Cynthia Weld remains a relatively unknown figure on campus. As Ohio University’s first female teacher back in 1882, and later the Ohio State University’s first female teacher as well, her namesake was Weld House. A former dorm on South Green, Weld House was built in 1969 and served hundreds of both male and female students during its time. Back South, or “Dirty South” as it’s affectionately called by OU students, has been undergoing a lot of demolitions in recent history. Over the past few summers, eight former South Green dorms have been demolished. Brough, Cady, Foster, Fenzel Martzolff, O’Bleness, Smith and finally Weld houses were all demolished throughout the 2010’s with Weld being the most recent demolition in 2019. As of right now, there are no formal plans to rename any current or future buildings for Cynthia Weld. The rest of the buildings demolished all bore the names of former presidents, students who became generals, and philanthropists. While important to the University's history, Cynthia arguably had a heavier impact with her teaching as the first woman to just demolish her namesake like this. Weld lead the path for both female students and faculty alike, and now has no recognition on campus but an empty, unnamed field.
But the university has a bit of a history of not paying much attention to namesakes. Notably, Templeton-Blackburn Memorial Auditorium is the only building on campus that shares two people for its namesake. Martha J. Hudley-Blackburn, the first black female student at OU, and John Templeton, a former slave who became OU’s first ever black student. Both incredibly important figures, but forced to share a memorial building. What for? Martha J. Hudley-Blackburn is remembered by her husband's name, who didn’t even go to the university. Shouldn’t we be honoring her successes with her maiden name? She didn’t marry until after she graduated, so even her diploma, she school’s records, hold her as Martha J. Hudley. Her and John Templeton never even met. In fact, they didn't even go to school at the same time. The sole thing that connects these two people is their race. Why do we highlight their accomplishments as being a joint one, rather than supporting them separately? What does this tell people about how we honor black former students?
Another instance is with Boyd Hall, named after Margaret Boyd--the first woman to graduate from Ohio University. Boyd hall was initially in the middle of campus and an all-girls dorm when it was built in 1907, but was demolished to make space for the large Alden Library project in 1966. Now, Boyd Hall is what was formerly known only as “Building 10” and holds coed dorms, a dining hall, and a new study space. Constantly, women’s namesakes are getting demolished, moved, forgotten, or misrepresented on campus. How do we combat this? How do we do better?
Paying attention to namesakes and their importance to the university’s history–as well as their presence and place in American history–means paying more attention to the people we choose to honor on this campus, the people we choose to uplift. By refusing to, or merely choosing not to, uplift those who were vital to the attendance OU students is disheartening to say the least. By not valuing these people, these important Ohio firsts, you’re not valuing the people now who benefit from their presence.
I think this is a really interesting point about the idea of memorization and erasure. It highlights quite well the silent ways in which our campus history is distorted or altered. This connects quite well to the Anderson article on the creation of Chinatown. Part of the naming of buildings in honor is to state that these groups of people were there. In the Chinatown article, it talks about creating a sense of community where there is hostility. I think this also speaks to the possibility of hostility that students of color feel at predominantly white institutions, like Ohio University. There is also a systemic bias here where the administration made a decision not to preserve some aspect of the name of Weld Hall. They decided that the name was not valuable enough to move.
ReplyDeleteI work as a tour guide on campus and I would also add that Templeton-Blackburn Auditorium is almost never referred to as the full name by the administration. Most times it is referred to as Memorial Auditorium or Memod which seems strange since it is one of the only buildings to honor people of color at Ohio University.
I am glad that I read your blog because I had no idea these female pioneers were misrepresented/underrepresented in the naming process and how these buildings were treated afterward. Your blog taught me about Ohio University’s missed opportunities to honor historical figures like Cynthia Weld, Martha J. Hudley-Blackburn, John Templeton, and Margaret Boyd through namesakes on campus. These individuals broke barriers in education, often as pioneers for undervalued groups, and each made unique contributions to the university’s legacy. It is a shame that Cynthia Weld, for instance, paved the way as Ohio University’s first female teacher, yet Weld House was demolished in 2019 leaving just an empty field there. It seems to have led to the fadeout of her memory and honor since Creswell advocates that buildings are not just buildings, spaces are not just spaces, rather, they are attached to meaning and people understand the world via the place.
ReplyDeleteLikewise, the shared namesake of Templeton-Blackburn Memorial Auditorium seems to downplay the distinct achievements of Martha J. Hudley-Blackburn and John Templeton, linking them solely by race rather than honoring them as individuals. This pattern of erasing or diminishing women’s namesakes is further exemplified by Margaret Boyd, the first female graduate of OU, whose original Boyd Hall was demolished for Alden Library in 1966. The new Boyd Hall seems to lack the same history and significance. To move forward, the university should reconsider its approach to preserving these legacies, ensuring that the stories of these remarkable individuals are honored in meaningful, distinct ways. I think this change would reflect a true commitment to celebrating diversity and progress on campus.
Hi Max,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your post! I think you bring up a really important point, many of these memorials are lost once the buildings are destroyed. I honestly could not name any of the dorms that were torn down or begin to tell the significance of their names. I am curious how these people can be memorialized now that the buildings are gone. In class, we have discussed the different conceptual lenses of memorialization (text, arena, and performance). This perspective has changed how I view memorials. For instance, I think of the memorial at the site of the former Scott Quad. It consists of a small patio listing the names of individuals associated with the building, but the narrative it conveys feels quite empty. There is no plaque explaining who these individuals were or even acknowledging that a building once stood at that location. While one might argue that this allows for audience interpretation, the lack of information diminishes the significance of the figures memorialized. Additionally, the space is so rigid and structured that it fails to foster an environment for individual expression. When designing a memorial for the people represented in Back South, I think it is important to consider not only the legacy of the figures but also the history and memories of those who lived in the dorms. Those names hold memories from generations of students, and highlighting their lived experiences is additionally important. Obviously, the accomplishments of those who the buildings were named after should not be understated, but creating a memorial that captures the dynamic nature of the spaces could lead to a more impactful and inclusive memorial.