Suppose you’ve been given a sizeable pot of money to fund an annual lecture. Leaving the question of topics aside, who do you invite? Who are the best speakers in academia today? Is there someone you’ve heard speak who you think is underrated—as an academic, or as a public speaker? Now imagine you had to publish the speaker’s talk. Does that change things for you? Or is your top choice still the same?
There are lots of people we enjoy reading whom we’ve never heard speak—especially when they’re from fields in which we don’t attend conferences. I thought it might be helpful to get comments from those outside my immediate fields (which are law, political theory and philosophy), though I’d certainly be interested in reactions within those disciplines as well.
I think the most impressive academic speaker I’ve heard is Ronald Dworkin. (Will Brian Leiter ever forgive me?) His Hart Memorial Lecture in 2001 (for which I couldn’t find a link) was probably the single best academic presentation I’ve seen. He gave the lecture without notes. By itself, that wouldn’t be anything all that extraordinary. But I’d read the manuscript that the speech was based on, and it was as if Dworkin had a teleprompter in his mind. You might have thought he’d delivered it from memory, except that it was clear he was just moving through his ideas systematically. I’ve heard a lot of excellent talks over the last few years, but none that stands out as much as that one.
I thought Larry Lessig’s talk on Feb 20, 2003 at Princeton was wonderful (or “superb” as I noted the next day). (I realize this may not be new to you, Micah, but I wanted to mention his name in response to this query.) Good question!
Interesting idea! There are different qualities that make a speaker ‘good’ - knowing the material is a favourite. Some riveting lecturers are unpleasant in person afterwards. Some speakers grab my attention because they appear such nice people, not for the talk itself. If I were endowing a lecture I’d care more that the substance was good, whether or not the peaker had the greatest delivery, since more people read than attend.
About the only person I’ve heard live who meets all these criteria would be Cornel West, but even he is more civil than flashy. Odd how my first ten selections have died recently - I should get out more.
Hm. Different strokes. I find Dworkin’s style grating in the extreme— and am convinced that he does memorize his talks, word for word, and cultivate an air of preppy casualness about making it up as he goes.
Gordon Wood (History, Brown) on the other hand, is shiver-inducingly good. Yesterday I saw Robert Pippin (Philosophy/ Social Thought, Chicago) turn in a truly bravura performance, and I’ve seen Jeremy Waldron deliver several such, but every time I hear Wood give a public talk I’m struck all over again at his talent and his mastery of the craft.
The glibness might make publication unattractive, but Richard Rorty is a pretty terrific public speaker. So’s Alan Ryan.
Harvey Mansfield is the most impressive speaker I have seen recently.
Hmm, I saw Waldron give a lecture and found him fairly ordinary. Fumbling around with powerpoint didn’t help much. Agreed on Rorty. Best I’ve seen that I can recall at the moment was Donna Haraway.
Dale Brawn hands down.
been a few years now but Quentin Skinner was superb.
Two theologians come to mind:
Hans Kung and Eugen Drewermann. I have heard both deliver extemporaneous speeches (in Kung’s case in both English and German) that were both immediately appreciable to lay audiences and ready-to-print directly from the transcript.
But then again, preachers probably have an advantage here.
I’ll second what push says on Quentin Skinner.
Peter Brown, stutter and all. I remember going to see him give a talk in Chicago ten years or so ago; I didn’t know what to expect, really. Breathtaking. Changed my life.
I rather enjoy Kermit Champa (Art History, Brown), though he’s not in the same league. Sort of like listening to the late Robert J. Lurtsema talk about Cezanne. Soporific, but in a good way.
Annoyingly, I’ve still never seen an academic speaker better than Tim Brighouse (British educationalist, more an administrator than an academic, but sometimes holds academic positions so I think he counts). I just saw Caroline Minter Hoxby give a talk (with PP) and she was terrific.
I’ve seen Waldron be very good indeed. But Powerpoint is something good speakers should only use if they have at least as much enthusiasm for using it as they do for their subject.
