Reflooding Restores Wildlife to Iraqi Marshes

David Biello in Scientific American:

00069b232b041477ab0483414b7f0000_1In the 1990s the Garden of Eden was destroyed. The fertile wetlands between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers were diked and drained, turning most of 15,000 square kilometers of marsh to desert. By the year 2000, less than 10 percent of that swampland–nearly twice as big as Florida’s Everglades–remained. But reflooding of some areas since 2003 has produced what some scientists are calling the “miracle of the Mesopotamian marshes”–a return of plants, aquatic life and even rare birds to their ancestral home.

More here.



Our Transhuman Future: Cyborgs, Lizard Men, and Cat People

William Saletan in Slate:

060605_hn_transhumanisttn2 Heeeeeeere’s Cat Man!

On a projection screen at Stanford Law School, an auditorium full of nerds stared at a picture of a guy who’d done himself up like a cat—not with makeup, but with tattoos and surgery. The guy’s whiskers were implanted. His nose had been converted to a cat nose. His teeth had been filed into the shape of cat teeth. His head has been flattened, and he was looking for a doctor to implant a tail. And that’s just the tip of the freakberg. Behind him, there’s Lizard Man, Amputee Online, the Church of Body Modification, and Suspension.org, the Web site for people who like to be impaled on hooks.

Our guide to the self-mutilators, professor Robert Schwartz of the University of New Mexico, wasn’t trying to gross us out…

More here.

SHIRIN EBADI’S TROUBLED HISTORY

Vali Nasr reviews Iran Awakening: A Memoir of Revolution and Hope by Shirin Ebadi and Azadeh Moaveni, in The New Republic:

The book is a powerful condemnation of the dictatorship of the ayatollahs, at its best when it recounts the suffering of those whom Ebadi represented. The gross injustices and the everyday cruelties of the Islamist regime in Iran would be comical were they not so tragic.   

But the narrative loses its poignancy when it shifts to the writer herself. As commendable as her efforts on the part of the victims of injustice in Iran have been, Ebadi’s confused rendition of Iranian history, which vacillates between celebrating the revolution and condemning its consequences, makes it difficult to regard her as a symbol of democracy. Still, it is possible to look beyond her perplexing tentativeness and regard her story as emblematic of the paradox of a revolution that mobilized, educated, and ultimately frustrated Iranian women. Revolutionary fervor promised to break down traditional patriarchy, but in its place there appeared new discriminations. Ebadi hopes that the unfulfilled promises of revolution will finally bring a fury down upon the Islamic Republic and fracture its pious edifice. But this hope, however fond, is a distant one–more distant than Ebadi seems to understand.

More here.

Physicists probe the fifth dimension

From MSNBC:Physics

The cosmos would make perfect sense … if it turns out we’re living in a 10- or 11-dimensional realm where gravity is bubbling off a different plane entirely. At least that’s what’s emerging as the hottest concept on the frontier of physics. Though these sound like virtually unverifiable claims, physicists are trying to come up with ways to gather evidence to back up or disprove the extradimensional theories currently in vogue. But it’ll take several years to get that evidence, if it can be gotten at all.

The claim that the cosmos has more than the four dimensions we can perceive — that is, three spatial dimensions plus time — is exotic enough. But the quest to prove that claim brings in a virtual menagerie of mysteries: mini-black holes and dark matter, gravitational waves and cosmic inflation, super-high-energy particle collisions and ultra-powerful gamma-ray bursts.

Even the physicists behind today’s most-talked-about extradimensional theory, Harvard University’s Lisa Randall and Johns Hopkins University’s Raman Sundrum, aren’t yet exactly sure whether the approaches will pay off.

More here.

Taking the Orange at second bite: Zadie Smith’s On Beauty wins £30,000 fiction prize

From The Guardian:Smith1_2

Zadie Smith’s novel On Beauty last night triumphantly passed the “desert island” test of a good read by winning the £30,000 Orange prize for fiction. After a record three-hour judges’ meeting, she narrowly beat exceptionally strong contenders by Hilary Mantel and Sarah Waters to take the first major literary award to match her prodigious celebrity.

She had the additional joy of finally winning the prize which first gave her recognition. She broke into the limelight as a 25-year-old when her debut – the exuberantly youthful, instantly bestselling White Teeth – was shortlisted for the Orange. On Beauty is the fruit of her early maturity and of her marriage to the poet Nick Laird.

