Inaugural Speech of Thomas J. Schwarz – November 12, 2003
Chairman Egan, Chancellor Robert L. King, State University of New York, Congresswoman Nita Lowey, President Emeritus Sheldon Grebstein and Acting President Hank Dullea
Members of the Bench, US Court of Appeals Judge Chester Straub, New York Surrogate Renee Roth, Judge James Lack, Judge Laura Ward
Distinguished members of the platform party and academic delegates, honored guests, faculty, staff and students of Purchase College and community friends.
Thank you all for coming today to share with me in this meaningful moment.
An event like this does not come together easily. At the risk of leaving some people out – to whom I apologize – I want to thank the committee headed by Vice President of External Affairs and Development, Margaret Sullivan, for all the work that went into this event. Aside from Margaret, I wish to thank the members of the committee, David Bassuk, Carol Walker, Linda Champanier, Judy Nolan, Joe Olenik, Christopher Beach, Cindy Gedeon, Michael Strong, Sandy Dylak, Lynn Mahoney, Gerri Sanderson, and Agnes Benis.
And thank you to Governor Nelson Rockefeller who built this wonderful institution of the State University of New York in the 1960s – and specifically created this campus in 1969. This service to our state and our nation is an example of the finest public service – public service that has provided an education for millions of students who have made significant contributions to our society as a result of the bounties offered by public education.
I am also honored that present here today are representatives of my two alma maters – Hamilton and Fordham. First, the new President of Hamilton College, Joan Hinde Stewart, who was inaugurated a month ago in a wonderful celebration. And I think it is important to point out that Joan came from a state university and will add her insights gained in that context to Hamilton.
Joan, will you please stand?
*The inspiration for this speech was a speech by Prof. Bill Brown, George M. Pullman Professor, Dept. of English Language and Literature, University of Chicago entitled “Art As Education” appearing in University of Chicago Record at p.10, June 12, 2003. Speech given 12/13/02.
I am also honored that so many of my fellow trustees from Hamilton are here to share in the festivities. Thank you for taking the time.
Also with us are other officers of Hamilton, including the Vice President, Dan O’Leary, who is retiring this year after many years of extraordinary service which has allowed Hamilton to thrive. And I am pleased to have representatives of Hamilton’s faculty present. I have already called upon the wisdom of Hamilton’s officers and faculty. Thank you for being here.
I am also deeply touched that my other alma mater, Fordham University, whose robes I proudly wear, is represented by my dear friend and mentor, John Feerick, the former Dean of the Fordham Law School who served in that capacity for twenty years after serving as my former partner at Skadden Arps. John is known to all of us as either St. John or John the Good. I cannot begin to tell you the number of awards that John has received in his lifetime and it is my privilege to serve with him again on a commission appointed by the Chief Judge of New York to try to clean up judicial elections. John recently received the Louis Stein Award in Ethics from Fordham University – and as I told John in a note, an award to John for ethics is redundant.
And at a time when the Catholic Church in this country is under heavy scrutiny, I want to say that the Society of Jesuits represent to me the highest calling – people who dedicate their lives to teaching. Thank you, John, for being here to represent Fordham University and thank you to Fordham and the Society of Jesuits for all you do to educate our youth.
John, please stand.
In ten days, it will be 40 years since John Kennedy’s assassination, an event that ended my youth and that of my generation. Approximately one month before his death President Kennedy gave a speech at Amherst College at the dedication of the Robert Frost Library.
Among JFK’s statements that day were the following:
“Many years ago Woodrow Wilson said, “What good is a political party unless it’s serving a great national purpose?” And, Kennedy continued, “what good is a . . . college or university unless it’s serving a great national purpose? . . .”
Kennedy went on to say:
“The men who create power make an indispensable contribution to the nation’s greatness. But the men who question power make a contribution just as indispensable, especially when that question is disinterested . . .
When power leads man toward arrogance, poetry reminds him of his limitations. When power narrows the areas of man’s concern, poetry reminds him of the richness and diversity of his existence. When power corrupts, poetry cleanses . . .
