Teaching Literature « What Is Needed Nowspeate speaks 20 powerfully. We must not let the abstrasenest and theseetical exclusivencss to which the exigencies of profes- ‘sonal competition have pressed us prevent us from {vailabie to students the Shakespeare that drew us bn, tbat as ‘drawn in andicnces and readers for centuries. Nor should we beso perversely, fale-bumbly egalitarian that we insist om talk- ing to our undergraduate students the same way we address our most learned fellow-Shakespeareans, even though we may be {alking about the same basic issues in both conversations. ‘We need, not a way of teaching that obeys the latest exclusions invented by theory. but rather a theory of teaching that does not forbid us to teach Shakespeare, the Shakespeare we fel we Know, the Shakespeare we feel others ought 10 know, whether for their ethical reform, their aesthetic pleasure, or theit intel lectual developeent—whatever itis we believe, as teachers and fellow human beings. is important. We nced to sustain the em- battled belie that citics can and should sim primarily at as- sisting authors en their comples efforts to communicate: and to do30, we need to believe in authors as well as author functions. According to Keats, the writing of Shakespearean drama te- ‘quired an ability to be “in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, ‘without any iritable reaching after fact & reason”—* perhaps. ‘we need a “negative capability” im our teaching that will permit ‘us to five with uncertain intentions, a mystcrious author, and oubtful meanings, without any iritable reaching after theo- ‘ecal purty. The “Shakespeare many people still teach may be essentially 2 valuedaden, humanistic mth. But myths are not Bes; they are among the most enduring, most pleasurable, ‘most profound ways of teaching. 24 Rest, The Lees, Hp 198. if I JUDITH. SHKLAR Why Teach Political Theory? ‘This essay is not about teaching any specific subject. It is shout teaching tcl If some imaginary dean were to ask me ‘thy Ishould be paid to teach political Uhcory. Twould naturally (fer him only the most conventional reasons for pursing my ‘oration, Fist of all I would remind him that ope of the main purposes of a liberal education 1S to integrate the young itor the Iiterary culture of our society. And no one would argue that the hissory of political theory ts marginal to our inteltoceal heritage, to our collective sel-anderstanding. of toa sense of the continuing presence of the ast. Just abot cvery unmvensty ‘course that coninbutes tothe general education of our students. Whether it deals with literature, the fine arts or the human sciences invariably has a political theory componeat- often it smust be Sai, rather crudely handled. The saject simply insn~ ats its into cvstyintetictual corner. Clearly there eal ccd to have if tmught propery, since it must be a part of an fducated person's reperiary” Among the ways of learning how to think coherently and critically about politiss. aooe is beter than the study of the gzeat authors trom Thucydides 10 the present. Seif- education wil, in ths case, fail. The autodidact always mises the obvious and the inslated analyst of concepts fs always ia dangcr of reinventing a primitive version of the 1st‘wheel He may alo become the prisoner of a single vocabulary. thich would be a disc givea that our accumulated political fotions constitute a veritable Tower of Babel. The only way 10 void banality is to cocowster, im an intense way, the itellex- ‘ually wholly other. and to discover how superi tothe present and the familiar the utterly remote can be. What could be more challeaging than Plato? On the practical sie, I would then point ‘oto the now subdued dean, that reading books s aot enough, and that there mast be a personal exchange fr deep learning fo actually take place. A teacher must be wiubly there 19 MOVE the students im the fist plsce and then prove to them that 2 sane and intelligent adult can really care deeply about such things as the history of political thought. Iti an Emersonian act of representation, in which the teacher gets the young 10 "recognize and become part ofa wide intellectual world, but also accepts that the questions and demands of individual students require respectfl answers, and even ovcasionaly a rethinking of received wisdom, especially one’s own, Such, then, would be the perfectly sound and not unconvincing talk would give in my official capacity. | would waik away pethaps richer. but ako quite ashamed of myself. For while I would not have fed, I would not have been entirely trathfal ether. would not have told the dean what it may not be his business to kaow, why 1 realy teach poliueal theory. or. indeed, why anyone teaches fy canon of great literature The only reason for teaching politcal theory is that one & utterly, and possibly irrationally convinced that its encemousty important—and one lovesit.Itismat forthe sake ofthe stdents and not evea for one’s own, apart from one’s intellectual obs ession, that one can, year after year, think and think about, snd explain and explain the contents of books writen unima” tsnably long ago. Its a complex response toa primary passion. Something fas sets off, possibly an ideology to which one ‘committed or it collapse, or historical experience, such 38 the Second World War lived in Europe or the Depression in Amer ies, or the felt need 10 find new politcal expressions for an altered and only half understood political world. In any ease there mast be some personally experienced public events 19 ‘Why Teach Political Thooey? 