In today’s Times, essential reading for those of you tracking the ravages of American cultural imperialism. Comp Lit and Society-types are more than welcome to add “worldwide Ivy League hysteria” to western culture’s rap sheet, which Akeel Bilgrami more or less did at yesterday’s Ethics and Protest panel. He argued that the ‘68 uprising was an attempt to bridge a centuries-old “cognitive gap” between the powerful and powerless, one that had emerged after the Enlightenment’s reconciliation with religion in the late 17th century (since religion and the Enlightenment were finally able to reinforce one another, which in turn reinforced an entrenched power structure. Or so his logic went.). Bilgrami was arguing for a socio-historical connection between knowledge and power–to him, knowledge had been “accruing” around power for the better part of 400 years, even to the point where the supposed intellectual freedom of the modern university could be stifled by arcane power dynamics.
For reasons I’ll explain in my 1968 reunion wrap-up, I don’t accept such a conveniently Marxist read on intellectual history. But one needn’t look any further than the aforementioned Times article to see how America’s Ivy League fetish–itself a product of some pretty outmoded ideas about knowledge and power–is recapitulated as a kind of blind faith in traditional (but waning), American notions of success. See, for example, the article’s scant explanation as to why Korean students are so Ivy League-crazy:
“Going to U.S. universities has become like a huge fad in Korean society, and the Ivy Leaguenames — Harvard, Yale, Princeton — have really struck a nerve,” said Victoria Kim, who attended Daewon and graduated from Harvard last June.
Sound justification if you’re making a Delbanco-style argument on education and inequality, one concerned with the near-metaphysical heft of the Brand Name. Terrible justification for a 15-hour school day.