Tag Archives: Booker T Washington

“…Now we often think of the Kingdom of God as being a thousand miles away; above the sun, above the moon, above the stars, above the clouds, anywhere, just so it is miles and miles away. The Kingdom must be so very far away. That is a wrong idea of the Kingdom of God. The Bible says the Kingdom is right within us. That brings to my mind that I want to help you to make up your minds to get to the point, as soon as possible, where you can have that power of self-control which will enable you to make the place, heareafter, wherever you are, the most beautiful and the happiest place there is in existence. If this cannot be done, then the teaching of the Bible is not true. You can make within yourselves a little Kingdom, where every minute of the day will be happiness…”- “The Kingdom of God,” October 7, 1906, (Tuskegee, Alabama)

Unbeknownst to some, Booker T. Washington’s studies did not conclude his studies after graduating from Hampton Institute. He would continue his studies at Wayland Seminary, which later merged with Virginia Union University. (There he spent nearly 2 years—“six months and a year” (to be precise)—studying theology under George Mellen Prentiss King, the President of Wayland Seminary who Washington credited for his training in English and speaking. Notwithstanding this, while there are a great many allusions, inferences and quite explicit references from Washington on the subject, there are virtually no long treatises, sermons or books from Washington regarding what were his deep-seated theological beliefs, and this Sunday evening talk to students titled, “The Kingdom of God,” perhaps explains why: Mr. Washington appears to have possessed a deeply intimate faith—though periodically expressed in words—that was most profoundly manifested in a life filled with fruitful works.

And in this talk he attempts to convey to students how they might do likewise through the possession of a “kingdom…within themselves” that emanates a ‘happiness” that would equip them to do the same. (Unlike his seminary training at Wayland or as would occur at other religiously founded African American institutions in the South, Mr. Washington did not share a single scripture reference in this talk—although he shared Bible verses in many other speeches, sermons and talks.) It seems apparent that he was hoping that the meaning of his talk, “The Kingdom of God,” to his students as an educator would be easily and readily received, discerned, absorbed and understood.

Washington would not only be criticized from northern “race men”concerning his program at Tuskegee, he would also receive criticism from African American churches at the time for Tuskegee not having an explicit statement with respect to a religious emphasis. (It should be known that the founding of most private historically black colleges and universities were associated with religious churches or organizations. Besides the most well-known African American religious organizations—African Methodist Episcopal, African Methodist Episcopal Zion and the Colored Methodist Episcopal churches—most privately founded HBCUs were largely founded and supported through the assistance of northern white philanthropy and white religious organizations.)

All the same, beyond his desire to ensure that Tuskegee Institute remained publicly silent on the more antagonistic racial issues of the day, he also did not wish—though a most admirable work—for the institution to be singularly focused or directed to the training of ministers for clergy work. His institution was to be for the training of men and women whose vocation was not limited to “ministry” and “preaching,” which he often discussed. Since finding its germination in the period of American slavery, the role of the preacher was the most widely accessible vocational calling that had been available—or permitted—for African Americans. In many ways, he was a historical forerunner of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in that both men distinguished their career and callings from the traditional configuration of the preacher.

Notwithstanding, it is clear that Booker T. Washington wanted to communicate to his students and all constituencies that both his faith and the institution would be best known by its observable fruit. And like most good fruit grown upon tall trees or upon vines, it all begins with the cultivation, nourishment and watering of the seed of this “kingdom” that he hoped would be deeply lodged and deeply abiding in their hearts. For this seed would yield some thirty, some sixty and some a hundred fold when received in the good ground of their hearts.

“My dear Mr. Washington,

I have your letter and note your objections to the song. In the first place, your objections to the line “Swift growing South” is not well taken because a song is judged not by the hundred of years that it lived but from the time at which it was written, and the “swift growing” only indicated what the South has been, and will contrast with what it may achieve or any failure it may make. The “Star Spangled Banner” was written for the time and although we may not be watching the Stars and Stripes waving from ramparts amid shot and shell, the song seems to be going pretty fairly still. As to the industrial idea, I have done merely what the school itself has done but I will make this concession of changing the fourth line of the third stanza into “Worth of our minds and our hands,” although it is not an easy to sing. The bible I cannot bring in. The exigencies of verse will hardly allow a paraphrase of it or an auctioneer’s list, and so I am afraid that I shall have to disappoint Mr. Penney as to that…”

“From Paul Laurence Dunbar to Booker T. Washington,” Washington D.C. January 23, 1902.”

