I feel pretty icky about non-Muslims saying that these students shouldn’t find this Islamophobic. They clearly did find it Islamophobic and offensive. I don’t think the professor should have been fired for it based on academic freedom and the lengths she took to contextualize the content, but they do have the right to be offended by it.

[AJL]

I read some other commentary on this issue and there was some discussion that visual depictions of the prophet are very much prohibited among Sunni Muslims but not among Shia. The piece in question was Persian. Shia Islam is the majority branch of Islam in Iran (Persia). But Sunni Islam is far more commonly practiced, particularly within MSP's Islamic community. There are some layers to this controversy and only one really relates to the professor's action in the classroom.

[Deleted]

Jan 8, 2023 19:58:01 GMT -5 AJL said:

I read some other commentary on this issue and there was some discussion that visual depictions of the prophet are very much prohibited among Sunni Muslims but not among Shia. The piece in question was Persian. Shia Islam is the majority branch of Islam in Iran (Persia). But Sunni Islam is far more commonly practiced, particularly within MSP's Islamic community. There are some layers to this controversy and only one really relates to the professor's action in the classroom.

It sounds like the professor pointed out that within Islam there are a lot of differing beliefs:

“Prior to displaying the image, the professor clarified the purpose of the exercise: “I am showing you this image for a reason,” she is quoted in The Oracle as having stated beforehand. “And that is that there is this common thinking that Islam completely forbids, outright, any figurative depictions or any depictions of holy personages. While many Islamic cultures do strongly frown on this practice, I would like to remind you there is no one, monothetic Islamic culture.””

Definitely a lot of layers to this.

[taratru]

My first reaction is that cutting things out of global history/art/literature classes is awfully close to censorship.

That adjunct was a scapegoat because the school wanted to avoid any issues. Just what education needs: more reason to be afraid of teaching.

[fryjack2]

I'm unsure how I feel. Do I think she needed to be let go? No. But should there be a bigger discussion about what is taught in class? Yes.

Let's say that it was 95% of Christians who don't depict the image of Jesus and consider it forbidden. But Catholics do. A non Christian professor is teaching about global art ( not religious art) and chooses to show a picture of Catholic art to a class with no Catholic students, but does include a Christian one. Is it ok then?

I can see how showing a religious work of art is not necessary when other choices of art from Persia could be shown. Or even just describing the art without showing it could have been more appropriate.

If something is offensive to the vast majority of a religious group, including a student in your class, maybe not showing a visual is the right move. Not just posting trigger warnings and making the student be the one to remove themselves form the offensive action.

But I also don't think we should censor everything, but the line of what we should and shouldn't is murky sometimes.

[msmerymac]

I paused when I got to the person saying it would be like using the n-word in class. Okay, what if a professor didn’t wield the n-word as a slur, but was teaching a literature class and assigned a piece that used it (like, famously, Huck Finn)? Giving the same warnings and opt-out ability as this professor did? I would lean towards that being appropriate for a college class, but defer to those whom it would impact the most.

[sonrisa]

I wonder about tone. When I first read the article, my thought was that the professor gave notice multiple times, opportunity to object and time to leave.

But as I thought about it, tone of those warnings really matter. She said she announced it was coming up. However, it doesn't sound like she specifically set aside time for anyone to leave the room or invited people to do so if they wished. Then I imagine sitting in the middle of one of those college lecture halls, with everything out taking notes, suddenly looking at everything I have to pack up, twenty people I would have to disturb and climb over between me and the end of the row, to then walk up or down the flight of steps out of the room. And suddenly a few minutes warning doesn't sound like an invitation to leave but more like an incoming threat.

I don't know.

[meganew]

I don’t know. I don’t know that I would feel comfortable with any other religion having that level of control over what’s discussed in an academic setting.

[Deleted]

Jan 8, 2023 23:51:30 GMT -5 sonrisa said:

I wonder about tone. When I first read the article, my thought was that the professor gave notice multiple times, opportunity to object and time to leave.

But as I thought about it, tone of those warnings really matter. She said she announced it was coming up. However, it doesn't sound like she specifically set aside time for anyone to leave the room or invited people to do so if they wished. Then I imagine sitting in the middle of one of those college lecture halls, with everything out taking notes, suddenly looking at everything I have to pack up, twenty people I would have to disturb and climb over between me and the end of the row, to then walk up or down the flight of steps out of the room. And suddenly a few minutes warning doesn't sound like an invitation to leave but more like an incoming threat.

