Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Virtual Events
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    An AI-Driven Work Force
    AI and Microcredentials
Sign In
The Review

Columbia University and Free Speech

March 28, 2010

To the Editor:

If President Lee C. Bollinger wants to be recognized as a champion of free speech (“A Free Press for a Global Society,” The Chronicle Review, February 26), he should have Columbia University officially acknowledge that it harmed Robert Burke and Jerome Klein, permanently destroying their academic careers because they had the courage to protest the Columbia administration’s forging of friendly ties with Nazi Germany.

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

To the Editor:

If President Lee C. Bollinger wants to be recognized as a champion of free speech (“A Free Press for a Global Society,” The Chronicle Review, February 26), he should have Columbia University officially acknowledge that it harmed Robert Burke and Jerome Klein, permanently destroying their academic careers because they had the courage to protest the Columbia administration’s forging of friendly ties with Nazi Germany.

Bollinger has been unwilling even to consider their cases, despite appeals to do so. The Columbia administration expelled Burke because he led a student picket line at President Nicholas Murray Butler’s mansion in 1936 to protest the university’s sending a delegate to Heidelberg University’s 550th anniversary celebration, a carefully orchestrated Nazi propaganda festival where Joseph Goebbels gave a welcoming address. Columbia terminated the appointment of Klein, a talented fine-arts instructor, because it believed he had initiated a petition protesting its warm welcome to Nazi Germany’s ambassador to the United States, Hans Luther, in December 1933. President Butler praised Luther as “intelligent, honest, and well-mannered,” a “gentleman” entitled to “the greatest courtesy and respect.”

I analyzed the Burke and Klein cases in my recent book The Third Reich in the Ivory Tower: Complicity and Conflict on American Campuses (Cambridge University Press, 2009), which was reviewed in The Chronicle Review by Carlin Romano (“The Shame of Academe and Fascism, Then and Now,” August 10, 2009).

As reported in The Jerusalem Post on April 3, 2008, the David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies invited President Bollinger to comment on my paper on Columbia’s response to Nazism, which I presented at the Organization of American Historians convention in New York in March 2008. Although the institute’s director, Dr. Rafael Medoff, invited Bollinger to participate on the panel more than a month in advance, by mail, e-mail, and fax, Bollinger did not attend and later claimed not to have received the invitation until the day before the session.

It is time for Columbia to recognize that it committed injustices against Burke and Klein, victims of the university’s contempt for freedom of speech. At the very least, Columbia should award both men, now dead, honorary degrees for taking a stand against Nazism at enormous cost when it mattered.

Stephen H. Norwood
Professor of History
University of Oklahoma
Norman, Okla.

The following comments from Chronicle.com are about the article “The Death of Film Criticism” (The Chronicle Review, March 5).

The problem with much of this discussion is that it fails to consider the digital world in which we live. Criticism lives! But it is no longer in the control of centralized systems of validation and approval. And this is the case not only for criticism of film, but also for criticism of literature, theater, fine art, and so on. My own thesis is clear: Commodification of cultural criticism has shifted (from what was, essentially, a 18th-century commodity culture to a 21st-century postcommodity address); definitions of professional criticism have thus also shifted. Too little has been written about this, and too little work is being done to consider it, generally. It is time to begin more actively addressing the digital world in which we live, and the ways in which this world truly works, and can be developed.

—graemeharper

What the Internet doesn’t do is quickly and obviously contextualize opinion or demarcate between preestablished source hierarchies. Historically, the vast majority of film criticism (i.e., film reviewers in newspapers or magazines) has been bad. This was as true before the Internet as it is today. However, it was once easier to identify the best film critics because they would usually be writing for The New Yorker (though not always, as the pre-Kael era shows us) or another eminent publication. Conversely, you could usually ignore whoever was writing for—say—The Des Moines Register (no offense to that fine city). Today, you can’t rely on such conventional hierarchies (or the market) to demarcate between the good and the bad.

