We appreciated Fudge’s satirical article regarding the state of mathematics and science education in America (“America sucks at math — and should be damn proud of it,” Feb. 17, p7). Yes, that’s right — satirical. Mr. Fudge, please correct us if we’re wrong, but we assumed you weren’t actually suggesting we illegally utilize cheap child labor to develop U.S. weapons systems. Two of the responses to Fudge’s article, namely those written by Matt Convente and Mark Hansen (“Teaching Brian Fudge some simple equations,” Feb. 21, p.6 and “History shows that innovation is necessary,” Feb. 21, p.7), seem to have missed this subtlety.
Satire is defined by the Cambridge Online Dictionary as “a way of criticizing people or ideas in a humorous way.” Jonathan Swift’s essay A Modest Proposal famously exemplified this technique. Swift, in response to the famine induced by oppressive British rule, suggests that starving Irish citizens eat their own children for sustenance. Although the tone of his work is ostensibly sincere, the absurdity of his argument forces one to conclude that his actual intent is precisely the contrary. Swift did not want the Irish to devour their children; in reality, he wanted England to realize it had left Ireland with no reasonable solution.
In his article, Fudge proposed that we outsource math and science jobs rather than improve America’s education system. Convente seems to believe that “Fudge is an advocate of outsourcing” based on the article. Taking Fudge’s suggestions seriously is akin to taking Swift’s suggestion to eat children seriously. Fudge’s suggestion was perhaps not as outlandish as Swift’s, so its satirical nature may have been more difficult to detect. Nevertheless, it was irresponsible to reply so malignantly to Fudge’s article without considering its overwhelming subtext. We hope that in the future such modest proposals won’t be taken seriously, but instead, with a sense of humor.
Emily Hostage ENG ’09
Alex Krause CAS ’09