Oral History Program George B. Campbell Interviewed by James F. Cartwright 1 June 1983 Oral History Program Weber State University Stewart Library Ogden, Utah George B. Campbell Interviewed by James F. Cartwright Assistant University Archivist 1 June 1983 Copyright © 2012 by Weber State University, Stewart Library iii Mission Statement The Oral History Program of the Stewart Library was created to preserve the institutional history of Weber State University and the Davis, Ogden and Weber County communities. By conducting carefully researched, recorded, and transcribed interviews, the Oral History Program creates archival oral histories intended for the widest possible use. Interviews are conducted with the goal of eliciting from each participant a full and accurate account of events. The interviews are transcribed, edited for accuracy and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewees (as available), who are encouraged to augment or correct their spoken words. The reviewed and corrected transcripts are indexed, printed, and bound with photographs and illustrative materials as available. The working files, original recording, and archival copies are housed in the University Archives. Project Description The Weber State College Oral History Program was created in the early 1970s to “record and document, through personal reminiscences, the history, growth and development of Weber State College.” Through interviews with administrators, faculty and students, the program’s goal was to expand the documentary holdings on Weber State College and its predecessor entities. From 1970 to 1976, the program conducted some fifteen interviews, under the direction of, and generally conducted by Harold C. Bateman, an emeritus professor of history. In 1979, under the direction of archivist John Sillito, the program was reestablished and six interviews were conducted between 1979 and 1983. Additional interviews were conducted by members of the Weber State community. ____________________________________ Oral history is a method of collecting historical information through recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account. It reflects personal opinion offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ____________________________________ Rights Management This work is the property of the Weber State University, Stewart Library Oral History Program. It may be used freely by individuals for research, teaching and personal use as long as this statement of availability is included in the text. It is recommended that this oral history be cited as follows: Campbell, George B., an oral history by James F. Cartwright, 1 June 1983, WSU Stewart Library Oral History Program, University Archives, Stewart Library, Weber State University, Ogden, UT. George B. Campbell 1 Abstract: The following is an oral history interview with George B. Campbell. Mr. Campbell came to Weber State College in 1966 as director of Project RESPECT. The interview was conducted on June 1, 1983 by James F. Cartwright in order to gather Mr. Campbell’s recollections and experiences with Project RESPECT, Black Student Union, and Black Scholars United at Weber State College. JC: My name is Jim Cartwright and today's date is June 1, 1983. I am in the home of Mr. George B. Campbell. I'm interviewing him concerning Project RESPECT and Black Student Union/ Black Scholars United at Weber State College. First of all, Mr. Campbell, I'd like to have you share with us a little bit of your background: where you were from, your parents, brothers and sisters, and some of this background. GC: I came to Utah from Pennsylvania (that's mostly where my family was from) in the mid-sixties for the purpose of working and continuing my education. Just a brief period before coming to Utah I was involved in Office of Economic Opportunity training. Do you remember the Office of Economic Opportunity programs back in the sixties? JC: I don't. GC: Office of Economic Opportunity. So under that came Peace Corps, Vista, Job Corps, and a number of other programs like that. I got involved in Job Corps staff training. The air base where my mother worked in Pennsylvania closed down, and the functions had been moved to Hill Air Force Base in Ogden, so my mother moved out here. Around that same time I was training in California for Office of 2 Economic Opportunity there was a decision to establish a Job Corps Center here in Utah, Weber Basin Job Corps. I was one of the first staff members of Weber Basin Job Corps. JC: When did that happen? GC: That was around 1965 or 1966. So that worked out family wise. My sister came out here. She was in college back East, but came out here, continuing her education and pursuing her career. So it was a change for all of us coming to a place like Utah, like Ogden and Salt Lake area, quite different from the East where there is more of a cultural basis for doing things and understanding things. It was rather difficult for me to understand why people did and said a lot of the things here without as much history as is established back East. It was rather difficult for me to relate to this place after having come from where you're continually just walking on historical monuments. Everywhere you turn everything's a monument. We were thirty five miles from Gettysburg. There's the Liberty Bell; there are different streets where different people lived like William Penn, John Harris, the Quaker tradition. So coming to Utah was quite different, and I found this culture out here to be one with still a pioneer spirit, a frontier ethic still going on. Whether the people here view it that way, I still see it as a tremendous frontier effort: people are still struggling to establish an identity as well as establish a historical basis. That was rather exciting to me to be a part of the life of a pioneer. JC: You probably thought you were. GC: Yes, very much so. 3 JC: Had you had much schooling in Pennsylvania before you came out? GC: Yes. I'd started some college: I'd gone to business college and started to a regular--well it wasn't four-year yet; it was a junior college, an extension of Penn State University. I had started my education career at least, and I had a background in most academic subjects as well as extensive travel. I traveled most of the East Coast as a professional musician. JC: I've noticed your picture with the guitar on the mantle. GC: As a matter of fact, at a very young age I was playing professionally, so I got to travel a lot and meet a lot of people, mostly on the East Coast. So the move to Utah, as I said, was kind of a pioneer effort. JC: Or a culture shock. GC: Yes, to say the least. Knowing that there was a part of the culture out here that suggested that perhaps I was in some ways inferior, I couldn't quite relate to that. You know, not along the grounds that were reported to me as to why perhaps I was inferior. I understood all the nuances that went on back East, but that's highly competitive. People say and do a lot of things, whether they call it discrimination or what, for competitive reasons as opposed to religious or cultural reasons. So discrimination, racial and cultural biases, I took them seriously because they hurt people, but I never took it to heart, as though there was any real basis except for the fact that there was a lot of people struggling. People do and say a whole lot of ugly things in order to climb over one another. That's all I understood the type of discrimination back East to be. But I came out here and when I took a few steps forward to the spiritual aspect I found a rather humorous. 