Frog BullfinchnThe Dictionary of Classical Mythologynby Pierre Grimal, translated bynA.R. Maxwell-Hyslop, Oxford andnNew York: Basil Blackwell; $34.95.nA useful handbook on classical mythologynis an indispensable volume fornany library. It is strange that a translationnof Grimal’s 1951 work was needed,nbut here it is. Of the works innEnglish, Smith is too large and out ofndate, while Robert Graves is delightfulnbut hopelessly eccentric. At an affordablenprice, Grimal’s some 600 pages ofnlucid entries fill the bill admirably.nSome Place in Timenby Tommy W. RogersnStanding at the Crossroads: SouthernnLife in the Twentieth Century bynPete Daniels, New York: Hill &nWang; $7.95.n”Rural areas are shrinking, accents arenbecoming less distinct, and Southernersnare being tamed,” writes Pete Danielsnof the changes which have transformednthe agrarian nation of Davisnand Lee into the modern South. Danielsnmay have his feet planted firmly innearthy Southern history, but there hasnnot been a concerted demand by creationistsnthat six-day creation be presentednas fact: The Moral Majority hasnnot foreclosed debate in America;nthere has not been a “heavy-handednpurge” by those Southern Baptists whonseek to hold organizational representativesnaccountable to their sponsoringnconstituency; the Bible does not warnnagainst either Jerry Falwell or JessenHelms as “pitfalls along the road tonrighteousness”; and neither Falwellnnor Oral Roberts established universitiesnwith purpose to “restrict curriculumsnand content.”nDoubtless, as Flannery O’Gonnor’snHaze Motes testifies, fundamentalistnreligion can warp and destroy. And itnmay be, as Daniels asserts, that an”surprising percentage of those whonwatch , . . evangelists . . . are thensame people who watch wrestling andnsoap-operas, go to stock-car races,ncockfights, and rock ‘n’ roll concerts,”nbut his claim that “many believersnpatronize only Christian owned businesses”n(as sacrosanct a civil rightsnmobilization as that may be in thenright hands) is a development of whichnfew other than Daniels are aware.nDaniels is doubtless as sincere as Baptistnpreachers (as generic types) who donnot hold prevarication on religiousnand/or pecuniary matters as dishonest,nbut his claim that the “religious right”nrepresents a “retrenchment from thenmodern world” which “leapfrogs fromnthe present to biblical times,” alongnwith his contention that fundamentalistsnseek “to build a heaven on earth,”nleaves one wondering if Daniels isnserious. It may be that the God of thenFundamentalists has not advancedncommensurately with social sciencenenlightenment or that Fundamentalistsnhave “cut themselves off from thenflow of history” by not networking orngoosestepping with New Age awareness;nhowever, the Utopian quest is sonalien to the dispensational eschatologyngenerally endorsed by fundamentalistnChristendom that such a claim asnDaniels’ is as divorced from reality as anRobert McNamara pronouncementnon Vietnam.nIt is Ham’s shadow which definesnDaniels’ vision—from the stompin’nand screamin’ over the presence of toonmany whites at Fisk University (anmajor training site for black physicians)nin the 1920’s, to tantrums at notnbeing able to mix with whites in classroomsnand restrooms in the 1950’s andn60’s. Standing at the Crossroads is sondoused with negrophobia that it exudesnmore grease than a hamburgernfrom a drive-in movie. Even /’// TakenMy Stand, an intransigent statementnagainst the agribusiness preemption ofnthe human dimension and the uncriticalnendorsement of alleged progress, isnregarded as almost insignificant becausenit was restricted to primary questions.nDaniels is still livid that the NorthnCarolina electorate rejected FranknGraham, who had been annointed bynEleanor Roosevelt. Purveyors of thenliberal faith seem to live in fear ofnpotential cleansing by the indigenousnelectorate. Representatives of originalnsin, such as Jesse Helms (who, fromnDaniels’ account, is the epitome ofnevil), still cast disreputable shadows. Innthe South of the new status quo. Citizen’snCouncil members are no longernnnwelcomed speakers at civic clubnluncheons, but even so, evil survivesnin code words (like “cuts”) and politicalnalignments with media evangelists.nDaniels finds it convenient not to recognizenthe diiference between statenenfranchisement of religion and thenrefusal of persons with a biblicallynderived life-and-world view to disregardnthat consciousness in their evaluationnof public issues.nNevertheless, Standing at thenCrossroads should not simply be dismissed.nWhile Daniels offers unswervingnorthodoxy, he does so with admirablenliterary skill, and often with tellingninsight. Standing at the Crossroads isnin some ways a warm and sensitivenaccount of the changes by whichnSouthland has been defined in thisncentury. The anecdotes often poignantiyncapture the oppression of blacks,nsharecroppers, debtors, and mill handsnwho stood unprotected against thenlandlords, furnish merchants, andnagents of civil authority.nThe bibliographical essays accompanyingneach chapter are excellent, asnare the text surveys of Southern literature.nThe account of liberalism innaction via New Deal agricultural policynis an apologetic masterpiece. Danielsncalls this episode of applied liberalismn”The Conservative Revolution.”nEven he is able to recognize that thenartificial raising of agricultural pricesnand the driving of yeoman operatorsnoff the land was a method of divertingnmoney, power, and privilege to overprivilegednagribusinessmen, banks,nand mortgage and life insurance companies.nTimes, people, places, and landnhave changed. No longer is life sonattuned to the rhythm of the seasons.nIt is a different time from the daysnwhen, as late as the early 1960’s, mostnof organized society in the South—npolitics, economics, education—heldnthat a sizable component of the citizenrynshould sit in the back. Thendynamics of the second deconstructionn—the mass stupidities whereby Dr.nKing’s most faithful allies in the Southnwere his avowed opponents and providednthe civil rights movement withnthe violence its legislative policy required—arensympathetically depicted.nNorms of racial segregation havenatrophied along with the system ofngovernment that harbored pluralism.nOCTOBER 1987 135n