Friday, May 11, 2007

Friday with Farred

Members of the faculty expect Duke students to meet high standards of performance and behavior. It is only appropriate, therefore, that the faculty adheres to comparably high standards in dealing with students . . . Students are fellow members of the university community, deserving of respect and consideration in their dealings with the faculty.

--Chapter Six, Duke Faculty Handbook

Even in an atmosphere of extreme and indefensible statements by members of Duke’s arts and sciences faculty, Literature professor Grant Farred has distinguished himself for his extreme and indefensible statements. The Group of 88 stalwart published what is arguably the most outrageous faculty op-ed of the entire case, denouncing the hundreds of Duke students who registered to vote in Durham as carriers of “secret racism.”

Farred, who currently has a visiting appointment at Williams College, recently gave a talk about the lacrosse case; EphBlog posted comprehensive notes on the talk, which were invaluable in making some sense of Farred’s often impenetrable prose. (An example: at one point, Farred spoke of “the wanton presence of the other; of the other who is not the other, of the other who is, who strikingly resembles—who is made to resemble—the self. The other who will not remain other. The other who is sometimes as myself, as other.”)

Several audio clips of Farred’s remarks have surfaced, making this post a multi-media one; it is worth taking the extra time to listen to Farred in his own words. (The audio clip links are in red.) I should note that Farred (much like Wahneema Lubiano) is a less-than-inspiring speaker, raising questions about how successful he possibly could be in the classroom.

Farred’s basic thesis: the players were guilty, maybe not of rape, but of “white privilege,” and so Roy Cooper’s decision to pronounce them “innocent” was wrong. Moreover, unnamed members of the team were—according to Farred—perjurers. And Cooper should have investigated Reade Seligmann, Dave Evans, and Collin Finnerty for committing a hate crime, since the three are modern-day versions of old-time Southern racists.

Trivializing the American Past

“Cooper’s ‘innocent,’ then, reveals not a truly innocent,” maintained Farred. “These three players, an entire team, a team with an unsavory, [unclear] history. The history of the lacrosse team is the history of being inhospitable. The history of being bad neighbors to the Durham community. At the heart of the lacrosse team’s behavior is the racist history of the South.”

View the team’s behavior in the worst possible light, assuming every allegation about their pre-March 13 behavior to be true: they partied too much and too loudly, often using alcohol. This behavior might alienate the dorm neighbors of the 75 percent who live on campus. But these students were likely to be—in Farred’s parlance—white and privileged also. Those who lived off campus might have irked the residents of Trinity Park—also generally white and privileged.

Can a tenured professor at Duke seriously maintain that college students angering their (mostly white) neighbors through loud partying illustrates the “racist history of the South”? Such a claim is embarrassing and insulting.

Denying Reality

The findings of the Coleman Committee were clear: the lacrosse players were good students and good athletes, with a good record of community service. They had a strong bond with the women’s lacrosse team and no record of racist or sexist behavior. Many drank much too much—on a campus where hundreds of students drank much too much—but even here, their offenses tended to be minor, such as underage drinking or open container violations.

If the facts don’t fit preconceptions, Farred’s approach appears to be just to make up some new facts. In his Williams address, he cited the team’s “tendency toward misogyny and arrogant sexual prowess, especially if the fall 2006 Rolling Stone story is to be believed, proclivities that all have been complicated by race and racism.” That article, of course, is the Bible of the Group of 88: it is one of just two publications cited in the Campus Culture Initiative report, and was required reading in Anne Allison’s “Group of 88 for Credit” class this spring.

So, which is more credible: a comprehensive investigation undertaken by seven colleagues, interviewing dozens of named witnesses; or a widely panned article allegedly quoting four anonymous Duke students? Most people would say the former. Not Farred.

Reinventing History

“The Duke lacrosse program is indicted here,” Farred informed his Williams listeners, “not for what it did, on the night of the 13th of March, 2006, or for what its members did not do that night, but for its past behavior, a blemished past made even uglier.”

Really? That’s not what Farred and his colleagues in the Group of 88 were saying on April 6, 2006, when they took out their full-page ad in the Chronicle. Then, they spoke of the events of “March 13.” They talked about “what the police say or what the court decides.” They thanked protesters who similarly “indicted” the team for what the potbangers were certain occurred on the night of March 13th, protesters who carried “castrate” banners.

The Group’s statement, meanwhile, contained no mention that some lacrosse players had been cited for the “past behavior” of underage drinking.

But Farred is no longer talking about the Group of 88. In response to a question on the issue, Farred said that for “legal” reasons he could not discuss the ad.

Kim Roberts, J.D.

Farred quoted from Roberts’ exchange with a few players as the party dispersed. “Roberts called the players ‘short-dicked white boys.’ One player shouted, ‘We asked for whites, not niggers.’ ‘That’s a racial slur, a hate crime,’ Roberts responded. Does ‘innocent’ cover, and eviscerate from the law’s memory, hate crimes? Or do strippers not have equal protection under the law? Do hate crimes matter?”

Alas, despite Farred’s contention, Kim Roberts is not a jurist, and I know of no jurisdiction in which responding to a racial taunt with a racial slur is considered a “hate crime.” Even Mike Nifong didn’t make such an absurd suggestion.

Unsubstantiated Allegations

“It is precisely because the lacrosse event began before it began,” Farred bizarrely asserted, “that the intended announcement of ‘innocent’ invoked the haunting specter of something else: silence, injustice, guilt, perjury, indecision, evidence—sufficient or not. [emphasis added] There is a vast, darkened edge of innocence, a determination to forget—to make history, both in the immediate, and the long dureé, not matter. The timing of the event, even and because it constitutes its own history, opens up into history and opens up history—the history of Southern racism, of educational indulgence.”

The evidence presented by Farred that the lacrosse players were guilty of “perjury”? None.

“To be declared innocent,” Farred fumed, “is to invent a history that is not the history of this particular event. What is the trajectory of innocence? [Unclear.] Innocent of bad judgment? Does the event demand, not only the responsibility . . .be assumed not only for that for which the accused is now pronounced innocent, but for that for which it appears the accused are no longer asked to stand to account. Those other transgressions: for bad neighborliness, to racism, for perpetuating the history of Southern racism.”

The evidence presented by Farred that Reade Seligmann, Dave Evans, or Collin Finnerty ever did anything to suggest racist behavior? None.

Assault on the Law

“It is because the law knows that it cannot achieve foreclosure, because it cannot be cannot be the last word,” remarked Farred. “There is something terrible—a hidden hint of terror in the language of the law.”

Translation: Farred didn’t like Cooper’s decision. Therefore, the decision cannot be the final word on the case, and the law which rendered this decision must be in some way at fault.

Denigrating Reade Seligmann

“In the event of Duke lacrosse . . . it was the players, those now innocent, who refused foreclosure, specifically Reade Seligmann,” said Farred, mispronouncing Seligmann’s name. “I quote Seligmann, ‘If police officers and a district attorney can systematically railroad us with absolutely no evidence whatsoever, I can’t imagine what they would do to people who do not have the resources to defend themselves.’”

“Seligmann [the mispronunciation continued], in the act of being proclaimed innocent, in the act of being released, in the sovereignty of the law, by the law itself, intentionally turned the issue, the consequence of the law’s finding, to what it is conspicuous of the event: race, class, gender.” [emphasis in original]

Farred was just getting warmed up. The man who published a book declaring Houston Rockets center Yao Ming “the most profound threat to American empire” now contended that Seligmann (the mispronunciation continued)—the “perfect white self”—inserted “itself . . . into the location of the other. The self—the white, male self—in the act of rhetorical flourish, making common cause with the other. The white self speaking as, presumably, phantasmatically, the black other. The law, apparently, can make the self other, to itself.”

To Farred, Reade Seligmann is not an individual—and, indeed, cannot be an individual. He is a white male—no more, no less. Imagine the appropriate outrage that would result if a white Duke professor publicly denounced a black Duke student for the offense of being black.


Farred concluded his remarks by linking the three falsely accused players with two prominent white men who made racist statements—Don Imus and Michael Richards. That none of the three players made any racist statements—and that no one apart from the utterly discredited Nifong and (sometimes) Mangum has ever accused the players of making any racist statements—appears not to have troubled Farred. After all, the three players represent “white privilege.” So they cannot be innocent.

“Cooper’s declaration of ‘innocent,’” proclaimed the Group of 88 stalwart, “will always be contaminated by something other than its imagined purity.”

Indeed it will be: by the remarks of people like Grant Farred.


Anonymous said...

After reading Farred's remarks, to quote the Caveman from Geico,"Ah...WHAT?"

Anonymous said...


1. How is this utter tripe by Farred not slander? Am I wrong in thinking that this guy must have slandered and libeled practically the entire lacrosse team?