4 JC: I suppose after you could get past the initial pain? GC: Well, it wasn't really pain because I understood. I had a strong background in religion also. I understand a lot of things that people do and say, especially when a religious order had been established; regardless of what religious order has been established, there is always the good guys and the bad guys concept, and somebody has to be the bad guy. It was just a matter of scapegoating [according to] sociological definitions, just a lot of scapegoating. But, I found it to be very important for those people who entertain that kind of philosophy, very important because that became the basis of their self-concept, not only their religious but also their family order, their whole social order. Whether I like it or not, I know that is awfully important. JC: To some of the others. GC: Very important; otherwise, how were they to feel as though they were someone, especially knowing what I know about the original pioneers that came out here. Like some of the original Americans, these weren't the elite stock. Look at the history of Ogden, for instance. It will be a long time before they can cover up the real history of Ogden's 25th Street which was an integral part of the culture. One day maybe we'll be able to hide and erase and say that those things never went on and people weren't gun toting or drunkards. The people who came here were not faithful followers; most of them were pretty rugged folks with all the ills and evils of many Eastern cities, even more concentrated, in a way, about 25th Street. This was long before a substantial number of minorities, blacks and others moved to this area. I'm only saying what people brought along with them 5 was not an elite culture. I had to look at that as a backdrop for why it was so important. JC: Why people responded to you the way they did. GC: That's why it was humorous to me, kind of a sociological study. JC: You came about 1965? GC: More around 1966 because I had gone to California and studied there. JC: How did you come into official relationship with Weber State College and when? GC: After I had worked as a counselor for federal Job Corps project, and while I was attending the University of Utah, a friend of mine alerted me to the fact that the State of Utah wanted to apply for some federal grants to do some man power studies with regard to training disadvantaged people. A staff was needed. Project directors and researchers were needed and I threw my hat in the ring. I became director of what became known as Project RESPECT, an educational program, the objectives of which were to go into the low income, poor, or what was then called disadvantaged neighborhoods, and seek people who wanted more training and job opportunities to be their way out of their situation. So the object was to locate those people and also provide job training and placement for those people. Well, there are a number of ways of doing that sort of thing. We found that there are a number of institutions that were already seeking to do that kind of thing, but they just didn't have our resource capability or the outreach capability which could be established by minorities themselves. Prior to that, most of the programs were based on what nonminorities thought minorities wanted, and so it was that perhaps through this kind of effort— 6 ethnomethodology—we could get closer to the needs of those individuals by utilizing a work force and a staff that actually represented the minorities themselves rather than having someone else try to represent minorities. This was a tremendous break-through for several reasons. It was a breakthrough in terms of the philosophy of how minorities are treated. Usually, we treat them as though they can't be responsible for themselves, as though there is no responsible leadership, no capable individuals who could conduct such projects. Also in the economic aspect, most of the studies showed that practically all of projects, the programs nationwide, were supposedly doing something for minorities and so called disadvantaged. Yet, the economic wealth went to nonminorities in terms of staffing, so the only benefits that the minorities themselves got were some of the benefits of training, but not the political and social benefits of being able to be responsible for one's own life. So I felt this was a breakthrough. JC: So in other words Project RESPECT was more or less supervised by, and the professional people involved were of the minority groups, blacks, Hispanics, various other groups, depending, I suppose, on the geographical location. GC: Right. At this point it was blacks and Hispanics, essentially and that was the philosophy. That became quite controversial because it was a deviation from the status quo. It was threatening for a lot of nonminorities who had previously held positions of esteem with minorities; they felt as though they were perhaps losing out to minority professionals. Its strange how one or two minority professionals can be viewed as an entire block, as a force that will undermine the entire nonminority, white, middle-class oriented power structure. But that had to be 7 dealt with in a rather difficult way because it manifested itself in rather strange and difficult ways. It was never a straightforward issue. It was always something else, but beneath it all, it was usually that some people were afraid that minorities would gain control of their own destiny and perhaps the time was not right. During the sixties, a lot of people thought about time, as though time was a function of social change. We're a lot smarter now, and we know that time is not the essential ingredient of social change. JC: I keep hearing even today that the social changes would have taken place in time. Then this program from its beginning was associated with Weber State? GC: No. Weber State competed for the delegate agency. There were a number of other institutions who submitted a proposal to me to become what's called a delegate agency. The responsibility there would be for whatever institution it was to locate people who were sympathetic and understanding of the needs of minorities; I'm talking about teachers and counselors who could actually conduct training, and relate to minorities in terms of training and placement. Employment security and a number of other social agencies were already [working on minority training]. So the basis for choosing the appropriate agency to conduct the training had to do with [which could function best]. In other words, "Can this institution relate to the clientele population?" There were a few people on Weber State's campus who were very impressive in their commitments. They mostly spoke for themselves, but in many ways they spoke for the college because the college was behind them in their efforts to undertake such a different kind of program. So Weber State won the delegate agency position. It then became my job to 8 establish myself with the appropriate staff and faculty who would be conducting the training and to set up office at Weber State; this was when my official relationship began to develop. In order for me to interact and to supervise a training program at Weber State I had to have— JC: You had faculty status? GC: Yes. JC: When did this start? GC: That started in 1969. JC: How long did Project RESPECT remain a part, a viable function [of]? GC: Because it was essentially a research project, there was a two year commitment on the part of the federal government. So in terms of a formal project, it lasted two years. There was an offshoot from that, of course, for a least some aspects became the Skills Center conducted by Weber State which entertained the same commitment that Project RESPECT did, [though] of course on a wider and larger scale. So Project RESPECT was in part responsible for a lot of what it took to establish the Skills Center. One of the reasons for choosing Weber State had to do with their commitment to vocational education; Weber State was one of the leading institutions in this state in terms of voc-ed so they fit in with the manpower concept. I'd say that was in 1969. After doing the studies and identifying some of the things that were needed. Some of our objectives were identifying training methodologies, for instance, for training so-called disadvantaged, low income 9 people. So we needed to not only train, but to locate, to communicate with them. That was accomplished in two years. JC: Besides the Skills Center, have there been other programs that have developed out of Project RESPECT either here or nationwide? GC: It's been rather difficult to say because nationwide at the same time there were similar projects going on in every [major] city; there