So the big news in Philly that has gone national is that the Prez of Penn University, Amy Gutmann, posed for a picture with a student who was dressed in an offensive Halloween costume. Of course, the "devil" in this Halloween story is in the details, and in this case the student showed up dressed as a suicide bomber, and he happens to be named Saad Saadi, and the Penn Prez hosted the party at her house. Oh, and some bloggers of apparent fame picked up on the story and expressed considerable outrage (and impressive click-thrus, no doubt). While I consider myself a strong supporter of Israel, and extremely sensitive to anti-Smithson, I think the moral outrage being expressed is a bit over the top.
Had Mr. Saadi, or anyone else, shown up dressed in as Hitler, Pol Pot, David Duke wearing his Klan garb, Bull Conner, Sirhan Sirhan, John Wilkes Booth, a slave trader with a whip, a rapist, or any such person, he would have been identified immediately as representing someone, and perhaps some force, that is evil. Neither Ms. Gutmann nor anyone else would have objected to having him barred from her home and party; indeed, to have failed to act in such a way would have invited opprobrium.But in the modern university, especially in anything relating to Middle East studies, the guardrails are down. After years of scholarship that consistently fails to investigate thoroughly, much less condemn, terrorism or jihadism, or which misrepresents both these historical actors and the consequences of their actions, can we be surprised at President Gutmann's lack of shock? With moral equivalency between bombers and the bombed, especially regarding suicide bombers, a mainstay of modern scholarship and pedagogy in Middle East studies, why wouldn't a young man presenting himself as a killer of innocents be laughed at rather than set straight by his intellectual and moral superiors--i.e., women like Amy Gutmann?
While I share the bloggers disdain for suicide bombers the comments about Gutmann just don't seem fair. The blogger states, "...can we be surprised at President Gutmann's lack of shock?", but both Gutmann and the student with poor Halloween costume taste agree that Gutmann refused to take additional pictures with the student after realizing he had a toy gun. I also take exception to his assertion that a student dressed as "Pol Pot" would have been refused entrance to her party. Maybe the blogger would recognize a Halloween-er dressed as Pol Pot, but 99.99 percent of the rest of the world certainly wouldn't. Not even at Penn. It is an interesting list of offensive people though. Kind of a Rainbow Coalition of bad guys. The problem is that even someone as despicable and recognizable as Hitler does get some "Halloween Love" (note the pic at the top of the gang from South Park where one of the characters is, indeed, dressed as Hitler for Halloween). One of my favorite movies growing up was "The Producers"with the unintentionally successful play, "Springtime for Hitler". Is The Producers anti-Semitic? Hardly. Is there anything really very funny about the actual Hitler? Certainly not. It is, however, part of our nation's long tradition to lampoon the objects of our distaste. It seems to me that this student's intentions were exactly that.
I have observed some similar behavior from student's in my son's high school. I saw a video by some students for a history assignment where they dressed up as "ninjas" but it was pretty clearly implied that they were terrorists. At first I was offended, but then I came to realize that these were kids that as children watched the Power Rangers and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles but in their adolescence have had to face the horrific nightmare of 9-11 and Jihadist beheadings on YouTube. Maybe the real story here, that everyone is missing, is the psychological toll that 9-11 and the war on terror has had on this generation.
