othello jealousy essay question

by William Shakespeare

Othello essay questions.

How is Othello's race a factor in the play?

Othello ascends to the rank of the Venetian military, a city - much like Elizabethan England when the play was written - rife with racism. A general in the army, Othello holds a distinguished place in the Duke's court due to his victories in battle, but not an equal one. He suffers barbs and preconceived notions, yet Othello is esteemed and wins the love of the daughter of a nobleman. However, Brabantio is enraged by Othello's marriage to Desdemona and claims Othello used magic to compel her to run to his "sooty bosom". Race is a factor in the tragedy both in those who seek to destroy Othello, and the victims of the schemes - Othello and Desdemona. Perhaps the most pernicious form of race as an instrument of division is Othello's own view of himself as an outsider, which makes him more susceptible to Iago's plan.

How does Shakespeare's use of language reveal character?

Often Shakespeare uses verse lines written in iambic pentameter to illustrate nobility. It is illustrative of Iago's duplicitous nature that he tends to speak in verse when he is with Othello and in prose for his soliloquies. One way in which Iago is a master in manipulation is his tendency to use Othello's own words to disguise his active role of instigator and make it seem that any dark thought came not from him but Othello's own mind. Othello's speech is very sophisticated at the beginning of the play, and in his soliloquy at the close of Act V, but when he is consumed with jealous rage, his eloquence falters. Shakespeare uses dialogue to convey the innerworkings of his characters.

Othello is often called a tragic hero. Discuss his heroic qualities as well as his flaws which lead to his demise.

At the beginning of the play Othello is presented as an honorable man of noble stature and high position. In the end it is his misguided attempt to maintain that honor which brings about his, and Desdemona's, demise. However, Othello is not simply the victim of a plot. Iago is able to engineer Othello's downfall in part because of Othello's own insecurities. His pride blinds him to his weaknesses, and he puts his faith in Iago over the word of his love, Desdemona. Othello is obsessed with his reputation, and ends up killing his wife to save face. Only to a flawed man would murder seem like a solution to a problem of reputation. Othello is spurred on by lies and misrepresentations, but he brings about his own undoing.

What motives, stated and implied, does Iago have for taking revenge on Othello?

Iago's stated reason for taking revenge on Othello is that he has been passed over for Cassio's post. But is this enough for him to "hate the Moor"? It is clear that he is jealous of Othello's ascension in the court and successful wooing of Desdemona. Othello's race and status as an outsider also seems to fuel this rage, as well as the rumor that Othello has slept with Iago's wife, Emilia. None of these motivations, however, seem to add up to inspire the violence that unfolds. Iago remains one of the most purely evil of Shakespeare's villains.

Discuss how loyalty is presented as a positive and a negative quality throughout the play.

Othello's lack of loyalty is what incites Iago's plan for revenge. Iago's ability to fool Othello that he is loyal while secretly plotting his demise is what makes his revenge effective. It is Othello's belief in Desdemona's lack of loyalty that seals their fates. In these ways loyalty, when misconstrued, can be dangerous. However Desdemona's loyalty to Othello even in her death and Othello's loyalty to her once his mistake is revealed are seen as ennobling aspects of their characters.

Compare and contrast the jealousy of Othello to that of Iago.

One major theme in Othello is revenge - Iago's revenge on Othello and Othello's revenge on Desdemona. They both believe death will bring justice. Iago's revenge is cooler, plotted out over time where Othello's is an act of heartbroken passion. Iago wears his lack of morals as a badge of honor where it is Othello's moral code that leads to his tragic end.

Although Othello is the title character in what way is Iago the main character?

Often in Shakespeare's plays such as Hamlet or King Lear , the title character is the main character and protagonist. In Othello this is not the case. Iago has almost 20% more lines than Othello, and has more asides with the audience. While it is Othello's decisions and actions that provide the dramatic structure for the play, it is Iago who sets in motion those decisions and spurs him to action. Othello is the tragic figure of the play, along with Desdemona, and it his characteristics that lend itself to most of the themes - jealousy, race, trust. However, Iago is the character who drives the plot.

How does Desdemona's dying assertion that she killed herself effect how you see her character?

From a modern feminist viewpoint Desdemona may be judged harshly for answering Emilia, when she asked who has mortally attacked her, "nobody; I myself. Farewell." Furthermore, she seemed resigned to her fate at the hands of her husband. While contemporary audiences may interpret these actions as unfathomable, they highlight the goodness of her character. Desdemona is described by others in the play with words that symbolize goodness - light, white, fair, delicate, alabaster. By the end of the play, Desdemona begins to symbolize goodness itself, so her reaction to her murder becomes another element in Othello's tragic end. Desdemona still loves Othello, though he is mistaken, and she goes to her death professing her husband's reputation. A modern audience may wish for a response that is less melodramatic, but that is not the world that Shakespeare has created in this play.

In what ways do Othello's suicide strengthen or undermine his heroism?

Though suicide is not usually the chosen end for a heroic figure, it is Othello's only escape from the crimes he has committed. Though the victim of Iago's trickery, Othello is still the author of his own demise. For Desdemona's death to be answered by anything less than his own would have felt false.

Describe how Othello's pride leads to his fall.

At the beginning of the play Othello is proud of himself and his achievements, but when Iago looks to punish Othello for his perceived slight, it is his pride that he preys upon. The belief that Desdemona has tainted his honor ignites Othello's rage, but it is his pride that blinds him to the fact that the evidence of her acts are lies invented not by a loyal friend but an enemy bent on his destruction.

Othello Questions and Answers

The Question and Answer section for Othello is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel.

what attributers of the green eyed monster jealousy are made painful apparent as the scene progresses

Jealousy is the green-eyed monster in this scene. In Act 3 scene 3 Othello pretty much displays his jealousy,

desdemonas speech here confirms the masterly nature of iagos plot with what words does she assure cassio that she will do her best to get him reinstated

What is your question here?

why does othello ignore the cries for help?

Othello is hurdling towards self-destruction: sadly, by the deaths of people closest to him. Like tragic heroes such as Macbeth, Othello's senses are dull to tragedy and screams of terror. Roderigo and Cassio fight, and both are injured; Othello...

Study Guide for Othello

Othello study guide contains a biography of William Shakespeare, literature essays, a complete e-text, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.

• About Othello
• Othello Summary
• Othello Video
• Character List

Essays for Othello

Othello essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of Othello by William Shakespeare.

• Iago and Edmund: The Silence and Complexity of Evil
• Unity in Shakespeare's Tragedies
• Inevitability and the Nature of Shakespeare's Tragedies
• Witchy Women: Female Magic and Otherness in Western Literature
• Racism in Othello

Lesson Plan for Othello

• About the Author
• Study Objectives
• Common Core Standards
• Introduction to Othello
• Relationship to Other Books
• Bringing in Technology
• Notes to the Teacher
• Related Links
• Othello Bibliography

E-Text of Othello

Othello e-text contains the full text of Othello by William Shakespeare.

• List of Characters

Wikipedia Entries for Othello

• Introduction
• Date and sources
• Themes and critical approaches

William Shakespeare

Ask litcharts ai: the answer to your questions.

Iago refers to jealousy as the "green-eyed monster." As this metaphor suggests, jealousy is closely associated with the theme of appearance and reality. For instance, at one point Othello demands that Iago provide "ocular proof" of Desdemona's infidelity—he demands to see reality. But Iago instead provides the circumstantial evidence of the handkerchief, which Othello, consumed by his jealousy, accepts as a substitute for "ocular proof." Othello's jealousy impedes his ability to distinguish between reality and appearance. While the prejudiced characters in the play denigrate Othello as an animal or a beast based on his race, Othello's obvious honor and intelligence makes these attacks obviously ridiculous. Yet when Othello is overcome by jealousy, he does become beast-like, falling into epileptic fits that rob him of the ability to speak intelligibly.

Othello is also not the only character in Othello to feel jealousy. Both Iago and Roderigo act to destroy Othello out of jealousy, with disastrous consequences.

Jealousy ThemeTracker

Jealousy Quotes in Othello

• Junior Cert
• Elizabeth Bishop
• Emily Dickinson
• Seamus Heaney
• Thomas Kinsella
• Derek Mahon
• All 2014 guides on CD
• Sylvia Plath
• Eavan Boland (LC 2012)
• Patrick Kavanagh (LC 2012)
• Adrienne Rich (LC 2013)
• Gerard Manley Hopkins (LC 2013)
• Cancelled Order
• Thank You for your order

Othello Exam Questions

First of all let’s look at the broad categories questions usually fall into:

You must be able to discuss the following when it comes to  characters :

• a tragic hero? (does he recognise his flaws and gain self-knowledge?)
• his nobility (is he a good man?) / strengths & weaknesses / virtues & flaws
• his relationship with Desdemona & treatment of her
• his manipulation by Iago and transformation into a jealous brute
• the extent to which he is responsible for the tragedy which occurs at the end of the play
• our level of sympathy for him
• the real ‘hero’ of the action?
• flaws and virtues?
• his motivation
• how he controls & manipulates all of the action/characters
• too good to be true or a believable character?
• dramatic function in the play?

Emilia / Bianca:

• Emilia’s dramatic function in the play
• foils to Desdemona – worldly and cynical rather than pure and innocent
• add variety to Shakespeare’s presentation of women & his exploration of their position in society
• symbol of goodness
• extent to which he contributes to the tragedy

All characters:

• contrast the extremes of good and evil presented in the characters in the play
• the play is very pessimistic about human nature
• the play is very pessimistic about human relationships

The major  themes  in the play are:

• Revenge / Power
• Good vs Evil
• Appearance vs Reality (Deception/Manipulation)
• Love & Hate / Loyalty & Betrayal
• Women’s position in society

For each theme – no matter what the wording – ask yourself

• WHO  does this theme apply to?
• HOW / WHY  does this character have to deal with this issue?
• Do they  CHANGE  over the course of the play?
• Are there any  SCENES  which highlight this theme specifically?
• What are our  FINAL IMPRESSIONS  of this issue?

