Listening to Paul Barrows discuss the unfortunate saga that has enveloped his life for some two years now, one thing is clear: for the former vice chancellor, things are not yet over.

To rehash the saga — an epic tale of dereliction, deceit, judgmental assumptions and the veritable tattering of so many reputations — is merely to relive a very dark era in the recent history of the University of Wisconsin. All sides seem to agree on this point; it is merely the cause for such tribulation that divides so many on this campus.

The problem we now face as a community is a classic tension between healing and scarring. With the Academic Staff Appeals Committee's recent ruling in favor of the former vice chancellor, it is natural for so many — especially those who feel the most deceived by a year full of half-truths and questionable actions — to wish a simple conclusion upon the saga. If we place it behind us, one might reason, we can begin to move on. The record now approaches a point of possible completion.

But we must also realize that to cut and run from unpleasantries is to deny an opportunity to not just remedy those elements of this situation that may be so repaired, but to do so with an eye on avoiding such heartache in the future.

It seems that many do in some way owe it to the community and Mr. Barrows alike to help project the truth, whatever that may be. And I do not exclude myself from such company.

Mr. Barrows insists that his case has been rife with conflicts of interest — including ASAC now handing its recommendation to the very UW administration under fire. And, in many ways, the former vice chancellor is right. With the aid of hindsight, one must question why it is that Susan Steingass, a judge working for the UW Law School, was charged with investigating her employer.

In an interview with The Badger Herald, Mr. Barrows also raised questions about racial motivations in the handling of his case. This is not an argument to which I initially am prone to subscribe, though points about certain language used in a memo prepared by former Dean of Students LuoLuo Hong certainly do strike as interesting. The problem we face, however, is one of hypocrisy. Certain claims of sexual harassment lodged against Mr. Barrows and lent credibility in the Steingass Report now appear to be relatively without merit. But in dignifying those assertions for so long, we allowed Mr. Barrows' reputation to be tarnished more severely than it ought to have. Now that he is making claims of victimization, are we to dismiss them and treat this former vice chancellor with a double standard?

Finally, the question to be asked is what should come of Mr. Barrows now. He claims to be underutilized and underpaid for his talents in his current position, and both of those arguments have foundation. With tensions in Bascom Hall necessarily being high in wake of this case — though Mr. Barrows does convincingly claim to have a professional relationship with Patrick Farrell, the school's new provost — how might the former vice chancellor be promoted without causing an almost certainly counterproductive level of tension?

Indeed, these are the questions that first come to mind after meeting with Mr. Barrows for barely an hour. To them, I have no answers — easy or otherwise. But it does seem worth noting that if we are to force a premature end upon this saga now, we will be left with just that — questions and no answers.

Mac VerStandig ([email protected]) is editor in chief of The Badger Herald and a senior majoring in rhetoric.