were other grants and other institutions all across the country. JC: This had a national legal foundation? GC: Right. JC: Nationally funded as well? GC: Right. JC: Were they called Project RESPECT in other places? GC: No, that was a local name. An acronym: Resources for Economic and Social Progress through Education and Cooperative Training. The name came first. Respect was a word circulating during that time. There was a popular song called "Respect" which I felt [relevant]. So the acronym came. JC: You then thought up what it meant. GC: This we did quite well. This is something we sort of chuckle about because most programs had to have some kind of catch name. I know it's kind of humorous, but that's the way it came about. Needless to say the title had a lot of integrity, and so it worked; it impressed a lot of people. I think what was important to me was the fact I was learning also. Though I knew a lot about ethnomethodology in terms of contact and communicating with 10 so-called minorities, interacting with the white power structure, [for] which I had pretty much to be the go-between a lot of time—I knew a lot about that—but I learned many other things. I learned how day-to-day issues can really affect the program, including social issues, for instance. At that time there was a strong move in the country for blacks to establish themselves and gain equality. This was a national movement so we had to conduct a project with that sort of backdrop and also with regard to campus activities. There were a lot of different things going on in the sixties. Not only did we appeal to minorities, but we related to all people. We're talking about an era of consciousness raising. A lot of times we question how much consciousness raising really went on, but I rather suspect that a lot went on that now days is taken for granted. JC: I think you're right. That brings up the environment at Weber State when you started. What were some of the attitudes at Weber State when you first started in relationship to some of those national issues that you've talked about? GC: First of all there were a lot of people in the power structure who had their minds pretty well made up as to how the so called minority issues and equality issues should be treated. I was highly suspect. They wanted to know where I stood immediately. There were those who had their minds made up as to how minority administrators should conduct themselves. Interestingly enough, those individuals [usually felt] that the minority administrator would become an extension of their own philosophy rather than one who perhaps was a challenge 11 or one who might even promote change. So, I can't say there was a real commitment to change. JC: It was mostly for status quo. GC: Right. But there were a lot of curious people on the faculty at Weber State, and I think that that was an advantage. You see Weber State had not had the privilege of having a black administrator. JC: You would have been the first one, then? GC: Right. JC: I would like to continue concerning attitudes on campus towards blacks, and other issues such as the antiwar issue, that were current nationally. What were some of the student attitudes towards these issues? What were some of the administrative attitudes? GC: Many of the questions posed to me by the administration had to do with the students that I was responsible for under the Project RESPECT programs. [These students] numbered anywhere from fifty to seventy at a time. The administration was concerned with the appearance and presence of fifty additional black students, with what impact that would have on activities of the blacks on campus. So they were asking whether that meant that there would be protests on campus similar to other campuses. Were there enough blacks to be vocal about issues? These were valid concerns of the administration. Of course, while I had to continually reinforce my position on social issues, making sure I was doing something on behalf of social change. Our main goal was to train students to get jobs and to become self-supportive. So philosophies that may 12 have affected a lot of other students may not have reflected the same goals, at least the primary goals, of our students. They really didn't have to look at our students as being that active in a lot of social issues because they did have a their own concerns to take care of, like getting a job to become self-supportive. Just the fact that they were black raised questions. This was not all bad because a lot of the faculty members who weren't even involved with the project wondered what was going on, what these blacks were learning, how they reacted in class, how they felt. So there was a kind of reaching out to our students. I can't say that they were met with rejection. They were suspect, much as I was, about a lot of things. Probably we still are and maybe always will be, but I can't say there was an atmosphere of rejection. JC: This must have significantly increased the black student population, then. GC: Yes. JC: About double? GC: Yes, even more, especially when. If we speak in terms of, for instance, student organization, I think at one time BSU (Black Scholars United—Black Student Union as it was named at the time) numbered somewhere from seventeen to twenty. You can imagine what. JC: Seventy new— GC: Yes. JC: Did the students in Project RESPECT participate in Black Student Union? GC: Yes. A good number of them did because there were a lot of black students from Ogden. In fact some [Project RESPECT students] were relatives, some friends 13 and it was rather difficult to separate them from these activities because they were also curious. And this was good. They were curious about being college students, wondering what it is to seek a college career. As a matter of fact, a number of them identified their own academic potential and found that they could actually do college level work. JC: So they pursued courses other than vocational training? GC: Right; a number of them did matriculate. These were some of the things that I learned that I never expected. They [Project RESPECT students] made an impact on a number of students and black students' activities; they became a substantial part of black student life. JC: That first year, 1969-1970, was the first year the Black Student Union was organized, wasn't it? GC: I think so. You see, this was all new to me also. I went there with the impression that the organization had been long established, but I learned later that it [had not]. JC: Did you personally participate in the Black Student Union activities? GC: I served as an advisor; they asked me to. There were no other black faculty members. Yes, I participated by speaking, in planning meetings, and just in helping to organize. A lot of things have gone on such as social events, wholetown events, and just a lot of student oriented things. I enjoyed being a part of it as much as I could. JC: That year James Robinson was one of the officers, and the Signpost at one time and you know I'm not saying the Signpost was right in the quote quoted 14 Robinson with saying that integration had failed and what blacks wanted now was separate autonomy. Was that a dominant philosophy in Black Student Union? Were there other philosophies? GC: I can't say that that was a dominant philosophy anywhere. It was certainly a statement that integration as we saw it then had failed, which meant it was not truly integration. That's all that really meant. The statement with regard to the separation was never a position that Robinson or any other black students took at Weber. There were not very many black people at all. Nationwide there were some groups, very small groups [which may have taken that position. But even the most radical groups, namely the Black Panthers didn't take that position. In the fifties, there was a Muslim order which took that position. After Malcolm X discovered it was a very faulty notion that was abandoned. I think that was a mis quote, and I think it was deliberate. I think it was deliberate because it appealed to a lot of people who found it in their best interest to say that blacks felt that