I don't know.

The articleI I read mentioned that it was an online class with a Zoom lecture. She mentioned when the slide was coming up so any student who wished could switch to audio-only, then told the class when the image was removed so they knew it was okay to start viewing slides again. I suppose any student who asked for permission to skip the lecture entirely would have been excused from logging in that day.

[hermione]

As a librarian who is married to a professor, I struggle with labeling the professor's actions Islamophobic. I recognize that as a non-Muslim, I am not a good judge of what IS Islamophobic; however, there are several beliefs and practices across a multitude of religions that I don't follow. That doesn't mean I don't respect those religions. The students were not forced to look at the photo and were given multiple ways to opt out. Yes, that puts the onus on them to take action by leaving the class or turning off their monitor - but I am unclear why that's unacceptable. I agree that it's wrong to force a student to identify themselves as part of a marginalized group - or really in any way - but that's not the complaint students are making.

In reality, the professor could have just asked students who wanted to see the picture to click a link to see it. That seems like it would have solved a lot of this.

[aurora]

I was reading about this and have the sense that it's a really hard one to arbitrate without having been there and understanding a lot more details than we can easily get from news articles.

I don't think that religions (any of them, including Christianity) should get a blanket veto button about what is taught in a history class (not that that happened here, just taking it to the extreme), but I also know that it's much harder for a student representing a minority demographic to feel belonging and it's appropriate for instructor to consider that. How this student and instructor actually interacted is hard to tell from the news. By definition, there is a power imbalance that could have led to the student feeling unsafe speaking up beforehand.

I agree wholeheartedly that universities abuse the adjunct model and it needs to be completely upended.

[StrawberryBlondie]

So... This is my alma mater. I'm inclined to believe they're in the wrong here, but I have too many questions to be sure. I'm also inclined to think the professor made a bad decision. IDK.

NYT is paywalled for me but I read several other articles.

I'd like to know if this was just one student that had an issue with this or if the one that complained was sort of a representative. If she was the only one, was she the only Muslim in the class? My gut says giving the warning should have been sufficient, but if youre the only one (or two) in the class, it would likely be really awkward to get up and leave. I doubt this was zoom - Hamline's
been in person for 2 years now. Hamline's really small and pretty white, despite priding themselves on their inclusiveness, so i wouldn't be surprised if this class had one Muslim student and 14 non-Muslim students, and it was likely a small room with tables set up in a square lining the walls of the room - not the easiest to get out of unless you're by the door already.

I'd like to know who actually made the decision and if any Muslim faculty or administration were involved. Was this the director of inclusiveness's decision? Was it a group of (largely) white people? Another thing about Hamline is that it's really liberal... and because it's also pretty white, that can lead to situations with white people kind of going overboard thinking they're doing the right thing on a minority's behalf without really consulting the minority in question.

Anyway.... That's enough word vomit for now. I don't think I'll get answers to any of those questions.

[rupertpenny]

Sure is convenient for universities to rely on contingent faculty!!!!

Academic workers have been organizing more recently and I hope that trend continues. If adjuncts were unionized at this school I bet the situation would have unfolded much differently.

[waverly]

Given the controversy/ offensiveness to that group, I am not sure that if I were an adjunct I would personally show it. And if I really felt it was that super important to show, I would have gone to the Department Head and asked their opinion/ best way to do it.

If I had asked my supervisor, and was guided incorrectly and still fired, I would have been pissed and seen it being unfair. But, if I didn't do the University the courtesy or asking/ heads up, then I can see why they did not renew the contract because I think most teachers when there is something super controversial would at a minimum do a quick check in. And yes, I understand freedom of teaching, but they are not tenured, so the check in would be because I am not tenured.  

[meganew]

Jan 9, 2023 11:51:13 GMT -5 StrawberryBlondie said:

So... This is my alma mater. I'm inclined to believe they're in the wrong here, but I have too many questions to be sure. I'm also inclined to think the professor made a bad decision. IDK.

NYT is paywalled for me but I read several other articles.

