Accusations of plagiarism leveled against a young Black professor at Cambridge University have suddenly ended his brilliant academic career. However, it is argued that Professor Ardey was guilty even before any alleged violations occurred. Furthermore, he might be guilty of many things other than creative writing. This raises the question of whether creative writing can be considered a legitimate branch of sociology and a valid source of knowledge. Moreover, can the production of knowledge borrow from the unreal, following a surrealistic impulse?
Professor Ardey, a sociologist, is accused of excessive borrowing of material from colleagues without proper attribution. In academic circles, such unacknowledged borrowing is condemned, especially when it concerns a Black scholar being accused of 'stealing' from the white establishment. Being Black itself is an identifier of unethical behavior. The establishment has already passed judgment; it is simply looking for evidence to condemn the person. If there is no convincing evidence, the establishment fabricates all sorts of fictions, which are then elevated to the rank of fact, thereby sanctioning a 'lynching.' Such a creative defense offered by the professor is unavailable to Black people.
Incidentally, in defense of the professor, one could cite the example of reparations instead of theft. One should recall the grand theft of knowledge from Ancient Egypt to Athens. Established Egyptology has long asserted the African origin of Western civilization, encompassing mathematics, medicine, as well as astronomy and philosophy. There is evidence of how great Greek scholars studied in Egypt, visiting it, and then returning with their bloodthirsty soldiers, raping knowledge and forcibly taking archives to Greece.
Can this ancient case of plagiarism be used in defense of Black people as a mitigating circumstance? Such reasoning would be ridiculed and deemed unfounded in the court of white justice! But one must not forget how the past shapes the present. The Black reality is worse than fiction. Therefore, it is not so difficult to move between reality and fiction when recalling the Black condition. Professor Lewis Nkosi once advised that Black science fiction writers from South Africa should stop writing fiction until liberation is achieved. His thought was that Black life made creative writing almost impossible due to the unreal nature of the Black condition itself.
It seems Professor Ardey encountered this dual reality, where reality mixes with imagination and vice versa. The professor could have extended his life from the real to the imaginary and viewed all of this as part of his biography. The problem is that he wrote on a white canvas that dictates what is ethical, acceptable, and sociological, and what constitutes legitimate proof. This entire saga was directed against him even before his birth.
As soon as a loophole in the plagiarism accusations was found, the door flew open, and all sorts of violations, real or imagined, were discovered. Frantz Fanon expresses an opinion on black transgressions and ethical evaluation elsewhere. It is reported that he said: 'He is guilty!' someone asked. 'Of what?' he replied. 'Of everything!'
Being Black in the world reverses the premise of guilt. Western logic dictates that a person is generally presumed innocent until a legitimate forum establishes guilt or innocence after evaluating the evidence. There are two criteria by which evidence is usually assessed. If a person is involved in a criminal case, the standard is much higher: guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. If a person is involved in a civil proceeding, the standard is lower and determined based on the balance of probabilities.
However, when a Black person appears in court, the subtleties of a system that prides itself on its blindness to race and relies only on evidence collapse. The Black person is guilty by the very act of existing. You are Black; you are already guilty before committing any crimes! Thus, Professor Ardey only needed a pointing finger, and his guilt would have been established.
The task of presenting justice outside of white coordinates of what is considered just falls upon black radical thought. Such a black uprising against whiteness may initially seem irrational. But it must reject this accusation and insist on its own standards, based on the deep experience of injustice since the black-white collision. The main sin of Professor Ardey is not plagiarism or embellishing certain biographical events. His main sin is blackness in an anti-black world. The fact that he was recognized as a high achiever at an early age put him on the path of racist views. According to this white logic, no Black person can achieve such success at such a young age, so the eugenic racist began digging and accusing. In limited acknowledgments of the Black professor's work, he discovered 'theft,' and this became the beginning of the end. Only an irrational black surrealistic view could explain the professor's transgressions, but such a defense is not permitted as legitimate; therefore, he is guilty.
Until whiteness is destroyed, Black people will continue to suffer for no reason. To be Black means starting from a position of priori condemnation. Blackness remains an unethical category in this anti-Black world. No Black person can easily survive in the constantly ready machine of anti-Black lynching. Justice today is globally impossible for Black people.