OPEN QUESTIONS:

• Relevance to a modern audience
• Pessimistic play

STYLE QUESTIONS:

• Language & Imagery
• Dramatic Irony
• Compelling Drama – scene or scenes

SAMPLE QUESTIONS

Othello & Iago:

 “ Othello’s foolishness, rather than Iago’s cleverness, leads to the tragedy of Shakespeare’s Othello ” (2008)

“ It is Othello’s egotism and lack of self-knowledge, and not Iago’s evil schemes, which ultimately bring about the tragedy at the end of the play “

“ Othello is arrogant, impulsive and violent. While Iago sets up the conditions for tragedy to occur, it is Othello, ultimately, who we must hold responsible for the tragic events which unfold “

“ A combination of Iago’s skill, Othello’s weakness and a measure of good luck, bring about the tragedy in Othello “

“ Iago cannot be blamed for the deaths of Desdemona and Othello “

“ We cannot blame Othello for being fooled by Iago. Everyone else in the play, including Iago’s wife, believes that he  is honest and true “

“ Othello and Iago are both egotists, obsessed with proving how clever and capable they are, and hell bent on revenge when they feel they have been wronged “

“Othello is the principal agent of his own downfall” (1994)

“ Othello is essentially a noble character, flawed by insecurity & a nature that is naive & unsophisticated ” (1990)

“ Othello is a good man who is skilfully manipulated by Iago. For this reason, despite his credulousness, we continue to feel sorry for him “

“ Iago’s schemes succeed, not because Othello is weak, but because he is so noble “

“ Othello is a noble hero who loses, but ultimately regains our sympathy “

“ We do not approve of Othello’s behaviour, yet we nonetheless pity him “

“ Othello is not a tragic hero; he is a gullible fool “

“ Othello is not a tragic hero. He never really takes responsibility for his errors of character and judgement”

“ Despite his suffering, Othello learns little of himself or of human relationships “

To what extent do you agree with Othello’s assessment of himself as an “ honourable murderer ” who “ loved not wisely but too well “?

“ The collapse of Othello and Desdemona’s marriage is the real tragedy of this play “

“ Iago is the real hero of Shakespeare’s play Othello ”

“ Iago is a likable villain ”

“ Iago is motivated by jealousy of others good fortune and by a lust for power ”

“Iago is a charming villain, but it is difficult to understand his motivation”

“ Iago is an evil villain with no redeeming qualities “

“ While we are repulsed by Iago’s evil, we are fascinated by his ingenuity “

“ Iago is the most evil but also the most fascinating character in the play Othello”

“ Desdemona is not a credible character, she is an unrealistic saint who does nothing to try and prevent her fate ”

“ Desdemona is a woman, not an angel; she lives and loves with her whole person, both body and soul ”

“ Desdemona’s dramatic function in the play is to act as a symbol of purity, innocence and goodness but this means that her behaviour is not always entirely believable ”

“ Desdemona and Iago are at opposite poles in the play, Othello, the one representing pure love, the other hate incarnate “. (1986)

Emilia / Bianca: 

Discuss the importance of the character Emilia in the play as a whole. (1994)

“ Women are not presented in a very positive light in Shakespeare’s Othello “

“ Cassio may be a ‘proper man’ but he is also an honest fool whose weakness plays no small part in the tragic death of Desdemona ”

“ Shakespeare’s play Othello demonstrates the weakness of human judgement ” (2008)

“ Shakespeare’s Othello presents the very best and the very worst in human nature ”

“ Shakespeare’s Othello presents us with a dark and pessimistic view of human nature”

“Shakespeare’s Othello presents us with a dark and pessimistic view of human relationships”

“ In the play Othello, naive, innocent characters are no match for the evil machinations of the world weary Iago “

“ The destructive power of jealousy is dramatically presented in Shakespeare’s play Othello ”

“ Shakespeare’s Othello is concerned not so much with jealousy, as with misunderstanding ”

“ Shakespeare’s play Othello powerfully portrays a world dominated by jealousy and revenge”

“ Evil ultimately conquers good in Shakespeare’s play Othello ”

“In Shakespeare’s play Othello, we witness a profound inability to distinguish between appearances and reality”

“ Appearances do not mask a sinister reality in this play, yet Iago manages to convince every character that there is more going on than meets the eye”

“ Love and hate are presented as opposite sides of the same coin in Shakespeare’s play Othello ”

“ Shakespeare’s Othello initially questions, but then confirms racist stereotypes ”

“ The role and status of women is dramatically explored in Shakespeare’s Othello”

Open questions:

“Shakespeare’s Othello remains relevant for a modern audience”

“ Despite the striking portrayals of goodness and nobility, the play Othello leaves the audience with a sense of dismal despair ”

Style questions:

“ Image of animals, images of storm and images of heaven and hell predominate in Othello ” (1990)

 “ Irony is a powerful dramatic device used by Shakespeare to heighten the tragic dimension of his play Othello ” (1998)

Othello contains many scenes of compelling drama. Choose one scene which you found particularly compelling and discuss why you found it so.

One response to “ Othello Exam Questions ”

Pingback: Week 1: Leavingcertenglish.net: Othello Exam Questions

Recent Posts

• A long slow goodbye…
• Lear’s journey
• Some themes in Lear…
• King Lear – Plot Chronology
• King Lear quotes (in translation!)
• Justice in King Lear – how to construct an answer…
• The Old Warrior and Me
• Single text options…
• Tackling the Comparative
• Reading Shakespeare (Othello)
• Game Based Learning
• Originality – Freshness – Energy – Style
• Discussions
• Comprehensions
• Comparative
• Studied poetry
• Unseen poetry
• Media Studies
• Uncategorized

Affiliations

Nominations.

Home — Essay Samples — Literature — Othello Jealousy — How Othello’s Jealousy Led Him To A Downfall

How Othello's Jealousy LED Him to a Downfall

• Categories: Othello Othello Jealousy

About this sample

Words: 1016 |

Published: Feb 8, 2022

Words: 1016 | Pages: 2 | 6 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

• Expert in: Literature

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1.5 pages / 763 words

4 pages / 1712 words

3 pages / 1346 words

2 pages / 820 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Othello Jealousy

In Shakespeare’s Othello, Iago plots Othello’s destruction when he is passed over for a promotion. Iago tells Othello that Desdemona has been unfaithful to him and provides circumstantial evidence for this. Othello becomes full [...]

It’s a known fact that jealousy can cause a person to go to extreme measures in order to get what they want. With a little bit of jealousy and a spark of ambition, the evil possibilities are endless but how far exactly will an [...]

The Elizabethan Era was the most obvious time period where the discrimination of race was very evident. The famous Shakespearean play, Othello, is an example of literature that displays the effects of racism. Therefore, Othello [...]

“Othello”, written by Shakespeare, uses multiple thematic focuses to develop a tragic plot. The Othello Oral Report focused on dishonesty and miscommunication, jealousy and regret, and gender and pride, as well as more themes [...]

Power is the underlying current that runs through both Webster’s ‘The Duchess of Malfi’, a 17th century revenge tragedy, and Williams’ ‘A Streetcar Named Desire’, a 20th Century modern domestic tragedy. Both plays offer stark [...]

In both Tennessee Williams’ A Streetcar named Desire and Sylvia Plath’s Ariel, there is extensive concern for how masculinity and femininity are portrayed. Both texts present archetypical interpretations of gender as [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

92 Exceptional Topics for Othello Essay

Shakespeare’s Othello is an extraordinary play that incorporates a huge variety of themes and symbols. You can find examples of allusions and imagery that are intriguing to analyze.That’s why our team prepared this list! Check our topics and choose one to write an outstanding Othello essay.

We suggest you the following ideas:

• Elaborate on religious symbolism. What hell & heaven imagery is present in “Othello”? Explain how Desdemona can be compared to the Virgin Mary; how both Othello and Iago are associated with the Devil. Describe Othello’s “fall from grace.”
• Explore the deception and bending the reality . Who doesn’t lie in the play and why? Who does? Comment on various types of deception that are apparent in “Othello”: from lying out of love to manipulating through trickery.
• Talk about Othello’s weaknesses . What character traits or views do you consider crucial for the plot? How does Iago use Othello’s weaknesses against him? Mention how Othello’s feelings and mood change throughout the play due to his flaws.
• Comment on Iago’s manipulations . Who does Iago control? How and why does he create his web of lies? Add how Iago views himself as a director of his play. Who is hurt due to his lies and actions?
• Examine Emilia’s lines in Act 4, Scene 3. What does she say about marriage and infidelity? Why is her speech about womanhood considered a feminist one? Elaborate on whether such thoughts were common for Shakespeare’s period and why the author decided to include them in the play.
• Compare Desdemona and Bianca. How are the women often contrasted in the play? How does the critical contrast, Desdemona’s virtue vs. Bianca’s sexual freedom, affect men’s attitude towards the respective women? Explore how both characters are more complex than the characteristics above.
• Analyze the topic of redemption in “Othello.” Who found redemption by the end of the play? For whom is it unattainable? Explain the journey of a tragic hero in terms of his downfall and the necessity of redemption.
• Elaborate on Iago’s motivation. Why does he start his play within “Othello”? What motivates him to control, hurt, and even murder other characters? Explain why there are many possible reasons as Iago may hide the whole truth even from the audience.
• Discuss heroism in “Othello.” Whose actions may be considered heroic? Who sincerely tries to act like a hero? Speculate on whether Iago may desire to be viewed as a heroic figure. Does Othello show heroism?
• Talk about Cassio’s character. What do we know about his flaws and strength? Mention his problem with alcohol and attitude towards Bianca. How does the end of the play change his character? Add how this change may be the reason for his happy ending and success.
• Explore the villain of the play. Who can be considered the main antagonist? Comment on a few characters in the play who act as villains, including the main one, Othello.
• Analyze the conflict of passion and love in “Othello.” What does Othello feel towards Desdemona? Which of the emotions prevails? Explain why his actions and words are easy to interpret as passion, while his suicide may prove that he was in love with Desdemona.
• Comment on the central conflict. When does it arise in the plot? Why did Shakespeare introduce the conflict later in the play? Explain how every event from this moment leads to a catastrophe. How is it both natural and staged by the villain?
• Examine the irony in “Othello.” What type of irony is present in the play? For what purposes does Shakespeare use it? Mention how humor adds more value to the characterization and the play’s tone.
• Consider the tone of the play What atmosphere is introduced in Act 1, and how does it change in Act 2? Mention how the stormy weather corresponds to this shift. Comment on the drastic changes in the tone that are apparent by the end of the play.
• Compare “Othello’s” Desdemona to “Hamlet’s” Ophelia. How do these female characters affect the plot of the respective plays? What influence do they and their fates have on the main Othello and Hamlet? Consider both of their tragic stories and their relationships with the main characters.
• Analyze the character of Desdemona. What are her essential qualities? How do men in the play treat her? Explore her disobedience to her father, banter with Iago, and death. Dive into her relationships with Othello and Emilia. How do Desdemona’s character traits and actions make her a perfect woman of the time?
• Discuss gender roles during the Elizabethan period How are male and female roles presented in “Othello”? How does Shakespeare comment on his time? Express what Elizabethan society expected from women and what sins were considered unacceptable.
• Comment on “Othello” as an Aristotelian Tragedy. What is a tragedy, according to this Greek philosopher? Explain how the play satisfies all the qualifications for tragedy as defined by Aristotle.
• Talk about Othello’s gullibility. What makes Othello so naive? Do his straightforwardness and gullibility make him more or less realistic and relatable? You can compare him to such characters as Hamlet, who lack naivety yet suffer through similar tragic events as Othello.
• Elaborate on Desdemona’s and Othello’s relationship. How does it change throughout the play? Explain how Othello’s capability of creating a healthy and loving relationship that we see at the beginning of “Othello” goes against prejudice.
• Explore the theme of racism in “Othello.” What characters have prejudice about Othello due to his race? Express how Othello’s speech and actions during the significant part of the play run contrary to the unreasonable expectations of his enemies.
• Consider Othello’s suicide. What leads Othello to it? Why may an audience respect it and view it as a redemption for a fallen hero? Does suicide strengthen Othello’s heroism? Elaborate on this action in terms of Othello as a tragic hero.
• Compare and contrast “Othello” and “The Blind Owl.” What is the role of women and love in these literary works? Compare the main characters of “Othello” and “The Blind Owl,” comment on the murder and suicide.
• Examine Emilia’s short interaction with Bianca in Act 4. Why is Emilia so harsh towards Bianca and disapproves of everything she says? Does she protect her husband’s deeds, or is she simply biased about Bianca? Comment on misogynistic behavior even among women during the period when the play was written.
• Analyze various symbols from the play. Speculate on the meaning of such objects as wedding sheets from Act 4 Scene 3. What is the significance of a candle from Act 5 Scene 2? Provide a short analysis of each one with examples from the text.
• Elaborate on Brabantio’s character. What’s his attitude towards Othello before he learns about his marriage to Desdemona? Why is he so opposed to this marriage anyway? Comment on Brabantio’s hurt honor and later death.
• Talk about Desdemona’s devotion to her husband . Where does it come from? Do her loyalty and devotion prevent her from understanding Othello’s anger towards her? Speculate why they can’t reach each other at the end of the play and solve their problems by discussing them.
• Consider Iago’s control over Roderigo. How does Iago manipulate Roderigo? Why does Roderigo trust him and obeys up to giving Iago his jewelry? Mention how Roderigo tried to escape the control once, but Iago didn’t let it happen.
• Compare Othello’s and Desdemona’s relationship with that of Iago and Emilia. Which relationship was first to be struck by jealousy? Elaborate on Iago’s control and lack of interest towards Emilia instead of Othello’s devotion to Desdemona. Has Iago ever experienced the same level of jealousy (in his love life) as Othello?
• Discuss the significance of race in the play . Was racism a standard way of thinking when “Othello” was written? Explain how the play reflects the Elizabethan era, its racial prejudice, and its cultural context.
• Comment on Desdemona’s and Emilia’s friendship. Are they close? What do they discuss, particularly in Act 4, Scene 3? Express how Emilia proved her devotion to her mistress in Act 5 Scene 2. Why did Emilia lie to Desdemona about the handkerchief a few scenes before?
• Analyze Iago’s hatred . Who doesn’t Iago hate? Where do his hatred and anger come from? Speculate on his nature and hidden reasons for his negative emotions. Mention the language that he uses and what’s unique about it.
• Talk about Roderigo’s character. What’s his goal? Why does he trust Iago and follow his demand? Elaborate on the moment when he tries to escape Iago’s control and fails. What’s his role in the play?
• Explore animal imagery in “Othello.” Why is Othello constantly compared to animals throughout the play? Provide quotes where Iago calls him “Barbary horse” and so on and explain what it means concerning racism and prejudice.
• Compare two plays: “Othello” and “Oedipus.” What are these tragedies based on? How do “Othello” and “Oedipus” end? Explain the reasons for the downfall of the hero that happens in both plays. What characters tried to prevent such a tragic end?
• Examine Othello’s pride and honor. How are these aspects tied to his race and reputation? Mention how his uselessness during the war could’ve affected his pride and make Othello more susceptible to Iago’s manipulation. How does a thought of Desdemona’s infidelity hurt Othello’s pride?
• Compare Othello’s and Bianca’s jealous behavior. Who takes the possibility of their lover’s infidelity better? Summarize their reasons for jealousy and their actions after gaining such a suspicion. Why is it intriguing that Bianca trusts her love interest more than Othello does?
• Consider Othello as the outsider . When do we find out that he doesn’t belong to the community? Mention how it’s uncommon for tragic heroes to be an outcast from the start of the play. How does Iago use it against Othello? How does his status as an outsider contribute to his downfall?
• Discuss Iago’s misogyny. What does he say about women? How does he treat women in the play, particularly his wife? Analyze his banter with Desdemona in Act 2, Scene 1, and his point of view.
• Talk about Desdemona’s independence from her father. Why does Desdemona decide to disobey Brabantio’s will and elope with Othello? Was it common for the time? Explain how Desdemona both showed her independence and immediately became obedient to another man.
• Compare the treatment of women in “Othello” and “Oedipus.” How did Shakespeare and Sophocles describe women in their plays? What role do these characters play in the stories? Analyze how men treat and talk about women in the plays. How does it reflect the period when “Othello” and “Oedipus” were written?
• Elaborate on Emilia’s assistance to Iago. Why does she help him in obtaining Desdemona’s handkerchief? Did she know anything about Iago’s plan? Express how Emilia tried to gain her husband’s approval covering his deeds. Why does she betray him in Act 5 Scene 2?
• Compare two movie adaptations of the play. Find two films based on “Othello” and analyze the alternations from the play in each of them. Which movie is more accurate to the source material? Which one do you prefer?
• Comment on Iago’s control over Othello. Why does Othello believe him more than Desdemona or any other character in the play? Did Iago do anything to gain this trust? Explain how Iago uses language to make Othello blind to his manipulations.
• Explore the theme of jealousy Who suffers from jealousy in the play? Elaborate on various types of jealousy presented in “Othello” (professional and personal) and how characters deal with this emotion.
• Analyze Othello’s changes throughout the play. What traits and behavior does he obtain and why? Does he become more himself by the end of the play than he was before, or it’s the opposite? Add a few examples of more animalistic behavior that Othello showed. Why did its features escalate and then disappear during Act 5 Scene 2?
• Discuss Iago’s plan. When does Iago come up with an idea? Who helps him? Add a couple of sentences about Iago’s motivation and his enjoyment that comes from manipulating people around him.
• Compare and contrast Othello and Oedipus Rex . What character traits do they have in common? What features of their respective journeys do they share? Elaborate on each person and their stories, analyzing the challenges that they face.
• Examine “Othello” in Shakespearean Theater. How did theatres look like when “Othello” was written? Could actors propose ideas and changes during the repetitions of a play? Express how “Othello” was initially performed and what these early performances looked like. When was it published?
• Explore the relationship between Othello and Cassio. Was their friendship strong before Iago’s web of lies? Why was it easy for Othello to believe that Cassio had an affair with Desdemona? Explain how their relationship changed throughout the play.
• Talk about murders in “Othello.” Why did Othello and Iago kill their respective wives? Why did Iago decide to kill Roderigo? Speculate on what causes murders in the play and how it’s connected to the themes of the play. Why did Cassio, whose death was planned by Iago early in “Othello,” survived?
• Analyze Tim Nelson’s 2001 movie “O.” How did the director adapt the play? How did the change of the setting affect “Othello”? Explain why this play is cinematically adaptable. How did Tim Nelson change the characters?
• Comment on the language of the play. What does the way Othello speaks say about him? How is the power of words highlighted in the play? Explain how Iago uses ambiguous and deceptive language to manipulate other characters.
• Examine Othello’s misogyny. What words and actions indicate that sexism has an impact on Othello’s worldview? How does he treat women around him? Mention how quickly he believes that Desdemona cheats on him, even though he doesn’t see any “ocular proof.”
• Elaborate on the way Iago changed by the end of the play. What causes changes in his behavior? Does he become eviler and more himself? Explain how he started from verbal manipulation and ended with murdering two people. Why did he get caught?
• Talk about possible interpretations of “Othello.” How may a person analyze Shakespeare’s works? How have interpretations of “Othello” changed over the years? Comment on the power of historical context.
• Explore the meaning behind the handkerchief. What’s its role in the play? What does this object symbolize? Express how it has a different meaning for every character: Desdemona considers it a symbol of love, while Othello starts to see it as a symbol of betrayal. Add how the handkerchief’s meaning changes.
• Express how “Othello” is experienced by a reader . Given that this is a play primarily performed on stage rather than written analyze it as a text. Are stage directions clear? What’s the focus of each scene? What catches your attention?
• Compare an Elizabethan audience’s reaction to “Othello” with today’s reception. How was the play perceived during Shakespeare’s time? Why do critics find more and more flaws in “Othello” over the years? Mention the role of historical context and how Shakespeare used classical references to entertain his audience.
• Analyze Othello’s character traits. What are his essential qualities? What traits are obtained (or revealed) due to Iago’s manipulations?
• Speculate on the moral of the story . What did Shakespeare want to say? Was it a lesson about jealousy and trust? Or did he try to show how a person can ruin a perfect life via his actions? Analyze all the possible explanations about the moral of the play. What’s Shakespeare’s comment on deception?
• Examine Iago’s jealousy. What’s Iago jealous about? Who is he jealous of? List and analyze all his professional and personal reasons to be jealous of Othello and Cassio. Does he explain them to the audience?
• Shakespeare’s influence on the Renaissance period . How does “Othello” represent this period? What common motifs for the Renaissance did Shakespeare develop in the play? Comment on the author’s contributions to the time via “Othello.”
• Discuss Giuseppe Verdi’s opera “Othello.” What changes did Verdi make in his opera? Why did he exclude Act 1 of the play? Add data about first performances and Verdi’s demands concerning the leading singers.
• Elaborate on the Willow song. Where does it appear? Why does Desdemona recall it? Speculate period what this song may symbolize and mention circumstances that forced Emilia to recite it in Act 5 Scene 2.
• Compare the play with its movie adaptation. How did the director of the film modify “Othello”? Is this play cinematically adaptable? Elaborate on changes in the movie and the director’s goal (whether it was adapting the story to fit another period or making it more accurate and close to the text).
• Explore the setting of “Othello.” Where do the events take place? How did the historical context affect the choice of scenery? Mention the details that highlight differences between Cyprus and Venice. What influence does the change of location have on the characters?
• Talk about Othello’s leadership skills . Do we see them in the play? How did these skills help Othello in gaining his reputation? Elaborate on Othello as a leader according to Machiavelli’s ideas.
• Comment on the theme of family. Who keeps in contact with their family in “Othello”? Who has a strong emotional connection to their roots? Elaborate on the relationship between Desdemona and her father.
• Consider Shakespeare’s impact on theatre . Was the social influence theme unusual for the theatre of his time period? What was new about the play for this era? Explain what themes and contemporary tone theatre borrowed from “Othello.”
• Examine Othello’s soliloquy in Act 5 Scene 2. What does it explain to the audience about his character? Does it count as a part of his redemption? Comment on the lines that convey Othello’s intelligence and racism. Can it be considered a suicide note?
• Compare Othello and Leontes from “The Winter’s Tale.” What traits do the characters have in common? What similar issues and conflicts do they face? Elaborate on the different ways that characters chose to solve their problems.
• Talk about Emilia. What role does she play in “Othello”? Does she change throughout the play? Explain why she helps her husband during the significant part of the play but then betrays him, revealing his plan to the characters around. Analyze the moments when she decides to keep silent or talk during the events of the play.
• Compare Othello’s jealousy to Iago’s one. What are the key differences? What is the foundation for their jealousy? Analyze the roots of the jealous behavior of Othello and Iago. How do they deal with this feeling?
• Elaborate on the point of view. What’s intriguing in watching or reading the play from Iago’s point of view? Why does Iago talk to an audience? Explain how the villain makes the listeners or readers his accomplices.
• Comment on Othello’s emotions . Analyze his feelings throughout the play. Explain how he’s eager to follow his emotions and base his decisions on them. How does it affect his journey?
• Explore the banter in Act 2, Scene 1. What do Iago and Desdemona argue about? Is it a serious discussion? Comment on each point of view and how Desdemona doesn’t take Iago’s words seriously.
• Examine the theme of betrayal. Why is loyalty presented as both a curse and virtue? Who uses it to their advantage, and who suffers from it? Express how Iago uses the fear of betrayal against Othello. How does the handkerchief start to symbolize betrayal to Othello?
• Analyze violence in “Othello.” Who acts violently in the play? How do characters fight and commit murder? Elaborate on Othello’s and Iago’s cruelty that they demonstrate in Act 5.
• Consider one of Iago’s monologues. Elaborate on the purpose of him explaining his plans and motivation. Does he tell only the truth or hide something even from the audience? Are there moments when he gains sympathy from the listeners?
• Discuss Iago’s moral grounds . Does he have any? Or is he inherently evil? Analyze his evil actions and schemes, providing examples from the play. Does he have a line that he can’t cross?
• Elaborate on the appearance vs. reality theme. How does Iago hide the reality of things from almost every character? Who is too straightforward and naive to suspect Iago? Mention how characters are blind to Iago’s lies up to the last scene of the play, when Emilia understands everything and reveals Iago’s plan.
• Talk about Desdemona’s death. How did she die? Did she suspect that Othello may want to murder her? Analyze Desdemona’s last attempt to protect her husband, claiming that he’s innocent, and she committed suicide. Does it make her a perfect wife for that time?
• Speculate on Othello’s transformation from a hero to a villain . What unique features does his journey demonstrate? What does Othello’s path have in common with Macbeth’s one? Elaborate on the role of fear and hope in Othello’s story. Did he redeem himself in the end?
• Comment on the passage of time. How many days does the play take? Why are there inconsistencies? Examine various theories about the duration of action and scenes where time could’ve elapsed.
• Explore Cassio’s misogyny. How does he treat his girlfriend to her face and behind her back? Analyze his dialogue with Iago in Act 4, where they talk about Bianca. Why does he act more attentive around Desdemona?
• Elaborate on the minor characters . Who are the critical minor characters? What role do they play in the plot progression? Briefly explain why they are vital for the story, as minor characters help us see the action from the inside, determine the path of the tragic hero, and develop the world of “Othello.”
• Examine the character of Iago . What are his crucial character traits? What role does he play in “Othello”? How does he affect other characters? Explain his motivation and his actions in the play. Why does he have a few soliloquies?
• Discuss the theme of love. How does love affect the characters of the play? Who suffers from love? Explain how “Othello” explores both platonic and romantic love; how love is often mistaken for other feelings.
• Consider the significance of evidence in “Othello.” How does the play demonstrate the significance of “ocular proof”? Explain how “Othello” can be helpful for policemen, lawyers, and other people who deal with evidence regularly.
• Analyze the clown scenes (Act 3, Scenes 1 and 4). Why did Shakespeare introduce the clown? What role does it play in the play? Elaborate on why “Othello” needs comic relief and a moment to take a breath.