For art establishes the basic human truths which must serve as the touchstones of our judgment. The artist, however, faithful to his personal vision of reality, becomes the last champion of the individual mind and sensibility against an intrusive society and an officious state.
Kennedy concluded by saying:
“I see little of more importance to the future of our country and our civilization than full recognition of the place of the artist. If art is to nourish the roots of our culture, society must set the artist free to follow his vision wherever it takes him. . .”
President Kennedy’s emphasis on the arts as manifested by that long quote was reinforced six years later when on October 6, 1969, there was a ground breaking ceremony here at Purchase.
Governor Rockefeller was, of course, the principle spokesperson at that dedication. I asked Patrick Callahan, Director of our Library, to find out what happened that day and he went to the Rockefeller archives.
Among the documents that Patrick found was the outline of the Governor’s speech which he no doubt used because we also have the transcript of his remarks. I want to read the words of the conclusion set out in the outline for the Governor’s speech:
“ . . . remain steadfast on preserving university as a gateway to opportunity.
Only qualifications that count are will, heart, mind of young people.
Purchase swings gateway open wider.”
His speech was short. He finished by saying, true to his outline:
“It will be the main campus of our State University System for professional training in the visual and performing arts. . .
Today, as we break ground for the State University College at Purchase, that gateway to opportunity swings open significantly wider.”
Now thirty-four years after Rockefeller’s speech, it is clear to me that our mission at Purchase has not changed.
We are “the main campus of our State University system for professional training in the arts and performing arts.” “The only qualifications that count are the qualities of will and heart and mind of our young people.” We are “that gateway to opportunity [that] swings open significantly wider.”
In 1977, Governor Rockefeller received an award from the Westchester Council of the Arts “in recognition of his lifelong commitment and leadership in the arts”.
Interestingly, in 1977 Governor Rockefeller also paid special tribute to Roy Neuberger for his donation which founded the Neuberger Museum and to Roy’s friend, Kitty Carlisle Hart for her work as Chair of the New York Council on the Arts. Life hasn’t changed much since we are indebted every day to Roy, whose side is graced by Kitty.
The 1977 award to Governor Rockefeller was presented by then President of Purchase College Michael Hammond, who went on to become the chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts before his untimely death in 2002.
And here is what President Hammond said about the mission of this institution:
“And we here at Purchase have a special bond to . . . [Governor Rockefeller] in that this campus, perhaps more than any of the others, was the fruit of his vision.
. . . A College where young artists and young liberal artists could work together, pursuing both art and knowledge, trying to find the common ground between art and knowledge. So that young liberal artists who are going to be doctors, and lawyers, and bankers, and executives, and sociologists could come to have a realization of the arts in their own lives, not just as the spectators learning how to admire what is good but as active participants pursuing a high level of amateur involvement that will stay with them throughout their lives and enrich the culture and give to the professional world that necessary underpinning of amateur love, just what the world needs.
At the same time for young artists, young people who wish to be dancers, who wish to be musicians, painters, sculptors, actors, set designers, for them to learn these crafts and to perfect their art in a place where knowledge is an important ingredient and where they can learn something about the history of mankind, something about a man’s philosophies so that their art can be informed and enriched through the great humanistic and scientific visions of their fellow man.”
Forty years ago was a very different time. Instead of terrorism we had the threat of nuclear annihilation. Instead of terrorists, we had Soviet missiles aimed at American cities. But today, instead of support for the arts, as under President Kennedy, Homeland Security Research and Training gets the bulk of the money for higher education. Medicare and Medicaid necessarily come long before support for colleges and universities. K-12 education is tied closely to local property taxes. Support for the arts has plummeted. Higher education is too often seen as discretionary in the eyes of our nation’s legislators. The push to improve secondary education through “No Child Left Behind” has left the arts behind. The case must be made for the arts and I want to emphasize – when I refer to the arts I include Humanities, about which I will say more later.
The arts should be a higher priority in Washington and in the legislative halls of all of the states. Children are often inspired by the arts. Art is a catalyst for intellectual activity. And yet, artists are on the periphery. The Donald Kendall’s of the world, who amass large independent art collections in corporations – as at PepsiCo – are, to say the least, rare. And corporations are being forced to sell their art collections as underutilized assets.
