1

Jim Beggs
ENGL 956
Dr. David Downing

Class Struggle, English and the “Corporate” University: Organizing Pedagogy and Labor

Karl Marx succinctly summarized much of his life's work in a famous early line of The

Communist Manifesto: “the history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class

struggles” (246). In the popular imagination, the university has been seen as an “ivory tower”

where highly paid professors conduct research into very specialized and perhaps useless topics

independent of outside interference. The outside interference could be political pressure to quash

an instructor's research due to its controversial nature. Or the interference could be the market

forces of capitalism. In light of Marx, I doubt the idea of the insulated, objective professor was

ever true. Not too surprisingly, as a part of the superstructure that produced knowledge and

trained future laborers, the educational system was worthy of Marx's consideration. “The

Communists have not invented the intervention of society in education; they do but seek to alter

the character of that intervention, and to rescue education from the influence of the ruling class”

(259). The history of the modern university, the origins of which I place in the late nineteenth

century, has been the history of class struggles. The nature of the classes has changed since

Marx's time, but many of the principles of the classes and their struggles remain the same. A

responsible educator in English will have to take class into account pedagogically and

institutionally. The composition of faculty and student bodies have shown that economically

disadvantaged and minority students are underrepresented in colleges. Need based federal student

aid and affirmative action have helped to remedy problems of access, but the contraction of the

economy and competition in the university for limited resources have imperiled the gains.

Neglect of the considerations of class will contribute to the hegemony of capitalism in the
 2

university. Faculty will lose control of their programs and will grow increasingly alienated in

their labor. Poor students will be unable to finance their educations and higher education will be a

resource for people of means primarily. The American meritocratic dream will be denied to some.

An English professor sensitive to class will ensure a more democratic and freer curriculum

accessible to more people.

The changing social relations and means of production within the United States led to a

shift in how Marxists thinking about the university and its relation to society described the

stratification of classes. Rather than a neat division between bourgeois and proletarian as the

principle contradiction, a third class has arisen in the United States. Richard Ohmann traced the

origins of the class to the late nineteenth century, when companies introduced levels of

management in order to integrate previously separate functions into a single company (28).

Ohmann called the newly emergent class the “professional managerial class” (16). In a strictly

Marxist sense, they have more in common with the proletariat in that they do not own capital, the

means of production in particular, and they sell their labor power to the bourgeoisie for wages in

order to survive. However, their wages were generally higher than the proletariat, but of course

lower than the bourgeoisie who enjoy profits from the addition of surplus value to commodities

by labor. The professional managerial class often receives compensation through profit sharing,

at times receiving company stock. In a limited sense, if they own stock they own a “share” of the

means of production, but have no real ability to exercise power over it.

The rise of the professional managerial class further fragmented the classes underneath

the bourgeoisie, making the formation of a consciousness of resistance to the forces of capitalism

more difficult. The power of the bourgeoisie within the United States helped to transform the

university into an institution that would employ and reproduce the ideology of capitalism. Clyde
 3

Barrow outlines the interesting history of the struggle for the university from the late nineteenth

and early twentieth century. The bourgeoisie were most successful in their efforts to make

universities function more like corporations by funding educational trusts like the Carnegie

Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (CFAT). The CFAT essentially oversaw the change

in governance of universities. Before the late nineteenth century, faculty held most administrative

posts in universities. Despite evidence to the contrary, the CFAT believed that running

universities like corporations would make them more efficient and therefore permit the education

of more students (66). The corporate model would release faculty from administrative

responsibilities, giving them more time for research and teaching. Unfortunately, it also involved

a loss of control and power. The lure of funding for the pensions of professors coerced

universities into accepting CFAT's recommendations for corporate governance despite populist

anger over the realistic perception that “robber barons” were attempting to influence education.

Scholars have only begun to uncover the history of capitalism within the university in the last

fifteen years.

Universities and English departments enjoyed their efflorescence in the 1950s and 1960s

when a number of factors contributed their growth. The GI Bill, Federal Student Aid, and the

highly disciplined New Critical theories ensured strong enrollment for universities and English

departments. The landscape of English departments has changed significantly. English

department enrollments are down, especially at public, land grant, and community colleges.

