I reason, earth is short

By Emily Dickinson

I REASON, earth is short,
And anguish absolute.
And many hurt;
But what of that?

I reason, we could die:
The best vitality
Cannot excel decay;
But what of that?

I reason that in heaven
Somehow, it will be even,
Some new equation given;
But what of that?

Add your comment here

Filed under: Miscellaneous , Emily Dickinson, Liberal Arts

Utility in the liberal arts: A cue from Dickens

 

by Anu Saha

Custodian of the arts: The Bodleian Library at Oxford has one of the world's largest collections of works in the liberal arts

Listen up! The verdict is in: in these hard times, fiction is irrelevant and poetry is frivolous. The Times portrayed a bleak trajectory last month: enrollment in the humanities is dwindling, funding for programs in languages, literature, the arts, history, cultural studies, philosophy and religion has slowed to a drip. The facts are all that matter, plain and simple, with no room to wallow or wonder. In this information age, the humanities increasingly appear to be a decadent luxury; the Dead Poets’ Society is not seen as likely to save the economy. Let’s face it, the worlds of Dickens, Kant, Auden and Foster did not feature in Friedman’s book about the flat world. We lovers of the written word, the sonnet, and oil on canvas, suddenly find ourselves having to justify the existence of these seemingly superfluous pursuits.

Is there a need to change the current perception of the liberal arts as an esoteric education for the elites to one with direct links to practical and economic considerations? Or, is the primary purpose of the humanities to go beyond practical considerations and develop critical reading, writing and thinking skills which indirectly influence any vocation? Where do the humanities fit in this age of ubiquitous information? These are old questions. While those in the humanities ponder the meaning of life, their more pragmatic counterparts question the value of this pondering, especially in hard times and in an age where greater emphasis is being placed by policy makers and administrators on the need for scientists and technologists.

Dickens resonates in this discussion. Particularly, the opening lines of his novel Hard Times:

Now, what I want is facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children. Stick to the facts, sir!

How dreary. The prototype of utilitarian education at its finest. Published over 150 years ago, the novel was set in the context of the toils of industrialization, when technological innovation sent GDP growth into overdrive. This, combined with the mind-numbing materialism of the period, resulted in pressure to create an education system that was (with the exception of elite schools) tailored to produce quantitative, ‘factory ready’ skills, with little emphasis on the development of the imagination.

Sound familiar?

The narrator of the novel’s opening lines is Thomas Gradgrind, the Dickens archetype of the all too pragmatically minded educator of the industrial revolution era. In the novel, Gradgrind is forced later in his life to face the consequences of his inane philosophy when confronted with his daughter’s terrible unhappiness in the factual world she grew up in that he so vehemently defends. This is not to say that an education without a focus on critical thinking skills leads to mass depression, but that the novel provides a brilliant depiction of the consequences of binary thinking (perceiving that everything is either on or off, true or false, black or white). The characters in the book find it difficult to know their own minds and discover alternate possibilities for their personal and social problems. In the conflict rich context of today, this theme is, to put it mildly, particularly relevant.

Will a black-and-white approach to thinking solve problems with population, water, alternative and green energy, all in the context of globalization with newly emerging centers of power? It’s doubtful. In an interdependent world, it seems to me that the ability to compromise is more important than purely staunch conviction, the ability to find alternative means a surer sign of progress than the ability to find the right answer. Perhaps it is because of this interdependent theme, this facet of our existence, that we may have a greater case today for the continuance of the liberal arts tradition than that of Dickens and his cohort over 160 years ago. In today’s world, more so than during the industrial revolution, there may not always be a right or wrong answer.

The challenge now lies in making this case persuasively. While the liberal arts are relevant, not enough has been done to emphasize their pertinence and practical applicability in today’s world. In this, the argument for rethinking the subjects with due consideration to current topics and realities warrants merit. This should be more than just a PR exercise with policy makers to garner increased funding. What is needed is a shift in the way these subjects are taught and studied. This approach has already been used in some fields with positive results (using the U.S. as an example since it is my best point of reference for post-secondary education at this point). Links between psychology and business have had profound impact on the study of organizational behavior in business schools. Political science and economics have fared similarly, with some business schools now housing graduate programs in political economy (contrary to the traditional model where teaching and scholarship was managed by the arts and science faculties). Elements of philosophy can be integrated in business ethics classes and the same principles can be explored in the languages and literature.

If science and technology are to be the key determinants of economic vitality, it must be acknowledged that both interact with and are nurtured by society, particularly, a society that fosters individual curiosity and allows experimentation and deviation from the often hackneyed norm. The focus in this discussion should be on how the humanities can inform the sciences – the poet who contemplates the road less taken may someday inform and inspire the scientist who must venture on such a path in the journey toward innovation.

I think both poet and pragmatist would agree: this would make all the difference.

Add your comment here.

 

 

Filed under: Alternate Progress , Anu, Culture, Liberal Arts

I’m Nobody

By Emily Dickinson

I’m nobody! Who are you?
Are you nobody, too?
Then there’s a pair of us — don’t tell!
They’d advertise — you know!

How dreary to be somebody!
How public like a frog
To tell one’s name the livelong day
To an admiring bog!

Add your comment here.

Filed under: Miscellaneous , Emily Dickinson, Liberal Arts