From The Law and Politics Book Review

Vol. 8 No. 11 (November 1998) pp. 412-413.

RACE AND REPRESENTATION: AFFIRMATIVE ACTION, by Robert Post and Michael Rogin (Editors). New York: Zone Books, 1998. 424 pp. Paper $20.00. ISBN 0-942299-49-3.

Reviewed by James L. Danielson, Department of Political Science, Moorhead State University. E-mail: daniels@mhd1.moorhead.msus.edu.

 

Following the 1995 decision by the Board of Regents of the University of California to prohibit the use of race as a criterion for student admissions, Post and Rogin edited a special issue of an interdisciplinary journal of cultural analysis, published by the University of California-Berkeley. This volume represents an expanded version of that issue of REPRESENTATIONS. The editors solicited additional assessments of the controversy surrounding affirmative action from "leading intellectuals" and their contributions are included in a second section following the original journal articles. Reflecting the interdisciplinary nature of the journal, the essays represent a wide variety of perspectives including political science, sociology, law, art, history, philosophy, rhetoric and literature.

As the title suggests, affirmative action developed in various guises as a program, practice, policy or set of precepts designed to address the consequences of racism in American society. The concept itself evolved from a phrase used by Lyndon Johnson in conjunction with an executive order during the 1960’s. Even after three decades of usage, there remains a great deal of confusion and controversy concerning the meaning and implementation of affirmative action. And, as discussed in several essays in this volume, the concept of race itself is not used consistently. Judges, administrators, politicians, scholars, defenders and detractors have all contributed to the cacophony. Scanning the table of contents to this volume, one could conclude that there are so many different orientations to affirmative action that attempts at clarification are doomed. However, this work may help to sharpen understanding concerning conceptualization and implementation of affirmative action.

In a general sense the authors included in this collection are supportive of the principle of affirmative action. Several do not hesitate to criticize the Board of Regents, Governor Wilson, administrators, judges or, for that matter, the electorate. Phrases such as "political agenda," "cynical and calculated," "red flag," and "insult" are woven into the texture of some essays. Obviously, the decision of the Board of Regents was viewed as having deleterious implications for the faculty and students at Berkeley as well as higher education throughout America. Most of the examples referenced by the authors are drawn from higher educational institutions.

Each of the twenty eight essays is complete within itself. There is minimal referencing of other chapters or analyses included within this book. Rather, the authors cite published sources within their discipline’s body of literature. One could be informed by the analysis in one essay without reading other essays.

The first two essays by Robert Post and Reva B. Siegel are fine examples of critical legal analysis. Both authors present informative discussions about the development of case law and the circumstances within California and Texas. Both authors provide critical assessments of the interpretations and applications of law by courts and administrative bodies. The consequences of the Regents decision, Proposition 209 and the Hopwood decision are discussed with concern about the racial and ethnic composition of student bodies in higher education. There is little doubt that the authors are opposed to the decisions and alarmed about the consequences.

David A. Hollinger’s essay helps distinguish between diversity and affirmative action. He proposes that a sharper theoretical focus addressing the meaning and purpose of group preference could serve to minimize confusion and enable citizens within the broader society, as well as the academy, to understand and approve applications of the principle of group preference under appropriate circumstances. This essay advances the discussion and challenges the reader to consider both conceptual and consequential issues.

An essay by Judith Butler is a polemic with a California context and content. She criticizes the Regents decision and presents an assessment of its consequences for curricular issues and higher education in general. Typical of several other essays in this volume, the references to recent events in California are described as exemplary of the conceptual and practical dimensions of affirmative action, wherever and whenever the issues arise. Cass R. Sunstein provides quite a different orientation arguing for casuistry as a means to apply affirmative action to concrete, empirically grounded situations. The essay by Michael Omi and Dana Y. Takagi adds an insightful discussion concerning the difficulties in defining and situating races other than blacks, such as Asian Americans, within affirmative action precepts and practice.

Readers of THE LAW AND POLITICS BOOK REVIEW do not often encounter an essay such as Anne M. Wagner’s discussion of the paintings of Andy Warhol. Artists and painters will enjoy the author’s interpretation and the examples of Warhol’s work that are reprinted within the context of the essay, some on glossy paper. Wagner’s analysis exemplifies the interdisciplinary feature of the perspectives included in this book.

The editors also invited several prominent scholars to write essays specifically for inclusion in this book. Their contributions are included in a short second section. Although names such as Fredrickson, Brown, Gutmann, Hochschild, Piven, and Zinn may be recognized by many readers, their contributions to the discussion are brief and, in some instances, superficial. Whether they add much more than prominent names and redundancy to the discussion is problematic.

The appendix includes the SP-1 Resolution by the Regents on admission, the text of Proposition 209 and the AAUP Affirmative Action Policy. These are useful references since they are central documents in the race and affirmative action debate.

The publication of the essays in this volume predates the Supreme Courts’ decision in the Taxman-Piscataway case. Given the Court’s decision in that case, some of the analyses herein seem dated. But such is the situation in contemporary American society where practice and precept concerning affirmative action are in such a state of flux. The sundry contributors to this volume should help readers gain an understanding of a plethora of perspectives among those who support affirmative action in some form or another. Members of higher education institutions may find the analyses more relevant to their circumstances than members of other types of institutions.


Copyright 1995