"The
Age of American Unreason," by Susan Jacoby;
Pantheon ($26)
___
Is the
United States an anti-intellectual country?
Many
think so. The notion probably unites people who worry
about such things in friendly places like Italy,
Britain and Germany, in nations that routinely oppose
American interests, such as China and Russia, and in
outright enemy territory, such as Iran.
Add the
vote of American intellectuals such as Susan Jacoby in
"The Age of American Unreason," and arguably
that of the great historian Richard Hofstadter in his
far subtler classic, "Anti-Intellectualism in
American Life" (1963), and you might wonder how
anyone, anywhere, could disagree.
But one
could. Where might the hunt for counterevidence begin?
Perhaps
among all those international elites who send their
children to U.S. universities because they view our
academic institutions as the best in the world.
Or with
those foreign publishers who compete each year to grab
rights to American books, knowing their own readers
prefer work produced here to anything besides that of
native writers. A third stop might be to members of
Nobel Prize committees, who award more big checks to
Americans than to any other nationality.
The
issue, in short, is complicated. And the greatest flaw
of "The Age of American Unreason," a
spirited, provocative polemic by a veteran freelance
journalist and author who writes books on weighty
subjects usually handled by professors (e.g., justice,
the history of secularism), is that it feeds the
notion of American anti-intellectualism as a
no-brainer truth.
"During
the past four decades," Jacoby asserts in her
introduction, "America's endemic
anti-intellectual tendencies have been grievously
exacerbated by a new species of semiconscious
anti-rationalism, feeding on and fed by an ignorant
popular culture of video images and unremitting noise
that leaves no room for contemplation or logic.
"This
new form of anti-rationalism, at odds not only with
the nation's heritage of eighteenth-century
Enlightenment reason but with modern scientific
knowledge, has propelled a surge of
anti-intellectualism capable of inflicting vastly
greater damage than its historical predecessors
inflicted on American culture and politics."
Enter
Jacoby as Paul Revere. She regards herself as a
"cultural conservationist, committed, in the
strict dictionary sense, to the preservation of
culture."
Jacoby's
examples of "junk thought" or "junk
culture" encompass an enormous range: religious
fundamentalism (her chief bete noire),
intelligent-design theory, video and digital culture,
iPod cocooning, celebrity infotainment, local control
of education, book packaging, innumeracy, youth
culture, expert-bashing, the Baby Einstein videos,
Social Darwinism, the anti-vaccination movement.
Yet if
Jacoby were a more nuanced thinker, she'd be less
abusive and more explanatory. Many secular thinkers,
after all, grasp that religious thought persists not
because believers are stupid or can't reason, but
because concepts like God, faith and design possess
logical peculiarities that make it impossible to
disprove religious beliefs without prior agreement on
how one defines terms.
Jacoby,
however, instead of viewing the rich debate between
American secularists and believers as proof of our
intellectual vibrancy, sees a dumbed-down culture in
which rationalists fail to silence believers with
muzzles authorized by the Enlightenment.
That
perspective unfortunately indicates Jacoby's general
bent. Her specific likes and dislikes emerge not from
the solid reasoning she advocates, but from a mishmash
of name-calling, confusion between intellectual
activity and America's "genteel tradition,"
and unconvincing links between modern communication
technologies and "unreason."
Her
style of argument often amounts to hitting the clip
file or Google, piling up thrice-told tales of
putatively vulgarized culture, then sarcastically
inviting the reader's repelled reaction without
examining whether the examples she lays out prove her
point. Anti-rationalism, she argues, is not
understanding the difference between factual evidence
and opinion, but Jacoby's own judgment about which
evidence counts for which assertions is often
unconvincing.
For
example, she angrily contrasts the use by today's
politicians of the word "folks" with the
"dignified, if not necessarily erudite,
speech" of older statesmen such as FDR. "To
keep telling Americans that they are folks,"
Jacoby writes, "is to expect nothing special - a
ratification and exaltation of the quotidian that is
one of the distinguishing marks of
anti-intellectualism in any era."
But is
"folks" really debased language? Leaving
aside Jacoby's own violations of purist usage, she
appears oblivious to how her linguistic snobbery
clashes with the pragmatism she reveres in bygone
thinkers such as John Dewey and William James. If
Jacoby delved deeper into their work, she'd find that
they considered focus on "the quotidian" a
fine description of a philosopher's first duty before
moving on to reform whatever's wrong with the
quotidian.
Jacoby's
exaggerated claim that modern American culture
"leaves no room for contemplation or logic"
reflects her rhetorical instinct to leap beyond
careful reasoning while not catching defects in her
own approach. Her book's overall argument underwhelms
because she stacks the deck. She takes the forums of
cultural life she disdains - dopey TV reality shows,
formulaic drive-time radio, fragmented Internet
discourse, and newspapers that pander to
lowest-common-denominator tastes - as the markers of
American intellectual life. She simply won't accept
that, for American intellectuals, life is elsewhere.
In a
nation that boasts more educated people, college
graduates, books sold and general literacy than ever
before, intellectually oriented people patronize
institutions that pay attention to sophisticated print
culture - universities, colleges, Web sites,
publications, radio shows - and dump those that aim at
bottom-level taste. It's telling that Jacoby piles on
"The Da Vinci Code" and "The O'Reilly
Factor" while ignoring NPR and BOOK-TV. The
latter play the same role in the "edifice of
middlebrow culture" as many of the media for
which she's nostalgic (e.g., Saturday Review), but
because she insists that edifice has
"collapsed," they don't exist in her
inventory.
"It
is possible that nothing will help," Jacoby
writes ruefully in her last chapter. "The
nation's memory and attention span may already have
sustained so much damage that they cannot be revived.
..."
On the
contrary. Jacoby needs to get out of her apartment,
stop seething about "junk," and parlay her
books into a professorship. That might introduce her
to students - a species with whom she seems
unacquainted - who reject her senior-citizen notion
that "reading for pleasure ... is in certain
respects antithetical to the whole experience of
reading on computers and portable digital
devices."
American
intellectuals don't waste their time reading about
junk, and neither should Jacoby. Ensconced at a
first-class university or college, she's likely to
find that her "Age of American Unreason"
never happened.