A few weeks back, Australian Education Minister Brendan Nelson notoriously attacked the validity of “cappuccino courses” in universities (i.e. non-industrial, usually new humanities courses). “Cappuccino”, of course being the drink of the time-wasting, overprivileged types most likely to study a course on mythology in popular culture or gender studies (unlike stockbrokers or corporate lawyers, we presume, who are worthy, useful, and in no way likely to drink coffee).

Leaving aside the obvious point that your average middle-class urban dilettante is more likely to go for the macchiato and wouldn’t spit on a latte, let alone a cappuccino, I just have to comment on an amusing and undoubtedly deliberate juxtaposition of two articles in the Higher Ed supplement of the Australian today. (No links, sorry – the stories appeared only in the hard copy version).

The first article was an opinion piece from a vice-chancellor slamming the government’s attempts to wrest autonomy away from the universities and tie industrial reform demands to funding, citing the “cappuccino” controversy. Immediately below it was a report on research “innovation” whereby cows may be bred to give more frothable milk, for use in…cappuccinos. Which I’m sure the research=commercialisable technical innovation school would love.

The thing is, if they have their way, luxuriously frothy cappuccinos will abound in inner-city cafes, but what on earth will people talk about when they are drinking them??

On a more serious note, the invisible adjunct has a long article about the current state of the university culture wars and the tensions between the market and “idealistic” notions of what universities should do. Importantly, as the adjunct points out, there is a long history to be considered.

And now I’m going to get a million hits from people looking for a cappuccino machine. Damn dilettantes.