Extract

Here they all were. Howard indulged in a quick visual catalogue of their interesting bits, knowing that this would very likely be the last time he saw them. The punk boy with black-painted fingernails, the Indian girl with the disproportionate eyes of a Disney character, another girl who looked no older than fourteen with a railroad on her teeth.

And then, spread across this room: big nose, small ears, obese, on crutches, hair red as rust, wheelchair, six foot five, short skirt, pointy breasts, iPod still on, anorexic with that light downy hair on her cheeks, bow-tie, another bow-tie, football hero, white boy with dreads, long fingernails like a New Jersey housewife, already losing his hair, striped tights – there were so many of them that Smith couldn’t close the door without squashing somebody. So they had come, and they had heard. Howard had pitched his tent and made his case.

More here.

Aula 2006 ─ Movement

Dear 3QD Reader,

Helsinkispace_top_1Aula is a Helsinki, Finland-based open community of people working in different fields of life including science, art, business, government and NGOs. In 2002, they started a group weblog called the Aula Point of View, which I edited until 2004 at the invitation of two of Aula’s founding members, Marko Ahtisaari and Jyri Engestrom. Like 3 Quarks Daily, the Aula POV was mainly a links blog, and this is how I got my start in blogging. So, in a very real sense, 3QD owes its existence to my earlier blogging experiences at Aula. (If you’d like to know the full story of the Aula POV, I wrote a short article about it which was published in the book Exposure, and the article is available online here.)

Aula_banner_sky_thinNext week there is a meeting in Helsinki organized by Marko and Jyri called Aula 2006 ─ Movement. It’s a two day affair with some very interesting speakers and will focus on various broad themes related to the direction in which society, culture and technology are heading:

The theme Movement points to mobility 2.0 (mobility meets web 2.0), the overlapping of the physical and the virtual, and the social movement-like nature of new technologies…

Movement also means a section of a piece of music, and the gathering will include interventions in music and dance. This event will be less of a conference, more an intimate gathering of people to discuss, detail and experience critical topics.

We, meaning 3 Quarks Daily, are Aula’s official blogging partner for this event, and Morgan Meis and I will be traveling to Helsinki next week to attend the meeting, give a short presentation, and report any and all happenings of interest there. Each day this week, starting tomorrow, I will be profiling one of the main speakers: Clay Shirky, Alastair Curtis, Martin Varsavsky, and Joichi Ito. And next week, as I mentioned, Morgan and I will be blogging live from the meeting itself.

So in addition to the usual links, there will be some Aula 2006 ─ Movement related blogging here for the next nine or so days. We hope you’ll find it interesting.

And if you should happen to be in Finland, do try to come to the public event on Wednesday, June 14th. It should be a lot of fun!

Tuesday, June 6, 2006

Chocolate Power

In New Scientist (via InkyCircus):

Microbiologist Lynne Mackaskie and her colleagues at the University of Birmingham in the UK have powered a fuel cell by feeding sugar-loving bacteria chocolate-factory waste. “We wanted to see if we tipped chocolate into one end, could we get electricity out at the other?” she says.

The team fed Escherichia coli bacteria diluted caramel and nougat waste. The bacteria consumed the sugar and produced hydrogen, which they make with the enzyme hydrogenase, and organic acids. The researchers then used this hydrogen to power a fuel cell, which generated enough electricity to drive a small fan (Biochemical Society Transactions, vol 33, p 76).

The process could provide a use for chocolate waste that would otherwise end up in a landfill. What’s more, the bacteria’s job doesn’t have to end once they have finished chomping on the sweet stuff. Mackaskie’s team next put the bugs to work on a production line that recovers precious metal from the catalytic converters of old cars.

Shafer Takes Down Peretz

This piece is 6 months old. I missed it when it came out. Moreover, in it, Jack Shafer reprints a piece he wrote in 1991 on Martin Peretz, but it’s worth reading.

[Peretz is] an insufferable name-dropper, he’s gratingly pedantic (he can’t avoid the word “perfervid,” using it five times in those 40 columns), and he’s so enamored of his own wit that he can’t resist recycling his previously published punch lines. “If [Amin] Gemayel is a researcher on anything, I am an astronaut,” he wrote in the May 8, 1989, New Republic. Six months later, in a dispatch from Paris, he wrote, “[I]f the Palestinians are any closer to actual independence in the West Bank and Gaza than they were a year ago, then I am an astronaut.” OK, Marty! OK! You’re an astronaut!