So the question is, in this day of Homeland Security – where the emphasis is as it must be on our national security – why should free nations, including ours, support the arts? Let’s look at what repressive nations do for the answers.
Dictatorships and fascists suppress the arts and burn the books. Why? It is because of the threat that the arts – all arts – raise for those repressive governments. Why did the Soviet Union in 1932 require artists to join the Communist Union of Artists where their job was to further government interests? Why did the Taliban destroy art? Even in our own country we have seen the McCarthy period where artists were blacklisted.
But this threat to order in repressive governments has another side if we turn the angle of our observation. If, as repressive governments realize, art can be a threat to their order and control, then it must be that support of the arts can be a weapon in the war against fascism, dictatorship, and repressive governments.
I have been reading John Dewey’s Art As Experience. It’s heavy slogging to say the least and I’m not finished. It arose from a series of lectures Dewey gave in 1931 at Harvard. As usual, Dewey has some significant things to say.
He talked about how the arts arose from everyday life, much like sports. He talked about how art fuses the past and the future:
“Art celebrates with peculiar intensity the moments in which the past reinforces the present and in which the future is a quickening of what now is.”
And he refers to art as “the greatest intellectual achievement in the history of humanity.”
Finally – in what no doubt has been often quoted he states:
“Any idea that ignores the necessary role of intelligence in production of works of art is based upon identification of thinking with use of one special kind of material, verbal signs and words. To think effectively in terms of relations of qualities is as severe a demand upon thought as to think in terms of symbols, verbal and mathematical. Indeed, since words are easily manipulated in mechanical ways, the production of a work of genuine art probably demands more intelligence than does most of the so-called thinking that goes on among those who pride themselves on being “intellectuals””.
What is the relevance of Dewey?
We are today in this country rightfully concerned with enforcing UN resolutions. We are at war because of our President’s view that such is our obligation.
But in 1948 in the United Nations’ universal Declaration of Human Rights, the UN stated, “Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community.” The arts, of course, are a part of the cultural life of each community in which all nations share.
We know that the arts flourish in a free society. But to say that is to minimize the arts because humanity flourishes in a free society. Rather, the point is that the arts – and the conflicts inherent in art – can be a catalyst for a free society. Or said in a more direct way, the arts – the spoken word in a novel, painting, dance, theater, music, can help cause a society to become free or even more free.
I will never forget in 1989 visiting Hanoi at a time when Vietnam was still under an embargo and governed by a repressive government. Going back to my hotel one evening, I heard American rock music blasting out of a back room. I went to see what it was and there was a group of teenagers mouthing words from rock music – words they couldn’t yet understand because they didn’t speak English. But they wanted to be free.
I asked Provost Waller to share with me his thoughts on this subject. In a typical erudite memo, Gary gave me examples from Dickens, Brecht and a French philosopher. But in his own words, which I want to quote, he said:
“Good art may be defined in terms of its ability to bring about social change by usurping the status quo, exposing, confronting and breaking down barriers of oppression and pushing, restructuring complacent boundaries. Art encourages us to engage in a kind of resistance to ideology by objectifying it and challenging its readers and spectators to examine the material conditions of their reality.”
Or as stated in a report recently published, appropriately, by the Rockefeller Foundation:
“Culture is an effective crucible for Social Transformation, one that can be less polarizing and create deeper connections than other social-change arenas.”
This is not to say, give us art and not guns. Unfortunately, in this world, guns are a necessity. But it is to say, that as we emphasize basic skills of reading, writing and arithmetic, let us not forget art. For a relevant pittance from the budgets of the industrialized free nations we can add another arrow to our quiver in the fight against repressive governments – international support for the artists in repressed societies who will, by their very nature as artists raise the relevant questions about their own societies, and, indeed, by their exposure to our culture, raise the necessary questions about our own society. As recently as last week, artists in Africa, both visual and performing, were using art to protest the repressive regime in Zimbabwe.
The UN Charter demands our support in this respect. Let us not forget in our quest for education in the basics that the Soviet Union had advanced literacy and science. Romania, one of the most repressive societies in all of Eastern Europe, had a highly educated population. But these societies failed. There was no true freedom of expression as the arts manifest.
