THIS WEEKEND, a team of students from Hamilton College engaged members of the Jefferson and Washington Societies in a debate over who was the greater founding father -- Alexander Hamilton or Thomas Jefferson. In seeking to disparage the legacy of Mr. Jefferson, the team from Hamilton College harped on the alleged relations of our illustrious founder with his slave, Sally Hemings. These allegations, while used in a humorous debate, brought to mind the recent "tommy heart sally" campaign around Grounds. This campaign seeks to publicize as much as possible the relationship between Jefferson and Hemings. Where the campaign must be careful is in their methods and motives. Those organizing it ought to make sure that their purpose and methods go beyond a tongue-in-cheek mockery of the University and actually accomplish their stated purposes.
The official website of the "tommy heart sally" campaign presents, in a press release dated Valentine's Day, that the campaign is meant to be "educational," and seeks to "embrace what our beloved Mr. Jefferson embraced, and to love what our beloved Mr. Jefferson loved." This language sounds good, and by exercising the freedom of speech and the press in expressing this viewpoint, the campaign embraces other things Jefferson loved. But this rhetoric lies amidst a paragraph of tongue-in cheek language. Those behind the campaign describe themselves as "Thomists, veritable Jefferson-o-philes," and attach words charged with the sexual nature of the Jefferson-Hemings saga, such as "amative," "castrate" and "impotent."
These words suggest that perhaps those behind the campaign, despite all the hard work that seems to have gone into it (judging from the numerous flyers and bumper stickers around grounds, as well as from the fact that the web site now sells t-shirts), present their topic in a juvenile manner, as if Hemings and Jefferson were grade-school sweethearts. According to Keith Cox, current spokesman for the campaign, this is intentional as the campaign uses elements of whimsicality and satire as part of its popular appeal. He also stated, however, that it treats some events "in earnest," such as having a Hemings relative speak to students, faculty, and the community. What the campaign needs to be careful of, if it seeks to be a legitimate voice, is that it publicizes itself not as a University counter-cultural group that seeks only controversy. Rather, it ought to make more apparent its serious focus.
The student body will not take a satirical campaign seriously. The flyers should clarify the purpose of the campaign, rather than trying to shock students or portray Jefferson in a different light. (Cox believes the campaign is the first to pair an image of Jefferson with that of an African-American.)
The other problem with the campaign is that in its public phase, it focuses too much on the relationship of Jefferson with Hemings at the expense of his other achievements. While Cox says this is unintentional, and that the campaign does not need to shore up the common perceptions of Jefferson, in its public sphere the only emphasis is on Jefferson's sexual habits.
The campaign argues that by ignoring Mr. Jefferson's relations with Hemings, people "whitewash" history and steer clear of racial issues and "miscegenation." Certainly the University Guide Service does not go out of its way to highlight the Jefferson-Hemings relationship. But as students in the 21st century, who all know about the personal proclivities of our University's founder, we ought to be able to move beyond any petty voyeurism that would seek to draw our attention to it, and instead to seek the correct perspective. Fixation on any one aspect of Jefferson's life would be narrow-minded, whether it is his college career at William and Mary, or his time as governor, or his building of Monticello, or even the founding of the University. It would leave an incomplete picture of the man. "Tommy heart sally" can play a role in this by helping humanize Jefferson -- to, as Cox said, make him less like a statue.
Jefferson ought to be remembered largely as he wanted to be: for the Declaration of Independence, Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom and the University. While Sally Hemings ought not be left out, her memory should accompany these achievements, not eclipse them.
Robby Colby's column appears Thursdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at rcolby@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 4 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
