But here I am more years later than I like to think of, and I have read thousands of pages... of very uneven quality and perspectives on nearly every aspect of Freemasonry. And I've done it in sources available to me in two languages. I've published articles of relevance to my guild and to Freemasonry in mainstream academic, peer-reviewed journals.
My conclusion is that it is still one of the more fascinating and least understood areas of Western -- even universal -- culture. I've also given a few talks to my Masonic brothers who have invited me to help them with what they need to know in order to be responsible scholars. If these speaking engagements mean anything, they are proof of goodwill, brotherhood and humility in one stroke.
This blog is intended to help those who would like to learn about Freemasonry, whether they intend to write about it or not. These audiences are easily subdivided at first glance into Masons and non-Masons. Further subdivisions are perhaps less apparent, for there are, in both of these groups, those who are prepared to do academic research. By this I refer primarily, and almost exclusively to those who hold Ph.Ds. Why?
Because, even though once in a while a truly talented person without a Ph.D. comes along with an instinct for the "rules of evidence" and who has excellent writing skills, understands how to proceed in the "literature search" and sift reliable sources from unreliable ones, who knows how to cite sources properly, organize their writing and so forth, serious scholarship is usually only learned under close tutelage. Its methods and conventions are the results of centuries of refinement and are now pretty much universal. While I see major signs of decay around me in the US, particularly in the Humanities, there still are standards and they are upheld at what are known as R1 institutions (where "Research is #1"). Guild standards are recognized and understood by scholars internationally. While most Ph.Ds in all accredited institutions of higher learning do revere, understand and follow their guilds' standards, they are not always closely followed by faculty or valued by administrators in institutions more focused on teaching.
It would seem proper to let educated Freemasons speak about the Craft to the general public, insofar as they are at liberty by their obligations to do so. That is why I created this blog. But the truth is that there are few Masons in higher education nowadays, and the few who are there might just be out to make a sensational buck, despite all they know. The general public is always drooling for something sensational. The more mysterious or scandalous, the better. And of course, no one speaks for Freemasonry. There is no one central defining authority about its meaning or purpose. Odd, isn't it? This fact makes Freemasonry vulnerable to stupid and bigoted attacks. The insiders' view, known as the "emic" perspective, is tainted in the public eye for their being, well, insiders.
The well intentioned non-Masonic Ph.D. is at a disadvantage for obvious reasons as well. The outsiders' view, known as the "etic" perspective, is tainted from the point of view of insiders for being, obviously, outsiders, absent from the culture of Freemasonry, no matter what he or she may have read in documents purporting to "expose all." This disadvantage is heightened somewhat in the case of a woman scholar, since traditional, regular Freemasonry is a fraternity and does not admit women. Nevertheless, there have been and are great scholars in this latter group, men and women, such as Dame Frances A. Yates
, Steven C. Bullock
, Mark Tabbert
, Margaret C. Jacob
, David Stevenson 
and Alexander Piatigorsky
.The difficulty for the serious Mason who has a Ph.D. is that he may be perceived, rightly or wrongly, by his peers in the academy. They might whisper about him. He fears questions like these going through people's minds: "Is that scholarship?"; "There he goes, trying to recruit people!"; "Another weirdo, grinding his axe!" or, more subtle responses such as: "He's writing about what no one else among us here are able to do -- no fair! How can we judge this work when we don't know anything about it?"
Worse still, in our day and age of hyperbolic and agonizing political correctness (a form of McCarthyism aimed from the left or aimed from the last frustrated seethings of feminism amid a post-feminist culture), Freemasons in the academy might be fearful of being viewed as misogynists, especially if they are more successful than their potential critics as scholars in their guilds, never mind that many such men give a lot of scholarship money to females, are happily married and have -- oh, my, daughters!
Finally, there is another group comprised of Masons and non-Masons whom I generally place in the "Masonic ghetto." Both of these groups are usually sans Ph.D. and both are, or can be, dangerous to Freemasonry. The former often deliberately; the latter because of his best intentions to defend or represent it without adequate academic preparation or guidance. My remaining comments are primarily directed at this latter group.
Remember what you learned in high school and college about good writing. Get a copy of the Harbrace College Handbook of English
-- a book unhappily no longer required of most freshmen. Become familiar with responsible and irresponsible books about Freemasonry. Review what a thesis statement is. Learn how to cite sources properly and how to quote them. Beware of too many editorial digressions and sermonizing. It's tough to do and I don't know if I always succeed in my blog postings! Outline your argument. In short, besides citing reliable sources to shore up your argument, remember: Say what you mean and mean what you say.
No comments:
Post a Comment