I'd like to know if this was just one student that had an issue with this or if the one that complained was sort of a representative. If she was the only one, was she the only Muslim in the class? My gut says giving the warning should have been sufficient, but if youre the only one (or two) in the class, it would likely be really awkward to get up and leave. I doubt this was zoom - Hamline's
been in person for 2 years now. Hamline's really small and pretty white, despite priding themselves on their inclusiveness, so i wouldn't be surprised if this class had one Muslim student and 14 non-Muslim students, and it was likely a small room with tables set up in a square lining the walls of the room - not the easiest to get out of unless you're by the door already.

I'd like to know who actually made the decision and if any Muslim faculty or administration were involved. Was this the director of inclusiveness's decision? Was it a group of (largely) white people? Another thing about Hamline is that it's really liberal... and because it's also pretty white, that can lead to situations with white people kind of going overboard thinking they're doing the right thing on a minority's behalf without really consulting the minority in question.

Anyway.... That's enough word vomit for now. I don't think I'll get answers to any of those questions.

The article posted stated that it was an online lecture, so the scenario you have in your head doesn’t fit. The students were given warning before class and also before the slide was shown.

I’m really struggling here to see how this was in any way Islamophobic. The painting in question was not a caricature or demeaning- I understand that the image itself is considered blasphemous to certain Muslims, but viewing it wasn’t a requirement. And someone else’s religious belief shouldn’t dictate curriculum or discussion, as long as it’s respectful.

[aurora]

Jan 9, 2023 12:28:24 GMT -5 meganew said:

Jan 9, 2023 11:51:13 GMT -5 StrawberryBlondie said:

So... This is my alma mater. I'm inclined to believe they're in the wrong here, but I have too many questions to be sure. I'm also inclined to think the professor made a bad decision. IDK.

NYT is paywalled for me but I read several other articles.

I'd like to know if this was just one student that had an issue with this or if the one that complained was sort of a representative. If she was the only one, was she the only Muslim in the class? My gut says giving the warning should have been sufficient, but if youre the only one (or two) in the class, it would likely be really awkward to get up and leave. I doubt this was zoom - Hamline's
been in person for 2 years now. Hamline's really small and pretty white, despite priding themselves on their inclusiveness, so i wouldn't be surprised if this class had one Muslim student and 14 non-Muslim students, and it was likely a small room with tables set up in a square lining the walls of the room - not the easiest to get out of unless you're by the door already.

I'd like to know who actually made the decision and if any Muslim faculty or administration were involved. Was this the director of inclusiveness's decision? Was it a group of (largely) white people? Another thing about Hamline is that it's really liberal... and because it's also pretty white, that can lead to situations with white people kind of going overboard thinking they're doing the right thing on a minority's behalf without really consulting the minority in question.

Anyway.... That's enough word vomit for now. I don't think I'll get answers to any of those questions.

The article posted stated that it was an online lecture, so the scenario you have in your head doesn’t fit. The students were given warning before class and also before the slide was shown.

I’m really struggling here to see how this was in any way Islamophobic. The painting in question was not a caricature or demeaning- I understand that the image itself is considered blasphemous to certain Muslims, but viewing it wasn’t a requirement. And someone else’s religious belief shouldn’t dictate curriculum or discussion, as long as it’s respectful.

Honest question, though: if you believe that viewing an image is blasphemous, might it also be that you think others viewing the image is disrespectful to your religion?

I don't know enough about this to say if that's true or not, just thinking about how it might be more complex than the one student leaving the "room."

[meganew]

Jan 9, 2023 12:31:41 GMT -5 aurora said:

Jan 9, 2023 12:28:24 GMT -5 meganew said:

The article posted stated that it was an online lecture, so the scenario you have in your head doesn’t fit. The students were given warning before class and also before the slide was shown.

I’m really struggling here to see how this was in any way Islamophobic. The painting in question was not a caricature or demeaning- I understand that the image itself is considered blasphemous to certain Muslims, but viewing it wasn’t a requirement. And someone else’s religious belief shouldn’t dictate curriculum or discussion, as long as it’s respectful.

Honest question, though: if you believe that viewing an image is blasphemous, might it also be that you think others viewing the image is disrespectful to your religion?

I don't know enough about this to say if that's true or not, just thinking about how it might be more complex than the one student leaving the "room."

I’m not sure if that changes my personal feelings on it. Religion is person to person, no one’s religion (regardless of what religion it is) should dictate what others can do/view/learn about.

[sequins]

My initial thoughts are why pick the prophet's image to share? I'm sure there are plenty of other examples of Persian art that are appropriate for art history class.

