ress” is never explained, and the readernwill find that omission unfortunate.nrl/llen Willis cannot be accused ofnleaving dead prose on the page. Hernwords sparkle with the vibrancy of onenarguing wholeheartedly for her cause.nOnly after reading this prose does onenfully understand that the message isndeathly.nMs. Willis engages in an intellectualnembrace with vulgar Marxism. She isnaware of material forces at work innhistory and retains the faith that eventuallyna society free from bondage basednon sex or class will surface as the truendirection of progress. Because even vulgarnMarxism requires that one acknowledgenthe inevitable working out of thesenhistorical forces, it does not permit anrole for the individual intellect. In historicistnsystems, each of us is determinednby slightly different social and culturalnforces, and we can never fully understandnor communicate our “determinants”nto others. Ellen Willis superblyndemonstrates this incapacity for communication.nOne comes to understand how Ms.nWillis is supposed to think as she enumeratesnthe historical forces that havenshaped her life. Her parents are middleclassnJews living in New York and imbuednwith the liberalism that these identificationsnimply. She was one of threenchildren who attended appropriatelynNew York Jewish schools. In the processnof becoming secularized, religion camento mean less and less to the entire family,nwhich placed great emphasis uponnintellect, especially “critical intellect.”nThe children were raised during thenformative events of the 1960’s: protests,nthe folk culture, the rock culture,nvarious forms of jazz, a bit of art andnliterary faddishness to accompany thenmusical faddishness and a touch of thenliberated cultures in sex and drugs.nMs. Willis emerged from this socializationnwith all the traits that fall in thenstereotypic profile of a Village Voicencolumnist. She has been married andndivorced twice and has had two othern18nChronicles of Culturenfleeting affairs (the reader is left tonimagine for himself the sex of the partnersnon these occasions). She hasnsmoked a few things in wrappers notnintended for tobacco, popped a few pillsnthat were not prescribed by her doctornand enjoyed her share of assorted beveragesnon the chablis-and-brie circuit. Shencrusades for “relevant” causes. The essaysnfrom her early period are guidednby the folk themes of the music of BobnDylan, but she has managed to driftnwith other cult figures since that Minnesotantroubadour found religion. His-ntural conditions do not have a correspondingneffect on Ms. Willis, however.nWhatever she encounters is evaluatednin terms of the changes it might causenin her career as a writer for the NewnYork chic set. Firmly anchored in thenfloating type of the Village Voice, thenauthor returns to her native culturalncondition to resume her assault on modernnsensibilities.nOne of Ms. Willis’s predictable concernsnis for the extension of abortionnrights. The author has decided that thenfetus and the woman bearing that fetusn”Willis’s insistence on hedonism as the center of a sane life is perhaps her mostnengaging quality …”n— The New Republicn”She is also unfailingly honest.”ntoricists would acknowledge the womannas a perfect product of her culture.nThe author has a major problem,nhowever. As culturally determined asnshe is, her brother somehow turned outndifferently. His mind, apparently morenintellectual and critical than her ownnsterling cerebellum, has drifted fromnDylan to Israel. He has taken up thenstudy of the sacred Hebrew texts thatnthe Jewish people have used for centuriesnas guides for their lives. Afternan examination of his own life in lightnof the commands contained in thosenbooks, her brother has become a verynconservative Jew. Perhaps insufficientlyngrounded in the deeper technicalitiesnof Marxist analysis, the author overlooksndialectics and heads off to Israelnto see what is going on in her brother’snlife.nHer experience in Israel actuallynfrightens Ms. Willis. She encountersnnot only her newly serene brother, butna good number of his friends, includingnseveral women, who do not look uponnthe Biblical regimen as an obsolete formnof enslavement. Somehow she recognizesnthat her brother is now capablenof facing his emotional problems, whatevernthey are. The vastly different cul-nnn—New York Times Book Reviewnare somehow incompatible. Rather thanna relationship in which both beingsngrow, pregnancy is a war for survival.nAfter nine months of this struggle, apparentlynonly one of the beings will remainnalive. Pregnancy, in this view, isnan assault on the woman bearing thenchild. Accordingly, abortion becomes,nwithin her common-law jurisprudence,nalways justifiable as an act of self-defense.nNo claims on the part of the childnare entertainable until the new baby isnable to enter them on its own.nPositions of this scope are nothingnless than the lunatic rantings of a beingnwith no moral compass. Ms. Willis isnindignant that no one has given her annadequate response to her argument.nBut adequate response in any politicalnargument requires an open mind on thenpart of one who might be persuaded.nMs. Willis’s mind has been culturallynconditioned, by her own admission. Hernexperience in Israel demonstrates thatnshe is simply unwilling to reconsidernthe premises that give her direction.nrlillen Willis and Margaret Canovan,nthen, present two faces of the povertynof historical thought in modern society.nSeeking the social and cultural condi-n