It is interesting that both Roy and Bruce mention anti-semitism. One theory has always been that "outsider status" is somehow necessary for these communities to flourish. In 18th century Europe, the systematic exclusion of women from the academy encouraged the female-led salons to flourish. Many of the bloomsberries had hoped for fellowships that didn't, in the event, appear. Two questions: 1. Are creative communities that develop outside universities qualitatively different from those inside? Put differently, does an academic appointment not encourage the kind of risk-taking and big intellectual leaps that outsider communities seem to support? 2. Does it matter if outsider status is a matter of "exclusion" or "choice"? If you think of RAND, for example, its participants worked largely outside the academy, but they were hardly excluded. Evelyn Forget