Notes & CommentsMay 2005 The virtues of a Cambridge history On the woeful failure of the new Cambridge History of Twentieth-Century English Literature. Where are the Greens when you need them? You know: those environmentally sensitive folks who hammer metal spikes into trees in order (so they say) to protect our arboreal friends from the depredations of evil loggers. Never mind that said loggers might be injured or killed trying to harvest such booby-trapped trees—for the Greens, that is only condign punishment for, for, for … well, you know: for capitalism, for patriarchy, for “speciesism,” etc. Possibly you suspect that this behavior on the part of the Greens has more to do with making a spectacle of their own presumed virtue than with protecting the environment. That’s what we think. But what we wish to know is, why are they so selective in their exhibition of outrage? A logging camp in Maine or the Pacific Northwest gets the full Green treatment: demonstrations, press conferences, sabotage. But what about a major university press whose act ... This article is available to subscribers and for individual purchaseSubscribe to TNC (Print and Online editions) Subscribe to TNC (Online only) This article originally appeared in The New Criterion, Volume 23 May 2005, on page 1 Copyright © 2010 The New Criterion | www.newcriterion.com http://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/the-virtues-of-a-cambridge-history-1316
rate this article for your user profile
E-mail to friend
|
On the Met's new galleries dedicated to art from the "Arab Lands, Turkey, Iran, Central Asia, and Late South Asia." On linguistic timorousness off the Timor coast. On the costs of contemporary college education.  The New Criterion is now optimized for Mobile Devices 
Webcasts
Elucidations & Corrections: Arts Criticism
Swallow Anthology Reading at The Grolier
New Criterion-Social Affairs Unit Conference: Part 4 |
add a comment
you must have an account to post a comment. {register now}