@hebegebe – Sullivan herself calls the Jeffersonian legacy “complicated” and welcomes the discourse. Sounds like she has less of a problem with the discussion than you.
I agree Jefferson was “complicated”. I also don’t have a problem with a discussion–I just don’t think that a denunciation qualifies.
Also, most people realize that the role of university President is a political one. In a corporation, you can get rid of employees who do stupid things, but to remove university faculty or students, the violation has to be rather egregious. So you focus instead on de-escalation.
I have no idea what you mean by the second paragraph.
As to the first – “denounce” was used by the WP journalist, not the letter in question. It used “disappointed” and “offended.” There is a difference.
And BTW, the Founding Fathers got their start by denouncing people, nations and ideas. In fact, protest and denunciations (“have you no sense of decency?”) have a long, storied and successful place in our nation’s history.
While I kind of understand what the protesters are saying, it also shows how someone with a grudge/point of view/legitimate beef can also lose sight that human beings are rarely perfect. Was Jefferson a slaveholder? Yes. Were the things he wrote, in part, hypocritical? Yep, saying “all men are created equal” while holding slaves most definitely was, and like a lot of people of his time, he didn’t think blacks were the equal of whites (on the other hand, neither did Lincoln). I wonder if those protesting this, for example, would be upset if she quoted Martin Luther King on something, despite the fact that the man plagiarized in his doctoral thesis and was unfaithful to his wife (and likely at some point jaywalked, cheated on his taxes, lied, etc). I realize the two are not the same thing, what I was trying to point out is that neither Dr. King nor Jefferson were saints…and I fully cheer on those who want to break down the myth that the founders were these god-like men who created this perfect country and all the other crap portrayed out there, they weren’t, they were men, they held attitudes of their time (think they though badly of blacks? Read up when the idea of giving women the vote was discussed at the time the constitution was being framed…). Jefferson also was not exactly a loyal person, he savagely undercut Washington and Adams in their administrations and some of his actions bordered on sedition (like a private little clique of his trying to get the US involved in the French Revolution).
On the other hand what did Jefferson leave behind? That slaveholder left behind, sadly, a country that allowed slavery, dodged the issue during the founding of the country, but he also left behind a ton of ideas, he left behind an imperfect government if looked at through slavery , yet he left behind ideas that later drove people to right those wrongs. Washington was a slaveholder as well, but if we had not had Washington, we likely would not have the country we have today, that is not myth, it is fact, for a number of reasons, do we judge Washington because he had feet of lead with slavery? Some of the people who so vehemently hate Jefferson likely worship people that you could probably find a lot of bad things about, does that mean they shouldn’t respect those people or quote them?
Founding fathers after having won freedom from an oppressive king (declaring that certain rights are so important that they cannot be taken away by anyone) formed a government that denied those very same rights from various groups of people. Seems to me the Declaration of Independence was more a marketing statement than some type of divine revelation or statement.
Can anyone name a historic personage who was not flawed? That happens only in legends, not reality. So saying that a university should not quote someone who is flawed, means that no one would be quoted, no one would be revered. Somewhere between a naive hero worship and expunging flawed people from being quotable; that’s the most realistic approach.
I agree. Which is fine to have the discussion about the merits or disadvantage of quoting – and using as a “moral compass,” in the faculty’s parlance – a “complicated” – in the president’s parlance – historical figure.
My point is that there’s nothing strange in having this conversation. Especially not in a university setting, a place where students and faculty engage in all manner of critical thinking. This is the sort of debate one should welcome in our universities.
I think President Sullivan has not shied away from any debate about Jefferson and the university UVa is part of an UNESCO world heritage site, along with Monticello. There is plenty of historical info out there included about Jefferson and his strengths as well as his flaws… The “conversation” doesn’t seem to be either new or suppressed .
But this thread exists because some here feel the “conversation” shouldn’t even exist.
The conversation is always relevant, and informed by history and context. Martin Luther King, Jr. has quoted Jefferson , as have others. Jefferson was the father of the University of Virginia. There is no getting around that. You will hear about him , the good and the bad, if you choose to attend school there.
The WaPo article quoted in the op noted that MLK regularly quoted Jefferson and went on to include one. Rather than do a verbatim, I’ll just summarize:
That he was perceptive enough to see that slavery degraded both whites & blacks. That teaching white children a false supremacy was cause for fear, for “I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just.”
Disregarding that MLK - in an earlier day - believed Jefferson worthy of reading and passing along, I think a useful exercise would be to start compiling a list of the new "moral compasses’ we intend to substitute for the old.
Suspect it will be exceedingly short, if everyone takes up rock-throwing.
Totally! Everyone’s flawed, and history is full of awful, awful stuff. That’s exactly why UVa’s near-deification of Thomas Jefferson is so problematic!
@marvin100 : your avatar is giving me nightmares. Seriously! @-)
This isn’t a safe space, @cameo43 
Yours is pretty when I really look at it, but at first glance it makes me think of cauliflower, which I instinctively distrust.
Yes, it makes my stomach queasy. What’s it gonna take @Marvin? A “pretty please with a cherry on top?”
Personally, I liked the one before last – whatever that was it was colorful and conveyed good energy. This one makes me scroll nervously down the thread hoping I don’t encounter it.
Okay, fine. Someone else pretty pleased me to change the colorful one. Hope nobody takes offense at hummingbird man.
You are a good guy @Marvin. 