Renaming and De-naming Places: From the Slater Museum to Fort Bragg, CA
On May 12th, 2023, the University of Puget Sound in Tacoma Washington’s Board of Trustees unanimously voted to approve the recommendation by the University president and naming task force, to remove the name “Slater” from the Slater Museum of Natural History. (1) https://www.pugetsound.edu/stories/university-puget-sound-remove-name-former-professor-museum-natural- history The museum reverted to its original name from 1919-1979, the Puget Sound Museum of Natural History. This change did not happen overnight and did not happen at the hands of only faculty or administration, but actually started with me, an undergraduate student at the time.
Before we go there, let’s back up to who I am, where I am from, and how I got here. My name is Grace, and I am originally from the Bay Area in Northern California. My mom is from Peru and my dad is from California. My dad grew up coming to the Fort Bragg/Mendocino area as a kid, and when my parents started dating and eventually married they also visited the Fort Bragg area together. I also came up with them a few times as a kid. My parents got a house up here and moved to Fort Bragg when I was in college and now I visit them during school breaks and holidays like today.
I started college at the University of Puget Sound or UPS for short, in 2016 planning to become a veterinarian. As we can see, I did not end up going to vet school and if I were to hear in 2016 that in the future I would go on to become a historian, I would probably laugh because that would never happen! When I started college, I took mainly all science and math classes, trying to knock out all these prerequisites for vet school. Coming from the Bay Area to a liberal arts school studying biology, I realized a big difference between college and home – there wasn’t a ton of diversity at college, especially in the sciences. I never knew that diversity was so important to me until I had experienced its absence. I didn’t know what I was doing in college and didn’t realize how many students relied on their families for advice and guidance on what to do – I felt like I was missing out on this insider knowledge on how to do college. But all I could do was try my best. It wasn’t until my second year of college that I started exploring other topics in addition to biology like African American studies and bioethics. This was the year I had also found out some information about Slater.
The Slater Museum of Natural History was a central part of the science buildings and the biology department. I had friends who were docents at the museum and it was a place I passed by daily and have even used specimens from there to conduct various lab experiments. One day in genetics class, my friend told me that she learned that Professor Slater, whom the museum was named after, taught eugenics at UPS. Eugenics for anyone who isn’t too familiar with this term is the movement for human betterment through better breeding, essentially using the same methods we do to breed the best animals and plants and implementing it to humans. Though well- intention, the eugenics movement in the 20th century United States evolved into a dark history with instances of forced sterilization – essentially forcing people who were considered to be of poor genetics to not have children and this was many times on the basis of class, race, and disability. There were also immigration laws in place to restrict Eastern and Southern Europeans and Mexicans from entering the country because they were considered “un-eugenic” or to be a threat to the genetic pool of the American people. Hearing this information about Professor Slater’s eugenic teachings and passing by the Slater Museum so often made me uncomfortable as a student of Color in a predominantly White school and in a predominantly White major, biology. I could see myself in this history as a Latina, if I were in school during that time what would a eugenics class say about me and my family?
In front of the museum there was a timeline of the history of Slater and the museum and nowhere on this timeline did it detail his eugenics teachings. This history was essentially erased from our knowledge as students and left me both in discomfort but also with more questions than answers. My friend’s comment, so small and probably only muttered because it pertains to our genetics course was a comment I realized I could not simply ignore or let go, so I decided to see if anyone could help me answer these questions about Slater’s eugenic teachings. I had asked one of my bioethics professors who had directed me to a historian of science on campus, Dr. KristinJohnson. She was actually the professor who had told her students about Slater’s eugenic teachings, one of them being my friend in genetics. I asked her if it was possible to rename the Slater Museum because of his teachings and explained my discomfort about hearing this news. Kristin, the good historian she is suggested, why don’t you learn more about him? Teaching eugenics was common and normal in the 1920s. What kind of eugenics did he teach? When did he teach eugenics? And she also suggested I talk with the Director of the museum, Dr. Peter Wimberger.
The three of us met and discussed my concerns of Slater’s eugenics teachings and what it meant to commemorate his name. To my surprise, the director of the museum and biology professor, Peter, was very open to this conversation, though made sure no one jumped to conclusions. I knew I wanted to look into this matter more and decided to apply to a summer research grant to investigate this issue once and for all, should the Slater Museum be renamed? So, the summer of 2019, there I was, nose-deep in books about eugenics and spent much of my days in the archives, reading course offerings from the 20th century at UPS and looking through Professor James. R. Slater’s personal documents. That summer, I had learned a lot about the history of eugenics, eugenics education in the Pacific Northwest, and Slater’s eugenic teachings at UPS.
Professor James R. Slater was a herpetologist (someone who studies reptiles and amphibians) and a biology professor at UPS from 1919-1951. Slater founded the Puget Sound Natural History Museum in 1930 and directed it until 1951, and in 1979 the museum was renamed after Slater at alumni’s request. Although his research interests were not in eugenics, Slater’s teaching of eugenics throughout his entire career at UPS, his membership in the American Eugenics Society in 1930, a eugenics pamphlet Slater kept from 1910, Slater’s journal notes on eugenics dated between 1917 - 1955, test questions Slater wrote for his eugenics class in 1939, his advisee’s thesis in support of eugenic sterilization in 1947, and Slater’s approval of this thesis suggests that Slater supported eugenic ideologies.
