| Jay Parini has 
						just had a book published, The Art of Teaching 
						(Oxford University Press), mainly for aspiring 
						instructors at American universities.  It makes one main 
						point:  find out what it takes to get tenure at whatever 
						institution, and do it. Parini seems a 
						kindly professor.  More than twenty years earlier, in 
						his first job, he failed to get tenure – job security 
						for life – and, he says, it traumatized him.  He wants 
						others to avoid this.  So he has lots of suggestions for 
						today's aspirants for full-time, tenure-track university 
						positions, that they may find the privileges and comfort 
						he enjoys. One innocence 
						wafts through his book – the silliness of slim 
						possibility that our many thousands of annually 
						newly-minted Ph.Ds. have some chance for the few 
						full-time university teaching positions that ever come 
						open.  Parini, however, knows the odds against most ever 
						having the remotest chance for such security as his.  He 
						acknowledges (briefly) the more dour reality, so his 
						book serves, as he admits, only the very, very few.  The 
						Art of Teaching came out 
						just before hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans and the 
						Gulf Coast.  As that storm revealed the extent of our 
						masses of damaged poor, by contrast it also showed the 
						world what has long been the massively blind detachment 
						of our highest-level governing and media elites.  
						Parini's book reveals the same systematic aloofness 
						floating all our privileged across all our corporate 
						academia.  His biggest 
						innocence, like that ever-anesthetizing our government 
						and media elites in their bubbles, shows most in how he 
						sees those "below" – in this case, students.  It's their 
						enrollments that justify his system and its travel, 
						holiday, and promotion entitlements, its immunities of 
						departmental hierarchy, and its Babel of complicated, 
						ever-accruing 401(K) and other pension plans.  The 
						systematic in-and-out of students under girds this great 
						corporate privileging system – but otherwise students 
						don't matter.  Except for passing reference in his book 
						to chance meetings with various graduates on his 
						travels, and generalized reference to personal 
						confessions he hears now and then in office hours, 
						students exist only as a class of interchangeables, 
						distantly vague, their truest energies amorphously 
						elsewhere.  They make, at best, a remote demographic, as 
						Katrina showed the New Orleans masses as most abrupt 
						surprise to our privileged.  We got the 
						news, for days following Katrina, that we were all 
						"shocked, shocked."  Historically, 
						at least, we can excuse ourselves.  We have the reasons 
						of tradition for dulled imaginations and myopias 
						shutting out our "huddled masses" or reducing them to 
						cliché.  We allowed ourselves to see them long ago as 
						bit players for our more glorious scripts back in the 
						mists of time – we assigned them their roles as the 
						"tired," the "poor," as Emma Lazarus put it in her poem 
						"The New Colossus."  This way, "yearning to breathe 
						free," the "wretched refuse . . . the homeless, tempest-tost" 
						could all just keep on melodramatically huddling, 
						legendarily ever-after in those words of hers inscribed 
						in the base of our Statue of Liberty.  As cliché allows, 
						too, the unwashed masses could return for further 
						installments in similarly repetitive scripts, as they 
						did a generation later in Jane Addams' chronicles of 
						Hull House in Chicago, Dreiser's and others' tales, and 
						the muckraking journalism of Jacob Riss in New York 
						City's Lower East Side, How the Other Half Lives.  
						Good tropes, they could return, too, a generation after 
						that as our arts again focused on the marginalized and 
						poor – through the great photographers Roy Stryker from 
						the Farm Security Administration set out across 
						Depression America, and through the WPA murals of that 
						era, Agee's prose and Evans' photographs in Let Us 
						Now Praise Famous Men, and Hollywood's great haloes 
						in Pare Lorentz documentaries and feature films from 
						The Salt of the Earth and  Sullivan's Travels 
						to John Ford's limnal recasting of Steinbeck.  A 
						generation more and journalistic arts would bloom, flame 
						anew as Michael Harrington's The Other America 
						goaded our 1960s War on Poverty.  Maybe our arts 
						can capture and sometimes remedy our divide from those 
						"below"; maybe art can "make something happen."  
