Word: reviewable
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: during 1960-1969
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
Entering its third year of publication, the Harvard Review suffers from a pronounced case of schizophrenia. It is the handsomest and often the most substantial magazine put out by undergraduates, yet students seldom, if ever, write for it. Its topics range from fairly narrow subjects with special relevance to the Harvard community--for example the excellent memorial issue on Perry Miller--to nearly limitless ones like this number on undergraduate education. Ambivalent about their audience and their contributors, the editors of the Review have never quite decided whether their magazine is distinctly a Harvard publication with a local focus...
Caught between these dissimilar if not entirely disjunctive roles, this issue of the Review attempts to comment generally on undergraduate education with particular reference to Harvard, and with results which are for the most part vaguely unsatisfying. Editor David M. Gordon had a noble conception. As he correctly observes in the Introduction, collegiate education is an exciting, relevant, and vital topic, the Doty Report and the Faculty debate notwithstanding. In contrast to the stultifying and unproductive dialogue to which the community has been subjected during the past year, he hoped to present nothing less than a discussion of the quality...
...tone suggests that these are not commonplaces at Harvard but still zones of combat. However, any reader of the Review in this community will be less than enthralled at his delineation of the components of a liberal education. If Buck had been willing, a much more important essay could have been written from the perspective of his extensive experience in the college examining the failure of the house system to establish a meaningful community and play a significant part in the student's education or the reasons for the discrepancy between the Redbook's ideals and the actual implementation...
...shock is therefore automatically entitled to respect as a worthy rebel. Yet this is how their followers regard the heroes of today's avantgarde, notably Jean Genet (Our Lady of the Flowers) and William Burroughs (Naked Lunch). "The new immoralists" is what they are labeled by Partisan Review Editor William Phillips, who is anything but a literary reactionary. He adds: "To embrace what is assumed to be beyond the pale is taken as a sign of true sophistication. And this is not simply a change in sensibility; it amounts to a sensibility of chaos...
...Supreme Judicial Court declared in a decision that "from a careful review the entire record we are satisfied that he was no error...