Thanks for checking our topics out! We hope now you’re ready to write your Othello essay. For more information, consider other articles about the play below or try our topic generator .

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to LinkedIn
• Share to email

Study Guide Menu

• Play’s Plot Explored
• Act 1 Scene 1
• Act 1 Scene 2
• Act 1 Scene 3
• Act 2 Scenes 1-2
• Act 2 Scene 3
• Act‌ ‌3‌ ‌Scenes‌ ‌1-2
• Act‌ ‌3‌ ‌Scene‌ ‌3
• Act 3 Scene 4
• Act‌ ‌4‌ ‌Scene‌ ‌1
• Act 4 Scene 2
• Act‌ ‌4‌ ‌Scene‌ ‌3
• Act‌ ‌5‌ ‌Scene‌ ‌1
• Act 5 Scene 2
• Characters Analysis
• Important Quotes
• Essay Samples
• Topics‌ for‌ ‌Essay‌
• William Shakespeare
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, May 21). 92 Exceptional Topics for Othello Essay. https://ivypanda.com/lit/othello-study-guide/topics-for-essay/

"92 Exceptional Topics for Othello Essay." IvyPanda , 21 May 2024, ivypanda.com/lit/othello-study-guide/topics-for-essay/.

IvyPanda . (2024) '92 Exceptional Topics for Othello Essay'. 21 May.

IvyPanda . 2024. "92 Exceptional Topics for Othello Essay." May 21, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/lit/othello-study-guide/topics-for-essay/.

1. IvyPanda . "92 Exceptional Topics for Othello Essay." May 21, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/lit/othello-study-guide/topics-for-essay/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "92 Exceptional Topics for Othello Essay." May 21, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/lit/othello-study-guide/topics-for-essay/.

• Share full article

Ibram X. Kendi Faces a Reckoning of His Own

In 2020, the author of “How to Be an Antiracist” galvanized Americans with his ideas. The past four years have tested them — and him.

Ibram X. Kendi, the founding director of the Boston University Center for Antiracist Research. Credit... Wayne Lawrence for The New York Times

Supported by

By Rachel Poser

Rachel Poser is an editor for the magazine. She spoke to Kendi over a period of several months and visited him at his research center in Boston.

• June 4, 2024 Updated 4:49 p.m. ET

Ibram X. Kendi has a notebook that prompts him, on every other page, to write down “Things to be grateful for.” There are many things he might put under that heading. First and foremost, his wife and two daughters, and his health, having made it through Stage 4 colon cancer in his 30s — a diagnosis with a 12 percent survival rate. Tenure at Boston University, where Martin Luther King Jr. earned his doctorate in theology. A National Book Award, and a MacArthur “genius” grant for “transforming how many people understand, discuss and attempt to redress America’s longstanding racial challenges.” Then there were the millions of people who bought “How to Be an Antiracist,” the first of five of his books to take the No. 1 spot on the New York Times best-seller list. But he was particularly grateful to the readers who wrote to him to say his work changed them for the better.

Listen to this article, read by January LaVoy

These days, he could use the reminder. Four years have gone by since George Floyd was murdered on the pavement near Cup Foods in Minneapolis, sparking the racial “reckoning” that made Kendi a household name. Many people, Kendi among them, believe that reckoning is long over. State legislatures have pushed through harsh antiprotest measures . Conservative-led campaigns against teaching Black history and against diversity, equity and inclusion programs are underway. Last June, the Supreme Court struck down affirmative action in college admissions. And Donald Trump is once again the Republican nominee for president, promising to root out “the radical-left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country.”

Kendi has become a prime target of this backlash. Books of his have been banned from schools in some districts, and his name is a kind of profanity among conservatives who believe racism is mostly a problem of the past. Though legions of readers continue to celebrate Kendi as a courageous and groundbreaking thinker, for many others he has become a symbol of everything that’s wrong in racial discourse today. Even many allies in the fight for racial justice dismiss his brand of antiracism as unworkable, wrongheaded or counterproductive. “The vast majority of my critics,” Kendi told me last year, “either haven’t read my work or willfully misrepresent it.”

Criticism of Kendi only grew in September, when he made the “painful decision” to lay off more than half the staff of the research center he runs at Boston University. The Center for Antiracist Research, which Kendi founded during the 2020 protests to tackle “seemingly intractable problems of racial inequity and injustice,” raised an enormous sum of $55 million, and the news of its downsizing led to a storm of questions. False rumors began circulating that Kendi had stolen funds, and the university announced it would investigate after former employees accused him of mismanagement and secrecy.

The controversy quickly ballooned into a national news story, fueled in large part by right-wing media, which was all too happy to speculate about “missing funds” and condemn Kendi — and the broader racial-justice movement — as a fraud. On Fox News, the conservative activist Christopher Rufo told the host John Roberts that the center’s “failure” was “poetic justice.” “This is a symbol of where we have come since 2020 and why that movement is really floundering today,” he said. In early October, a podcast affiliated with the Manhattan Institute, the conservative think tank where Rufo works, jubilantly released an episode titled “The End of Ibram X. Kendi?”

‘I don’t know of anybody more ill suited for fame than Ibram Kendi.’

In December, I met Kendi at the Center for Antiracist Research, which was by then mostly empty, though I caught signs of its former life: Space heaters sat idly under desks, and Post-it notes lingered around the edges of unplugged monitors. On the frame of one cleared-out cubicle, a sticker in the shape of Earth read “Be the change.” Kendi welcomed me into his office in a pink shirt and a periwinkle blazer with a handkerchief tucked neatly in its pocket. He was calm on the surface, but he seemed to me, as he often did during the conversations we’d had since the layoffs, to be holding himself taut, like a tensile substance under enormous strain. The furor over the center, he said, was a measure of how desperate many people were to damage his reputation: “If this had happened at another center, it would either not have been a story or a one-day story.”

