Publications
Partners
LET us go then, you and I,
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherised upon a table;
Let us go, through certain half-deserted streets,
The muttering retreats
Of restless nights in one-night cheap hotels
And sawdust restaurants with oyster-shells:
Streets that follow like a tedious argument
Of insidious intent
To lead you to an overwhelming question …
Oh, do not ask: "What is it?"
Let us go and make our visit.
From the Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock, by TS Eliot
AS A university student in 1957 in Dallas, Texas, I sat at the feet of the great poet and listened to him recite his famous works.
He was in a wheelchair, his face seamed and ancient but his voice large and unforgettable. TS Eliot seemed appropriate for a trip into the quicksand of the politically incorrect subject of race and ability.
Perhaps it’s the sombre mood of his Love Song – with its constant chant of mortality and the pointlessness of our lives – that somehow resonated with a remark in a letter to this magazine from Dr Max Price, vice-chancellor of the University of Cape Town.
Price, a thoughtful man, wrote in defence of UCT’s race-based admissions criteria. In the UCT system much more is demanded of white applicants than of Indians – of whom, in turn, much more is asked than is asked of coloureds, of whom, in their turn, much more is asked than is asked of black kids.
Critics believe there are other ways of dealing with the legacy of apartheid. Those include UCT students of colour who resent being considered inferior applicants who didn’t get in on merit.
Faculty members object on the grounds, among others, that Price’s approach entrenches apartheid era race classifications, insults those of colour and is intellectually unsound.
In his letter Price argues for his approach, stating he believes "talent is randomly distributed in all race groups, in all schools and geographical areas, whether rural or urban".
Let us assume he means for that to apply universally. There’s no reason why South Africa should differ from other societies if that’s a universal truth.
Interestingly, Price doesn’t say what sort of "talent" he’s talking about. Thus we can assume he’s referring to talent not only in academics but also in sport, the arts, business, politics and, quite simply, all spheres of human activity.
The evidence would suggest not all "talent" is "randomly distributed". At the Olympic Games the 100m track event invariably has eight black finalists, while the 100m swimming final will have eight whites.
In the United States black players make up 80% of teams in professional baseball while blacks account for around 12% of the population.
Academic results in the US reveal Asian students outperform all other groups, particularly in maths and science.
That may well reflect parental discipline and other cultural norms. It’s interesting that recent Asian immigrants in the US have rapidly moved ahead of Hispanics and blacks in income and have outpaced whites in family wealth creation.
Again, those trends may well have no connection to race or genetics. But they do tend to beg the question: if "talent is distributed randomly" – as Price believes – why do we have such varying outcomes for different races?
And where do race and culture part so that it’s only culture and circumstance that affect the distribution of talent, as Price seems to suggest?
To demonstrate a random distribution of talent, one would surely be obliged to take race into account. Price takes it into account in assisting those previously disadvantaged.
It would be insane and financially ruinous for a US basketball coach to choose other than on merit. And 80% of the time they choose black players.
Again, the question is begged: are blacks inherently superior in some forms of sport or is that success reflecting cultural norms? And are Asians inherently smarter or are Asian parents just stricter and more demanding?
When the evening is spread out against the sky
Like a patient etherised upon a table;
Let us go, through certain half-deserted streets,
The muttering retreats
Of restless nights in one-night cheap hotels
And sawdust restaurants with oyster-shells:
Streets that follow like a tedious argument
Of insidious intent
To lead you to an overwhelming question …
Oh, do not ask: "What is it?"
Let us go and make our visit.
From the Love Song of J Alfred Prufrock, by TS Eliot
AS A university student in 1957 in Dallas, Texas, I sat at the feet of the great poet and listened to him recite his famous works.
He was in a wheelchair, his face seamed and ancient but his voice large and unforgettable. TS Eliot seemed appropriate for a trip into the quicksand of the politically incorrect subject of race and ability.
Perhaps it’s the sombre mood of his Love Song – with its constant chant of mortality and the pointlessness of our lives – that somehow resonated with a remark in a letter to this magazine from Dr Max Price, vice-chancellor of the University of Cape Town.
Price, a thoughtful man, wrote in defence of UCT’s race-based admissions criteria. In the UCT system much more is demanded of white applicants than of Indians – of whom, in turn, much more is asked than is asked of coloureds, of whom, in their turn, much more is asked than is asked of black kids.
Critics believe there are other ways of dealing with the legacy of apartheid. Those include UCT students of colour who resent being considered inferior applicants who didn’t get in on merit.
Faculty members object on the grounds, among others, that Price’s approach entrenches apartheid era race classifications, insults those of colour and is intellectually unsound.
In his letter Price argues for his approach, stating he believes "talent is randomly distributed in all race groups, in all schools and geographical areas, whether rural or urban".
Let us assume he means for that to apply universally. There’s no reason why South Africa should differ from other societies if that’s a universal truth.
Interestingly, Price doesn’t say what sort of "talent" he’s talking about. Thus we can assume he’s referring to talent not only in academics but also in sport, the arts, business, politics and, quite simply, all spheres of human activity.
The evidence would suggest not all "talent" is "randomly distributed". At the Olympic Games the 100m track event invariably has eight black finalists, while the 100m swimming final will have eight whites.
In the United States black players make up 80% of teams in professional baseball while blacks account for around 12% of the population.
Academic results in the US reveal Asian students outperform all other groups, particularly in maths and science.
That may well reflect parental discipline and other cultural norms. It’s interesting that recent Asian immigrants in the US have rapidly moved ahead of Hispanics and blacks in income and have outpaced whites in family wealth creation.
Again, those trends may well have no connection to race or genetics. But they do tend to beg the question: if "talent is distributed randomly" – as Price believes – why do we have such varying outcomes for different races?
And where do race and culture part so that it’s only culture and circumstance that affect the distribution of talent, as Price seems to suggest?
To demonstrate a random distribution of talent, one would surely be obliged to take race into account. Price takes it into account in assisting those previously disadvantaged.
It would be insane and financially ruinous for a US basketball coach to choose other than on merit. And 80% of the time they choose black players.
Again, the question is begged: are blacks inherently superior in some forms of sport or is that success reflecting cultural norms? And are Asians inherently smarter or are Asian parents just stricter and more demanding?
