The Use of the Humanities
by Tamara Gilkes
According to Stanley Fish of the New York Times, the humanities have no use. In his blog Think Again, Fish wrote in his entry titled "Will the Humanities Save Us?" that little attention is ever paid to the humanities because they do not produce a useful product. He was responding to a study by the New York State Commission on Higher Education, which barely mentions the humanities in their review of university education. He mentions several opinions as to why the sciences are more useful since they can produce life-saving vaccines or significantly affect the economy - but the humanities do not do anything like that. He also goes so far as to say that they do not have any use and do not need to justify themselves, for their merit as a subject is within themselves.
As a professor of law at Florida International University in Miami, Fish may be able to justify the humanities by stating that they "are their own good," but I refuse to accept that. The humanities serve a purpose, whether it is art, history, performing arts or another aspect of the humanities.
Let's start with art. Architecture, plays, operas, beautifully-landscaped cities and the like all combine to create a culture. Without culture a society loses its very essence - but before we go into some abstract discussion such as that, let's look at something more concrete: buildings. Great cities are often built with an emphasis on beauty and grandiosity. Washington, D.C., for example, is a carefully planned city with imposing pediments, Ionic columns and massive steps leading to monuments. This was not done on accident but rather to reference antiquity. And just why would a country hoping for greatness wish for its capital city to be modeled after the Greeks and Romans? Because the history and culture of such civilizations has a deeply-rooted reference to elegance, strength and democracy in the Western world. This is not something that can simply be created in a lab; it is something that repeats itself throughout history. This may not produce a product, but it creates pride and is something that must be learned and appreciated in order to carry on the power that such designs have.
Let's deny that this has any importance for a moment. We take away the columns of D.C. and create a city whose function is just as important but lacks the reference to antiquity. Admittedly, nothing much would happen, despite a possible decline in tourism. So, what other uses are the humanities?
The hottest topic in the media right now is the primaries. The country is looking to a possible history-in-the-making moment with a female candidate and a black candidate running for the top office. But aside from the historical importance of this, the country is wondering who, if either, can win over the entire country come November? Undoubtedly, public speaking is at the forefront of this. Can people relate to Hillary Clinton? Can they imagine drinking a beer with Barack Obama? One thing that Obama has done an excellent job with is his ability to incorporate history into the politics in a way that he includes the African-American community without excluding everyone else. Throughout his campaign, he has sprinkled references to the Civil Rights Movement with other references to American history, showing a united front and an American struggle. This ability, of Obama and his team behind his campaign, has created a situation where people relate to Obama, and he has been able to rally people to the point of voting. Do I need to point out the relevance of history in all of this? Understanding people (which is more of a social science but also was overlooked as an important subject by the study) and referencing history has made his campaign stronger. Could the same be said for Obama if he got up to the podium and told the country that he created a cure for AIDS? Sure, he would have achieved something extremely important, but would he have the same ability to rally people under one cause?
It seems immature to ride off the humanities as either so useless as not to be worthy of study or so high and mighty that they need no justification. Where would we be without people studying the English language? Or foreign languages, for that matter? The CIA looks for people with such knowledge to help protect the United States and bring some of the brightest minds into the government. It shocks me that someone of such importance would simply put the entire importance of an area of study on the point that it is a good within itself. Students - whether it is for the sake of being well-rounded, becoming a politician, studying to go to law school or even studying for the sciences - need to have a grasp of the arts, culture, society and history. Without such the world would be awfully flat, and we would be missing the much needed passion and desire that we see in political campaigns and marches for social change. To not debate the importance of an entire branch of higher education is just immature.
