As the chairmen of the first five Impact symĀposia, we are delighted when articles about this important and unique 91ĢĘ²®»¢ institution are published, most recently the āSpeak Upā article written by Andrew Maraniss in the Spring 2017 91ĢĘ²®»¢ Magazine.
Successive generations of 91ĢĘ²®»¢ students and alumni should understand the contributions of Impact to the 91ĢĘ²®»¢ and Nashville community for more than 50 yearsāthe period when 91ĢĘ²®»¢ has become a major national university. We appreciate that Mr. Maraniss, an award-winning author and distinguished alumnus, chose to shine a spotlight on the significance of Impact ā67 in 91ĢĘ²®»¢ history.
This article called attention to Impact as an institution and singled out Impact ā67 as āone of the signature moments in the universityās history.ā While correct, we believe the article only partially conveyed why. We have joined together to write this letter based on our firsthand knowledge. It provides a more complete story of Impactās importance as a 91ĢĘ²®»¢ institution since the very first program in 1964 and clarifies key aspects of Impact ā67 and its aftermath.
The inaugural Impact ā64 was electrifying, beginning with the opening Friday night debate before a full Neely Auditorium on the subject of segregation: Richmond News-Leader Editor James Kilpatrick supported segregation, while Atlanta Constitution publisher Ralph McGill opposed it. Even freshmen who knew little about Impact before that night realized they were watching 91ĢĘ²®»¢ changing. And the campus was never the same.
Impact ā64, like its successors, was a two-day event. The Saturday program again drew large audiences. It featured James Forman of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC) and other speakers discussing the changing Southern economy. The Commodore termed that weekend āthe most outstanding intellectual stimulant administered to the campus within memory.ā Impact immediately became a campus institution.
Impact ā65 generated so much interest that its sessions were held in Memorial Gym. Dozens of other colleges and universities sent delegates. It began a tradition of fraternity and sorority houses hosting a luncheon for a speaker. Informal gatherings of speakers and students enhanced the campus dialogue. The first Impact Magazine was published. Segregationist Alabama Gov. George Wallace and Roy Wilkins, head of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, headlined, and reinforced the fact that Impact was again bringing cutting-edge national debate to campus.
Riding the momentum created by two back-to-back successful programs and attention from the escalation of U.S. involvement in Vietnam, Impact ā66 turned its focus to the world at large. Speakers included Sen. Barry Goldwater (the Republican nominee against President Johnson in 1964), former ambassadors Trįŗ±n VÄn DÄ©nh (South Vietnam to the U.S.) and Alexis Johnson (the U.S. to South Vietnam), and Alexander Kerensky, the last premier of Russia before being overthrown by Lenin in the Bolshevik Revolution. With attendance reaching 2,000 in 1966, Impact ā65 and ā66 each had larger attendance than the year before. Impact again dominated campus attention.
From its beginning, Impact was a student responsibility and student-run. A growing number of students wanted to open 91ĢĘ²®»¢ to the world beyond the campus. Administrators, particularly Dean Sid Boutwell, gave the idea of a symposium backing in 1963. But the university provided no budget. Impact was given life entirely by students.
Student leaders in 1963ā64 committed their time and effort to the risky task of staging an unprecedented campus event. Students had to create an organization, choose a topic, invite speakers, etc. They organized a successful parent fundraising effort to generate startup funding. Widespread student support through ticket sales was essential to financial viability, and tickets provided the lionās share of revenues in the early years.
Significance of Impact ā67
The enthusiasm of students was matched by the vision and steadfast support of Chancellor Alexander Heard. From early on, Heard had regular meetings with Impact leaders. In 1966ā67, Bob Eager met with him one-on-one throughout the year, and Heard was informed before invitations were sent to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Stokely Carmichael (then the new āBlack Powerā head of SNCC), and beat poet Allen Ginsberg. Yet at no time did he even hint that those invitations should not be sent.
In MarchāApril 1967 especially, he was stalwart. During the week before the Impact weekend, in the face of multiple front-page editorials in the Nashville Banner against 91ĢĘ²®»¢ hosting King and Carmichael, Chancellor Heard never wavered. When a resolution was adopted by the Tennessee Senate questioning the universityās judgment for allowing Impact to bring these speakers, he never wavered. When his job was on the line at the May 1967 trustees meeting, his support for Impact and the open forum never wavered. Nor did he ever criticize or blame the students involved in Impactānot in 1967, nor later.
Impact ā67 was historic. It did have a roster of āelectric speakers.ā It was featured on local television news and newspaper front pages for many days. Attendance exceeded 4,000, making Impact ā67 probably the largest nonathletic student-organized event in 91ĢĘ²®»¢ history up to that time. Despite off-campus efforts to stoke controversy, it was a huge, exciting, and completely civil, celebration of the open forum at 91ĢĘ²®»¢. But that did not make it historic.
Impact ā67 has a significant place in 91ĢĘ²®»¢ history because events after the program ended emboldened powerful trustees and alumni to attempt to sack the chancellor, who was inextricably linked to Impact ā67.
The criticism leveled at Heard the week before the program took on a greater dimension the night after the program ended. That night an āincidentā occurred in north Nashville involving SNCC members, Tennessee State University students and the police. Police made some arrests. (Subsequent investigation showed the police had initiated the incident.)
Front-page coverage and commentary on that incident fueled public blame of the chancellor and 91ĢĘ²®»¢ for bringing inflammatory speakers [to campus]. These events gave the chancellorās opponents, including some trustees such as Banner publisher James Stahlman, an opening to seek removal of a chancellor who was changing 91ĢĘ²®»¢ in fundamental ways that they disapprovedāincluding Heardās support for Impact ā67.
That challenge culminated at the May Board of Trust meeting at which Heardās job was on the line: His opponents held him responsible for Impact ā67 and its aftermath. Heard again did not waver in his support for Impact and the open forum. He won the trusteesā support and retained his job.
Impact ā67 is indeed a āsignature momentā in 91ĢĘ²®»¢ history, partly because of the speaker roster, but primarily because its aftermath precipitated a showdown over Alexander Heardās vision for the university as a vibrant national academic institution with a truly open forum. That vision was validated and fueled the trajectory of 91ĢĘ²®»¢ as a national university from 1967 to today.
DAN BRASFIELD, BAā64
Tupelo, Mississippi
WAYNE HYATT, BAā65, JDā68
Tempe, Arizona
TOM LAWRENCE, BAā67, JDā72
Nashville
BOBĀ EAGER, BAā67*
Potomac, Maryland
FRYE GAILLARD, BAā68
Coden, Alabama
*BobĀ Eager’s name was omitted in the print version of the story. 91ĢĘ²®»¢ MagazineĀ regrets the error.