Does this guy have a lawyer? Is that lawyer completely oblivious? Is it possible to legally accuse someone of being guilty of a rape *after* having been completely exonerated by the Atty Gen?

2. That's not dense prose. That's a complete incompetent trying his level best to ensure nobody will figure out he's incompetent.

As the saying goes: If you can't dazzle them with brilliance then you can baffle them with bulls**t.

Anonymous said...

What an embarrassment for Duke University and Williams College. Where are the Duke trustees?

Anonymous said...

Farred's comment about Kim's "hate crime" leads me to believe that he spends time over on the TalkLeft board strategerizing with Immyhole and pony boy on ways to smear the players.

Anonymous said...

Based on the transcript of Farred's talk, once again a supposedly public intellectual does not want anyone to make a video or audio recording of his statements. In other words, he wants to be able to criticize the lacrosse team freely, but he doesn’t want anyone to criticize him for what he must know are absurd comments. It is hard to believe that anyone could actually sit through such worthless nonsense, much less take it seriously.

Curiously, even the NYT has done an about face on the lacrosse team, noting that the team GPA was 3.45 and that 13 players are graduating this week. Not to mention that two of the top players are from working class backgrounds.

Farred sates that the lacrosse team is “burdened by its history,” but I think he must be speaking about the group of 88.

Anonymous said...

Farred is, was and always will be a pompous ass. I hope he gets the ax.

Anonymous said...

You can’t really argue with Farred since he refuses to be bound by logic, clear communication, fair play and reason.

The only real question I would have is why does Duke embarrass itself by having this man represent them? Actually I’m afraid that I know the answer but find my conclusion depressing.

Anonymous said...

I waiting on a reply to my email from Grant Farred.

I was worried that by choosing the self-checkout kiosk at Wal-Mart over an African American cashier, I might be exhibiting secret racism. The cashier did have 2 customers waiting in line, while the self-checkout kiosk was open, but YOU CAN NEVER BE SURE IF YOU'RE A RACIST UNTIL GRANT FARRED TELLS YOU YEH OR NAY!

Kim Roberts is a monster. Unbelievable!

Unknown said...

I have for some time now believed that the English Language is a principal mainspring of progress and sanity in the world. Indeed, there are few places in the world where decent, fair-minded, parlimentary democracy is in force and english is not the language it all depends upon.
So when I encounter a political theorist who seems to be speaking in Enlish - but with a closer look comes across as a a mere poseuer - an essentially illerate wannabe English speaker, I think it is time to withdraw all of thconsiderationnnd mercybthat folks like me habituallyxtend to normal, natural english so=pekers.
in other words, i am saying bthat farred and labamma are just fakingbt. they can no morre copoe eith a hard corevhigh school debate tean tha theybcould

Gary Packwood said...

If Reade, Collin or Dave were mine to worry about, I would be taking the day off tomorrow to accompany them to the court house in order to petition the court for a restraining order on Professor Farred.

We would then be on vacation until I could be assured that the restraining order had been served.

The rage in his voice is evident and his sentence structure leads me to believe that he future actions can not be predicted.

He is striking out at phantom enemies of his own creation.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...

So, this is a Duke professor and I should still hold Duke in higher esteem than say Dade County Community College? I really can not understand why in the world any would pay half the Duke tuition to send their child to a place that would hire someone like that?

Anonymous said...

Has any member of this Group of 88 ever read Stunk & White’s “The Elements of Style?” I am appalled at the syntax of the Duke faculty. I get the impression they are unable to articulate a single “admissible sentence.”

This sounds like the ranting of a lunatic masquerading as a scholar. As a Duke grad with 2 children who recently graduated from Duke I am embarrassed.

Unfortunately these creatures such as Farred are under the rocks at most of our universities. At Duke we see them in glaring daylight only because the false promise of “the perfect offenders” caused them to scurry out from under the rocks.

Anonymous said...

"...Where are the Duke trustees?"

Waiting with Farred to be summoned to a court of competent jurisdiction.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

When I was young and incredibly stupid, I did dope - and I talked just like that.

Anonymous said...

He sounds authoritative.

Anonymous said...

Who hired Farred at Duke?

Anonymous said...

My guess: Lentricchia signed off on it. Probably so he wouldn't have to advise students personally.

Then when I noted that the advising was nonexistent, he had to advise anyway.

How sad for him.

His own hire blew up in his face.

And all he is capable of doing is writing an idiotic book about whales in imitation of DeLillo.

Probably couldn't throw a baseball if he tried, at this point.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

It's not the presence of some raving hate-mongers on the Duke faculty that most amazes me. Rather, it's the utter silence of the mainstream Duke faculty in the face of the fulminations of people like Farred and Lubianno.

Of what use are the sacrosanct institutions of academic freedom and tenure if they are insufficient motivators for standing for truth, logic, and justice?

They came first for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.

Then they came for me,
and by that time no one was left to speak up.

Anonymous said...

Anon 1:57 said:

"Of what use are the sacrosanct institutions of academic freedom and tenure if they are insufficient motivators for standing for truth, logic, and justice?"

Oh my! I've read almost every comment on KC's blog and that statement stands out as the perfect substance of the criticism of the entire Duke faculty. To that I would humbly add, with a slight "PC edit": "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men [and women] do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

One Spook

Anonymous said...

The commentor at 1:10 is asking the right question. Who, by and large, has hired these mental midgets for the Duke faculty? And the question now is whether the BOT has the courage to do what's best for Duke and excise the cancers? Both the hiring manager of these pea brained professors as well as the angry and entitled pea brained professors themselves, who are paid WELL to prepetuate this juvenile and racist banter.

Anonymous said...

Again, I'm astounded by what I learn daily about the rest of the world: How can this mumbling fantasy let's-play-pretend Farred even HAVE a job?!

Anonymous said...

Farred is concerned about "educational indulgence?" Me, too. I'm concerned about the "educational indulgence" of an elite university hiring clearly incompetent and unqualified professors solely because of the color of their skin.

Instead of railing against the U.S.'s history of racism, Farred should be down on his knees thanking God for it. After all, if it hadn't happened, then fools like Farred would actually be judged (and subjected to hiring decisions) on the basis of their qualifications, rather than their ethnic heritage -- and we all know where that would leave people like Farred.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn 1:01, and GP 12:38:

You're right, Carolyn: he
(Farred) sounds like he's
doing some serious weed.

GP: "Striking out at phantom
Again, absolutely right.

There is recent research
on schizophrenia-like paranoia
and delusions that indicate -
using MRI - that an area of the
brain that suppresses paranoia
might be shut down while under
the influence of THC.

The study was stopped as a
measure of the severity of
the symptoms induced in the
mentally ill subjects:
the stable schizophremics
who were studied were profoundly
affected by the THC. About
half of the "normal" volunteers
showed similar psychotic symptoms.
It was remarked upon by the
scientist that it was surprising
that the psychosis of the
mentally ill subjects was made
worse, since many schizophrenics
are pot-craving.
In other words: why would someone
have a drive for a drug that made
their symptoms worse?

The area of the brain was the
inferior frontal cortex.
It is apparently the area that
inhibits irrational fears
and phantom delusion, when
that part of the brain is
active. Marijuana shuts that
portion of the brain down.
(Source:AP, May 1, 2007)

Farred shows some of the same
paranoia that one might expect
of either an active psychotic,
or someone who is under the
influence of THC.

Marijuana is a drug that is
fairly commonly used in the
AA community, and it shows
that the persistence of paranoia -
(irrational fear and delusion)-
that permeates the AA community
is likely - in part - to be
chemically induced psychosis.

This might also explain the
inconsistent statements of

As a condition of employment,
Farred should be required to
get medical clearance and/or
drug tested. He could very
well be a Cho, based upon the
profound disorganization
and paranoia in his many

And folks: I am NOT joking.
Mental illness - acquired or
innate - is not a laughing
matter. Farred's statements
may indicate that he is a
danger to himself and others.


Anonymous said...

12:45 "...Unfortunately these creatures such as Farred are under the rocks at most of our universities. At Duke we see them in glaring daylight only because the false promise of “the perfect offenders” caused them to scurry out from under the rocks."

I disagree. You see them because the leadership of the University by action and inaction actively supports these frauds.

Anonymous said...


Note to Duke BOT:

If Mr. Farred should harm
or endanger the student body
at Duke University while
in the employ of the University,
and the University was forewarned
by Mr. Farred's irrational
commentaries and inconsistent
behavior, it might be wise to
consider the potential for damage
to the University.
(Think "Cho.")

And also ask yourselves, as
parents: would you want such a
man teaching your children?


Anonymous said...