way, so they could continue to treat blacks according to that kind of notion. But no, the history that I remember was one of becoming more a part of the institution. As I mentioned, that's when they changed the name of Black Student Union to Black Scholars United. JC: What was the rationale behind that name change and when did it take place? GC: Now, I didn't have very much to do with that. As it was explained to me, it had to do with the fact that Black Student Union only accounted for an activity by which blacks unite and get together. It didn't account for the academic pursuits. JC: Scholar does do that. 15 GC: Right. So here was an effort to become a part of the academic community. The other, of course, was participating in campus events—voting for president of the student body, other kinds of events like that, rather than just being an isolated minority. JC: They also sponsored Black Awareness Week and had a speaker. I think that year it was Bill Russell from the Boston Celtics. GC: Dick Gregory. Here again, you see, these were for all students not just blacks. As you know, Dick Gregory and Bill Russell were popular in all communities. This was a contribution made on the part of the blacks to the academic community. I had the privilege of introducing him Bill Russell on the program. Dick Gregory spent time at my home along with a lot of students. We just sat around on the carpet and talked and it was very invigorating, very enlightening. It made a contribution to the academic dimensions and goals of the college. JC: The Signpost also quoted Robinson as saying they hoped to have black studies classes taught by black professors. GC: Right. Robinson many times was echoing things that were being said, aspirations that a lot of blacks had, not only just here but at other colleges. He had just come from Merritt College down in the Bay Area which saw the beginning of the black and ethnic student curriculum, so he had an awareness and was echoing a lot of these hopes. These were recommendations that were also made by a lot of my students, for self-concept reasons; the goals of the disadvantaged students had to do with bringing together their self concept so that they felt more in power as human beings and not rather just poor. 16 JC: Without any kind of input into their own destiny. GC: Right. This all was meaningful. Those who were threatened by that questioned it in terms of some of the traditional things: "Where are we going to get the money to hire black faculty?" That's of course an administrative response. Then the other thing was, "Will these people take over?" A lot of silly notions, actually. I say silly notions, but of course they were real fears that some people had. Silly as these fears are, some people actually thought, because of their limited exposure, that blacks were that different in what they wanted. These same individuals became surprised when, I think, I played an important part as an administrator in letting them know in terms of how or what we want, as a result of participating in our American way of life. They were very surprised actually to find out that these black students wanted a high standard of living a little picket fence, a pink refrigerator, and two cars in the garage, and little dog named Spot. I found it fascinating that those individuals thought the black students wanted something so much different than that, because when I asked them to explain to me what it is that they thought they blacks wanted, they never made it clear exactly what they thought. But they thought that whatever it was, it was radically different, and that difference would pose a threat to black/white community. I'm glad that that notion has sort of outdated itself, though not with all people. Getting back to Robinson, well he said a lot of things because he was chosen as a spokesperson for the black students by them. I know a lot of times he was speaking on his own, out of his own sensitivity and awareness. 17 JC: He was forcibly removed from campus. What impact did that have on the student body in general as well as upon students in BSU? GC: A lot of students were shocked, surprised, that this was actually happening [on] their campus. JC: White as well as black students? GC: Right. White as well, because they had heard of—See, these kinds of things were going on all over the country, and whites as well as blacks were aware of that. There was a lot of conspiracy connected with this kind of treatment towards blacks. The surprising element was the fact that it would take place here and that it could take place here, right in front of their very eyes. They were shocked and surprised, if not outraged. In my recollection it was not the smartest thing to do. JC: I would think it could have been potentially so bad. GC: [They were shocked] that there were those in responsible positions who thought that they could get away with using that kind of tactic. Of course, I'm talking of individuals who were likely to use that kind of power with regard to minorities anyway. These were individuals who would have done that kind of thing anyway because that's just the way they viewed people who were different than themselves. But with Robinson being so vocal, they actually thought that this would be a way to intimidate and suppress the threat of black students' unity and progress. You see these people viewed progressive black people as threatening to take something away from them if not threatening to destroy our American way of life also. So their interest was, "We've got to save America" and protect the status quo, etc. 18 That one event had even more of an impact than all the antiwar demonstrations that went on and a few did occur, very small. I don't know whether you were there at the time. JC: I wasn't here. I was aware of antiwar movements yet did not know whether Weber. GC: Well, Weber had a few, but they were sort of token events—something that had gone on in other places in the country, but nothing real big. What I learned was that there were people who were afraid of someone burning draft cards and people assembling in large numbers. This became very offensive. JC: Frightening per se. GC: Yes, and I was surprised. I was really learning a lesson in sociology of outright value clarification, where there were people who really thought as though it was taking something away from them personally if some other guy burned his draft card or some other guys said, "We don't like the way things are going, and we want a change." See, this is all rhetoric. Sure a lot of things were being done, but people used a lot of rhetoric. Rhetoric was threatening, and I suppose maybe that's why there was so much of it. A lot of speakers found out that all you have to do is say certain things and. JC: You get a reaction. GC: Get a reaction as though you had taken something physically from someone, or as if you were bodily armed. Those were volatile times in the sense that so-called responsible administrators could not only do things like that [Robinson's removal from campus], but also do such things as wiretap telephones which would be 19 revealed later. My office happened to be one of those offices; of course I learned this later. JC: You didn't know it at the time. GC: No, I didn't know it at the time. This was not by some federal court order or anything like that; this is just by some individual there on campus who thought that this was the proper conduct; you know, how to keep [control of] those people. Robinson wasn't the only one who was—well, he was the only one who was—bodily carried off and all that, [but] there were a lot of other offenses against individuals that took place. JC: Which brings to my mind one of the other alleged offenses. There was a charge made by BSU that the football coach was discriminating. Do you know any of the background there and what was the basis of the charges? GC: I had very little background. I spoke to some athletes because I wanted to know what was going on. I was ignorant about how black athletes were treated. They were in substandard housing. They were brought here and offered a lot of things such as food, housing, and