with black students. Their lives in this idyllic community of Swarthmore separated them from any meaningful interaction with blacks, other than servants. The gap between us was widened further by the changes in our superficial appearance. During the 1966–67 school year, as we let our hair grow naturally and sometimes wore African-style clothing, we began to resemble the students who were sometimes seen shouting in protest on TV. As the presumed adults in the situation, it was incumbent upon those who were assigned as our faculty advisors to look beyond the surface and connect with us. If bonding with faculty had occurred for all of us, we could have grown intellectually, learned about other perspectives and world views, and possibly gained allies who would work with us on the pressing issues for black students at Swarthmore College. When we return to the College today or meet alumni in other situations, we frequently hear that the most rewarding aspect of their Swarthmore education was the ability to connect with and be mentored by faculty. Their memories of the Swarthmore experience differ greatly from ours.
Negro History Week
In February of 1967, Swarthmore College celebrated Negro History Week for the first and only time under that name. This was the first visible sign that black students were organizing as a group. It was early in the development of a formal group that the official pronouncements were about “Negro” students, not “Blacks.” Organizations of black college students had been developing for some time prior to this, and an inter-college meeting of black students at Colombia University just a few months before had urged the formation of such groups by blacks on predominantly white campuses. This was part of the new Black Power movement, but participants had not yet fully identified themselves as black. By the next year, we rebranded our celebration as Black History Week as the term “Negro” gradually disappeared from the campus lexicon.
The agenda for Negro History Week began strategically with a folk concert in an intimate setting. In the late 1960s, folk music was popular, and the genre included black and white artists. What better way to create a conversation than with a black folk singer who could sing about current events from a black perspective? As had been the tradition at Swarthmore, all events were free and open to the public. This event took place only hours after the Student Council had formally approved SASS as an official student organization. The next event, and perhaps the highlight of the week, was a soul food dinner in the College dining hall. The College had only one dining hall, so every student and many faculty were exposed to this event, co-sponsored by the dining hall administration. If the main goal of SASS was to create an awareness of and foster dialogue about a different culture than was most prevalent on the campus, the dinner certainly accomplished that.
As Sam Shepherd explained in a letter to the school newspaper, it was not without a great deal of discussion that the organization came into being. A significant number of blacks saw no need to create an organization of this type. They had not come to a progressive, “integrated” college to separate themselves from the majority. Even among those who saw some justification for a black organization, disagreement on its goals generated intense discussions.
The Black Experience
As we learned and grew, the number of “Negroes” on campus gradually diminished as black spirits began to soar. Dean of Admissions Fred Hargadon commented that the rise of black consciousness was a deterrent to some Negro students who were looking for an integrated campus environment.
A militant “black student” group which dominates the Negro subculture on a campus may be a deterrent to attracting some Negro students to enroll here. Many Negro students are interested in finding an “integrated” situation at college.10
We argued that some black students might be deterred by the fact that Dean Hargadon referred to them as “Negro.” The dean had increasingly become the symbol of resistance to our advocacy for black awareness on campus.
We came to Swarthmore in all shapes, sizes, and colors and with many diverse perspectives on how we identified with the African American community or did not. Some grew up in predominantly white communities, some in predominantly black communities and some in foreign countries. Some brought a knowledge of black culture with them, others had minimal knowledge of it. Some were quite comfortable with and embraced the cornucopia of white cultural options available to them and some felt awkward and out of place in navigating those options.
In the ’60s, the discussion about blackness went far beyond skin color. As we began to define ourselves as black rather than Negro or colored, heated debates often ensued on what defined our blackness. Those who were comfortable with the status quo were categorized as “Uncle Toms.” At the other end of the spectrum were those who embraced the struggle and chose to actively participate in dismantling racial oppression. The majority of blacks fell somewhere in the middle, believing that any changes should be slow and orderly. Blacks at Swarthmore paralleled this continuum of the larger society, and we engaged in discussions on who was black enough.
One of the most frequent topics of debate was about the “black table” in Sharples Dining Hall. We used to say that if more than two blacks gathered together in discussion it would attract attention and conspiracy rumors would abound. You can imagine the level of discomfort that we caused when groups of black students started eating together at the long tables in Sharples. There was no conspiracy to plot an uprising, just a desire for community. With so much change going on within us and around us, we had much to discuss. Discussions about the black evolution (or revolution) took place throughout the campus and even included non-black students, but it was always easier and more productive to have these discussions with people who, although diverse, shared the common experience of growing up black in America.
As we settled into college life, the lack of black upperclassmen confirmed that we were pioneers. Although the College was one of the best endowed in the country, it shocked us to discover that it took an external grant to bring about an improvement in black admissions. The College had not lived up to its espoused core values in the matter of racial integration. SASS was not founded specifically to address the College’s shortcomings, but when black students came together in this organization, it was inevitable that the persistent inconsistencies in the College’s policies would be brought to light.
Some in our group had chosen Swarthmore explicitly because of its Quaker affiliation. Others were attracted to the overall image of the College as a place that was not just an education factory. When we arrived on campus in the late sixties, white students were already actively engaged in protesting the Vietnam War on and off campus. Several in our group supported the anti-war movement and even participated in protests. Over its history, Swarthmore had developed a reputation as an activist college. Activism was not restricted to students, as some professors were also activists in the anti-war movement.
In contrast to its Quaker values, the College aligned with the American mainstream in supporting a de facto caste system. One of the first grievances that the Seven Sisters addressed with the administration was the treatment of the College’s black service workers which helped us develop a special relationship with them. We cannot speak for all black students who were at Swarthmore during those years, but our small group had a closer relationship with the black service workers than with the white faculty. They could not advise us academically, but they did listen and give us emotional support. One of the first SASS confrontations with the College was the publication of a list of demands and a press release titled Why We Can’t Wait. In this document, we exposed the College’s history of segregation and its liberal hypocrisy.
…because its students tutor Chester Kids, lily white Swarthmore automatically assumes it’s [involved in] the racial scene and doing the best it can. White liberal Swarthmore has been content to push for racial justice and Black self-determination in Chester, or Philadelphia, or Media, rather than in its own backyard. Black Power is good in Chester, but bad on campus.11
Admissions
