Unfortunately, this Yale edition leaves out about half of what Newman himself published in 1873 as the definitive edition of THE IDEA OF A UNIVERSITY. Published here are only the nine "Dublin Discourses" from Part I on "University Teaching" and but four of the ten chapters of Part II, "University Subjects Discussed in Occasional Lectures and Essays." For the hundred-page displacement of Newman's essays, the editor substitutes five interpretive essays supposedly inquiring into the relevance of Newman's book for today's higher education debates. These interpretive essays have major inconsistencies and repetitions among themselves and are of mixed quality, with inaccuracies and serious misunderstandings of some of Newman's central ideas. As accurate forays of the Newmanian mind into the twentieth- and twenty-first century university, only the engaging and intellectually challenging essays by George Marsden and George Landow succeed. (COMPLETE paperback editions of Newman's IDEA are available from Loyola University Press, 1987, and University of Notre Dame Press, 1982).

A wonderful work, too bad that this edition by Regnery is chock full of glaring typographical errors. Detracts from Newman's otherwise brilliant prose.

Newman's work is not only an eloquent, erudite, and careful defense of the virtue of knowledge and the value of a liberal education; it is also a brilliantly reasoned and felt argument for the prevention of hubris on the part of any particular branch of knowledge.

Newman's sound warnings against the overreaching of scientific fields and the triumph of smug materialism and positivism are still urgent, of course. Newman is also careful to point out that the liberal arts and even theology may attempt to establish a single, inadequate framework for the discovery of truth.

Newman's complex epistemology does not fall prey to the heresy that truth is not one, but reminds us that in our present state, truth present various aspects and that the tyranny of any particular branch of knowledge is the victory of ignorance.

While Empson's posthumous publication, "Faustus and the Censor," first came out in the 1980's, it remains a relevant document in Christopher Marlowe criticism. The oft-disputed authenticity of Marlowe's play "Doctor Faustus," and its two versions, the A and B-texts is the main focus of Empson's book. Empson begins with the beginning - Marlowe's sources, primarily the German Faust Book. Empson discusses the possible relationship with the translator of English Faust Book, a mysterious gentleman named 'P.F.' who may have provided Marlowe with information on German and Latin texts.

Empson's thesis is that the A text is the 'original' - but that its seeming inadequacies are due to the interference of the official censor of plays in the late 1500s. Scenes missing that Empson argues were removed for reasons of state and morality are an appearance of the chorus and an episode in a Turkish harem.

The censor, Empson argues, had three major problems with Marlowe's play that required change: 1)the women Faustus consorts with must be real women - because Anglican belief did not allow that devils could consort with humans. 2)Mephistopheles must be a devil - again, Anglicanism does not allow for middle spirits. 3)Faust must be punished eternally at the end of the play; apparently, the original version when acted, left some ambiguity about this issue.

Empson's "Faust and the Censor" tends to be somewhat repetitive on supporting these points. However, the repetition is done well, so that the points he makes are continuously reinforced and consistently developed. This is an engaging piece of literary criticism - the language is familiar, even colloquial, making the book an interesting and even entertaining read - very unusual in the field of literary criticism. I don't even like Marlowe, but Empson's style and substance make this a critical work worth checking out.