The description KC applies to Farred’s views, “embarassing and insulting,” best captures in a single phrase my reaction to the mtetanarrative of many of the Group of 88 and the Group themselves. My bottom line is that I find Farred and others like him such as the dear (?) departed Houston Baker are just pathetic: racists posturing as academics. I cannot understand why any institution that has claims to be one of higher learning would have a Farred on its faculty. As a former academic and a Duke alum, the lacrosse case has tested my core beliefs in tenure as a protection for academic freedom.


Anonymous said...

RDUBOS: It's hard to type with a catcher's mitt on, isn't it?

Anonymous said...

So when I clear away most of Farred's "otherly otherhood" bluster what I get from his words is a proud practitioner of open racism, Farred abominates secret racism.

Oh, and he understands a fundamental element of what he hates very well, too: wanna check if you're a racist? Observe other-skinned people registering to vote, brood about just why they want to do such a thing, get real mad, and do what you can to stop them.

The super-angry, near-incomprehensible Farred is one lucky SOB; even in the current world of pc-bs-spewing, incredibly low-expectation academics there's just no chance Farred would ever have a job without white guilt. He is very poor at this kind of demagoguery; his rantings are not even entertaining.

But then nobody's yet forced to take Farred's classes, are they -- and surely Duke students can switch out of a class if they wander into the wrong one? I don't know that anybody who'd sit through one Farred lecture and come back for the next one really has any reason to complain.

Anonymous said...

Academic Integrity Council

Academic Integrity Committee (06-07)

Formed in 2001, this committee--which contains undergraduate faculty, administrators, and student representatives from relevant undergraduate organizations and the Graduate and professional schools-- is an umbrella organization for academic integrity initiatives across the University; it charge is to enhance the climate for academic integrity at Duke through policy and programs. Term: 2 years.

Term Ending August 31, 2007

Denise Comer, English

Jim Bonk, Chemistry

Owen Astrachan, Computer Science

Kathryn Nightingale, Engineering

Krishnendu Chakrabarty, Engineering

Joe Nadeau, Engineering

Susan Sterrett, Philosophy

Sherryl Broverman Biology

Ex Officio

*Judith Ruderman, Vice Provost for Academic and Administrative Services

Stephen Bryan, Judicial Affairs

Tim Dodd, Center for AIC

Zoila Airall, Student Affairs

Jimmy Soni, DSG

Jonathan Schatz, Honor Council

Leslie Modlin, Honor Council

Bronwyn Lewis, Honor Council

Tom Buchanan, UJB

Molly Gregas, (GPSC)

Maksim Rakhlin (Max), (GPSC)

Anonymous said...

Does he spell his name Farred or Fared? Is this fellow on the admissions committee? Duke deserves everything it gets...

Admissions and Financial Aid

Admissions and Financial Aid Group (06-07)

Composed of faculty from Trinity and Pratt, administrators, and one undergraduate student, the committee addresses issues of undergraduate admissions and financial aid and provides input on those issues to the directors of the two salient offices as well as to the Provost. Term – 3 years.

* Denotes Chair

Term ending August 31, 2009

Ana Barros, Civil Engineering

Gregory Wray, Biology

Angie O'Rand, Sociology

Grant Fared, Literature

Term ending August 31, 2008

Susan Thorne, History

Gary Ybarra, Electrical and Computer Engineering

Term ending August 31, 2007

David Kraines, Math

Martha Putallaz, Psychology

Anonymous said...

Maybe the Duke Board of Trustees should consider a committee that addresses pure misconduct and not just that related to research...

But no, they instead, support a man, who is pushing the CCI.

Misconduct in Research

Misconduct in Research (06-07)

Appointed by the Provost. Assess, determine, advise and report allegations to the MRO
(Misconduct Review Officer), to distinguish between carelessness or incompetence and
misconduct, to ensure the health and safety of research participants, and to preserve and
protect physical evidence such as research data. The assessment outcome will be provided to the MRO in a written report accompanied by all relevant documents.Term: 3 years

* Denotes Chair

Terms ending August 31, 2007
*Robert Behringer, Physics

Terms ending August 31, 2008

Sara Sun Beale, Law

Kenneth Land, Sociology

Jonathan Shaw, Biology

Terms ending August 31, 2009

Gabriel Katul, Nicholas School of the Environment & Earth Sciences

Michael Reed, Mathematics

Tad Schmaltz, Philosophy

Ex Officio

Peter Lange, Provost

Anonymous said...


This simply is stunnng. Moreover, it gives the lie to the propaganda from William Chafe and others of the G88 ilk who insisted that they were not rushing to judgment.

You are right in your Durham-in-Wonderland analogy; indeed, it seems to me that Duke University has embraced its Wonderland designation with all enthusiasm. What would happen if a white professor at Durhm gave a talk in which he denigrated the basketball team at Duke with "Step 'n Fetchit" stereotypes? I think we know the answer.

If Grant Farred really believes that Duke University is crawling with the Second Coming of the Ku Klux Klan, then he needs to go someplace where he could be safe. And you know something, NOTHING will happen to him. He will come back to Duke as the Conquering Hero and Richard Brodhead and John Burness will welcome him with open arms and great the Great Prophet as he steps back on the Duke Campus That Is Not Worthy To Have Such a Great Professor in Their Midst.

Anonymous said...

The inmates have control of your television dial...

This is how Duke locks the students in...the dumbing-down of America.

Admissions Committee...
Admissions preferences...
Director of Program...
Program Mission...
Core requirements...

Undergraduate Literature Major
The Literature Major

The Literature Major offers a unique interdisciplinary approach to ...engage in cross-cultural analysis both in a global (colonial and postcolonial) context train students to develop a sophisticated appreciation of the ways questions of race, class, gender, and sexuality arise in different historical and social contexts.

...All students must take ...and three core courses in each of the three major areas that constitute the major... Introduction to Cultural Studies, ...

...Additionally, all students must take least one course devoted to the study of race, class, gender, or sexuality."

The outcome...

Would you like for me to leave room for cream sir?

Anonymous said...

You know the story "A Beautiful
Mind?" (in reality, it was
not so beautiful, except in
sanitized the movie version.)

Farred is no such hero,
but he may suffer from the
same malady.

Folks, it's not racism:
it's very probable that it is
profound mental illness.

Measures should be taken.


Anonymous said...

How did Farred get a position teaching? Any position?

Anonymous said...

As a practicing lawyer, I too read those comments viewing them are slander -- indeed, slander per se as they accuse the players of criminal behavior.

I would take that case pro bono. Sue Farred here in NYC. Force him to litigate in a nice expensive place like NY.

Anonymous said...

I think the most incredible thing about this guy is that people - sane, rational, accomplished, intelligent people - spend tens of thousands of dollars a year for the chance to sit through three hours a week of him babbling in pseudo-English.

Furthermore, if you manage to endure four years of listening to absolute gobbledygook like this day after day, someone then hands you a piece of paper pronouncing you "educated".

The entire education establishment is infected with dry rot of the brain.

Anonymous said...

An example: at one point, Farred spoke of “the wanton presence of the other; of the other who is not the other, of the other who is, who strikingly resembles—who is made to resemble—the self. The other who will not remain other. The other who is sometimes as myself, as other.”)

Sheesh! What is this guy going on about!!?
Classic case of intellectual onanism.

Anonymous said...

Two comments from the Ephblog sum the "spectacularity" of Farred's idiocy.
Posted by: at May 3, 2007 04:09 PM

The following train of... (well, it's not logic, and it's certainly not thought) diarrhea-like stream of consciousness perhaps exemplifies the best of the postmodern influence on racial studies:

• Abbreviation of lacrosse = lax
• Suggestive of the latitude, lack of discipline for Duke lacrosse
• Associates the introduction of “x” with signifier, importance to black power movement, the American unknown (?)
“The unknowable necessitates the production of thought”
• Native American inventors of lacrosse
• Malcolm X
“In the name of the ‘X’, there is always a secret history of violence

It's self-parody! Note that Farred ACTUALLY made this abortion of an attempt at argument during the bout of postmodern diarrhea that he called a lecture. The above is, word for word, direct from the notes, and sadly in tune with the rest of Farred's meaningless verbiage (see KC Johnson's blog for Farred's ridiculously hilarious take on Yao Ming).

Posted by: Loweeel at May 3, 2007 04:24 PM

Yes, you too can provide trenchant insights like the brilliant and learned "scholar" Grant Farred.

Here's mine:

• An abbreviation of "Facsimile Machine" is fax.
• Suggestive of the Euro-centric, heteronormative fixation on "Facts" as opposed to narratives or authentic cultural experiences.
• Associates the introduction of “x” with signifier, importance to black power movement, the American unknown.
“The unknowable necessitates the production of thought”
• You never know what's going to be on an incoming fax, and what color is fax toner? It's not White!
• The first fax machine was sold by Giovanni Caselli, an Italian, back at a time (1861) when Italians were not considered "White"
• Malcolm X
“In the name of the ‘X’, there is always a secret history of violence.”
• Fax machines have been replaced by email and .pdf because people can't handle the secret violence of the "black" toner covering the "white" paper.

