changes that have occurred in the UnitednStates in the last twenty years or so. Thus,nbesides an introduction and a conclusion,nhe devotes a chapter to each ofnseven areas of change: crime, homosexuality,nthe economy, cults, the women’snmovement, shoddiness of manufacturedngoods and the unwillingness of servicenpersonnel to provide service. Harris is annanthropologist who claims in this book tonhave explained all the changes in thesenareas according to changes in one basicnarea: the modes of economic production.nThat is, he asserts that since World War IInthe American economy has turned fromnproducing mainly manufactured goodsnto producing services (he calls it “peoplenprocessing”). This, combined with thenentry of women into the work force innlarge numbers, explains all the awfulnchanges around us. For example, Harrisnclaims that the frightening increase inncrime in our society is the result of blacknunemployment in the inner cities. This,nin turn, is directly caused by the entry ofnwomen into the work place (they tooknjobs that would otherwise have gone tonblack teen-agers).nThe difficulties with Harris’s reductivenschema are immediately apparent in thisnexample, for it does not explain whynaime and vandalism have spread to thenaffluent white suburbs. Harris, to hisnaedit, is aware of these difficulties, but,nin the end, it may not matter, for his realnaim is not to explain America but tonargue that what’s wrong with America isna permanent condition and that there’snreally not much we can do that will help.nThe real theme of the book is expressednin the tide of Chapter II, “Why NothingnWorks Anymore.” His pursuit of meaninglessnessnin the central role ofnAmerica’s condition leads Harris to denynconsistendy the real economic advancesnthat we have made since 1945 in real incomenthat permit a larger share of thenpopulation to own such creature comfortsnas cars, television sets and homes.nWhile Harris makes many valid points,nhis central thesis is invalid, a trendy mixturenof scientific reductionism, existentialndespair and radical economics. Thisnreally is a trivial book, mean-spirited, notna contribution to knowledge, not thenpopularization of a new idea, not even andefense of the indefensible. Harris cannotnexplain America, and his single solutionnfor the trouble we are in—locally organizednresistance to big business—is sonforlorn that even Harris admits there’snnot much chance it would help.nA . Bartlett Giamatti’s T/>e Universitynand the Public Interest is a collectionnof essays and speeches from the last fewnyears (since he became the president ofnother item that no doubt was of more interestnto the group of Yale alumni thanneven Newman’s idea of a university—nnamely, that as President of Yale, Giamattinwas cutting its varsity programnfrom 37 to 33 varsity sports. Imagine thenconsternation of the Yale alumni hearingnthat speech; all that delightful whirlingnof veils woven to achieve their acquiescencento the dismemberment of Yale’snathletic program.nOn topics of more general interestnGiamatti engages the same technique,nwith results equally unpleasant for then”… thcpxisturc. [hc>.iancc, ofafirc.^idtni (fin.n and ilic issues of tiif larfjern.stKi’t’iy is ;idmirablc.”n- -Netr York Times Book ReviewnYale University). Unfortunately, thenbook does not contain the famous—ornnotorious—speech he wrote on thenMoral Majority. Before he became itsnpresident, Giamatti was a professor ofnliterature at Yale, so, appropriately, hisnspeeches are noted for their style. Hisnstyle is indeed worthy of note, for it isnboth allusive and elusive, a kind of intellectualnstriptease in which veils of wellchosennwords float past our eyes in a whirlnof color and rodomontade, weaving anpattern of complexity and delight. Butnwhen the veils are dropped, we see a differentnreality than that which we werenpromised. The reality we discover underneathnthe style is just another tirednliberal.nConsider, for one glorious example,n”Yale and Athletics,” which he deliverednto a group of alumni. This literate speechncontains a lucid comparison betweennthe ancient Greek and English conceptionsnof the place of athletics in the educationnof young men, a brief discussionnof John Henry Newman’s idea of whatnconstitutes a liberal education, an encomiumnon winning that might havenmade the late Vince Lombardi blush (“Inthink winning is important. Winningnhas a joy and discrete purity to it that cannotnbe replaced by anything else.”), thenetymology of the word’ ‘athlete ” and onennnrest of us. “Power, Politics, and a Sensenof History,” which was delivered as anspeech to the senior class of 1980, isntypical. It contains a perceptive critiquenof Emerson on the subject of power,nsome enlightening comments on thenseparation of ideas and politics in America,nseveral paragraphs on the need forntraditions in our civic life, and a condemnationnof those who use bully tactics tonforce their will on the American people.nJust as one is anticipating a perorationncondemning the arbitrary use of theirnpower by liberal judges, Giamatti flingsnaway the final veil to reveal a condemnationnof the Moral Majority. That is, Giamattinsees more of a threat to the Republicnfrom a Baptist preacher attackingntrashy novels in the local library than hendoes from the state and federal courts,nwhich, together, are currentiy ruling thenpublic school system, public housingnand the county jails in the city of Boston.nHe makes an exception if the governmentnacts contrary to the interests of YalenUniversity. Then Giamatti manages tonsound like Edmund Burke defendingnthe prerogatives of the French royal family,nas in “Science and the University,” innwhich he attacks the federal government’snsystem of regulations for institutionsnthat use federal funds to supportnscientific research. As President of a ma-n^ I H H I ^ I SnSeptember 198Sn