Anecdotal evidence suggests English enrollment has fared better at private institutions. The

implication is that English is preferred among the leisure class, who might not have to concern

themselves with laboring for their own survival. The difference of conditions has implications for

faculty solidarity. Michael Berube estimates that graduate students have to publish several
 4

articles, present at conferences, and maybe publish a book in order to land a job. I seriously

doubted George Levine's sanity when he stated that many of his fellow graduate students at the

University of Minnesota received three job offers despite intelligence or level of accomplishment

(43). Berube wrote: “Moderns awarded their Ph.D.s in 1993 can find themselves asked to write

more stuff just for an interview than some of their interviewers wrote for tenure, and as a result,

they all too often wind up considering Ancients as nothing more than blocking figures” (104).

Graduate students often engage in more alienated labor at universities, teaching introductory

composition courses so that advanced faculty can teach literature and graduate students. Until

exploited graduate students strike as they did at Yale, many people are unaware of how vital they

are to the everyday functioning of the university. The best remedy for remedying the

fragmentation of academic labor would be to more fully equalize working conditions and

compensation, but this is probably unrealistic. The need for solidarity among English faculty is

absolutely essential as market forces increasingly influence universities and erode academic

privilege.

The worst examples of what happens to English departments when the logic of capitalism

takes over are when they lost the bread and butter of their curriculum: writing and composition

programs. Often times, the decision to separate composition and literary criticism programs

comes from attempts to cope with capitalist management. James Zebroski wrote about the

development of a “composition program” at Syracuse University. It was a deliberate attempt to

separate composition and literary criticism. Apparently both disciplines welcomed the split.

Zebroski attributed the desire for the split to “professionalization . . . that is, the creation of a

specialized, formal knowledge in institutional spaces and the establishment of certified

professionals who use this formal knowledge for the purpose of 'treating' a clientele” (165). The
 5

unintended effects of spinning off the composition program included “a near elimination of full

faculty say in curriculum and shared governance” and “high full-faculty turnover” (168).

Zebroski likened the turnover rate of the faculty in the composition program to that of the

workers in a fast food restaurant. The emphasis on entrepreneuriship and the discouragement of

teaching the politics of writing discouraged academic freedom and probably contributed to the

high turnover rate in the program. Zebroski noted that eleven tenure-line faculty service 5,000

undergraduates and twenty doctoral students per year. In other departments, that is the work of

twenty to thirty full time instructors. Where have the full-time tenure-line professorships gone?

The positions have either been eliminated or reduced to instructor or TA workers, and they also

used “linked courses,” service learning, and “writing consultants” (172). The changes are good

for the bottom lines of the university and the program, but bad news for the working conditions

of academic laborers.

Beyond English Inc. included five different views of the difficulties that the English

department at Drake University faced. There, the administration frankly instituted a review of

Drake's existing programs with the ultimate goal of eliminating 20% of them. The departments

had no say in whether the review should take place or under what it conditions it would be

conducted. They were expected to articulate how their program achieved the “excellence” that

the university desired. Excellence makes a poor criteria for the qualitative judgment of programs.

As Bill Readings pointed out in The Univesity in Ruins, excellence can mean different things to

different people (24). For financial managers, excellence might be the most efficient and cost-

effective use of resources, but for a teacher, it might be the inefficient expense of time to help a

student produce a superior essay. The two both might talk about the “excellence” of their own

efforts, but they will be talking about entirely different things, from totally different worldviews.
 6

Having a strong sense of the criteria by which we value ourselves and our own work is important,

because we will then be expected to repeat those justifications to administrators and the public.

Curricular and institutional changes created problems for the English department at Drake.

First, Drake began running first year seminars. The university cross-listed English 001,

the course that was formerly a requirement for all undergraduates with the seminars from other

departments. The seminar was the requirement, rather than strictly English 001. Second, other

departments could use seminars or other courses to help students meet writing requirements

within their own departments. The English department lost the in-depth teaching of reading and

writing as integral to a quality university education. The department undertook good faith efforts

to revise its own curriculum to conform to the university's standards of “excellence,” but their

efforts went unnoticed. In fact, they were severely criticized. They no longer taught canonical

literature and failed to organize courses around periods, genres, or themes. A person in another

department claimed “she regularly taught history classes twice as large while performing the

same work English faculty do in writing courses--'correcting grammar, spelling and punctuation

in blue books'” (Horner et al 89). The main problem for the English department was a

fundamental misunderstanding of what most English departments currently see their missions as.