part-time jobs, and those kinds of things, and the coach at that time didn't deliver it. They were placed in substandard housing, and I mean rats, roaches, and things like that right here in Ogden. (Some of the buildings are still around.) When they snowed me the photographs, I wanted to see those places. So these particular athletes showed me what the basis of that statement was. Yes, this was something that was on the BSU agenda. It was one of the issues. JC: Were you successful in getting this taken care of? 20 GC: That I really don't know. I'm not sure that issue was resolved. JC: I'm curious. The Signpost had two parts of a three-part series, and the third part, as far as I know, didn't ever appear, and I wondered what had happened. GC: No. That issue as I now remember, was not resolved. One thing that did happen was some of the athletes were intimidated, threatened, by some administrators that if they had any part in those protest statements, that their standing would be jeopardized. In terms of a resolution, I'm not sure what took place. JC: I have a couple of areas that I'd like to explore briefly. What were the relationships among the black community on campus? For example, did you have any African black students? How did they relate with American black students? GC: There were a few African black students; some I knew personally. In talking with them they told me that they were cautioned even before arriving here (now this is something that I never have substantiated) by some government officials, against getting involved with American blacks. They were told that prior to even coming to Weber State. Those whom I did meet at the college, at first were rather standoffish with most of the black students because they felt, well, their own standing would be in jeopardy. But I do remember being around to see a lot of that change. There was more unity. African students began to understand more of what the American blacks were talking about. At first they asked, "Why are you guys doing this?" JC: They had come from cultures in which there wasn't a minority. 21 GC: Yes. They'd come from cultures that even if they were poor, even if they were in substandard living conditions, they felt that the nation was theirs. They weren't trying to become a part of Africa; Africa was their home. So, it was really difficult for them to relate to. American blacks who felt homeless. American blacks learned a lot too. Prior to that, there was the denial by a lot of American blacks about their own heritage, the fact that they did come from Africa, and they did come here as hostages. A lot of American blacks found this whole notion so very painful that they denied it. Some said they were brought here as a result of marrying a Dutch fisherman, or whatever—I've heard such stories—rather than being taken hostage. So a lot of those things were clarified. I saw a lot of that happen, and I was pleased that I became part of their education. JC: Was there any problem between the black athlete and the black nonathlete? What were their relationships? GC: There were a few problems that I remember. For instance, I remember a good number of athletes who did participate, who came to BSU meetings for instance. But a lot of their issues were different, and of course they were brought here as athletes and they had to protect that interest also. If they were threatened by the coach to kick them off the team if they got involved in [BSU], then of course they were rather standoffish with other blacks; so that became the basis for some of the separation. Another conflict was going on between out of state blacks versus in state blacks. It was pretty much the same thing. There were blacks who came in from other parts of the country who were pretty much aware of black heritage, what 22 the black progress movement was calling for, and those kind of things. I don't know whether you want to call it elitism or misunderstanding or what; there was certainly some separation. Some of the blacks who came in from out of state maybe felt that they were better than blacks in state, and of course some of the in-state blacks felt that they were better than the out-of-state blacks since the out-of-state blacks came from large ghetto areas. And so there was that kind of separation. I saw the coming together of these factions. See, there were the major issues that were discussed among blacks, issues pertaining to unity. Back to the academic issue with regards to the athletes. A lot of nonathletes didn't understand the plight of the black athlete, and they had never had the opportunity to listen to a black athlete explain the dilemma of trying to be successful in his sport as well as be a good student. JC: I suppose in many circumstances, as well as being a father. GC: Yes. JC: Because many of them would have been married. GC: Most of them were. I'd say 90% of them were. And that was a very difficult thing, especially for those who were placed in substandard housing, to bring their wives and children here, be placed in those living conditions, try to be a good student, a good athlete, and still try to be a good father and husband. I gained a lot of respect for those individuals. Of course they talked about other aspects of exploiting black athletes, and these are issues that still continue today. Fortunately, many black athletes are becoming more responsible in terms of making a career other than just playing sports. 23 JC: You have to be mighty good to get into professional sports; the diploma is the best way out of college and into something in the future. GC: That's it. Blacks and whites now have a clearer understanding of that. Then, they found their way out of their situation through athletic but didn't know clearly where they were going. Some of the allegations BSU made had to do with the type of counseling and academic advisement that the black athletes were getting. Sure, athletes as far as I understood, got a lot of breaks. Some other students felt that athletes were getting breaks that [nonathletes] weren't getting in regards to being in class, to grades, and those kinds of things. That went on, and of course it didn't do anyone any good in the long run. This also became one of the issues within the black community. So-called leaders of Ogden's black community were taking their own positions with regard to what was going on on campus. I'm talking about people like the president of the NAACP, the Urban League and various black organizations. They had their viewpoint about what was going on, and several of those people didn't really have very much understanding about what was going on with the students. They were not very sympathetic, but they did feel as though they had to protect the image of black people, which is another one of those notions that I'm glad has almost disappeared. Anyway, because these were blacks themselves who felt as though the group of blacks on campus reflected on them in some— JC: Negatively. GC: Yes, negatively. Nowadays we find that is a rather silly notion to have our integrity, ergo our identity, based on somebody else. Because if you allow people 24 to establish your identity then that's just what they'll do. I've heard some of those so-called leaders; all they were interested in was that nothing negative ever be said about blacks or be reported or show up in the newspaper. JC: If you do anything on campus that allows the white establishment to represent you in a bad light then you're doing damage. GC: Right. In my position at the time, I was continually being placed in the middle in these issues because as the only black administrator on campus, as well as one of the few black professionals, I was in a position of close working with the white establishment. I say white simply because the representation made it practically all white. So, I found myself many times being asked to carry messages for instance from one community to the other. It was very interesting because I always rejected that notion. I never wanted to become a gate keeper. This was something I found that was almost a formal kind of situation with the white administration; the white administration had a formal established place for a gate keeper. In other words, someone in the black community should serve as a gobetween, who would allay any fears of the white community. That would be the job of the black person, and the white community placed a lot of importance on such a position. I was not appalled, but I was really surprised at the seriousness that white administrators placed on such a position, rather than on a more open situation where there was straightforward communication. So I always rejected being placed in that position even though many time I found myself in it. JC: Do you have anything else you would like to add? I've more or less gone over the areas that I wanted to cover. It's been extremely informative. 