444
PARTISAN REVIEW
were teaching a wise resignation before the inevitable, or openly
avow that they were giving instruction for subjective usage, namely
instruction in various techniques which would assist persons, stu–
dents, in eventually integrating themselves in one or another social
hierarchy. Curiously, it seems to me that Donald Marshall and Roger
Shattuck,
I
think, pointed this out. On the one hand there is a plea
for the general enlargement of our public cultural horizon with a
plea for a self-critical approach on the part of our entire cui ture to its
historical position. On the other hand there is an interesting notion ,
that the teaching of literature might well turn into cultural creativity
of the individual by improving or encouraging writing-not in some
vulgar sense of improving techniques of communication but as
individual cultural exercises curiously disjoined from the larger
movement of culture, just in the way that instruction in the social
sciences, which sometimes improves the insight of individuals, is
disjoined from any larger sense of political or moral purpose. So it
would seem that some of these fields have, viewed in this way ,
curious and quite unexpected resemblances.
ROGER SHATIUCK:
I
would like to respond
to
what Morris Dickstein
brought out.
I
don 't think that we should set up a series of certifica–
tion processes that would involve the examination of the personal
life of the candidate.
I
was really trying to point out the curious
situation in which we do have a system called the Ph.D. system,
which we have accepted tacitly as qualifying people to talk about
very, very delicate things
to
our own children. Yet that degree has
many things in it which seem to be the opposite of what you would
expect. For instance, it would normally be an expectation of anyone
teaching literature that he should spend at least, let's say, five years
away from the academic scene. But the Ph .D. may never have spent
more than a few months away from school and spend the rest of his
life there.
I
mean this is built in-a very wrong thing is part of the
institution and vigil and prayer.
I
guess we cannot introduce that
into our certification programs in literature, but
I
am trying to point
out a kind of paradox.
I
agree that the teacher, like the author, the
writer, must by his performance generate his own authority. And
there is no agency which is finally going to be able to do this. But
from time to time
I
think we simply ought to have a very hard look at
some of the aspects of the training of our teachers, things that we
make part of that institution.
WILLIAM PHILLIPS:
I
think the talks were interesting in more than one
way. Aside from the fact that
I
was generally agreeing with and