Now I’ve re-read it a bit more carefully, I have another comment. My guess is that people who speak well and frequently tend to be overrated, and people who speak badly or infrequently tend to be underrated. I certainly think there is not a great deal of overlap between the best academics and the most famous academics (Rawls, of course, is in the overlap). I have one colleague who doesn’t publish much and never goes to conferences but, even from what he has published, is clearly worthy of a much bigger reputation than he has, and more worthy than many others with bigger reputations. I imagine this is not uncommon (I say this as someone who reads a lot of work in three different disciplines and has a reasonable sense of who is famous in each).
I’d happily second Peter Brown and repeat the caveat - “stutter and all” — he’s fantabulous.
Another non-native speaker I would have paid to hear again is Georges Duby.
How about a vote for the worst public speaker? I’d think it would have to be Habermas, at least when he speaks in English. Between the thick accent and the lisp, he’s totally incomprehensible. I don’t mean this in any way to comment on the accademic quality of his work, which I’m in no good position to judge. Merely, hearing him give a talk is like torture.
I’m an ex-scientist and so read these suggestions from the outside: most of the names mean nothing to me.
What strikes me is that all the nominations are for men, and that all the nominators whose gender I can guess are, with a single exception, male as well.
I would not have been surprised to see this in the sciences, but to see it on a humanities board surprises me greatly.
What does it mean? I have absolutely no idea.
Tom — I named three people, one female. Didn’t exactly nominate anyone, but Hoxby was excellent.
Stuart Hall is excellent both as a speaker and an answerer-of-questions.
Next up:
You have a sizable advertising budget that has to be spent. Who would you invite to draw up the plan? In other words, who is the greatest (living) advertising planner? Would you change your opinion if the planner had to come up with the creative theme as well?
Nominations will be accepted later on in this thread.
I’ve seen Philip Kitcher speak a few times, and its always been stunningly good.
Oh! I forgot about Stuart Hall.
When I rack my brain to figure out the best speakers I’ve heard, my mind invariably goes back to a handful of panelists at conferences who were not famous at all, probably graduate students. One gentleman gave a paper on Nietzsche and Rorty on childrearing that was a pretty good paper, but his 15 minute conference presentation was both brilliant and hilarious; I think every political theorist in the room was tearing up with laughter at some point or another. (It involved, at one point, holding up a copy of Irony, Contingency, Solidarity, and asking “why is this man so smug?” It sounds borderline-unprofessional to retell, but noone thought so at the time). Sadly, I can no longer remember the presenters name, or which conference it was at.
Composer and Wesleyan University Professor Alvin Lucier. Strong stutter, but audiences are spellbound.
This might not be considered academic enough, but John Szarkowski’s talks on photography, specifically Atget, are amazing.
Two luminaries in “critical whiteness studies,” both fantastic speakers—George Lipsitz and David Roediger. I can’t decide which is the very best speaker I’ve heard.
I really enjoyed Bas van Fraassen’s Locke Lectures a few years back… accessible, clear and witty.
[I tend to miss the big name academics though… always look at a poster for Prof. X and think “oh yeah, that looks great, when is that?” and then see that it was 3 days ago.]
Martha Nussbaum is pretty good. I haven’t seen her give an actual academic talk or lecture, but rather a book-tour talk - but since the audience was probably pretty academic, it seems fair to assume she planned her talk with that in mind. So maybe it’s close enough. (The book was Upheavals of Thought.)
In a seminar-style class (not a public lecture), Syela Benhabib is amazing. She distilled all of Habermas’ Theory of Communicative Action into under 30 minutes, and less than two blackboards worth of notes (chalk, not PPT). Do we add all the points Jurgen loses to her speaking score?
…er, Seyla Benhabib, of course.
Debra Satz or Ted Glasser at Stanford. Both are sharp, confident, eloquent, and completely engrossing speakers. These days when ethics in general and ethical journalism in particular seem to be so misunderstood, don’t pass up a chance to hear either of them speak.
(BTW - I don’t mean ethical journalism in in the insignificant, personal J. Blair sense, but as in the crucially important, institutional what-gets-covered and what-does-not sense.)
I would never miss a talk by philosopher Louise Antony, who is charming, funny, and smart as hell.
Philosopher Linda Alcoff’s talks are straightforward in presentation-style but astonishing in their erudition.
A friend of mine saw political theorist Drucilla Cornell give a departmental job talk a number of years back and reports that Cornell wiped the floor with the rather inferior gentlemen interviewing her (she didn’t get the job).
