Note to reader: In addition to working very closely with Dr. Desiderius for years, I did and still do count him as the dearest of friends. We are open and direct with each other, as this interview will show. He left the academy a few years ago because, in his words, there was no longer a point to teaching. I also interview him about fifteen years ago, and sadly he has become "more jaded" (his words, not mine). This interview is equal parts, cautionary tale, reflection on the wonders and purpose of the liberal arts, and the deep sadness of a spurned lover. I can attest that there was a time when Professor Desiderius was passionate about humane learning.
Robert Woods: It is always a joy to converse with you and I appreciate your time, as I know you are busy.
Michael Desiderius: I use to be busy, when I was teaching, now I finally know leisure.
RW: Well, I thought we would have a few moments before you took a dig at the university.
MD: I'm sorry. Let me begin again. It is also a pleasure to speak with you my friend, as conversation is among the greatest gifts. Since this gift was discarded by the university years ago, I always appreciate these occasions.
RW: Let me return to a question I asked you more than fifteen years ago. Why did you want to teach liberal arts?
MD: Like the apostle said of preaching, "I could not do other wise." I had this sense of calling to teaching.
RW: Do you miss teaching?
MD: I barely remember teaching at all.
RW: What do you mean, you only quit last year?
MD: As I travel back in my mind, I can tell you that I remember being in inferno like meetings that lasted for hours and did little to no good for the true end of education.
RW: What is the true end of education?
MD: To lead the soul from darkness to wisdom and I worked on the factory line for years and saw little of this. When I walked around in the manner of Diogenes, with lamp in hand, I did not see it anywhere. I survived on the hope that there was somewhere, at some time, real education occurring.
RW: What went wrong?
MD: We forgot the purpose of education! Let me layout briefly what I chronicled. I taught at one school where the highest academic ranking official was a manager. He was completely ignorant of humane learning. If you employ a manager to lead academics, you may have a well organized business, but you will not have a university. Now, I understand that the trend is to hire lawyers. Obviously, boards that place lawyers in charge of academics have never read Shakespeare.
RW: So much of the decline of education is the result of poor leadership?
MD: Once the camel gets his nose in the tent, his body will soon follow. The camel in this case is the complete confusion of what a school, college, or university is. Managers, manage. They manage people, money, and the bottom line. Lawyers are technicians of a different sort, but their limited filter also funnels in a narrow manner. The academic, when truly an academic, considers the wisdom of the ages. Effieicny, immediacy, and relavancy are consider in light of the consensure of humane learning for thousands of years, not the last fifteen minutes. Most technicians only see what is right in front of their faces and since that is always changing, so is the nature of education.
RW: So do you not think that institutions of learning should keep up with the times?
MD: Absolutely not! If and when places of authentic learning do what they are supposed to be then they become timeless and continuously relevant.
RW: What do you mean?
MD:
RW: What about today's students?
MD: Since human nature has not changed from the beginning, in many ways students are today what they have always been. In short, teachable However, the modern moment has placed some astonishing obstacles before those who desire to know. The distractions offered to the modern student, and many come from the administrations of schools, are daunting. I stronly suspect that these distractions are crippling. What this means
Robert Woods: It is always a joy to converse with you and I appreciate your time, as I know you are busy.
Michael Desiderius: I use to be busy, when I was teaching, now I finally know leisure.
RW: Well, I thought we would have a few moments before you took a dig at the university.
MD: I'm sorry. Let me begin again. It is also a pleasure to speak with you my friend, as conversation is among the greatest gifts. Since this gift was discarded by the university years ago, I always appreciate these occasions.
RW: Let me return to a question I asked you more than fifteen years ago. Why did you want to teach liberal arts?
MD: Like the apostle said of preaching, "I could not do other wise." I had this sense of calling to teaching.
RW: Do you miss teaching?
MD: I barely remember teaching at all.
RW: What do you mean, you only quit last year?
MD: As I travel back in my mind, I can tell you that I remember being in inferno like meetings that lasted for hours and did little to no good for the true end of education.
RW: What is the true end of education?
MD: To lead the soul from darkness to wisdom and I worked on the factory line for years and saw little of this. When I walked around in the manner of Diogenes, with lamp in hand, I did not see it anywhere. I survived on the hope that there was somewhere, at some time, real education occurring.
RW: What went wrong?
MD: We forgot the purpose of education! Let me layout briefly what I chronicled. I taught at one school where the highest academic ranking official was a manager. He was completely ignorant of humane learning. If you employ a manager to lead academics, you may have a well organized business, but you will not have a university. Now, I understand that the trend is to hire lawyers. Obviously, boards that place lawyers in charge of academics have never read Shakespeare.
RW: So much of the decline of education is the result of poor leadership?
MD: Once the camel gets his nose in the tent, his body will soon follow. The camel in this case is the complete confusion of what a school, college, or university is. Managers, manage. They manage people, money, and the bottom line. Lawyers are technicians of a different sort, but their limited filter also funnels in a narrow manner. The academic, when truly an academic, considers the wisdom of the ages. Effieicny, immediacy, and relavancy are consider in light of the consensure of humane learning for thousands of years, not the last fifteen minutes. Most technicians only see what is right in front of their faces and since that is always changing, so is the nature of education.
RW: So do you not think that institutions of learning should keep up with the times?
MD: Absolutely not! If and when places of authentic learning do what they are supposed to be then they become timeless and continuously relevant.
RW: What do you mean?
MD:
RW: What about today's students?
MD: Since human nature has not changed from the beginning, in many ways students are today what they have always been. In short, teachable However, the modern moment has placed some astonishing obstacles before those who desire to know. The distractions offered to the modern student, and many come from the administrations of schools, are daunting. I stronly suspect that these distractions are crippling. What this means