from the exciting metropolis; it also stifles intellectual creativity, especially among those for whom the dominant paradigms are problematic. Yet the incredible expansion of the Academy in the past few decadesâincluding the enormous federal dollars that support both private and public universities and collegesâhas made the Academy a world in itself and a caretaker of nearly all intellectual talent in American society. Therefore, even the critiques of dominant paradigms in the Academy are academic ones; that is, they reposition viewpoints and figures within the context of professional politics inside the Academy rather than create linkages between struggles inside and outside of the Academy. In this way, the Academy feeds on critiques of its own paradigms. These critiques simultaneously legitimate the Academy (enhancing its self-image as a promoter of objective inquiry and relentless criticism) and empty out the more political and worldly substance of radical critiques. This is especially so for critiques that focus on the way in which paradigms generated in the Academy help authorize the Academy. In this way, radical critiques, including those by black scholars, are usually disarmed.
Second, many black scholars deliberately distance themselves so far from the mainstream Academy that they have little to sustain them as scholars. American intellectual life has few places or pockets to support serious scholarly work outside of the Academy and foundationsâespecially for those in the social sciences and humanities. The major intellectual alternatives to the Academy are journalism, self-support communities (Bohemia and feminist groups), or self-supporting writers (such as Gore Vidal, Norman Mailer, or John Updike). Unfortunately, some frustrated and disgusted black intellectuals revert to isolated groups and insulated conversations that reproduce the very mediocrity that led them to reject the Academy. In this way, mediocrity of various forms and in different contexts suffocates much of black intellectual life. So, despite the larger numbers of black scholars relative to the past (though still a small percentage in relation to white scholars), black intellectual life is a rather depressing scene. With few periodicals available for cross-disciplinary exchange, few organs that show interest in this situation, and few magazines that focus on analyses of black culture and its relation to American society, infrastructures for black intellectual activity are feeble.
Like black politicians, black scholars fall into three basic typesârace-distancing elitists, race-embracing rebels, and race-transcending prophets. The first type are dominant at the more exclusive universities and colleges. They often view themselves as the âtalented tenthâ who have a near monopoly on the sophisticated and cultured gaze of what is wrong with black America. They revel in severe denigration of much black behavior yet posit little potential or possibility in Afro-America. At times, their criticism is incisiveâyet it often denigrates into a revealing self-hatred. They tend to distance themselves from black America by ironically calling attention to their own cantankerous marginality. They pontificate about standards of excellence, complexity of analysis, and subtlety of inquiryâyet usually spin out mediocre manuscripts, flat establishmentarian analyses, and uncreative inquiry. Even so, they prosperâthough often at the cost of minimal intellectual respect by their white colleagues in the Academy. The mean-spirited writings of a fellow progressive like Adolph Reed, Jr., are an example.
The second type of black intellectual, the race-embracing rebels, often view themselves in the tradition of W. E. B. Du Bois. Yet they are usually wrong. In fact, they fall much more into the tradition of those old stereotypical black college professors who thrived on being âbig fish in a little pond.â That is, race-embracing
Second, many black scholars deliberately distance themselves so far from the mainstream Academy that they have little to sustain them as scholars. American intellectual life has few places or pockets to support serious scholarly work outside of the Academy and foundationsâespecially for those in the social sciences and humanities. The major intellectual alternatives to the Academy are journalism, self-support communities (Bohemia and feminist groups), or self-supporting writers (such as Gore Vidal, Norman Mailer, or John Updike). Unfortunately, some frustrated and disgusted black intellectuals revert to isolated groups and insulated conversations that reproduce the very mediocrity that led them to reject the Academy. In this way, mediocrity of various forms and in different contexts suffocates much of black intellectual life. So, despite the larger numbers of black scholars relative to the past (though still a small percentage in relation to white scholars), black intellectual life is a rather depressing scene. With few periodicals available for cross-disciplinary exchange, few organs that show interest in this situation, and few magazines that focus on analyses of black culture and its relation to American society, infrastructures for black intellectual activity are feeble.
Like black politicians, black scholars fall into three basic typesârace-distancing elitists, race-embracing rebels, and race-transcending prophets. The first type are dominant at the more exclusive universities and colleges. They often view themselves as the âtalented tenthâ who have a near monopoly on the sophisticated and cultured gaze of what is wrong with black America. They revel in severe denigration of much black behavior yet posit little potential or possibility in Afro-America. At times, their criticism is incisiveâyet it often denigrates into a revealing self-hatred. They tend to distance themselves from black America by ironically calling attention to their own cantankerous marginality. They pontificate about standards of excellence, complexity of analysis, and subtlety of inquiryâyet usually spin out mediocre manuscripts, flat establishmentarian analyses, and uncreative inquiry. Even so, they prosperâthough often at the cost of minimal intellectual respect by their white colleagues in the Academy. The mean-spirited writings of a fellow progressive like Adolph Reed, Jr., are an example.
The second type of black intellectual, the race-embracing rebels, often view themselves in the tradition of W. E. B. Du Bois. Yet they are usually wrong. In fact, they fall much more into the tradition of those old stereotypical black college professors who thrived on being âbig fish in a little pond.â That is, race-embracing
Similar Books
