WHEN word leaked out Thursday that President Bok had named Professor of Law Robert C. Clark dean of the Law School, fellow scholars said they were shocked. A member of the faculty search committee said that a majority of the Law School faculty had opposed Clark's candidacy. One professor called the appointment "a disaster," another said Clark was "the worst possible choice."

Their dismay at the appointment is hardly surprising; Bok could not have picked a more controversial professor to lead the Law School into the 1990s. At a time when diversity--of gender, race and politics--is such a key issue for the Law School, Bok's choice is truly puzzling.

ALTHOUGH he is a highly respected corporate law scholar, Clark is probably better known on campus for his caustic attacks on the radical Critical Legal Studies (CLS) movement. Over the last five years, Clark led the factions that have denied tenure to three CLS adherents, speaking out against them at every opportunity. While many of his right-wing colleagues kept their criticism "off the record," Clark continued his attacks in the national press.

Likewise, Clark has shown no great commitment to racial or gender diversity in the faculty. During his term as chair of the Subcommittee on Appointing Women, Clark was responsible for appointing only one woman to the faculty. When Professor of Law Derrick A. Bell, one of the School's two tenured Black professors, held a sit-in to protest the denial of tenure to Dalton, Clark said "This is a university--not some lunch counter in the South."

Perhaps most disturbing of all, Bok's choice seemed to defy the will of the faculty. Members of the faculty-elected search committee said they had expressed strong reservations about appointing Clark. Bok's response was, "You don't always agree with all the advice that you get." The president was apparently more intent on steering the Law School towards more traditional forms of scholarship than he was on listening to the advice of the faculty.

BENEATH all the controversy, however, there was some encouraging news from last week's announcement. For one, Clark is very well-liked by his students. Known for making up songs about corporate law in his lectures, Clark is described by his students as caring and deeply interested in education. For once, it seems, Bok chose an administrator who was as much a teacher as a scholar.

And in an interview last week, Clark promised to make minority faculty hiring "more systematic than in the past." He said he would reach out to all members of the faculty--even the CLS faction he has so strongly attacked.

Bok said he had "long and specific conversations" with Clark about his past hostility to radicals, and said he expected Clark to act more conciliatory as a faculty leader than he did as a professor.

CLARK will need to be that kind of moderate leader if he hopes to be successful. It is time for the faculty to allow for a diverse range of opinions and concentrate on equally pressing issues like inadequate facilities and poor student-teacher ratios. By leaving his own rhetoric behind, Clark would set a good example that even his staunchest political enemies could follow.

Unfortunately, this promised conciliation seems far away. Clark's newfound commitment to gender, racial and political diversity are dubious at best. Bok has already lost the faith of the faculty, choosing a candidate whom the majority of professors opposed and committing the School to traditional forms of scholarship. Whether Clark will follow through on his promises or like Bok fail to address the interests of his fellow scholars remains to be seen.