EDITORnThomas FlemingnMANAGING EDITORnKatherine DaltonnASSISTANT EDITORnTheodore PappasnCONTRIBUTING EDITORSnJohn W. Mdridge, Harold O.J.nBrown, Samuel Francis, GeorgenGarrett, Russell Kirk, E. ChristiannKopff, Clyde WilsonnCORRESPONDING EDITORSnBryce Christensen, Odie Faulk, JanenGreer, John Shelton Reed, JosephnSchwartz, Gary VasilashnEDITORIAL SECRETARYnLeann DobbsnEDITORIAL ASSISTANTnMatthew KaufmannPUBLISHERnAllan C. CarlsonnART DIRECTORnAnna Mycek-WodeckinPUBLICATION DIRECTORnGuy ReffettnADVERTISING REPRESENTATIVEnGeorgia L. WolfnCOMPOSITION MANAGERnAnita FedoranCIRCULATION DIRECTORnCarol BennettnA Publication ofnThe Rockford InstitutenEditorial and Advertising Offices: 934 NorthnMain Street, Rockford, IL 61103.nEditorial Phone: (815) 964-5054.nAdvertising Phone: (815) 964-5811.nSubscription Department: P.O. Box 800, MountnMorris, IL 61054. Call I-800-435-07I5, innIllinois 1-800-892-0753.nU.S.A. Newsstand Distribution by EasternnNews Distributors, Inc., 1130 Cleveland Road,nSandusky, OH 44870.nCopyright © 1989 by The Rockford Institute.nAll rights reserved.nCHRONICLES (ISSN 0887-5731) is publishednmonthly for $21 per year by The RockfordnInstitute, 934 North Main Street, Rockford, ILn6II03-7061.nSecond-class postage paid at Rockford, IL andnadditional mailing offices.nPOSTMASTER: Send address changes tonCHRONICLES, P.O. Box 800, Mount Morris,nIL 61054.nThe views expressed in Chronicles are thenauthors’ alone and do not necessarily reflect thenviews of The Rockford Institute or of itsndirectors. Unsolicited manuscripts cannot benreturned unless accompanied by a self-addressednstamped envelope.nChroniclesn1 U A C’A Z I N E OF H M E li I ( A N C U L T U It En4/CHRONICLESnVol. B, No. 8 August 1989nOn ‘A Lotnof Americans’nPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESnAlbert Einstein once noted that a thingnshould be made as simple as possible —nbut no simpler. I am afraid that E.nChristian KopfF (Cultural Revolutions,nMay 1989) has reduced my ideas belownan acceptable minimum and distortednthem in the process.nI have said that teaching is undervaluednin today’s university, that we do notnput sufficient stress on the importancenof communicating to the next generationnthe great ideas and books that arenour heritage and theirs. To observenthis—and to advocate recognition ofnexcellent teaching — is very far fromnwhat Dr. Kopff charges me with; “askingnthat our children be taught whatnpeople who have never wrestled aggressivelynwith great literature remembernfrom their graduate school days.” Excellentnteachers don’t do this. They readnand contemplate books anew when theynteach them. They grapple time andnagain with the enduring questions greatnliterature raises. Their students benefit.nOur society benefits. And we shouldnrecognize such efforts as part of thenscholariy office — even when they donnot result in publication. Excellentnteachers — those whom John Silberncalls “sound scholars who never publishnbooks or articles and instead publishnorally in the classroom” — should havenan honored place in the academy.nAnd so should those sound scholarsnwho do publish. Their work preservesnmemory of the past, engages scholarsnwith other scholars and sometimes withnlarger audiences as well. It also enrichesnteaching, as Dr. Kopff observes. For allnthese reasons, I recently recommendednan increase for 1990 in NEH fundingnfor our Research Division — and this atna time when our overall budget requestnremains about level with this year’s.nBut it would be a mistake to regardnpublication, in and of itself, as what Dr.nKopff calls an “objective standard ofnacademic expertise.” Even in refereednjoumals, one can see the “self-isolatingnvocabularies” and “symptoms of thennnfragmentation of the humanities” thatnWilliam Bennett lamented when henwas chairman of the National Endowmentnfor the Humanities. It is becausenexamples of jargon-laden and hyperspecializednresearch are so easy tonfind that publications like The NewnRepublic — cited by Dr. Kopff—canncall the entire research enterprise intonquestion.nFor the sake of serious scholarship,nwe need high standards for research —njust as for the sake of our students, wenneed high standards for teaching. Wenat the National Endowment for thenHumanities are committed to both.n— Lynne V. Cheney, ChairmannNational Endowmentnfor the HumanitiesnWashington, DCnAmong the many stirring and insightfulnthings between the covers of the Maynissue I find a couple of alarming hints ofncannibalism that call to mind Pogo’s “Inhave met the enemy and it is us.”nThus we have the distinguished journalistnSam Francis blasting away atnPresident Bush’s conduct of the presidencyn(already) because he appointednWilliam J. Bennett the “drug czar.”nAnd E. Christian Kopff mounts a sharpnif rather vague and unsupported attacknon Lynne V. Cheney at NEH, of allnpeople, for being against research andnthereby playing Trojan Horse for “minimalnstandards” in higher education.nNeither of these attacks is warrantednby the facts; indeed, far from it. BillnBennett, philosopher and lawyer byneducation, was never a public schoolteachernyet turned out to be the bestnsecretary of education in the history ofnthe Republic — according even to ThenWashington Post. Simply because henhas never been a dope addict (unlessncigarette smoking counts) or a narcoticsnofficer doesn’t mean he won’t be asneffective in the vexed sphere of dopentrafficking as he was in prodding thencountry’s education establishment intonsemiconsciousness. (Let’s not expectnmiracles!) George Bush knows talentn