Anybody want to do: M/max, Sox (Boston was the last team in MLB to have a Black player; but curiously, the first hockey team thanks to the Boston-friendly name of "Willie O'Ree"; Chicago's White "Sox"), Hans Blix, the gustatory delight that is lox, fox, box, Tex(as), Mex(ico), ATX motherboards, or the xylophone? Tax(es) might be a bit too easy, given the poll tax.

Anonymous said...

I am curious about the "other end" of the Williams presentation. Who at Williams issued the invitation, and what was the reaction there to his comments?

Anonymous said...

There is no way I would ever let any of my kids (or relatives or friends for that matter) ever go to Duke. Thank you Prof Johnson.

Anonymous said...

This is really eyeopening for us who have one conception of what goes on at college but who now can see there is an "other" there who views all through the lens of "class,race,gender". And that view now is revealed. This is great because now the hard questions can be asked by students and parents such as "since I am of ___ race , ____ sex, __ income level does that I am to be given no identity based on who I am inside? that my identity in your class and my grade and my relationship are predetermined?" Maybe someone at the Duke faculty adviser level can come up with a R-G-C coefficient to apply to each student and each faculty member so there would be a "E-Harmony like" matching of others in the classes and no future denigration would take place.

Anonymous said...

I am a Law Degree, a Masters in Jurisprudence, consider myself fairly well read and I can't understand a word that Farred is saying. Who, whom or what is "the other"?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

The Duke facility of 88, or at least the few that I have heard quoted, with Farred leading this auspicious gathering, are not giants among men intelligently. It would appear that they are midgets among dwarfs intelligently speaking.

Anonymous said...

Farred reminds me of some of the erstwhile "poets" and philosophers of the '60s who paraded their nonsense in public and during antiwar or anti-whatever rallies, marches, smoke-ins etc. I attended many of these as an intelligence agent and I ultimately concluded that these buffoons were a threat only to reason and logic. I can't imagine any rational person being able to tolerate more than a minute of Farred without either laughing out loud or blowing grits. Where do clowns like Farred learn this gibberish? Easy. In any American college or university. Duke's hard science departments are world-class, the liberal arts side is pretty sorry judging from what I've seen.

Anonymous said...

the other is the boogie-man. it means that someone who is not you who is out to do you harm possibly.

Anonymous said...

I am happy to report that several of my daughter's professors at Duke would make openly critical comments about the group of 88 in class, and also celebrated the DA's statement of innocence. Every elite university has a number of bottom feeders like Farred, I imagine out of some misguided sense of political correctness, but they are supposed to stay hidden under a rock somewhere and only speak to like-minded losers. That way they don't stir up any trouble and the university doesn't look foolish.

The unique part of this case is that the group suddenly had a public forum for their extreme views and laughable writings, which I hope will serve as a lesson to Duke and other universities around the country. The university administration knows full well that people like Farred and Lubiano are third rate, so the solution is to never make a job offer to these losers, either at Duke or at any other school. I think that even Brodhead has figured that one out, and I hope that other colleges will learn from Duke's mistakes.

Anonymous said...

The whole Duke non-rape affair, with malicious players like Nifong, the Group of 88, Farred, et al, puts me in mind of the Salem witch trials. It's the same dynamic.

Anonymous said...

To Anon. 8:15

Here is the Wikipedia entry on "The Other." I know it sounds convoluted, but compared to the way the word is generally used, this explanation is relatively clear. That should give you some idea about its practitioners.

Anonymous said...

"The Duke lacrosse program is indicted here,” Farred informed his Williams listeners, “not for what it did, on the night of the 13th of March, 2006, or for what its members did not do that night, but for its past behavior, a blemished past made even uglier."
Therefore, we can conclude that by thanking the protestors and potbangers in the Chronicle ad, Farred is saying castration is appropriate punishment regardless of what happened that night because of previous lacrosse team behavior.
Lovely. That is how aggressive male dogs are handled-just in case.
Brant Jones

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

If I were the Seligmann family, I would make sure that Farred would never have a place to sit in the future. I would sue his ass off!Not only does he slander the lacrosse team, but he is a disgrace to the University. Perhaps Duke doesn't care either way.

Anonymous said...

"Prof." Farred spoke of "'the wanton presence of the other; of the other who is not the other, of the other who is, who strikingly resembles—who is made to resemble—the self. The other who will not remain other. The other who is sometimes as myself, as other.'"

Now, will someone, *anyone*, please tell me just WTF this means? Translation please, in plain, simple (Strunk & White) English so that the rest of us (unlike Farred and his "educated" AAAS-crowd) can understand and benefit from such tenured "brilliance."

Duke and its BOT must be awfully proud of gems like these. Any fundraising for crap like this is unconscionable. Hard to fathom why anyone would donate to Duke.

Anonymous said...

This guy's use of the English language is embarrassing. I'm glad he doesn't write warning lables for dangerous products.

Anonymous said...

8.47: "This guy's use of the English language is embarrassing. I'm glad he doesn't write warning lables (sic.) for dangerous products."

Farred is a dangerous product.

Anonymous said...

Oops. Labels.

Anonymous said...

One beneficial aspect of the Hoax has been the outing of many of the Despicable 88 as intellectual lightweights. Farred's stupidity is so egregious in that he compounds it through personal aggression. Curiously, he and Imasissyposingasathug and others are so very stupid that they haven't figured they might be better off laying low for a couple of years. Consequently, I really hope the civil suits can reach Farred and those of his ilk. sic semper tyrannis

Anonymous said...

I found a mother-lode of otherism, (and big surprise, it's on

"... contemporary notions of
paternity and maternity, especially the othered body, and suggest alternative ways
to conceive of self-other relations and the subjective identity at stake in them in
order to begin to develop a theory of subjectivity as openness to others...I begin to explore the usefulness and limitations of the notion of recognition,and its flip side, abjection, in developing a theory of identity that opens the subject to otherness or difference."

Hopefully, that clears it up. Farred suffers from abjection.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ 7:53 AM: "I am curious about the "other end" of the Williams presentation. Who at Williams issued the invitation, and what was the reaction there to his comments?"

According to an article in the Williams college newspaper, President Schapiro of Williams had not ONE word of criticism for Farred. However, the reporter's story quoted (former Williams professor) KC Johnson saying that Duke students and athletes, like Williams', are "high class". Schapiro found reason to criticize KC for that.

Btw, KC, where is Farred's "the law is madness" quote that the Williams reporter published?

R.R. Hamilton

Anonymous said...

Every elite university has a number of bottom feeders like Farred, I imagine out of some misguided sense of political correctness, but they are supposed to stay hidden under a rock somewhere and only speak to like-minded losers. That way they don't stir up any trouble and the university doesn't look foolish.

Something about the strength of chains and their weakest links...

Anonymous said...

I have come to believe that people like Richard Brodhead worship at the feet of the Grant Fart-Heads of the Duke faculty. While most reasonable people look at this nonsense for what it is -- nonsense -- Brodhead is enraptured by the prose that the brilliance of Fart-Head-isms.

Keep in mind that Brodhead has not made ONE public statement against ANYTHING said or done by the G88 and their supporters. He has gone after a number of other people, but to Brodhead, the G88 is sacrosanct.

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately, Duke is not unique among academic institutions in employing Grant Farred and his ilk. For starters, look at Williams, consistently rated at or near the top of all liberal arts colleges in the nation. In his capacity as a visiting professor, he didn't even have to con his way into a spot on the faculty; they actually invited him to spew his bilge for a year.

I'm unclear on the concept of how bringing in a Grant Farred enhances the reputation of Williams except as it relates to my larger point: colleges and universities, with just a few exceptions, have jumped the shark. The decay has thoroughly overwhelmed the "arts" side of the house and is now slowly creeping into the "science" side.

In 20 years, Pratt undergraduates will not be the only hard science students that will be offered a cornucopia of classes and even majors that are based on the truth of global warming as caused by the American infatuation with the SUV and the use of toilet paper with a dash of the notion of the "other" mixed in for good measure.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Anderson, I've got to disagree with you this time. Brodhead doesn't consider the Group of 88 "sacrosanct."

He wants to keep his job. Brodhead knows that if he goes after illiterate race mongers like Farred, he will lose his job.

And as incomprehensible as it might be, Brodhead is right.

Anonymous said...

Bill (8.58) wrote: "Keep in mind that Brodhead has not made ONE public statement against ANYTHING said or done by the G88 and their supporters. He has gone after a number of other people, but to Brodhead, the G88 is sacrosanct."

Indulging such garbage is evidence that Brodhead is guilty of one of the most sinister, pernicious forms of racism--low expectations. Of course, as Bill notes, Brodhead may actually like this crap.

Anonymous said...