						Perhaps, if we've the artists for it, Katrina's 
						aftermath may awaken a nation whose media have long been 
						hirelings spinning celebrity worship and authorities' 
						lies.  Maybe we'll have the right movies and other arts 
						that can open perspectives and locate us for more 
						connections with the many others we seldom see 
						at home, and with the many more abroad whom we damage 
						through our lifestyles here, our policies there.  Parini, 
						however, in his systematic shuttling of students off to 
						the margins of The Art of Teaching, shows we're 
						unlikely to change.  The ethos of higher education 
						won't, either – its organs will continue as they long 
						have:  graduating more and more with imaginations ever 
						geared to seeing and noting no body except as strategic 
						tools (or consumerism accomplices) for our otherwise 
						mutually-isolated careerism channels.  Parini, 
						nevertheless, presents one great possibility for 
						imagination.  He admits, and gives examples to show, how 
						clothing, whenever we look upwards in academia, serves 
						as much more than clothing.  It serves as props.  When 
						we desire progress through their channels, and properly 
						look to them, we may see how department chair people, 
						dissertation directors, and others of academic rank may 
						sport the officious formalities of tweeds, vests, ties, 
						and ironed skirts and trousers.  They may flaunt the 
						informalities of jeans, khakis, tee-shirts, sweats, and 
						flannels.  Whatever they choose, its conveys multiple 
						levels of messages.  Our superiors may not put into 
						words their truest values, longings, myths, and taboos – 
						but if we look and see, Parini says, we can see much 
						more of how these, our betters, express roles and 
						announce expectations.  Those who will negotiate the 
						mazes and systems of rank had better have some skills in 
						reading what pervasive non-verbal language may be 
						saying.  He does not, 
						however, similarly read students.  He mentions in 
						passing how surprised he is when, years later and cities 
						away, he meets former students no longer in their grubby 
						sweats, tees, and sneakers.  But that's it – Parini 
						never stops to consider how the clothing they wear in 
						class may also say something vital about them, and their 
						poses.  Not only does 
						he feel no obligation to look at student clothing 
						for what it may be announcing, but he feels no urge, 
						either, to look at what their range in vehicles and 
						transport styles may say, or their choices in food, 
						their preferences in landscapes they inhabit, or the 
						architecture and interior design of their buildings.  By 
						not looking at what students may be saying in any way, 
						he exemplifies the well-focused ethics of normal 
						careerism.  (Its opposite ethics, those of poetry, 
						invite us to rhyme, analogize, and connect widely – with 
						"strategy" very other than careerism's cloning and 
						fitting-of-oneself – poetry's only real law:  that we 
						entertain, however, whatever, the nets of 
						reverberation.)  Our 
						universities – all of them – train all in the ethics 
						that corporate administrators, corporate textbook 
						publisher accomplices, and corporate departmentalized 
						faculty all model.  To fit oneself to them, one learns 
						to look up and follow.  As one U.S. senator observed of 
						the recent Bush appointee as UN ambassador, John Bolton 
						(an extreme of the corporate type):  he was a "kiss-up, 
						kick-down" kind of guy.  This coinage stirred chuckles 
						in government and media – not merely for how it 
						characterized Bolton, but, too, for how it sheds light 
						on all of us who learn to train ourselves to any 
						system's well-rutted tracks.  Thus Parini advises in 
						The Art of Teaching to "kiss-up," even if never to 
						"kick-down."  He never disparages, ridicules, or dumps 
						on students, maybe because he's a nice guy, maybe 
						because (follow the money) no academic can get 
						tenure in any of its corporate departments if any ever 
						abuses any of the consumers.  For this reason – and this 
						alone – students matter:  not as human beings amid 
						ongoing, conflicting, evolving stories, but as flow 
						chart units who write evaluations.  Students matter 
						because they signal customer satisfaction.  They count 
						for how their instructors – as syllabus-contracted 
						modular unit delivery providers – implement their larger 
						and more important corporate processes and procedures.  
						Student evaluations never measure anything else – 
						nobody expects anybody in "higher education" to take any 
						ongoing narratives seriously, nor to take seriously 
						anyone "below," outside of, or not easily fitting 
						tracked and channeled syllabi purposes.  Instructors 
						often needn't even know student names, let alone connect 
						to the human stories (issues, values, contradictions) 
						percolating in otherwise evidently expressive 
						combinations of clothing, food, transport, buildings, 
						and landscape.  At the same 
						time Parini publishes his book, and Katrina hits New 
						Orleans and the Gulf Coast, over in the Persian Gulf 
						American diplomacy and soldiering get bogged down, and 
						not a few observers miss the analogies to Vietnam a 
						generation before.  Among these links to parallel 
						incompetence, arrogance, and spiraling money and human 
						costs, as our best military observers note, is how in 
						both places our otherwise superior troops remain 
						primarily based in withdrawn fortifications.  They may 
						foray out on missions, but they always return to base – 
						unlike the elusive insurgents who remain mixed in with 
						the civilian population, regardless of temporary 
						expulsions superior force may occasion.  We can't win, 
						these critiques say, unless we know the local language – 
						unless we can recognize and live among local customs, as 
						our "enemies" do.  We can't win – 
						anywhere – so long as a "kiss up" mentality reigns – as 
						such an ethos does throughout in our nice, genteel, 
						sophisticated corporate world where all systematically 
						learn to ignore "others" laterally around, or "below." |