Shots In The Dark

A week or so ago I was interviewed by a writer from USA Today for a piece on Harvard Rules and Ross Douthat's book. Today I just received a letter from the paper—the "USA Today Accuracy Survey." The letter asked if the piece had made any specific mistakes, and if I thought it was fair or unfair, and in what capacity I'd been interviewed.

Such a simple tool to improve journalism, but I've never seen any other newspaper do this. (And good luck getting a correction in the New York Times, if they do you wrong.)

Good for USA Today.

Some months back, the Monterey Aquarium in California was given a young great white shark that had been captured by a fisherman. Great white sharks have never survived in captivity, but this one did, and attendance at the aquarium soared as people came to see this remarkable animal.

Now the shark has grown too big and has started to eat the other fish—hate it when that happens—and so the aquarium had to release the animal into the wild.

We can only wish it well. According to Peter Benchley in this month's issue of Men's Journal, sharks kill about 12 humans a year. And every year, we kill about 90 million sharks. No, that's not a typo. Ninety million.

A scholar examines an aspect of Larry Summers' infamous NBER remarks other than the biology question: his suggestion that women were unwilling to work the 80-hour weeks required for success in math and science.

Her conclusion: "We need to get past the mythology of what makes creative people productive, past the American ethos that all can be ours if we just put enough hours into it, and do solid research on the topic. We don’t need occupational stereotypes to scare talented youth of either sex away from science, and I hope at some point prominent academicians such as the President of Harvard become good enough scholars to move past inaccurate clichés."

Must enjoy controversy. Some cleaning-up after your boss required. Experience in fending off hostile faculty members also a plus.

So if you're interested in becoming Larry Summers' new chief of staff, apply here.

The craziness in Colorado continues. Ward Churchill says he won't cooperate with any investigation into whether or not he really is of Native American descent. The investigation, he says, is appropriate for a "lunatic asylum."

Meanwhile, a state legislator is criticizing the university panel that suggested that Churchill should not be fired for his boneheaded essay about 9/11. "The patients are in charge of the asylum," said this state representative.

Here's a crazy thought: Let's strap Churchill and the politician in straightjackets, lock them in a padded cell, and see if they can headbutt each other into unconsciousness....

Both sides at Columbia sound unsatisfied with the faculty report on whether pro-Palestinian professors intimidated Zionist students, according to this story in the Times. The Zionist students feel that their complaints haven't been adequately redressed. Supporters of the pro-Palestinian professors feel that there really wasn't any intimidating behavior to complain about, except perhaps by the Zionist students. But there may not be enough outrage to fuel more controversy, and for Lee Bollinger, the worst of this controversy may be over.

The New York Sun, however, doesn't think much of the report and wonders, "Where are the trustees?"...

The Detroit Free Press includes Larry Summers on a list of "real-life April Fools." Other nominations include Michael Jackson, Bernie Ebbers, and Paris Hilton.

Are the media glamorizing the suicide of Hunter S. Thompson? This Denver writer thinks so. I agree: there's a fine line between believing that people of sound mind should have the right to choose how they die, and describing it in a way that might encourage others to pursue the same path.... Hunter Thompson's death is being romanticized just as his life was. I suspect part of him would loathe that; part of him would like it very much.

News flash #2: the Pope's urinary tract infection is responding to antibiotics.

News flash: the Pope has a urinary tract infection.

Another African-American scholar is leaving Harvard. Tenured political scientist Michael Dawson, a graduate of Berkeley with a Ph.D. from Harvard, says farewell in this e-mail:

<<Subject: With regrets

Dear Colleagues,
I'm sad to say that for a variety of reasons--including some important
familial ones--[my wife] and I have decided to return to the University
of Chicago. I regret that I didn't get to work with many of you more
closely than I have been able to, but know that the future of the
department is extraordinarily bright and it will be my loss that I will
be unable to join you in the coming years.
With all my best wishes,
Michael>>

Is this a sign of things to come?

This Reuters article about the anti-Semitism debate at Columbia contains the following egregious lines: "The Columbia controversy is one of several freedom of speech issues to hit U.S. college campuses. Harvard University President Lawrence Summers was criticized for comments about women's aptitude for science..."

The controversy over Summers' remarks was not a controversy over free speech, despite the attempts of a number of conservative commentators to frame it that way. It was a debate over a university president saying that women in science are held back by genetic shortcomings, which in turn fueled a debate over that president's leadership style.

