In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

474 ALAN KENNEDY concentration of abstract words and concepts to the extent that communication breaks down; second, popular cliches to the contrary, I am convinced that English is a thoroughly adequate instrument for the clear and precise articulation of most arguments and viewpoints. (If I wasn't, I would have left the profession years ago.) The present article is written in a relatively relaxed and direct style that some might consider too informal for a learned journal. I believe, however, that it is time someone spoke out. Long words, elaborate constructions, high-sounding phrases are rarely required; more often than not they are a barrier to clear thought. It is still possible in the last years of the twentieth century to convey information and construct arguments in language that is comprehensible to all who can lay claim to a reasonable combination of basic education, intellectual curiosity, and general good will. It is even possible to present an argument about teaching and scholarship in terms of (for example) woods and trees. ALAN KENNEDY Ubi Sunt? I BITING THE WIND The haunting cry of 'ubi sunt?' goes up, and offwe go again lamenting the demise of the intellectual. Or not: insisting instead that 'he' has not demised at all, but is alive and well (or in suspended animation and as well as can be expected, awaiting the thaw) and living in communes, or co-op bookstores, or in one little corner or another of the campus. And it will be impossible to resist joining in that chorus. But as we do it, and as we lament or deny the decline of the intellectual, the real question may go begging. Just what are intellectuals for (we might be able to say what they 'are' without too much difficulty)? If we do find out where are all the intellectuals of yesteryear, are we going to know what to do with them? For, after all, there is a seductively available short riposte to Russell Jacoby's thesis about the 'last intellectuals.' If we have only just noticed they are gone, why haven't we missed them before now? The answer could go either way: we haven't missed them because Jacoby is wrong and there are intellectuals all over the place, one just has to know how to look for them (like knowing good places for boletus edulis in October woods); or the public function of intellectuals, lamented by Jacoby, had no organic function in our culture and so it naturally withered away. In order to explore the complex issues involved, we shall have to agree with Jacoby that in part atleast an intellectual is defined by having a public role: he (I'm deliberately emphasizing the sexist role of the traditional UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO QUARTERLY, VOLUME 58, NUMBER 4, SUMMER 1989 SYMPOSIUM ON PROFESSIONALIZATION 475 intellectual) makes a courageous intervention in public (politically charged) discourse(s). We have to note, with interest, that also for Jacoby the disappearance of the intellectual is really a matter of the disappearance of the radical, critical, 'left' intellectual. That is the burden of his lament that 'intellectuals' have been captured by the institution of the university. The shift from bohemia to the campus was a shift from radical critique to the life of the accommodating professoriate. The easiest first phenomenological test (subject to obvious sources of error) would be for an 'intellectual' professor like myself 'to look around and see if my own experience bears outJacoby's thesis. But even that isn't easy. On the whole, however, if I had to ask myself if my university colleagues are primarily 'intellectuals,' I would reluctantly have to say, No, they are not. When I first arrived at Dalhousie University in 1974 I was excited by the fact that the university housed a resident alien intellectual in the person ofEdgarZ. Friedenberg. Aconsiderable number of my colleagues didn't know whom I was talking about when I asked about his presence on campus. Other colleagues smiled in lofty condescension at my youthful enthusiasm for such an artful faker. He was a gadfly, it seemed, a proposer of witty speeches in senate meetings, but not really sound. Ultimately he would demonstrate his...

pdf

Share