25 GC: I suppose the area that stands out in my mind had to do with how things ended up for black students as well as some of the other impacts on black student life, and on the whole campus. I'm looking at some conclusions in the final report of Project RESPECT for objectives which [were] successfully achieved. In terms of its economic aspect, unfortunately, I don't think that there was that great a change in the economic status of blacks as a result of this small project. I had some pretty lofty goals. I would have liked to have been associated with being the savior of blacks and with doing away with poverty. As counselors, a lot of times we were asked to act as policemen. Many times attendance was poor at the program. It had to do with our failure to recognize some of the needs. I'm talking about babysitting needs or... transportation needs. I suppose I was just as guilty as other people in assuming that all people had means of transportation, but I learned that they didn't. Some of the trainees had classes which were scheduled early in the morning and late afternoon which created a void at midday and which made them suspect as to what they were doing at the college. There were some recommendations which came out of my position as the first black administrator. My paycheck—now this was done on purpose--came from the state education agency; it didn't come directly from Weber State. So I was not subjected to any sort of intimidation. JC: By the college officials. GC: Right. At the same time that this policy gave me some protection, I probably got a lot of animosity from the practice. And so one of the recommendations was, if the project was to continue at Weber State, then the director should become full 26 fledged faculty, and be responsible to the college. Now that speaks for the college's need to control, but it also has the other name tag we want to deal with, the faculty of the college. JC: Yes, the benefits and protections that the faculty senate could extend to the individual. GC: Yes. Along those lines, by the way, you asked a question about demands and recommendations of black students with regard to the faculty, and you mentioned the statement of Robinson; we should elaborate a little bit more because he was talking about integrating the staff and the faculty. See this is why that report didn't make very much sense because he was actually talking about more integration of the faculty at Weber State and more counselors. He was not talking about setting up a separate college. That's why I found it always amazing how people could construe someone as meaning that, when he's saying that we ought to hire more black faculty. Well that was in fact one of the recommendations of the black students. In fact that was one of the first recommendations. I was approached along those lines by the students who wanted me to stay on after the project was over, because we had a two year commitment from the federal government. At the time I took the position I had at least some career goals. I felt that perhaps they should not just look at me as being the only black professional; maybe there were others around. So they began to broaden their own view of what was possible. Out of that notion, they asked for black counselors as well as some black teachers and administrators. So the first year a man by the name of Daily Oliver was the first counselor. 27 Oh, by the way, another thing that was taking place in regard to one of the things that Robinson was talking about—and when I say Robinson, of course, I'm speaking of the black students—was the establishment of ethnic studies program, which he was familiar with in California. As a matter of fact, I and a number of faculty members from Weber went to the Bay Area to survey some ethnic studies programs. We came back with some ideas as to how an ethnic studies institute is set up, and so that became one of the offshoots, one of the answers to the black students' requests, which was a positive move on the part of the college. As I remember, even some of the most conservative faculty members there at Weber endorsed the notion of an ethnic studies program which I think is quite fascinating. The ethnic studies program included Hispanics and blacks and the other minority groups. Daily Oliver got the job as the counselor. There were some problems at the time. I don't know whether it's important to talk about that now. Maybe it's not, because we're talking about personalities. I'll just put it this way: even at that time the administration was trying to install a black whom they felt kind of comfortable with. The students felt more comfortable with someone else. It all worked out. The first year students got their man. The next year Weber State got their man. But you see, even though people were working in their own interests, something positive was happening in terms of articulation. I think maybe a year or so later a couple more blacks were appointed. I'm saying in a short time Weber was catching up. JC: Going from no representation at all to— 28 GC: And I'm saying there must have been some commitment there; it all wasn't just tokenism. And even it was, I'm saying something positive happens when you start integrating, because you put yourself in a position to discover the truth. And so it turned out positive because by then a number of blacks was hired. That wasn't the easiest thing for some of the leaders in the black community proper here in Ogden. I'll tell you why, and this is just a biased viewpoint, but I have seen many times with blacks from this area—they weren't comfortable being led by someone other than some of the local people. They thought of [outside] black faculty members, teachers, counselors, administrators at Weber State, and whoever else there might be, as threatening to them. Some of the members of the black community were really anxious about the type, the quality and the qualifications of the blacks who were chosen from those positions. They were anxious to even stop hiring. JC: Among the black community? GC: Yes, because of these fears which they later found out were ill founded. But you see how years of negative training and self concept can actually hinder when opportunity presents itself. In other words when the white establishment responded to the requests of the black students and there was an opportunity to select among the people who applied with their qualifications, the local black community showed this anxiety, which really perplexed me. At the same time there were factions among whites, there were also some organized blacks who were opposing these opportunities at Weber State because of these fears. The whites had their fears; the blacks had theirs. The fears of the blacks were, "Will 29 these people truly make it?" Think of it this way. Blacks in Ogden, and in Utah for the most part, have never had the opportunity of being touched by a black physician, taught by a black teacher, served by a black banker, or helped by a black used car salesman. So it was a suspicious situation. JC: Are you saying that the point of view was almost, "Because I've never known a black professional, could there be black professionals?" GC: Yes. Because they've never known one, never seen one, they really did question whether these people existed, outside of what they saw on TV. So I think it was a learning experience for many blacks as well as an expression of the power