Something About Larry

Let’s be clear about one thing: 218 Faculty of Arts and Sciences professors (out of 690) secretly voted lack-of-confidence in Larry Summers because they think he’s a schmuck.

His speech about “intrinsic aptitude,” the supposed source of the Faculty’s moral outrage, is rarely mentioned anymore. Arguing about Cornel West and Israeli divestment doesn’t work for the Larry-haters because even though some may think he chose the wrong words, a majority at Harvard knows Summers has the right policy: an accountable faculty, and zero tolerance for prejudice.

What he has accomplished as president—the biggest expansion of low-income aid since the GI Bill, the Crimson Summer Academy to prepare disadvantaged high school students for college, the greatest investments in science and technology ever, recruiting extraordinary new faculty like Louis Menand and Steven Pinker, expanding study abroad, defending affirmative action, making ours a “Green Campus”—all of that is irrelevant to the one-third of professors (of one out of Harvard’s nine faculties) that voted to kick the bastard when he’s down.

A friend who was close to Summers in Washington summed it up better than most: “He’s always been brilliant, competent, unusually good at getting things done—but there’s something about Larry that pisses people off.”

After Tuesday’s meeting, Anthropology and African and African-American studies professor J. Lorand Matory—fiercest of the Faculty’s warriors—strode outside in triumph to tell the press that “there is no noble alterative to [Summers’] resignation.” In case you hadn’t gotten the message, Matory added a TV-ready soundbite: “Larry Summers should resign as president of Harvard University.” Pardon me for asking, but: resign for what, exactly?

Because outside our ivy-covered walls, when presidents or CEOs are pushed out, it happens for a reason. Either they have crossed some ethical or moral line or, far more commonly, they haven’t accomplished what they were hired to do. Nobody can seriously claim that Summers’ performance violates the first shibboleth. And, reviewing the 2001 reportage about the Corporation’s goals for a new president—stronger leadership, higher standards, an aggressive curricular review, and Allston expansion—it is hard to argue that, in terms of substance, Summers has not lived up to expectations.

And so we are left with what one professor described to me as “Larry’s personality problem.” Rumors and gossip abound on this subject—and most sound like they came straight from a middle school cafeteria: Larry ignored me while I was talking, Larry was mean to me at lunch, Larry made fun of my idea, Larry excluded me.

A new book is even devoted to these anecdotes. Harvard Rules is an anti-Summers polemic written by Richard Blow—who was so embarrassed after cashing in on his late friend John Kennedy Jr.’s death that he actually changed his last name to Bradley. “Fundamentally,” the very considerate Blow told students, “the issue is [Summers’] lack of consideration, his lack of kindness.”

But while a lack of kindness is a serious issue—after all, some talented professors are now threatening to leave because of it—isn’t a lack of kindness more easily fixed than a lack of intellect, or a lack of competence? And to those who argue that we shouldn’t have to make that choice (and I agree) my answer is this: After all he’s done for Harvard, as a star economist and in his three years as president, we owe Larry Summers at least a chance to change.

So here—offered in the same spirit of modesty and benevolence that has always characterized Harvard professors—is a three-step, three-month Goldsmith Plan for Harvard Peace.

Step One: For the next three months, no more faculty meetings on subjects related to the University President.

Step Two: For the next three months, Larry Summers gets to do his job without pickets hurled at his face, epithets shouted in his ear, or applications of tar and feathers. From now until the semester ends, Summers gets the chance to prove his seriousness about his pledge to “temper my words and actions in ways that…help us work together more harmoniously.” He gets a fresh start to deal with the Faculty—to listen to their ideas and concerns. Success does not mean Summers never disagrees with a professor. It means that when there are differences, both sides feel their views got heard, and that they were treated with respect.

Step Three: On June 17th—three months from today—one last faculty meeting on this subject is called to order, this time including professors from all nine of Harvard’s faculties. The no-confidence motion is again put to a vote. If it succeeds, Summers resigns. If the motion fails, Summers stays, thanks his lucky stars, and University Hall’s attention turns back to the business of leading the world’s greatest university.

Either way, Harvard gets what it needs: an end to this distraction.

Brian M. Goldsmith ’05 is a government concentrator in Lowell House. His column appears on alternate Thursdays.