The other faculty who saw the English department's role as teaching canonical literature and

correcting comma splices has only a superficial understanding of the battles within English. At

times, it feels like English departments have no real object of study, and more must be done to

combat this perception. One measure to combat this is for each English instructor to have a clear

rationale and justification for the study of literature and the ability and willingness to

communicate that rationale to other people.

The institutional changes at Drake University forced the departments to compete against
 7

one another for open teaching positions. If a professor left the department, they could not

automatically hire someone with the approval of the dean to fill a vacancy. Instead, the position

itself and the “department's own discipline” are reviewed by department chairs, program chairs,

“the college's Planning and Review Committee, and the deans of the other other colleges”

(Horner et al 78). The diffusion of decision making at Drake reflects the wider trend that I have

noticed in many of the cases of corporate institutional changes. The general trend is to increase

management, often times using faculty of higher ranks to manage large groups of teaching

assistants and adjunct instructors. Hiring and other controllable expenses are relegated to

managers who either has no knowledge of the department's needs or balances that need against

other departments who might have higher enrollments.

Corporate changes have happened at the university despite protests and will continue. The

board of trustees in the University of California system approved a 32% increase in tuition for

students. The decay of the university's physical plant has forced rollbacks in activities, and

faculty are reportedly abandoning ship as they have at Syracuse University and Drake University

(Lewin). Even Harvard University, the #1 school in the United States according to US News and

World Report, the private university with a reported endowment of $37 billion has halted new

construction. Its endowment shrunk $11 billion to $26 billion due to the recession (Salsberg).

While public universities had already felt a pinch due to decreased funding from governments,

even “the blessed of the earth” at private institutions will face scarcity in their working

conditions. While the current bear market has negative implications for actual working conditions

at universities, it more easily facilitates collective action to address the problems facing students,

faculty, and administration at universities. Faculty should stop pretending there are not problems

and overcome the fear of reprisal from colleagues and administrators. If we truly believe in the
 8

mission of the university as a public space that allows open debate of all points of view—

regardless of popularity—we will all have to deal with our critics. Even if public universities

weather the current financial crisis, we must prepare for another one. Since the late nineteenth

century, the United States economy has seen at least one major depression and three recessions. A

sentiment shared by many people, including graduate students, is to hope for the best but prepare

for the worst.

Economic crises produce a scarcity of capital in universities. In response, universities

eliminate positions and programs and restrict access to programs. In The Rise and Fall of

English, Robert Scholes argued that departments should only admit a small number of students

that the department can fully fund. Michael Berube argued for the elimination of some graduate

programs and diminished PhD enrollment. The idea is, I think, that a reduction in the supply of

labor will improve the working conditions for all. Access to a university education has been a

problem for many, and I believe it will continue to be a problem because schools seem to have

taken Berube and Schole's advice. The ivy in Pennsylvania, the University of Pennsylvania opens

applications for its English program sometime in November. The application must be completed

online and the application deadline is usually around December 15. They require a GRE general

test score, recommend a GRE subject score, three letters of recommendation, a twenty page

writing sample, transcripts, and the gratuitous $70 application fee. “The writing sample should be

one paper and must match your interest/concentration” (University of Pennsylvania).

Supposedly, being able to jump through all these hoops will indicate that one is the best qualified

candidate to matriculate at Penn. However, there are a number of problems with these

requirements.

For one, the limited time within which to apply, roughly thirty days, would require at least
 9

a year of planning ahead of time in order to accumulate the various materials needed to complete

this application. The GRE general exams are only administered at certain times and locations.

The subject tests are even more restricted to certain times and places. For instance, a student at

IUP hoping to take the English literature subject test would have to take the test at April 10,

2010. The test might be offered more times at more locations, and hopefully, the student would

have transportation to the other testing centers if they cannot make that date. When I checked the

ETS website for this paper, most of the PA schools only offered the test on the same date. I

remember my own application process was screwed up because IUP either did not have a subject

test or seats for the subject test, and I had no way to Penn State or another school for the exam.

