TALKS AT THE TANNER | FY 2017
#BlackLivesMatter and the Politics of Racial Mis/Recognition
by RACHEL ALICIA GRIFFIN, Assistant Professor of Race & Communication
Department of Communication, University of Utah
February 14, 2017, NOON
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC | LUNCH PROVIDED
Previously tenured at Southern Illinois University, Dr. Griffin is a new faculty member at the U. This talk theorizes #BlackLivesMatter discourses as demands for humanizing recognition that represent a continuation of historicized labor to contest racial oppression. Anchored by the Hegelian assertion that mutually affirming recognition fosters humanization, these discourses respond to racial misrecognition (e.g., stereotypes, microaggressions, stigma, racism, etc.) which has profound consequences for people of color ranging from devaluation to dismissal to death. When #BlackLivesMatter is theorized as a demand for humanizing recognition and simultaneous response to dehumanizing misrecognition, our societal inability to consistently respond with affirmation, compassion, and action is pedagogically revealing in terms of racial progress.
by DR. BREAN HAMMOND | Distinguished Professor, University of Nottingham
October 25, 2016, NOON
The two giants of Renaissance literature, Miguel Cervantes and William Shakespeare, died four hundred years ago, in 1616. In "Cervantes' Bones" Brean Hammond, a distinguished professor from the University of Nottingham, goes beyond this coincidence to explore other intersections between the life and work of these two authors - including the possibility that Shakespeare and his sometime collaborator John Fletcher based a lost play on one of Cervantes' stories in Don Quixote. (Professor Hammond's edition of the eighteenth-century play, Double Falsehood, in which traces of his work survive, is definitive.) Hammond's lunchtime talk at the Tanner Humanities Center will also address Shakespeare's turn toward the genre of tragicomedy and his broader connections to Spanish literature of the Golden Age.
by DR. AGNES BINAGWAHO | Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School
January 26, 2017 | Noon
Dr. Binagwaho is currently a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School, and Clinical Professor of Pediatrics at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth. She is Professor of the Practice of Global Health Delivery at the University of Global Health Equity, and also serves on the International Strategic Advisory Board for the Institute of Global Health Innovation at Imperial College London. Dr. Binagwaho serves on many academic boards and has published over 150 peer-reviewed articles and book chapters.
Her engagements include research on health equity, HIV/AIDS, information and communication technologies (ICT) in e-health, and pediatric care delivery systems. She has published over 90 peer-reviewed articles, serves on the International Advisory Board of Lancet Global Health, the Editorial Board of PLoS Medicine and of Health and Human Rights: An International Journal, and contributed to multiple books. She chairs the Rwanda Pediatric Society and is a member of the Global Task Force on Expanded Access to Cancer Care and Control in Developing Countries.
Dr. Binagwaho met with students and faculty from the College of Social Work, School of Medicine, and the College of Architecture and Planning.
Earl Warren, Ernesto Miranda, and Terrorism
by AMOS N. GUIORA | Professor of Law, S. J. Quinney College of Law, University of Utah
February 07, 2017, NOON
Earl Warren was a District Attorney, Governor of California, and Chief Justice of
the United States Supreme Court. As Governor of California, Warren was tough on crime,
a fierce proponent of law and order, and an advocate of Japanese Internment during
WWII, a decision he would later regret. Warren was one of the most significant and
influential Chief Justices in US history.
Warren wrote the majority opinion in Miranda v. Arizona (1966). In that decision, the Supreme Court created the Miranda warning: “you have the right to remain silent.”
In my forthcoming book, “Earl Warren, Ernesto Miranda and Terrorism,” I explore whether Warren would apply that holding to Americans suspected of involvement in domestic terrorism?
To answer requires investigation of following matters:
- What were his motivations in a holding widely assumed to be the pinnacle of the so-called “Warren Court criminal procedure-constitutional revolution?”
- Why would a Chief Justice, whose background was deeply rooted in law enforcement, craft a decision whose focus was protecting suspects?
- How did his experiences as District Attorney, Attorney General, and Governor shape his understanding of the imbalance between the interrogated and the interrogator?
- What was the contemporary context of his holding?