“Can Brodhead Survive?”

We’ve just ended a Duke Commencement weekend during which, at various social events, I got to speak with a mix of people, including old friends and other folks I was meeting for the first time.

What they all had in common was some connection to Duke: students, parents, grandparents, many young people including brothers, sisters and friends of graduates, “old family friends” of graduates (“I remember the night she was born. ”), some faculty and a few administrators, none senior.

Some people were in Durham to help celebrate the graduation of the first member of their family to graduate Duke; others were there to see a third or fourth generation “Duke family” member process into Wallace Wade Stadium.

Most of the conversations revolved around pride in the graduates, “old stories” recalled and laughed at, future plans, and fondness and appreciation for Duke. The Hoax was not mentioned or if it was, it was only in passing.

But there were also times when conversations focused on aspects of the Hoax. I never brought the Hoax up in any conversation, but when others did, I responded to their questions and comments.

Very few people I talked with this weekend know I blog but just about all of them knew or learned I live in Durham. So for them I was a kind of “resident expert.”

Tomorrow I’ll say more about those Hoax conversations. Today I’ll confine this post to the question that, in one form or another, came up most often: “Can Brodhead survive?”

[Full disclosure: In late December 2006, when President Brodhead made his “jump the sinking ship” decision that he could after all support the recommendation Duke Law Professor James Coleman had made six months earlier that Nifong remove himself from the Hoax case, I called for Brodhead’s resignation “the sooner the better.”

I’m even more convinced now than in December that Brodhead’s resignation is in the best interests of Duke University.]

I was asked the “can he survive” question directly in one-to-one conversations and in small groups of up to five.

Each time I was asked, I’d pause before answering, sometimes nodding, looking at the questioner and repeating the question.

I’ll bet you know why I did that. Sure, I was giving the questioner and any others who heard it a chance to “go first” on the question.

Many did. (So much for respecting “the resident expert.")

Anyway, in every case those answering the question indicated they didn’t see how Brodhead could “survive” as Duke’s President.

Some wondered why the trustees hadn’t already fired him outright.

The people wondering about that didn’t strike me as necessarily angry, so much as they felt his leadership had been, as one put it, “a disaster for Duke.”

Others felt it was only a matter of time before the trustees would “work something out with Brodhead.” “Something out” to these people meaning what others call “a golden parachute.”

A few people said they thought the threats of suits might be holding the trustees back, since letting Brodhead go would be seen as an admission that Duke had mismanaged its response to the witch hunt and frame-up of its students.

None of those who spoke had anything good to say about Brodhead.

On the other hand, there was no “dancing on the grave.” The people talked about Brodhead’s departure the way we would talk about an impending operation that is necessary and should lead to better functioning, but is not anything to cheer about.

The conversations were quiet; no one tried to dominate others; and while there was some polite interrupting, people were listening to one another.

I had expected to be asked the Brodhead “survival question” and had thought about how I’d answer it. I wanted what I said to be sensible, fair to Brodhead and helpful to those listening to me.

Here’s how I tried to answer the “survival” question:

I can’t say for sure what’s going to happen but it’s a very safe guess that at best Brodhead will have a shortened presidency marked by limited achievement.

A typical term for a Duke president is 8 to 11 years. Brodhead’s just completed his 3rd year. I don’t see him surviving for 5 more years.

I feel sure if the trustees had known when they first considered Brodhead that he was the kind of person who would remain silent when death threats were shouted at Reade Seligmann and “Vigilante” posters targeting Duke students were distributed within sight of his office windows, they would have realized he was not the candidate to whom they should offer the presidency of Duke University.

I doubt the trustees want to or can prop up Brodhead for another 5 or more years.

Except in a case of a president such as President Terry Sanford who assumed office at a time of extraordinary division and crisis, a Duke president is expected to spend his/her first few years getting to know the University, building relationships, and identifying and laying out a plan that will address the University’s needs and expand its services.

By the end of a president’s third year support for the president within the University community should be very strong. He/she should be seen as an admired and uniting figure. That admiration and unity is the “launch pad” for what the president wants to accomplish in the next 5 to 8 years.

This June will mark the end of the 3rd year of Brodhead’s presidency. He reaches it as a divisive and much criticized figure whose presidency is badly damaged.

What’s more it is as certain as anything in this life that Brodhead and the office of Duke President will suffer even more damage in the coming months as the Duke community and the general public learn more of what went on at Duke during the witch hunt and frame-up.

Can trustees have much confidence in a president who won’t say whether or not the Dean of Students advised students under police investigation for committing multiple felonies not to let their parents know that was happening? Can they have any confidence in such a president?

Can trustees have much confidence in Brodhead when they read a Chronicle ad endorsed by 1,000 Duke students asking when he will repudiate the faculty’s Group of 88 with whom he’s widely regarded to be sympathetic, and instead start standing up for students?

Folks, when answering the “survival” question at those social functions, I didn’t always say all or most of the above. But you get the idea of what I was saying.

I want to say more about what will encourage Brodhead to leave Duke “sooner” than he might otherwise. I also want to say something in response to commenters who’ve pointed out that “it’s not all Brodhead’s fault,” something with which I fully agree.

But this post has gotten long. So I’ll end here. I'll post in the near future on Brodhead and the very valid “it’s not all his fault” observation.