Additionally, I had no writing sample on my particular area of interest. I suppose in an ideal

world, I would have a paper written on every major period of English literature, but it has not

happened. I have never had the opportunity to write a research paper on medieval literature, not

even in my undergraduate days. The Penn English program also assumes that people have access

to computers, and that another $70 application fee is not a big deal for most people. Both

assumptions can be an issue for people.

I suppose I am “venting” somewhat, but some of these criteria reflect a “banking” model

of education that any theoretically serious student must have at least some questions about (Friere

72). I realize that departments are in binds . The department has limited resources to devote to the

recruitment of qualified applicants, and when resources are scarce, exam scores are probably the

best effort they can make. An already overworked Penn faculty would not have the time to

interview the 500 applicants who apply to the PhD program every year to find the twelve

students to whom they offer admission. It is pretty remarkable that they even read 10,000 pages

of writing samples. The prestige of the university and program as well as the compensation
 10

provided to admitted students accounts for the outrageous disconnect between the number of

applicants and the admitted students. Michael Berube insists that even with a small group of

graduate students at the University of Illinois, they had a diverse student body. He did not

specifically mention by what criteria he judges its diversity, but I think universities typically

measure diversity according to the standards of racial and gender difference. The Supreme Court

has offered opinions in favor of racial diversity. Feminist movements have effectively brought the

underrepresentation and undercompensation of women in many fields to the consciousness of the

public. There is still a lot of work to be done to increase the access of women and minorities.

Class continues to be a neglected criteria of diversity, and I think it has been neglected

due to the perception that need based financial aid has solved the problem. At IUP, financial aid

is awarded to students based on merit, rather than need. Merited financial aid plays upon the idea

of the university as a meritocracy, which helped justify the initial quasi-socialist innovations of

the public university and land grant university. Increases in tuition and changes to the financial

aid system have rolled back the access that they have provided. Departments have to believe

there is merit in providing greater access to shift to need-based financial aid. The University of

California system has proposed to increase need based aid in order to help economically

disadvantaged students deal with steep tuition increases. Lawrence Gladieux noted that the

flattening of wages, increases in tuition, and increased dependence on loans for the financing of

student education has made the value of education more questionable over the long term,

especially for economically disadvantaged students.

Low-income, at-risk students are actually the most ill-served when student aid incentives

encourage their enrollment in programs subject to minimal quality control. In such

programs they have, at best, only modest chances of success; at worst, they are left with
 11

no job, a defaulted loan, and a bad credit record.

Additionally, changes in eligibility criteria have made more students eligible for aid, which

means less aid for poorer students. The approval of a 32% tuition increase in the University of

California system indicates that tuition can be raised to any level that people are willing to pay

and that student loan companies are willing to finance. Financial managers would probably

advise against a $150,000 education for a $30,000 per year salary, if the graduate is lucky. With a

$150,000 student loan debt, the student's monthly payment to service the loans would be in

thousands of dollars. Income-based repayment will only prolong the course of the debt,

permitting the accumulation of interest.

The pedagogy, institutional critiques, and curriculum reform that I envision for the future

of the university is one organized on simplistic Marxist principles. While I have not formally

read more advanced Marxist theorists such as Lukacs or Jameson my own pedagogy has

indirectly been informed by them as well as feminist, deconstruction, and postcolonial theory.

The fundamental idea of my pedagogy and institutional critique is examining and forming the

networks for the organization of labor. I agree with Zebroski that one essential element for the

sustainability of English studies in the university is for academic labor to organize into unions

(176). The effort to organize academic labor should not be isolated to English departments,

however. As the case of Drake University showed, administrations will force departments to

compete with one another for the scarce resources of positions, funding, and students. A loss of

one element weakens a department. In order to effectively organize resistance to institutional

changes, such as violating principles of shared governance, requires as broad a base as possible

to avoid detrimental divisions. The solidarity does not require so much ignorance of differences

or divergent interests as recognition and articulation of shared interests.