13 ‘ereate an enduring interest in asking the vital question. “how ‘can one think about this at all?” If that becomes an unshakable ion and 2 passionate quest, then one will teach po- ‘theory. In different, but related ways I believe this to be ‘true of all literary studies “There are easier and betters ways of making a living than (Dec trcapy te compen af young pipe tol prod ches ‘nly db the relios betwee olen and teachers ae iy ayaa! and beet. To enter wpon an seadenie carer esi cas aks ae ens we tein pe tintubled “ile ye" ts wo head for Waterloo, Unless ove sealet teaching Ol and he ‘srmal bron of cademic le ny Become Incest. To took forward toa caret of being general alpurpoe mentor a ea ee os eee se teticoteml:itlctal decay ad the condescending py of Se ee oes the difernce nage rows geste Onc ne te seme of thle individuality and begins to treat them as instances of the same category of being. Such impersonality may bother the student, ‘but it may be less damaging than the too personal manner of ating eee Os Seneca mal wep pie ay aoe eee ey the love ofthe sabe polical ery i ths cae, tt a Seen ace hee ore ‘the flow of students through the classroom, the seminar, and one's study worthwhile. For the teacher there has to be an {Snerng cera incentive forte ders, someting more Sees tm rd cecroimcn, To tach is tcettew {Eere a precios git that onc ges every new gneraton gales oe mel eal) ant Sead over mal ver ome fo Deca cach renting teal now pom, ow sal oe tae aare e mong cuales tloks forthe teat, thee won't be anything itesing in ere ec a ener es ae pomive sade, she canoe expt to get the one thin hey1st Judith N. Shae can contribute 10 our mutual encounters: questions and chal= lenges. Nor will the teacher have the occasional pleasure of seeing an immature mind become absolutely accomplished, ‘The only reason to teach politcal theory is the conviction that a complete person must be able to think intelligently about government, and that the only way to rise above banality isto learn to think one’s way through the works ofthe preat writers ‘on the subject and to learn to argue with them. To see how political ideas fit ito the republic of letters generally, into the political systems within which they took place, and finally 19 see what is dead and alive within Usis accumulated wealth of, psychological and social speculation isto be intellectually trans- formed, and 19 have something completely and immediately felevant to think about at any time of the day. IE did not believe that. L would quit teaching at once and go into business Somcone might suggest that writing offers a better way to tell, the world about political theory and especially to contribute something directly to it, This is 0¢ the trivial and commonplace notion that, given the limits of time, ene should do one’s “own work,” oF “research,” rather than teach, Teaching students is 35 much one’s own work as anything can be, and research is something that natural scientists do, Very little if anything that politcal theorist does can be described as an adltion to factual knowledge aout the world, as experimentation or as discovery. Itis therefore pretentions and silly for us to talk about a eanflict between the demands of research and teaching. If there i a choice to be made at all, its between two modes of teaching ‘And while itis true that life is short, [do not see why there ‘Should be a particularly great dificulty in dividing one's time between two kinds of teaching and any of the other things one might want to do, Time is not, T suspect, the real issue at all, I is merely a way of talking about the fact that some teachers cannot and do not write anything at all, or nothing worth read- ing. In fact, there are two ways of teaching, directly and indi- rectly, and both are psychologically necessary fora full sholarly lie because they make different demands upon the teacher. To. address an indeterminate and anonymous audience of readers is very different from talking to visible students. It is not Why Teach Poitial Theory? 183 has already said, s0 the level of clarity has to be higher and there ts no room for spontaneity. One means to say something ‘that has not been said before and present it n a way suited (0 ‘one's peers. Still one is teaching political theory, because in one ‘way oF another, one wsites to instruct one’s readers. The great- est difference in writing rather than talking is that one can ‘concentrate entirely on getting it right. In that respect i s more like teaching graduate students, who, one hopes, will be the political theorists of the future, Because they are colleagues-in- the-making they force the teacher to acts of self-clanfication and self-education at the highest level, That is what happens When one writes shout any aspect of political theary as well, whether it be placing texts in historical context, a conceptual analysis, an explication of 2 text, or an argument about a set ff ancient issues in the light of current experience. Not to do this at alls to doom oneself to intellectual stagnation and 2 sort ff aged infancy, which cannot but damage one’s performance a8 a direct teacher. And staleness, of course, sets an awful example to graduate students. The isu thus cannot be whether to teach or to write, but how to engage in two ways of teaching slmultancously or alternatively Some teachers can successfully weite up and publish their lectures. Some of my most distinguished colleagues have writen some of the best books this way. They think them through on their feet and then transform them into readable prose, For them the distinction between direct and indirect teaching hardly sists, and they often ae the most accomplished and interesting lecturers. If they do anything indifferently its the seminar and ‘utorial, simply because their strength is public presentation, in speech as well a in print-I, however, like many other scholars, must Keep the two kinds of teaching completely apart. If | do rot, my lectures become well turned litte essays and are hard to follow. Moreover, my better lectutes, which do serve the needs of undergraduates, no longer seem to me fit for publi cation after T have given them. Writing up my lectures