Peretz’s view from space is easily summarized. The Arabs are an undifferentiated mass, consumed by antique tribal hatreds, fated to fratricide, torn asunder by their religious sectarianism. The “general afflictions of Arab politics,” he wrote March 14, 1988, are “the principal resistance to compromise, the intoxicating effects of language, the endless patience for vengeance.” How about that for a MacNeil/Lehrer conversation-stopper? “[The Lebanese] fight simply because they live. And the culture from which they come scarcely thinks this is odd. Their men fight on and on, and the women and children bleed” (March 19, 1990). Has a guest slot opened up on Washington Week in Review? The moderate Arab “is a figment of the imagination” (May 7, 1984). Has Oprah called yet?

One definite Peretz theme that clangs in column after column is that there are no Arab nations. The partisan of Zion hasn’t staked this position for the convenience it lends in delegitimizing the call for a Palestinian state. Nor has he adopted it to make it easier to repel the arguments of those who would paint the nation of Israel as a counterfeit creation of Western imperialism. Peretz actually believes what is in his clips.

The Marine Corps and Haditha

This past NYT’s Week in Review has an informative piece by John Burns on Haditha. (Even though it doesn’t answer all the questions I have about what happened and why.) It contextualizes and historicizes the apparent war crime, and it does so without excusing them (unless you believe that to understand something is to excuse it). For that, it’s to be commended. I wonder if all those hawks who see in similar attempts to do the same with Al Qaeda will charge Burns with trying to let the soldiers off the hook with his talk of seeing their comrades killed, “growing pressures” and “resentment”. I doubt it.

Whatever emerges from the military investigations, the narrative of the Marines’ experiences in Iraq will have a central place for the brutalities associated with Haditha. Last summer, in two separate attacks over three days, Taliban-like insurgents operating from bases at mosques in the city killed 20 Marine reservists, including an enlisted man who was shown disemboweled on rebel videos that were sold afterward in Haditha’s central market.

Like other Marine battles, from Tripoli to Iwo Jima to Khe Sanh, the story of their battles in Iraq will center on themes of extraordinary hardship, endurance and loss, as well as a remorselessness in combat, that offer a context, though hardly any exoneration, for what survivors allege happened that November day.

They also offer a counterpoint to another theme at play here, one also learned with great bitterness in Vietnam: the hard cost to military intentions of killing innocent bystanders in a counterinsurgency. That is a lesson the Marines know well and accept as an institution. But in recent months in Iraq it has been recited largely by Army generals, and the distinction has begun to cause resentments between the two services as the Haditha investigations begin.

Privately, some marines say the killings at Haditha may have grown out of pressures that bore down from the moment in March 2004 when a Marine expeditionary force assumed responsibility for Anbar province, with Haditha and its 90,000 residents emerging as one of its most persistent trouble spots.

it begins

ON WEDNESDAY, CONDOLEEZZA RICE said that Washington had changed its mind and, under the right conditions, might be ready to join Europe and negotiate with Iran over its nuclear program. Next Sunday, in Nuremberg, Iran plays Mexico in the first round of the World Cup. Who can say for sure which event, in terms of Iran’s engagement with the world, will be seen by history as the more important?

As a large part of mankind awaits with acute excitement the epic quadrennial tournament of the World Cup, America yet again sits it out. Yes, the brave guys of the United States team are in Germany, ready to play the Czechs, Italians, and Ghanaians (London bookies make the Yanks 80-1 to win the Cup, which is at least better than Iran, at 250-1). Yes, more and more Americans have played the game at school or college. Yes, they know about bending it like David Beckham. Yes, “soccer moms” are a significant sociological and electoral group.

And yet there is no pretending that the final in Berlin on July 9 will matter to America remotely as much as baseball. You have the World Series, the rest of us have the World Cup, and never the twain shall meet.

more from Boston Globe Ideas here.

david salle does Sistine

Article002_1

I’D SEEN THE SISTINE CHAPEL a couple of times and been awed—along with hundreds of others craning their necks—but I’d never really studied the paintings. After doing some reading on their iconography, I began to see images that had a metaphorical quality I thought I could deal with. The idea of the commission was not to repaint the ceiling, but to make some kind of contemporary reference to it. Together with Carlo, I picked the three themes of the Creation, the Flood, and the Last Judgment as being representative of the whole. The first painting I worked on represents the Creation. Rather than take the most famous image from that cycle, in which God touches Adam’s hand, I used the image of God as a purple-clad protean actor flying around, building, making stuff happen. This seemed the most compelling and straightforward image to use, because God was so identifiable and, in Michelangelo’s mind, linked to the idea of the artist-creator.

more from Artforum here.

a poem for warren zevon

I want you to tell me if, on Grammy night, you didn’t get one hell of a kick
out of all those bling-it-ons in their bullet-proof broughams,
all those line-managers who couldn’t manage a line of coke,

all those Barmecides offering beakers of barm –
if you didn’t get a kick out of being as incongruous
there as John Donne at a Junior Prom.