ADVERTISEMENT

Fortunately, serious cinephiles are typically equipped with mammalian brains and good taste, both of which aid in the search for and discovery of worthwhile critics. Sorry that the Internet destroyed your newspapers. But the kid in small-town Alaska who just discovered Kiarostami and Kael is glad that it exists.

—saintfrank

Doherty’s wider assumption appears to be that “serious” film scholarship and academic film study are virtually the same, but within my experience, only a few of the best film scholars are employed by universities. And the fact that Doherty doesn’t even bother to mention the most sophisticated online blogs and sites devoted to film (e.g., Dave Kehr’s and Girish Shambu’s blogs, or Rouge) apart from Bordwell’s, which he jokingly slights because it doesn’t have the industry clout of Ebert and Siskekl’s TV show, is not exactly encouraging. Personally, I don’t read Harry Knowles, but even on the few occasions when I have, I don’t find the slangy, with-it, would-be populist tone there all that different from the tone of Doherty’s piece. The root of assumption of both is that quantity seems to equal quality, whereas the best film criticism, online and offline, on paper and on the Internet, should be judged by the quality and seriousness of the readership, not by the number of hits or readers.

—JROSENBAUM2002

Thomas Doherty responds:

My own thumbs are not all the way down on what the Internet hath wrought for film criticism—the digits are actually more like needles quivering somewhere in the midrange. I had hoped to avoid coming off as a doddering print-based bastard wagging an ink-stained finger at the young Web-slingers, wary of playing the 21st-century version of a medieval monk who cut his teeth on illuminated manuscripts grousing about the decadent media world wrought by that punk Gutenberg. Still, as I read the literary lights collected in Lopate’s American Movie Critics and surveyed the prose on the current film sites, I couldn’t help but lament the passing of the old guard. Like Gerald Peary in For the Love of Movies, seeing beloved bylines (and knowing some of the faces behind them) fired and forced to adapt made for a poignant montage. I know that film critics should be no more immune from the march of technology and bottom-line layoffs than any other profession, but it’s a melancholy passing nonetheless. ...

ADVERTISEMENT

Obviously, the virtues apply whatever the communication platform—newspapers, blogs, chatting over coffee—but here’s what I look for:

1. Expertise. Do they know what they’re talking about? ...

2) Chops. Can they write well? ...

3) Taste. Do your two cinematic hearts beat as one?

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Tags
Opinion Free Speech
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

Photo illustration showing internal email text snippets over a photo of a University of Iowa campus quad
Red-state reticence
Facing Research Cuts, Officials at U. of Iowa Spoke of a ‘Limited Ability to Publicly Fight This’
Photo illustration showing Santa Ono seated, places small in the corner of a dark space
'Unrelentingly Sad'
Santa Ono Wanted a Presidency. He Became a Pariah.
Illustration of a rushing crowd carrying HSI letters
Seeking precedent
Funding for Hispanic-Serving Institutions Is Discriminatory and Unconstitutional, Lawsuit Argues
Photo-based illustration of scissors cutting through paper that is a photo of an idyllic liberal arts college campus on one side and money on the other
Finance
Small Colleges Are Banding Together Against a Higher Endowment Tax. This Is Why.

From The Review

Football game between UCLA and Colorado University, at Folsom Field in Boulder, Colo., Sept. 24, 2022.
The Review | Opinion
My University Values Football More Than Education
By Sigman Byrd
Photo- and type-based illustration depicting the acronym AAUP with the second A as the arrow of a compass and facing not north but southeast.
The Review | Essay
The Unraveling of the AAUP
By Matthew W. Finkin
Photo-based illustration of the Capitol building dome propped on a stick attached to a string, like a trap.
The Review | Opinion
Colleges Can’t Trust the Federal Government. What Now?
By Brian Rosenberg

Upcoming Events

Plain_Acuity_DurableSkills_VF.png
Why Employers Value ‘Durable’ Skills
Warwick_Leadership_Javi.png
University Transformation: a Global Leadership Perspective
Lead With Insight
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin