A professor fired to have showed images of Mohammed to a warned public....

[Rex Francorum]

https://hamlineoracle.com/10750/news/who-belongs/

Hamline University in Minnesota

Student and community's response to classroom incident

Hamline undergraduate students received an email from the Dean of Students on Nov. 7, condemning an unnamed classroom incident as "undeniably inconsiderate, disrespectful and Islamophobic." In the month since, the email and the event it references have reignited discussions about the persistence of such incidents at Hamline.

The email, signed by Dr. David Everett, Associate Vice President of Inclusive Excellence at Hamline, did not identify the nature or date of the incident.

The Oracle has since learned that the event in question occurred on Oct. 6, when a professor shared two depictions of the Prophet Muhammad in class, while discussing Islamic art. One was a 14th century depiction of the Prophet and the other was a 16th century depiction of the Prophet with veil and halo.

Within Islam, there are varying beliefs regarding whether the representation of the Prophet Muhammad is acceptable. The majority of those practicing Islam today believe it is forbidden to see and create representations of Prophet Muhammad.

Aram Wedatalla, a Hamline senior and the president of Muslim Student Association (MSA), was in the class at the time the photos were shared.

"I'm like, 'this can't be real,'" Wedatalla told the Oracle. "As a Muslim, and a Black person, I don't feel like I belong, and I don't think I'll ever belong in a community where they don't value me as a member, and they don't show the same respect that I show them."

Deangela Huddleston, a Hamline senior and MSA member, also shared her thoughts with the Oracle.

"Hamline teaches us it doesn't matter the intent, the impact is what matters," Huddleston said.

After class, Wedatalla spoke to the professor but did not feel that the conversation was productive.

Wedatalla emailed MSA's leadership team and members of the Hamline administration on Oct. 7, the day after the incident. On this same day, she met with President Fayneese Miller. Dean of Students Patti Kersten also called Wedatalla and apologized for her experience.

 
The event and initial response

The professor of the class emailed Wedatalla that Saturday, Oct. 8.

"I would like to apologize that the image I showed in class on [Oct. 6] made you uncomfortable and caused you emotional agitation. It is never my intention to upset or disrespect students in my classroom," the professor wrote in the email to Wedatalla, who shared it with the Oracle.

The professor shared the depictions over a Powerpoint through a Google Meet online class. The Oracle has acquired this recording through a student in the course who wishes to stay anonymous.

In the video of the class, the professor gives a content warning and describes the nature of the depictions to be shown and reflects on their controversial nature for more than two minutes before advancing to the slides in question.

The Oracle was able to identify these two images using video of the lecture. The first was a 14th century depiction of the Prophet receiving his first revelation from the archangel Gabriel, created by Rashīd al-Dīn, a Persian Muslim scholar and historian.

The other depicts the Prophet with a veil and halo. It was created by Mustafa ibn Vali in the 16th century as part of an illustration of the Siyer-i Nebi (the Life of the Prophet), an earlier, Ottomon Turkish epic work on the life of Muhammad.

"I am showing you this image for a reason. And that is that there is this common thinking that Islam completely forbids, outright, any figurative depictions or any depictions of holy personages. While many Islamic cultures do strongly frown on this practice, I would like to remind you there is no one, monothetic Islamic culture," the professor said before changing to the slide that included these depictions.

In the Oct. 8 email to Wedatalla, the professor stated that they "[let] the class know ahead of time" what would be shown and to give students time to turn off their video.

"I did not try to surprise students with this image, and I did my best to provide students with an 'out,'" the professor wrote in the email.

"I also described every subsequent slide I showed with language to indicate when I was no longer showing an image of the Prophet Muhammad. I am sorry that despite my attempt to prevent a negative reaction, you still viewed and were troubled by this image."

[garbon]

And?

[Sheilbh]

I thought the NYT piece was very good on this:
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/08/us/hamline-university-islam-prophet-muhammad.html

I found this question from a professor the really interesting angle: "How does something that comes from the very middle of the tradition end up being received later on as something marginal or forbidden?"

Representations of Mohammed are common in the Shia world, but also existed more broadly in the Persian, Mughal and Turkish traditions - created by devout artists for devout rulers for devout purposes in Muslim societies. It seems to be dangerously straying towards a blasphemy rule if somehow Shia Islam and many historical forms of Islam are interpreted as Islamophobic.

There may be devout Sunni Muslims who have a very strong view on any image, so I think the warnings and prefacing of showing the image is a good approach. But in an art history class about representations of the divine in different cultures I'm not sure it's great to exclude very important Islamic cultures because of some contemporary Islamic cultures. Although I have other quibbles with that sort of class and the way it's framed.