No one was saying that President Summers' 1st Amendment rights have been impaired—no one serious, anyway. This Reuters journalist is editorializing by presenting the Summers controversy that way...

The Yale Daily News reports on a contentious faculty meeting at which women and minorities (in particular, though not exclusively) lamented a lack of diversity on the Yale faculty. The story shows just how complicated this issue is, and how the specific issues can break down differently for women, as opposed to people of color. For example: It may be relatively easy to recruit women in the humanities, but not in the sciences. The challenges for minority faculty seem even greater: they appear to be more scarce across the board.

Ecology and Evolutionary Biology chair Stephen Stearns explained that "his department recently hired four new faculty members, two of whom were women, and although the department's senior faculty helped search for minority candidates, they were unable to find any candidates of color whom they believed would have reasonable chances of attaining tenure. Also, Stearns said it is difficult to identify minority candidates because candidates often do not indicate their ethnicity in their applications."

It is an irony that, while Larry Summers' clumsy remarks back in January have been extremely damaging to him, and at least in the short term damaging to Harvard, there's no doubt that Summers has brought enormous attention to a serious problem at campuses across the country. As he might put it, this wasn't his intent, but it certainly was his effect.

Summers' story, like that of the challenge of recruiting female and minority professors, defies simple conclusions....

Neil and Tim Finn, two of the three remaining members of Crowded House, played a gig at London's Royal Albert Hall the other night, as described by the Financial Times.

Key quote: <And so the masters of catchy tunes and feelgood chord changes found themselves in improbably melancholy mood, one that Neil Finn in particular managed to shake off only during an extended and poignant encore. For the rest of the time, he looked listless and uninspired, while brother Tim took over most of the big stage numbers.>>

The encore was, fittingly enough, "Don't Dream It's Over."

Posted by: richard / 11:09 AM 0 comments   

The Daily Californian, the newspaper of the University of California at Berkeley, has this take on the women in science issue. You won't find this article in the "Harvard in the News" wrap-up, but it's representative of a genre I've seen quite a bit of in the past few weeks: college newspapers using Larry Summers' remarks on women in science to demonstrate how much more progressive their institution/president is than Harvard/'s.

Two thoughts:

1) Individually and collectively, these articles damage Harvard's reputation. It's a subtle thing, but Harvard is becoming better known for the off-base remarks of its controversial president than for all the amazing scholarship and remarkable graduates the university produces.

2) One of the striking things about Harvard's culture is how masculine it is. In ways small and big, obvious and subtle, from the number of female tenured faculty, the coolness of much social interaction, the macho, competitive culture—even the fact that out of something like 42 portraits in the faculty room, only two are of women. And don't even get me started on the subject of Hanna Gray...

I can't help but think that this gender-construction at Harvard is unhealthy, and it's one of the ways in which Larry Summers was a problematic choice for president. He was steeped in masculine cultures from the time he went to college, if not before. More, he'd scorn the intellectual genres—women's studies, for example—that would provide some insight into this state of affairs.....

Even though Harvard College is on spring break at the moment, the Crimson follows up the Globe with this story about Harvard's abysmal ranking in a poll of student satisfaction. I suppose because the students are gone, the Crimson interviews a number of professors—Steve Pinker, Harvey Mansfield, et al—about their opinions on the survey. The professors' comments are, with one or two exceptions, inadvertently hilarious, as they merely reflect the prejudices of the person being interviewed and they show just how little Harvard professors know about undergraduate life. Steve Pinker, for example, uses the opportunity to talk (yet again) about what a great humanitarian Larry Summers is, while Mansfield blames the problem on—what a shock—the faculty. (I'm surprised he didn't specify "feminists.")

Here's something I've wondered: Who leaked this document to Marcella Bombardieri in the Boston Globe in the first place? Was it a Summers opponent who wanted to keep the heat on?

So unlike Terri Schiavo, the Pope now has a feeding tube. "Frail Pope Supports Dignity for the Ill," headlines the Drudge Report. "Wants Life Support to the End."

It's dangerous to overinterpret a headline, of course, but since Matt's take on the Pope seems supported by consensus, let's parse that. The Pope apparently can't speak, so he wanders over to a window for a brief moment to show his believers that he's still alive. On Easter Sunday, his image is beamed to the masses, but shown only from behind. His illness has become a morbid spectacle watched the world over. He's being fed through a tube.

This is dignity for the ill?

Given that the Pope apparently can't speak for himself, it's hard not to wonder how much this situation is being manipulated by high-ups in the Vatican. Who knows what power struggles and intrigues are taking place behind the scenes?

