ABSTRACT
There are almost as many works about intellectuals as there are intellectuals. 1 Intellectuals are of course masters of the
word and their mastery is often used to write about themselves. So it may very well be that aside from ballplayers and actresses, intellectuals are the most overpublicized people in America. In this literature there are widely differing views as to who might be said to be an intellectual, much less an elite intellectual. For the most part, works on intellectuals follow a pattern. Almost half the work is devoted to a definition of who should be included under the title intellectual. Reference is often made to the development of the term "intelligentsia" in nineteenth century Russia. Arguments are then advanced as to the viability of the term today: are all "intellectual workers," from engineers to poets, to be considered intellectuals? Once the matter of definition is settled, the characteristics of intellectuals are debated: are intellectuals today old or young; are American intellectuals all to be found in New York City or has the growth of universities dispersed them around the countryside; is there an inner
clique or family of intellectuals who rule the roost; is it true that most intellectuals are Jews; is there a two-or three-culture system in which scientists and perhaps social scientists are exiled to a world separate from the literary elite? After these characteristics are decided upon, the denouement consists of an· attack on or defense of the role of intellectuals: are they critical enough or too critical of the "system," are they a priesthood defending current values or are they a revolutionary wave with new and better ideas and values; or perhaps the problem is that they are beside the point and focus mainly on their own irrelevant little intellectual world.
