Excerpt

Excerpt from Philosophy 4: A Story of Harvard University, by Owen Wister

Conversation ceased. Instruction went forward. Their pencils worked. The
causal law, etc., went into their condensed notes like Liebig’s extract
of beef, and drops of perspiration continued to trickle from their
matted hair.

II

Bertie and Billy were sophomores. They had been alive for twenty years,
and were young. Their tutor was also a sophomore. He too had been alive
for twenty years, but never yet had become young. Bertie and Billy had
colonial names (Rogers, I think, and Schuyler), but the tutor’s name was
Oscar Maironi, and he was charging his pupils five dollars an hour
each for his instruction. Do not think this excessive. Oscar could have
tutored a whole class of irresponsibles, and by that arrangement have
earned probably more; but Bertie and Billy had preempted him on account
of his fame or high standing and accuracy, and they could well afford
it. All three sophomores alike had happened to choose Philosophy 4 as
one of their elective courses, and all alike were now face to face with
the Day of Judgment. The final examinations had begun. Oscar could lay
his hand upon his studious heart and await the Day of Judgment like--I
had nearly said a Christian! His notes were full: Three hundred pages
about Zeno and Parmenides and the rest, almost every word as it had come
from the professor’s lips. And his memory was full, too, flowing like
a player’s lines. With the right cue he could recite instantly: “An
important application of this principle, with obvious reference to
Heracleitos, occurs in Aristotle, who says--” He could do this with the
notes anywhere. I am sure you appreciate Oscar and his great power of
acquiring facts. So he was ready, like the wise virgins of parable.
Bertie and Billy did not put one in mind of virgins: although they had
burned considerable midnight oil, it had not been to throw light upon
Philosophy 4. In them the mere word Heracleitos had raised a chill no
later than yesterday,--the chill of the unknown. They had not attended
the lectures on the “Greek bucks.” Indeed, profiting by their privilege
of voluntary recitations, they had dropped in but seldom on Philosophy
4. These blithe grasshoppers had danced and sung away the precious
storing season, and now that the bleak hour of examinations was upon
them, their waked-up hearts had felt aghast at the sudden vision of
their ignorance. It was on a Monday noon that this feeling came fully
upon them, as they read over the names of the philosophers. Thursday was
the day of the examination. “Who’s Anaxagoras?” Billy had inquired of
Bertie. “I’ll tell you,” said Bertie, “if you’ll tell me who Epicharmos
of Kos was.” And upon this they embraced with helpless laughter. Then
they reckoned up the hours left for them to learn Epicharmos of Kos
in,--between Monday noon and Thursday morning at nine,--and their
quailing chill increased. A tutor must be called in at once. So the
grasshoppers, having money, sought out and quickly purchased the ant.

---

Explanation

Detailed Explanation of the Excerpt from Philosophy 4: A Story of Harvard University by Owen Wister

Context of the Source

Owen Wister (1860–1938) was an American writer best known for The Virginian (1902), a foundational work of the Western genre. However, Philosophy 4 (1903) is a satirical short story that critiques the academic culture of Harvard University in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The story reflects Wister’s own experiences as a Harvard student (Class of 1882) and his observations of the pressures, pretensions, and inequalities within elite education.

The excerpt focuses on three sophomores—Bertie, Billy, and their tutor, Oscar Maironi—as they confront the final examinations for Philosophy 4, a course on ancient Greek philosophy. The passage contrasts the diligent but soulless Oscar with the carefree but unprepared Bertie and Billy, using humor and irony to explore themes of academic pressure, social class, and the superficiality of elite education.

---

Themes in the Excerpt

1. The Illusion of Meritocracy & Class Privilege

   • Bertie and Billy are wealthy ("they could well afford it") and have colonial names (Rogers, Schuyler), suggesting old-money pedigree. Their ability to hire Oscar—who charges $5 an hour (a substantial sum in the early 1900s)—highlights how wealth can buy academic success, undermining the idea of meritocracy.
   • Oscar, despite his mechanical brilliance, is reduced to a commodity—a "purchased ant" (referencing Aesop’s fable of The Ant and the Grasshopper). His labor is exploited by the wealthy grasshoppers (Bertie and Billy), reinforcing class hierarchies.

2. The Dehumanizing Nature of Academic Pressure

   • The opening lines describe students as automatons: "Their pencils worked. The causal law, etc., went into their condensed notes like Liebig’s extract of beef" (a reference to a concentrated meat product, suggesting rote memorization without true understanding).
   • The "Day of Judgment" metaphor for exams frames academia as a punitive, high-stakes system where students are either prepared (Oscar) or doomed (Bertie & Billy).
   • Oscar’s mechanical recitation ("An important application of this principle, with obvious reference to Heracleitos, occurs in Aristotle, who says—") shows how education becomes performative, reducing philosophy to regurgitated facts rather than critical thought.

