prolonged, if not a life, sentence on anperson still widely thought of as a dangerousncriminal. The sentence is, in effect,none of incarceration, not of treatment.nIn this instance, however, the shamnof the mental-illness treatment facilitynwas exposed, and the ensuing scandalnpermitted the young man to seek genuinenpsychiatric help. Psychiatry, briefly outnfrom under the looming shadow of thencriminal justice system, is given an opportunitynto prove itself as a true alternative.nWhat is proved, however, is onlynthe inherent defects of psychiatry, flawsnthat permitted its exploitation as a thinlyndisguised jail warden. For upon thisnyoung man, psychiatry bestowed not angrace that heals the wounds of the spirit,nnot a redemption whose heroism is commensuratenwith the horror of his deed,nbut only therapy: therapy that will enablenhim to limp forward through youngnmanhood into middle age, destined ultimatelyn(in the closing words of the book)n”to resemble the rest of us.” This is andemocratic apotheosis indeed, consistentnwith the author’s persistent fear ofnjudging his subject as a responsible andnfree human being, rather than as a merenvictim of wider circumstances. If this isnthe sublime justice the law cannot give,nthen our condition is sorry indeed.nDespair is not in order, however,nuntil other alternatives to law as a meansnof attaining justice have been explored.nThis is the purpose of Professor Auerbach’snsuccinct treatise. Auerbach acceptsnthe Tocquevillean premise thatnthe energies of a democratic society tendnto find expression in the myriad and diffijsenactivities of a mass of self-interestednindividuals. He agrees that the proliferationnof litigation arising from this conditionnso dUutes the ideal of justice that itnis often deprived of any meaning othernthan the settlement of clashing interests:n”Justice becomes a compromise thatngives the least offense to most people.”nEchoing Goodman’s yearning for thendistant age of Solomon, Auerbach lamentsnthe disintegration of the early colonialncommunities of New England. Distin­n22inChronicles of Culturenguished by the subordination of individualninterests to the greater good of a socialnorganism animated by intense religiousnfervor, the lamilial method of resolvingndisputes in these settlements constitutes,nfor Auerbach, the most convincingnand palpable alternative to the systemnof law in America’s historical experience.nThe other alternatives he examines—^fromnthe instimtions of arbitrationnestablished among immigrant communitiesnand in the postbellum South tonthe numerous community arbitrationnpanels established in our own day in re­nMisunderstanding CriticismnCleanth Brooks: William Faulkner:nFirst Encounters; Yale UniversitynPress; New Haven, CT.nThe Presence of Grace and OthernBook Reviews by Flannery O’Connor;nEdited by Carter W. Martin; Universitynof Georgia Press; Athens.nby Marion MontgomerynAt some point in one’s encounternwith the imposing work of WilliamnFaulkner, one w^ill want to read CleanthnBrooks’s larger stadies. The YoknapatawphanCountry and Toward Yoknapatawphanand Beyond. But the generalnreader should start with First Encounters,na prologue written after Mr. Brooks madenthe long journey and returned to sharenit, generously and considerately. Onenstarts here not simply to learn how tonread Faulkner’s great work; the deepernlesson is how to move beyond Yoknapatawpha,nto understand the relation betweennlife and art’. Mr. Brooks, who hasnbeen caUed “the best critic of our bestnnovelist,” knows that literature providesna resonant ground for those serious so-nProfessor Montgomery’s most recentnbook is Why Poe Drank Liquor, ^M&lishednby Sherwood Sugdennnnsponse to the approaching paralysis ofnthe overburdened court system—^tend,nlike psychiatry, to collapse into mere appendagesnof the legal system. Thus, havingnrummaged through American historynin search of ways of effecting justicenwhich might stiU leave justice exalted.nProfessor Auerbach, overawed by thenprogress of secularism and of the noncommunal,ndemocratic, individualisticnsocial order, concludes his quest in despafr,ninvoking Kaflca’s poetic recognitionnof the futUity of seeking justice beforenthe law. Dncial pleasures through which we paynhomage to the community of man, tonour strengths and weaknesses, individuallynand in concert. The end of such a socialnencounter is not simply knowledgenbut understanding. Reading this “littlenbook” (as Mr. Brooks calls it) is likenlistening to good conversation about Ufenitself between a great artist and his bestnreader. It is to learn what it means to bencivflized—and weU-mannered, for Mr.nBrooks includes the reader in the colloquynas equal to the serious pleasures.nBy such tribute to Mr. Brooks, I surestnthat he is very much “Southern,” but I intendn”Southemness” as a much more inclusiventerm than the provincial understandingnof it when it is applied withnpejorative undertones. There is an importantnpoint at stake, given the growingntendency among students of Americanncriticism to misunderstand Mr. Brooksnas “New Critic.” Mr. Brooks’s “Southemness”nis of more ancient lineage than ansuperficial anchor in geography, politics,nor history (thou^ he is more than superficiallynanchored in the historical South);nthus, his conversation has an added dimensionnas it touches upon the fabric ofnFaulkner’s own “Southernness.” Mr.nBrooks understands that one must makendiscoveries about “Southemness” fornoneself, out of one’s own experiences asn