Two graves must hide, Warren, thine and mine corse
who, on the day we met, happened
also to meet an individual dragging a full-length cross

along 42nd Street and kept mum, each earning extra Brownie points
for letting that cup pass. The alcoholic
knows that to enter in these bonds

is to be free, yeah right.

the poem continues at the TLS here.

Inspiring Evolutionary Thought, and a New Title, by Turning Genetics Into Prose

From The New York Times:Dawkins_9

Thirty years ago, a young biologist set out to explain some new ideas in evolutionary biology to a wider audience. But he ended up restating Darwinian theory in such a broad and forceful way that his book has influenced specialists as well. “Richard Dawkins: How a Scientist Changed the Way We Think” is a collection of essays about Dr. Dawkins’s book “The Selfish Gene” and its impact. Contributors to the book, edited by Alan Grafen and Matt Ridley, are mostly biologists but include the novelist Philip Pullman, author of “His Dark Materials,” and the bishop of Oxford, Richard Harries.

The biologists have copious praise for Dr. Dawkins’s work of synthesis, while the writers remark on his graceful and vivid style. It is quite surprising for anyone to be commended from such opposite quarters, but “The Selfish Gene,” published in 1976, was unusual. Written in clear and approachable language, it worked its way so logically into the core of Darwinian theory that even evolutionary biologists were seduced into embracing Dr. Dawkins’s view of their world.

Dr. Dawkins’s starting point was the idea that the gene, not the individual, is the basic unit on which natural selection acts. The gene’s behavior is most easily understood by assuming its interest is to get itself replicated as much as possible — hence the “selfish” gene of the title.

More here.

Scientists get inside look at viruses

From MSNBC:Virus_1

Exactly 25 years ago, in the body of the world’s first diagnosed AIDS case, the full capabilities and mysterious workings of a virus unfolded. Three years later, in 1984, Luc Montagnier of the Pasteur Institute of Paris and Robert Gallo, then of the National Cancer Institute, announced their discovery of HIV, the virus that infects the human immune system and causes AIDS.

Even though the smallest viruses are only about one-millionth of an inch long, they live up to their Latin namesake — poison. They are capable of infecting and hijacking a human body, creating health hazards as minor as the common flu and as disastrous as the AIDS epidemic.Viruses are neatly organized, petite packages of genetic material, shaped like rods, filaments, harpoons, or spheres. Proteins surround the package, which is called a capsid. Some viruses have an added layer of lipids that coat the capsid. Little extensions on the virus are called antigens, which help the virus hunt down the target host cell.

More here.

THE HORNINESS GENE

Maggie Wittlin in Seed Magazine:

SexgeneAre you unhappy with your ability to function sexually? Do you lack interest in sex or find it difficult to become aroused? Are you unsatisfied with your orgasms? If so, you may be genetically predisposed to have a moderate to low sex drive.

Israeli researchers published a study online in the April 18th issue of Molecular Psychiatry suggesting a link between a dopamine receptor gene and human sexual desire, arousal and function. They conclude that one gene variant found in about 60% of the population may lead to a more subdued sex drive while another, found in about 30% of the population, contributes to higher sexual desire, arousal and function.

More here.

SEPTUAGENARIAN SEX

Virginia Ironside reviews Unaccompanied Women by Jane Juska, in the Literary Review:

As this is a book about a book, in order to get through this one, you need to have waded through the first one: Jane Juska’s A Round-Heeled Woman: My Late-Life Adventures in Sex and Romance. In this, the author recounted what happened after she’d placed an advertisement in the New York Review of Books which read: ‘Before I turn 67 – next March – I would like to have a lot of sex with a man I like. If you want to talk first, Trollope works for me.’ Billed as a strike for sexual freedom for the mature (actually very mature) woman, it came across as a tragic wail from someone who was young in the Fifties but who clearly wished she’d been young in the Sixties.

