Four decades ago, Dwight Macdonald rued the impending triumph of “Midcult,” an “agreeable ooze” of denatured high culture produced for the college-educated. Curtis White’s The Middle Mind surpasses Macdonald’s work. Where Macdonald thought Midcult a merely insipid affair, White contends that the Middle [RETURN TO ARTICLE]
FOLLOW US
Also by Eugene McCarraher
-
A Merry Marxy Christmas
A specter has been haunting Marxism —the specter of Christianity. Routed politically by capitalist globalism, and hard-pressed to...
MORE » -
Stale Air and Dearest Freshness
Four decades ago, Dwight Macdonald rued the impending triumph of “Midcult,” an “agreeable ooze” of denatured high culture...
MORE » -
Against All Odds
Before he married and became a father, my cousin was a gamblin’ man. A successful banker from Monday...
MORE »
SUPPORT INDEPENDENT MEDIA
Invest in the news you need. In These Times is a nonprofit, reader-supported magazine and website.
subscribe today for $19.95!
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
MOST READ
- Why Conservatives Can’t Fix Poverty
- The Girl’s Guide to Staying Safe Online
- Siri and the High-Tech Gender Gap
- It’s the Stupid Republicans, Stupid
- True Crime Finance Stories
- Is the Federal Government Helping to Bust Unions?
- Anger Sowing Seeds of a New Consumer Movement
- What Can Labor Learn?
- Marching Off the Cliff
- New Eden, Old Devils

Reader Comments
born-again modernism, but the book might have some references for us?
born-again modernism, but the book might have some references for us?
A good example of this is the New York Timees radio station, WQXR.
Once the home of classical music, it has been dumbed down into a classical top-40’s venue. A policy of gently stroking the minds of a college grad audience without waking them up seems to be the formula.
Sometimes I really think it’s impossible to write cultural criticism from within academia. You get so many bad samples. There’s a particular kind of stupidity that prevails not just among “the college-educated” or the “bobos” but among faculty and other producers of cultural criticism themselves: it isn’t particular to academia—so you can’t write a *thesis* about how it’s particular to academia, the academic impulse to write theses about observations or frustrations notwithstanding—but it’s certainly at home there. It sounds like this book encompasses one of these manias developed by a person who isn’t at home, for various reasons, within his own coterie, and has found a generally appealing way to say why that should be important to us all. I mean, who isn’t sick of upper-class liberal banality? But it’s the fact that it’s *banal* that is significant, not the particulars, except in the discussion of attitudes towards American imperialism, which sounds like it is probably well-taken. Banality has always, and always will, come in a multitude of shapes and forms. The only way to attack it is at the root, often with the language and methods of a field highly denatured and untimely in this age of biodeterminism and deconstruction: namely psychology. If you’re going to write a book about any kind of “mind,” that seems like a good place to start.
But hey, I’ve proven my implicit theory about doctrines and their limitations: now *I* want to write a book about some segment of American culture, a book the world would be much better without. Huzzah.
register a new account »Posting Security