Rating: 
Summary: Will Classics be killed by classicists? Why should we care?
Review: . . . The first question Hanson and Heath answer: Yes, in the next generation. Already, departments of Classics in US colleges turn out three times more PhD.s than can be employed, and existing positions (in some cases entire existing departments) are being eliminated rather than filled by budget-trimming administrators. Who cares, or ought to? The authors argue we ALL should, since Western civilization--love it or hate it--is now, thanks to the spread of technology developed by western science, as well as the global reach of market capitalism and consumerism, the dominant pattern of culture on earth, and it owes this dominance in large part to what the Greeks gave it at its birth 2,500 years ago. Not to mention the fact that the history and examples of the Greek and Roman experiments in shared government had much to do with the design of our own; that representative democracy is enjoying a renascence in the world following a century of totalitarian experiments; that the study of classics (if done right) is conducive to clarity and discipline of thought and expression and the inculcation of an ethic of personal responsibility--where modern education and indeed society at large seem to have given up on these ideals altogether. If the Greeks and Romans have so much to teach us, it's largely the fault of the people who teach Classics in colleges and universities that we haven't heard about it. Apropos their thesis the authors quote Yeats: "The best lack all conviction, while the worst/Are full of passionate intensity." While most hard-working professors of classics don't necessarily hate and avoid their students, focus on narrow, philological, highly exoteric specialist studies of no conceivable interest to anyone but themselves, skip class in order to jet off to network and schmooze at academic conferences (at departmental expense), or write taxpayer-subsidized, turgid, unread and unreadable fashionably-leftist tomes in an opaque, post-structuralese dialect, these besetting sins are common enough among those who run departments, select books for publication, hire professors, and in general set the agenda for the profession (argue the authors) that the the study of classics--as measured by dwindling enrollments in classes at all levels for decades now--is practically dead now in this country, and will by simple attrition disappear from US higher education in the next ten years or so. Hanson and Heath drop napalm in prose on varying types of those whom they view as narrowly-focused, self-interested careerists, indeed as the murderers of their profession and as traitors to both the society they study and the one they live in. Names are named, incriminating and revealing incidents of public record and personal observation are passed on, and passages from prominent, recently-published books in classical scholarship which seem to have no discernible or possible sense are quoted and allowed to stand with a minimum of comment. But their most magnificent vitriolic writing is saved for those learned, subsidized custodians of out shared past who simply lack enthusiasm for passing on knowledge of the Greeks and their achievements (N.B., the authors are Hellenists--that is, specialists in Greek language and culture--and their personal experiences as such provide much material), and who seem to despise as bad form the combination of learning and passion in those who actually do have it. Hanson compares these alleged drones to a particular late scholar of wide learning and generous spirit, Eugene Vanderpool by name (one which students of classical archaeology will have surely run across), and concludes, "[t]o be brutal, it would have been a rare bargain to push twenty of them off the Acropolis to give that gasping septuagenarian one more year or two of air" (p. 176). No weasel words elsewhere in the book, either. No quarter is given or prisoners taken: this is a declaration of war to the knife, and knife to the hilt--which is what makes it so worth reading. Especially if you do care about classics, as a current or former teacher or student, and whether you agree with their indictment of the discipline they clearly love and are proud to serve or violently don't, you've got to read this book: you're implicated in it, somewhere.
Rating: 
Summary: provocative
Review: A reviewer below, who describes himself as a cognitive psychologist with an interest in classics, said that this book convinced him not to waste four years studying Greek just to understand the nuances lost in translation; programming languages and other applied fields are worthier of the student's time. I must applaud a cognitive psychologist for taking an interest in classics, but his view exemplifies the problem with our university education that the authors of WHO KILLED HOMER aim to attack in the first place. Being in the field of cognitive science myself, I am quite familiar with the simple-mindedness, not to say ignorance and arrogance, so common among its practitioners. The view expressed by our cognitive psychologist seems quite typical. Whether or not one should devote time to the study of Greek is a matter of choice; surely the student can decide for herself. But to say that it is not inherently worthwhile as programming languages is mistaken, and to say that people only study Greek due to cognitive dissonance is exceptionally stupid. (The very concept of cognitive dissonance is neither original nor helpful, perhaps useful for social psychologists for their problematic predictions but will disappear altogether from textbooks in about 50 yrs as a historical relic of the bad old days of psychology in its primitive phase.) How can our scientifically minded psychologist be so certain about the value of something he himself never studied? Perhaps the nuances lost in translation are the truly important ones; perhaps those with such faith in translation should not claim that they have understood the classics; perhaps Greek is not as difficult as the numbers (350 verb forms) would suggest. The truth is: the professional practioners and naive friends of classics cause more harm to the discipline than its true enemies. WHO KILLED HOMER? would be worth reading if only for this reason.
Rating: 
Summary: Nice try, but reform won't save classics
Review: Although I'm not a classicist (I'm a cognitive psychologist at a teaching university), much of my "fun" reading is in the classics - it's something of a hobby. With that proviso, I can't bring myself to recommend this book or its assertions.Classics as a field is dead. True. However, the authors are kidding themselves if they think that this is due to the way classics is taught (or not taught). The argument that students should take Greek or Latin is based on an incorrect assumption of positive transference from the language to whatever else the student is pursuing. Research shows that this doesn't work in reality - a big problem for the approach the authors are taking. On a positive note, the authors convinced me not to study Greek. The idea that it is worth the time to spend four years studying a language in order to better understand a nuance in translation is criminal! My students (hell, all students) would be much better off spending four years learning programming languages. I believe classics are dead at the college level because of the students, not the teachers. I can see where a good professor (like Hanson) can "create" a thriving classics program, but to appreciate classical literature, one really has to have lived a more complete life than the average 18-year-old American. The discipline just isn't as inherently interesting for students as more applied areas of study. A few other points from a psychologist: 1) the book treats psychology as if it were counseling, and bad counseling at that! 2) learning Greek is essentially cognitive dissonance - the more difficult the trial, the more valued the experience. This shouldn't be confused with the actual merit of what is learned. 3) Freud was wrong; the catharsis that Hanson & Heath feel in backbiting successful (grant-wise) colleagues only leads to more anger. Stop the insanity! I'll stop now by saying that I'm a great admirer of Hanson's other works (I'm not familiar with any by Heath). The Western Way of War is a gem, and Hanson's work with The Landmark Thucydides created a wonderful classics experience.
