History News Network
This so-called review of David Horowitz's The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America is a shining example of why History News Network is an embarassment to the profession.
Look, I haven't read the book, and you can color me agnostic on the larger question which I gather it raises: namely, whether higher education in the U.S. is dominated by some America-hating, left-wing clique more interested in political indoctrination of students than in honest instruction and scholarly inquiry. I suspect I'd paint the picture quite differently, but I haven't done anything like a careful study. Got more important things to do.
But come on, have you ever seen a more substance-less review of a book? There's no judgment whatsoever. We're simply given a capsule version of Horowitz's argument, liberally sprinkled with long quotations.
At the very end, this is the closest we get to evaluation of the book's worth:
Yes, but does he deserve to be taken seriously, on the merits of his case? That's the question that needs answering. On this, though, the HNN reviewer punts. Moreover, in a review of a book which apparently purports to expose the real, hidden motives of dozens of academics, and attacks their credentials, the writer appears utterly uninterested in Horowitz's own motives or credentials.
Oh, and by the way, on the latter score, unless all of the on-line bios of Horowitz I found chose to omit it, he hasn't earned the title of "Dr." Sounds to me like he wouldn't want it.
UPDATE: HNN confirms my suspicion, and says it will remove the "Dr." references.
Look, I haven't read the book, and you can color me agnostic on the larger question which I gather it raises: namely, whether higher education in the U.S. is dominated by some America-hating, left-wing clique more interested in political indoctrination of students than in honest instruction and scholarly inquiry. I suspect I'd paint the picture quite differently, but I haven't done anything like a careful study. Got more important things to do.
But come on, have you ever seen a more substance-less review of a book? There's no judgment whatsoever. We're simply given a capsule version of Horowitz's argument, liberally sprinkled with long quotations.
At the very end, this is the closest we get to evaluation of the book's worth:
It seems increasingly unlikely, however, that the critiques leveled by Dr. Horowitz will simply go away. The book is endorsed by Rep. Jerry Lewis (chairman of the House Appropriations Committee), Stephen and Abigail Thernstrom (Professors at Harvard University), Laura Ingraham (host of the Laura Ingraham Show), and a slew of state senators and representatives. With such politically and intellectually powerful backers, and a public increasingly aware of issues relating to academic freedom (a number of court cases and legislative acts have recently captured media attention), it appears possible that academia may soon be forced to take David Horowitz as seriously as he would like.
Yes, but does he deserve to be taken seriously, on the merits of his case? That's the question that needs answering. On this, though, the HNN reviewer punts. Moreover, in a review of a book which apparently purports to expose the real, hidden motives of dozens of academics, and attacks their credentials, the writer appears utterly uninterested in Horowitz's own motives or credentials.
Oh, and by the way, on the latter score, unless all of the on-line bios of Horowitz I found chose to omit it, he hasn't earned the title of "Dr." Sounds to me like he wouldn't want it.
UPDATE: HNN confirms my suspicion, and says it will remove the "Dr." references.
posted by RS | 11:21 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home