In “How to Be an Antiracist,” his best-known book, Kendi challenges readers to evaluate themselves by their racial impact, by whether their actions advance or impede the cause of racial equality. “There is no neutrality in the racial struggle,” he writes. “The question for each of us is: What side of history will we stand on?” This question evinces Kendi’s confidence that ideas and policies can be dependably sorted into one of two categories: racist or antiracist.

Kendi is a vegan, a tall man with a gentle, serious nature. “He’ll laugh at a joke — he’ll never crack one,” Kellie Carter Jackson, the chair of the Africana studies department at Wellesley and someone who has known Kendi for years, told me. He considers himself an “introvert and loner” who was chased down by the spotlight and is now caught in its glare. “I don’t know of anybody more ill suited for fame than Ibram Kendi,” said Stefan Bradley, a longtime friend and professor of Black studies at Amherst. There is a corniness to Kendi that’s endearing, like his use of the gratitude notebook — a thick, pastel-colored pad with gold spiral binding — or the fact that his phone email signature is “Sent from Typoville aka my iPhone.” Though he is always soft-spoken, volume sometimes seems to be a gauge of how comfortable he feels. The first time I met him in person, he greeted me so quietly that I worried my recorder wouldn’t pick up his voice.

Kendi had hired a pair of crisis-P.R. consultants to help him manage the fallout from the layoffs, a controversy that he believed had fed into dangerous, racist stories about Black leaders, and about him in particular. In the fun-house mirror of conservative media, Kendi has long loomed as an antiwhite extremist trying to get rich by sowing racial division. Kendi told me he received regular threats; he allowed me to come to the center only on the condition that I not reveal its location. “When it comes to the white supremacists who are the greatest domestic terrorist threat of our time, I am one of their chief enemies,” he told me.

Boston University had recently released the results of its audit, which found “no issues” with how the center’s finances were handled. The center’s problem, Kendi told me, was more banal: Most of its money was in its endowment or restricted to specific uses, and after the high of 2020, donations had crashed. “At our current rate, we were going to run out in two years,” he said. “That was what ultimately led us to feel like we needed to make a major change.” The center’s new model would fund nine-month academic fellowships rather than a large full-time staff. Though inquiries into the center’s grant-management practices and workplace culture were continuing, Kendi was confident that they would absolve him, too. In the media, he’d dismissed the complaints about his leadership as “unfair,” “unfounded,” “vague,” “meanspirited” and an attempt to “settle old scores.”

In the fall, when I began talking to former employees and faculty — most of whom asked for anonymity because they remain at Boston University or signed severance agreements that included nondisparagement language — it was clear that many of them felt caught in a bind. They could already see that the story of the center’s dysfunction was being used to undermine the racial-justice movement, but they were frustrated to watch Kendi play down the problems and cast their concerns as spiteful or even racist. They felt that what they experienced at the center was now playing out in public: Kendi’s tendency to see their constructive feedback as hostile. “He doesn’t trust anybody,” one person told me. “He doesn’t let anyone in.”

To Kendi, attacks from those who claim to be allies, like attacks from political enemies, are to be expected. In his books, Kendi argues that history is not an arc bending toward justice but a war of “dueling” forces — racist and antiracist — that each escalate their response when the other advances. In the years since 2020, he believes, the country has entered a predictable period of retrenchment, when the force of racism is ascendant and the racial progress of the last several decades is under threat. To defend antiracism, to defend himself, he would simply have to fight harder.

Not so long ago, Kendi thought he saw a new world coming into being. “We are living in the midst of an antiracist revolution,” he wrote in September 2020 in an Atlantic cover story headlined, “Is This the Beginning of the End for American Racism?” Nearly 20 percent of Americans were saying that “race relations” was the most urgent problem facing the nation — more than at any point since 1968 — and many of them were turning to Kendi to figure out what to do about it. They were buying his memoir and manifesto, “How to Be an Antiracist,” much of which he wrote while undergoing chemotherapy. “This was perhaps the last thing he was going to write,” Chris Jackson, Kendi’s editor, told me. “There was no cynicism in the writing of it.” (Jackson was the editor of a 2021 book based on The 1619 Project, which originated in this magazine in 2019 ; Kendi contributed a chapter to that book.)

Kendi confesses in the introduction that he “used to be racist most of the time.” The year 1994, when he turned 12, marked three decades since the United States outlawed discrimination on the basis of race. Then why, Kendi wondered as an adolescent, were so many Black people out of work, impoverished or incarcerated? The problem, he concluded, must be Black people themselves. Not Black people like his parents, God-loving professionals who had saved enough to buy a home in Jamaica, Queens, and who never let their two sons forget the importance of education and hard work. But they were the exception. In high school, Kendi competed in an oratory contest in which he gave voice to many of the anti-Black stereotypes circulating in the ’90s — that Black youths were violent, unstudious, unmotivated. “They think it’s OK to be the most feared in our society,” he proclaimed. “They think it’s OK not to think!” Kendi also turned these ideas on himself, believing that he was a “subpar student” because of his race.

Kendi’s mind began to change when he arrived on the campus of Florida A&M, one of the largest historically Black universities in the country, in the fall of 2000 to study sports journalism. “I had never seen so many Black people together with positive motives,” he wrote at the time. Kendi was disengaged for most of high school, as concerned with his clothes as his grades. His friends at the university teased him for joining a modeling troupe and preening before parties, particularly because once he got to them he was too shy to talk to anyone. “He would come out, and you could smell the cologne from down the hall,” Grady Tripp, Kendi’s housemate, told me. But experimenting with his style, for Kendi, was part of trying on new ideas. For a while, he wore honey-colored contact lenses that turned his irises an off-putting shade of orange; he got rid of them once he decided they were a rejection of blackness, like Malcolm X’s straightening his hair with lye.

Over long hours spent reading alone in the library, Kendi found his way to some unlikely conclusions. In “How to Be an Antiracist,” he describes bursting into his housemate’s room to declare that he had “figured white people out.” “They are aliens,” he said. Kendi had gone searching for answers in conspiracy theories and Nation of Islam theology that cast whites as a “devil race” bred by an evil Black scientist to conquer the planet. “Europeans are simply a different breed of human,” he wrote in a column for the student newspaper in 2003. They are “socialized to be aggressive” and have used “the AIDS virus and cloning” to dominate the world’s peoples. Recently, the column has circulated on right-wing social media as evidence of Kendi’s antiwhite extremism, which frustrates him because it’s in his own memoir as an example of just how lost he had become.

Kendi went on to earn a Ph.D. in African American studies from Temple University. The founder of his department was Molefi Kete Asante, an Afrocentrist who has called on the descendants of enslaved people to embrace traditional African dress, languages and religions. Kendi eventually changed his middle name to Xolani, meaning “peace” in Zulu; at their wedding, he and his wife, Sadiqa, adopted the last name Kendi, meaning “loved one” in Meru. Kendi has called Asante “profoundly antiracist,” but Kendi remained an idiosyncratic thinker who did not consider himself a part of just one scholarly tradition; he knew early on that he wanted to write for the public. In a 2019 interview, when asked about his intellectual lineage, Kendi named W.E.B. Du Bois, Ida B. Wells and Malcolm X.

Kendi became part of a cohort of Black writers, among them Nikole Hannah-Jones and Ta-Nehisi Coates, who, through the sunset of the Obama presidency and the red dawn of the MAGA movement, argued that anti-Blackness remains a major force shaping American politics. They helped popularize the longstanding idea that racism in the United States is systemic — that the country’s laws and institutions perpetuate Black disadvantage despite a pledge of equal treatment. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended de jure white supremacy, but President Lyndon B. Johnson, who signed it into law, acknowledged that it wouldn’t uproot a racial caste system grown over centuries.

“The next and the more profound stage of the battle for civil rights,” he said, would be to achieve “not just equality as a right and a theory but equality as a fact.” Kendi and others wrote bracingly about the failure of that promise. Far from economic redress, Black Americans were met with continued discrimination in every realm of life, while being told the country was now “colorblind.” Kendi and others argued that remedying the impact of hundreds of years of subjugation would require policies that recognize, rather than ignore, that legacy, such as affirmative action and reparations.

‘The vast majority of my critics either haven’t read my work or willfully misrepresent it.’

Far too many Americans, Kendi felt, still thought of racism as conscious prejudice, so conversations got stuck in cul-de-sacs of denial, in which people protested that they were “not racist” because they harbored no anti-Black animus. To convey this, he landed on the binary that would become his most famous and perhaps most controversial idea. “There is no such thing as a not-racist idea” or a “race-neutral policy,” he wrote in “How to Be an Antiracist,” published in 2019. “The opposite of ‘racist’ isn’t ‘not racist.’ It is ‘antiracist.’”

Black activists have long used the word “antiracist” to describe active resistance to white supremacy, but “How to Be an Antiracist” catapulted the term into the American lexicon, in much the same way that Sheryl Sandberg turned “Lean In” into a mantra. After George Floyd’s death, the book sold out on Amazon, which was “unheard-of,” Kendi said. Media coverage of Kendi in those days made him sound nearly superhuman. In a GQ profile, for example, the novelist ZZ Packer describes Kendi as a “preternaturally wise” Buddha-like figure, “the antiracist guru of our time” with a “Jedi-like prowess for recognizing and neutralizing the racism pervading our society.”

During the summer of 2020, Kendi sometimes appeared onstage or onscreen alongside Robin DiAngelo, the educator whose book “White Fragility” was also a No. 1 best seller. Kendi and DiAngelo write less about the workings of systemic racism than the ideas and psychological defenses that cause people to deny their complicity in it. They share a belief in what Kendi calls “individual transformation for societal transformation.” When Kendi took over Selena Gomez’s Instagram, for example, he urged her 180 million followers to “1. Acknowledge your racism,” “2. Confess your racist ideas” and “3. Define racism and antiracism.” Then they would be ready for Steps 4 and 5, identifying and working to change racist policies.

Kendi and DiAngelo’s talk of confession — antiracism as a kind of conversion experience — inspired many people and disturbed others. By focusing so much on personal growth, critics said, they made it easy for self-help to take the place of organizing, for a conflict over the policing of Black communities, and by extension their material conditions, to become a fight not over policy but over etiquette — which words to use, whether to say “Black Lives Matter” or “All Lives Matter.” Many allies felt that Kendi and DiAngelo were merely helping white people alleviate their guilt.

