Letter to the Editor: On Noa Tishby

The careful introduction to Noa Tishby’s talk by Associate Dean of Students for Equity and Engagement Crystal Norwood on Monday reminded us that, in the spirit of critical inquiry, Amherst College values curiosity, listening, and learning from one another. She reminded us too that the college strives to center “respect for difference” and the “opportunity to hear voices across the ideological spectrum.” The event itself — securitized, stage-managed, forgoing audience questions, and rather sparsely attended by Amherst students themselves — was hardly such an invitation to broad engagement. In her tone and content, Tishby’s intention to “set the facts straight” fell far short of upholding these ideals. Opting for polemics over nuance, she proved herself not to be equal to the strong social and intellectual spirit of the community she was addressing.  

Tishby’s disdain for those opposing her views was evident. In her defensive words, she replied to a welcome call in Hebrew by saying that “it wasn’t heckling, but the night is young.” Was she disappointed when no such heckling materialized? Her suggestions that demonstrators had been “radicalized” by social media or were a “bunch of sweet misguided kids” denigrated student political agency and sophistication. Protesters outside Johnson Chapel “would not be able to tell me what Zionism is, at all,” Tishby stated. That insulting characterization willfully ignores students in classes across multiple departments that immerse them in the past and present of such ideas. She also mocked protesters who were masked, ignoring the real dangers that students — especially undocumented and international students — face in the current climate for protesting Israel’s war in Gaza. Tishby’s own explanations, meanwhile, were glib: light on facts, and heavy on rhetoric. “Every answer of how and why is probably going to be [the Jews],” she quipped. This would not pass muster in an Amherst classroom, where students seek meaningful depth and answers. 

While she was supposedly here to “set the facts straight,” Tishby’s infrequent informational statements were frequently wide of the mark. Tracing the rise of Palestinian nationalism to a reactionary force formed in the 1960s with KGB funding, or claiming that the Chinese population (where there is ongoing persecution of Uyghurs and other minorities) is composed of just “one group of people,” demonstrates a lack of the curiosity we see in our student body. It is safe to say that the talk itself would not have contributed to grade inflation in the humanities.   

Antisemitism, Palestinian activism, Islamophobia, and immigration are issues that touch many students personally and have ramifications for campus life. They deserve to be treated with a fitting seriousness. Like all Amherst students, Jewish students on campus represent a wide range of viewpoints, and they deserve speakers who will enrich and enliven their Jewish identification instead of wielding it against others. All of us would benefit from speakers who inject seriousness and vibrancy into campus conversation, bringing students, faculty, and staff together around new ideas.

Higher education is under greater pressure than ever to make a pitch for its value. For the sake of students, staff, and the institution alike, let us showcase its worth. This community has come too far in its fierce will to hold together in dialogue to allow facile sloganeering to call it into question. 

Eliza J. Clark Folger Professor of English Judith Frank

Associate Professor of Art & the History of Art and of Asian Languages and Civilizations; Program Chair of Architectural Studies Yael Rice

On behalf of concerned Jewish faculty and staff