This article was a group project. It was researched by several Nieman Fellows and written by Mike McGrady.)

Social Sciences 5, Harvard's first and only course in black history, was conceived in tragedy and born--perhaps prematurely -- in an atmosphere of crisis. And now, less than two months after its first class meeting, there is some question whether the infant course will, or even should, survive.

The course, rising from the anguish following the murder of the Rev. Martin Luther King, has been swaddled in controversy since its beginning. The attack, for the most part, comes from black students complaining of white lecturers, white textbooks and white outlook. Defenders of the course are willing to concede the possibility of a misstep but maintain that it is at least a misstep in the right direction.

A Starting Point

And direction is ultimately what is at stake here. Social sciences 5, officially catalogued as "The Afro-American Experience," is only a starting point. It is the first black course offered by Harvard; there will be others. How many others, what shape they will take, when they will appear -- these are matters that will be influence by the success or failure of this pilot course.

What seems likely at this point: the Faculty Committee on Afro-American and African Studies will soon recommend that Harvard begin the blue-printing for a wide range of black-oriented courses. And what seems equally likely: the committee will not recommend that Harvard offer a Concentration in Afro-American studies.

The attack from black students many of them freshmen, has prompted the Ad Hoc Committee of Black Students to announce it will prepare a critique of the course. These are some of the charges that will be aired:

* The instructorial staff headed by Frank Freidel, professor of History, brings a white complexion to black subjects. Says Wanda Williams, '72: "As the course now stands it is hardly relevant to black students because we're still seeing history through the white man's eyes." Adds one junior: "The real problem is that Freidel devotes all his time to refuting prejudices his audience does not hold. The lecture series might better be called, 'Negro Heroes I Have Known'--it consists of black equivalents of the George Washington cherry tree tale."

A Black Perspective

* Martin Kilson, member of the teaching staff, is not black enough. Says Clyde Lindsay, '69: "Professor Kilson will have to put some emotion in his lectures to let the students know that he has a perspective from which they can view the black man's historical experience in a light perhaps many of them have not considered." A letter to the Crimson from Jeffrey P. Howard, '69, adds this thought: "It should be clear from this point forward that Kilson's views are not particularly black -- he seems to have much more in common with his old-line colleagues in the Government Department than with us."

* The course is to anecdotal in nature. Says Clarence James, "72: "Lectures consist of sitting around and telling stories which may be interesting but most often are unreal." Adds Ray Hammond, '70: "There should be more concentration on student participation. Lecturers should leave 15 minutes after each talk for questions to clarify points and, in some cases, to correct the lecturer."

* The course is too objective; it should strive to generate heat as well as light. Say Rip Smith, '72: "I thought it would give us a black, subjective viewpoint. Adding more subjectivity to the work would improve it....The subjective concept would give whites more insight into why blacks act as they do today. Perhaps it could explain why Negroes are seeking a greater voice in determining their own identity."

The complaints have not gone unanswered. Perhaps the most succinct response has come from Kilson, assistant professor of government, who terms the courses "racially bigoted and disgustingly anti-intellectual." In a letter to the Crimson, Kilson made this point: "Blissfull unaware that their bigoted and paranoid outlook makes shambles of scholarship and learning, the black critics of Social Sciences 5 seek to reduce the course to a platform for black nationalistic propaganda."

Other faculty members point out that the situation is by no means unique to Harvard. The black courses rushed this year from the drawing boards to the classrooms of other universities, most notably Yale and Cornell, have aroused similar complaints from black students.

Wanted: A Place

The roots of the dilemma at Harvard go back to the week following the King assassination. A Harvard service at Memorial Chapel attracted 1200 mourners, less than a dozen of them black. Other black students, numbering nearly 100, gathered on the steps of the chapel to hold a rival memorial service. During the course of that informal ceremoney, Jeff Howard, '69, reduced the issue to its basic:

"We want black people to have a place here at Harvard."

That same day the black student organization Afro ran a half-page advertisement in this newspaper putting the complaint into sharper focus:

"It is said that Harvard is a microcosm of American society....Has Harvard fulfilled its obligations to its black students? This year at Harvard there are only TWO courses on Africa. Next year there will be NONE. Yes, Harvard is indeed a microcosm of American society--there is no place for the black man at Harvard."