I agree that educational discussions shouldn't be censored. But that's not how the world works. We censor ourselves and bring our biases into everything we do. Let me give an @ example below.

[sequins]

@@@


Coming off of yet another Christmas season, how would people feel about a teacher revealing that Santa isn't real to a bunch of kids? (I understand that Santa is not a religious figure). Why is it important to protect the illusion of Santa and why don't we have teachers fighting against censorship there? I think it's because the majority in the class believe in Santa and we feel obliged to cater to the majority. That courtesy is not extended to US-minorities and their beliefs.

Having said that, if there is a religious studies class and the teacher had responsible discussions on all religions, not just US-minority religions, I don't think I'd have a problem with that.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Jan 9, 2023 12:28:24 GMT -5 meganew said:

Jan 9, 2023 11:51:13 GMT -5 StrawberryBlondie said:

So... This is my alma mater. I'm inclined to believe they're in the wrong here, but I have too many questions to be sure. I'm also inclined to think the professor made a bad decision. IDK.

NYT is paywalled for me but I read several other articles.

I'd like to know if this was just one student that had an issue with this or if the one that complained was sort of a representative. If she was the only one, was she the only Muslim in the class? My gut says giving the warning should have been sufficient, but if youre the only one (or two) in the class, it would likely be really awkward to get up and leave. I doubt this was zoom - Hamline's
been in person for 2 years now. Hamline's really small and pretty white, despite priding themselves on their inclusiveness, so i wouldn't be surprised if this class had one Muslim student and 14 non-Muslim students, and it was likely a small room with tables set up in a square lining the walls of the room - not the easiest to get out of unless you're by the door already.

I'd like to know who actually made the decision and if any Muslim faculty or administration were involved. Was this the director of inclusiveness's decision? Was it a group of (largely) white people? Another thing about Hamline is that it's really liberal... and because it's also pretty white, that can lead to situations with white people kind of going overboard thinking they're doing the right thing on a minority's behalf without really consulting the minority in question.

Anyway.... That's enough word vomit for now. I don't think I'll get answers to any of those questions.

The article posted stated that it was an online lecture, so the scenario you have in your head doesn’t fit. The students were given warning before class and also before the slide was shown.

I’m really struggling here to see how this was in any way Islamophobic. The painting in question was not a caricature or demeaning- I understand that the image itself is considered blasphemous to certain Muslims, but viewing it wasn’t a requirement. And someone else’s religious belief shouldn’t dictate curriculum or discussion, as long as it’s respectful.

I read several that referred to having the option to "leave the room" so I'm not sure which is accurate. Regardless, I'm struggling to reconcile what the student says - that she was completely blindsided - with the professor saying she gave warnings. Both of those can't be true.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Jan 9, 2023 12:13:18 GMT -5 rupertpenny said:

Sure is convenient for universities to rely on contingent faculty!!!!

Academic workers have been organizing more recently and I hope that trend continues. If adjuncts were unionized at this school I bet the situation would have unfolded much differently.

Hamline,surprisingly, doesn't use a lot of adjuncts. Certain areas do, like music, where different instruments will have an adjunct rather than, say, a full time flute instructor for the 1 flute major to come through every 7 year. The fact that they don't is one thing they consider a pretty big selling point.

[wildrice]

I keep thinking about this. Kind of building on what sequins and others mentioned - this work is deemed important because it is a masterpiece and a common piece that is shared in art history courses. But who declared it a masterpiece? Who designed the curriculums for art history? If those ideas came out of the western world, they were decided in white supremacist systems in a largely white, Christian, white supremacist society. That isn't to say that there is any ill intent - rather that the people determining what is important probably don't have a completely unbiased worldview. One can be an expert on art and still see it through a white supremacist lens.

Also, although to me - a white person raised in a mostly Christian society - it sounds like the professor did everything she could to avoid upsetting her Muslim students, if her Muslim students and their fellow students were upset anyway - that isn't meaningless. Why were they upset? Could it be because she (and I) thought she was doing everything she should but that wasn't actually what the Muslim student needed? Is it because she DID do what she could, but there had been so many other offenses and microaggressions at this college that this was the final breaking point? I do tend to think that a minority student isn't likely to bring attention to herself in this way unless there is a real reason why she feels that way. This could have brought her harm or put her in danger by making a big deal of something if it wasn't a big deal. The fact that she doesn't feel the college is the inclusive institution that it says it is should be a big signal to administrators that they need to do more. Assuming the problem is solved by removing this professor from their curriculum isn't likely to actually make the changes needed.

