CAUT concludes Capilano University violated academic freedom

Remember that weird artwork in the library a few months ago?

Perhaps you remember a strange sculpture that was in the Surrey library for a few months. It depicted a person wearing a cap and holding a poodle, draped in an American flag. The work, titled Margaux & the Monarch, is a satirical piece depicting current Capilano University president Kris Bulcroft, created by former Capilano University fine art professor George Rammell.

It turns out that this was a reconstruction of a similar sculpture seized and destroyed by Capilano University last May.

The Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) released a report in June, reaching the conclusion that George Rammell’s academic freedom was violated.

In the spring of 2013, the university announced plans to cut funding to several programs, namely adult basic education, textiles and studio art. It was around this time that Capilano students and faculty protested the cuts on campus by demonstrating and creating and destroying art. George Rammell did the same, in the form of Blathering on in Krisendom.

“At a glance, you can pick up what I’m saying. In the new piece, I resculpted it last summer, because I took the broken heaps they gave back to me,” says Rammell.

“That was meant to send me a message, that if I criticized the president, my voice will be squashed. It was extremely draconian.”

Rammell mentioned that his faculty has a wrongful dismissal suit in the works.

Rammell agrees that the destruction of his work could have created a “Streisand Effect,” which is the idea that attempting to censor something draws more attention to something than simply leaving it alone.

“If they had just ignored it, or if she had laughed at it, the way Trudeau might laugh at political cartoons over his morning coffee, it probably wouldn’t have had much impact. The fact that they tried to hide it by destroying it and shutting me up, that’s what put it on the front page all over the country. That encouraged the [CAUT] to take up the case.”

“It wasn’t just George who was a subject of a crackdown on political protest at the university. A lot of students who were protesting the cuts had their banners taken down and destroyed,” says David Robinson, executive director at CAUT. “There was a real culture of intimidation going on within the university as the report found out. I think the university’s actions were so over the top, their justification so weak, that in the end, it came back to haunt them.”

“In the end, they even refused to recognize that they had made a mistake.”

Robinson explained that academic freedom gives professors freedom to criticize the university without fear of getting fired.

“Are there any limits to academic freedom? Absolutely. Academic freedom doesn’t give you the right to manufacture data and say, ‘Well that’s my academic freedom, I can do whatever I want.’ You have to adhere to certain academic standards. If I’m a professor of biology, I can’t walk into a classroom [and start teaching creationism].”

Robinson further explains that professors cannot use their academic freedom to discriminate against people on protected grounds or harass anyone as defined by the law.

Rammell was never approached by police.

Robinson isn’t sure if the seizure of the artwork was legal or illegal, but likely fell under the internal policies of the university.

“Had Rammell been a professor of English and wrote an essay in protest, and the university sent staff into his office to rip it up or delete it from his hard drive, we would be similarly outraged.”

Jane Shackell, a former board member of Capilano University who ordered the seizure of his artwork, declined an interview request.

Kris Bulcroft didn’t reply to an email request, however, a Capilano University communications advisor sent The Runner a prepared statement. According to the letter, the university settled the matter last year, and considers the matter “closed.”

“Very seldom do I come across something so black and white,” says Robinson. “What the administration did was so egregiously repulsive, that offended all sensibilities of academic freedom, it was so clear. Many other cases that we deal with, there are shades of grey that we have to wade through, but this was a clear black and white case.”