struggle. Some of the leaders in the community felt as though they were in power, were accepted, and they enjoyed the acceptance, as well as—I don't know whether it's respect or at least patronage from the white community. And this new breed, especially the college educated, might take something away from them. That's an issue that is not completely resolved, but it's more resolved now than. At least a lot of previous suspicions have been resolved with regard to that issue. So those are things that with regard to my own position led to the recommendation that I become fully fledged, and I acquiesced. Timing was different then after a couple of years, so I didn't feel as though I was selling out to some unreasonable demands to the establishment. I felt as though it was a good time for me to even make some concession. JC: How long did you stay on after Project RESPECT was over? GC: Right after that, what is called the Skills Center opened up, but for a year after that I was with the Ethnic Studies Institute. And then the following year—I'll try to 30 establish the chronology; I think it was 1972 when the Skills Center [began]. Anyway, I stayed on with the college until the spring of 1974. So in 1972, after a year with ethnic studies, I went with the Skills Center, which was part of Weber State, as assistant director there and head of the counseling unit. Here again I was working in my related field, at the same time still trying to pursue my educational goals. This was, by the way, another dilemma that black activists faced, not only students but faculty members: how could we be activists and achieve our academic goals at the same time? We were in a kind of advocacy role—that's what I found myself in—and so therefore my own educational goals took a back seat. I think about that often. If I had to do it again, I'd probably do it the same way; I'm not so sure it could be done another way. I think some of us just found ourselves in that situation. It was certainly something that we didn't foresee. I didn't foresee as a black professional; a lot of black students didn't foresee their involvement; and so as a consequence, a lot of black students took longer to graduate, and of course a few of them didn't graduate at all. The question still remains, "Would they have graduated if they weren't involved in those activities?" Those answers we don't know. I'm saying that all across the nation, the consciousness raising experience was taking a lot of time from those who were pursuing academic goals. Even with women's issues, I saw that happen. I saw the antiwar people on the campus, organizing, meeting, many times when they should have been in classes. And it's difficult for me to say, to make a judgment, where their place really was. Maybe 31 some of the changes wouldn't have taken place if those people hadn't sacrificed their own career aspirations. I don't know. JC: That reminds me of something I meant to ask. How much relationship was there between BSU and other liberal groups on campus, such as Liberal Students Group and The Federation? Did they do much together? GC: On a few occasions they did, like I say with regard to hiring or for very specific reasons such as campus elections and things like that. BSU, however, never got involved in the antiwar demonstrations. They thought it was something that white people did. That was the feeling at that time. They weren't aware of the fact that most of the soldiers being killed on the front line happened to be black and poor. This issue was like that. I guess there were so many other issues to deal with; so, no, they didn't get involved in it. At that time, I'd say by 1972-1973, some of the women's groups started organizing. Some of the black women got involved, but still they viewed the gender thing a little bit removed from some of the things that they felt pertained to the needs of blacks. I can't say that these organizations opposed each other or rejected each other; on occasions, especially with regard to campus politics and elections in the United States, they got involved. You mentioned the Signpost articles; they were indicative of even the Signpost's involvement with all those different political organizations. I remember a few black students became part of the Signpost. JC: Oh yes. In 1969-1970 Byron Warfield-Graham. 32 GC: Precisely—and Hollis McCullum and a number of others. They were also involved in some kind of effort for teacher evaluation. I don't know how far that actually got; I don't know how it got on most of the campuses across the nation. But they were involved in those kinds of issues. JC: Well, I've appreciated very much your sharing this material. It's been a good experience for me. GC: Thank you. Much of the remaining material on the tapes consists of excerpts from a couple of reports which George Campbell read, interspersed with his comments and explanations. One report was the "Final Report of Project RESPECT" prepared by Mr. Campbell and submitted to the Utah State Board of Education. A copy of this is available in the Weber State College Archives, WA/234/1. The other report appears to have been an unpublished report on an ethnic studies visit to Bay Area colleges. One copy of this accompanied a cover letter from Gary L. Carson and Richard O. Ulibarri to Helmut Hofmann, vice president of academic affairs, and is available in the William Miller Papers, WA/1/7, 66:25, in the Archives. Especially the excerpts of this latter report are included in this typescript to increase their relative accessibility. When Mr. Campbell quotes from the report, his words are typed in block quotation form. When the report itself quotes another source, the words are enclosed in quotation marks within the block form. 33 GC: There is an item here [in the ethnic studies report] under "miscellaneous" having to do with Jim Robinson.... Information gained from Jim Robinson and corroborated by his attorney may create new reflections regarding the implications of the officer in the incident that took place on campus. That had to do with him being hauled off at gunpoint. Further documentation of this can be expected via Harold Parry [his attorney] and perhaps the bonding company or the bondsmen themselves. At this point all the reports weren't in, so I couldn't say very much. Initially it was thought that the appearance of Weber State College delegation before the local judge in California might expedite Jim's release and enable him to return to school in time to complete the winter quarter. When we went down to California, we also met with some of the officials there who incarcerated him to explain what had gone on and perhaps he could be released and could continue his education. However, a further checking with Harold Parry confirmed that Jim was being held on $15,000 bail for suspected involvement with a postal money order difficulty.... I think this had to do with what is called mistaken identity; he was accused of being someone else. Mr. Campbell then read from the section in the report titled "Students for a Democratic Society and Black Students" and commented: 34 Students for a Democratic Society, as I understand it, was quite a controversial organization, and so back to one of the questions that you asked [about relations between BSU and other activist groups]: there were times when these organizations did approach the black students. In most cases they were not outrightly rejected, but they were not endorsed. Paraphrasing Dr. Dunn of Peralta College District of Oakland, California, Mr. Campbell commented on the relations between SDS and BSU in the Peralta District, Black students felt a lot of time these organizations were like parasites; they were just riding on the strength of other people. They felt that SDS used whatever group they could to further the confrontation without really ever wanting to move to a resolution and BSU wanted resolution and was less inclined to form further alliances with SDS. Mr. Campbell then read from a section on minority student funding and added: Some people felt that "athletes had access to monies that nonathletes did not have." That was another issue you asked