Here, Rosenstock-Huessy points out the chief problem with most of the research that goes on in higher education. Berry and Zizek have bought this up regularly as well.
I have my doubts on account of the excess of money available for “research.” Money corrupts. If I have to solicit great foundations for money for my research, then I have to propose something which is already obsolete for me. I know no researcher who in the first moment of a new inspiration could have found the sympathy and approval of the establishment.
-Eugen Rosenstock-Huessy, Immigration of the Spirit, p.174
Later, he continues:
I’ve seen terrible instances where young people have asked themselves, “What do I have to propose to get money?” A man who does that once in his life has ceased to be of any possible significance for science. He is corrupt. This great danger for the future of science in America distresses and oppresses me. It doesn’t rest on anyone’s evil will, but on the opposite; it is caused by too much good will, by the belief that spirit can be aroused by cash. Of course that’s impossible.
What is the result of only following the lead of the establishment? You can only work on something that is politically correct or commercially viable.
“Climate change” study is hot right now. There is lots of money there for people who will dig up new data in this field – both high numbers and low ones. There are some really smart people that could be doing something better. I’m sure of it.
Another example: You want to write a symphony but are relegated to arranging the latest Green Day record for piano/vocal/guitar for the next Mel Bay publication.
You want to follow up on an innovative idea you have to make biodiesel from sage brush, but you can only get funding to boost corn oil production.
You are a Christian and want to create grand new art, but the National Endowment for the Arts is hostile. However, your mocking proposal for a sculpture of the Virgin Mary being eaten by raptors seems to have some real traction.
How can this be fixed? Get bureaucrats out of the R&D loop. That would require an incredible earthquake in our public university system – one that would leave it transformed into something wildly different – if there were anything left. There seems to be more promise in the private sector. Here, political correctness is not near as much of a factor, but money is, even more so. For some things, this is good, for others, disastrous. It seems that we need more wealthy angel investors willing to put their neck out for something innovative or for something they love. (I believe that love has always driven space exploration more than people are willing to admit!)
Fortunately, this is easier to do than ever with the easy availability of information (on the internet, Google books, etc.) and relatively inexpensive high-tech equipment. Enthusiastic scientists really CAN make a clean room in their garage to study cancer. People in the humanities have easier access to books and people all over the world than ever before. There is a lot of potential for discovering and developing really good stuff, despite all the stagnation.