jor university, he finds them onerous: “Inbelieve in regulation but not in levelingnall distinctions and issues. The City ofnGod is desirable but it does not occurnwhen a landscape consists of evenly distributednrubble.”nThere is an air of paradox in all thisnconstant shifting of ground, fluttering ofnveils, that almost constitutes evasion.nGiamatti is ready for the accusation:n”There is, therefore, a good deal of dealingnin paradox in this collection,” hensays, and he is right. It is true that thesenare occasional pieces, not chapters in anphilosophical discourse, so complete logicalnconstancy is not to be expected. Itnmust be noted that what is not apparentnin these collected essays is any comprehensivenvision of what education, especiallynuniversity education, should be. Norndoes Giamatti provide a link betweennthose principles that we expect shouldngovern a university and other educationalninstitutions, and the principles whichngovern our civic lives.nJ-lespite their avowed desire to locatena connectedness among the various elementsnthey consider, both these authorsnfail to find it, perhaps because of the contradictionsnin each of their points of view.nAnother reason for their failure lies in thenfact that both hold a disparaging view ofnreligion, and religion is traditionally thenmeans through which we try to gain anunitary view of the contradictory elements—joys,ntragedies, triumphs andntrials—of our experience, Harris reducesnreligious belief to the reaction to thenperceived loss of economic security, andnhe provides a detailed explanation ofnhow television pastors raise their fundsnfrom viewers. He seems to think that thengreed of some religious hucksters provesnthat all religion is a scam. Giamatti, onnthe other hand, apparently perceives religionnas simply a yahoo phenomenonnwhose only significance is in its allegednthreat to academic freedom. Neithernman mentions the sense of purpose,nmuch less the access to God, that religiousnbelief provides. Yet if they cannotndeal adequately with religion, they can­n14inChronicles of Culturennot claim to have given us a comprehensivenview of our personal or social lives. Itnis thoroughly typical of the modernntemper that it disdains aid from tran­nscendent sources while perceiving withnperfect clarity the mess that we havenmade of our world all by our unaidednselves. nnEssays on Murder & BiographynDiana Trilling: Mrs. Harris; HatcourtnBrace Jovanovich; New York.nWilfrid Sheed: Clare Boothe Luce; E.P.nButton; New York.nby Betsy ClarkenD iana Trilling finds murder unappetizing,nbut no more unappetizing thannpoor taste in architecture, homely looksnor social pretensions in individuals withninsufficient intellectual gifts. “The badnesthetics of a society matter 2jaA so do thenbad esthetics of an individual within thensociety; Tarnower’s house matters, thenpretensions of his diet book matter—nstyle is a moral mode, a mode in morality,”nthe author asserts. And since thenplebeian mechanics of the criminal-justicensystem are ill-equipped to makenthese ultimate judgments about goodnand bad, beauty and ugliness, DiananTrilling is here to offer her services.nThe Tarnower to whom she refers is, ofncourse. Dr. Herman Tarnower, celebratednWestchester County cardiologist andnauthor of the best-selling The CompletenScarsdale Medical Diet, who was murderednby Jean Harris, headmistress of thenposh Madeira School. Mrs. Harris hadnunwillingly abdicated her role as Tarnower’snhead mistress to the cardiologist’snyoung nurse, and by the time of thenshooting had been relegated to the positionnof garden-variety mistress, as had sonmany other women in the couple’sn14-year relationship. Meanwhile, back atnMadeira, Mrs. Harris was functioningnunsatisfactorily, and plans were undernway to remove her from her post. In ad-nMiss Clarke is a frequent contributor tonthe Chronicles.nnndition, Mrs. Harris fretted that her expulsionnof four seniors who had violatedndrug laws may have been inordinatelynsevere.nUnable to recover from the depressionncaused by these circumstances, Harrisnclaims she packed her gun and ammunitionn(about 40 rounds) and drove to NewnYork to say good bye to her beloved HinTarnower and then kill herself. But whennthe shooting stopped, the medium-builtndoctor lay dying in his bedroom, and thenfrail Mrs. Harris had only a bmised lip. Anjury rejected Mrs. Harris’s contentionnthat the shooting occurred accidentallynduring a struggle for the gun; they foundnher guilty of murder. Unbelievably,nDiana Trilling brought to her task “anspirit of partisanship” favoring the headmistress,nand, in fact, had planned to callnthis book A Respectable Murder. Shenchanged her mind, not upon acknowledgingnthat her heroine opened fire onnan unarmed man, but when she learnednthat Mrs. Harris rather liked Tarnower’sngaudy abode and good-for-nothingnbook. Such a woman should not be entmstednwith the moral development ofnthe young. Trilling sniffs, murderer ornnot.nEverything is a federal case with Mrs.nTrilling except cold-blooded homicide.nThe doctor’s pagoda and private Buddhansend her into outer space: “This is whatncame of our winning the war in the Pacific:nAmerica now had rights on the peacenof the Orient!” Nor does his diet book donmuch to soothe her nerves. She accusesnTarnower of dictating “the way in whichnwe were to conform our bodies to an arbitrarynconsumer ideal,” forgetting thatnthe man’s object was the promotion ofnhealthy hearts, not plastic surgery.nWhy, cries Mrs. Trilling in page aftern