When Fort Lewis College canceled “Saving Navajo Weaving,” the final program in its Life-Long Learning Lecture Series on April 17, it missed what used to be called a “teaching moment.”
Jackson Clark II, owner of Durango’s Toh-Atin Gallery, was set to give a talk about the history of Navajo (Diné) weaving. The brochure said: “In the late 1800s, the Navajo wearing blanket began to disappear as Pendleton blankets and white man’s clothing became common wear for Navajo (Diné) people. Without the influence of the traders, the art form would likely have died.”
Clark chose an economic argument to explain why a particular art form persisted. It’s one of several explanations.
We don’t know how Clark’s presentation developed, because Steven Schwartz, FLC interim president, asked Clark to postpone his talk because of campus protests.
In a recent article (Herald, Apr. 20), Staff Writer Reuben M. Schafir wrote that protesters claimed Clark was presenting a “white savior” narrative. In the same article, Clark objected to the cancellation and said, “That’s censorship.”
If a college is accused of stifling free speech, the answer is not to shut down speech. The answer is: Create a platform for more speech – for dialogue.
By canceling the program, FLC missed an opportunity to have a speaker present a topic followed by a public discussion in which questions could be asked and other viewpoints expressed. That’s been the purpose of the college’s free lecture series from the beginning 24 years ago. On Feb. 2, 2001, Bill Lupien launched the program with “Fundamentals of Investing.”
Well, not all topics are controversial, but some are. Last Jan. 30, attorney Frank Bowman presented “The Pardon Power and the American President.” It was well researched, well attended and invited many questions.
One path the college could take now would be to schedule a panel discussion to air out the current controversy. It’s what colleges do – gather people from different points of view and conduct a civil conversation.
Invite Clark to present his argument. Invite Trennie Burch, co-creator of Four Borderless Corners, to present the protesters’ point of view. Invite a Navajo weaver. Add FLC faculty members from business, history, economics, anthropology and art.
In short, set the stage to inform and educate. Set a tone for respectful discourse. Have a dialogue rooted in a collaborative exchange of viewpoints, that perhaps even arrives at the increasingly novel, and evermore vital, goal of mutual understanding.
Sounds complicated, but not impossible with skilled facilitation. Let FLC show other colleges and universities how it can be done.
FLC has already demonstrated it can handle big topics with a history of various symposia. Last year’s AI conference is one example, organized by Provost Mario Martinez. In 2017, Gary Rottman, current lecture series team leader, organized FLC’s Climate Change Symposium.
In 2025, a symposium on cultural change in the Southwest could include the ongoing debate about Navajo weaving and “The Chief.” The large advertising sculpture opposite Toh-Atin Gallery has been a lightning rod and subject of innumerable letters to the editor.
In October 2021, after a flurry of angry letters arrived at the Herald, I wrote a column (Herald, Nov. 3, 2021) suggesting a new approach to an old Durango dilemma. Here’s the kernel of what I proposed:
“The over-sized, cartoon sign of an American Indian pointing to a place of business has outlived its moment.
The Chief belongs in a museum not on a downtown street. He belongs with his historic advertising brethren like Uncle Ben and Aunt Jemima.
Created 80 years ago, the larger-than-life, comic figure once had a job: pointing customers to a Durango eating establishment: The Chief Diner. When it closed in 1983, the folks at Toh-Atin Art Gallery bought The Chief and placed him in the parking lot across from the gallery. Since then, The Chief has continued to fulfill a classic, if outdated, trope in American advertising – show the customer where to go.
He needs to move on again. A museum is a reasonable destination for a controversial artifact, whether it is a Confederate statue or an outdated version of a minority population.”
I further suggested that The Chief might find a home at FLC’s Center of Southwest Studies and inspire an exhibition about the controversial history of American advertising. If not at FLC, why not one of the following: The History Colorado Center in Denver; Santa Fe’s Museum of Indian Arts and Culture; The National Museum for American History or The National Museum for American Indian Art and Culture, both in D.C.
Addressing controversial issues is better than ignoring them. Despite the emotional chaos that is gripping the country, we can still remember and model how to have civil conversations about our differences. The college could lead the way.
Judith Reynolds is an art historian, journalist and volunteer founder of FLC’s Life-Long-Learning Series.