In what may perhaps be one of the more humorous yet profoundly historic communications in all of Booker T. Washington’s letters is the one that led to the eventual creation of the most rehearsed lyrics in Tuskegee Institute’s long history: “The Tuskegee Song.” Mr. Washington throughout his lifetime had dealt with strong, youthful and ingenious personalities without taking personal affront or referring to it as ego or arrogance. (For he knew that their talents were necessary for the upbuilding and advancement of Tuskegee.) He successfully recruited Emmett J.Scott to become his chief of staff; He managed the talent and ego of T. Thomas Fortune to represent Tuskegee in the then Negro press. He recruited perhaps the greatest professor and researcher in Tuskegee’s history George Washington Carver. (Though he was unsuccessful in recruiting W.E.B. Du Bois who technically reached out first seeking employment at Tuskegee, he would have certainly created a pathway for their partnership.)

All the same, here we find Washington recruiting the talented but deeply troubled and short-lived life of Paul Laurence Dunbar to write the school’s official song: “The Tuskegee Song.” (A song which might not have been were it not for this gifted poet’s insistence even against Mr. Washington’s “objections’” to some of the lyrics.)

Dunbar’s rebuffs to Washington’s reveals a wit and sarcasm that though it might have infuriated Washington, we have no record of it. In response to Washington’s suggestion to remove the ‘Swift growing South’ due to its possible anachronistic symbolism, Dunbar shrewdly—and very comically— made the comparison to the nation’s anthem noting that the “Stars and Stripes [no longer are] waving from ramparts amid shot and shell.” Even Washington’s keen perception might have given this a chuckle. Yet and still, Dunbar conceded to one verse being changed at Washington’s suggestion, the “Worth of our minds and our hands.” This however did not come without perhaps a parting barb from Dunbar that “it is not easy to sing.” On one of the final points of disagreement was the bible to which in all finality Dunbar replied: “The Bible I cannot bring in.”

Notwithstanding this communication from Dunbar to Washington during the creation of The Tuskegee Song’s, we would be remiss if we did not understand the admiration Dunbar had for Booker T. Washington. For he wrote a poem in tribute to Mr. Washington and in turn Mr. Washington gave him perhaps a greater honor in writing “The Tuskegee Song,” which still is in existence at this present day.

“…I have been keeping in touch with your good work in America, and although there is a difference of opinion on the lines on which the Negro should develop himself, yet the fair-minded critic cannot fail in admiring your noble efforts. The two schools of America have gone as far as to give us, who are outside the real possibilities of the industrial and intellectual scope for Negro energy. We are organized here on broad lines and we find it conducive to pave our way industrially and intellectually…”-

“From Marcus Mosiah Garvey to Booker T. Washington (Kingston, Jamaica) September 14, 1914”

“…I hope that when you come to America you will come to Tuskegee and see for yourself what we are striving to do for the colored young man and woman of the South…”-“From Booker T. Washington to Marcus Moriah Garvey,” September 17, 1914

The personal letters between Marcus Garvey and Booker T. Washington leave much to conjecture because the two did not meet personally as did Washington with other such notable contemporary figures. (For Mr. Washington passed in 1915 prior to Marcus Garvey’s first visit to the states.) While it can be determined that Garvey expressed deep admiration and respect for Booker T. Washington as noted in his letter to Washington to enjoin with his efforts to “pave [the] way [for Negroes] industrially and intellectually,” it is not so clear to what extent Washington reciprocated the overtures beyond this September 1914 invitation to Tuskegee’s campus.

Prior to to his first visit to America, Garvey had been subject to deep criticisms from African American leaders of the period including W.E.B. Du Bois who was concerned that Garvey’s growing influence among the National African African American community was expanding. What made Garvey’s platform palpable for many African Americans was Garvey’s call through the (UNIA) the United Negro Improvement Association and the African Communities League for African Americans to embrace his call to return to African lands. And Garvey envisioned his organization as the potential intellectual partner to Washington’s efforts.

And when this vocation was coupled with Garvey’s UNIA’s possible threat to rival the influence of Du Bois’s NAACP, it is not beyond reason to think that Garvey’s admiration for Booker T. Washington might have been a bit too much to bear for Du Bois and other similarly situated leaders. For if Washington would have secured the public voice, symbolism and support of the flamboyant Garvey whose public stature grew until his eventual deportation from America, Washington would have had an advocate far greater than the pens of both T. Thomas Fortune and Emmett J. Scott in the African American press.