Ralph Williams, an English professor at Michigan, is spellbinding. I don’t know how much he lectures outside the university.
I’ve chuckled my way through presentations by philosopher Gerry Cohen and lit-crit guy Stanley Fish, too.
I would like to become an excellent presenter, and I’d like to hear more from others with that aspiration. Surely it’s a skill that can be cultivated.
I agree with Jacob (and others) above about Waldron, Rorty and Ryan. Rorty was at UVA while I was an undergrad, and he gave some great lectures. Though, after a few weeks, they sort of all start to sound the same. I saw Waldron’s Carlyle Lectures on Locke and Christianity in Oxford. I enjoyed them a lot, although there was some grumbling from the philosophers in the crowd. As it turns, Alan Ryan happens to be at UVA law school right now teaching a short course on Rights and Bills of Rights. I don’t know how UVA managed to get him to do this, but I’m grateful for it.
Awhile back, there was a conference on Sandel’s book Democracy’s Discontent at Georgetown, and I remember being very impressed with a talk by Robin West.
And what to say about Jerry Cohen? Academic humor may never be the same after watching him mime the difference between analytic and contintental philosophy.
Linguist David Tuggy gives wonderful, charming, illuminating, entertaining, and enthusiastic talks. I never miss hearing him when I have the chance.
To draf the debate away from the social and legal…Richard Dawkins
i’ll second martha nussbaum, and i’ve also found fareed zakaria quite good. not sure if he counts as purely academic, but quite good.
Why has no one mentioned Michael Walzer? Susan Wolf is also wonderful.
There are two experiments which may be relevant to this discussion.
First, an actor was hired to make a speech to a group of psychologists, most of whom had PhDs. The actor was presented to the audience as a gifted academic and gave a speech that was literally empty of content, full of meaningless phrases in the psychological jargon of the day. The psychologists rated the speech as very good, though a few complained that it was vague.
Second, a young man was paraded in front of the usual groups of undergraduates, and described with different academic ranks. As his rank rose, so did the students’ estimate of his height. As I recall, he grew 3 or 4 inches as he rose from graduate student to full professor.
Not that any of the posters at this site would make the errors shown in those experiments, of course.
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.
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.
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.
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.
How can any discussion on this subject be complete without Lawrence Holmes or Leonard Spinks?
You haven’t seen extemporaneous speech until you see Douglas R. Hofstadter debate in blank verse.
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.
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.
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. :) )
For sheer entertainment value: Jerry Cohen, no question.
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?
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.
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.
Why would you not like Umberto Eco? Ok, some of his jokes can be sometimes a little repetitive and he is sometimes condescending.
Because eco was duuuuullll?
Another vote —
Patrick Stewart speaking on Shakespeare to a university audience — does that count?
À Gauche
Jeremy Alder
Amaravati
Anggarrgoon
Audhumlan Conspiracy
H.E. Baber
Philip Blosser
Paul Broderick
Matt Brown
Diana Buccafurni
Brandon Butler
Keith Burgess-Jackson
Certain Doubts
David Chalmers
Noam Chomsky
The Conservative Philosopher
Desert Landscapes
Denis Dutton
David Efird
Karl Elliott
David Estlund
Experimental Philosophy
Fake Barn County
Kai von Fintel
Russell Arben Fox
Garden of Forking Paths
Roger Gathman
Michael Green
Scott Hagaman
Helen Habermann
David Hildebrand
John Holbo
Christopher Grau
Jonathan Ichikawa
Tom Irish
Michelle Jenkins
Adam Kotsko
Barry Lam
Language Hat
Language Log
Christian Lee
Brian Leiter
Stephen Lenhart
Clayton Littlejohn
Roderick T. Long
Joshua Macy
Mad Grad
Jonathan Martin
Matthew McGrattan
Marc Moffett
Geoffrey Nunberg
Orange Philosophy
Philosophy Carnival
Philosophy, et cetera
Philosophy of Art
Douglas Portmore
Philosophy from the 617 (moribund)
Jeremy Pierce
Punishment Theory
Geoff Pynn
Timothy Quigley (moribund?)
