He fervently believed that the problems facing the United States would require well-educated leaders drawn from all ethnic backgrounds, as well as a far deeper understanding of the issue of race, which could only be achieved if white and black students were educated together. As he did in the case of coeducation, he believed that by diversifying the student body, a far more intellectually vibrant university, and one with a much more interesting cultural milieu, would arise. He also understood that he needed help in attracting and supporting black students at an institution that had not been welcoming in the past, and he therefore brought Carl A. Fields to Princeton as the first African American dean in the Ivy League. In a few short years, the two men transformed the landscape for students of color at Princeton, created the forerunner of the Carl Fields Center, and changed the University, as we see today, very much for the better. The third example of Bob’s leadership came in response to the Vietnam War. In the 2004 oral history he laid out his own journey from supporting President John F. Kennedy’s foray into Vietnam—seeing it as he said at the time as an extension of the Korean War to slow the march of communism—to what he eventually described in this way in 1972:

In your time, in your country, no little jingoism and no little arrogance have contributed to our tragic, wasteful, devastating involvement in Indochina, where we are perhaps finally learning the bitter results of collective pride and of actions taken in ignorance of the history, culture, and aspirations of the peoples of a far-off land.

He changed his mind after studying and reading about the events in Vietnam, listening to those who were knowledgeable and weighing the tremendous cost in human lives—both American and Vietnamese.

While his personal views were evolving, Bob faced the enormous challenge of steering Princeton through the rough seas of the late 1960s. Indeed, a number of our peer institutions veered badly off course during this era of student unrest, an era characterized not only by antiwar protest and a continuing battle for civil rights, but by broader societal upheaval and dissent. Princeton weathered the storms with its dignity and its civility intact, largely because of Bob Goheen. I recently compared him to Abraham Lincoln, in the sense that his greatness was partly due to his own inherent qualities of intelligence, open-mindedness, and integrity, and partly due to the turbulent times through which he lived. Like Lincoln, he did not simply endure those times, he provided inspired leadership at a point when it was desperately needed. His calm willingness to listen at large University gatherings where students and faculty vented their fury and frustration at events outside their control; his defense of their right to dissent but his opposition to all forms of coercion defused what could have been incendiary moments. He focused attention on what was in Princeton’s control, and he encouraged students and others to channel their passions in constructive ways. Not only did Princeton survive this era, the University was actually strengthened by it. The ferment of those years led to the opening of the FitzRandolph Gates as a symbol that the University was of the world and not apart from it; the creation of a University-wide deliberative body, the CPUC, and the Priorities Committee; and the inclusion of young alumni on our Board of Trustees.

I don’t believe that you, the members of the graduating classes of 2008, could find a more compelling model than Bob Goheen for how to live in a world that is changing rapidly and how to change the world into a better place. His strengths as a leader were embedded in the qualities we hope to have instilled in each of you—an open-mindedness to new evidence that allows for the possibility that your original impressions were wrong, coupled with the courage to say so out loud; the habit of listening to and learning from the views of others, particularly those with whom you deeply disagree; the capacity to speak the truth as you understand it; a willingness to hold your ground against fierce opposition; a deep respect for learning as opposed to uninformed opinion; and the strength that grows out of humility and compassion for human shortcomings.