The relationship between black students and Harvard administrators at this point was more a confrontation of wills than a meeting of minds. Initial Afro demands--a quota system built into the admissions policy, an endowed chair for a black professor, a rapid increase in the number of lower-level black faculty members, a Concentration in Afro-American experience--were immediately rejected.

"That was a very interesting ten days," Dean Franklin Ford said recently. "Black students demanded some major symbolic act of atonement--so many black students admitted, so many black professors by such-and-such-a-date. Well, no one reacts to that kind of demand, that kind of tone, around here. Within a week the language had changed. Then they wanted two things--to set up a committee to explore a program of African-American studies and to set up this specific course."

What Long-Range Role?

The softened demands were both approved. A committee under Henry Rosovsky, professor of Economics, was named to study the long-range role of black studies in the Harvard curriculum. And on May 16 of this year Dean Ford announced plans for Soc Sci 5. That same day Richard E. Neustadt, chairman of the General Education Subcommittee in the Social Sciences, cautioned that experts in this new academic area were not readily available: "We felt the important thing was to get serious faculty working in a serious way rather than wait for the right expert to come along."

"We did see the dangers involved even then," Dean Ford says. "Since it was an experimental course, it would be quite uneven. And since it was emotional course, a lot of people would have their own ideas on how it should be run."

The springtime drama at Harvard was simultaneously replayed at dozens of other universities. Even as Harvard announced its plans for Soc Sci 5, 100 representatives of 35 colleges and universities were meeting at Yale to listen to many leading black intellectuals arguing in favor of including black-experience courses in the curriculum.

Some attending that meeting urged caution. Gerald McWhorter, professor at Fisk, warned that few universities were adequately prepared to establish such courses or departments. McWhorter went on to propose a preliminary foundation-financed study of the problem.

One of the spokesmen at that conference personifies the problems that Harvard has begun to encounter. Nathan Hare, special coordinater of black studies at San Francisco State College, recently authored a memo that sets strict standards for a teaching staff ("Any white professors involved in the program would have to be Black in spirit in order to last. The same is true for 'Negro' professors"), specifically excludes the possibility of whites teaching black history ("The white man is unqualified to teach black history because he does not understand it") and finally wonders whether white students should be permitted to take black classes ("It may be necessary eventually to distinguish Black education for Blacks and Black education for whites.")

"I don't see how you can take this position," argues Dean Ford. "It leads to segregation. This is to isolate cultures in a way no national culture could stand. There are two main reasons we don't agree. One, we don't set up a course to teach any particular kind of student. Two, this would make a shambles of any curriculum, this hang-up between national and intellectual criteria. It is our feeling that a narrative can be honestly taught by honest men."

Center of the Storm

The man selected to launch Soc Sci 5 at Harvard--and the man bearing the brunt of the criticism--is Professor Frank Freidel, 52, senior member of the History Department and noted Franklin D. Roosevelt biographer. Freidel, approached both by members of Afro and by the faculty committee last spring, abandoned his plans to teach a course this year on the New Deal and accepted the draft. After soliciting recommendations from black students and other faculty members, Freidel spent a summer on Cape Cod gathering together his lecture material and drawing up a reading list.

During the course of a recent two-hour interview, Freidel seemed relaxed--but not at all unaware of the criticism. He admitted at the outset that time had been limited.

"It was hasty preparation," he said. "Obviously, the first time through changes must be made and I'm ready to talk to anybody. Still, it would not have been possible to postpone this course until spring....Given more time, it would not necessarily have been better. Our preparation was adequate. I have no apology for the course as it has existed this fall, even though some changes could be made."

Freidel was asked about the charge that the course seems to some to have a white complexion.

Whites Not Disqualified

"I well understand that they would prefer to have it taught by a black person," he said. "I don't think this means that a white is therefore disqualified, any more than a black would be disqualified from teaching Renaissance history. I would fight to the death any feeling that black professors could teach only black courses....And I've done my best to set up a good reading list. It never occurred to me to check whether the authors were black or white. And if I had it to over again, I wouldn't make that check. I'm not trying to follow aa line."

That, of course, is one of the other criticisms, a feeling among black students that the course should have a black point of view.

"I'm outside the family," Freidel said. "I'm under suspicion of being a white racist and a black racist at the same time. The truth is, I'm not trying to be a racist at all, but to give the best insight I can into a very painful subject....I'm not an activist, I'm a scholar. I wouldn't have agreed to teach this course if I didn't think it would be a scholarly contribution. I'd like to run this as a Harvard course, as a subject for serious study. I'm not interested in just the Afro-Americans, but in all students. It's not my purpose to foster a given line. White students need the course as much as black students."