Rating:
Summary: Who Killed Higher Education?
Review: An immensely amusing critique of higher education in general and classical eduction in particular. The authors are classics professors and this tome is a flaying of modern academia. From professors who can't or won't teach to academic articles written in an unreadable gibberish, their targets will be familiar to all who have had the misfortune to waste, at incredible cost, several years of their lives being miseducated at many of our elite universities. The authors write with considerable verve and anger: no dry example of "collegese" in this book except as satire. I recommend this book to all parents before they take out a third mortgage to send Jack or Jill off to Ivy League U only to have them emerge five years later no wiser than before, and any enthusiasm for true intellectual achievement beaten out of them by the pretentious mediocrities who infest the professoriate. My ultimate accolade for this work: Juvenal couldn't have said it better.
Rating:
Summary: A Good Read
Review: As a student of John Heath at Santa Clara University, I was more than happy to read this intelligent man's view on why and how classical education has virtually died in this country. An informative and well researched piece.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent
Review: As someone who is trying to learn Greek on my own I was quite impressed by the author's analysis of Greek grammar and what a learner of this language can expect in the way of challenges to be overcome. Moreover the author's thrilling discussion of what Greek civilization has contributed to life as we know it today is the sort of information which can instill even the most reluctant student with a desire to plug ahead to discover what treasures Greek has in store for her. Finally the list of books which the authors have suggested we read will almost certainly enrich our knowledge of the ancient Greek world without our having to acheive a doctorate to do it: this is a great book to buy and read right away.
Rating:
Summary: A delightful rant.
Review: Even if, as the author now admits, the main argument was a bit overplayed, this is a delightful rant, bristling with wit and wisdom and marvelous asides. It remains on my "most beloved" shelf and I reread it every year or so since buying it in first edition hardcover in 1998. A downbeat message delivered in bracing, upbeat prose. Cheers.
Rating: 
Summary: Interesting Thesis
Review: First. I have yet to read the book. This will be a quick response to some of the reviews. Undoubtedly our current civilization is founded on the basic ideas first expounded in Greek by Greeks. However, these ideas were profoundly influenced by admixture of ideas first expounded by Semites in Hebrew, and later by Arabs in Arabic. The original works have all been translated into modern languages many many times. No need to learn the languages to get the basic ideas, especially if you consult multiple sources. Second. The discipline required to learn Greek, Latin (and well, why not Sanskrit while we're at it) will produce a way of thinking that is much more likely to be organized, coherent, and thereby more influential. The discipline required to advance in mathematics will also produce this type of thinking in terms of organizing thought, but not necessarily in expressing those thoughts. Better to do math and language. Best still to do advanced math, using Russian texts, and really twitch and tweak the dendrons. Third, to sum, my father, a minister, once told me that any church to which I belonged was as good as any other. What mattered was my own dedication to that church, and the depth of my belief in its teachings. I love Greek, I love math, I am dismally inadequate in both fields, but find great joy in the pursuit anyway.
Rating:
Summary: The death of classics and classical education.
Review: Hanson and Heath describe in devastating detail the unfortunate turn to obscurity and irrelevance taken by the new generation of classics departments under the influence of postmodernist and radical leftist trends in the university. While similar problems afflict other areas in the liberal arts, the authors explain why it is particularly troubling in the case of classics, arguing passionately for the importance of understanding the ancient Greek and Roman heritage of Western civilization.
One cannot help but agree with their critique, as well as with the basic recommendation of restoring knowledge of the classics to the average university student; however, the authors go too far in advising that the entire university curriculum be restructured around the classics, including the learning of Greek and Latin.
Although Hanson and Heath are no doubt correct in insisting that the classics are best understood when read in their original languages, they can be understood well enough in translation. And while the authors are equally right that learning a difficult language like Greek helps one to develop a logical and disciplined mind, this objective would be accomplished as well through increased emphasis on mathematics, which would also have more practical dividends.
On the whole, a very interesting book, though somewhat over the top, readily recommended to anyone interested in the direction university education is going.
Rating:
Summary: Vibrant compelling must read
Review: Hanson and Heath present a tightly reasoned, completely convincing thesis: that is, the American University student has been robbed of a precious cultural inheritance, the genius of Greece.
I have recently returned to a college campus after many years in the work force and I can attest that the undergraduates are fed a curriculum which denigrates the Western cultural tradition. It is quite possible to graduate without the slightest knowledge of the monumental geniuses of the Classic world who founded our civilization.
It is important to contrast the Greek intellectual stance of continuing questioning and seeking with that of Islamic scholars who maintain that all important questions have been asked and answered and further questioning is blasphemous and harmful.
It is not a coincidence that science has prospered in the West.
Our students cannot appreciate the value of our Constitution without understanding the it was the product of minds steeped in the thought of classical Greece.
Particularly now I fear for my country. Our young people are unprepared to defend the culture of free speech and free inquiry.
|
