I have started reading this book called
"The Two Culture" by C.P.Snow. I am far from having finished writing it but already I would like to speak about it. The main point the author makes (so far in my reading) is that there is an immense gap between the world of letters, the "writers" he calls them, and the scientists, that the scientists hardly read and that the writers hardly know about the b.a. ba (maybe a French expression there sorry) of science. This is true, and perhaps maybe more true in the Anglo-Saxon world that separates both from an early age, contrary to the French system, where, it is almost de rigueur (unless really you are doing classics) to get a
scientific baccalaureat (and where, of course, French and Philosophy are also taught). Having said that, when the author mentions the second law of thermodynamics being the equivalent of a work of Shakespeare for scientists, I haven't a clue. I am French, and I have no idea of what the second law of thermodynamics is... I don't know the first law either, and I don't even know what thermodynamics is! From my poor knowledge of Ancient Greek, I would understand that thermo has something to do with temperature (?!) and dnynamics, no sure, can't remember, a dynamo is like a box with some sort of power in it, God knows where from... so yes the scientists are allowed to laugh at me!
This lecture dates from 1959, a while ago, I would perhaps argue that it is even worse today, probably there is a bigger gap between scientists themselves given the advance of many different fields of knowledge, and same for the writers, this can be reflected perhaps even in France: twenty years ago, you had two main baccalaureat, the scientific one, the literary one, now you have three: the scientific, the literary, and economical and social sciences ...today, if you study film studies or sociology, would you understand a classicist much? And I would go further, if you do a PhD, you do not necessarily know much else other than your subject. I went to a music conference once, and I was horrified at the lack of general knowledge of some of the speakers who had been so heavily involved in their subject that they knew nothing of the next door subjects, but perhaps I have been lucky enough to have received some general music education at the Paris Conservatoire (history of music).
There is the dream of course of being a Pantagruel, an ogre of knowledge, who makes sure his son, Gargantua, gets an education, and that meant, in the humanist sense of the term:
religion, astronomy, philosophy, sport, biology, arithmetic and reading books in the original: Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and quite a few others, as the letter from Pantagruel to Gargantua illustrates:
« l'entenz et veulx que tu apprenes les langues parfaictement : premièrement la grecque, comme le veut Quintilien ; secondement la latine, et puis l'hebraicque pour les sainctes lettres, et la chaldaicque et arabicque pareillement. Puis soigneusement reuisite les livres des medicins grecz, arabes et latins, sans contemner les thalmudistes et cabalistes. »
An extract, in French, illustrates also the spirit of the learning, which is a happy spirit.
Learning a lot is great, and I can see, living and working at Oxford University, the best of students enjoying their time in my place of work, just for the pleasure to learn something more than their "usual" studies at Oxford. But how many people are being stuffed with knowledge without pleasure? (if they are being stuffed with knowledge that is!)
I met an old friend yesterday, he's a French primary school teacher in Danmark, he said to me, his key point is to teach the kids how to be happy. How to be happpy. That's all. He then explained that in Danmark, most people have a decent salary, even if they have not made long studies. He's against giving marks, against a society that encourages ferocious competition... but we cannot do much about this I'm afraid, the elite will always be made of people who went to the good institutions and most of them will also have had an education at home (I cannot claim I am part of the elite, and I spent most of my studies sleeping at the end of the class, but at least I was in good schools, and both my parents were interested in art, literature and films), all of this helps and one cannot expect kids, living in deprivate areas -with sometimes parents who do not even speak the language of the country well- to do so well in school where, anyway, it is sometimes -if not all the time- a challenge to hear the teacher. Perhaps, and it was a point made by many librarians at Oxford in a survey, it is now important for the elite not to be elitiste.
There are some efforts being made, Oxford and Cambridge get regularly attacked by the media for not including enough kids from non-public schools and they really do try their best. In France, la cour des comptes just released a
report about the geographical inequality of spendings between schools; monsieur Sollers, on French television, defends the study of the "classics", how important it is to know Latin and Greek; in Germany, Latin is still a language that can be taught in school from the age of 11 (at least in Swabia where I was last week) and in Russia and Ukraine... well I cannot speak about those countries much but the few Russians and Ukrainians I have done a language exchange with were mostly scientists and were all reading literature books and loving poetry and learning other languages, on top of learning English that is...(the other Russian speaking friends I have are doing theology so language learning is de rigueur for them: Old Slavonic, Hebrew, Latin, Greek, German, French, English, Modern Hebrew... but one must remember that theology, "speaking of God" was the highest of all knowledge in medieval times and that one couldn't start learning this field without having a previous degree in another field... do please correct me if I am wrong there!) Languages, at least the living ones, and especially English, are pretty much on the agenda on the "continent" as the British call our lands and in many other countries... in Great Britain, this is another matter. Shame really, because the European Union is craving for British graduates with multilingual skills.
If we were to live in a perfect world, yes, it would be great to get an equivalent of the baccalauréat (or as whatever people want to call it) in most countries, which would mean that all high school students would study as many discipline as possible till the age of 18. As for the joy of learning... hm... I have had teachers who made me want to learn, but others who kept me asleep in my corner and a big part of my education has come from my surroundings, not a suburb, but Paris, difficult then not to go out and see exhibitions, concerts, films etc... and make friends, speak with them, learn from them... a Russian short-story goes even further (I'm sorry I do not remember who wrote that) with this woman, in an hotel, educating herself with the men she sleeps with... I have to admit one of the most cultured people I met where working in la FNAC, were
autodidacts or people who had gone to the "professional baccalauréat" as we used to call them then. They would get a better pay in Danmark I suppose...
Derrida, I think, wrote some interesting things about the education of the future, if I recall it well, there was an interview with him in
les Inrock : the university of the future will change dramatically (I must read more on that sorry, in particular
L'Université sans condition).
"La culture, c'est ce qui reste quand on a tout oublié"... Sagan is right, and the more disciplines you learn the better it is... but Sagan is wrong too, la culture, and la connaissance, should be, for those interested, a perpetual need and thirst of knowledge. Perhaps also this links with the "learning society" we are in (and in which librarians, and many other chartered professions, need to continuously upgrade their knowledge) but I very very much hope one learns for the pleasure and enlightenment of learning rather than just for money.