 12

While there might be differences according to the amount of funding that departments

receive according to discipline and pay, in times of scarcity even the most lucrative departments

can face cuts. Enrollment in business programs has remained strong at many universities, while

the humanities have declined. Scientific and engineering programs have the ability to produce

technologies and innovations that universities can patent and then sell. A portion of graduate

education involves “professional” education in order to initiate a student into the professional

community. The initiation comes with all the customary rites of passage, including the absorption

of 1,000 pages of literature and theory a week, making conference presentations, writing three

substantial research papers every fifteen weeks and mass submissions of articles for the hope of

publication. Except for teaching three to five courses per semesters, graduate students are given a

taste of the professional life. I think graduate programs should move from an emphasis on

professionalism to a recognition of the real conditions of academic labor. Most students will

change positions and possibly careers several times throughout their lives as the market and he

university shift full-time and well compensated positions to contingent labor.

A more realistic assessment of the the current university's mission, curriculum, and

student's position within it will provide a broader base for challenging capitalist hegemony. The

university system in the United States might have been founded in the ideal that it could inculcate

culture to the professional managerial class or produce civic subjects devoted to a nationalist

cause, but the increased power of global capital has changed that mission and those ideals a good

deal (Readings 68). For a teaching college literature course, I compiled a syllabus that allowed

students to contemplate how people's relationships with labor have changed from medieval times

to the current moment. The texts included Chaucer's “The Miller's Tale,” antebellum American

poetry, Jack London's The Iron Heel, The Communist Manifesto, Jose Antonio Villareal's Pocho,
 13

Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, and Octavia Butler's Kindred. I have my own agenda with

the class, but the texts permit a wide range of considerations including race, slavery, gender, and

postcolonialism. I included reflective journal entries and replies to other students on IUP's

discussion board technology Moodle to help students reflect on their own current or future

statuses as laborers and what it is like to labor today. I also planned to encourage student

reflection on the role of the university in labor. Is the mission of the university to produce

competent laborers for employment? The group presentations in the course were on specific

historical figures that resisted capitalism or other dominant ideologies—from John Brown to

Cesar Chavez. Many students enroll in universities to advance their careers, and the course might

be one of the few times when they opportunity to reflect on the history of labor.

The pedagogical approach has the advantage of being sold to departments and

administrations as a kind of career services courses with a bit of the traditional humanities

approach of criticism and reflection thrown in. The course could easily degenerate into too much

career services with students drafting resumes and conducting mock interviews in order to

prepare for applying for jobs. I would hope that after reading stories of extreme oppression,

exploitation, and brutality that they would desire other than to become better capitalists and

exploiters if they eventually achieve power and affluence in the workforce. The fundamental

danger to the value of a non-banking education is that students can do whatever they like with the

knowledge they are given, including become exploiters and oppressors. If they cannot improve

the situations of others, hopefully they will be able to advocate for themselves. The Marxist

readings from my course could serve as a kind of life jacket, helping to keep them afloat through

capitalist crises.

I believe Marxist theory provides the best pedagogical and institutional tools for surviving
 14

and ultimately changing capitalism. That progressive academics have to negotiate capitalist

structures in order to ensure greater fairness within the university is an unusual situation. Indeed,

a frank explication of the aims and methods of my course would probably ensure my never

getting a job at a for-profit university. I think this approach could address the dilemma that

Berube outlined.

when it comes to thinking about underprivileged student populations, we want the

university to behave as a social force for equal opportunity, a democratic corrective to the

inequalities of capitalism; we want many things for such students, no doubt, but among

the things we want are good jobs. But when it comes to thinking about training the

professional-managerial class (PMC) and the elite, we would rather emphasize our

capacity for helping people deconstruct corporate capitalism than stress our utility for

helping our future-PMC students find some well-paying jobs at IBM. (166)

Berube sees the role of the professor as split between poorer students, who will hopefully gain

opportunities otherwise denied to them. On the other hand, professors should be teaching social

justice and ethics to the PMC students. The progression of capitalism will help resolve this

dilemma some. The current economic crisis has led to a greater proletarization of the

professional-managerial class with many sectors freezing wages and cutting positions.

Consequently, the ranks of the unemployed have grown. The Bureau of Labor Statistics U6 rate,

which measures the underemployed and the unemployed who have stopped looking for work

( the usually cited statistic ignores these people), was measured at about 17.2%. The idea behind

my vision of Marxist theory is not to read Marx and hope that one day things will be better.

