Association for the Study of Ethical Behavior in Volume 2, Issue 1/2 Literature, St. Francis College, Brooklyn Spring 2007

ASEBL J OURNAL

Books : From Conversation to Conflict E.M. Forster, Howards End Why do we read Great Books and care to discuss Big ? D.H. Lawrence, Etruscan [ ] Places Do some books endure histori- , furthermore, ought to be the heated discussion. cally by of a vital es- understood as an act in which More Books sence inherent in them, or are responsibility and consequence they perpetuated in a contin- inhere. When readers of texts For instance, many people are uum based on false premises? come to realize that ideas are not aware that two of the three James Rachels, ed., Ethi- Such books ought to be seen unfixed, are part of an ethical preliminary volumes to this set cal Theory 1: The Question not as a lexicon of standardized fabric of real and intellectual of books are entitled, The of Objectivity words or ideas we are expected conflict, and that these ideas Great Ideas: A Syntopicon . . . to mimic, but as the volatile are themselves nuggets of re- This strongly suggests that there is not a fixed set of books Charles Burack, D.H. fuel to drive imaginative sponsibility and consequence, to argue with the key ideas in the debate about books we call but a continuous interweaving Lawrence’s of such books. While at its core “great” ought to shift from the of numerous strands, for indeed Sacred : The the word idea denotes that static and what they appear to the Syntopicon includes exten- Transfiguration of the which is Platonic and everlast- be, to the dynamic and what sive bibliographies that refer ing, here we are concerned they are as motors of change. the reader to thousands of Reader books not included in the col- with what an idea connotes. There are fluid edges around an lection. Quote idea, mutable in the realm of The western literary tradition ambiguous human behavior has handed down to us, in an unorganized and non- In considering the liberal in “There is always an iner- and intellectual . a college core curriculum, it is Great books are ideas in con- systematic manner, a series of tia to be overcome in interrelated texts that were, in important to reconsider the striking out a new line flict, bits and pieces of an un- debate about canonized texts fixed argument which at best the early 1950s, collected in what has become known as not in light of the editors’ origi- of conduct—not more lead to a debate narrowed nal metaphor of a conversation in ourselves, it seems, to a discussion of ethics and great books. It is not insignifi- cant to note that this collection but in light of the Russian liter- human morality. than in circumscribing of books was published as great ary theorist and philosopher books, not as The great books, M.M. Bakhtin’s notion of het- events . . .” (Thomas eroglossia, the diversity of Hardy, Far From the The emphasis on ideas in argu- which their detractors would ment, therefore, shifts focus have one believe. Debate has speech styles in a language. Madding Crowd) from an abstract concept (for swirled around this collection, (Michael Holquist, in the glos- example, , text) to a but the editors, principally sary to The Dialogic Imagina- more palpable notion (for ex- and tion, defines heteroglossia as ample, Right, context). An Mortimer J. Adler, anticipated that “which insures the primacy Philosopher of Note Emmanuel Levinas, C ALL FOR CONTRIBUTIONS: ARE YOU A “Ethics as First Philoso- phy.” H UMANIST? H OW HAVE BOOKS AFFECTED YOU? In February 2002 we cele- five years have passed, we will fiction) has influenced, af- Word brated our one and only Hu- be running some of the original fected, or even effected one’s manities Day at SFC, and as quotes (edited to fit) from the behavior. Limit yourself to part of that event, we produced Humanities Day brochure; but approximately 250 words, be - Sincerity - a brochure that featured obser- we now ask today’s SFC com- clear, concise, and specific; vations and reflections on the munity—especially students— write well. The best entries Copyright©2007 By impact the humanities to reflect on, specifically, lit- will be published in this news- [email protected] (literature, , , erature and how the written letter periodically. music) have had on us. Since word (fiction, , non-

