Letters

Abstract

90 OHQ vol. 122, no. 1 LETTERS To the Editor: Several articles in the Winter 2019 issue of the Oregon Historical Quarterly advance our understanding of the lamentable racial discrimination that mars Oregon’s history. But the “White Supremacy & Resistance” volume is seriously compromised by the singular focus on “Whiteness” set forth in the introductory essay, a theme that carries over into most of the otherwise generally well-researched essays. The essays that follow guest editor Carmen Thompson’s confirm that Oregon’s history is replete with examples of racial discrimination still reflected in present-day institutions. But Thompson’s essay claims far more than that racial discrimination persists and that people of good will and fair mind are sometimes unaware of the lingering effects of historic discrimination and of the advantages they may derive from those effects. Thompson presents the controversial concept of “Whiteness” as an undisputed lens through which we are to look at Oregon history, leaving none of that history free from racist explanation. Thompson’s description of the concept of “Whiteness” allows for no possibility of White people who do not bear the trait of “Whiteness.” She describes “the American form of Whiteness ” as “organic” and “ubiquit[ous].” Organic implies inherent and inborn; ubiquitous implies comprehensive and omnipresent. As defined by Thompson, “Whiteness” theory posits that every White individual past, present, and future is complicit in whatever racism persists. Uncritical acceptance of the theory helps explain why White people whose lives are unblemished by racist thought or deed find themselves apologizing for their presumed racism. History viewed through this all-inclusive lens of pervasive and systemic racism ignores the complexity of history and distorts the truth historians should seek to reveal. Readers of Thompson’s essay are meant to read the remaining essays with “Whiteness” as an accepted and unquestioned explanation for all historic discrimination and for the current and future state of Oregon society. It is a simplistic, close-minded and ironically racist approach to history. In the epilogue to the volume, Quarterly editor Eliza Canty-Jones describes the project as “emotionally wrenching.” She goes on to recount recent events that she and presumably most readers find offensive. But history done well is a dispassionate enterprise. If historians, or those who publish history, prejudge or react emotionally to the actions and words of the past, the stories they tell and print will be partly theirs. An account of the background and timeline for the special issue declares that the project “is not neutral on the subject of White supremacy.” There is no disputing that. Authors and editors are seldom neutral in their personal views on the events and people they write about, but they should aspire to neutrality in understanding and reporting on those events and people. By telling the stories of history without judgment, they allow their readers to judge for themselves. Objectively and fully told, the stories of racism and White supremacy in Oregon will allow readers to understand people and events in their historical context without the filter of the authors’ or editors’ personal judgments that unavoidably reflect present-day values. James L. Huffman Lewis & Clark Law School 91 From the Editor: Having engaged in close editorial work with Carmen P. Thompson on her introductory essay, I am disappointed to learn of James Huffman’s misreading of Thompson’s framing of the concept of Whiteness. Thompson argues that “the American form of whiteness is historical and organic,” that it “has its genesis in each European nation’s initial decision to cross the Atlantic Ocean,” and that its “longstanding ubiquity . . . makes it difficult to recognize and articulate, especially for White people.” Such statements do not conflate Whiteness with White people and instead define Whiteness as being historical and constructed — that is, connected to particular places, times, events, and decisions. Thompson’s essay reviews some of the extensive literature on Whiteness, offering readers a window onto the complex arguments contained within that body of work, developed over many decades, and indicating how the Oregon Historical Quarterly’s special issue contributes to that ongoing endeavor. That Huffman could read the essay to argue that the concept of Whiteness is both simplistic and not based in policies...