What’s in a Name

The past year has seen a heightened awareness of the reverberations of names on campus. Student activism resulted in the changing of “House master” to “Faculty Dean." University President Drew G. Faust unveiled a plaque on Wadsworth House honoring the names of four slaves who lived and worked there centuries ago. Law School students occupied a portion of the student center, re-christening it “Belinda Hall” after a slave owned by law school benefactors.

But as Harvard grapples with the names of the past, it is quietly filling the campus with the names of the present.

From the John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences and the T.H. Chan School of Public Health to Danoff Dean of Harvard College Rakesh Khurana and Edgerley Family Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences Michael D. Smith, a new generation of names is discreetly trickling into campus.

With the recent revelation that Dean Smith is considering allowing faculty deanships to be named in honor of donors, Harvard might not be stopping at its current lineup. Given that the house renewal phase of the Harvard Campaign is behind schedule, and that the Faculty of Arts and Sciences is strapped for liquidity, we understand the particular predicament facing the University.

Still, extenuating circumstances notwithstanding, the University must weigh the permanence of an endowed title against its short-term need for funds. After all, once these titles have been sold to donors, administrators must search elsewhere for funds. And with the recent lackluster performance of Harvard Management Company, even more pressure to find sustainable sources of income may to weigh on the shoulders of FAS leadership.

Despite the fact that fundraising and endowment performance are not immediately related, both fundraisers and donors are put in a difficult position when HMC is not able to earn a positive return from investing their gifts.

The lasting nature of these titles has other important consequences. When a title is intended to last indefinitely, administrators must make sure the donors from whom it accepts money reflect well upon the University. Though we are not proposing specific criteria for the University to consider, administrators must keep this reality in mind.

Despite our reservations, we are not necessarily opposed to allowing donors to name faculty deanships. Endowed names in the houses are, after all, hardly unprecedented. Eight of Harvard’s houses bear the names of former University presidents and have for centuries. Each house has an Allston Burr Assistant Dean of Harvard College, and many individual house buildings bear the names of donors.

But while we understand the arguments in favor of renaming the faculty deanships and do not wish to dismiss the idea out of hand, the University would do well to remember current debates over names as it undertakes this project. It would be a bitter irony if administrators who have been highly conscious about today’s controversies give birth to tomorrow’s.