"In 20 years, Pratt undergraduates will not be the only hard science students that will be offered a cornucopia of classes and even majors that are based on the truth of global warming as caused by the American infatuation with the SUV and the use of toilet paper with a dash of the notion of the 'other' mixed in for good measure."

True, but the good news is that the Singularity will have occurred by then, or so says Ray Kurzweil,

Kurzweil says that by 2020, computers will have exceeded human intelligence, and they will take over all the serious work.

We'd better hope he's right.

Anonymous said...

This man is a university professor? His postmodern cant is almost completely free from argument, or hell, syntax.

Maybe in some fields that's regarded as an accomplishment. I'm proud to say I got my degrees in hard science.

KyGeezer said...

Professor Grant "Doofus" Farred is a Marxist...a bullshit artiste.

Recent Publications (More Publications)

3. G. Farred. "Socratic Solitude: The Scouser Two-as-One." Marxism, Cultural Studies and Sport. Ed. Ben Carrington and Ian MacDonald. Routledge, Accepted, 2007.

Marxism, Cultural Studies and SportEditor(s) - Ben Carrington, Ian McDonald
Series Editor(s) - Jennifer Hargreaves
Series: Routledge Critical Studies in Sport

List Price: $120.00
ISBN: 9780415375405
ISBN-10: 0415375401
Publisher: Routledge
Publication Date: 30/07/2007
Pages: 290

Available for Pre-order

Binding(s): Hardback | Paperback

About the Title

The cultural ubiquity, political prominence and economic significance of contemporary sport in global capitalist society present fertile terrain for its critical socio-cultural analysis. Whether it's the corporate and media dominated mega-events like the Olympics, state programmes for nation-building, or the politics of 'race', gender and sexuality, sport is so profoundly marked by relations of power, that it lends itself to critique and deconstruction. Foremost in this scholarship are Marxist and Cultural Studies approaches.

Marxism, Cultural Studies and Sport aims to contribute to the critical analysis of sport in society by joining together Marxist and Cultural Studies approaches in one volume, so as to reveal the underlying structures of power present in contemporary sporting cultures.

With contributions from:

David L. Andrews, Alan Bairner, Rob Beamish, Anouk Bélanger, CL Cole, Ross Dawson, Grant Farred, Jayne O. Ifekwunigwe, Toby Miller, Garry Whannel, Brett St. Louis.

Anonymous said...

anony at 9.06 asks: "This man [Farred] is a university professor?"

The flaw in your question is that it implicitly assumes Duke is a "university." Such an assumption no longer holds. Duke, as someone previously noted, has already "jumped the shark." It is no longer a university and, instead, serves merely as an employer of last resort for clowns like Farred.

Anonymous said...

Did anyone answer 8:44? I didn't understand "the other who is not the other" either.

Was he just checking if anyone was listeneing?


Anonymous said...

If you lack entertainment for the day, visit the web page below (Farred's Department faculty listed by specialty). Farred appears under Critical Theory. What a hoot. The names link to brief bios. Note, while visiting, that meaningless labels and specialties have become an art form in this little literary corner of academia. Note also the absence of anything faintly resembling literature in this "Literature" Program.

Anonymous said...

Isn't a tenured professor at a prestigious university also a form of "white privilege?"

M. Simon said...

Farred is a Trot.

The symptoms are easily recognizable.

Turgid prose, no discernable meaning. Solidarity forever.

Unknown said...

I am astounded that Farred comments so authoritatively on southern white racists. His experience growing up in South Africa (yes, he's not even an American by birth, only coming here for grad school, and unfortunately staying) I'm sure gave him great insight into the minds of the white rural community in good ole Dixie.

Anonymous said...

It's unbelievable......I read the posts from Duke parents and alums and feel for them. I cannot imagine how it feels for the once proud students, parents, and alumni to have the Duke name besmirched by this type of ridiculousness.

How many more ways can Duke professors embarass themselves and the school?

It must be such a sinking feeling to see a University you love (and once held in such high regard) be made to look so foolish. I cannot imagine how I would feel if Professors from my alma mater acted this way.

I have to think I would feel compelled to seek Farred out and try to reason with him, which would probably only aggravate me even more.

Duke students, parents, and alumni...I feel for you. I can't imagine how much crap like this must tear you up.

Anonymous said...

I gather from context that I'm supposed to be upset over Farred's remarks... but... to be honest, I have absolutely no idea what the hell he said.

M. Simon said...

They came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.

Actually in this case the Communists have come for us.

Michael said...

Thanks for putting the clips in red. I originally wanted to hear the whole thing but after hearing the clips, determined that reading the transcript would be a lot less painful.

He seems to talk in a droning voice and then pauses and then goes on; kind of like reading bad poetry. Is this a particular style of speaking that I haven't heard before?

I'd need a Large Regular from Dunkin Donuts to stay awake in his class.

M. Simon said...


My conclusion from studing the pot question is that chronic smokers are self medicating - PTSD would be the most common complaint.

Is Addiction Real?

this about fear memories is also good:

Fear memories, the amygdala, and the CB1 receptor

and this one:
PTSD and the Endocannabinoid System

The paranoia bit just proves that each person's reaction to a medicine is individual.

One of my favorites is this study of female heroin addicts:


More germaine is why every one who tries drugs does not get addicted:

Addiction Is A Genetic Disease

In any case I'm not sure the study mentioned is useful unless they controlled for set and setting. A big time variable in these kinds of experiments.

Chicago said...

How in the world can Brodhead sit back and keep this racist on the payroll? What a sickening disgrace he is.

Even more tragic is the fact that people went to listen to this racist rubbish under the umbrella of education.

Anonymous said...

Farred:“the wanton presence of the other; of the other who is not the other, of the other who is, who strikingly resembles—who is made to resemble—the self. The other who will not remain other. The other who is sometimes as myself, as other.”

Impressive: A slanderer and a libelist with an excellent defense. He can always just say in court that he has a psychotic thought disorder and cannot be held accountable for his bizarre statemants.

My vision of hell is having to be a student in his class for all eternity.

M. Simon said...


Didn't you leave out a word?

Now you know what they are talking about whan they say X muthas.

i could go on but as you can tell my heart is not in it.

M. Simon said...

We are all individuals.

As individuals our life experiences are determined by race, sex,and income level.

So take that you whiteys. Original sin done gotcha. You can't escape.

Anonymous said...

In order to provide corrective action for problems that exist within the university setting, you must first recognize that you have a problem, define the problem, define the negative impact(s) and consequences of the problem, and devise ways to avoid or mitigate the problem. These are actually the fundamentals of risk management.

Duke needs to employ these basic management tools to mitigate the problems/risks that they currently face and plan how to avoid risks that are staring them in the face.

Unfortunately, the reality of the situation is that Duke leadership so weak that they are not able to move due to the many individuals in place at Duke who see it as their job to say "no" to any and everything as a way to exert their power.

Having done business with Duke in the private sector I can state with authority and from my personal experience that this management style exists at Duke in a big way. I can also state from experience that Duke eventually gets around to cleaning house of the worst of the rotton apples, but it seems to take a long time for them to move. And sometimes their top talent gets swept up in the purge.

Duke - you do not have the luxury of time this go around. Clearly define the problem and clearly define the required corrective action.

And for the love of Duke and for the sake of your careers - execute the required corrective action before Duke is further damaged.

Anonymous said...

The modern notion of the "other" is tricky. Hegel(quoted in the wiki article by 8:31) created a philosophical system that reconciled all opposites, completing Descartes assertion that all of reality is rational. He uses the logic of identity (A=A) and the logic of non-identity(A does not=A) to create a super concept called the Absolute or the Same. When we reach this point all opposites are indentified: faith=knowledge; man =woman; master=slave etc. This is where all ehtical obligations are fulfilled and man enjoys perfect reciprocity, i.e. he receives as he gives.(Marx developed his thought in contrast to Hegel).
Philosophers who followed Hegel reject this system because of the violence it does to the "other". They look around and claim it is nonsense to think that man lives in a state of perfect reciprocity and all ethical obligations have been fulfilled. We can never complete our duty to the "other".
The problem I have with the G88 is they seem to transform this latter sentiment of "I must always seek to fulfill my duty to the other" into a shrill accusation:"You are not fulfilling your duty to me". As such, it is, imo, a cynical attempt to achieve "mastery" status in a new order.
I realize this sounds like bullshit but there is quite a bit to it. Philosophy, like most subjects, has prerequisites. Most people who invoke "the other" in public discourse do so in an Hegelian sense: it becomes a club to beat up people rather than a call to look outside one's self.
It is hard for me to understand at this point why so many people deny the lacrosse team the "otherness" they deserve.

Brant Jones

M. Simon said...

When English was clearer we used to call "the other" "the stranger".

"People are strange when you're a stranger". - Jim Morrison

Anonymous said...