Notwithstanding, it is not entirely clear from Mr. Washington’s return replies to Mr. Garvey that he would have completely aligned his “Tuskegee Machine” with Garvey. The usually very cautious and sagacious Washington learned from news and personal reports concerning Mr. Garvey’s activities prior to his coming to America. Mr. Garvey even wrote at length to explain to Mr. Washington that the criticisms he faced were categorically unfair. Beyond this while Mr. Washington managed his affairs quickly, quietly and with quality, Mr. Garvey moved in a near completely opposite direction for his purposes. Mr. Garvey utilized grandiose speeches, bold rhetoric and military attire that called attention to the nobility of the then described Negro race.

All the same, it is very clear in his communications to Garvey—with his last being on October 1915 one month prior to his death—that he remained non-committal. In this final letter, he wrote that he could not “afford the time just now to give careful study to [Garvey’s] plans as outlined.” Yet, still, as noted in his 1914 invitation to Mr. Garvey to come to Tuskegee—which he did as much for supporters and detractors alike—he remained gracious, kind and hospitable to Mr. Garvey leaving us to pause and wonder yet again ‘what might have been’.

“[New York City Nov. 10, 1915] [To Alexander Robert Stewart] Be sure my yard is well cleaned.” – Booker T. Washington

In all likelihood, this November 10, 1915 letter from Booker T. Washington to Alexander Robert Stewart was the final letter written by the eminent founding principal and president of Tuskegee Institute (University). (For Booker T. Washington died on Sunday morning November 14, 1915-not 5 days later-after requesting to return to Tuskegee, Alabama to spend his final days.) Mr. Stewart, a 1904 graduate of Tuskegee Institute and described as his “faithful agent,” had not only been Mr. Washington’s personal agent managing all of his personal business and financial affairs since 1906, he was the 11th ordered beneficiary named in Mr. Washington’s “Last Will and Testament” in the amount of $200. (This was executed on May 25, 1909 and a codicil was added on June 13, 1911.)

Until his death, Mr. Washington wrote several short letters with instructions to his colleagues in Tuskegee with the above being the last one that is recorded in all of his published correspondence: “Be sure my yard is well cleaned.” While one may regard this final communiqué as someone who regarded his yard more important than his soul, this is not so. For this final epistle was a reflection of his soul indeed-a soul devoted to the very end to his vocation (calling).

Tales abound in the Tuskegee community about Mr. Washington’s intense devotion to work, and there is no greater joy for a man or woman than to be engaged in a line of work that honors both the souls of men and their own. Mr. Washington spent countless hours in the yard and in the garden working, when time and travels permitted. Mr. Washington took great pride in the now world-renowned “Oaks,”-the president’s home at the time, located on the Tuskegee University campus, the only national park on a fully functioning college campus.

Annually, thousands of visitors trek across the nation and the world to visit the home site of Tuskegee’s founding principal and president now maintained by the National Parks Service. So perhaps Mr. Washington’s final concern for his yard being cleaned was not only for that generation but also for the many future generations that would follow in the 110 years since his death. All the same, if it could be said of anyone who lived to fulfilled a lifelong vocation (calling), it might certainly be said of Booker T. Washington: For careers fill pockets; callings fulfill people; careers linked to callings fulfill great purposes for people.

“We frequently hear the word ‘lucky’ used with reference to a man’s life. Two boys start out in the world at the same time, having the same amount of education. When twenty years have passed, we find one of them wealthy and independent; we find him a successful professional man with an assured reputation, or perhaps at the head of a large commercial establishment employing many men, or perhaps a farmer owning and cultivating hundreds of acres of land. We find the second boy, grown now to be a man, working for perhaps a dollar or a dollar and a half a day, and living from hand to mouth in a rented house. When we remember that the boys started out in life equal-handed, we may be tempted to remark that the first boy has been fortunate, that fortune has smiled on him; and that the second has been unfortunate. There is no such nonsense as that. When the first boy saw a thing that he knew he ought to do, he did it; and he kept rising from one position to another until he became independent. The second boy was an eye-servant who was afraid that he would do more than he was paid to do-he was afraid that he would give fifty cents’ worth of labour for twenty-five cents […]The first boy did a dollar’s worth of work for fifty cents. He was always ready to be at the store before time; and then, when the bell rang to stop work, he would go to his employer and ask him if there was not something more that ought to be done that night before he went home. It was this quality in the first boy that made him valuable and caused him to rise. Why should we call him ‘fortunate’ or ‘lucky’? I think it would be much more suitable to say of him: ‘He is responsible.” – “Individual Responsibility: A Sunday Evening Talk,”- Booker T. Washington