would strike me as simply warming up an uninteresting soup. What I like doing most, and probably do best, is small-group instruc- tion. T enjoy teaching seminars for both undergraduate andafter week, soon work together in an easy way, and though there should be a tense and even competitive spirit afoot, a lot ‘can be achieved in discussing a single text in « group, Political theory lends itself particularly well to such teaching because is naturally and inherently controversial. The best texts, how- ever, do provide a core of inner unity, so the discussions do not fly all over the place. I find such instruction difficult but very rewarding when it goes well, hough painful when it does not |work out. In some mysterious way f also get ideas for articles and books out of these sessions Even devoted tcachers have long periods of dokdrums. What to do? Because political theory as a subject is always in motion, given its respoasivencss fo events, one cannot remain idle, Get. fing on with something. new is important even before routine hhas made teaching a chore. Even going to a good conference a couple of times a year should be seen as a way of recharging the batteries. Is book reviewing a total waste of time? Not if tone picks the books carefully. It is as good a way as any to keep up with the field. To eseape from tedium one might avoid teack- ing the same courses too often or repeat them only every second year. Students can always be told in advance and can plan ac- cordingly. They will be the beneficiaries of revised notes, re thinking, and an altogether livelier teacher. Teaching in a university quite unlike one's own can also be very invigorating. ‘Abscnee notoriously inspires fondness. In any case something ‘must be done. The worst thing: that can happen to a teacher is just to rot away. The importance of remaining actively engaged with political theory, by writing about it oneself and reading, what others write, is particularly great when teaching graduate students. Falking #0 them about one's own writing i the best way of showing them how an article or a book is actualy put together. Moreover, they help with their agpressive critical attitudes and with the generational differences they bring to bear on any discussion. Nothing is better for teaching the really goosk grad- uate students than making them realize that their ideas matter and that soon they will be ready to teach and write independ- cently. What neither they mor the undergraduates need is 10 ‘Why Teach Politieal Theary? is {s neither actively contributing to the literature of political the ory nor interested in new work of any kind. Whatever teaching political theory may be, it eannat merely amount to the relaying ff some body of accepted wisdom which requires nothing but teansmission from teacher to student. An elernent of inconcl sive struggling between young and old is very necessary part ‘of the process of graduate education especially, and it cannot ‘occur unless the teacher is also creative as an author, with all that implies psychologicslly and intellectually. The awiulalter- native to teaching as enjovment with others isthe repetition of the same wretched anecdotes and the same stale doctrines year alter year by a teacher who cannot offer a graduate student ‘a genuine picture of what real thinking i like. Thats the certain fate of the politcal theorist who never writes at all or even falis te write about a fair variety of topics ‘Teaching political theory. like any profession, has its built-in hazards, and there is no point in pretending that they do not ‘exist, Tecium, indifference, and! stagnation are the typical aft ietions of older teachers. They will not be fatal if the instructor really feels an unabated passion for political thinking. for she can easily protect herself against the onset of passing ill humor If, however, she his really ceased to care about the subject, then there is no chance of recovery. Indifference is not the only way to fail to teach honestly. The ‘other extreme is aso tempting and fatal in its own way. There is always a big demand for the guru-tcacher at any university Many young people seck leaders, superior parents, inspiration, and above all the feelings of whole-hearted discipleship. Most ‘of us, either for lack of talent or by following plain good sense, find it easy 10 resist thi call 10 serve as a prophet, but not all do, Political theory, being so close to ideology, particularly attracts students looking for a guru-teacher, and teachers who hhave both strong personal convictions and hetter than average thetorical powers may find the prospect of 2 devoted following irresistible. The masters" are not doing those students a favor because they end up retarding their maturation and closing their minds to the rich variety of alternative views. That they are betraying the scholarly vocation might abo be « considerationiss Susith N. Star they are basically interested im themselves, in their message, in ther followers, and in their renown, Tf there are many ways of Being a bad teacher and alo of loxing interest i teaching. there are also many gratification. Every student is new challenge and it s+ delight 10 268 the young catch onto tie dificult txts and ideas, especially i they toga as virtual nbulee race. And while a bad seminar sean is pore hella good one is surely a treat. Among the pleasures ‘of teaching graduate student i thit one does not love touch With the best ones. They san hesome one’s colleagbes and Trios; the ope tat lowes Of appeeatiocthip med ae ee com lng sim smtrellly fonpotan. It the petals renewal, of keeping poliieal thecry alive, aad chaaghag, The ‘same thing does not occur in one’s relations with undergradu- des, and thot i undeniably one ofthe moce unfortunate fact bout teaching. One never can really know what impact, any, ‘one has had on the young people who take motes in one's