So while repressive governments suppress the arts by force, democratic, free nations should not repress the arts by starvation. As the only super power in the world we should support the 1948 UN Charter with respect to the right to culture for, as the Rockefeller Report stated:
“The arts allow us to imagine how the world could be different.”
Now what does all of this discussion mean for us? And why is this issue the subject of my address today?
Because we are a college whose center is the arts – the written word, painting, sculpture, music, dance, theatre and film, and we should not be marginalized as an “arts” college, subordinate to career preparation institutions. Rather we should be celebrated and celebrate ourselves as the arts college both visual and performing, on the one hand, and liberal on the other hand. The teaching of the arts, as President Kennedy stated in 1963, is “a great national purpose.”
Our courses should reflect the variety of the arts – creative and liberal – from every angle.
We must of course continue to emphasize the fundamentals, whether sculpture, acting, music, dance, or creative or dramatic writing, literature or journalism. But we must seek ways to highlight and build upon our multiple strengths in the arts. We must understand that a significant number of all of our students are attracted to this campus because of the arts and we must find ways to tie our programming in the liberal arts to the creative arts wagon in order to more deeply reflect throughout our curriculum the various aspects of the arts, including by developing more arts courses for non-majors – the “amateurs” who President Hammond referred to.
The creative arts must take advantage of their variety on this campus by continuing to explore collaborative opportunities that give us an advantage over many institutions which are dedicated to only one or two of the arts. Rhode Island School of Design doesn’t have performing arts. Julliard doesn’t have Art and Design. Mannes doesn’t have dance. Collaboration among our programs gives us a creative advantage.
Seeing the Humanities in a very real sense as part of the “arts” is to see the further development of arts courses for non-majors, programs like Creative Writing and Literature, Drama Studies and Cinema Studies as part of the College’s emphasis on the centrality of the Arts. It is also to ask History, Philosophy and Art History to reach out actively to the arts in their curriculum. It is to ask them to plan together, to recruit together, to think of working concretely to achieve the same degree of excellence as the conservatory and studio programs.
In short, the conflicts between and among the creative arts and the liberal arts must end to be replaced by an understanding that any strength pulls up the entire institution.
We must continue our incorporation into our curriculum of the museum and the Performing Arts Center. I am aware of no college our size which has four professional creative arts programs, a liberal arts program, a fine museum and an exalted Performing Arts Center. The presence of those two institutions, leaving aside their own public missions, is an opportunity for unique excellence. How can a student leave here without having an association with contemporary art, classical music, dance, jazz and so forth. Not even Williams College – the richest of the elite liberal arts colleges – has the resources of this campus.
Now let me talk a few minutes about Natural and Social Science. As the College Community knows, I combined the two divisions into one school and we have a new Dean who will carry out that integration. And I believe that there is a great opportunity for growth and strengthening our programs here. This division is already at work considering the important common intellectual ground that natural and social science share and how best to engage students in issues which are not only central to their own lives, but also central to an informed citizen’s participation in society. Contextualizing disciplinary pursuits is what differentiates a liberal arts degree from a technical degree. Teaching scientific principles in the context of civic engagement is just the start. One need only look at the New York Times Science section yesterday to find the substance of courses which would be the basis for educating an informed citizenry.
Building upon the fundamentals of our Natural and Social Science courses, we should also offer courses which interrelate the Natural and Social Sciences to the arts as we have done through the New Media program. Some questions come easily to mind which could be so addressed:
- Why does music sooth the savage beast and the human heart?
- What is the phyics of sound?
- Why does a tight skin on a drum produce a higher pitch than a loose skin?
- Why does the chemical treatment of wood on a new violin make it indistinguishable from a Stradivarios?
- How does the use of photography influence politics?
- How does literature affect law?
- What did High Noon say about the McCarthy period?
These are but a few examples that readily come to mind. Our students would oversubscribe these courses in a heartbeat.
