Chaneysville Incident, a professor ofnhistory, carefully details his thoroughninvestigation. The novel is the historynbook that culminates his research. It isna laudatory scheme, and the prose stylenis workmanlike.nHowever, while reading the novel, Infelt like a person who accidentally entersna room wherein people are vilifyingnhim. John Washington is black—I’mnnot—and John Washington is a racist.nNaturally, since The ChaneysvillenIncident is historically oriented, thenwhole disgusting, depressing story ofnslavery is recounted. And white peoplenare excoriated for continuing to holdnblacks down. Bradley presents an interpretationnof black history based on economics;nhe buttresses his argumentsnwith everything from the credits andndebits of the slave trade to the fact thatnsanitary facilities on buses aren’t asnnice as those on jet planes (the pointnhere, of course, is that only blacks ridenbuses and that they never fly, thereforenthe bathrooms on buses are deliberatelynlousy so that the blacks are humiliated).nRobin W. Winks writes, “The historiannis not particularly interested in retribution.n. . . There are a few who enter anroom with all guns blazing, and somenfew who think they are judge andnjury. . . .” Bradley’s fictional historiannis among the few.nWhich brings me back to The MC5nand the White Panthers. Their ancestorsndidn’t come from Africa, and there isnnothing they can do about that. But whatnthey could and did do was feel guilty.nThus the comment on the record albumnand the Party name change. The BlacknPanthers, as far as I know, have nevernfelt compelled to effect a title change.nBut it isn’t just those who spout hokumnand dress up in silly costumes who feelnthis ridiculous guilt, this feeling of responsibilitynfor something (i.e. slavery)nin which they had absolutely no part.nAnd let’s not hear any more about thenoppression of minorities in this country.nMuch of what is said on that score (likenBradley’s buses and planes) is just son38inChronicles of Culturenmuch nonsense, calculated to do nothingnbut cause trouble.nHow many have the squeamish feelingnof guilt.” Obviously enough for anpublisher like Harper & Row to printnBradley’s book. Reading it, I suppose,nwould be like wearing a hair shirt.nConsider this. What would happen ifna person whose “roots” were in Europenwrote a novel that blasted blacks thenway that Bradley’s novel blasts whites.”nYou can be sure that no leading NewnYork publishing house would get nearnit. They’d treat the manuscript likenThree Mile Island, even if the writernwere the most talented person to comenalong in years. And if the novel werento be published (probably by a smallnpress), one of two things would happennto it. It would be totally ignored andnthereby effectively condemned to collectndust on store shelves, or it would benlambasted by critics so fiercely thatnanyone who picked up the book wouldnfeel like a filthy pervert.nIf John Sinclair (and Abraham Lincoln,nfor that matter) is correct andn”Separation is doom,” then as long asnbooks like the The Chaneysville Incidentnare published, race relations willnnot improve, they will deteriorate. Thenbook can cause some people—black ornwhite—to feel anger, sadness, guilt,ndesperation, or a combination of all ornsome of them. Such a combination,ngiven the conditions of high unemploymentnand rising prices, inevitably leadsnto hatred. Then comes violence, realnviolence: yelling and screaming andntearing down … and death. DnTechnique and the Ecology of ChoicenThomas McGuane: An OutsidenChance: Essays on Sport; Farrar,nStraus & Giroux; New York.nOrville Schell: Watch Out for thenForeign Guests!’ Pantheon Books;nNew York.nLowell Edmunds: The Silver Bullet:nThe Martini in American Civilization;nGreenwood Press; Westport,nConnecticut.nby Gordon M. PradlnJjy all rights, the machine (and itsninstantaneous progeny) was going tonset us free—any generation now, anynday now. At last we would control ournown destinies. With science and technologynexploding the boundaries of ournknowledge, both through time andnspace, possible connections and optionsnbegan to multiply exponentially, andnthe range of possibilities for self-defi-nDr. Pradl is professor of English educationnat New York University.nnnnition and personal expression appearednendless. But alas, something came unhinged,nsome code got reversed, andnfreedom dissipated into exposure: wenexposed the fact that we had lost ournsense of an integrated identity and thusnhad no basis on which to choose andnvalue our futures. We had reduced ourselvesnto slick means desperately searchingnfor justifying ends, while “technique”nrushed blindly onward in thenservice of amorphous bureaucratic slogans:n”the better life.”nSuch ponderous issues seem far removednfrom flycasting for brook troutnin Michigan, carousing with the cynicalnnew counterculture version of red Chinesenyouth at the Peace Cafe in Pekingnor sipping the restorative seven-o’clocknmartini in ceremonial fashion throughoutnAmerica’s bedroom communities.nYet in their diverse and idiosyncraticnways McGuane, Schell and Edmundsnforce us to reconsider central questionsnregarding the phenomenon of choicenas it characterizes both our public andnprivate lives—questions that need exploringnshould we entertain any hopen