I still come to the point where I don't think this should have been a fireable offense for an employee - if anything, it should have resulted in a change of curriculum going forward and some ongoing dialogue between administrators and minority students to figure out how to improve instruction in a truly inclusive way. But given that this professor is not a "real" employee that the college has invested in (and that they probably have very little, if any, mechanism to discipline adjunct faculty), it was easier for them to just not renew her contract than to try to address it.

[MixedBerryJam]

Jan 8, 2023 19:16:31 GMT -5 AJL said:

… Unfortunately, as an adjunct, professor Lopez-Prater is essentially disposable in the eyes of Hamline. She never stood a chance, honestly.

QFT, esp this last part.

Also, though, while I’m not an art history person I probably wouldn’t have done this my first semester at the place anyway. I wonder if the outcome would have been different if this was an adjunct or prof with a longer history with the college.

[StrawberryBlondie]

Jan 9, 2023 15:16:55 GMT -5 MixedBerryJam said:

Jan 8, 2023 19:16:31 GMT -5 AJL said:

… Unfortunately, as an adjunct, professor Lopez-Prater is essentially disposable in the eyes of Hamline. She never stood a chance, honestly.

QFT, esp this last part.

Also, though, while I’m not an art history person I probably wouldn’t have done this my first semester at the place anyway. I wonder if the outcome would have been different if this was an adjunct or prof with a longer history with the college.

Considering Hamline is where I first learned about the Piss Christ, probably.

[rupertpenny]

Jan 9, 2023 15:16:55 GMT -5 MixedBerryJam said:

Jan 8, 2023 19:16:31 GMT -5 AJL said:

… Unfortunately, as an adjunct, professor Lopez-Prater is essentially disposable in the eyes of Hamline. She never stood a chance, honestly.

QFT, esp this last part.

Also, though, while I’m not an art history person I probably wouldn’t have done this my first semester at the place anyway. I wonder if the outcome would have been different if this was an adjunct or prof with a longer history with the college.

The situations are not directly comparable, but NYU Chemistry professor Maitland Jones was fired in reaction to student complaints and he had been teaching at NYU full-time (in a non-tenure track capacity) for 20 years. 

[meganew]

Jan 9, 2023 14:57:05 GMT -5 StrawberryBlondie said:

Jan 9, 2023 12:28:24 GMT -5 meganew said:

The article posted stated that it was an online lecture, so the scenario you have in your head doesn’t fit. The students were given warning before class and also before the slide was shown.

I’m really struggling here to see how this was in any way Islamophobic. The painting in question was not a caricature or demeaning- I understand that the image itself is considered blasphemous to certain Muslims, but viewing it wasn’t a requirement. And someone else’s religious belief shouldn’t dictate curriculum or discussion, as long as it’s respectful.

I read several that referred to having the option to "leave the room" so I'm not sure which is accurate. Regardless, I'm struggling to reconcile what the student says - that she was completely blindsided - with the professor saying she gave warnings. Both of those can't be true.

The NYT article linked to the interview with the student who made the initial complaint and included a summary of the zoom, which was recorded. It stated that the professor did give warning and spoke about each image before it was shown. It also gave a summary of what the professor said in her lecture in reference to the images.

[hermione]

Jan 9, 2023 14:40:40 GMT -5 sequins said:

@@@


Coming off of yet another Christmas season, how would people feel about a teacher revealing that Santa isn't real to a bunch of kids? (I understand that Santa is not a religious figure). Why is it important to protect the illusion of Santa and why don't we have teachers fighting against censorship there? I think it's because the majority in the class believe in Santa and we feel obliged to cater to the majority. That courtesy is not extended to US-minorities and their beliefs.

Having said that, if there is a religious studies class and the teacher had responsible discussions on all religions, not just US-minority religions, I don't think I'd have a problem with that.

Is this comparable though? College age students vs little kids. Plus there was at least the option to opt out. If the teacher informed parents multiple times this discussion about Santa would be taking place with an invitation to discuss beforehand and/or opt out and could identify pedagogical reasons to have the discussion, it might be a fair comparison.