And it is in the area of Natural and Social Sciences where we also have a unique opportunity to serve as what Governor Rockefeller in his speech called the “gateway.” There is a difference between private and public colleges in providing opportunity: Last night I talked about the high percentage of our students who come from low-income families. To make available the promises of education to those from lower income backgrounds, first generation college students and those who have persisted – who have started their higher education at the community colleges – perhaps even with English as a second language – is where we can also make a great societal contribution.
It is in Natural and Social Sciences that we can build programs that prepare our students for professional careers outside the arts – sociology majors who come from neighborhoods which need help – students who will leave us, get their Master’s and return to their communities as social workers; pre-law students who will come from neighborhoods where crime is an every day event who will go back to those neighborhoods as lawyers; science majors who come from underrepresented minorities and central cities and will go on to be doctors or researchers; who will teach the environmental and health risks arising from an urban environment. And here I want to single out the work that Dean Joseph Skrivanek has done with the Bridges to Baccalaureate program in focusing on underrepresented minorities in the sciences and preparing them for careers in the sciences. We can emulate that program throughout Natural and Social Science – where students who want to connect their degree with a profession are apt to be found.
So I propose that we strengthen our ties to community colleges and strengthen our pre-professional programs. Let us be known not only as an arts college, but also as a college that fulfills our public mission by being a bridge between the community colleges and graduate schools.
I am also very proud of our Liberal Studies Program and how it fulfills our public mission. We must strengthen our program. For the most part, our students are adults who have persisted and are completing their college education on a part-time basis. The value added to society is enormous. I recently read that the income difference of a college degree over a high school education can be as much as a million dollars over a lifetime. Even if we assume that the adult Liberal Studies student will have fewer years to earn that differential, the economic value added is still enormous. And we should continue to look for opportunities to export our program to those who need it. Coupled with our obligation to community college graduates, these programs help us to fulfill our public mission. And by reinvesting in our Continuing Education programs, with appropriate certificate courses, we can truly fulfill our public mission to educate and to serve.
And make it absolutely clear – strengthening these programs is no threat to the arts. A rising tide does carry all boats.
Purchase’s degrees are distinctive for requiring a senior project. It is an invaluable requirement but it must be strengthened. We must assess our senior projects, make sure that they are truly of quality across the board and become the gateway to graduation.
The requirement of a senior project means that Writing, from freshman year to graduation, is centrally important. I would like to see more writing-intensive courses created and also required. While the English literature faculty should have writing as one of their prime responsibilities, it ought also to be the commitment of all areas of the College, including the Arts.
Now let me say something about service and tenure because all of these issues require faculty service. A contract for lifetime employment is available nowhere else. Tenure is a contract for lifetime employment in exchange for three components – teaching, research or artistic endeavors and service to the community. Service can take many forms. So we need to have a dialog between faculty and administration about expectations and obligations. And for our new faculty we need to develop a formal mentoring system so that new faculty can understand their obligation and not get off on the wrong track leading to a rejection of tenure.
Now let me talk about a particular type of service – advising. Advising has been a problem. We have opened the Advising Center and although it is too early to draw any conclusions, students are taking advantage of it in significant numbers. But it will only work if it is supplementary to, and not a substitution for, the faculty’s advisory obligation.
Our Learning Communities are a way of providing a small college environment where most faculty live far away. I want to expand the learning communities both horizontally by number and vertically by including more than one year. As we build more housing, we should include more opportunities for learning communities and faculty in residence.
Now all of this needs some context to really be “higher education.” And in this era of corporate corruption, plagiarism and the stealing of music rights, that context must be one of ethics, respect and service. We must teach our students that it is not enough to be successful. Success cannot be measured by the dollar. Success is only real when it is achieved honestly and ethically, with a true sense of obligation to give back. So we must imbue in our students values – values which can be taught. This college cannot remain an island. We have an obligation to teach our students to reach out, to serve and when they leave here to continue to serve in an ethical and forthright manner. One ethics size, one service size, may not fit all. But students graduating from this college must do so only if they have achieved a level of understanding of their ethical place in a democratic society.
Our students must be taught to honor the diversity of our society. And I categorically reject the notion that selectivity is inconsistent with diversity. Selectivity cannot be measured solely by GPAs and SATs. This nation and New York City in particular thrive on the ever fresh diversity of new groups.