The idea for the course is for students to learn how to organize. Graduate students have

successfully organized as labor in some places such as the University of Illinois. Their efforts
 15

have been less successful due to hostility from faculty and administrations at Penn State and

Yale. In reading Marx and other writers, students can get some idea of how people organized

politically to bring about social change in the past. Through protracted effort, labor unions won

concessions from corporations, women and African Americans received legal rights and the right

to vote, and many members of the Left from the 1960s onwards managed to attain substantial

power and shelter in universities. Honestly, I have not learned much about how labor unions, the

civil rights movement, or the women's right movement built their organizations. I have read some

of their output, but I feel there is a hole in my knowledge about how people organized. I hoped to

fill in this “hole” with my teaching and uncover these processes. For the most part, I wanted

students to research the anarchist and socialist movements to help shed light on The Iron Heel but

also what those organizations did right and wrong. There is a growing body of literature on how

graduate student organizations can organize and why faculty should BE in solidarity with the

students. Also, I have not heard much about students being in solidarity with faculty when they

are threatened, but that seems appropriate, too. A few people are on their own organizing student

and alumni support for the IUP's faculty union vote of no confidence for Dr. Atwater. Some

students are not fans of the faculty union, but Dr. Atwater gives them sufficient reason to support

the no confidence vote.

In The Communist Manifesto, Marx failed to characterize the nature of the struggle that

communists should use in seeking to establish greater freedom and democracy in the world. He

did not say whether communists should roll out the guillotines, as the bourgeoisie did in France.

The only great exhortation came at the end: “WORKING MEN OF ALL COUNTRIES,

UNITE!” Most of Marx's life was dedicated to participating in the organizations that could help

facilitate socialist revolutions in the world. From that basis, I have tried to lay down a theoretical
 16

and pedagogical groundwork for a Marxist critique of capitalism in society as well as the

university. Professors and contingent labor within the university must sacrifice some of the

dignified aura that professionalism provides in order to perceive themselves as labor and

organize in order to resist or negotiate corporate changes to the management of the university and

its departments. Some reflection on the value of professionalism in graduate education should

lead to more academic freedom. Unless programs change significantly, students will have to

think about the marketability of their research and pedagogy to meet the pressures of the

academic marketplace and put bread on their own tables. While there is some value in that, there

are many oppressed students who will teach Twilight rather than St. Erkenwald. The faculty's

students will love the course, but academic freedom will suffer.
 17

Works Cited

Barrow, Clyde W. Universities and the Capitalist State. Madison: U of Wisconsin Press, 1990.

Berube, Michael. The Employment of English: Theory Jobs and the Future of Literary Studies.

New York: New York UP, 1998.

Downing, David, Claude Mark Hurlbert, and Paula Mathieu. Beyond English Inc.: Curriculur

Reform in a Global Economy. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 2002.

ETS. GRE. 14. Dec. 2009. <http://www.ets.org/gre/ >

Friere, Paulo. Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum, 2005.

Gladieux, Lawrence E. “Federal Student Aid Policy: A History and an Assessment.” United

States Department of Education. 14 Dec. 2009.

<http://www.ed.gov/offices/OPE/PPI/FinPostSecEd/gladieux.html >

Horner, Bruce, et al. “Excavating the Ruins of Undergraduate English.” Downing, Hurlbert, and

Mathieu. 75-92.

Levine, George. “The Real Trouble.” Profession 93 (1993): 43-45.

Lewin, Tamar. “A Crown Jewel of Education Struggles with Cuts.” New York Times. 19 Nov.

2009. 14 Dec. 2009.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/education/20berkeley.html?_r=2&em>

Marx, Karl. Karl Marx: Selected Writings. Ed. David McLellan. Second Edition. New York:

Oxford UP, 2000.

Ohmann, Richard. Politics of Letters. Middletown, CT: Wesleyan UP, 1987.

Readings, Bill. The University in Ruins. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1999.

Salsberg, Bob. “Harvard Univ. to Halt Science Center Construction.” Associated Press. 14 Dec.

2009. <http://bit.ly/6Yf4yG>
 18

Scholes, Robert. The Rise and Fall of English. New Haven: Yale UP, 1998.

University of Pennsylvania. “Department of English: Admissions.” 14 Dec. 2009.

<http://www.english.upenn.edu/Grad/admit.php >

Zebroski, James Thomas. “Composition and Rhetoric, Inc.: After the English Department at

Syracuse University.” Downing, Hurlbert, and Mathieu. 164-180.