"But then nobody's yet forced to take Farred's classes, are they -- and surely Duke students can switch out of a class if they wander into the wrong one? I don't know that anybody who'd sit through one Farred lecture and come back for the next one really has any reason to complain."

Well, of course not... unless this dimbulb is teaching a course you are required by your major to take to graduate, and is the only professor who ever teaches the course, or the only one who's teaching it at the time your schedule will allow, and it won't be offered again for another two semesters... At that point, yes you do have to enroll, you can't drop out, and you can't risk your graduation by being flunked for not toeing the line. So, Mr. Hobson, what will you do then?

Anonymous said...

May 11, 2007 9:06:00 AM mentions Toby Miller as a contributor.
I'm sure one of the reasons Farred likes Miller so much is the joy he found in reading Miller's ground-breaking essay entiltled, “A Short History of the Penis”

M. Simon said...


Yep sport is all about race and power.

White men do the heavy lifting and the black folk are sprinting away.

However, there is a reason whites excel at weight lifting and blacks in foot races.



Sport is about performance. You can't fake it.

Anonymous said...

The truly sick and depraved thing, is that Farred and others like him WANT this woman to have been raped, tortured, brutalized, beaten and almost killed by the bad white boys. It KILLS him that nothing happened to her, beyond the tortured imaginings and lies of her sick brain. Farred and his colleagues NEED for her to have been brutalized beyond belief.

Sick, sick, sick. But of course, it's only the white people who harbor ill feelings toward Crystal -- right?

Anonymous said...

Let's call Farred's stance on the issue what it is....racism. Does anyone actually believe that he would have acted in the same manner were the accuser white and the falsely accused black?

And as for Farred's comments on the alleged rape of a white Duke students by a black man at a Duke frat party where illegal drugs were found and alcohol was prevalent.....silence.

Readers of this blog are not the only ones to have taken notice of Farred's racist statements in this case:

The true scandal at Duke
Article Launched: 05/07/2007 02:58:41 AM EDT

Monday, May 07
To the Editor of THE EAGLE:
On April 30, Williams College hosted a talk by Duke professor (and current visiting professor at Williams) Grant Farred called, "Public Secrets, Public Scandals: The Event of Duke Lacrosse." While I could not attend the event, I am familiar with Professor Farred's public comments on the Duke lacrosse case, which provide some context for his lecture.

Professor Farred is one of 88 Duke professors who endorsed a full page ad last spring in the Duke Student Newspaper called, "What does a Social Disaster Sound Like?" which has been interpreted by many as presuming the guilt of the lacrosse players. It was published in the midst of the hysteria surrounding the rape accusation, and, rather than appealing for calm, the professors offered this message: "To the students speaking individually and to the protesters making collective noise, thank you for not waiting and for making yourselves heard."

That statement was an obvious reference, at least in part, to the most notorious protest surrounding the lacrosse incident, at which students and community members stood outside the house where the lacrosse party took place, banging pots and pans and holding signs that said, "castrate" and "time to confess." Other protesters put up "wanted" posters with the pictures of the lacrosse team members. These are the people whom professor Farred and his colleagues thanked.

Farred also wrote an op-ed in the Durham Herald-Sun ("Secret Racism" Oct. 29, 2006) in which he criticized certain Duke students' "naked self-interest." What selfish act had these students committed to earn Professor Farred's contempt? They registered to vote. They registered to vote in Durham in an effort to oust a district attorney whose well documented prosecutorial abuses in connection with the Duke case are staggering both in number and severity. Even more disturbingly, Farred explained, "What Duke students becoming Durham citizens does is displace the problem of racism from the lacrosse team and the university to Durham's political system." Looking past the academic jargon, this statement can only be interpreted as a baseless accusation of racism against Duke students who registered to vote.

The accuser, who perpetrated this hoax, has now been thoroughly discredited in the attorney general's report on the case. Soon-to-be-former District Attorney Nifong is rightly facing ethics charges, and his political career is all but over. Even some members of the media have been taken to task for their biased and often factually inaccurate reporting on the case. Yet Farred and his Duke colleagues, curiously, still hold their heads high.

Farred refuses to apologize for signing on to a statement that, at best, added to the lynch-mob hysteria in Durham and, at worst, condemned the innocent lacrosse players as rapists. Nor does Farred show contrition for slandering his own students as racists for exercising their right to vote.

Farred is right about one thing, though. There is a "public scandal" at Duke, but it has nothing to do with the lacrosse team.


Durham, N. C., May 1, 2007

The writer is a resident of Dalton currently attending Duke University School of Law.

Good to see a Duke law student calling Farred out on his racism.

M. Simon said...

Mike Lee,

Winning that election was the worst career move Jailfong ever made in his life.

Had he lost all this would have blown over and he might ahave escaped with a reprimand.

Anonymous said...

M. Simon,

Thanks for the links.
The amygdala and PTSD
are interesting issues
with regard to cannaboid
receptors, but the researchers
found that the "paranoia-
inhibitors" in the inferior
frontal cortex were shut
down by THC.

They discontinued the study
when it became apparent that
the schizophrenic subjects
were being affected so profoundly
that continuation of the study
on other schizophrenic patients
would have been "unethical."
A quote:

"Experts theorized that
schizophrenics may mistakenly
judge the drug's pleasurable
effects to outweigh any negatives."

I didn't write about Farred and
his issues to bring up the medical
use of marijuana, but one of
your links did help explain
the issue of certain populations'
deficiency of cannaboid receptors,
thus explaining why some people
seek to self-medicate (i.e. using
extrinsic substances) because
of a deficiency in intrinsic
endorphins, enkephalins etc.
(things that constitute "reward

Farred is someone
who APPEARS to demonstrate
paranoid delusion (and from
the description of the lack of
affect, the flat, toneless voice
of Farred, which is yet another
criteria for certain mental
disorders, not limited to

It's not clear whether Farred
has had help in obtaining
his delusion, or whether they
are innate.

Judging from Duke University's
failure to institute any kind
of risk management (as another
poster alluded to) it is therefore
not surprising that Virginia Tech
failed to come to grips with the
murderous rage of Cho: the
violence implied in Cho's writing
is just a stripped-down and
ineloquent attempt at playwriting,
wheras Farred's work appears to be
an ineloquent-work-on-steroids.


Anonymous said...


Is the link a satire?
It has to be!
Just like National Lampoon's
"Penis Pity" (which was similarly

Back in the bad ol' days...


Anonymous said...

People are confused by the PC world of racial, gender, and power politics. Because the ideals and ideas of this world are unreasonable, the words used to describe it are also unreasonable. Therefore, reasonable (read sane or not corrupt) people find the world unintelligible. Some speak out, "This guy doesn't make sense." Others cower and pretend they see the sense in these kinds of ramblings because they don't want to be "found out". To be found out would be to be labled a racist or ignorant or pedestrian. Hence, you have the Duke administration and the BOT complicit in promulgating and hiring professors who obviously are either 1. Nuts, 2. Dropped too much acid in the 60s, 3. Smarter than everyone else because they have fooled those handing out tenure. Political correctness (or insanity at this level)is just a method to cower the masses and make it impossible to speak to truth.

Anonymous said...

Your post proves that things make strange sense when you're stoned. I kept expecting the next line to be, "These doritos are smiling at me, man."

BTW, what is "arrogant sexual prowess" and where can I go to get some?

Anonymous said...

This guy is an idiot. i cannot believe he works for a university.

Anonymous said...

11:10 writes, "This guy is an idiot. i cannot believe he works for a university."

I can, and if you knew anything about Duke you would as well.

Anonymous said...

I've come up with one word to describe Farred's style of communication: feral.

Anonymous said...

In 2003, Grant Aubrey Farred was stopped for having expired tags on his car.

This unthinkable act of sedition smacks against the very values of the State and is tangible evidence of Grant Farred's careless disregard for his fellow motorists.

The Other was driving the car was the Same as the One, but not the Other, whose expired registration puts all Others in danger because of the One who is the Same.

Anonymous said...

what the f is this idiot talking about...jibberish

Anonymous said...

My God! You are talking about the mind set of people like the Kemer Rouge or the French Revolution. These people are crazy, and they are teaching. At some point people don't have to put up with this crap. It has happened before. Yes, eye glasses make you a member of the middle class for which the only cure was to be killed as in Cambodia or was it "white privilege?" All over North Carolina are whites who have never gone to college let alone gone to Duke. What a group of self serving asses these revolutionary intellectual wanta be's are.

Anonymous said...

I know email addresses of the G88 have been posted here in the past...can anyone repost or provide a link?

Michael said...

Regarding the comments on his flat tone of voice: I had five years of training in public speaking and I would think that anyone that speaks as much as a professor does would have some speech training.

This guy seems old enough so that he could correct his classroom performance if he placed a high enough priority on it.

