This is Lew Margolis.

Anthony Newfield as Peter Stockmann and Michael Bryan French as Thomas Stockmann in "Enemy of the People." (Photo by Jon Gardiner via PlayMakersRep.org.)

Anthony Newfield as Peter Stockmann and Michael Bryan French as Thomas Stockmann in “Enemy of the People.” (Photo by Jon Gardiner via PlayMakersRep.org.)

For anybody who wants to participate in the ongoing controversy about the UNC academic and athletics scandal, run to see Playmakers’ stunning performance of Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People. If you can’t see it, at least read it and discuss it with friends. To summarize briefly: the town doctor discovers that the recently constructed springs, the basis of an institute intended to bring health and prosperity, are contaminated, promising sickness instead of cure. Instead of welcoming this undeniable truth in a community meeting, the town leaders and the mob denounce the doctor and threaten his family as the curtain falls.

The play offers many lessons about leadership in the face of controversy. One especially troubling theme that shines a light on UNC’s big-time sports quagmire is how easily disputes can be reduced to ad hominem arguments. Attacking the character and motives of the advocate is a spurious, but sadly too-often-used strategy. Such seems to be the case with the recent publication of Cheated by Jay Smith and Mary Willingham. Instead of reading and analyzing their arguments, too many have already denounced them as self-serving with financial motives or as mean-spirited people who hate UNC. One might recall the supercilious mayor in the play who, instead of being curious about how the town doctor arrived at his conclusions, denounced him as one “who is never happy unless he is badgering authority, ridiculing authority, destroying authority. He wants to attack the springs so he can prove that the administration blundered in the construction.”

At UNC, whose mission is to advance research, scholarship, and creativity, books and other publications are the currency of our work. When two respected members of the UNC community, who have been so immersed in research and analysis of the UNC scandal, take the time and effort to share their thinking, the least we can do is to study their work, and be curious about their evidence and their analysis. Remember that we each see things that others may not see, so these differences are opportunities to learn. Criticize and attack their arguments if you will, bring to light a different truth if you see it, but ad hominem denunciations of their character is neither appropriate in the culture of the university, nor helpful in bringing light to or closure to UNC’s sordid tale. Perhaps WCHL would like to organize a panel to discuss their work.

As the raucous town meeting in the play comes to an end, the doctor reflects on the ridicule he has faced for his efforts to educate the community about the dangers it is about to foist on unsuspecting tourists. He professes, “It’s always the same. Rights are sacred until it hurts for somebody to use them.” Let’s celebrate the core university right of relentlessly pursuing the truth.