At the onset of receiving an entering incoming freshman class into a university, one becomes awed and buoyed by the extraordinary sense of possibility that each student has in his or her future. Whether they were 4.0 student or a 2.8 students in high school, the beginning of freshman year matriculation is a unique opportunity in their lives to start anew and afresh. And Mr. Washington, founding principal and president of Tuskegee Institute (University), provides an example of two young boys who possessed the same opportunities, but had very different outcomes 20 years later.

It is all too easy to pass off Mr. Washington’s telling as some moralizing tale designed to motivate his students during one of his Sunday evening talks. Yet, we must be inclined to think that either Mr. Washington himself experienced this so-called tale directly-his autobiographical narrative Up from Slavery (1901) suggests as much-or he observed this in the lives of two of his students in his 34-year long tenure at the helm of Tuskegee University. Washington’s telling of such a tale might also raise the ire and suspicion of those who might argue the following: “It is roundly unfair for Mr. Washington to ascribe lacking personal responsibility to the woes of the second boy’s life because he doesn’t know what happened to him.”

Notwithstanding any such dismissals, what Mr. Washington seeks to convey in this talk was the sense of a very real distinction between two young men who approached life matters-whether in the classroom or beyond-quite differently. The first young man was likely accused of being too punctual, too exact or just plain too serious. He often heard the now common proverbial expression: “It doesn’t take all of that.” And in spite of all attempts to justify the many failures of the second boy, all such attempts are undergirded with a profound sense of irony. (The very individuals who defend or make excuse for the second lad will also not hire him nor give him any responsibility regarding that, which is their own.)

Wholly consistent with his reputation for being frank, honest and giving ‘straight talk,” Mr. Washington would not allow any such misgivings about his impressions of the success-or relative lack thereof-of the two boys described here. For Mr. Washington believed that “it does take all of that” to reach any desirable outcome, and one will be subject to the envy and criticism of others while doing it. Yet, enduring the sort of suffering experienced by the first boy is far better than experiencing the suffering of the second. We all experience one form of suffering or another, and if one learns how to suffer-to truly know how to suffer well in the thing that is good-one will learn how to succeed.

“I believe that one always does himself and his audience an injustice when he speaks merely for the sake of speaking. I do not believe that one should speak unless, deep down in his heart, he feels convinced that he has a message to deliver.” -Booker T. Washington _Up from Slavery_ (1901)

It is a wise and prudent man or woman indeed who does not readily accept-or seek-any and every invitation to speak. Although such restraint is uncommon, Mr. Washington’s recommendation is one that would serve us well to follow. For the best speakers-whether teacher, professor, lecturer or any number of itinerant persons-are those whose words proceed from the works that support them. 

Mr. Washington was known locally, regionally, nationally and globally for his oratorical prowess and was largely regarded as such for the work he was doing at Tuskegee University. And this work was no mere job for the founding Principal and President of Tuskegee University, but his life’s purpose “deep down in his heart.” When he spoke, men and women could feel the force of someone who was not pretentious but purposeful. And he was able to do so because he spoke concerning those things he was doing or had done.

Booker T. Washington did not theorize about how to lead an institution. He led one. He did not simply ask of those within his charge to persevere, endure and overcome. He himself had done these things. He did not simply speak about the “race problem” affecting newly freed and formerly enslaved men and women but was engaged in a work to solve this problem in a manner consistent with his beliefs. And all of these things were visible, tangible and remain so nearly 110 years since his passing (1915-2025). For audiences know easily enough whether one has done or is doing the things that he or she speaks which is why one should avoid the temptation to offer words without corresponding works.

