Less than a week after a noose was found on the seventh floor of Geisel Library, police are investigating another racially charged act on campus: a Ku Klux Klan-style pillowcase hood, complete with a hand-drawn KKK symbol, placed on the Dr. Seuss statue outside Geisel.
The discovery was made at 11 p.m. on Monday, March 1, and has since been confirmed by UCSD Head Librarian Brian Schottlaender. In addition to the hood, a rose was placed in the statue’s fingers.
The statue was donated in 2004 by Audrey Geisel — widow of Theodor Geisel, also known as Dr. Seuss — who also donated $20 million to the construction of the library.
According to an article in the San Diego Union-Tribune, Geisel was contacted by a librarian regarding the incident. She said the act was an example of “a little faction” that gets “carried away” with the attention these events receive.
According to an article from KPBS San Diego, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the District Attorney’s Office and the U.S. Attorney General’s office are all investigating the recent offensive acts on campus.
Both Director of Library Communications Dolores Davies and Assistant Manager of University Communications Christine Clark said the planting of the hood is being treated as a crime, and all those responsible will be punished under the law.
Police have removed the items and are processing them for evidence, including fingerprint and DNA analysis.
“This is being treated as an investigation which is being treated with all authority,” said Clark.
Officers at UCSD finished their investigation of the noose today and submitted it to city police. The student who claimed responsibility for the noose is currently suspended, and has been charged with a possible hate crime.
The hood is the latest incident in a two-week rise in hate speech throughout the UC system, which included the scrawling of a noose on a UC Santa Cruz bathroom — with the words “UCSD lynching” near it — and the vandalizing of the UC Davis LGBT Resource Center with homophobic slurs.
Readers can contact Angela Chen at shchen@ucsd.edu.
Related posts:
(1) UCSD: A group of dumb white frat guys hold an event called a “Compton Cookout.” This pisses people off as it used Black History Month as a reason to mock black people with racist stereotypes. Also involved is some idiot who tries to use this opportunity for shameless self-promotion, who also happens to be black. To say the least, the guy is basically a wannabe Flavor Flav.
(2) UCSD: Another dumb white frat guy gets mad that blacks are offended of being relegated to a bigoted stereotype. He tries to hold another racist event.
(3) UCSD: Meanwhile, a terrible student media publication (which, after viewing their website consists of all white staff, nudity, staff wrestling each other, and well, not much else), pushes their limits calling black students “ungrateful n——” – not just that word, but also that apparently the black students owed them something. They have a reputation of being trashy, and at this point, administration and faculty rush to condemn racism by students of the campus and various protests begin. Funding is also cut from all student media at UCSD, creating an extra bitter controversy.
(4) UCSD: On Friday of that week, a noose is found in the library. Everything gets worked in a frenzy and – something I’ll address later – a large amount of white commenter’s on the internet begin claiming that is was probably a black student who planted it in order to gain more sympathy. In addition, there are rumors of a threatening note sent to the Guardian and a second noose, there was no second noose, and the threat seems to be just a rumor.
(5) UCSD: Protests basically happen at all schools in support of the students. There are various sit-ins, and teach-ins, and what have you. School administrators become pushed to be more active in fixing what’s going on.
I have not seen this noose person, but most of you blame her and conveniently forget wear this all originated.
Instead of an apology there has been steady escalation and now the noose. So, what exactly will the excuses be for this cowardly act that brings up memories of the confederate KKK of the South in their attempts to keep slavery and the non-whites in fear? Is it that are uneducated, is it that their parents planted these seeds of hate, is it that they are live in fear because our President in the white house is not 100% white. In my opinion this is what the small portions of the republican party of “birthers, baggers and blowhards” have brought you. These kids are good at “Follow the Leader” of their dullard leaders, they listen to Beck, Hedgecock, Hannity, O’Reilly, Rush and Savage and the rest of the Blowhards, they are young and dumb. Are you surprise at what they do when you know what they think? The world is complicated and most republicans (Hamiliton, Lincoln, Roosevelt) believe that we should use government a little to increase social mobility, now its about dancing around the claim of government is the problem. The sainted Reagan passed the biggest tax increase in American history and as a result federal employment increased, but facts are lost when mired in mysticism and superstition. Although most republicans are trying to distant themselves from this fringe they have a long way to go.
@Montana: nice summary of the issue but i really doubt any of this is politically motivated. dumb kids? yes. anti-establishment beck scions? highly unlikely.
And the worst thing was Dr Suess B party was cancelled!
Montana,
Thanks, that was a nice summary of the events. However it could have easily stopped at point 5 and been helpful without the rant. It is obvious that the people responsible for these actions are racist, no question. But I think it is pretty rude and judgmental to assume that means they are Republicans or listen to Conservative media. No matter how many times you say they are a small portion of Republicans or the “bad seeds” you are still attributing intolerance to being a primarily Conservative flaw which is offensive.
Also, while I know the end of your speech about Hamilton, Lincoln and Roosevelt being good and Regan being bad was supposed to be inspiring and smart, the fact that its all straight out of the last episode of the Colbert Report makes you lose a lot of what you were going for.
@Amelia,
Individual conservatives may or may not be racist. My guess is that the rank and file conservatives are well-meaning. But the standard bearers of the movement on Fox News, talk radio and other conservative media very often play on racial fears with either overt reference to race or, more often, with coded language that creates racial images in the listeners.
