Race, diversity and affirmative action are weighty words that carry on their shoulders years of strife and struggle. Increasingly, however, they have become catch words used to grab the attention of readers, and they may have begun to lose their power. One can hardly turn the pages of a newspaper without seeing several headlines concerning race. President Neil L. Rudenstine's annual report was about diversity at Harvard, Kenan Professor of Government Harvey C. Mansfield Jr. '53 is in the news about his views on blacks at Harvard, "Diversity and Distinction" is a monthly campus publication, and since the O.J. Simpson murder trial, race and justice (or the lack of it) have become inextricably linked words. In many ways, of course, the omnipresence of racial discussion in American media is testimony to the importance of the growing social chasm separating whites and blacks; it is proof of the problem of black/white relations (demonstrated as clearly at Harvard as anywhere else). But two things seem to be happening concerning these popular words: a cashing in on their market appeal and a desensitization to the issue at hand.

Harvard's DuBois Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. and Professor of Afro-American Studies and Philosphy of Religion Cornel West '73, two of the most distinguished black intellectuals in the United States, have recently published a book called The Future of the Race. When two black intellectuals of the caliber and reputation of these two men publish a book and join the race debate, we listen. We expect one of two things: either a scholarly analysis of the debate or initiatives that propose policy changes. Does this book accomplish either?

The Future of the Race is composed of two essays, one by Gates, the other by West, a joint preface by both scholars and reprints of two essays by W.E.B. DuBois (the appendix also includes a look at "The Talented Tenth" by Gates). In the preface, they speak of the crisis of black leadership and tell us that they, "the remnants of the Talented Tenth," must "assume a renewed leadership role for, and within, the black community." They tell us that what is at stake is "nothing less than the survival of our country, and the African-American people." Gates' essay is a compelling account of his days at Yale and West's is a thoughtful criticism of DuBois' essays as well as a look into contemporary America, but neither essay comes close to fulfilling the large goals created by a title as bold as The Future of the Race. Gerald Early, director of African-American studies at Washington University in St. Louis, reviewed the book for The New York Times and while he found professor Gates' essay "charming and coherent", he criticized it for being at times "all too sweeping and superficial." Early also criticized Cornel West's essay for being overly "sermonic and moralistic", and for having "too much free association and not enough in-depth analysis."

Gates' and West's essays in The Future of the Race may not be as crisp and insightful as the rest of their respective bodies of work, but nobody is perfect and their credentials speak for themselves. Harvard University has been truly fortunate to have West and Gates on the faculty, and I feel thankful for having had the opportunity to have taken West's introduction to Afro-American studies last fall and for being able to see him speak as often as I do. The complaint that may be legitimately voiced is that a good portion of this $21 book is simply reprinted essays. And with a particularly presumptuous title that promises a certain product and plays on the sensibilities of people interested in racial discourse, the question is, how substantially does this book contribute to the arena of race discussion?

Is it fair to indict West and Gates for their new book on the basis that we are being misled? Perhaps. The most (startling?) interesting sentence of Early's review is one that comes in the last paragraph: "...Mr. Gates is far more honest than Mr. West is about the rank opportunism concealed in his (and all) bourgeois ambition." Regardless of who is more honest about it, the idea that "rank opportunism" features in the efforts of either West or Gates is a serious claim that could make us question why they are as prolific as they are.

But do we believe that "rank opportunism" is why Cornel West and Henry Louis Gates are where they are--in the top tier of intellegensia, black or white?

No...and yes. In an era when, according to Cowles Professor of Sociology Orlando Patterson, "the bottom third of the African-American population--some 10 million persons--live in dire poverty," and "the bottom 10 per cent or so--the so-called underclass--exist in an advanced stage of social, economic, and moral disintegration," seizing opportunity, making use of programs like affirmative action for example (as both men admit was part of the reason they made it to the Ivy League as students), is an integral part of success. A Yankelovich Partners, Inc.--New Yorker survey (the results of which were published in the special issue of The New Yorker called "Black in America") conducted among approximately 1200 African-American adults found that "forty-eight per cent of African-Americans believe that the failure of blacks to take full advantage of the opportunities available to them constitutes a greater problem than discrimination by whites."

In light of this statistic, perhaps we should condone taking advantage of opportunity instead of condemning it as "rank opportunism". To make progress in this country where a third of the black male population between the ages of 20 and 29 are or have been involved with the criminal justice system, opportunism might be an unfair word for legitimate struggle.

However, a book like The Future of the Race may be an example of a kind of cashing in that has unfortunate repercussions. While both essays would well belong in a compilation of original essays, marketing them as a book with a title that is both deceptive and weighty for a book that is half reprinted essays, is an example of using words like race to sell books. The unfortunate consequence of this could be a discrediting of their reputations and a numbing to more important racial discourses (that both men have themselves written). For example, affirmative action has been so exploited that it has become the object of many jokes. In the "Black in America" issue, there is a cartoon of black politician standing at a podium; the caption reads, "And, if elected, I promise to put more black people in cartoons." Another features three aliens in a spaceship, one reading a memo, saying "It's from headquarters--we're not abducting enough blacks." These cartoons (and there are many more of them) demonstrate where the future of racial discourse may lie--comedy--if words like diversity and affirmative action continue to be used as eye catchers and marketing tools.

Gates and West are by no means guilty of perpetuating desensitization to race issues in the broad sense; on the contrary, they are responsible for much of the popular interest and concern about the current race crisis in America. But they are at the forefront of their field and are able to attract large audiences and book buyers. If they take it upon themselves to write The Future of the Race, it is their responsibility to seriously enhance the discourse surrounding the issue of race in America, which I fear this book has not.

The Catch-22 is that in order to have meaningful discourse about race in America among not just intellectuals, the issues must reach a large audience. But, ironically, it is the saturation of the market and the media with race catch words that is undermining the real struggle people like Gates and West are involved in.

Race, diversity and affirmative action are serious words that do hold at stake the future of African-Americans; but cashing in on them may serve only to discredit them and leave Gates and West open to the charge that they have abandoned their role as scholars.