Letters

1 6 Historically Speaking February 2002 LETTERS To the Editors, I read with great interest Rae Sikula's "Archives: A Second Look at History Careers" (September 2001). I am a graduate student also, studying history and trying to become an archivist. Ms. Sikula astutely notes that "changing technology has discouraged the entry ofhistory graduates by strengthening the tie ofarchives to library science and records management." Historians and librarians have been wrestling with the question "is an archivist an historian or a librarian?" for decades. Sadly for historians, librarians are winning, precisely because oftechnology. Unless historians begin supporting students who want to become archivists and offer programs ofstudy or even a class or two on archival management, administration , and preservation, then we will shortly, within a generation, have archivists who are librarians, with little or no knowledge ofwhat it means or takes to be an historian. Russell D.James University ofWest Florida To the Editors, While I am in agreement with most ofwhat Professor McClay says in his "Teaching Religion in American Schools and Colleges" (November 2001), I disagree with one of his fundamental arguments, that relating to "original texts." When teaching about religion , using "original texts" basically means having students read the holy books of the faith being studied . My experience in teaching about religion in public schools from the 1960s until well into the 1990s has been that this approach does not work when one has a "view toward the sympathetic apprehension of the world picture that lies behind those texts," as McClay puts it. Detailed knowledge of a holy book from a religion to which one does not belong is unlikely to cause empathy. For example, few non-Muslim students will acquire a "sympathetic apprehension" of Islam by reading the Koran. While it is possible to find isolated passages (e.g., Surah 60:8) that instruct Muslims to "be nice" to non-believers, the dominant theme is that non-believers are, at best, to be avoided. They are pictured as being enemies ofGod who deserve no sympathy since they have rejected Muhammad as God's messenger. Again and again they are said to be doomed to a fiery hell that will exist for all eternity. This kind of reading does not result in "imaginative sympathy." More likely, non-Muslim students will be revolted and find support for whatever prejudices they have concerning this faith that's followed by a billion people. Brant Abrahamson The Teachers' Press To the Editors, Articles on "how to teach X or Y," however wellmeaning , often fail to give readers anything beyond anecdotal information. Professor McClay's thoughts on teaching religion (November 2001), however, are quite different and daring in their own way. I appreciate the way in which McClay gets beyond pedagogical issues and into the real intellectual and cultural issues at stake, including the incredible reality that any knowledge about religion, much less understanding ofit, has been all but banished from the realms of secondary and higher education (with the exception ofthose schools that dedicate themselves to including some religion in their programs). No doubt, part of the ignorance ofreligious history is the result ofthe disdain for anything connected with religion or religious history that McClay mentions in his article. Another part, it strikes me, derives from a more general assault upon anything related to "Western civilization," the kind of argument that almost prides itself in knowing little about Western culture for fear of "privileging" that culture in comparison to others that are ostensibly no less worthy. The question of worth aside, those in the "West" at least face the central problem offailing to understand their own cultures. I fear that as knowledge of the religious roots of Western culture fades, it may well take with it any meaningful understanding ofthe historical experience of the West (including that of the United States, most obviously). Professor McClay's suggestions as to how an understanding of religion might be integrated into the broader study ofhistory and culture present an original and welcome variety of remedies for this neglect. SamuelC. Ramer Tulane University McClay responds: Mr. Abrahamson is mistaken in thinking that we have any disagreement about the use oforiginal texts in teaching aboutAmerican religion...