November 16, 2008
Public Intellectual 2.0
Disquisitions about public intellectuals usually conclude that they ain't what they used to be. Subtitles from recent books on the topic include A Study of Decline and An Endangered Species? Indeed, the major point of debate is dating the precise start of the decline and fall. For some critics, Götterdämmerung started in the 1950s; for others, the 1930s. More-curmudgeonly writers place the date earlier, stretching back to the heyday of John Stuart Mill or even the death of Socrates.The pessimism about public intellectuals is reflected in attitudes about how the rise of the Internet in general, and blogs in particular, affects intellectual output. Alan Wolfe claims that "the way we argue now has been shaped by cable news and Weblogs; it's all 'gotcha' commentary and attributions of bad faith. No emotion can be too angry and no exaggeration too incredible." David Frum complains that "the blogosphere takes on the scale and reality of an alternative world whose controversies and feuds are ... absorbing." David Brooks laments, "People in the 1950s used to earnestly debate the role of the intellectual in modern politics. But the Lionel Trilling authority figure has been displaced by the mass class of blog-writing culture producers."
But these critics fail to recognize how the growth of blogs and other forms of online writing has partially reversed a trend that many cultural critics have decried — what Russell Jacoby called the "professionalization and academization" of public intellectuals.
more from The Chronicle Review here.
Posted by Morgan Meis at 11:15 AM | Permalink






Comments
Anybody seen Slumdog Millionare yet? It sounds perfect.
Posted by: Jerzy | Nov 16, 2008 11:29:55 AM
How nice the public has blog access to its intellectuals, even though some may miss Adlerian leatherette volumes.
Posted by: CriticalMassI | Nov 16, 2008 1:42:46 PM
Intellectuals are not welcome into the public debate because they only respect the opinions of others. Many intellectuals wrongly believe their narrow area of expertise entitles them to a louder voice in public debates. This of course ifs false. If intellectuals would like the American public to accept them they should first accept the American public. An apology and humility are in order.
Posted by: simon | Nov 16, 2008 7:06:07 PM
I'm cautiously optimistic about blogs as a remedy for the decline of the public intellectual. But I think critics of Jacoby such as Drezner are too hasty to find a solution in either a list of individuals committed to the cause or the naked fact that blogs exist. As Jacoby makes clear in "The Last Intellectuals," and as he restates in the Preface to the new edition, his argument is not about individuals but rather a societal shift. You can read his story as a kind of social history of the US with public intellectuals as protagonist. One component of Jacoby's argument, for example, is the decline of urban bohemia and rise of suburbia. Complimentary is the decline of a market for the work of public intellectuals in newspapers and magazines. Of course, it would be unreasonable to think that we can reverse these trends. Perhaps the blog can fill the void left behind, but what should not be overlooked is the economic underpinnings of Jacoby's public intellectual heroes. The days of earning one's living off of book reviews and occasional feature articles are over. But, as Drezner rightly acknowledges, some writers earn a living as bloggers or (my brother being a case in point) gain employment based on their skills evidenced online. I'm a fan of blogs like 3quarksdaily. In fact, I'd even venture to say I'm a convert. But I don't think that blogs have quite reached the status of the bygone newspaper columns of Jacoby's golden era. (Just think about how diffuse internet readership is in contrast with major newspapers, for example. Blog posts don't tend to resemble tightly-argued and well-researched long form essays either.) That doesn't mean that public intellectuals haven't made it back onto the scene. It just means that a better argument than "blogs fill the void" has to be made in order to win the argument with Jacoby. Perhaps a deeper reassessment of contemporary social history and intellectual life can reveal that the work of bloggers is an appropriate compliment to the contemporary situation--how we access news and commentary; what informs conversation on current issues; the type and threshold of knowledge required to make informed decisions. A better argument will account for these aspects and not simply rely on a few particulars and enthusiasm for the blog format.
Posted by: eric | Nov 19, 2008 10:29:45 AM
Post a comment