As a result of the ad, Jane managed to get quite a few orgasms under her belt but oh, what a price she had to pay! Eighty-two-year-old Jonah, for example, insisted she talked dirty the first night and, on the second, announced that he didn’t desire her – ‘Get yourself some KY jelly. You get dry before I can get in, and I can’t keep it up long enough for you to get wet,’ he said, brutally, before fleeing with the two champagne flutes that she’d brought to drink from, not to mention the trousers of her red silk jim-jams. Then she met Robert. He was a member of AA and already had a girlfriend, whom he rang repeatedly, in order to tell her he loved her. He had also started drinking again. The following lovers were equally, if not more, unappetising (one of them sucked boiled sweets when they had sex) and finally she bumped into the much younger Graham, whom she adored because he pompously uttered this smug and well-worn cliché, which it appears she had never heard before in her life: ‘The greatest pleasure for me in making love is giving the other person pleasure.’

In her latest book, Juska tells us what happened next.

More here.

In West Bank, a First Hint of Agriculture: Figs

John Noble Wilford in the New York Times:

Figs_650_1In the ruins of a prehistoric village near Jericho, in the West Bank, scientists have found remains of figs that they say appear to be the earliest known cultivated fruit crop, perhaps the first evidence anywhere of domesticated food production at the dawn of agriculture. The figs were grown some 11,400 years ago.

Presumably that was well after Adam and Eve tried on the new look in fig leaves, in which case the fig must have grown wild in Eden.

Two botanists and an archaeologist, who describe the discovery in today’s issue of the journal Science, said the figs came from cultivated trees that grew about 1,000 years before such staples as wheat, barley and chickpeas were widely domesticated in the Middle East. These grain and legume crops had been considered the first steps in agriculture.

More here.

Monday, June 5, 2006

Below the Fold: Forget the Sheepskin, and Follow the Money, or Please Don’t Ask What a University is For…

Garbed in cap and gown and subjected probably for the first time in their lives to quaint Latin orations, three quarters of a million students, sheepskin in hand, will bound forth into the national economy, hungry for jobs, economic security, and social advancement. They exit a higher education economy that looks and works more and more like the national economy they now enter. The ivory tower has become the office block, and its professors highly paid workers in an $317 billion dollar business.

Some of this is, of course, old news. From the Berkeley 1964 Free Speech movement onward, the corporate vision of American universities as factories of knowledge production and consumption bureaucratically organized as the late Clark Kerr’s “multiversities,” has been contested, but has largely come to pass.

But even to this insider (confession of interest: I am now completing my 20th year before the university masthead), there are new lows to which my world is sinking. They amount to the transformation of American universities into entrepreneurial firms, and in some cases, multinational corporations.

Most of you by now are used to the fact that universities are big business. The press never stops talking about the $26 billion Harvard endowment, or how the rest of the Ivy League and Stanford are scheming to be nipping at old John Harvard’s much-touched toes. But many non-elite schools are joining the race for big money and to become big businesses. Twenty-two universities now have billion dollar fund-raising campaigns underway. After talking with a colleague from the University of Iowa on another matter, I went to the university web page to discover that Iowa has raised over a billion dollars in a major campaign since 1999 – not bad when you recall that the state itself only has 3 million residents. Even my university, the City University of New York, the ur-urban ladder to social mobility for generations of immigrants and poor, has announced that it is embarking on a billion-dollar crusade.

In addition to billion-dollar endowments, there is revenue to consider. You might be surprised at all of the billion dollar universities in neighborhoods near you. All it really takes to put a university over the billion-dollar revenue mark is a hospital. Iowa, for instance, is a half billion a year all-purpose education shop; add its medical school and hospital system, and its revenue quadruples. A big enrollment urban school like Temple does a billion dollars of health care business in Philadelphia, easily surpassing its educational budget of 660 million. These university budgets often depend as much on the rates of Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement as they do tuitions from their various educational activities.

Tuitions are no small matter, of course, for those who pay them. The elite schools have recently crossed the $40,000 a year threshold, but the perhaps more important and less noticed change in higher education finances is that states are passing more of the burden for public college and university education directly onto the students themselves. The publics enroll three quarters of the nation’s students. As late as the 1980s, according to Katharine Lyall in a January, 2006 article in Change, states paid about half of the cost of their education; now the proportion has dropped to 30%. For instance, only 18% of the University of Michigan’s bills are paid by the state; for the University of Virginia, state support drops to 8%. Baby-boomers on that six-year plan at “old state” where they paid in the hundreds for their semester drinking and drug privileges find themselves now paying an average yearly tuition of $5,500 a year for their kids. When you add in room and board, a year at “old state” now costs an average of $15,500 a year, a figure that is 35% of the median income for a U.S. family of four.

