Loyola University Maryland’s Department of English has recently made headlines for its commitment to anti-racism, a stance that appears to reshape its understanding of literature itself. According to The College Fix, the department claims that literature has historically played a role in reinforcing white supremacy. Such an assertion reflects a broader trend in certain academic circles, where the dominance of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) rhetoric seems to overshadow traditional literary study.
The English department’s website echoes contemporary slogans such as “black lives matter” and promotes the belief that racism is based in white supremacy. This rhetoric signals a shift from examining texts to interrogating the societal structures around those texts. This emphasis on confronting racism suggests that classroom discussions will now prioritize confrontational dialogue over critical analysis of literary works themselves.
Critics argue that this move reveals a bias against Western civilization. The department’s commitment to acknowledging the centrality of whiteness in literary canons raises eyebrows. In professing this commitment, the department appears to equate well-established literary traditions with historical injustices, undermining the value of longstanding literary figures. The promise to hire a professor of African-American literature and diversify the curriculum seems to suggest that traditional texts might not hold the same relevance they once did.
The rhetoric surrounding this initiative is provocative. Terms like anti-racist teaching and pledges to examine all classes through this lens indicate a prioritization of ideology over literature itself. This shift could lead to a neglect of classical authors who have shaped the literary landscape, as the focus pivots toward more contemporary authors deemed favored by today’s educational standards.
One professor’s critique at Emory highlights these concerns. Professor Bauerlein pointed out the implications of these changes, stating, “The position of the Loyola department gives neat evidence for why English has become such a marginal discipline.” He argues that if the department embraces this ideology, it risks sidelining iconic writers such as Shakespeare and Emerson in favor of inferior works by people of the favored identity. This critique taps into a broader anxiety about the declining status of literary study in academia.
Indeed, the consequences of prioritizing ideological commitments over traditional literary analysis could threaten the integrity of the discipline. By adopting a mindset that views Western texts through the lens of racial theory, the department may inadvertently alienate students who seek a more balanced and comprehensive understanding of literature.
The push against centering the experiences of white students reflects a growing trend within certain academic environments. This approach raises questions about educational equity and the importance of inclusivity in academic discourse. While it is essential to acknowledge diverse perspectives, the method of marginalizing any group based on race could lead to a fragmented educational experience.
The consequences of this ideological shift could extend beyond the university’s walls. As institutions grapple with their missions in a multicultural society, the balance between honoring literary tradition and embracing diversity becomes increasingly complex. The original Jesuit mission of Loyola, focused on serving the community and fostering knowledge, might face challenges as the department aligns itself with contemporary progressive ideals.
In concluding this discussion, it is clear that the English department’s new direction embodies the ongoing friction between traditional literary values and contemporary social justice principles. The drive to reshape literature and literary study through an anti-racist lens may satisfy some calls for accountability, but it poses risks to the depth and richness of literary exploration. As this conversation unfolds, it remains to be seen whether departments like Loyola’s can retain their educational integrity while navigating these turbulent waters.
"*" indicates required fields