They also questioned Kendi’s willingness to turn his philosophy into a brand. Following the success of “How to Be an Antiracist,” he released a deck of “antiracist” conversation-starter cards, an “antiracist” journal with prompts for self-reflection and a children’s book, “Antiracist Baby.” Christine Platt, an author and advocate who worked with Kendi at American University, recently co-wrote a novel that features a Kendi-like figure — a “soft-spoken” author named Dr. Braxton Walsh Jr., whose book “Woke Yet?” becomes a viral phenomenon. “White folks post about it on social media all the time,” rants De’Andrea, one of the main characters. “Wake up and get your copy today! Only nineteen ninety-nine plus shipping and handling.”

Those who thought of him as a self-help guru, Kendi felt, simply hadn’t read his work. Like most scholars of race, Kendi believes that Blackness is a fiction born of colonial powers’ self-interest, not just ignorance or hate, meaning that combating racism today requires upending the economic and political structures that propagate it. But Kendi doesn’t like the term “systemic racism” because it turns racism into a “hidden and unknowable” force for which there’s no one to blame, so he prefers to talk about “racist policies.”

In The Atlantic, he warned against the country going down a path of symbolic change where “monuments to racism are dismantled, but Americans shrink from the awesome task of reshaping the country with antiracist policies,” like Medicare for All, need-based school funding and reparations. Changing policy was exactly what he aimed to do at Boston University. During the protests, in the summer of 2020, the university named Kendi the Andrew W. Mellon professor of the humanities, a chair previously held by the Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel, and announced the creation of a center on campus to put his ideas into action. Donations came pouring in, led by an anonymous $25 million gift and a $10 million gift from the Twitter founder Jack Dorsey, which the provost said would give Kendi “the resources to launch the center like a rocket ship.”

Kendi started the center from his home in Boston, while Sadiqa, a pediatric E.R. doctor, came and went from the hospital in full protective gear. Kendi ran a research center as part of his old job at American University, but he felt unable to make a meaningful impact because the resources were modest and he was diagnosed with cancer just four months after its founding. Now, granted tens of millions of dollars to enact his most ambitious ideas, Kendi was determined to create an organization that could be a real engine of progress. “We’ve got to build an infrastructure to match what the right has created,” he later told a co-worker. “We’ve got to build something equally powerful.”

Kendi’s two centers were part of a wave of racial-justice spaces being founded at universities, like the Thurgood Marshall Civil Rights Center at Howard or the Ida B. Wells Just Data Lab at Princeton, that pledged to work in partnership with activists and community groups to achieve social change. Kendi envisioned an organization that supported people of color in campaigning for policies that would concretely improve their lives.

To reflect that mission, he designed a structure with four “pillars” or offices: Research, Policy, Narrative and Advocacy. He recruited data scientists, policy analysts, organizers and educators and brought in faculty members working on race from across the university. They set up a model-legislation unit, which would draft sample bills and public-comment notes; an amicus-brief practice, which would target court cases in which race was being overlooked as an issue; and a grant process to fund research on racism by interdisciplinary teams elsewhere at the university, among other programs. Kendi also struck up a partnership with The Boston Globe to revive The Emancipator, a storied abolitionist newspaper. “It was a really exciting time,” he told me.

That summer, however, Kendi found himself on the defensive beyond Boston as Republican book-banning campaigns revved up. On Fox News, Tucker Carlson denounced “How to Be an Antiracist” as “poisonous,” plucking out Kendi’s summary of the case for race-conscious policymaking, which sounded particularly maladroit when taken out of context: “ The only remedy to racist discrimination is antiracist discrimination ,” Carlson read in mock disbelief. “In other words, his book against racism promotes racism.” This was around the same time that Rufo, the conservative activist, started to position Kendi as a leading proponent of critical race theory, a school of thought, Rufo told The New Yorker, that he discovered by hunting through the footnotes of “How to Be an Antiracist.”

Critical race theorists were a group of legal scholars in the 1970s and ’80s who documented ways that the American legal framework of racial equality was nevertheless producing unequal treatment. They elaborated the idea of systemic racism and the critique of “colorblindness” that inform much of the writing of Kendi’s cohort. Rufo wrote on Twitter that his goal was to change the meaning of the term “critical race theory” — to “turn it toxic” by putting “all of the various cultural insanities under that brand category.” In his attacks on Kendi, Rufo also amplified the left’s critique of Kendi’s corporate-friendliness, caricaturing Kendi as a grifter out to enrich himself by raking in speaking fees. The number of threatening messages Kendi received began to rise. “I don’t feel safe anywhere,” Kendi later told a colleague. “I’m constantly looking over my shoulder.”

By the time the academic year began, in the fall of 2021, Kendi decided to take extraordinary measures. Before the center began in-person work that September, Kendi sent the staff an email about “security protocols,” instructing them to conceal the location of the center even from other Boston University faculty members and students. “It is critical to not share the address of the center with anyone or bring anyone to the center,” Kendi wrote. The email included a mock script to be used in the event of an inquiry about the center’s location, which ended abruptly with, “I gotta go.”

Though such precautions felt necessary to Kendi, they were met with incredulity and frustration by some employees who were starting to question his leadership. Problems emerged within the first six months, according to more than a dozen staff and faculty members I interviewed. Some told me they had gone to the center because they considered Kendi a visionary; others had reservations about or flat-out disagreements with his work but believed he had brought much-needed attention to issues they cared about. They would be able to find common ground, they thought. They were ready for some chaos as they tried to spin up a new organization remotely, but they quickly ran into difficulty as they tried to execute some of Kendi’s plans.

Kendi emphasizes in his books that policies alone are the cause of racial disparities today. In “Stamped From the Beginning,” his 2016 history of anti-Black ideas from the 15th century to the Obama presidency — which won the National Book Award and was recently made into a Netflix documentary that made the Oscar shortlist — Kendi writes that blaming Black people for their own oppression, by implying that Black people or Black culture are inferior or pathological, was one of the oldest cons in America. He had witnessed it again during the early days of the pandemic, when the numbers suggested that Black people were dying from Covid faster than every racial group save Native Americans. Some pundits speculated about the “soul food” diet or posited that Black communities weren’t taking the virus seriously, even though a Pew survey found that Black respondents were most likely to view the coronavirus as a major threat.

Kendi wanted the center to build “the nation’s largest online collection” of racial data to track disparities like this one and do analytical work to understand each policy responsible. In the case of Covid, for example, Black Americans are disproportionately likely to work in low-income essential jobs, to live in crowded conditions and to lack access to high-quality insurance or medical care. The center might research these conditions and propose targeted interventions, like changes to Medicaid coverage, or more transformative measures, like a universal basic income. One faculty member involved told me that she was “initially incredibly enthusiastic” about the idea. “It seemed like an opportunity to do rigorous, well-funded social-science research that would be aimed at real policy change on issues that I cared about,” she told me.

Like Kendi, his staff believed that historical oppression and ongoing discrimination explained why Black Americans fared comparatively poorly on so many measures of well-being, from education to wealth to longevity, and that centuries of injustice demanded a sweeping policy response to remedy. But understanding that past and present racism is the underlying cause of Black disadvantage is different from the work of assessing its role in any single policy, let alone figuring out how to change the policy to eliminate it. That takes careful analysis. “You have to have specificity,” the faculty member said, “or you can’t measure.”

Kendi pushed back at staff members who argued that the center should constrain its focus. There were plenty of academic centers and researchers that tracked data on racial disparities in one policy area or another, he said; he wanted to convene that pre-existing data, bringing it together in one place for easy access by the public. In a 2022 meeting, when the team tried to get a better sense of his vision, Kendi told them that he wanted a guy at a barbershop or a bar to be able to “pull up the numbers.” To many employees with data or policy backgrounds, what Kendi wanted didn’t seem feasible; at worst, they thought, it risked simply replicating others’ work or creating a mess of sloppily merged data, connected to too many policies for their small team to track rigorously. In the midst of the pandemic, the center struggled to hire a director of research who might have been able to mediate the dispute.

In November, a confidential complaint was filed with the university administration raising concerns about Kendi’s leadership. The anonymous employee told a university compliance officer that Kendi ran the center with “hypercontrol” and created an environment of “silence and secrecy” that was causing low morale and high turnover, claiming that “when Dr. Kendi is questioned, the narrative becomes that the employee must be the one with the ‘problem.’” The employee warned the university that the situation “is potentially going to blow up.”

One of Kendi’s refrains is that being antiracist demands self-criticism. “If I share an idea that people don’t understand, I’m to blame,” he told an interviewer in 2019. “I’m always to blame.” Kendi told me that his most productive conversations with critics of his ideas often happened in private, including one with a prominent Black thinker who inspired him to make a change in the revised edition of “How to Be an Antiracist.” “This person talked about how the goal should not just be equity,” Kendi said. “The goal should not be the same percentage of Black people being killed by police as white people. The goal should be no one being killed by police.” But some Black scholars, as the right-wing backlash strengthened, debated whether to make their criticisms in public. The philosopher Charles Mills, after listening to a graduate-student presentation about Kendi and DiAngelo at a conference in 2021, asked the presenter: “Are their views now sufficiently influential, or perhaps sufficiently harmful, that we should make them a part of the target?”

Kendi was frustrated to be constantly lumped in with DiAngelo, whose ideas diverge from his in important ways. DiAngelo considers “white identity” to be “inherently racist,” while Kendi argues that anyone, including Black people, can be racist or antiracist. That puts him at odds with an understanding — common in the academy and the racial-justice movement — that Black people can’t be racist because racism is a system of power relations, and that Black people as a group don’t have the structural means to enforce their prejudice; this notion is often phrased as a formula, that racism is “prejudice plus power.”

Kendi thinks of “racist” not as a pejorative but as a simple word of description. His reigning metaphor is the sticker. Racist and antiracist are “peelable name tags,” Kendi writes; they describe not who we are but who we are being in any particular moment. He says he opposes the censoriousness that has become the sharp edge of identity politics, because he doesn’t regard shame as a useful social tool. But he has no intention of taking the moral sting out of “racist” completely. “I wouldn’t say that a person is not being condemned when they’re being called a racist,” he told Ezra Klein in a 2019 interview.

Rather than replacing one definition of racism with another, Kendi is really joining two senses into one. For much of the 20th century, the white mainstream considered racism a personal moral issue, while Black civil rights activists, among others, argued that it’s also structural and systemic. In his definition, Kendi aims to connect the individual to the system. A “racist,” he writes, is “one who is expressing an idea of racial hierarchy, or through actions or inaction is supporting a policy that leads to racial inequity or injustice.”

