HISTORY um can't from "A

by dull teachers who make hysteriophonic sounds with— out meaning."

The natural attraction whi- ch study of the past has to young pople inevitably is blunted in many instances by the horrible initiation into the discipline. In an Amer— ican survey made a few years ago, history was rated by high school students as the most irrelevant" of 21 sub- jects in the curriculum.

But this is nothing new. Students have been resisting

and overcoming poor history teaching\in the public so— hools for generations. For some reason, however, the virus is now being carried into the university, where hitherto student interest

in history has often revived strongly. So virulent has the ,disease become that the eff- orts of the occaisional fo- rceful high school history teacher are being frustra- ted.rather than promoted at

vy,the university level.

iflGOdS

This brings us to the sec- ond, and in my opinion ma- jor, cause of the decline

'of history's image as a dy— namic, inspiring, creative discipline. It may be den— oted by two words, "elitism"

and "structuraliSm." If a_ catch—phrase is desired, It might be the "graduate scho— ol syndrome". This syndrome involves nearly all univers- ity departments, but its effect on history is espec- ially pernicious.

Most academic departments of universities are staffed by men and women whose life-

e1r training for‘post—grad- uate degrees. This training is usually described and justified as contributing

to "professionalism", but

in my judgement "elitism" better characterizes it. The values of exclusiveness, condescension, righteousness, pedantry and intellectual arrogance are, if deliberate- ly not encouraged, the almo— st inevitable result of imm— ersion in the rarified at- mosphere of erudition and specialized research typical of most departments in most graduate schools.

There is little cross-fer- tilization in graduate scho- ols. Disciplines are self— contained, each with its father—figures, great books, specialized jargon and other identifying symbols. The young academic too often be- comes, in the words of Lewis Mumford, "the servile spec— ialist, eloquently ignorant of any departmevt of thought but his own, and therefore fundamentally ignorant of essential relationships in his own field...."

The young teacher emerging from such a department with one of the post-graduate degrees, especially the doc- torate, sees himself as a kind of missionary priest d5 his discipline. Hls appren— ticeship over, he envisages his future role as apostle to the undergraduate savages whom he will be called upon to instruct at the universi— ty or college where he se- vcures his first independent teaching appointment.

THE CADRE, TUES. MARCH 5, 1974. Page 5.

mission in life as, in part, spreading the gospel to the vheathen, but also, more imp— ortant, recruiting new can- didates for his preisthood.

Belonging to what he regards 'as a noble elite, the profe— ssor is concerned with stre— ngthening and perpetuating it. This can best be done by identifying among his under- graduate students, bright scholars, that is, students with personai qualities like his own, who can be sent up to the graduate schools, preferably his own, to become missionary priests in their turn.

Elitism calls forth struc- turalism. The professor, es- pecially the young professor newly emerged from graduate school, considers himself the custodian of a body of sacred knowledge. This know- ledge, he believes, can only be taught and learned in a single way. Any other app- roach to it profanes it with the evils of "popularism" & "unprofessionalism".

Consequently, most univers- ity professors place heavy emphasis on structure. The beginning student is presen- ted with certain elementary theories which he must grasp which he must learn before more advanced learning is permitted. He is given a va— st body of data which he is expected to commit to mem— ory. He is told that failure to adhere to a more or less "scientific" methodology will not be tolerated. Heavy emphasis is placed upon ta— king courses in a certain

Imbued with the mystique of

and ersonal ideolo— _ . _ styles P his disc1pline,-he«sees his

gies have been molded by th—

m

If they persist,» if they make you feel like some dim-wit robot programmed by someone else, maybe you should bless the questions, take advantage of the time-out, and think.

If you're asking yourself what in God's name you're doing, why not think about doing something in God‘s name?

That's right, a priest.

A Redemptorist.

It's an extraordinary life for the right man. .

Ask us about it. Phone or write:

THE REDEMPTORIST PRIESTS

Gerry Pettipas, C.S.S,R.,

426 St. Germain Avenue, Toronto NHRAIWW.

(416) 466-9265

Some guys can go pelting down the Road of Life like an arrow. They never hesitate, never swerve, never even slow down.

But the rest of us get gnawed by these funny little questions. They come, unasked for, unwelcome and usually about two o'clock in the . morning. They can stop you cold in your tracks. Samples: 15 this all there is? If everything's working out for me, why am I bugged? What in God 5 name am doing anyway?‘

sequence, reading specified books before others, avoid- ing certain authors who are out of fashion or in poor repute, using disciplinary jargon (at an elementary le— vel,to be sure), writing re— search papers of increasing depth and complexity, foot-- noting sources in a special way, passing progressively difficult exams, etc.

cont. p~g.6

kampus koncorn can t. pg . 3

as a dogmatic revelation of trggh such a Judaic—Christain tradition could have been possible," claimed Naylor. After the initial lecture, which in my opinion was of high calibre, a dialogue occured. This resulted in the explication of even furtner‘ and more interesting contra— dictions between the Greek and Judaic traditions too nu— merous to list in this review. If anyone wishes to chall- enge Joe Naylor on his ideas concerning the origin of the separation of ideas and real— ity they can find him 'held— up' on the third floor of Main, philosophy section.