So under-funded are important state universities that they are resorting to tax-like surcharges to make up for chronic state neglect. The University of Illinois, for example, is adding an annual $500 “assessment” on student bills for what the university president Joseph White, as quoted by Dave Newbart in the April 7 Chicago Sun-Times, describes as deferred maintenance. “The roofs are leaking and the caulking is crumbling and the concrete is disintegrating,” President White says. Next year it will cost $17,650 to go to Champaign-Urbana. The state will cover only 25% of Illinois’ costs.

Illinois’ President Newbart may be a bit old-school, and perhaps has lagged back of the pack of higher education industrial leaders. He should get smart. Instead of milking the kids on a per capita basis and incurring undying consumer wrath (after all the plaster was cracked way before I got there, I can hear a student voice or two saying), Newbart should join his peers in a little financial manipulation. What do big firms with billions in assets and large revenue flows do? They sell bonds! So much money, so little interest. And with principal due after a succession of presidents has become so many oil portraits in the board room, so little personal and professional exposure. With the increasingly short tenure of university presidents, even Groucho Marx’s Quincy Adams Wagstaff could get out in time.

American universities have made a very big bet on their future prosperity. They have issued over $33 billion in bonds, according to the May 18 Economist. For the multinationals like Harvard, this is sound money management. To raise working capital, rather than sell some of their stock portfolio at a less than optimal moment or sell the 265-acre arboretum near my house which would diminish the university endowment, Harvard can use its assets as guarantees. The university’s credit is AAA, interest rates are still historically fairly low, and their tax-exempt status makes them attractive investment choices. Harvard can deploy the money in new projects, or re-invest it in higher-yielding instruments and pocket the difference tax-free.

The entrepreneurial universities, that is, those not internationally branded and not elite, are trying to gain a competitive edge. They borrow through bonds to build dormitories, student unions, and to beautify their campuses. Many are borrowing money they don’t have or can’t easily repay. As the saying goes, they are becoming “highly leveraged.” A turn around a town with more than a few universities will likely reveal how it’s raining dorm rooms locally. Here in Boston, it has afflicted universities on both sides of the Charles. Even an avowedly commuter campus like the University of Massachusetts-Boston is building dorms to create that market-defined “campus” feel. Bonds pay for the dorms, and the students through higher rents, pay them off.

The educative value of dorm living, smart remarks aside, is rather problematic. Talking with an old friend who heads an academic department at a Boston university, I have begun to understand, however, the business logic at work. His bosses have explained the situation thus: the last of the baby boomer progeny are passing through the system, and a trough lies behind them. The children of baby-boomers, alas, prefer the reproductive freedoms of their parents, and are having children late as well. International students, full-tuition payers and once the source of great profit, are choosing increasingly non-American universities, for a variety of reasons, some related to our closed-door policy after 9/11. Add income difficulties among the American middle class, and the entrepreneurial universities calculate that they must improve their marketability and take business from others. Expand market share, create new markets (new diplomas, new student populations), or fight to keep even, they reason. Or face decline, now perhaps even a bit more steep since they are into hock for millions of dollars in bond repayments. The “high yield” customer is the traditional customer, a late adolescent of parents with deepish pockets. So dorms, fitness gyms, and student unions it is, and the faculty is mum.

In the great expand-or-die moment occurring among America’s entrepreneurial universities, you would think faculty would be making out, but they aren’t. Let us set aside for another time comment on the highly limited American Idol, star search quests among the elite schools and the entrepreneurs’ somewhat desperate casting about for rainmakers and high-profile individuals who can help in creating a distinctive brand for their paymasters. College and university faculty salaries as a whole since 1970 have stagnated, the U.S. Department of Education reports. Part of the reason is that although the number of faculty has risen 88% since 1975, the actual number of tenured faculty has increased by only 24%, and their proportion of the total has dropped from 37% in 1975 to 24% in 2003. Full-time, non-tenure track and part-time faculty are being used to meet increased demand. Universities are succeeding in gradually eliminating tenure as a condition of future faculty employment.

Forty-three years after Kerr presented his concept of the “multiversity,” the facts conform in many respects to his vision. American universities are massive producers of knowledge commanded by technocrats who guide their experts toward new domains of experiment and scientific discovery. They possess a virtual monopoly on postsecondary education, having adapted over the past half century to provide even the majority share of the nation’s technical and applied professional training.