[Josquius]

Seems pretty dumb to have a class on Islamic art where you can't show such a major part of Islamic art.

[Tamas]

And?

Does that mean you agree this is something the prof really had to apologise for?

Aram Wedatalla, a Hamline senior and the president of Muslim Student Association (MSA), was in the class at the time the photos were shared.

"I'm like, 'this can't be real,'" Wedatalla told the Oracle. "As a Muslim, and a Black person, I don't feel like I belong, and I don't think I'll ever belong in a community where they don't value me as a member, and they don't show the same respect that I show them."

That's the guy who should apologise for trying to enforce his personal religious views on the whole community.

[Sheilbh]

Seems pretty dumb to have a class on Islamic art where you can't show such a major part of Islamic art.

This is where I'm a little less sure around this class. Apparently it was in "global art history" with abundant warnings that it would include images from Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam etc.

I think there's a role for global surveys and I get the desire to show and talk about a more diverse picture of art history than just the Western tradition. But with that, I think there is a risk of effectively quite shallow tokenism if that person isn't able to talk about Buddhist or Hindu or Muslim art.

I'm sure the professor said more but I'm not sure this line in the article, I think from the lecture, does anything. I don't think it points to any views or deeper research or adds much of anything:

"I am showing you this image for a reason. And that is that there is this common thinking that Islam completely forbids, outright, any figurative depictions or any depictions of holy personages. While many Islamic cultures do strongly frown on this practice, I would like to remind you there is no one, monothetic Islamic culture," the professor said before changing to the slide that included these depictions.

That's where I'm less sure. If it's a class on Islamic art or studies in the Ottomans, Persians or Mughals I think it makes absolute sense, similarly if it's in a survey where you are engaging in the issue but also with the art and pointing for where students can delve deeper then I think it's supportable. I'm not sure from the description that that's quite what the class was - even if she seems to have handled it fairly sensitively.

[Tamas]

Seems pretty dumb to have a class on Islamic art where you can't show such a major part of Islamic art.

This is where I'm a little less sure around this class. Apparently it was in "global art history" with abundant warnings that it would include images from Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam etc.

I think there's a role for global surveys and I get the desire to show and talk about a more diverse picture of art history than just the Western tradition. But with that, I think there is a risk of effectively quite shallow tokenism if that person isn't able to talk about Buddhist or Hindu or Muslim art.

I'm sure the professor said more but I'm not sure this line in the article, I think from the lecture, does anything. I don't think it points to any views or deeper research or adds much of anything:

"I am showing you this image for a reason. And that is that there is this common thinking that Islam completely forbids, outright, any figurative depictions or any depictions of holy personages. While many Islamic cultures do strongly frown on this practice, I would like to remind you there is no one, monothetic Islamic culture," the professor said before changing to the slide that included these depictions.

That's where I'm less sure. If it's a class on Islamic art or studies in the Ottomans, Persians or Mughals I think it makes absolute sense, similarly if it's in a survey where you are engaging in the issue but also with the art and pointing for where students can delve deeper then I think it's supportable. I'm not sure from the description that that's quite what the class was - even if she seems to have handled it fairly sensitively.

Can you honestly say that if it was a lecture on Christian art and one of the Christian students flipped out over something like that guy I quoted, we'd be analysing it at this level instead of dismissing it as a far-right bigot rambling?

It took us in the developed world a thousand years and a lot of bloodshed to remove blasphemy and other nonsense from our general culture. As the rest of the world demonstrates it regularly, such a secular society is NOT the default state of humanity. It needs guarding, even when it is challenged by minority religions.

[garbon]

And?

Does that mean you agree this is something the prof really had to apologise for?

No but I'm also not sure we need a new thread for us to talk about Islamic iconoclasm. Haven't we done that to death?

[Tamas]

And?

Does that mean you agree this is something the prof really had to apologise for?

No but I'm also not sure we need a new thread for us to talk about Islamic iconoclasm. Haven't we done that to death?

Fair enough.

[Sheilbh]

Can you honestly say that if it was a lecture on Christian art and one of the Christian students flipped out over something like that guy I quoted, we'd be analysing it at this level instead of dismissing it as a far-right bigot rambling?

No, obviously not. But iconoclasm and opposition to images isn't a belief held strongly by a significant number of Christians. It is within Islam.

Given the controversies over education in the US by Christian groups, I think if that was a strong belief by many Christians in the US I think it's unlikely you'd show it.

