Highly Specialized

In the spirit of sharing what went before and hoping that the topic is still relevant I post here a previous effort from many, many years ago.

I am reading a history of early Rome that is well done but painstakingly detailed and slow reading. It’s title is Through The Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 A.D. Yes, that’s just the title. The book is by Peter Brown an Emeritus Professor of History at Princeton. Not long ago I was wading through another history book, The Creation of the American Republic 1776-1787 by Gordon Wood. I never made it through Wood’s book even though I am downright compulsive about finishing books I have started to read. The book is ponderous, provides much more detail than I require, and is not well written. So I gave up on it. The Peter Brown book, on the other hand, exhibits better writing and was recommended by a friend, so I will probably work my way through the 530 pages (with 200 pages of notes and index, which I will skip). It reminds me of the fact that we suffer from over-specialization in this country.

The phenomenon results in books written by professionals in the field for other professionals — I dare say historians would appreciate the details and copious notes in both of these books. I speak here of history, but the same thing can be said of books in other disciplines (reading philosophy is like swimming through glue). Even novels are now written by writers who seem to be writing for other writers, not for the average reader who just wants a good read. The novel has to be clever and in the latest postmodern fashion.

Music is composed that can only be appreciated by professional musicians. For the rest of us it sounds like a cat with its tail caught in the car door. Much art has become specialized as well as artists experiment with their media and try to discover new ways to say the same old things. This is not such a bad thing in the plastic arts, since they are more readily appreciated by the unsophisticated viewer and new ways of seeing things can be exciting. The plastic arts may survive the trend toward overspecialization, though there is always the lunatic fringe who create works that can be appreciated only by others on the lunatic fringe — like those artists who place a urinal in the museum on the grounds that it is “art.” In so many of the arts sophistication has become the key to appreciation.

In any event, the phenomenon of overspecialization has infiltrated our colleges and universities where there are now specializations within specializations. As Michael Polanyi said 60 years ago,

“. . .it is a rare mathematician, we are told, who fully understands more than half a dozen out of fifty papers presented at a mathematical congress.” 

And that was then! This has resulted in a hodge-podge undergraduate “education” where students take bits and pieces of this and that until something strikes their fancy or someone convinces them that they can find work in that field when they graduate — or they have decided going in that they will become physicians or CPAs and they stay on track for their entire undergraduate years and get trained but not educated. Neither of these alternatives amounts to a coherent education that broadens as well as deepens perspective. But that’s what we seem to be stuck with as the specialists, separated as they are from one another by discipline — and often by geographical location on campus — don’t (can’t?) talk to one another and cannot come to any sort of agreement about what kinds of things make for a defensible undergraduate education. From the faculty’s perspective, it’s all about protecting their turf. The student is victim though she doesn’t know it.

And the rest of us suffer as well when we want to know a bit about the history of humankind and we are faced with ponderous books that are deep in detail and shallow in writing skill and readability. The curious layman (and student) has been forgotten in this age of specialization where walls between schools of thought cannot be conquered even by the most determined climber.

5 thoughts on “Highly Specialized

  1. Hugh, suffering through poorly written books of any kind is a chore. Books based on history need not be dull. The book on the life of Hedy Lamarr called “The only woman in the room,” was based on history, but was portayed as a novel. Her story of escaping a Nazi friendly and domineering Austrian munitions manufacturer and become an actress and scientist is true, but it included dialogue and conversation.

    I mentioned to you one of the best history books I have ever read was called “Water” by Steven Solomon. It told of the rise and fall of countries and empires based on their management of water for sustenance, transportation and naval might. Keith

      • Hugh, I am with you. I know the quality was not high, but I enjoyed the John Jakes books (“The Rebel,” “The Patriot,” etc.) that took a family and its offshoots through various parts of US history starting in England. It fascinated me how he thought through how to get from here to there. Keith

  2. Dr. Curtler,

    Your comments about specialization resonate.

    In my experience, academicians are narrowly educated in their specialization to the point where university faculty have little in common save their own mutual unintelligibility — and a distrust of the university administration.

    This narrow specialization is reflected in the argot of each narrow sub-discipline. Add to this that one’s academic prose tends to reflect one’s academic pose and the result can be pretty disastrous writing. (Having done enough of it myself, this is a statement I can make honestly.)

    It is possible to find common ground for purposes of either good conversation or shared research, but it takes a bit of doing. However,learning to write clearly about complex ideas, that is harder, by far.

    You make good points.

    Regards and respects,

    Jerry Stark

    • Well said. The real problem here is that these specialists, each an expert in his or her narrow field of interest, cannot get together to decide what would best serve the general student. They simply want those students to take their courses!
      I have run into that again and again.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s