Kendi’s focus on outcomes is not new. For decades, civil rights activists have brought lawsuits based on the legal theory of “disparate impact,” which holds that unequal outcomes prove that certain practices (by, for example, an employer or a landlord) are racially discriminatory, without evidence of malicious intent. Kendi’s definition urges us to perform this sort of disparate-impact analysis all the time. In Politico in 2020, Kendi proposed the creation of a federal agency that would clear every new policy — local, state or federal — to ensure that it wouldn’t increase racial disparities. But as his team at the center knew well, policies can have complicated effects. Let’s say that a local environmental policy would improve the air quality in Black neighborhoods near factories but would also lead to hundreds of lost jobs and worsen the area’s racial wealth gap. Should it be cleared? Is such a policy racist or antiracist?

The question is made even trickier by the fact that the racial impact of many policies might not become clear until years later. The legacy of desegregation, for example, shows that even a profoundly antiracist policy can be turned against itself in its implementation. This is what the term “systemic racism” captures that can be lost in Kendi’s translation of “racist policies.”

In “Stamped From the Beginning,” Kendi writes that “racist policy is the cause of racial disparities in this country and the world at large.” Mary Pattillo, a sociologist at Northwestern, told me that Kendi’s focus on race didn’t fully capture the complexity of social life — the roles of class, culture, religion, community. “No one variable alone explains anything ,” she said. But she thought there was value in simplifying. She understood Kendi not as an official making policy but as a thought leader making a “defensible, succinct provocation.” “We live in a country whose ideology is very individualistic, so the standard response to any failure is individual blame,” she said. “Those of us who do recognize the importance of policies, laws and so on have to always push so hard against that that we have to make statements like the one that Kendi is making.”

I came to think, after months of talking to Kendi, that this was the key to understanding him — to remember that he is trying to push so hard against that . To shove back the anti-Black stereotypes he documented in “Stamped From the Beginning,” the racist ideas that poisoned his own mind and sense of self-worth. His aim, at every turn, is to blame the policies that create unequal conditions and not the people enduring them. But Kendi is so consumed by combating the racist notion of Black inferiority that some of what he says in response is overstated, circular or uncareful, creating an easy target for his critics and discomfiting his allies. Conservatives were far from the only ones alarmed, for example, by his proposal for a constitutional amendment to appoint a panel of racism “experts” with the power to discipline public officials for “racist ideas.” (Kendi told me he modeled this proposal on European countries like Germany, where the bar for hate speech is much lower.)

Some of Kendi’s ideas are softer than they appear at first. Kendi told me that people who believe that his binary applies to “everything” are misreading him. Though he writes that “there is no such thing as a not-racist idea, only racist ideas and antiracist ideas,” he says he never meant that sentence to apply to the whole universe of ideas, only to ideas about race. When I asked him whether the environmental policy above would be racist or antiracist based on his definition, he qualified that “policies can be like people, both racist and antiracist,” and went on: “By improving the air quality in Black neighborhoods near factories, the policy is being antiracist. By exacerbating the area’s racial wealth gap, the policy is being racist.” Many of his critics might find this a more reasonable position, but it also leads to a question about how useful or powerful a dichotomy it is in the end.

Kendi wanted to remain open to criticism, but so much of what he encountered was racist mockery, lies, professional jealousy, misreadings and threats. “I have thought many times about exiting my vocation as a scholar who studies racism,” he wrote in the revised edition of “How to Be an Antiracist.” “After the experience of the last three years, it does not feel safe for me to be publicly self-reflective or self-critical. It feels dangerous for me to be vulnerable.” Though he commits to doing so anyway, the onslaught brought on by celebrity seemed to cause Kendi’s introversion to harden into distrust. “Fame can be defeating and depleting,” Stefan Bradley, Kendi’s friend, told me. “Every word he puts into the atmosphere will be chopped up a hundred different ways, and that takes a toll on somebody’s mental health.” Bradley continued: “I think that if he were a lesser spirit, he would have been destroyed.”

That Kendi felt under siege became clear to Yanique Redwood when she started her job at the Center for Antiracist Research. Redwood had met Kendi once, in 2017, and she remembered him as soft-spoken but burning with big, exciting ideas. In the fall of 2021, when she interviewed to be the center’s executive director, Kendi told her he felt as though he was failing. Fund-raising while also running the center was too much for one person, and he wanted Redwood, a Caribbean American health and racial-equity researcher who had spent nearly a decade running a small foundation, to take over internal operations. Redwood was prepared to find some disorder, but the state of the center’s finances was a mess unlike any she had ever seen. “Nothing was in place,” she said. “It was unbelievable that an institution like that, with so much spotlight on it, just did not have systems. I understood why I was being brought in.”

Before starting, she conducted a round of entry interviews with faculty and staff members, and by her 27th and last conversation, she was exhausted from absorbing their frustration. “There’s something really wrong here,” she told Kendi. Much of the staff was relieved when Redwood was hired. There had been widespread confusion as employees were asked to do “damage control” by performing jobs for which they weren’t hired, or even qualified. “Everyone was overwhelmed,” Redwood told me. “There were too many promises being made to funders. Products were being promised that could never be delivered.”

Redwood designed a process to help get researchers going on pilot projects tracking disparities relating to felony murder, the health and social safety net, reparations and student-debt forgiveness. She wanted to share some takeaways from her round of entry interviews with the staff, in a tactful and encouraging way, to start the work of repairing the center’s culture, but Kendi worried that whatever she wrote might leak. A reporter from a conservative media outlet was reaching out to former employees, asking about problems at the center. “This media storm was coming,” Redwood told me. “It was brewing.”

Employees said Kendi’s fear of leaks slowed the work and created confusion and unease. The first time Rachael DeCruz, the head of the Advocacy office, asked Kendi about the center’s finances to help her budget, in 2021, he reacted “bizarrely,” she told me. “Why do you need that information?” he asked. (Kendi denies that this conversation took place. DeCruz says that after asking repeatedly, she received the information about six months later.) The threat of outside scrutiny exacerbated what employees described as Kendi’s tendency to withhold information to avoid interpersonal conflict. “He doesn’t understand people, how to nurture them, how to make them want to do their best work,” Redwood told me. “It’s not his strength, not even a little bit.”

During her entry interviews, Redwood asked each employee what the organization’s values were, and many of them responded by saying something along the lines of “I’ve been wondering that myself.” She encouraged Kendi to hold a retreat to talk through the mission as a group. Kendi was hesitant because he found work retreats “uncomfortable” — “sitting in a room with a large group of people all day long is exhausting for me,” he told me — but he committed to holding one anyway and solicited staff comments on a document he wrote laying out his theory of social change and the center’s role in it. “I was happy to receive all this great feedback,” he wrote to Redwood. “I think the changes will make the document much stronger and clearer.”

On a spring day in 2022, the staff met at a conference center a half-hour’s drive from campus. The day’s agenda, though couched in the gentle jargon of nonprofits, contained hints of the mood: The organizers on staff had scheduled time for an acknowledgment of the center’s growing pains, for a “healing justice moment” and for a period of “wicked questions” when concerns or challenges could be raised. At the start of the day, Naima Wong, an outside facilitator, encouraged the staff not to hold back. “We’re here to really get into this,” she said.

Late in the afternoon, when it was time to wrap up, the group assembled at tables arranged in a circle. Saida Grundy, a sociologist, was seated across from Kendi. She had never been on board with Kendi’s understanding of racism, subscribing instead to the “power plus prejudice” view. Grundy had forwarded Kendi’s email about security to colleagues with the note “The paranoia is INSANE.” “Ibram is so lily-livered he probably jumps when the biscuit tin pops,” she told me. Grundy was the one who, back in November, had made the anonymous complaint, in which some charges carried a hint of paranoia of her own, like the idea that Kendi “despises academia” and had “gotten satisfaction out of pulling academics out of their own research.” She had accused the center of being an exploitative workplace and, after having conflict with her supervisor, had already mostly stepped back from her role. Grundy had told the compliance office that the center might explode, and now she was ready to blow it up herself.

Her voice raised, Grundy laid out an indictment of the document Kendi wrote. “This is a mile wide and an inch deep,” she said. She argued that the center needed to be more specific about its goals; “fighting racism” was such a broad mission that it felt cynically strategic, allowing the center to take in money for all sorts of projects. “If there is a grant for antiracism on Jupiter, great,” she said. “We do extraterrestrial antiracism.” Grundy, unlike most of the staff, thought the center should become a resource for university faculty members and students; her parents were Black student activists in the 1970s, and she believed that real change starts where you are. “If you lined up 99 Black students at B.U.,” she said, “99 will tell you the center’s made no difference to their experience.”

When she finished speaking, the room was silent. Several people were crying. Dawna Johnson, the center’s financial director at the time, called it an “explosion.” “People didn’t know what to say after that,” she said. “It just left you so unhappy and uptight.” Kendi, his face inscrutable behind a Covid mask, said nothing, and the facilitator wrapped up the session. “Scholars who study the experience of Black leaders find that the No.1 racist challenge Black leaders face is contested authority, even from other Black leaders and staff,” he wrote to me later. I asked him what he remembered from that day. “It’s almost like trying to remember a day in which you were really happy, but then something horrible happened at the end,” he told me. “It’s hard to remember anything else other than that horrible thing.”

Grundy had admittedly come in hot, many staff members agreed, but it didn’t seem to matter how they couched their concerns. Employees continued to push to make sure that the center’s research projects were both rigorous and responsive to community needs, but the issues they raised in response to Kendi’s “theory of change” document never seemed to get fully resolved. “He’s communicating one thing,” one person said. “Behind the curtain, he’s behaving a very different kind of way.” Redwood and several others said that if someone was too persistent about a concern, Kendi would slow or stop his communication with that person. “If someone disagrees or someone is being vocal, you can’t just get rid of them,” she wanted to tell him. “Like, this is how you breed distrust.”

Redwood ultimately decided that Kendi wasn’t interested in building consensus around a shared mission. “Only he had the ideas,” she said. “We were there to execute on his ideas.” Redwood resigned in October 2022.

In a memo to The Times, Kendi disputed many of the staff’s recollections of his leadership. “This is not me, and anyone close to me, who has worked with me for a long time, knows that I’m open to constructive criticism as a writer and a thinker and a leader,” he wrote. Many progressive advocacy groups, Kendi pointed out, have been torn apart by internal clashes in recent years, conflicts that he said were driven by employees who “care more about performing their radicalism” than working to “improve the lives of everyday people.” “Former employees constantly deauthorized me as the director of the center — not because they were against hierarchy — but to assume authority for themselves,” he wrote.