But swimming with instead of against the stream of American capitalism over the past half century has cost American universities what few degrees of freedom they possessed. They have become captives of corporate capitalism and have adopted its business model. They are reducing faculty to itinerant instructors. Bloated with marketeers, fund-raisers, finance experts, and layers of customer service representatives, they are complicated and expensive to run, and risky to maintain when the demographic clock winds down or competition intensifies. Moreover, as Harry Lewis, a Harvard College dean pushed out by the outgoing President Larry Summers, put rather archly in the May 27 Boston Globe, students whose parents paying more than $40,000 a year “expect the university to treat them customers, not like acolytes in some temple they are privileged to enter.”

As a priest in the temple, it hurts to note how much further down the road we have gone in reducing teaching and learning to a simple commodity. However, in demanding to be treated as customers, students and their parents are simply revealing the huckster we have put behind the veil. Their demands cannot change the course of American universities for the better, but they tell those of us still inside where we stand, and where we must begin anew our struggle.

Random Walks: Band of Brothers

Ufc_hughesgracie_ufcstoreWhile a large part of mainstream America was blissfully enjoying their long Memorial Day weekend, fans of the Ultimate Fighting Championship franchise were glued to their Pay-Per-View TV sets, watching the end of an era. In the pinnacle event of UFC-60, the reigning welterweight champion, Matt Hughes, faced off against UFC legend Royce Gracie — and won, by technical knockout, when the referee stopped the fight  about 4 minutes and 30 seconds into the very first round.

To fully appreciate the significance of Hughes’ achievement, one must know a bit about the UFC’s 12-1/2-year history. The enterprise was founded in 1993 by Royce’s older brother, Rorion Gracie, as a means of proving the brutal effectiveness of his family’s signature style of jujitsu. The concept was simple, yet brilliant: invite fighters from every conceivable style of martial art to compete against each other in a full-contact, no-holds-barred martial arts tournament, with no weight classes, no time limits, and very few taboos. No biting, no fish-hooks to the nostrils or mouth, no eye gouging, and no throat strikes. Everything else was fair game, including groin strikes.

(Admittedly, the fighters tended to honor an unspoken “gentlemen’s agreement” not to make use of groin strikes. That’s why karate master Keith Hackney stirred up such a controversy in UFC-III when he broke that agreement in his match against sumo wrestler Emmanuel Yarbrough and repeatedly pounded on Yarbrough’s groin to escape a hold. I personally never had a problem with Hackney’s decision. He was seriously out-sized, and if you’re going to enter a no-holds-barred tournament, you should expect your opponent to be a little ruthless in a pinch. But the universe meted out its own form of justice: Hackney beat Yarbrough but broke his hand and had to drop out of the tournament.)

The first UFC was an eight-man, round-robin tournament, with each man fighting three times — defeating each opponent while still remaining healthy enough to continue — to reach the final round. Since no state athletic commission would ever consider sanctioning such a brutal event, the UFC was semi-underground, finding its home in places like Denver, Colorado, which had very little regulations in place to monitor full-contact sports. Think Bloodsport, without the deaths, but plenty of blood and broken bones, and a generous sampling of testosterone-induced cheese. (Bikini-clad ring girls, anyone?)

Rorion chose his younger brother, Royce, to defend the family honor because Royce was tall and slim (6’1″, 180 pounds) and not very intimidating in demeanor. He didn’t look like a fighter, not in the least, and with no weight classes, frequently found himself paired against powerful opponents with bulging pecs and biceps who outweighed him by a good 50 pounds or more. And Royce kicked ass, time and again, winning three of the first four UFC events. (In UFC-III, he won his first match against the much-larger Kimo, but the injuries he sustained in the process were sufficient to force him to drop out of the tournament.)

He beat shootfighter Ken Shamrock (who later moved to the more lucrative pro-wrestling circuit) not once, but twice, despite his size disadvantage. Royce_09_1 His technique was just too damned good. Among other things, he knew how to maximize leverage so that he didn’t need to exert nearly as much force to defeat his opponents. Shamrock (pictured at right) has said that Gracie might be lacking in strength, “but he’s very hard to get a hold of, and the way he moves his legs and arms, he always is in a position to sweep or go for a submission.”

UFC fans soon got used to the familiar sight of the pre-fight “Gracie Train”: When his name was announced, Royce would walk to the Octagon, accompanied by a long line of all his brothers, cousins, hell, probably a few uncles and distant cousins just for good measure, each with his hands on the shoulders of the man in front of him as a show of family solidarity and strength. And of course, looking on and beaming with pride, was his revered father, Helio Gracie (now 93), who founded the style as a young man — and then made sure he sired enough sons to carry on the dynasty.