Anonymous said...

speech training?? I wonder if He's housebroken.

Anonymous said...

In re: 11:38 AM --

If not, should he be considered a farm animal?

Anonymous said...

With apologies to KC and
Bill Anderson: College
and University education
are about Business these
days. Not the rise of
nobility, the enabling of
the noble man etc, but
a ticket that must be punched
in order to gain access to
most of the best jobs.

Ask any Accountant: were the
courses you studied what you
currently practice in your

The notion that you have proven
your ability to BE-AND-BECOME
EDUCATED is the reality.

Not that it's a bad thing;
I actually think it's a good
thing: it becomes a bad
thing when the production-line
breaks down, and when the
result is an inferior product.

Apparently, some aspects of
Duke's production line are
throughly broken, and are in
need of replacement. Certain
of the product-lines, too,
are defective.


Anonymous said...

Most of us likely knew some Farreds in college. Some overdosed on Ayn Rand, some on Karl Marx and/or Michael Harrington, and others on some other extremist or possibly just on LSD. Some joined the Weathermen and killed a few folks, others just provided free sex to some Black Panthers. Most of the nuts grew out of their extended adolescence when they eventually got a real job and took on some real responsibilities. Others, such as Farred himself, kept looking for a free ride and found it in academia, where they could live forever as "sophmores." In Farred's case, the evidence suggests that some affirmative action was also part of the mix.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
wayne fontes said...

Anonymous said...

I've come up with one word to describe Farred's style of communication: feral.

May 11, 2007 11:13:00 AM

Try fecal

Anonymous said...


"Khmer Rouge?" Yes.
French Revolution? Yes -
(though he's not as good
as Robespierre, nor Danton:
more like Marat, after the
onset of his disease.)

My analogy?
Louis Farakhan.
Two pees in the piss-pot.


Anonymous said...

I think I had better post this anonymously.

"But then nobody's yet forced to take Farred's classes, are they -- and surely Duke students can switch out of a class if they wander into the wrong one? I don't know that anybody who'd sit through one Farred lecture and come back for the next one really has any reason to complain."

I have personal knowledge of a 'program' in a university in which classes extremely similar to Farred's are part of the 'requirements' to graduate. One or two profs teach a course that is taken by most social science majors (and some hard science types). It is well-known what the grading scale is: Be a member of a Victim CLass, show up for class every session grade = A/A-; Be a member of a Victim Class, mostly show up grade = B+/B; be a member of a Victim Class, rarely or never show up grade = C+/C.

Not a Member of a Victim Class; show up for every single session and take copious notes grade = B/B- or less; Not a member of a Victim Class, show up most of the time work hard, turn in work on time, etc, grade = C+C; not a member of a Victim Class, show up less than half the time grade = failure.

Pretty simple when you get the hang of it. Oh. They also have some weird writing requirements that I'm not about to go into, but the only affect it has on your grade is to lower it if you're not a member of a Victim Class and you less than whole-heartedly admit your Guilt and agree with the prof. If you're a member of a Victim Class and don't even hand in the writing it is evidently assumed that The Man kept you from doing it and you get the regular grade based on the previous scale.

This is only, unfortunately, a slight exaggeration.

Anonymous said...


That's offal; just offal!


Anonymous said...


Hi, Bill!


Anonymous said...

To come across anyone, much less a college professor, so unmoored from reality is frightening. I would respect someone who got an F in one of Farred's classes more than I would respect someone who got an A.

Anonymous said...


Isn't the better question: Why not sue Duke for fraud? Farred et al are not educators. They are preachers


Anonymous said...

"Racial profiling" has been one of the most popular buzzwords and causes in the liberal Zeitgeist for the last several years now.

Profiling an ethnic minority, especially a black, is one of the most heinous crimes a white person can commit.

But when an academic like Farred racially profiles Colin, Reade, and David - maintaining that they are not innocent because of their membership in a group of southern white lacrosse playing racists - its passed off as scholarship.

Chicago said...

The "Other" thing reminds me of the famous "Who's on first" riddle.

cathyf said...

I haven't read all the comments yet, but has anyone else noticed the eerie similarity between Farred's prose and the paranoid ravings of the VA Tech shooter?

Anonymous said...

dpd report released

Anonymous said...

never mind wrong report

my mistake

Anonymous said...


See: 1:01 am, 12:38 am,
5:24 am; 5:52 am; 7:24 am;
10:35 am.

Note: while this conjecture
is plausible, a diagnosis
by a qualified Mental Health
Professional would be in

On the other hand,
those folks didn't do Cho -
(or his victims) - a whole
lot of good, did they?

Glad that someone sees the


Anonymous said...

God, this is TOOOOO funny! I want to go to a coffee shop and hear this guy speak. God, I am rolling on the floor. He talks like David Hasselhoff eating a hamburger while hammered out of his mind. God, stop it! hahahahahaha. I am crying this crap is soooo funny. He makes DAN QUAYLE sound like a rocket scientist.

Anonymous said...

Not to insert logic, but the non-rapists were not southerners. It's part of the Yankee myth that there were (are) only bigots in the South. I know that the academics and the "intellectuals" got to define history because they won the war but the mindset of the stupid racist southerner recorded by Hollywood is deeply entrenched into the american mindset. My New York mother in law thinks everyone at Duke are grit eating coon huntin' drawling inbreds. I keep telling her that most of them are from some exit in New Jersey.

Anonymous said...

liestoppers say the DPD report will be released at 4pm today

Anonymous said...


"grit eating coon huntin'
drawling inbreds..."

Hmmm. Some of us who grew
up in the South, but moved
here as children, shared that
same view...until we grew up.
Now we don't like it so much.

The term "carpetbagger" still
pinches, though it doesn't mean
everyone who comes South from
the North. Same with "racist,"
which means, to some AAs,
white people only: it is the
"N" word, applied to whites,
like "cracker." I don't like
the term "redneck," either.

All the terms - and others -
insinuate that the user knows
something about the person
or persons they're describing.
However, I don't think Rod
Allison was being serious:
he was characterizing Farred's
probable view.

Farred's view.
Which should, in likelihood, be
a view of a small room with soft


Greg Allan said...

anonymous @ 8:44:00 AM asked...
Now, will someone, *anyone*, please tell me just WTF this means? Translation please, in plain, simple (Strunk & White) English so that the rest of us (unlike Farred and his "educated" AAAS-crowd) can understand and benefit from such tenured "brilliance."

My initial interpretation is he refers to conscience. I'm not surprised at his ongoing confusion while he desperately seeks one for himself.

Anonymous said...

"At the heart of the lacrosse team’s behavior is the racist history of the South.”

Heh. Down here we call Duke "The University of New Jersey". Where were those players from?

Anonymous said...

You don't understand. If you are white, you are naturally the "racist history of the South" applies to you. It doesn't matter where you come from, what you believe, how you act. If you are white, and not part of the PC police, you are by definition "racist"

Bill Alexander

Anonymous said...

That Farred is actually a professor at Duke is just beyond embarrassing for Duke. His "prose" sounds like it was written while on some sort of hallucinogenic. His attacks on three innocent young men and their teammates are clearly more calculated but no better.

This just continues to cast Duke in a very bad light. My boyfriend has taken his Duke diploma off the wall and buried it at the bottom of his closet. He has no desire to see it anymore.

Anonymous said...

My God, the man is a raving lunatic. He better take the self of himself that is the other self and all his "others" right to the pysch hospital. Crazzzzzy.

Gayle Miller said...

A torrent of verbiage with not one whit of sense in sight!

Anonymous said...

After followin the Duke story for months, I have a few questions for readers of this blog: Are the liberal arts components of American higher education beyond redemption? The Duke faculty reaction to the “rape” case was beyond caricature. Anecdotes about radical faculty misconduct abound. Surveys point to overwhelming political imbalance among university faculties. If all is true, how can our children possibly benefit from exposure to such an environment?

Anonymous said...

What parents would send their kids to duke?

wayne fontes said...

To Anon 3:08

If your looking for hope actuarial tables could provide some solace. However my impression is that these replicants are reproducing at above a replacement level.

Anonymous said...

This may explain why the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Anonymous said...

In response to Brant Jones (8:15):

I think I enjoyed philosophy more when explained & performed by Monty Python. Remember the Greeks vs Germans soccer match? Maybe the G88 needs to take up lacrosse and we'll have a grudge match.

Anonymous said...

I don't think it's just Duke. Farred had a PH.D. from Princeton. Brodhead came out of Yale (and Andover--talk about "privilege" and guilt). We know about Ward Churchhill. Chapel Hill is infamously liberal. I'm sure the list goes on and on. "Liberal Arts" is a literal translation apparently through most of the upper tier educational system. This could have happened at any school with a Brodhead type president and a Steel-like BOT. Duke just happened to be in Nifong's orbit.

