MARY LEFKOWITZ
591
eral coouTlitment to making the curriculum more inclusive. Evidently she
associated the term with the particular "culture" that she (and her
producer or the producer alone) wanted to promote.
But although I think university curricula and the syllabi of individual
courses should become more inclusive of subjects and points of view that
have traditionally been excluded or ignored, I wish the proponents of
particular interest groups or "cultures" would use a term other than
"multicultural" to describe what they have in mind. For it seems clear to
me from my conversation with the student and with some of my col–
leagues, that "multicultural"
to
them really means "unicultural," and
even "anticultural," when the cultures involved are those that have tradi–
tionally been studied in university curricula.
Since uniculturalists think of themselves as multiculturalists, it is per–
haps not surprising that they suspect that the inclusive multiculturalism
that I have been talking about is merely a facade for my own brand of
uniculturalism. Thus recently, on a radio program, Molefi Kete Asante
explained to the audience that I had built a career on promoting the su–
periority of Greek and Roman civilizations. Presumably Asante thought
that I was using the same methods that he and other Afrocentric writers
have been, to demonstrate through research the superiority of African
cultures. In
Kemet, Afrocentricity and Knowledge ,
Asante rightly states that
"a proper attitude toward human discovery and human knowledge
depends on views that do not cast aside others' ways of thinking." But
at the same time he argues that Afrocentric methodology is not only
different, but also more effective than Eurocentric methods. According
to Asante, "Africalogists" depend on the "soul of method," which
works frOiTl matter outward and does not depend on prior classifications,
like much European thought. "Soul of method" enables researchers to
focus on what is natural, rhythmic, and organic. Eurocentric thought , by
contrast, imposes structures and prejudices, and thus leads to
misapprehension. There is considerable truth in Asante's general
observations, but to be fair to Europeans, he should also point out the
positive side of classification, categories and structures, which provide the
underpinning for philosophical and scientific thought, and, indirectly, of
all
scientific progress.
In discussions of political organization of societies, it is possible to
discern a similar tendency to point out what is good about Africa and
bad about Europe, but not what is good about Europe and bad about
Africa. Clinton Jean, in
Behind the Eurocentric Veils,
describes how
Mrican "values" permit people to live together in greater social harmony
than in Europe, with its class struggle and interest group politics. African
warfare, Jean argues, was ritualized, culminating in peaceful exchange of