about. The recommendation was that we look at the needs of all black students, not just athletes; not all blacks are athletes [pause]. JC: Some of us whites aren't either. GC: Right. [Laughter.] That was an issue of course that you mentioned, the feelings between athletes and nonathletes. Next [section in ethnic studies report] "Moving from Confrontation to Construction." This is from our visit to San Jose. We had a 35 chance to see some of those demands or requests in action in other places such as San Jose State. I was involved with regard to the minority programs on campus. Some state as well as federal officials were down on me getting involved to this extent in campus politics and development. But they had to concede that whatever developed on campus was going to affect my students one way or another so they gave in to the idea that I would become part of this fact-finding mission. The purpose of this... excursion [the fact-finding mission] was to become acquainted with programs that have been developed for minority groups at a sample of campuses in the southwest and the California Bay area. It is hoped that becoming better informed, higher quality decisions would enable us to avoid some of the frustrations for the students, faculty and administrators that have been experienced at some other campuses. As a step in the process of accomplishing this goal, members of the Ethnic Studies Committee, including Richard Ulibarri, Gary Carson, Ray Clark and Dee Green attended a three day workshop in Santa Fe, New Mexico.... Following the workshop Dr. Ulibarri and Dr. Clark then traveled to San Francisco, where they met Dr. John Gisler, George Campbell, Skip Simmons [who was a student and] Kim Slater.... We spent four days seeking information from schools in the Bay area. The following schools were visited: University of California at Berkeley, San Francisco State, San Jose State and Merritt College. In addition, we gained an audience with Dr. Dunn. 36 Mr. Campbell then read some excerpts from and commented on the Project RESPECT report. The report tells of the newspaper account of a shooting incident in which three blacks --students of Project RESPECT--were arrested. Campbell quotes from the report, Examining the context of the news article, as one reader stated, causes one to believe that this was a racial incident on the basis that the offenders are specifically pointed out as being "Negro" while the race of the offended is left up to the readers' imagination. It should be noted that in fact all involved were black. This was going on in our papers. Splash! "Three Negroes Show Up with Guns" or something like that. You'd think that they were going and... shooting up the white establishment, whereas it had to do with a local issue among blacks. This is not something that we hear about whites. When a white man goes and kills his wife or a white lady kills her husband,... it's not mentioned that they were whites. Coupled with the fact that the Project RESPECT seemed more equipped to deal with the students' and community problems, the project director was concerned with the fact that grossly distorted incidents were being supplied to campus officials. In other words these reports [such as the newspaper account mentioned above] were placed in files of the black students on the campus. I hadn't mentioned that. Mr. Campbell read from the section headed "Institutional Racism" 37 Because many whites do not directly participate in discrimination or exploitation against black people, they are sustained in belief that it does not occur. The report cites a Gallup poll that supports that a lot of whites don't even believe that discrimination exists, and it cites the National Advisory Commission of Civil Disorder. John Gisler, assistant dean of Continuing Education at Weber State College has this to say about some [problems the project director faced]: "It has been an interesting experience to have a project such as RESPECT on Weber State College campus administered as it has been. The direct control of the project has come from George Campbell through the state board of vocational education. This arrangement has allowed Mr. Campbell some freedoms which he might not have otherwise experienced. At times it has been necessary for Mr. Campbell to strongly criticize some services and practices on the campus. Had he been under the direct control of the college, he may have restrained himself unnecessarily. The traditional patterns of restraint usually available in most organizations were not available; consequently persons [with] whom Mr. Campbell came into conflict had to deal with him as a person [laughter] because they could not invoke the usual power structure so often available." "But, if it is possible to look beyond Mr. Campbell and look at the situation in a comprehensive manner, one might find that the types of 38 conflict that have arisen this year were pretty much inevitable; more specifically, any black man in a responsible position on a college's campus today is treated with suspicion by students until his behavior tells them that he is sympathetic and actively involved in the civil rights movement. This means that he must make public statements, 'bear his testimony' [and] must in some way take an active part in some of the black students' cultural, social and political events or he is viewed as a spineless liberal. Once [a] significant black person on the campus shows some allegiance and support for black students he is viewed in a negative fashion by many people who have little understanding, patience or sympathy with the concerns of black students and black people in general." "The project director in the future, should it be Mr. Campbell or any other black person, shouldn't be forced into the above described dilemma, at least to the same extent as this year. The college campus has grown considerably in its understanding and sympathy. Also there will be an increase in the number of black counselors and faculty on the campus which should take the pressure off the Project RESPECT director in serving as a black staff advocate of the Black Student Union. " JC: In other words you were alone. GC: Right. So I was it. I was the advocate. Mr. Campbell continued to quote Gisler in the final report and insert comments: 39 "It is advisable that the project director become a member of the college staff for several reasons. 1) The college's adminstration would be better able to respond to local community concerns about the project.... Many times when there were some questions from the local community, the college couldn't feel as though they could really back me up. [They almost had to say], 'Hey, you'll have to go see that guy over there.' So he [Gisler] was saying that being a part of it, I'd have the backing of the college for the entire project, which makes sense. "2) The project director would be in a supervisory position over employed teachers and staff which he presently doesn't have." See, I had to have liaison, which was Gisler, by the way. He was my—how do you put it when.... I spoke of a position that whites place a black in as liaison, as a go-between. I had a go-between, a white guy! [laughter] So he's saying, "Hey look, why don't we resolve all this stuff?' "3) The project director and staff would be eligible for college benefits.... 4) The project would be viewed by the college as a part of the college's ongoing operation and commitment." The commitment would be more people. It makes sense. It goes on with some more objectives in terms of retention, etc. JC: Which was one of your goals at the beginning. GBC It's like a black eye because we had some problems: lousy placement. Here again was one of the lofty goals. I thought that all you had to do was start training people, get them ready; so here I'm thinking, 'Hey, I did my part, guys.' But, as 40 we see even today, I can say, "Get the jobs." It's of course a lesson that all of us had to learn. Just because we get a degree, it doesn't mean that there is a job standing out there on a line for us. So the report makes some recommendations. Mr. Campbell and Mr. Cartwright then concluded the interview.