On The Uses ofnDiversity:nRecovering thenRecent Past’nAlthough one gets a good reaction bynreading a critique on modernism hkenthe one by Thomas Fleming {Chronicles,nOctober 1986), the feeling quicklynturns to disillusionment upon realizingnthat the modernists are stillnentrenched in our institutions.nPerhaps modernists are impregnable.nIt remains to be seen whethernconservatives can be instrumental innrouting them and have enough energynto renew the world as it was once basednon Christian values.nIn fine arts the modernists bribednsome artists to become smeary barriersnbetween reality and the art viewer.nMaterially well-rewarded, those artistsnquickly and eagerly found out thatnconcealing reality is much easier thannrevealing it with force and beauty.nTheir abstract canvases, framed nonsense,nspeak elegantly to the forces ofnchaos.nDismantling the old world, ofncourse, called for the fine arts to parallelnother modernist works in order tonguarantee our continued advancementninto the disordered life.nIf that sounds like the totalitariannway of achieving chaos, that is what itnis. Perhaps the top echelon of thenmovement biologically depend uponnthe chaotic environment in order tonhave their sense of well-being. If that isnthe case, it would indicate that modernism,nGod forbid, is institutionalizednparanoia.n—Frank BroussardnOpelousas, LouisiananPOLEMICS & EXCHANGESnOn ^Rock ‘n’ RollnNever Forgets’n”Rock ‘n’ Roll Never Forgets: Healingnthe Wounds of the 60’s” by ThomasnFleming {Chronicles, May 1986) is anpiece of solid insight. The 80’s doesnnot represent a return to the 50’s nornthe rediscovery of small-town America.nNeither does the 80’s completelyncleanse America of the past sins of then60’s. In this new age of conservatism,nMr. Fleming has conveniently remindednus that we cannot so easilynforget the last several decades and expectnthe 80’s to be swell.nAmerica must continue to reflect,nKv?>«^nthough not dwell, on the Americannexperience. Losing ourselves in thenexcesses of consumption and pleasurenwill only complicate, if not hinder,nour quest to come to grips with “thenreal America.” The small-town Americanthat John Mellencamp sings aboutnis not a relic of the past, but it has beennpassed up by rootless Americans whonare forever striving to be modern andnchic. But all is not lost; we just need anfew more Mellencamps to remindnAmerica that its greatness lies in smallntowns.n—C.G. MarionWashington, DCnOn TadnFatherhood’nnn”You’re cute when you’re mad” is, ofncourse, a cliche, but even a cliche hasnsome authority by virtue of the factnthat it has become one.nIn her assessment of the “fad dads”n{Chronicles, October 1986), Mrs. Barlowncuts better than the Barlow I havencarried since Mark Twain explained itsnvirtues, most of which are genuine. Ifnshe needed to elaborate, and there isnno reason to think that she got itnanything but just right, it would be innthe area of historicity.nArrested development has beennaround for a long time. . . . BobnGreene and Dan Greenburg simplynexplain it better in that they are accomplishednwriters. Children do, fornthe most part, grow up, assisted, unassisted,nand sometimes in spite of both.nThe fact that some don’t quite make itnis perhaps a bit more prevalent today,nbut only because there are more of us.nThere are, in fact, more nincompoopsnwriting today, though there hasnnever been any reason to believe thatnthe ability to write has anything to donwith being a nincompoop or not (look,nfor instance, at Roe v. Wade).nI want to thank you for that particularnarticle, the like of which I haven’tnseen since Mark Twain took off onnJames Fenimore Cooper.nAlso, as long as I’m in the mailnanyway, John Shelton Reed is alwaysnlike a visit from a distant and dearnfriend.n—Harry E. JohnsonnBatavia, IllinoisnJANUARY 1987 / 45n