From the Director
>> Tuesday, February 19, 2013
 |
| Dr. Daniel E. Wueste |
Integration at Clemson was very different from the integration of other Southern universities, for example, the University of Alabama, the University of Georgia, or the University of Mississippi. This was not because South Carolina was more favorably disposed to the idea of desegregation. Far from it. South Carolina law not only required segregation, the “State Budget and Control Board was authorized to close public colleges to prevent court-ordered desegregation.”
The “conspiracy for peace” responsible for Clemson’s peaceful integration was not the upshot of advocacy, and acceptance isn’t quite right either. Harvey Gantt may have captured the critical point when he said, “The Clemson gentleman was always something we heard about. There was this suggestion that even if people disagreed with [desegregation], they would be civil about it.” He had the sense that people on campus “would not get out of line or do anything to hurt Clemson’s image.” http://www.clemson.edu/cedp/cudp/pubs/gantt/pdfs/002.pdf
One might have wished for something more high-minded than this as an explanation of peaceful desegregation at Clemson, but at this juncture it’s much less important how it came to pass than that it did.
In the “Afterword,” of Integration with Dignity: A Celebration of Harvey Gantt’s Admission to Clemson, published in 2003 as Clemson marked the 40th anniversary of its desegregation, Clemson Professor Skip Eisiminger writes,
It is a shame that it took courage for anyone to matriculate at this institution, but it did. It’s a shame Clemson’s registrar didn’t welcome Gantt’s application to Clemson, but he didn’t. It’s a shame that admitting Gantt in 1961 would have broken a state law, but it would. It’s a shame that President Edwards and Dean Vickery didn’t become advocates for Gantt, but they didn’t. And it’s a shame that it took five court cases to allow Gantt to continue his education, but it did. “Human history is a race between education and catastrophe,” wrote H. G. Wells. On January 28, 1963, in Harvey Gantt’s preliminary contest at least, education won. It wasn’t “ebony and ivory... in perfect harmony,” à la Paul McCartney and Stevie Wonder. It was something far more complex: a paradox. Had Clemson won its appeal to the Supreme Court, it would have lost; but in losing, it won. To his credit, President Edwards saw Clemson’s loss as an opportunity to begin anew, and we did. http://www.clemson.edu/cedp/cudp/pubs/gantt/pdfs/006.pdf
In losing, Clemson won. Professor Eisiminger is right about that. Clemson is better because of integration, and because Clemson is better, South Carolina is too.
Celebrating “A Legacy of Inclusion” at Clemson http://www.clemson.edu/administration/diversityoffice/50-years/ has provided and will continue to provide opportunities to get clear about the value added by diversity, as well as opportunities to learn about the sources of resistance to change and ways to overcome such resistance. And one more thing. It may prompt reflection on the power of a commitment to upholding the honor and dignity of something larger than oneself of which one is a part by, among other things, recognizing that disagreement is compatible with civility and that civility facilitates progress.
Some resources, in addition to those at the links included above:
To coincide with Clemson University's 50th anniversary of integration, you’ll find links to more information about desegregation and diversity here: http://libguides.clemson.edu/integration/
A podcast of Walter Edgar’s Journal SCETV Radio: Joining Dr. Edgar to talk about the events of January 1963 are Dr. Vernon Burton, Professor of History at Clemson University; Dr. Bobby Donaldson, Associate Professor of History and African American Studies, at USC; and Mr. Harvey Gantt.
0 comments:
Post a Comment