“For example, not very long ago I had a conversation with a young coloured man who is a graduate of one of the prominent universities of this country. The father of this man is comparatively ignorant, but by hard work and the exercise of common sense he has become the owner of two thousand acres of land. He owns more than a score of horses, cows, and mules and swine in large numbers, and is considered a prosperous farmer. In college the son of this farmer has studied chemistry, botany, zoölogy, surveying, and political economy. In my conversation I asked this young man how many acres his father cultivated in cotton and how many in corn. With a far-off gaze up into the heavens he answered that he did not know. When I asked him the classification of the soils on his father’s farm, he did not know. He did not know how many horses or cows his father owned nor of what breeds they were, and seemed surprised that he should be asked such questions. It never seemed to have entered his mind that on his father’s farm was the place to make his chemistry, his mathematics, and his literature penetrate and reflect itself in every acre of land, every bushel of corn, every cow, and every pig.”- Booker T. Washington, (1899) The Future of the American Negro

“A person never gains anything in real power, in real lasting influence except as he remains always himself, always natural, always simple-and whenever he departs from that attitude, yielding to the temptation to imitate somebody else, of something else, to be that which he is not, in that same degree he loses his influence, he loses his power, and his strength.” – Booker T. Washington, “A Sunday Evening Talk,” January 10, 1909

Ralph Waldo Emerson suggests in his essay, “The American Scholar,” the following concerning individuals and their originality: “Is it not the chief disgrace in the world…not to yield that peculiar fruit which each man was created to bear [?]” And the founding principal and president of Tuskegee University, Booker T. Washington, reminds students about this all too forgotten principle in one of his Sunday evening talks. Both Washington and Emerson bid students the following: Become more organic to become more fruitful.

Like fruit and trees, individuals come in all sizes and shapes. Moreover, they all serve different purposes. Still further, individuals have been born in different soils of environment, culture, creed and ethnicity for the singular purpose of fulfilling the distinct function they were each designed to fulfill in the earth. Each person is designed “to yield that peculiar fruit which each man [or woman] was created to bear.”

And when a person, like a particular tree that was designed to produce a particular “fruit,” “departs” from its central purpose in life, “in that same degree he loses his influence, he loses his power, and his strength.” Any student, like any fruit-bearing tree, that is not developed or cultivated to produce that which he or she alone can produce cannot fulfill their “purpose” and tap into the requisite “passion” to succeed in their given career or still better “calling.” (Careers fill pockets; Callings fulfill people; Careers linked to Callings fulfill great purposes for people.)

” I used to picture the way that I would act under such circumstances; how I would begin at the bottom and keep rising until I reached the highest round of success.” – Booker T. Washington, Up From Slavery (1901)

Presidential Commentary by Dr. Brian Johnson

Robert Hedrick’s translation of Xenophon’s Cyrus The Great: The Arts of Leadership and War captures a rather profound and startling idea about the power of both the mind and imagination in one’s youth. This is particularly evidenced in Mr. Washington’s autobiographical telling of the time spent in his youth thinking of his future. Hedrick translates Cyrus as follows: “I created an empire in my thoughts long before I began to win an empire in reality.”

The founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University, Booker T. Washington, tells of not having many flesh-and-blood examples of “success” due to both his poverty and enslavement. Yet, while his “hands” might have been bound, his “heart” and his “head” were certainly not.

Though he might have seen but dimly into what his future held, he “used to picture the way [he] would act under such circumstances.” (Note, one can hardly go where one cannot see one’s self beforehand going. And one can hardly do what one cannot see one’s self beforehand doing.) “Vision” is the greatest 6-letter word, and “leader” is the second greatest 6-letter word in this writer’s opinion. And Mr. Washington possessed “vision” enough for himself to see himself as a “leader,” which he later realized for some 34 years at the helm of Tuskegee (Institute) University.

“”Associate yourself with people of good quality. It is better to be alone than in bad company.”-Booker T. Washington

You cannot hope to succeed if you keep bad company. As far as possible try to form the habit of spending your nights at home.” – Booker T. Washington, “A Sunday Evening Talk: On Influencing by Example”

The adage that one is known by the company he or she keeps is an oft-expressed one, but the founding principal and president of Tuskegee University, Booker T. Washington, extends the adage even further both in the aforementioned passage and in another commonly quoted passage: “Associate yourself with people of good quality. It is better to be alone than in bad company.” Moreover, his additional suggestion to “try to form the habit of spending your nights at home” is a very practical one worth noting.

Insofar as it is possible to discern from his autobiography, correspondence, letters, speeches-and more importantly his accomplishments-the man, Booker Washington, apparently did little else but read, write, work and stay at home with his family.