I'm not a Catholic, but I've always had tremendous respect for this pope, a remarkable and inspiring man. Lately, though, I'm just feeling sorry for him. Where is the dignity in having a tube inserted into your stomach just to keep the body functioning past the point where the Lord is calling you home? I don't find this death-watch inspiring; I find it tawdry.

From a journalist's perspective, this is a book one would love to write. I'm not qualified to, but someone should: the behind-the-scenes story of what's happening inside the Vatican during the last months of the Pope's life. It'd read like The Da Vinci Code....

Students and faculty at the University of Toronto are protesting a lecture by pro-Israeli academic Daniel Pipes. They're not trying to stop him from speaking; they just don't want people to go hear him.

I was skeptical—is this just another example of pro-Palestinian radical chic—until I read this letter in the University of Toronto newspaper...sounds to me like the protesters have a point.

That's the name of a song by the New Zealand band Crowded House, a group I've loved for two decades and still listen to frequently, even though they broke up in 1994. Crowded House created bright, catchy pop music that sounded easy but was exquisitely crafted. And on many of their songs, their playful quality was tempered with a dark and subversive take on life, so typical of the art produced by musicians and filmmakers from that part of the world. Plus, they wrote some of the most heartbreakingly honest and beautiful love songs you could ever hear, like the aforementioned "Don't Dream It's Over."

The first Crowded House album came out in 1986, as I was graduating college and moving to Washington, D.C., to start a career in journalism, making $25 a week as an intern at the Center for Investigative Reporting. When I hear Crowded House now, I can't help but think of those days...the wonderful stale popcorn and cheap beer at Mr. Egan's, the fire department coming after my roommate and I lit our Christmas tree on fire (on purpose), bailing the aforementioned roommate out of jail after he decided to take his unregistered, unlicensed, uninsured motorcycle for a spin on the Washington Mall....

That year or the next, I got the chance to see Crowded House play at the Bayou in Washington, and they were just fantastic—playful, fun, warm. An extremely likable bunch of guys. But perhaps the one having the most fun was drummer Paul Hester, who, even from behind his drum kit, appeared to be having the time of his life. He was the jester of the group, and he made everyone in the audience laugh along with him. (A friend reminds me that at one point he used his whisks to play bandmember Neil Finn's guitar.)

Some months after the death of my boss, John Kennedy, in 1999, I traveled to Australia, where Crowded House is hugely popular. I listened to the group all throughout that recuperative journey. You couldn't really help it; Aussies love their local heroes. Crowded House helped bring some light to that dark period of my life.

But things are not always what they seem. Yesterday the New York Times reported that Paul Hester took his own life at the age of 46, leaving behind two daughters. He hanged himself from a tree in a park near Melbourne, Australia.

This one is tough. Only Crowded House fans will get this, but without Paul Hester, there is a hole in the river. Like the song says, I hope he was dreaming of glory/miles above the mountains and plains/free at last....

I had a great visit to Yale yesterday, although I do have one pointer for aspiring lecturers: try not to give your talk at the exact same time as a much-publicized lecture by New York Times columnist David Brooks. Nonetheless, thanks to all those people who came to the Branford College master's tea and to the Yale Bookstore for some terrific conversation. And much appreciation to Branford master Steven Smith and writing tutor Fred Strebeigh for setting up the event. It's always nice to make a return visit to Yale, and New Haven certainly looks much spiffier than when I was a student....

A group of students at Columbia is circulating a petition calling for the resignation of Lee Bollinger because his speech the other day was, apparently, an insufficiently strong defense of free speech for them.

I'm off to Yale to speak, but more later...

—and why wouldn't you be?—I'll be speaking at the Yale Bookstore at 6:30 PM tonight...and would love to see you there.

Shocking news: Larry Summers is becoming a transvestite. You read it here first. Or maybe second.

Three political scientists have surveyed 1, 800 university professors and concluded that—yes—academics really are more liberal than the general population.

According to the Washington Post's Howie Kurtz, "College faculties, long assumed to be a liberal bastion, lean further to the left than even the most conspiratorial conservatives might have imagined, a new study says.

By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative."

There are some hints that this study should be taken with a grain of salt: the data is six years old, the study was funded by a conservative group called the Randolph Foundation, and the political characterizations are self-descriptions by the academics surveyed.

I'm sure that this report will have conservatives such as David Horowitz, author of the Academic Bill of Rights, hollering that campuses need affirmative action for conservative professors.