Royce’s crowning achievement arguably occurred in 1994, when, in UFC-IV’s final match, he defeated champion wrestler Dan “The Beast” Severn. Many fight fans consider the fight among the greatest in sports history, and not just because Severn, at 6’2″ and 262 pounds, outweighed Royce by nearly 100 pounds. Technique-wise, the two men were very well-matched, and for over 20 minutes, Severn actually had Royce pinned on his shoulders against the mesh wall of the Octagon. Nobody expected Royce to get out of that predicament, but instead, he pulled off a completely unexpected triangle choke with his legs, forcing Severn to tap out.

For all his swaggering machismo, Royce was one of my heroes in those early days, mostly because I had just started training in a different style of jujitsu (strongly oriented toward self-defense), at a tiny storefront school in Brooklyn called Bay Ridge Dojo. True, it was a much more humble, amateur environment than the world of the UFC, but Royce gave me hope. I trained in a heavy contact, predominantly male dojo, and at 5’7″ and 125 pounds, was frequently outsized by my class mates. My favorite quote by Royce: “I never worry about the size of a man, or his strength. You can’t pick your opponents. If you’re 180 pounds and a guy 250 pounds comes up to you on the street, you can’t tell him you need a weight class and a time limit. You have to defend yourself. If you know the technique, you can defend yourself against anyone, of any size.” And he proved it, time and again.

For smaller mere mortals like me, with less developed technique, size definitely mattered. The stark reality of this was burned into my memory the first time one of the guys kicked me so hard, he knocked me into the wall. Needless to say, there was a heavy physical toll: the occasional bloody nose, odd sprain, broken bone, a dislocated wrist, and a spectacular head injury resulting from a missed block that required 14 stitches. (I still proudly bear a faint, jagged two-inch scar across my forehead. And I never made that mistake again.) I didn’t let any of it faze me. I worked doggedly on improving my technique and hired a personal trainer, packing on an extra 30 pounds of muscle over the course of two years. Not very feminine, I admit: I looked like a beefier version of Xena, Warrior Princess. At least I could take the abuse a little better. In October 2000, I became only the second woman in my system’s history to earn a black belt.

I learned a lot over that seven-year journey. Most importantly, I learned that Royce was right: good technique can compensate for a size and strength disadvantage. It’s just that the greater the size differential, the better your technique has to be, because there is that much less margin for error. And if your opponent is equally skilled — well, that’s when the trouble can start, even for a champion like Royce.

After those early, spectacular victories, Royce faded from the UFC spotlight for awhile, focusing his efforts on the burgeoning Gracie industry: there is now a Gracie jujitsu school in almost every major US city. He’d proved his point, repeatedly, and it’s always wise to quit while you’re at the top. But every now and then he’d re-emerge, just to prove he still had the chops to be a contender. As recently as December 2004, he defeated the 6’8″, 483-pound (!) Chad Rowan in two minutes, 13 seconds, with a simple wrist lock. (“Either submit, or have it broken,” he supposedly said. Rowan wisely submitted.)

The very fact of Royce’s success inevitably caused the sport to change. Fighters were forced to learn groundfighting skills. Back when the UFC was all about martial arts style versus style, many fighters in more traditional disciplines — karate, tae kwon do, kickboxing — had never really learned how to fight effectively on the ground. The moniker changed from No-Holds-Barred, to Mixed Martial Arts — a far more accurate designation these days. Today, the UFC has time limits (with occasional restarts to please the fans, who get bored watching a lengthy stalemate between two world-class grapplers), and even more rules: no hair-pulling, and no breaking fingers and toes. The formula is commercially successful — UFC events typically garner Nielsen ratings on a par with NBA and NHL games on cable television — but these are not conditions that favor the Gracie style. Eventual defeat was practically inevitable.

And so it came to pass over Memorial Day weekend. The UFC torch has passed to Hughes. But Royce’s legacy is incontrovertible. He changed the face of the sport forever by dominating so completely, that he forced everyone else to adapt to him. That’s why he was one of the first three fighters to be inducted into the UFC Hall of Fame (along with Shamrock and Severn). Royce Gracie will always be a legend.

When not taking random walks at 3 Quarks Daily, Jennifer Ouellette muses about physics and culture at her own blog, Cocktail Party Physics.