1850), who is given respectfvil attention;rnone misses a mention of the story thatrnshe once declared that she had decidedrnto accept the universe, causing Carlylernto exclaim, “By God, slie’d better!” Anotherrnclwpter is devoted to the Scottishrnclassical scholar and poet DouglasrnYoung, who ended his career at ChapelrnHill, North Carolina, where Kopff andrnThomas Fleming were the two pupils ofrnwhom he was most proud. Young was arnfriend to whom I was greatly attached,rnand I read with much interest KopfiPs accountrnof how he was twice imprisonedrnfor resisting conscription on the groundrnof his determined Scottish nationalism.rnThat was one of the reasons that preventedrnhim from getting a chair in Scotland,rnas I discovered when I spoke on his behalfrnBut despite his great energy, liveliness,rnand charm, his scholarship hadrnfaults, including a streak of sillinessrnwhich, though endearing, was also di.sabling;rnin his generous affection for hisrnformer teacher, Koptf seems to me tornoverrate its quality.rnOne of the most interesting chaptersrnin the book is entitled “Scholarship andrnBricolage,” which reproduces a reviewrn(which appeared in the April 1996rnChronicles) of tlie very important bookrnShame and Necessity by the distinguishedrnphilosopher Bernard Williams.rnIn that book, Williams argues that thernethics of early Greece, before the time ofrnPlato, have much to teach us. Kopffrnstrong]}’ approves of Williams’ rejectionrnof what he calls “progressivism,” the beliefrnthat the passage of time is accompaniedrnby a steady moral progress, and ofrnthe notion that Greek culture evolvedrnfrom being a primitive “shame culture”rnto being a more advanced “guilt culture.”rnThus he agrees with Williams’rnpolemic against philosophers who, likernthe neo-Kantian John Rawls, separaternmoral judgment from social context andrnhistorical contingency. But he complainsrnthat Williams ends up on thernsame side as Kant in their common missionrnof salvaging the Enlightenment.rnWith this, he contrasts the attitude ofrnMaclntyre, who has “understood that thernrejection of Kant means the rejection ofrnthe Enlightenment, and of the liberalrnregime.” Indeed Williams, like Nietzsche,rnwhose sympathy with early Greekrnethics had an important influence on hisrnwork, does not hold that ethical beliefsrnshoidd be sanchoned by religion. Butrnthough the ancient Greeks were notrnChristians, thev had a religion, andrnZeus, their principal god, although thernworkings of his justice were difficult forrnhumans to discern, was thought to punishrnthe crimes of men. The importancernof this element in early Greek ethical attitudesrnshould not be forgotten, as I arguedrnin my book The justice ofT^eus.rnIn the epilogue, Kopff offers some veryrnnoteworthy suggestions for educationalrnreform. He would simplify the elementaryrnschool curriculum so as to concentraternon languages and mathematics; hernwould take certification away from thernschools of education; and he believesrnthat American churches should begin tornteach the sacred tongues: Greek, Latin,rnThe Devil Knows Latin:rnWhy America Needs the Classical Traditionrna Examples of the inhumaneiiess of humanities departments are, unfortunately,rnplentiful. In his writings, Foucault, speaking of power/knowledge,rnpassionately protested against the suppression of the Otherness of the madrnand the criminal. Feminists like Julia Kristeva sought a fuller life for oppressedrnwomen. Other feminists argued that scientific statements about women were notrnfactual but rather the expression of males’ desire to dominate. .. . Paul de Man declaredrnthat historv, and presimiablv biography as well, is only ‘a written text’ andrntlierefore a just target for deconstructive sabotage.rn”There are, of course, logical problems with critical theor}’. If we are trapped inrnthe closed box of language, for instance, with no objective realitv’ to correct, falsi!)-,rnor confirm our notions, on what basis do we condemn or approve? The DeconstructivernTurn was good at showing up false certainties in science, progress, andrnother Western accomplishments. But on w hat basis did it condemn the West forrnbeing trapped in its own linguistic conventions? That trap is the human conditionrnafter all, is it not? Moreover, if there is no objective reality, physical or moral, howrncan we denounce, or even criticize, the Holocaust Revisionist for his denial of therngas chambers? Or how can we excoriate Israel for her treatment of the Palestinians?rnOr men for tjieir subjugation of women?”rn— E. Christian Kopffrnand Hebrew. It is refreshing to find anrnAmerican who has no faith in schools ofrneducation, but holds that those who havernit in them to teach well will learn to do sornby obser ing good teachers.rnThe appendix, entitled “Doing It OnrnYour Own,” contains information thatrnwill be greatly valuable to people who setrnout to teach themselves Greek and Latin.rnI know some people who, though theyrnstarted late in life, have done this withrnconsiderable success.rnLet us hope that, when this very valuablernbook appears in paperback, it willrnhave an index, which would appreciablyrnincrease its value.rnSir Hugh Lloyd-jones is professor emeritusrnof Greek in the University of Oxford.rnOccupied Territoriesrnby Paul GottfriedrnThe Shadow University: The Betrayalrnof Liberty on America’s Campusesrnby Alan Charles Kors andrnHarvey A. SilverglaternNeil’ York: The Free Press;rn415pp.,$27.50rnThe introductory chapter of ThernShadow University contains a powerfulrnindictment of contemporary higherrneducation. Kors and Silverglate get itrnright when they characterize universityrnadministrators as “careerists who havernmade a Faustian deal.” They are correctrnas well about the professorial, political,rnand cultural pressures that have turnedrninstitutions of learning into conduitsrnof multiculturalism and victimologicalrnconcern. Since administrators need tornstay in the graces of nonideologicalrntrustees, vocationally minded parents,rnand charitable alumni, they typicallyrnshove the nuttiest professors and the silliestrncourses into the liberal arts.rnTo deal with minority- grievances, administratorsrnappoint deans who invariablyrnform working alliances with liberalrnarts protectors. This is the way universitiesrninfect themselves, according to Korsrnand Silverglate: by creating and “wallingrnoff a shadow university” that exists to accommodaternaggrieved ideologues. Byrnnow, the authors argue, the “walled-ofiP’rn30/CHRONICLESrnrnrn