But should anyone really be surprised by these numbers? To the extent that being liberal in today's United States means being open-minded, non-moralistic, and non-judgmental, then of course you're going to find that academics tend to be liberal.

The real problem for conservatives is the deep strain of anti-intellectualism inherent in much of modern conservativism. (See, for example, the conservative fight against the teaching of evolution.) How, for example, could you go into science when you don't believe in the scientific method? How could you become, say, an anthropologist when you're more interested in judging other people's behavior than understanding it?

It's also possible that this story misses the larger point: that while university faculties may be liberal, universities themselves are not—and at universities across the country, faculties have a smaller and smaller role in governance and decision-making. The number-crunchers rule. And guess what? They're conservative.

Thanks so much to the good people at Hue-Man bookstore in Harlem for hosting the event with Cornel West and me last night—and thanks to everyone who braved an absolutely miserable night of cold and pelting rain to come hear us. Sometimes book-writing can seem like a good way to play a cruel joke on oneself. In Boston, my reading at the Old South Meeting House took place on the coldest March 9th in the city's recorded history. Last night, the reading began after it had been pouring rain for around 17 consecutive hours, until New York looked like something out of Blade Runner.

But then you get a warm and welcoming group of people in a fantastic and important bookstore like Hue-Man, and people who ask smart and thoughtful questions, and welcome you into their community, and writing books for a living suddenly seems like not such a crazy idea after all.

If you weren't able to make it, C-SPAN recorded the event for posterity, or at least for "Book Notes." I'll keep you posted on the airtime as soon as they tell me....

According to an internal Harvard memo reported by Marcella Bombardieri of the Boston Globe, Harvard students have such low levels of satisfaction with their college experience, Harvard ranks 27th out of a group of 31 elite universities, including the entire Ivy League.

Key quote: <<''Harvard students are less satisfied with their undergraduate educations than the students at almost all of the other COFHE schools," according to the memo, dated Oct. 2004 and marked ''confidential." ''Harvard student satisfaction compares even less favorably to satisfaction at our closest peer institutions.">>

That's basically a fancy way of saying that Harvard students don't like their university.

Or—forgive me while I toot my own horn—as I write in Harvard Rules, "A startling number of Harvard students will tell you that they don't like their school. They appreciate it. They respect it. They are thankful for the opportunities it provides them. But they don't like Harvard."

The question is why. I think it has something to do with the established culture of the institution: hurried, competitive, over-achieving, and individualistic. This is not a warm and nurturing place. It's not a fun place.

But it's not just the institution's fault. So many kids at Harvard have worked since kindergarten to get into the university, you'd sometimes think that they wouldn't know fun if it hit them on the head. They've put the university on such a pedestal, they don't realize that once you're there, it's all right sometimes just to play. College may be the last time in life when you can have fun without guilt...but at Harvard, some kids feel guilty whenever they're not doing the same things that helped them get in in the first place: over-achieving like mad.

Cartoonist Sage Stossel has this entertaining take on a women in science panel discussion held at the Radcliffe Institute on March 21st...

Perhaps the most interesting part: Nancy Hopkins, the MIT biologist who walked out of Summers' NBER talk, got a standing ovation. She said that she regretted having walked out, though. Who could blame her? She's been pilloried as a hysterical woman for having done so...and called a feminist by Harvey Mansfield. Perhaps sometimes it takes an overreaction to draw attention to something that merits greater scrutiny.

This USA Today piece by Harvard grad Alvin P. Sanoff talks about why events at Harvard attract so much attention in the larger culture....and discusses Harvard Rules and Ross Douthat's book Privilege.

My theory: "It is seen as a way station to the American dream in the same way that Ellis Island is," Bradley says. "The idea that any kid can grow up in the United States and go to Harvard and become successful is as ingrained in the American imagination as the idea that any kid can grow up to be president."

Despite a few snarky lines, this review in the New York Times Sunday Book Review is smart and thoughtful. I don't agree with all the points made by reviewer Rachel Donadio, but one never does, and I don't want to quibble.

A few people have mentioned that the piece is sort of an odd hybrid of book review and essay. That's something new to the Times Book Review under new editor Sam Tanenhaus, and I have to say that I like it. The NYTSBR used to be dry as dust; Tanenhaus is livening it up immensely.

I'll be speaking tonight at 7:00 at the Hue-Man Bookstore in Harlem. (For more information, see the link.)

Special guests will include Cornel West and C-SPAN....

Hue-Man is at 125th Street and 8th Avenue, easily accessible by the A/C/D/B subway....