It took us in the developed world a thousand years and a lot of bloodshed to remove blasphemy and other nonsense from our general culture. As the rest of the world demonstrates it regularly, such a secular society is NOT the default state of humanity. It needs guarding, even when it is challenged by minority religions.

Well we only abolished blasphemy laws here in 2008 I think the last successful (individual) prosecution was in 1977 - the famous Gay News and Whitehouse case.

I think education should teach the values the secular(-ish) state espouses and not the beliefs of any faith. So it should teach about LGBT+ rights and how LGBT+ people exist in our society. They should teach evolution. These are things that reflect our society and not teaching them or teaching creationism would impose religious beliefs on our society. Similarly I think you should learn about faith in general and how it works in our society - I always loved those classes on the "big six" religions as a kid In a faith school I think you can also have education about the values and practices of that faith in particular from a believers' perspective as long as it does not contradict the wider values of society.

I think in the context of teaching about Islamic art or those cultures it's entirely reasonable to show these images in a class - I'm a little unsure about the context here as it sounds potentially like it was a little just tokenism of "here's the Islamic world, which is NOT monolithic". I think it's also right teaching that for most Muslims images of Mohammed are considered blasphemous and not to show them outside of a relevant context.

Similarly with Christianity. I think it'd be wildly inappropriate for a teacher to be teaching against the divinity of Christ. Instead they should teach what Christians, because that's what matters in how it interacts with society. But in the context of some history classes for example you absolutely need to be able to talk about those arguments around the divinity of Christ and to read Arians or whatever - in part because the belief is why the argument matters.

[HVC]

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

[Tamas]

Can you honestly say that if it was a lecture on Christian art and one of the Christian students flipped out over something like that guy I quoted, we'd be analysing it at this level instead of dismissing it as a far-right bigot rambling?

No, obviously not. But iconoclasm and opposition to images isn't a belief held strongly by a significant number of Christians. It is within Islam.


Given the controversies over education in the US by Christian groups, I think if that was a strong belief by many Christians in the US I think it's unlikely you'd show it.

Nah. Imagine a similarly hot topic issue for Christians in a similar university classroom setting, for example historic Christian stance on homosexuals or birth control, implying that the current main trend has not been eternal. If some guy made a big deal out of it in a zealous rage, we WOULD dismiss it outright, and there'd be no apologies necessary.

It took us in the developed world a thousand years and a lot of bloodshed to remove blasphemy and other nonsense from our general culture. As the rest of the world demonstrates it regularly, such a secular society is NOT the default state of humanity. It needs guarding, even when it is challenged by minority religions.

Well we only abolished blasphemy laws here in 2008 I think the last successful (individual) prosecution was in 1977 - the famous Gay News and Whitehouse case.

I think education should teach the values the secular(-ish) state espouses and not the beliefs of any faith. So it should teach about LGBT+ rights and how LGBT+ people exist in our society. They should teach evolution. These are things that reflect our society and not teaching them or teaching creationism would impose religious beliefs on our society. Similarly I think you should learn about faith in general and how it works in our society - I always loved those classes on the "big six" religions as a kid In a faith school I think you can also have education about the values and practices of that faith in particular from a believers' perspective as long as it does not contradict the wider values of society.

I think in the context of teaching about Islamic art or those cultures it's entirely reasonable to show these images in a class - I'm a little unsure about the context here as it sounds potentially like it was a little just tokenism of "here's the Islamic world, which is NOT monolithic". I think it's also right teaching that for most Muslims images of Mohammed are considered blasphemous and not to show them outside of a relevant context.

Similarly with Christianity. I think it'd be wildly inappropriate for a teacher to be teaching against the divinity of Christ. Instead they should teach what Christians, because that's what matters in how it interacts with society. But in the context of some history classes for example you absolutely need to be able to talk about those arguments around the divinity of Christ and to read Arians or whatever - in part because the belief is why the argument matters.

Indeed. And there are no serious forces left challenging the ability to talk about those arguments. But the Muslim religious far-right have found what I thought would be an unlikely ally in the dogmatic left, supporting their efforts of censorship because they are a minority.

And faith schools -no matter the faith in question- should just not exist, period. Indoctrination, pure and simple.

[The Brain]

But they're still called Hamline?

[Tamas]

But they're still called Hamline?

 

[DGuller]

And?

Does that mean you agree this is something the prof really had to apologise for?

No but I'm also not sure we need a new thread for us to talk about Islamic iconoclasm. Haven't we done that to death?

Seems like the real issue here is that a university in the US appears to be endorsing and enforcing the hardline religious dogma.