And while it is easy to regard Tuskegee (Institute) University’s founding principal with an overwhelming sense of awe, one can begin to appreciate and understand him in view of his own self-discipline and self-sacrifice. (Everyone suffers but few suffer voluntarily. Yet, if one learns how to suffer, one will learn how to succeed.) One need not be reminded that everyone has the same 24 hours in a day, but how one spends those hours is what ultimately distinguishes men and women.

(One would simply be amazed at how much more time can be committed to a meaningful mission or a purposeful project if time is not spent in (un)meaningful and (un)purposeful ones that do not result in progress.) Clearly, recreation, fun and leisure have their place but not if these things come at the expense of sustainable success.

(Mr. Washington suggests that it is even better when one’s recreation, fun and leisure become part and parcel of one’s work.) For when an individual can transform his or her home into an extension of their workshop, they have the benefit of continuing, doubling and multiplying their labors when others have ceased from theirs.

“(4) I felt some concern lest at Tuskegee the manual labor side had an excessive development as compared with the mental labor side, or in other words, lest industrial training should unduly impair academic training. Is it not important the graduates of Tuskegee should have acquired not only a trade or an art, but the power to read and cipher intelligently, and a taste for reading? Otherwise the isolated negro farmer or mechanic will not prove to be capable of progress. The world changes so fast nowadays that the man or woman who does not read will be left behind, no what the calling. The academic side of Tuskegee ought there to give all its graduates a competent mental equipment and especially to implant the purpose to improve continually.”-“From Charles W. Eliot to Booker T. Washington,” September 7, 1906

Os Guinness poses the following rhetorical query in his (2022) _The Great Quest: Invitation to the Examined Life and a Sure Path to Meaning_: “Do you agree with Bertrand Russell’s famous dictum that “what science cannot discover, man cannot know”?

Upon Booker T. Washington’s invitation to visit the Tuskegee Institute campus and offer his assessment of the institution, Charles W. Elliot, President of Harvard University, who served for a record-setting 40 years, offered this 4th suggestion amongst five additional ones on how the institution might continuously make improvement beyond its tremendous successes under the administration of Booker T. Washington. (While Elliott and Harvard had honored Booker T. Washington with an honorary degree in 1896, it does not appear that Mr. Washington was present during the visit but he did respond in a letter dated October 20, 1906. A forthcoming commentary will discuss Washington’s response.) Notwithstanding his other recommendations to Washington and Washington’s response, Elliott’s present recommendation is one whereby modern American colleges and institutions have been confronted with: The neglect of the liberal arts.

To be sure, institutions like Tuskegee that experienced tremendous growth through its STEM-related fields ought be commended for they have ensured that they have contributed research, innovation and employment for many students. Moreover, STEM-related fields have contributed to society in far too many ways to be recounted here. All the same, “academic training” in the liberal arts which also contributes to human “progress” ought not be neglected. (This is Mr. Elliott’s reminder to Mr. Washington.)

The ability to “read and cipher intelligently” is the hallmark of a traditional liberal arts education and it is tantamount to STEM-related fields’ knowledge creation. (In fact, it is the “A” that gives “STEAM” to STEM.) It is necessary for the researcher and scientist to consider the impact of their important scientific discoveries and advancing technology upon societal interests. And in incredibly powerful ways, reading, writing and thinking fostered in the liberal arts help to determine whether such advances are consistent with long-held traditions that help determine not only whether to undertake certain scientific and technological advances but whether should we.

“[To Gilchrist Stewart]…I will tell you in a word what we want in the position that you are now attempting to fill. We want a man who puts his whole soul in the work-who gives it his thought night and day-who can teach the theory of dairying in the class room, and who is not afraid after his teaching to put on his dairy suit and go into the stable and remain with the students while they are milking, and then go into the creamery and take hold in a whole souled way and show the students who to do their work. We want a man who is so much in love with the work that he thinks it is just as important for him to remain with students while they are milking and separating the milk as it is for the academic teacher to remain with his class while they are reciting arithmetic. We want a person whose soul is so deeply in love with his work that it is a pleasure for him to co-operate and obey orders, who looks so closely after every detail of his work that matters will not get so out of order that others will have to be constantly calling his attention to defects and to whom orders will not have to be continually repeated by the farm director or myself. We want one who is continually planning for the improvement and perfection of his work. This is what we want in this position and we can accept nothing less.”-“November 9, 1897,” Booker T. Washington 

Esteemed author and educator, Parker Palmer, writes the following regarding finding one’s purpose and passion in connection with one’s work: “It is not easy work rejoining soul and role.” And the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University, Booker T. Washington thoroughly outlines in this letter to Mr. Gilchrist Stewart the kind of employee he sought to assist him in his work at Tuskegee. Mr. Stewart, a remarkable graduate of Tuskegee Institute in his own right, would go on to co-found NFCF-National Federation of Colored Farmers.

