End W&L’s Misrepresentation of History

End W&L’s Misrepresentation of History

The university follows a philosophy that is intentionally deceitful about its past.

(The museum beneath Lee Chapel lies dormant. | SOURCE: Anonymous)

An alumnus writing to The W&L Spectator recently noted his worry that Washington and Lee University was fast becoming “____ and ____ University.” Thankfully, the names “Washington” and “Lee” survived the coordinated attempt by many faculty members, administrators and alumni to erase them and silence all opposition amidst a national wave of cultural self-immolation.

But the alumnus’s point was that W&L may nonetheless become “____ and ____ University,” regardless of  the Board of Trustees’ decision. “____ and ____ University” is a philosophy of systematically hiding, desecrating, and rewriting our university’s history, and has been the modus operandi of the school’s administration for years.

The university’s recent survey asking the W&L community their thoughts on a new Institutional History Museum appears like step in the right direction. Yet, the philosophy of “____ and ____ University” over the past few years makes its sincerity questionable at best. Up to this point their behavior suggests they do not care one bit about the past. It’s time for that to change.

A look at their track record since university officials first proposed a Museum of Institutional History in 2017 reveals that they are more interested in manufacturing their preferred history than presenting the true past of the school.

The university pretends that Lee Chapel, National Historical Landmark, is actually named “University Chapel & Galleries,” going so far as to remove a federally-issued plaque that reflects its proper name and replacing it with an imitation.

It acts like a whole museum dedicated to the school’s history does not exist below Lee Chapel, closed to the public since the pandemic with no timetable for return.

The school acts like Robert E. Lee and many of his direct relatives, people critical to the history of Virginia and the United States, are not buried within the chapel. While the administration cannot disentomb the Lee family, they went back on their promise not to strip all references to him.

And the university has long neglected one of its other founders, the Reverend William Graham, who as rector of Liberty Hall Academy solicited Washington’s donation of 100 shares of the James River Company. Graham is buried outside Lee Chapel.

The university states its origins lay in 1749, a heavily discredited claim originating after the Civil War. Despite having numerous accomplished and respected alumni, the university feels the need to call William Clark a General, another disputed claim.

Most recently, the university failed to celebrate, or even acknowledge, George Washington for Presidents’ Day, a federal holiday officially known as Washington’s Birthday.

In short, W&L has been playing fast and loose with history, misrepresenting its past to support the priorities of the day. The new Institutional History Museum — and the university as a whole — must at last put an end to this tradition of manipulation.

Instead, students, faculty, alumni, and the community deserve a sophisticated, holistic, and nuanced telling of the school’s lengthy history. Washington, Lee, and other figures should be represented given the degree to which they determined the university’s development and growth.

Marginalized figures, such as the enslaved people owned by the school, should of course be included. So should other dark marks on the university’s past, such as its early twentieth-century promotion of eugenics. But their representation needs to be proportional, and their importance must not be inflated by progressive mores.

The irony is that so many people who simply wish for a nuanced telling history, free of moralist shaming, get slapped with the label of “Lost Cause.” Just as the “Lost Cause” distorted history, by ignoring slavery’s central role in the Civil War and shaming anyone critical of the South, so too does progressive historical revisionism.

Ignoring or underemphasizing the achievements of Lee, champion of education, or Washington, the selfless soldier, is no more accurate than calling both men angels. Ignorance and blind adoration both lack any depth of knowledge.

We hope the Institutional History Museum will truly reflect “not only the greater story of our nation, but also is important for the countless experiences, traditions, events, and people, both known and unknown,” as Institutional History Director promised last fall.

The university had previously stated that “The stories of Lee and Robinson will figure prominently, along with those of many others who have shaped W&L, in a new museum to be constructed,” an assertion that appears more questionable by the day.

After a repeated pattern of deceitful representations of history and its years of feet-dragging, the university can no longer be taken at its word.

The W&L community must use the survey as a chance to express dissatisfaction — maybe, just maybe, a strong enough response can shock the university into taking timely, decisive steps to accurately and completely portray its past. Otherwise, our school risks continuing to degrade into “____ and ____ University.”