fec- tures, come to tutorials regularly and talk to one during office hour. They srt eowally very bright: Tht doesnot sie te Hkethood that in a few years they will neither nemeatBos mo date about what Lor anyone ele tight them. Our effec upon Their development may be profound, because we see them dure inga very intense and sigmiicant period in their ives, but sn unknowable and forgotten lite pve oftheir life's exper- ness even wile at cllege, not to mention in “the real work” (ur specific contnbution ws fccting and forgettable. Two years nt of colog: Jour sedats wil seacatict pos, bet ga you said oe ge them 10 read, even if you aopeea ea tome enduring way. The neglighle and indize bearing one's work has on students cannot but give one a sense of futility at times. The best way to cope with such feelings sf concentrate fom the learning that does po on visibly, ever # ts fatre func ‘bons must remain obscure. | place my bet on the students’ being altered forthe bette, though in unknowable ways, by my teach ing. And who would not say that knowledge, however digested, ir not hetter than ignorance? And ignorant is what the young would be and remain if we did ot teach them. Basically it depends upon us whether the cntire colicge carcer of a young: Why Teach Politica! Theory? 1 woman or man i significant and improving or not. Do we ac- tually have aright to act on any other assumptions? ‘Some of tke afflictions that threaten teachers are not entirely ‘within our control, but there is one that is wholly sel inficted land also contemptible. That is what I call the new snobbery The old snobbery was bad enough. It tended to be the special preserve of humanists, politcal theorists among them. Its chief ‘componcats were racism, antisemitism, and a fawning prefer- ‘ence forthe sons of the rich ancl famous. Deeply unintellectul {twas sometimes perfectly compatible with the more traditional forms of scholarship and fine teaching for the happy few. It id liede to prepare anyone for the actual world and it was morally repulsive, with implications that eventually became quite clear. ‘There is litle left of that, because in time it became strangling ‘and threatened the inteTiectual prospects of any university and the advance of the human as well as physical sciences. It has now been replaced by a different virus. It tells the world that clever young women and men should not become unglamorous schoolteachers, but should use the university as platform from which to impress the world of affairs, to affect the public at large, and to find wealth and fame through the certificates of expertise that a university appointment yields. They will. so 10 speak. be instructing the entire nation by their advice. Write for conspicuous publications. meet, consult alend, make money, ‘and get your name into the newspapers, they tll us. The young will certainly yearn to be seen with them. will complain oftheir all too frequent absences. and if they cver do get to hear a lecture by the celebrity-professor they will get nothing, and not even realize that they have been cheated. Teaching s openly looked dows upon and despised in a manner mot unlike the disdain that the hereditary nobility of Europe used to fee! for ‘manoal labor and trade. Except, of course, thatthe new snob is supposed to be a teacher and has simply sold himself. very successfully, it must be said, as something else and better to 2 lle public. ‘The consequences of the new snobbery for the life of the university ate fainly serious. It embitters the relations herween the old and the young. the tenured and the untenured, im 310 Joi 8. Sitar wholly destructive way. In an institution where there are many. justifiable and functional differences of prestige and rank, 2c- ‘cording to distinction. accomplishment, and age. it is particu larly unnecessary and damaging to add useless and destructive ‘ones. The untenured faculty + forced nat only to do all the ‘caching. but they most hear their seniors openly refuse to teach land make dersory remarks about the poor medhocrties and the junior faculty who do it all. And with the association of ideas being what it b, teaching, when itis identified entirely with the young and untenured. is regarded with a diffuse contempt. Its ‘source is surely the uncasy hostility that many an aging male {eels and displays for the young, whom at another level he may well fear as successors. ‘That is in itself a recipe for il feeling. To add to it, when promotion time comes around, teaching is suddenly taken into account, but because the university 3u- thoritics sill require some proof of teaching skill, aot because: itis universally valued. ‘Adding to the demoralization of the young teacher is the pathetic effort of his seniors to look like aatural scientists with out actually doing analogous. or similar work, and a general attitude of looking down at the merely local scene. This is the self-hating fantasy of many humanists and socal scientists, and. it does no one any good af all, There is no proof, moreover, that im spite of much pompous talk: about research projects, grants, and the bike these peaple actually produce better work or even publish more than those who quicly teach in classes and in writing. Like the old snobbery. the new variety expresses a very deep lows of self-esteem. And that brings us back to the beginning: to teach without loving one’s subject at all, oF caring for ita lot less than for other graifications, whether material or intangible, is neither easy nor satisfying. Moreover, those ‘who are ncither scholars nor teachers now present areal menace to any university and to education generally. That i why the response of those who really understand what teaching i all about must simply be real self-respect grounded in the knowl ‘ge that they alone constitute the real world of learning now. Reading and Writing: In the Academy and Beyond