barbecue I feared the worst — something like the catfishnrecipe I saw in Esquire not long ago that called for mincednshallots, dry Sauterne, heavy cream, and poached seedlessngrapes, with pastry crescents in place of hushpuppies. ButnJake & Earl’s is run by a Southside Virginia boy, ChrisnSchlesinger, who reportedly tends a pretty good, traditionalnpit. My spy complains that Jake & Earl’s motto ought to ben”Southern Food at Northern Prices,” but many Yankeesnwouldn’t take a $1.75 barbecue sandwich seriously. Besides,nif a Virginian can rip them off, I say more power to him.nObviously I don’t buy the theory that eating pork makesnyou stupid, but good barbecue can certainly make younmellow, and Cambridge could use a dose of that. (By thenway, Schlesinger is the author of The Thrill of the Grill,nwhich is the kind of cookbook Jimmy Buffett would write ifnthe composer-singer of such fun-in-the-sun masterworks asn”Cheeseburger in Paradise” wrote cookbooks.)nTo close on a more sober note: I wrote recently innChronicles about Professor James Coleman of the Universitynof Chicago, who a few years ago faced the threat ofncensure by the American Sociological Association. Coleman’sntransgression was not plagiarism, not fabricating data,nnot suppressing uncongenial findings, not dishonesty of anynsort. On the contrary, Coleman had honestly reported hisnbest interpretation of some sound research, and his offense,nquite simply, was that his conclusions were not “p.c.” —npolitically correct. In the event, the ASA did not disgracenitself by censuring a man who may be the most accomplishednsociologist working today, but I gather it was a nearnthing.nWell, how’s this for good news: Jim Coleman wasnrecently elected president of the ASA. True, by anynequitable standard his election was long overdue, but whennhe was finally nominated, he won handily.nIt is ironic that Coleman was nominated by petition,nhaving been passed over once again by the association’snnominating committee, which came up with two worthy butnless “controversial” figures. A generation ago, in Communism,nConformity, and Civil Liberties, Samuel Stouffernreported that the elites of most American organizations,nfrom churches to labor unions, were more “liberal” than thenrank and file. This sociological generalization seems to havenheld up pretty well over the years, and it seems to hold forn26/CHRONICLESnBOOKS ON CASSETTESn’*^ Unabridged Recordingsn•*^ Purchase & 30 Day Rentalsn’•^ Columnist George Will has stated, “I gonthrough a book a week usingntime otherwise wasted inntaxis, shaving or walking.”n«^ We specialize in Biography,nHistory, Politics,nEconomics, Philosphy,nReUgion, Social Issues, andnTimeless Literature.nCLASSICS ON TAPEnP.O. Box 969, Ashland, OR 97520n<•§ For Free Catalog, CallnEVAN6EIICALn[ZjiMSflSTBrrini.;ii:»;Mi.-f.w.-‘d!r»353an1 (800) 729-2665nnnthe discipline of sociology itself. The fact that Colemannwasn’t nominated by the association’s official machinerynsuggests that the association’s ordinary members are less farngone in ideological double-think — of at least less cowed bynvocal pressure groups — than its leadership. Funny that itntakes something like a populist revolt to restore “elitist”nstandards like excellence, isn’t it?nWe have a long way to go yet in sociology, and as far as Incan see the condition of some other disciplines, notably innthe humanities, is still deteriorating. But do you suppose thatnthese things really do go in cycles? Could it be that the oldnacademic values are just down, not out? *$>nJohn Shelton Reed is a professor of sociology at thenUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. He isnspending the 1990-1991 academic year at the Center fornAdvanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences in Stanford,nCalifornia.nWHY I LOVE THE LAMBADAnby Janet Scott BarlownThree weeks after leavingnhome for college lastnfall, my son reported that henhad attended a universitysponsoredn”minority festival,”nan event organized to explore,nunderstand, and celebrate minoritynand alternative lifestyles,nperspectives, and sensitivities.nThis was, however, anfestival of unforeseen consequences,nsince it came tonpass that all of the minoritynand alternative-lifestyle boothsnwere completely ignored savenone, that being the Hispanicnbooth, whose occupants, foregoing the usual leaflets andnlectures, had set up a stage on which they presented andemonstration of the Lambada, that wonderfully steamynLatin-flavored dance. A huge and diverse crowd of studentsnmobbed the front of the stage, all of them drawn there,naccording to my son, by a shared thirst for knowledge: thenfemale partner in the dance duo — was she or was she notnwearing panties under her twirling skirt?nThe moral here is: never sell kids short. In a time whenneducators systematically practice political indoctrination innthe name of intellectual and social development, it’s nice tonknow that kids by their very nature — their nature beingninvoluntarily youthful — are capable of turning coercion onnits ear by transforming a university-sponsored sensitivity festninto a debate over a dancer’s underwear. In the midst ofnartificially imposed questions, the young still seek realnanswers. Lambada, anyone? <^nJanet Scott Barlow writes from^ Cincinnati.n