Comments on: Who is the greatest (living?) academic speaker?

By: Another Damned Medievalist

Another Damned Medievalist — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 20:18:09 +0000

Because eco was duuuuullll? Another vote— Patrick Stewart speaking on Shakespeare to a university audience—does that count?

By: Phersu

Phersu — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 16:08:58 +0000

Why would you not like Umberto Eco? Ok, some of his jokes can be sometimes a little repetitive and he is sometimes condescending.

By: Simstim

Simstim — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 12:30:45 +0000

I third Skinner, he also made an effort to speak to us postgrads in the bar afterwards which pushed him up in my estimation. I also nominate Zygmunt Bauman. I saw him give a plenary at the British Sociological Association a few years back. He was speaking absolute tosh, but had the audience in the palm of his hand.

By: marooned in florida

marooned in florida — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 03:47:27 +0000

K. Anthony Appiah—I saw him give a 90 minute talk without notes which sounded as though it had been crafted word-by-word over a period of months. And personal style…impeccable, classy, charming, cosmopolitan without pretension.

By: Another Damned Medievalist

Another Damned Medievalist — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 19:50:46 +0000

Another vote for Peter Brown here. A big no on Umberto Eco. Krugman was okay, but I wouldn’t pay to see him. How about Elizabeth A.R. Brown?

By: anon

anon — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 18:59:14 +0000

For sheer entertainment value: Jerry Cohen, no question.

By: An

An — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 17:27:42 +0000

Roberto Unger (for content and general style points)—When considering law schools, I sat in on one of his lectures during a visit to Harvard. The man walked into the room in an understated way, not really looking around or seeming to pay attention to what people were doing/saying around the room. He was also IMPECCABLY dressed—I’ve never seen another male academician dressed like that just for class. (fancy suit, white shirt with matching white shiny tie. even men who are paid to dress well can’t usually pull that off). He then proceeded to sit down at a table at the front of the room and deliver a two hour lecture with no notes, yet perfectly structured. In the end, it seemed he had been talking from a well-structured and in-depth outline, but no visible outline existed. He also, after the first 10 minutes or so, had the entire class rapt, inspite of his low-key delivery. I’ve been to MANY lectures, and I’ve never seen anything that approached his delivery. (Of course, it should be noted that the ideas were fascinating as well. :) )

By: drapeto

drapeto — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 16:49:57 +0000

Why has no one mentioned Michael Walzer? because he’s a drip? then again, ppl mentioned martha nussbaum and cornel west. my votes are for mahmood mamdani, sanjay subrahmanyam and aijaz ahmad, who are all irresistibility interesting live and in print.

By: hew diolch

hew diolch — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 11:13:58 +0000

I hear there’s some bearded guy in fatigues down in Cuba who can talk for ten hours straight. They should get him up to Berkeley some time.

By: Sebastian Holsclaw

Sebastian Holsclaw — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 07:14:46 +0000

You haven’t seen extemporaneous speech until you see Douglas R. Hofstadter debate in blank verse.

By: John Mc

John Mc — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 04:13:06 +0000

How can any discussion on this subject be complete without Lawrence Holmes or Leonard Spinks?

By: gemma

gemma — Sun, 11 Apr 2004 22:31:27 +0000

From my undergrad years, the best lecturer I heard was astronomer Alex Filippenko. Brilliant, funny, and a helluva nice guy. The worst? There was an obscure visiting Pol Sci prof from Italy who was simply awful—pompous, mean, boring, unintelligent, with a nearly impenetrable accent. Thankfully, I’ve forgotted his name. Worst among the Big Names? Robert Nozick gave a lecture once that was so trivial and meandering that half the grads and undergrads in attendence walked out after 30 minutes.

By: chutney

chutney — Sun, 11 Apr 2004 21:58:06 +0000

Environmentalist/geneticist David Suzuki was just in, and he was passionate, humble, and engaging. He was also good with students outside the lectures. Also good have been Harvey Cox and Stephen Carter. Worst we’ve had is Robert Coles. Skipped out on dinner with the donor who provided funds to meet with admirers, gave a fifteen minute speech, accepted no questions, and left immediately (but four hours early) to catch his plane.

By: chris

chris — Sun, 11 Apr 2004 16:53:46 +0000

One speaker who actually lived up to the billing was Peter Winch. It was not just the talk but the way he handled questions that I recall best. My own teacher, John Gunnell, is awfully good too. The more contentious the situation, the better he gets.

By: matt

matt — Sun, 11 Apr 2004 15:25:50 +0000

A few comments on some of the comments above- Philip Kitcher gave a series of 3 lectures at Penn a few weeks ago- they were terrific- very interesting lectures presented in a very enjoyable manner and easy to follow, despite their serious nature. He definitly deserves more votes. He also was very good at taking questions. Walzer, on the other hand, gave a talk here in the fall that was, at best, so-so. It was uninspired in content and lacking in presentation. He basically re-hashed some old ideas in a dull and tired way, and then treated anyone who questioned him as if they were just too dumb to understand.