At Purchase we are also blessed with opportunity because of our physical environment. The next two residential facilities will begin to give us a sense of our own town. We will build residences with commercial downstairs – like the small town - and we will create a village square or oval with a sense of place. And we must begin to focus on building faculty housing so that at least some faculty can live near our students.
We must continue our excellent job of development – which as the word “development” suggests – is not quickly attained. We must continue to look for opportunities to use parts of our real estate – consistent with our mission- for development that will create a quasi-endowment ensuring our ability to deliver a quality education at a time of stiff competition for state resources. We must pay more attention to our alumni – not only for the purpose of raising dollars – but also for insuring a loyal network of alumni who will help each other. We need to realign our website with these goals and to recognize as a general proposition that whether it be admissions or development, investment in the future is the key. We cannot make short-term decisions merely to get through the year. To do so is to diminish our future.
CONCLUSION
There is much work to be done. It is said “artists don’t get down to work until the pain of working is exceeded by the pain of not working.” and as with the artist, “vision is always ahead of execution.” But the vision is very clear. Within 10 years all of our programs must be at the level of Dance, Theatre Arts and Film, Psychology and Philosophy. Our goal is nothing short of being the best public arts and liberal arts or liberal arts and arts (whichever you like) college in the nation. With our resources, including our four arts programs, our Museum, our Performing Arts Center and our proximity to New York City, that is an attainable goal. And while, as someone once said in a more important battle, “I may not get there with you,” our path is clear.
Thank you.
[1] Carol Becker and Ann Wiens, eds. The Artist in Society: Rights, Roles, and Responsibilities (Chicago: The Art Institute of Chicago, 1994) 69-72.
[2] “Text of President’s Address at Amherst,” New York Times 26 Oct. 1963.
[3] Governor Nelson A. Rockefeller, “Groundbreaking Ceremony,” State University College at Purchase, Purchase, NY, Oct. 6, 1969, Nelson A. Rockefeller Papers, Press Office, Box 83, Folder 670, Rockefeller Archive Center.
[4] Rockefeller, 6 Oct. 1969.
[5] “Westchester Arts Unit to Honor Rockefeller,” New York Times 15 Dec. 1977.
[6] Nelson A. Rockefeller, “1977 Arts Award Presentation of the Council for the Arts in Westchester,” State University College at Purchase, Purchase, NY 16 Dec. 1977, Nelson A. Rockefeller Papers, Speeches, Box 2, Folder 17, Rockefeller Archives Center.
[7] Michael Hammond, “1977 Arts Award Presentation of the Council for the Arts in Westchester.”
[8] Ann Marie Borrego and Jeffrey Brainard, “In Directing Dollars, Congress Favors Homeland-Security Projects,”
The Chronicle of Higher Education 26 Sept. 2003.
[9] Alan Riding, “A Supreme Moment in Soviet Art,” International Herald Tribune 8 Aug. 2003.
[10] John Dewey, Art As Experience (New York: Perigee Books, 1980) 7.
[11] Dewey 18.
[12] Dewey 25.
[13] Dewey 45-46.
[14] Don Adams and Arlene Goldbard, Creative Community: The Art of Cultural Development (Rockefeller Foundation, 2001) 19.
[15] Adams 21.
[16] “When Laughter Gets You Locked Up: Fighting Back with Art,” The Economist 8 Nov. 2003: 83.
[17] Adams 22.
[18] “Does Science Matter?” New York Times 11 Nov. 2003: Fl.
[19] Nicholas Wade, “We Got Rhythm; The Mystery is How and Why,” New York Times 16 Sept. 2003: F1.
[20] Alice Gomstyn, “Swan Song for the Stradivarius,” The Chronicle of Higher Education 26 Sept. 2003.
[21] “The Political Uses of Photographs of the Missing,” The Chronicle of Higher Education 3 Oct. 2003: B17.
[22] Quoting Stephen DeStaebler in David Bayles and Ted Orland, Art and Fear: Observations on the Perils (and Rewards) of Artmaking, (Eugene, OR: The Image Continuum Press) 9.
[23] Bayles 15