not only how schook reproduce existingnsocioeconomic arrangements, but alsonhow their impact on students andnteachers always threatens to unsettlenthese traditional arrangements. Typically,nApple assumes the followingnposture toward his subject:none fundamental latent social role ofntheschoolis’devianceamplification.’nThat is, the school naturally generatesncertain kinds of deviance. This processnof natural generation is intimatelynrelated to the complex place schoolsnhave in the economic and cultural reproductionnof class relations—on thenone hand to the school’s function asnan ideological state apparatus andnthrough this in producing agentsn(with the appropriate dispositionsnand values) to fill the needs of thensocial division of labor in society, andnon the other hand to the place ofneducational institutions in producingnthe particular kinds of knowledgenforms required in an unequal society.nIn such a world evil is easily located:nclass division, profits, inequality, exploitation.nApple’s rhetoric is tiresome andnmisdirected. He will remain unconvincednthat there is nothing inherendynwrong with the fact that technologicalnknowledge benefits corporate concernsnor that the rationalization of productionnhas meant a better life for all. He willnIn the Mailnforever be shocked that “In offices,nword-processing technology is employednto reduce labor costs and deskill womannworkers. Thus, management attempts tonconaol both the pace of the work and thenskills required, to increase more effectivelyntheir profit margins or productivity.”nProductivity and profit marginsnpresumably have nothing to do with thengood life, and word-processing will supposedlynfurther enslave us.nYet part of his educational analysis cannbe used to expose the dynamics of Uberalnculture’s authoritarian invasion of thenschools. “Deviance amplification” providesnappropriate jargon with which tonstart. Schools are supposed to equipnstudents with the skills, the initiative,nand the discipline to compete successfiillynin the marketplace. What gets lostnin the process, however, is human agency.nPerhaps some mistaken notion isnoperating which equates submission andnobedience with the control of production-linenworkers, or perhaps it has beennforgotten that the goal of any system isnj^^discipline. Not allowed to buy intonthe system because their powers ofnagency are not legitimized, vast numbersnof citizens descend into a limbo worldnwhich increasingly strikes out against thendominant culture in a variety of forms—nfrom labor featherbedding to saawlingngraffiti on pubUc monuments.nThe Virginia Papers on the Presidency, Volume Xedited by Kenneth W. Thompson; UniversitynPress of America; Washington, DC. Abe Fortas, Dean Rusk, Eugene McCarthy, andnothers provide tips on how better to administrate in an unwieldy world.nPortraits of American Presidents, Volume I: The Roosevelt Presidency: Four Intimate Perspectivesnof FDR edited by Kenneth W. Thompson; University Press of America; Washington,nDC. FDR is the first in the series; LBJ will be next. What happened to G.W., J. A., T.J., andnthe others without middle initials?nVietnam: Three Battles by S.L. A. Marshall; DaCapo Press; New York. In its first life, this wasnknown as Fields of Bamboo (1971). The new title is more accurate: text, field sketches, andnphotos concerning three battles. The flora remain the same.nWord City by Marvin Morrison; Pilot Light; Stone Mountain, GA. Anyone with spelling difficultiesnwho can figure out how to use this dictionary should skip English and immediatelyntake up advanced algebra.n28inChronicles of CulturennnApple claims that “the norms thatnguide school life” are being rejeaed bynmany students. Why aren’t these normsnworking? Certainly at fault is the educationalnsystem’s neglect of the student’snability to exercise her own intentions.nSuch self-control has nothing to do withnthe whining self-indulgence encouragednby liberal culture. Quite simplynyou don’t indoctrinate the values ofnfreedom; you have people live them.nFurther, you don’t separate individualnautonomy fiom the social fabric.nYet, a number of current curriculumn”innovations” are attempting to do justnthat:nWith the increasing employmentnof prepackaged curricular systems asnthe basic curricular form, virtually noninteraction between teachers is required.nIf nearly everything is rationalizednand specified before execution,nthen contact among teachersnabout actual curricular matters isnminimized.nRows of children in front of their individualnlearning consoles is hardly a reassuringnvision of the fiiture. Again the figurenagency is lost without the ground of ansocial network of standards which can benconstandy tested. Beating the machine isnfinally just asterileachievement. Indeed,nthe very values of the free market arenundercut once all the “prepackaged curricularnmaterial” is placed on automaticnpilot. For if this comes to pass (as is alreadynhappening), it will be equivalentnto placing ourselves under the dominationnof a system which pretends to knownin advance what will be the outcome ofnour experiments and our risks. On thenday that initiative is surrendered, Americanwill be no longer.nApple may be using the wrong lens,nbut both he and Hoggart prod us tonthink seriously about how far we havenbought into the liberal culture’ s programnfor progress. For as long as we fail to supportnagency and standards, schools willnremain peifecdy content to mm out thenfull line of deviance liberal culturendemands. •n