A Very Strange Case

I inspired myself earlier today (that happens from time to time) and I thought I'd check out the American Association of University Professors website (they are the folks that hand out censures on "academic freedom" offending institutions), just to see what they are saying about the topic. There is a lot on there; some of it laudable, some laughable, and much of it illogical or contradictory.

In looking over their list of offenders I came across this listing:

Brenau College (Ga.) 1934, v.20, 10b 1943, v.29, 446

So this says Brenau College was reported as an offender back in 1934 and censure was, eventually, imposed in 1943, which has remained in effect ever since. What exactly did Brenau do to incur the AAUP's wrath? I've no idea. I've tried to find this online to no avail, and I don't have copies of the AAUP's publication Academe from the 1930's and 40's handy at the moment. The "b" in the above citation points you to a footnote on their website to the effect that the original report of the AAUP's investigation of Brenau College was never published.

I have to wonder at the standards of an organization that allows for censure to be imposed on an institution for 62 years and counting. It seems unusual, even by the AAUP's written standards.

Placing the name of an institution on this list does not mean that censure is visited either upon the whole of the institution or upon the faculty, but specifically upon its present administration. The term "administration" includes the administrative officers and the governing board of the institution. This censure does not affect the eligibility of nonmembers for membership in the Association, nor does it affect the individual rights of members at the institution in question.

I'm assuming that very few, if any, of the people originally involved at Brenau or in the AAUP's investigation are even still alive at this point. How is anyone looking at the ongoing censure of Brenau College (now Brenau University) supposed to be able to evaluate it? I'm not sure anyone can, particularly as the original investigation was never published to begin with. But this is exactly what the AAUP expects from its members.

Members of the Association have often considered it to be their duty, in order to indicate their support of the principles violated, to refrain from accepting appointment to an institution so long as it remains on the censure list. Since circumstances differ widely from case to case, the Association does not assert that such an unqualified obligation exists for its members; it does urge that, before accepting appointments, they seek information on present conditions of academic freedom and tenure from the Association's Washington office and prospective departmental colleagues. The Association leaves it to the discretion of the individual, possessed of the facts, to make the proper decision.

It would be helpful if the AAUP, the very organization that imposes the censures, would supply the facts in all of its ongoing censure cases.

Brenau strikes me as a funny case for academic freedom issues. Not that it is unimportant, just humorous. It began life as a Baptist theological seminary for women in Gainesville, Georgia. It lost the Baptist affiliation in 1913, and a lot of other things between now and then. Today it seems to have an academic program dedicated to equal parts fashion design and dance. What a long strange trip it has been.

This opens up endless avenues of speculation to explain the original dispute. Maybe a faculty member was fired for designing clothes that "bunched too much at the hip."

It seems to me that you need to have a pretty compelling reason to maintain censure on a college or university after 62 years. At this point no one can be sure that the AAUP has any reason, let alone a compelling one.