Not for Freshmen

Then Freidel turned to the charge that his lecturing was too anecdotal: "Well, you know, we accepted all sophomores, juniors and seniors who asked to take the course. We couldn't take everybody else but we let in some black freshmen. It may very well be that my lectures are ill-suited for freshmen and sophomores. I put in anecdotes to illustrate points--students complain if lectures become straight factual presentations. I assumed when I saw their backgrounds--and these are great kids, caught up in a great movement -- that these students already knew about Nat Turner and John Brown. But I was assuming too much knowledge on their part. Now I'm trying to give lectures that have more emphasis on fundamentals.

"I've been guilty of giving too high-powered lectures. I goofed, that's all. I've been aiming at juniors and seniors. these freshmen are very bright but they haven't grasped what the anecdotes are about. It's gone over the heads of some of them, that's all."

Needless to say, not all students express disenchantment with the new course offering. Three-fourths of the 250 students enrolled in Soc Sci 5 are white; and some of them seem more disenchanted by the critics than by the course.

"Some of the criticism has been unauthorized and unconstructive," says Roger Brooks, '71. "My impression is that some of them think the more noise they make, the more they will be able to accomplish in trying to make the professor see it their way....Professor Freidel is really feeling his way through. But I've been enjoying the course. I've learned a lot, especially during the sections."

"The course has been good therapy," says Hamilton Hadden, '71: "I realize I'm a prejudiced person. Maybe by understanding the cultural biases of society I'll understand myself better. The course is no great solution in itself. But if you're interested in current problems and solutions, you'll find them there."

Faculty Optimistic

The faculty as a whole remains generally optimistic about the progress of the course. Liberal faculty members who supported the course from the beginning feel that it is getting by the rough spots; the "conservative establishment," skeptical from the outset, has had its skepticism reinforced.

Despite Soc Sci 5's well publicized difficulties, the general faculty feeling is that these difficulties are only transitional and can be explained, to use the phrase of one professor, "by exogenous factors." The exogenous factors cited by some faculty members include:

* The feeling that Black Power advocates would tend to reject anything that appears to be a creation of whites;

A Strange Method?

* The unfamiliarity of black freshmen with the simple mechanics of a Harvard course, the manner in which material gradually unfolds, the reluctance to use any current material ("the bang-bang stuff") until the second term;

* And even the worsening weather, the onset of winter, was cited as a factor that might have contributed to the generally tense situation of the past few weeks.

On the administrative level, however, the success of the course is not assumed.

"If this course fails," said one key man, "it would hurt the prospects for future black courses. There is great concern over demonstrations against the course, fear that an attempt will be made to close it down. The administrators are trying to face all possibilities realistically--but it's possible that by being so concerned with developing antidotes, we're actually helping to create some of the symptoms. Particularly worrisome is the possibility of a picket line which students, and perhaps even Freidel, would not cross."

Even the most outspoken critics of the course, however, do not now envision the possibility of demonstrations.

"If we protest for any adjustments in the course," says Ray Hammond, '70, "it will not be in the form of a disruption. Any legitimate adjustments can be made easily. We're dealing with basically good people, and the relationship between black students and the faculty is direct, not indirect."

Soc Sci 5 is, to use Professor Rosovsky's phrase, "a response to an emergency." And the limited but emotional war waged against it these past few weeks is perhaps important only to the extent that it affects the future of black-experience courses at Harvard.

The Rosovsky committee studying this problem will submit proposals in January. The feeling among committee members and administrators now is that the proposals will not lead to a Concentration in Afro-American Studies. Rosovky's current thinking: "It is more important to introduce the Afro-American experience into the general curriculum."

Every bit as important as the committee's recommendations will be the black students' reactions. And that must be a question mark.

'Afraid of Harvard'

"These students are afraid of Harvard," observed one committee member, "and Harvard is afraid of them. Both are suspicious. And it's going to get worse. I sympathize with the black militants but this is a harmful phenomenon; it is both destructive and polarizing. It's a reflection of what's going on now, a reflection of the militancy of society as a whole. At this moment we're fighting a holding action."

Similar concern was expressed by committee member Alan Heimert, Master of Eliot House:

"If the wisdom of the black students is for total separation, the crunch will come.