Anonymous said...

Farred has clearly moved to the Land Beyond where a belief can become fact without proof or even evidence.

Don't be concerned with him. He is helping those he believes to be his enemies.

Cindy Sheehan is somewhat his spiritual sibling. By blaming each and every problem on Earth on Bush she gradually lost all effect.

At least her behavior started with an actual loss - her son.

The real problem with the crazies in the liberal arts and education schools - and like it or not that is where they congregate - is that they control the content of the core courses every student must take to graduate.

Many majors headed for other fields, such as engineering, business, medicine, etc. regard the core courses as unavoidable horrors taught by snots who are full of crap.

But those snots who are full of crap control your GPA just as much as the statistics class where you actually learn.

Anonymous said...

In 20 years, Pratt undergraduates will not be the only hard science students that will be offered a cornucopia of classes and even majors that are based on the truth of global warming as caused by the American infatuation with the SUV and the use of toilet paper with a dash of the notion of the "other" mixed in for good measure.

Too late.

Deans discuss social impacts of engineering
Andrew Beach
Posted: 2/16/07
University deans hosted a discussion in the Duke Chapel Thursday, which centered on a pending global energy
crisis and the need for socially conscious engineering.
The panel, the third in a series entitled "Is it possible to do any good?" featured Kristina Johnson, dean of the
Pratt School of Engineering, and Sam Wells, dean of the Chapel.
The two discussed the role engineering should play in society and the ways in which the discipline can
contribute to the solution of global problems.
"It seems to me that what engineers do is solve problems that are important to society," Johnson said.
Wells questioned, however, the efforts of universities in cultivating this sort of social involvement among
"In what ways are engineering schools part of the solution?" Wells asked.
Johnson said that in recent years, Pratt has come to emphasize interdisciplinary study in order to graduate
engineers who are aware of the issues in the world around them.
"Today, it's not enough to be an engineer, and it's not enough to be public policy," she said. "It takes much more
to be part of the solution."
She added that Pratt students stand out from their peers at more technical institutions largely because so many
of them study abroad and double major.
"Duke is one of a handful of institutions that encourage students to learn more outside of their major," Johnson
One of the primary issues facing engineers today is the unfair distribution of energy around the world, she said,
adding that concerns with global warming and diminishing energy supply only heighten this debate.
Many people say that engineers need to develop ways of creating more power to better supply the world, she
"As you look at the globe at night, Africa is dark," she said. "Where is the fairness in that?"
The real issue, however, is not how much power there is but how certain regions of the globe are using it, she
said, adding that Americans and Europeans, for example, have little restriction on how much energy they use
"Why do I have six lights on in my office? Because I can," she said. "There's no penalty for that."
Though engineers can find ways to increase global energy supply, Johnson said they cannot ignore the problems
with the lifestyle of western society.
"The problem here is that if we talk about engineering social good, we are going to have to learn to live on less
power," Johnson said.
More-developed countries have largely chosen to ignore the lack of power provided to the marginalized people
of the world, Wells said.
Focusing solely on harnessing more energy only ignores this disparity, he added.
"Can the idealistic undergraduate engineer go into the business world thinking that they can do more than just
push the problem from one side of the table to the other?" Wells asked.
Engineers must deal with the paradox that their efforts often benefit the capitalist, developed countries at the
expense of the less-developed world and a widespread "social good," he said.
"Is it possible to do any good?" he asked.
These sorts of questions often go overlooked in engineering curricula as well as in practice, Johnson said.
"One of the things that surprised a lot of scientists was the backlash toward stem-cell research-I don't think they
expected that," she said.
She added that it is important for engineers to think about the impact their developments might have on society
and the environment.
Gaston Warner, director of university and community relations, noted the importance of bringing these critical
issues to the surface in a university setting.
"We have this academic standing, so we have the opportunity to help make the world a better place," Warner
Wells and Johnson said they agreed that fostering this sort of debate at the university level will help students to
engineer a better future.
"We can't make a better world without making better people," Wells said.

Anonymous said...

Locomotive Breath,

"Captain, the infection is
complete. Commence quarantine."


anonymous said...

rumor has it that Prof Farred is moving to Cornell?

Anonymous said...

What a wonderous surprise: this member of academia's penchant for blaming everyone else for your problems and making conclusions of law based solely upon skin color has gotten him an all expense paid trip to the upper echelons of leftist academia. Will wonders never cease? How can our economy move forward without this person's contributions in the marketplace? I suppose the real world's loss is a campus' gain.

Anonymous said...

There's a nice place up
there in Ithica called
"the Res," where people
swim - (or used to) - sans
swimwear, and sunbathed
in similar fashion on
the rocks.
Farred would fit in - sans mind.

Don't let the screen door hit
you on your way out, Professor.
And by the way, do yourself
a favor: get an MMPI or
some other wack-o-meter test.


Anonymous said...

Farred left the faculty of Williams in the late 90's to take a position at Duke. KC, according to this article, is also a previous Williams faculty member.

Anonymous said...


How dare you use energy to post that. Someone in Africa wants to post and it's dark there. We should let the islamo-facisits and the marxists take us back to the middle ages so we can use less energy.

Anonymous said...

The loony left has completed its long march through the public institutions. Let this be the high-water mark of the "progressive" rabble. Let us devote ourselves to the abolition of tenure and the de-Stalinization of our universities. This half-educated filth has got to be rooted out of the institutions where society is formed and governed, and put back to useful work in the mines and ditches and fields of our nation.

M. Simon said...

Locomotive Breath,

"We can't make a better world without making better people," Wells said.

They are still pining for the New Socialist Man.

BTW engineers get paid to solve the problems their employers want solved.

Choose who you work for wisely.

Simon - aerospace engineer, which is pretty darn close to rocket scientist. LOL

Unknown said...

@ 11:54 am

Oh my yes, I do remember.

When I was a grad student at Wharton, I used to study in a wonderful little room off the library that held original annual reports going back for decades. It was for economic historians obviously, but it had such comfortable leather seats, big tables, wonderful quiet, etc. So I spent part of every day there, reading or writing. There was a handful of regulars, including a guy with wild frizzy hair.

One day, Frizzy asked me whether I could read German. Back then I still could, so I answered affirmatively. He then asked me to translate a paragraph of dense German prose, which for those of you who have not studied German means the densest prose imaginable. So I did. He thanked me, and I asked him what it was. He was reading Marx in the original German. I seem to remember it was Theorien Uber die (?) Mehrwert, but who knows forty years later.

The theory of surplus value was not a topic required for most Wharton students so I asked him to step out into the hall for a chat. He turned out to be the "ideologue" of the campus branch of the Weathermen. I became even more curious. So why was he hanging out in the Wharton library of all places? Stupid me, it was so simple, obvious really. He wanted to "observe the blond, blued-eyed beasts of American fascism in their lair."

Hey you absolutely CANNOT make this stuff up.


GaryB said...

Ironically for the G88, Karl Marx got this whole case right:

"History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce."

Anonymous said...

Anon 3:08 asks:

Are the liberal arts components of American higher education beyond redemption? The Duke faculty reaction to the “rape” case was beyond caricature. Anecdotes about radical faculty misconduct abound. Surveys point to overwhelming political imbalance among university faculties. If all is true, how can our children possibly benefit from exposure to such an environment?

Not just the liberal arts components. Many if not most of the "soft" sciences are this way as well. IMO the listening statement of the Duke 88 could have come from sociology, history or anthropology departments just as easily as Angry Studies (I *want* to say psychology might be a little more resistant, but I have this terrible fear that if I did, I would be fooling myself).

I am extremely pessimistic about the possibility for change in these fields of higher ed, largely because it's self-reinforcing. Faculty like to hire people who think like them (I always get a kick out of statements along the lines of "as college professors we should be committed to constantly challenging our thinking" because it is so untrue). It makes me very depressed about the state of higher education. As to your question about your children can benefit from exposure to such an environment: Well, IMO they really can't. *sigh* They can learn a bunch of vague amorphous "west-is-evil" crap long enough to regurgitate it for the exam and then promptly forget it.

It makes me very sad. I would love to see academia rid itself of this poison, I would love for the left to recover from the sickness it has fallen under (I see troublesome tendencies on the right as well, but IMO nothing like the full-blown disease that is rotting the left from the inside--of course, that may also be because as a student, I'm surrounded by the left part of the spectrum on a daily basis). I just don't know if it's going to happen in my lifetime.

Anonymous said...

Well, that's certainly enlightening.

I got my Ph.D. from NC State (a few minutes down the road from Duke), and man howdy, am I glad I studied engineering instead of humanities. At least there, when I didn't understand a professor, it was because I missed some of the math, not becuase the professor was a blazing nutjob.

$2000 a semseter at State vs. $20,000 at Duke. Pretty glad with my decision.