From Humanities Day program of context over text.”1) Of course, conversation is not, as critics of great books would have us believe, a brochure, February 2002, spon- reductive and static chat in a monologic system devised by a privileged coterie. But, more to the point, sored by SFC (with support from heteroglossia implies unrestricted openness and turgid movement out toward many competing . Any the NEH and NY Council for the great book, although authored by one person, is a creation that erupts out from a historical and intellectual Humanities). context. Philosophers, for instance the intellectual enemies of Hegel (the rational) and Schopenhauer (the irrational), were themselves readers not merely of texts (great books) but of contexts (ideas in argument). Consequently, Bakhtin’s notion of heteroglossia, replacing Hutchins’ metaphor of conversation, gives a James C. Adams, Ph.D. – fuller comprehension of discourse as discord in a multi-layered variety of contentious voices. (Retired VP for Student Affairs, Dean of Students): For example, although this writing is fixed on the page, you read it (hear it) as my speech from my socio- economic group, and as you hear it you will interpret it, massage it according to your personal reading “. . . . Do not, I urge, merely (listening) style, according to the context in which you “hear” it, according to the context in which you accept things as they are—or, at understand it, and then, perhaps, you will recollect it later in a metamorphosed way, in another context, to first blush, seem to be—but, lay claim to it by making it your own speech. rather, constantly demand to know Why? What’s the evi- In the introductory essay that accompanies the University of Chicago’s Great Books of the Western World, dence? or, finally, So what? a separate volume entitled, The Great Conversation: The Substance of a Liberal , it is appropri- This orientation, it seems to me, ate for Hutchins to inform us that the tradition of the great books is one of a conversation and a dialogue in is important principally because the spirit of inquiry.2 We are told that there cannot be any finality in a discussion founded on inclusive- it moves one toward what I be- ness, and human understanding can evolve only from participation in an open conversation.3 The refrain lieve to be ultimate things: the of Hutchins in his introductory essay is that readers of great books should think of themselves as liberal purpose of and the contexts artists4: the liberal artist develops a method of understanding, a method of working efficiently by mental within which each of us it. perspicacity. But this analogy of conversation is outdated; whereas critics of great books would discard For me, it has always been the the set (and, presumably, all of its thousands of references) because of historical archaism, it is more con- humanities that have provided structive to see enduring works of humanistic thought for what they are: Not a set of books but a flaming the best sense of all this, because pool of often virulent concepts, notions, and statements. Only after students evaluate a variety of ideas these are the disciplines which can they proceed to synthesize them, perhaps to lay claim to a new idea. Future policy makers, whether simply will not let go of these legislative, ecclesiastical, or medical, must first be grounded in arguments focused on moral issues, and fundamental questions. Indeed, those issues are implicit in the ideas of great books. it has been through the humani- ties (philosophy, literature, and, especially, the fine arts) that I In this way, reading should come to be viewed not as dehumanized work, a non-teleological task, but as have come closest to an under- intellectual exertion that is filled with a long series of small but cumulative meanings gained as one re- standing of the fact that ‘human peatedly activates critical thinking faculties. However, key to this analysis is that no intelligent person work is an imitation of Divine will come to his or her own conclusion about ethics or morals unless first aroused (indeed, angered) by work,’ and have realized the best ideas in argument in great books. Simply stated, great books represent the distillation of unusual (and terrestrial approximation I am sometimes radical) ideas in an intense and perpetual argument with ambitious proponents of equally revo- likely to get of final . lutionary ideas. Conversation is a tepid analogy and should be discouraged when introducing readers to That’s why the humanities mat- any book; rather, readers must see that writers and thinkers of the past have been and, in a sense, still are ter today, and always will.” engaged in an intellectual fight where there is battle for moral dominance. Thus, the text is static, but the open-ended notion of context (ideas) is inclusive and expansive, without historical or linguistic parame-

ters. Many great books advance a claim to persuade the reader to accept a new idea: Plato’s idealism, Locke’s empiricism, Hume’s skepticism, Hegel’s rationalism, Schopenhauer’s . While there M.W. Gordon (Of Academic might be overlap among these various notions, they are ideas in argument, all of which are fundamental to Enhancement, deceased): human thought and all of which are still valid today.

“. . . . Going to College doesn’t The canon of great books cannot be discarded because that would topple a contextual foundation of ele- necessarily solve the problem of mental thinking that has been explained by these writers (in their respective texts). One can dismiss the meaninglessness, but it does give special vertical or horizontal place of any particular so-called great book; indeed, that is the point: a great you a head start. Plato didn’t idea invites and accepts challenge within the context of difficult and challenging ideas. One cannot dis- claim to have all the answers, but miss the extraordinary insight of the ideas, especially for new readers, in many of such books. New voices he did give us a method of deal- must be encouraged to participate in the debate (whether it be Malcolm X or John Updike or Salman ing with them. ‘Accept nothing, Rushdie or Peter Singer) but readers must ask if these voices, too, offer the radical claims of argument that question everything,’ has to be are necessary to help us change our viewpoint, perception, and ethical thinking about ourselves, individual the mantra of the critical thinker. morality, and the world. For a book to be called great, it must stimulate movement toward ethical change . . .” and advocate conflict among competing (past and present) claims.

- When you hear, do you listen? TO BE Continued and Concluded (text, notes, bibliography) in our Next Issue, Fall 2007. When you look, do you see? -

2