Re: response to Al B, Rnd I

Sat, 14 Jan 1995 16:22:35 -0700 (MST)
ABERG@CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU

WE JUST DON'T GET IT I read Tom Hall give reasons why PEWS is in decline
and I don't believe them. The enviroinmental issues isn't just "flashy"
but real about real lives in the North and the South. We are not that
arcane: the lit-crit stuff in culture is much worse, yet they are
thriving. Everyone has shorter budgets, yet other sections are doing
well and growing. No, it is the issues, and our lack of them. Gender is
about peoples lives, and it thrives, as does medical, organizations, and
other sessions. Ancient, and art, history have a place in abstracted
scholarly discourse, yes, but so does the real world, and of that we say
little these days that is not said better by someone else.

One can put all the blame on wants on outside factors, but the central
fact is still that we have lost the vision of focusing upon the
injustice, pain, poverty, and underdevelopment of most of the world's
peoples in the thrid world, and with that have lost those who thought we
had a new vision.

To be frank, PEWS is no longer on the cutting edge, of issues in the
South or North (well, it never was there). People and interests have
their own sections--gender, environment, emotions, culture, and while we
occassionally address them, they remain more vangard, more relevant, and
hence have more members.

I understand your feeling about Wagar's utopian novel, but I remain firm
in feeling that for a research profession to use half of its alloted
sessions on fantasy politics about the 21st century in the face of
falling numbers in PEWS and real issues not addressed, is irresponsible
at the least, and terribley indulgent by the powers that be in this
sectionthat priortized that over sessions dealing with real issues.

al bergesen