We are here, because we love you.

The current reading material in chéz Hegemoné (oh, the pretensions) includes "Herzog" by Saul Bellow, "The History Man" by Malcolm Bradbury and several Thomas Pynchon and Philip Roth novels. This, combined with the recent viewing of both series of "A Very Peculiar Practice" and the recent reading of "Wonder Boys" by Chabon ("Shhhhhhhhaboooon!") brings the reader to ask the question:-

How badly do campus satires date?

Now all of the above are satires, of one form or another, of academia, of post-academia, or of academics. And all of them creak, to some degree or another. The Pynchon and Roth books have a certain vigour about them, a post-60s freewheelin' freeflowin' freefallin' rambunctiousness which allows the dated element of the subject to be glossed over. In this po-mo post-milliennium post-irony post 9/11 world, they still feel of a different world, completely, and the "satire" element is dead. But they manage to last to some degree (this is also helped in Pynchon's case by the very bagginess of his narrative - all human life is contained therein).

"Wonder Boys" has dated the least but given it's not yet a decade old, you wouldn't have expected it to. It's quite difficult to read after seeing the film first - one finds it impossible not to picture Grady Tripp as Mr M Douglas, despite him not physically resembling the character in any way.

"Herzog" is about an academic. It's supposedly Bellow's classic. One can see the lineage from it to Roth and Pynchon but Bellow is a pallid version of those two gentleman. There is no fire, no energy. I can find little or nothing worthy of admiration in it, despite the odd phrase of beauty or interest. I cannot see - to be honest - why precisely Martin Amis, Malcolm Bradbury et al venerate(d) the old codger.

Which leads us on to "The History Man" by the late departed Mr Bradbury. This was, apparently, in it's day a sensation, a vastly comic (which, we can agree, is different to satirical) but also savagely satirical piece of work. One only has to read the recommendations on it's cover, from Auberon Waugh to Kingsley Amis to Martin Amis to Uncle Tom Cobbley and all to realise the respect in which this book was held. I've virtually finished it. It's a nothing of a book. Seriously. It may have had the power to move mountains at some point in the past, all thunder and lightning, but now it's more a wet fart.

"A Very Peculiar Practice" - mainly watched in a frenzy of nostalgia for my alma mater - held some power still because it showed the battle between academia and managerialism, and also because of the character of Jock McCannon, all alcoholic scottish King Lear posing. Again, however, it's toothless.

One has to wonder, really, looking at my list of the above novels and films, about that initial question, about the ageing. Is this something inherent to satire, or is it something which affects all culture? (I have noticed, in the past, how 90% - to grab a completely random made up figure - of all comedy ages badly. In some cases, to the point of complete unfunniness. If you don't believe me, listen to the comedy stylings of "The Goons", the funniest thing since the Black Death)

But the campus "comedy" or "comic" novel dates worst of all. Of all the examples of the genre I can recall, perhaps only "Porterhouse Blue" is over 20 years old and still has an impact, and even this is lessened with age.

Conclusion: Creative Writing Lecturers, pick a new fucking subject. Please.