Just the name of a location (like Compton), a political party (Democrats), a known leader (Jesse Jackson), government program (welfare) or even an adjective (lazy) bring up race for many white conservatives. Some of this may even work unconsciously, but most of it is obvious, especially to the Black community. Whites and Blacks knew who Ronald Reagan was referring to when he said “welfare queens” (and it wasn’t the many poor white women or males that were on welfare.) When Clear Channel’s John and Ken refer to “illegal aliens”, they’re not talking about Canadians here illegally; it’s a code word for “Mexican”. When Sean Hannity talks about “taking the country back”, it’s not about taking it back for minorities but taking it back from them. When Rush Limbaugh called NOLA Mayor Ray Nagin “Mayor Nager”, it was clear what his little pronunciation trick actually meant. And when Glenn Beck speaks…well, I’ll leave that one to you because I don’t have the foggiest idea of what Glenn Beck actually means about anything.
I understand that you don’t wish for conservatives to be stereotyped, and no one is accusing every conservative of being a racist. That’s wrong and unfair. But I can understand how many people can end up with the idea that conservatives all think like popular conservative media figures.
Nicely put, Lili. Instead of fighting Glenn Beck’s wacko battles, the conservative movement should think if they really want to re-group around Neverneverland and all the fictions these seducers conjure up for the weak-minded. There once was a time… Well, guess what: there once was a time when I was listen to respectfully listen to somebody who said they are a conservative. Their shrill yapping today is way past my pain threshold.
Dear Chancellor Fox:
I am writing to you concerning the continued racial controversies at various University of California campuses. Since the noose left at the UCSD library has been removed, I’m contemplating to send you a new one. Why? Because a good old-fashioned lynching is in order.
Before you rush to conclusions, let me explain.
The current episode of turmoil began with a local party whose theme poked fun at stereotypes supposedly representative of South Central LA. Any reasonable person would readily perceive this approach as satire, a longstanding literary and dramatic device. Was it offensive? As with most satire, it definitely was – and that is good.
You see, when we are offended, we are likely to react. Unless that reaction is simply a knee-jerk response (such as that by your office), a reaction requires activation of one’s brain. You may agree that activating our brains is infinitely preferable over mindlessly swallowing whatever b.s. we happen to be served.
One particularly unpalatable piece of b.s. that is shoved down our collective throat is “diversity.”
In its original form, diversity is highly desirable. In nature, biologically diverse ecosystems are less vulnerable to diseases and more productive than monocultures. On a university campus, opposing (or even merely different) viewpoints spur lively debate, which in turn fosters creativity and innovation. Without question, humanity collectively benefits from the contributions inspired by a large variety of backgrounds and experiences.
Why has the University of California chosen to adopt race/ethnicity as the single decisive factor in furthering diversity? Are you ensuring UCSD receives a balanced mix of Republicans and Democrats? Gays and heterosexuals? Opera lovers and metal heads? Meat eaters and vegans? How about students who prefer the writings of Ayn Rand versus those of Karl Marx? Perhaps a proper mix of students interested in quantum physics and aspiring poets (and those writing poetry about quantum physics)? Folks that can appreciate Dr. Seuss on a subversive level, and those who can’t? I’m virtually certain that more diverse viewpoints will result from any of these arbitrary traits than the color of someone’s skin.
I assumed that college application essays served to differentiate students beyond grades and test scores. It appears that with all the budget cuts, there is no staff to read them. Therefore, instead of treating students as the unique individuals they are, it seems easier to simply lump them into categories with emotionally charged labels.
Sure, race and ethnicity, along with height, weight and gender, are the most obvious traits we notice about people we meet, before they have a chance to open their mouths and let us glean some insight into more substantial aspects of their personas. But isn’t that precisely the sort of simpleminded superficiality higher education is supposed to eradicate?
Throughout history, people with their own agendas have used arbitrary traits to unite, divide and discriminate against people. Each time, they applied a nice, shiny euphemism. “Preserving family values” – sounds like a good thing, right? How about “preserving the pure blood of the Aryan race?” It gives us cold chills today, but it sounded perfectly benign, even laudable, during the Nazi era.
Another shiny euphemism is “diversity.” If we add more “blacks” (however you may define that label), we will create a student body that is more balanced and representative of our society – so goes the reasoning du jour. Are we going to assume that “blacks” … come from challenged socioeconomic backgrounds? Are more conscious about human rights? Have rhythm? Jump higher?
I am not privy to UCSD’s list of stereotypical “black” traits. Make no mistake, that list exists, even if it is only implied – because every time we attempt to force a group of diverse (in its original meaning) individuals under a labeled (or red and white striped) hat, we give birth to such a list. Such a list, while perhaps not offensive at first glance, is far more damaging than the list of attributes used by the Compton Cookout as the recommended attire, behavior and attitude of its attendees. Because any list that is born under the auspices of a prestigious institution such as UCSD will automatically be imbued with a sense of legitimacy.
The characteristics we choose to identify others and ourselves mark the dividing lines between social groups. By focusing on race, we are furthering this broken model of diversity.
If we allow racial definitions to divide us, if we allow the fear of symbols to control us, if we allow the threat of persecution to silence us, our race – the human race – will succumb to the worst form of slavery.
This is my call to hunt down and publicly execute the ignorant and racist notions that have hijacked the concept of diversity. What better place than a library, a place of learning and organized knowledge? Let’s hang these ill-conceived ideas from the rafters and let their rotting corpses remind us that if we want to vanquish racism, we must start by treating all people equally.
For if we allow misguided preconceptions to live, we are bound to witness the death of the accomplishments brought by the Civil Rights Movement, of free speech, and of our human dignity.
Yours sincerely,
The Cat in the Hood
Experienced quite a few difficulties browsing the website in Safari using the Mac pc, nevertheless I still appreciated the web page!