The University of Puget Sound’s student newspaper called Puget Sound Trail detailed Slater’s thoughts on blaming criminality on genetics in 1924 in which he stated that different chromosomes conditioned a man’s nature – meaning that behavior such as crime was genetic and could be solved through institutionalization and sterilization to prevent people with said criminal genes from procreating. We now know that criminality is not a genetically fixed condition people are born with but rather a behavior that stems from certain environmental and social conditions. This is just one example of Slater’s eugenic views, but what is perhaps even more damning evidence of his eugenic beliefs was how late they went. 1924 was a time when eugenics was a popular science, but Slater was in support of eugenic sterilization in 1947, five years after the State of Washington passed a law banning eugenic sterilization, a time when public schools in the area were not in support of eugenic sterilization, and this was also after forced sterilization and other atrocities took place in the second world war. All of this evidence and more led to my recommendation to change the name of the Slater Museum of Natural History back to its original name, the Puget Sound Museum of Natural History. (2) https://historyofeugenics.pugetsoundmuseum.org/eugenics-at-puget-sound/
In the summer of 2019, I had co-written an email to the University President with Professors who had helped me with this project, including the director of the Slater Museum and the head of the Race and Pedagogy Institute and African American Studies department chair on Campus, to ask that the University form a committee to consider building renaming and to consider renaming the Slater Museum. Since UPS is a small school, we were actually able to reach the University President and he agreed to this. A month later when I gave my summer research presentation, a woman stopped by to hear my poster talk about the renaming of the Slater Museum, and I had later found out that she was a University lawyer who was hired to find out if the name Slater had any donation connections to the University, luckily no money was tied to the name.
In January 2020, the University President finally announced the start of the naming taskforce, but he gave no recognition to myself or the professors who co-wrote the email requesting the formation of this committee. Additionally, it was announced that no particular building would be investigated and when I asked, I was not allowed to be on this committee. Though the University was moving in the right direction overall by creating a process and policies for renaming buildings on campus, modeling the process of other Universities who have renamed buildings, this process was still incredibly slow and there was no recognition. The professors who co-wrote the email with me were able to be a part of the naming committee as well as some students and many other professors who were experts in biology, history, bioethics, and ethnic studies. I was invited to listen in on a meeting in September 2020 and one of the arguments I heard in opposition to renaming the museum was that Slater was being commemorated for his founding of the museum and work on herpetology, not his work in eugenics. Why rename the museum? Many in the committee and myself agreed that though this is a good point, the impact of the commemoration of Slater on students and their discomfort toward Slater’s eugenic support outweighed the intent to commemorate Slater’s other accomplishments. The committee and students agreed that when considering renaming buildings like the Slater Museum, diversity, equity, and inclusion within the Puget Sound community was a priority.
In September 2021 I wrote a request to change the name of the Slater Museum to the Board of Trustees which was endorsed by the naming taskforce. The naming taskforce also wrote their own request to change the name of the Slater Museum, using my research as well as the committee’s own research to support the renaming of the museum. My reason for wanting to rename the museum was not just because of Slater’s late eugenic teachings, but also because I did not think commemorating Slater fostered equity and belonging for students of marginalized identities in science like myself. The Board of trustees took a long time to even look at the recommendation and a sub-group of the naming committee which was in contact with the board of trustees were not allowed to communicate the board of trustees’ process or which way they were leaning, which did not align with the naming taskforce’s guiding principles of openness. The process of researching Slater, creating a naming taskforce, that committee creating policies and norms for renaming buildings, and finally considering renaming the Slater museum was incredibly long but a decision was finally made in May 2023 – the Slater Museum was renamed back to its original name, the Puget Sound Museum of Natural History!
The local news covered this renaming and this is when we all started hearing the common arguments that are always made in opposition of any renaming of a building or space. This included arguments about history being erased, changing names is overly woke, and otherwise distaste for renaming movements. When it comes to concerns of erasing history, a question we can ask ourselves is what history did we know before and after concern of renaming a place was made? In my case, it was widely unknown that Professor Slater was a strong proponent of eugenics and taught eugenics so late. Additionally, professor Kristin Johnson, myself, and other students helped create a permanent website documenting the history of Slater and eugenics in Puget Sound to ensure none of this history is ever erased. An exhibit is also being created that will be placed in front of the museum to ensure none of this history is forgotten. This was our plan all along regardless if the name was changed or not as we thought history should never be hidden. In this case of changing names being too “woke,” one thing to consider is that the time in which the museum was named after Slater occurred in its own historical context in 1979. In 1979, renaming the museum after Professor Slater did not raise any red flags either because people were not aware of Slater’s eugenic support at the time or this was not reason enough not to rename this museum.
In the present day, the historical moment in which we live in offers much critical thinking and review of memorials. We live in a post George-Floyd era and in a time where people want to reckon with their local history. In Tacoma Washington, where the University of Puget Sound is, two local public schools recently underwent renaming within the last two years. Historical contextualization never stops and we will always be re-evaluating history and commemorative buildings. We continue to do this in many ways. For instance, just because someone wrote a book about president Andrew Jackson in 1950 doesn’t mean we can’t write another book about him today, our perspectives are ever-changing. New evidence continues to appear on Slater’s views on eugenics as apparent on the History of Eugenics at Puget Sound website– if anything the case only looks stronger for renaming the museum since 2019.
To conclude, though my experiences in renaming a museum are at a smaller scale than considering the renaming of a city, my story shows how one person can create a cascade of change. I believe there are some commonalities and take-aways we can make from the renaming of the natural history museum, and the consideration to rename Fort Bragg, CA. Both renaming considerations deal with a place in which people have deep connection to, there is concern for the erasure of history, and there are differing perspectives on what the intent of the commemoration was and the impact it is having on various people. Historical contextualization never stops, it didn’t stop in 1857, when Fort Bragg, CA was named, and it doesn’t stop today.