Different Experiences Necessarily Inform Debate

To the editors:

As a student interested in intellectual growth and academic dialogue, I am particularly disheartened by Adam Kovacevich's "As an X, I feel Y" (Opinion, March 15). Kovacevich argues that the introduction of identity, particularly gender and ethnicity, into academic discourse "can be lethal to informed and penetrating scholarly inquiry." This criticism on the part of a white male, who can easily ignore his gender and ethnicity in all aspects of his daily life, to be a patronizing example of what Jean-Paul Sartre describes as "condescending liberalism."

Kovacevich's opinion is frighteningly misguided in its approach to scholarship. As academics we are engaged in a quest for understanding the world, reality and truth. To be sure, Kovacevich is not so nave as to think that his reality, his daily experiences, are the same as those of a black man or a Latina. But it is frighteningly nave for a government concentrator to assume that daily experiences have nothing to do with important academic investigations.

While I agree with the underlying idea that statements in the classroom must be contested and that timely liberalism is a respectable project, Kovacevich's "condescending liberal" attitude only ignores and at worst reinforces racism in society.

Until historically constructed and socio-economically damaging distinctions can be fully recognized and remedied, a blind faith in the noble "modern liberal tradition" will continue to do as much damage to minority rights and to the search for academic truth as it will contribute to the building of a better society.

David Edeli '99

March 16, 1999

•

Challenge Stated Prejudices

To the editors:

It is true that opinions like the ones Kovacevich mentions ("As a member of X ethnic group, I think..."), when accepted dogmatically by professors and fellow students, halt conversation to the point of complete silence. But there is no reason why it should be this way: if they are nothing more than prejudices, they should collapse, or at least be uncovered, when rigorously tackled. To criticize professors of not tackling them is one thing; to criticize students for voicing such opinions is unacceptable censorship.

Despite what Kovacevich (or John Stuart Mill, for that matter) may believe, cultural background unavoidably skews the development of our mind. But ideally, there should be no trade-off between cultural background and independent thinking. The ideas expressed in the editorial, properly distorted, have been used to silence outside criticism and impose one culture's norms on others under the guise of universal logic. Knowing that this statement will annoy Kovacevich, I must say that, as an international student, I have often felt this pressure.

Conclusively, it is good to challenge "identity" aphorisms, but to reject them as inherently narrow-minded is monolithic in itself.

Evan G. Liaras '00

March 16, 1999

'Shakespeare' Screenplay Cut Corners for Convenience

To the editors:

Jordana R. Lewis makes a couple of mistakes in her article "Shakespeare in Love with a Man" (Opinion, March 16).

First, she assumes that when Levin Professor Literature Stephen J. Greenblatt wrote in The New York Times that the movie could have "depicted Shakespeare writing his sonnet to a fair young man," Greenblatt meant that the movie could have, and should have, presented Shakespeare as homosexual. In fact, Lewis presents no evidence at all that Greenblatt thinks Shakespeare was homosexual.

Furthermore, Lewis does not even acknowledge the traditional view of Shakespeare's sonnets: namely, that the first half of them were written to a "fair young man" for whom Shakespeare had very strong, but non-sexual, feelings. If she thinks Shakespeare's descriptions of his male friend sound a little too intimate to be non-sexual, she should remember that these were not Shakespeare's personal letters, but were openly read and accepted by many of his contemporaries in straight-laced, sexually repressed Elizabethan England.

Bottom line: maybe Shakespeare was homosexual, maybe he wasn't--but there is no conclusive proof for his sexual orientation in his sonnets. Certainly, the writers of the movie are cutting corners artistically when they have Will write Sonnet 18 to his girlfriend, but they are doing it for the sake of convenience, not homophobia.

Josh N. Lambert '01

March 16, 1999