Even before Redwood’s departure, Kendi told me, he realized the center was in financial trouble. He was far from the only nonprofit leader caught short as funding for racial-justice work collapsed after 2020. Funders that doused organizations with cash in the wake of George Floyd’s murder proved unwilling or unable to sustain their commitment, and layoffs were taking place across the sector, even at large nonprofits like the Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative. The center had gone from raising $40 million in 2020 to a fraction of that — $420,000 — the next year.

In June 2023, after he went on parental leave, Kendi approached university leaders with the idea of switching to a fellowship model, which could adjust its number of awards to fluctuations in fund-raising. He told the staff only that he would be announcing some major changes when he returned from leave. Dawna Johnson, who succeeded Redwood as executive director, was left to manage a staff frustrated by being kept in the dark. “I think the staff thought I knew more than I actually did, as far as what the future of the center was,” she told me. “He’s like, Just don’t spend money, essentially, which is kind of difficult in an organization that needs to move forward.” (Kendi denies that he said anything like this to Johnson, who remains in her role today.)

Kendi spent the next three months taking care of his newborn daughter, Imara, and his wife, who was diagnosed with Stage 4 breast cancer while pregnant. In his absence, at another staff retreat, four employees stood up and spoke in turn about the problems at the center. Much of the staff had just learned that the center agreed to partner with the D.E.I. arm of the consulting company Deloitte, which does work for the police and prisons, on designing an antiracism training for corporate workplaces. “Why wasn’t this shared with the broader staff sooner, as a potential high-risk partnership that could impact the relationships we are forging with movement leaders?” one person said. “Why are we contemplating this partnership that arguably goes against our values?”

Kendi, who identifies as a police and prison abolitionist, suggested that donations from corporations could be seen as a “form of reparations,” and he stressed to me that the Deloitte agreement “allowed us to control the products from design to delivery.” He once again dismissed the critics at the retreat as “performative radicals” of the sort that have been “causing all kinds of havoc in Black-led social justice organizations for years, claiming that they are against hierarchy when they really are against being directed by a Black person.” He thought they were being hypocritical in objecting to the Deloitte partnership because they “do not object to personally having profiles on social media corporations that platform copaganda, or buying goods from retailers employing incarcerated labor in their supply chains, or using technology from corporations providing carceral states with technologies of surveillance.”

When I asked the employees about this, one of them called Kendi’s comments about hypocrisy a “deflection tactic.” She stressed that the staff was not making a demand but asking for an open dialogue — or at least a clearly articulated rationale — about decisions that affected them. His response fit a clear pattern, they thought, of believing that employees were trying to undermine him when they really just cared about the work. “I understand he’s coming from a place of trauma,” another told me. “He’s criticized unfairly and through a racist lens constantly. I do understand it. But then to distort that into an inability to receive feedback that’s going to ensure the success and usefulness of the center — that’s where it becomes a problem.”

In September, Kendi fired 19 of the center’s 36 employees in a series of Zoom meetings. Many told me they could understand the layoffs given the financial climate, but to change the model from an ambitious organization that had pledged to drive social change to one that handed out academic fellowships felt like a betrayal of the mission. The abruptness of the decision forced the staff to scramble to find other homes for projects, including a research program supporting Boston-area organizers on a campaign to challenge family policing in schools, for which they were in the midst of sensitive interviews with affected parents and caregivers. Breaking promises they’d made to grass-roots partners was what bothered her team most, said DeCruz, the head of the Advocacy office, because equitable and sustained relationships between communities and advocates build a strong network — a movement aligned on its goals. Pulling out damaged those relationships.

Though some staff members told me they appreciated Kendi — “My life forever, forever changed because I worked for someone who pushed me to envision what’s possible,” one said — many others had become darkly cynical about him. The most vocal among them was Grundy, who took to Twitter calling Kendi a “grifter” and fueling the rumor that he might have stolen funds. Redwood tried to have empathy. She imagined what it must be like to be constantly attacked — to have your intelligence insulted, your motives questioned. “I wonder if some of the secrecy and paranoid behavior came about as a result of that,” she told me. “I have no idea, and I had to just eventually stop trying to figure it out and just move on, because I couldn’t understand how the person I met when he was at American, when I sat down with him for lunch, the person who appeared to be so humble, so committed — and I still think he is committed — could be the person that I worked for. It is not something that I have ever been able to understand.”

Several people stressed to me that Kendi’s weaknesses as a leader were not as important as the larger forces that surrounded his leadership — the opportunism of white-led institutions, the boom and bust of trend-chasing nonprofit funding, the commodification of Black thought and activism. I asked Boston University to comment on a complaint I heard from the staff, that its administration had failed to provide adequate oversight. “Boston University provided significant financial and administrative support to Dr. Kendi and the center. Dr. Kendi did not always accept the support,” a spokesperson wrote. “In hindsight, and with the fuller knowledge of the organizational problems that arose, the university should have done more to insist on additional oversight.”

The spokesperson also said that the decision to end the center’s projects was Kendi’s choice. “Several different models were discussed with Dr. Kendi, including bringing many of the projects to completion over the next two years and lessening the impact on staff,” he wrote. “However, Dr. Kendi’s preference was to terminate the ongoing projects and ask the funders to repurpose the funds for his new endeavor.” (In a written response, Kendi accused the interim university administration of trying to undermine the center’s work. “The center has faced more oversight and scrutiny than every other center at B.U. from the Office of Research and this interim B.U. administration,” he wrote. “I’m disappointed that this interim B.U. administration is giving The Times a version of events that doesn’t reconcile with the facts.”)

The last time I saw Kendi in person was in January, when he came to New York to promote his newest book, a young readers’ adaptation of Zora Neale Hurston’s “Barracoon,” based on her 1927 interviews with Cudjo Lewis, one of the last survivors of the Middle Passage from Africa. That night, Kendi was doing an event at an independent bookstore in Brooklyn Heights, where the streets were salt-streaked after a light snowstorm and white string lights glowed on a tree outside. One of the three personal-security officers he brought with him — bearded Black men in black peacoats and dress pants, fitted with earpieces — was checking bags at the door.

Kendi was standing by a wall of books in a teal blazer, his pocket square in place. For a while, he said, he stopped doing many public events because of his security concerns, but he realized it had contributed to his feeling alienated and embattled. “Not doing live book signings prevented me from engaging with the people who were reading and appreciating my work,” he told me later. Going on tour again had “helped tremendously,” he said. But he didn’t want to be away from home long while Sadiqa was in treatment. “It’s incredibly difficult to witness someone you care about deeply facing so much pain and loss,” he said. “I’d much rather just be the one facing that pain.”

Boston University had cleared him and the center of grant mismanagement, but he was still waiting for Korn Ferry, the management consulting firm hired by the administration, to finish its culture inquiry, and he continued to attribute any dysfunction at the center to the hardships of the pandemic and employees who repeatedly contested his leadership. He was coordinating with the university on the center’s next phase, he said, but the work that felt most meaningful to him at the moment was “getting back to my roots as a writer.” He was at work on his next big project, a contemporary political history.

Kendi has spun out 13 books since “How to Be an Antiracist” in 2019, 10 of which are adaptations of his or others’ work for children. Since becoming a father, he told me, it has become even more important to him to reach young readers — particularly Black kids like him who may have internalized racist ideas about themselves. Earlier that day, Kendi spoke to 250 kids at a middle school elsewhere in Brooklyn, taking questions from a panel of seventh and eighth graders. “Barracoon” was the latest in a series of books he was adapting by Hurston, the Harlem Renaissance ethnographer he has called the “greatest antiracist novelist of the interwar era.” “I wanted it to read like a grandparent sharing their difficult life story with care and love to their grandchild,” Kendi wrote on Instagram.

During the talk, Kendi told the audience that there are some Black people who, from the way they maneuver in the world, you can tell are spiritual maroons. “This is the person who truly is living and navigating from the standpoint of a freedom,” he said. “They’re unafraid or not worried at all about the white gaze. They’re operating and navigating the world based on their own destiny, based on what they want.” Hurston, who traveled throughout the South, Jamaica and Haiti collecting folklore from the descendants of slaves, was one of those people, Kendi said.

Listening to him, I wondered how often he felt like one of them, too. I got the impression that Kendi spent a lot of time in his head, in that defensive pose, anticipating or parrying attacks from his critics. When I asked him later where he and Sadiqa had gone on vacation over the New Year holiday, he declined even to name the country for fear that “bad-faith people” would try to figure out where they had stayed and how much their hotel room cost. I told him it seemed as though he devoted a lot of thought to how something he said or did could be used against him by the least generous person on the internet. “I certainly don’t want to provide fodder for it,” he told me.

Kendi is right that there’s a mess of misinformation about what he believes. He has become a cipher for the unfinished national conversation about the post-George Floyd moment — the outrage and wild hope of the protests, the reactionary anger, the disillusionment. In tying together racism’s two senses — the personal and the systemic — Kendi has helped many more Americans understand that they are responsible not only for the ideas in their heads but also for the impact they have on the world. But this gap between intention and action, so core to his thinking, is where all the hard work takes place, DeCruz told me. That’s where organizing and movement-building happens, where you practice the kind of world you want to live in. “Having a shared language is important,” she said, but “it’s just the first step.”

Read by January LaVoy

Narration produced by Emma Kehlbeck and Krish Seenivasan

Engineered by David Mason

Rachel Poser is a story editor for the magazine. She has previously written about whiteness in classical studies, sting operations and the charms of paleoart. Wayne Lawrence is a visual artist in Brooklyn and Detroit whose work is focused on community and purpose. His work is in the permanent collection of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture.

An earlier version of this article misstated the center’s fundraising in 2021 as compared to the previous year. It was approximately one-hundredth of the amount raised in 2020, not a tenth. The article also misstated the recognition given to the documentary adaptation of “Stamped From the Beginning.” The documentary was named to the Oscar shortlist, but was not nominated for the award.

How we handle corrections

Explore The New York Times Magazine

Taking Down Roe v. Wade : A conservative Christian coalition’s plan to end the federal right to abortion  began just days after Donald Trump’s 2016 election.

The Interview : The Netflix chief Ted Sarandos has a plan to get you to binge  even more film and television on the streaming platform.

How Israeli Extremists Took Over : After 50 years of failure to stop violence and terrorism against Palestinians by Jewish ultranationalists, lawlessness has become the law .

The Dynamite Club : In early 20th-century America, political bombings by anarchists  became a constant menace — but then they helped give rise to law enforcement as we know it.

Losing Your Native Tongue : After moving abroad, a writer found her English slowly eroding. It turns out our first languages aren’t as embedded as we think .

Advertisement