3. Youth vs. Premature Aging (The Loss of Innocence)

   • Bertie and Billy, though chronologically young (20), embody youthful irresponsibility—they’ve "danced and sung away the precious storing season" (another Ant and the Grasshopper reference).
   • Oscar, also 20, has "never yet become young"—his premature seriousness (or joyless diligence) makes him a tragic figure, robbed of youth by academic grind.
   • The contrast suggests that Harvard’s system forces students to either fail or grow old before their time.

4. The Absurdity of Elite Education

   • The trivialization of philosophy: Bertie and Billy don’t even know who Anaxagoras or Epicharmos of Kos are, yet they’re in an advanced philosophy course. This satirizes how elite students can coast on privilege without genuine engagement.
   • The commercialization of learning: Oscar’s tutoring is a transaction, not a mentorship. His 300 pages of notes are a product, not a sign of deep understanding.
   • The irony of "elective" courses: Philosophy 4 is supposed to be a choice, but the exam system makes it a source of terror, exposing the false freedom in elite education.

---

Literary Devices & Stylistic Choices

1. Satire & Irony

   • Dramatic Irony: The reader knows Bertie and Billy are doomed, but they laugh helplessly at their ignorance ("Who’s Anaxagoras?").
   • Situational Irony: Oscar, the tutor, is also a student, yet he’s more machine than man—his memory flows "like a player’s lines", suggesting theatricality over authenticity.
   • Sarcasm: "Do not think this excessive" (about Oscar’s $5/hour fee) mocks the normalization of exploitation in academia.

2. Biblical & Classical Allusions

   • "Day of Judgment": Frames exams as a moral reckoning, but the comparison to the wise and foolish virgins (Matthew 25:1-13) is undercut because Oscar’s "wisdom" is mechanical, not spiritual.
   • "Grasshoppers" vs. "Ant": Direct reference to Aesop’s fable, where the ant works while the grasshopper plays. Here, the grasshoppers (Bertie & Billy) buy the ant (Oscar), subverting the moral—wealth trumps diligence.

3. Imagery & Metaphor

   • "Liebig’s extract of beef": Compares note-taking to processed food—nutrient-dense but flavorless, symbolizing education stripped of meaning.
   • "Drops of perspiration trickled from their matted hair": Evokes physical strain, making academia feel like manual labor.
   • "Bleak hour of examinations": Personifies exams as a harsh winter, reinforcing the punitive nature of testing.

4. Characterization Through Contrast

   Oscar Maironi	Bertie & Billy
   Mechanical, joyless ("never yet become young")	Carefree, immature ("blithe grasshoppers")
   Overprepared (300 pages of notes)	Woefully unprepared ("the chill of the unknown")
   Exploited laborer (tutoring for money)	Privileged consumers (can "well afford it")
   False wisdom (recites like an actor)	True ignorance (don’t know basic philosophers)

5. Humor & Exaggeration

   • The absurdity of their ignorance: They embrace in helpless laughter when realizing they don’t know Epicharmos of Kos, a minor philosopher—highlighting how little they’ve learned.
   • Oscar’s over-the-top preparation (every word from the professor’s lips) is ridiculous, mocking the obsession with memorization over understanding.

---

Significance of the Excerpt

1. Critique of Harvard’s Elite Culture

   • Wister exposes how wealth and connections (Bertie and Billy’s colonial names) trump merit.
   • The pressure-cooker environment of exams dehumanizes students, turning them into either anxious memorizers (Oscar) or clueless hedonists (Bertie & Billy).

2. Timeless Relevance to Education Systems

   • The commodification of learning (Oscar as a paid tutor) reflects modern test-prep industries and grade inflation.
   • The superficial engagement with philosophy (students who don’t know basic thinkers) mirrors today’s debates about "checklist education" vs. genuine intellectual growth.

3. Social Commentary on Youth & Labor

   • Oscar represents the exploited young scholar, while Bertie and Billy embody entitled youth.
   • The story questions whether academic success is about true learning or surviving a flawed system.

---

Conclusion: What the Text Reveals

This excerpt is a sharply satirical snapshot of Harvard’s academic culture, where:

• Wealth buys salvation (Bertie and Billy hire Oscar to save them).
• Education is performative (Oscar’s recitations are lines, not insights).
• Youth is either wasted or stolen (the grasshoppers play, the ant toils).
• Philosophy—a subject meant to enlighten—becomes a source of terror for the unprepared and a mechanical exercise for the overprepared.

Wister’s humor and irony make the critique biting yet entertaining, revealing how elite institutions can fail their students—whether by crushing them with pressure (Oscar) or letting them coast on privilege (Bertie & Billy). The excerpt remains relevant today, as debates about equity in education, the purpose of higher learning, and the mental health costs of academic pressure continue.