The debate as to whether the humanities is in decline is almost over. Statistics on declining enrolments, shrinking job prospects, dwindling funding and growing condescension from society add up to show that all is not well. Humanities scholars have, in the recent past, tried to discover what is wrong as well as do something to demonstrate that the humanities is still relevant to society. In this regard, many have suggested that the humanities should change to accommodate the needs of the marketplace, while others have argued that to do so will change the humanities so drastically as to render it unrecognizable. This article is about the current state of affairs in the humanities and the different views that have been expressed on it. It argues that rather than the humanities, it is actually society that is in decline, and as such changing the humanities to suit the needs of the marketplace would be a disservice to our long humanistic tradition. It acknowledges that humanities scholars need to engage more with society even as they continue in activities that have defined the humanities through the years and argues for humanities therapy as a way for the humanities to engage with a world that is increasingly enamoured with technê.
Ibanga B. Ikpe
Kate A. Berry
This article focuses on the United States (US), looking at the American culture war specifically as it relates to environmental issues. Looking at the US today is a reminder that the culture wars are as overtly political as they are culturally motivated, and they diminish social cohesion. The term “culture wars” is defined as increases in volatility, expansion of polarization, and obvious conflicts in various parts of the world between, on the one hand, those who are passionate about religiously motivated politics, traditional morality, and anti-intellectualism, and, on the other hand, those who embrace progressive politics, cultural openness, and scientific and modernist orientations. The article examines this ideological war in contemporary environmental management debates. It identif es characteristics of environmental leadership and discusses how networks can act as environmental leaders.
The reawakening of interest in Sartre outside of specialist circles prompted by the publication of Lévy’s Le siècle de Sartre shows no sign of abating as we move into the new century. In England, it is true, a combination of endemic anti-intellectualism and age-old francophobia has conspired to ensure that Sartre’s face has sadly not graced the covers of Hello! Magazine or Home and Garden, but the theatre has proved more welcoming. Following Richard Eyre’s revival of Dirty Hands in Spring 2000, there have been two new productions of No Exit. The later of the two (Spring 2001) was unfortunately too recent for Ben O’Donohoe to be able to include in his witty review, in this issue, of the reception of Sartre’s theatre in the USA and UK; however, if the publicity bumph is anything to go by (‘Hilarious!’, ‘Uproariously funny!’) the director would appear to have tapped into a rich comic vein that had remained concealed these fifty-five years past.