Expounding upon his conception of “heart (calling), head (competence) and hands (capable),” Mr. Washington wanted someone to “take hold in a whole souled way,” and “whose soul is deeply in love with his work.”  While Mr. Washington’s passage needs no additional commentary, and one might argue that he offers a 19th century notion of work, we are able to glean two important lessons for the 21st century from his remarks to Mr. Stewart.

First, he wanted someone “who gives [work] his thought night and day.” Now, there are a great many employees whose work ends as soon as the bell rings, yet there are some who give constant thought and deliberation to how their work might be improved and made better.

To be sure, work-life balance dictates prudence in these matters. Notwithstanding, the student, scholar, professor, staff member and administrator who is constantly turning about in their head how to make things better will likely become the person who surpasses those whose work is done at the close of the class period or the business day. (For this man or woman is working while others are talking or sleeping, and when they become successful, it is only a surprise to those who do not know the supreme value of works as opposed to words.)

Second, Mr. Washington wanted someone “who looks so closely after every detail of his work…whom orders will not have to be continually repeated…[and] one who is continually planning for the improvement and perfection of his work.” Herein lies the (3) chief descriptors of any successful man or woman at their craft: 1. They look closely after the details. Contrary to popular opinion, “it does take all of that” to become a man or woman whose work transcends any boundary. Attention to the most minute of details is a characteristic of excellence that is oft-times avoided because it is perceived as additional work 2. They do not need to be told repeatedly what to do. If a supervisor must spend his or her time repeatedly issuing the same instructions and expectations to those within their charge, then they might rightly do the work themselves. On the other hand, if a supervisor can issue a general set of expectations and instructions and never return to the person except when absolutely necessary it enables the supervisor to attend to their own duties and not the duties of others. 3. They are continually planning for improvement and perfection in their work.

Note, one will never arrive at perfection which is precisely why an institution and its employees must be in a constant state of “continuous improvement.” It is a poor employee or organization that rests upon past successes or achievement. The best employees and organizations work constantly to achieve and do more. Success-true success-begets more success and, most importantly, continued success. (Success is the 3rd greatest 7-letter word after “purpose” and “passion.”) Every man or woman wants to work in a culture of success.

“We can fill your heads with knowledge, and we can train your hands to work with skill, but unless all this training of head and hand is based upon high, upright character, upon a true heart, it will amount to nothing. You will be no better off than the most ignorant.” – Booker T. Washington, A Sunday Evening Talk

Presidential Commentary by Dr. Brian Johnson 

In this writer’s opinion, “integrity” is the greatest 9-letter word, “knowledge” is the second greatest, and “ignorance” is-by far-the worst and most dangerous. And the founding principal and president of Tuskegee (Institute) University, Booker T. Washington, gives on this Sunday evening talk his oft-repeated conception of “heart-head-hands” to help his students avoid the dread of becoming “no better off than the most ignorant.” One can easily seek the help of professors to develop one’s “head”. (These men and women have as their primary purpose to fill the “heads” of students with “knowledge”.) Likewise, professors are able to help make a student’s “hands”-or their work-“skill”[ful]. (Through repeated instruction and correction a student will either become skillful at their work or they will receive failing grades.) Yet, the matter of the “heart,” Mr. Washington suggests, is one matter where students must begin and complete this work largely alone.

(Let no man or woman ever presume to become an expert on the subject of another’s heart.) Of all subject matters, it is the one that is deeply personal and unique to the individual. Whereas both the competencies of the “head” and the credentials of the “hands” lie in full view, the character of the “heart” is always hidden from view. Yet, without it, all else “will amount to nothing.” For Mr. Washington’s complete configuration of Heart-Head-Hands in education is akin to the strength necessary to shoot arrows a great distance even as universities have shot forth theie sons and daughters into rewarding and meaningful careers of service. (The heart is the unseen and invisible strength that determines how far one can bend the bow to make the arrow go. How far one can bend the bow and shoot the arrow tells you precisely what one needs to know.)