Conor Roddy
Sappho's Breathing
Anders Schoubye
Wolfgang Schwartz
Scribo
Michael Sevel
Tom Stoneham (moribund)
Adam Swenson
Peter Suber
Eddie Thomas
Joe Ulatowski
Bruce Umbaugh
What is the name ...
Matt Weiner
Will Wilkinson
Jessica Wilson
Young Hegelian
Richard Zach
Psychology
Donyell Coleman
Deborah Frisch
Milt Rosenberg
Tom Stafford
Law
Ann Althouse
Stephen Bainbridge
Jack Balkin
Douglass A. Berman
Francesca Bignami
BlunkettWatch
Jack Bogdanski
Paul L. Caron
Conglomerate
Jeff Cooper
Disability Law
Displacement of Concepts
Wayne Eastman
Eric Fink
Victor Fleischer (on hiatus)
Peter Friedman
Michael Froomkin
Bernard Hibbitts
Walter Hutchens
InstaPundit
Andis Kaulins
Lawmeme
Edward Lee
Karl-Friedrich Lenz
Larry Lessig
Mirror of Justice
Eric Muller
Nathan Oman
Opinio Juris
John Palfrey
Ken Parish
Punishment Theory
Larry Ribstein
The Right Coast
D. Gordon Smith
Lawrence Solum
Peter Tillers
Transatlantic Assembly
Lawrence Velvel
David Wagner
Kim Weatherall
Yale Constitution Society
Tun Yin
History
Blogenspiel
Timothy Burke
Rebunk
Naomi Chana
Chapati Mystery
Cliopatria
Juan Cole
Cranky Professor
Greg Daly
James Davila
Sherman Dorn
Michael Drout
Frog in a Well
Frogs and Ravens
Early Modern Notes
Evan Garcia
George Mason History bloggers
Ghost in the Machine
Rebecca Goetz
Invisible Adjunct (inactive)
Jason Kuznicki
Konrad Mitchell Lawson
Danny Loss
Liberty and Power
Danny Loss
Ether MacAllum Stewart
Pam Mack
Heather Mathews
James Meadway
Medieval Studies
H.D. Miller
Caleb McDaniel
Marc Mulholland
Received Ideas
Renaissance Weblog
Nathaniel Robinson
Jacob Remes (moribund?)
Christopher Sheil
Red Ted
Time Travelling Is Easy
Brian Ulrich
Shana Worthen
Computers/media/communication
Lauren Andreacchi (moribund)
Eric Behrens
Joseph Bosco
Danah Boyd
David Brake
Collin Brooke
Maximilian Dornseif (moribund)
Jeff Erickson
Ed Felten
Lance Fortnow
Louise Ferguson
Anne Galloway
Jason Gallo
Josh Greenberg
Alex Halavais
Sariel Har-Peled
Tracy Kennedy
Tim Lambert
Liz Lawley
Michael O'Foghlu
Jose Luis Orihuela (moribund)
Alex Pang
Sebastian Paquet
Fernando Pereira
Pink Bunny of Battle
Ranting Professors
Jay Rosen
Ken Rufo
Douglas Rushkoff
Vika Safrin
Rob Schaap (Blogorrhoea)
Frank Schaap
Robert A. Stewart
Suresh Venkatasubramanian
Ray Trygstad
Jill Walker
Phil Windley
Siva Vaidahyanathan
Anthropology
Kerim Friedman
Alex Golub
Martijn de Koning
Nicholas Packwood
Geography
Stentor Danielson
Benjamin Heumann
Scott Whitlock
Education
Edward Bilodeau
Jenny D.
Richard Kahn
Progressive Teachers
Kelvin Thompson (defunct?)
Mark Byron
Business administration
Michael Watkins (moribund)
Literature, language, culture
Mike Arnzen
Brandon Barr
Michael Berube
The Blogora
Colin Brayton
John Bruce
Miriam Burstein
Chris Cagle
Jean Chu
Hans Coppens
Tyler Curtain
Cultural Revolution
Terry Dean
Joseph Duemer
Flaschenpost
Kathleen Fitzpatrick
Jonathan Goodwin
Rachael Groner
Alison Hale
Household Opera
Dennis Jerz
Jason Jones
Miriam Jones
Matthew Kirschenbaum
Steven Krause
Lilliputian Lilith
Catherine Liu
John Lovas
Gerald Lucas
Making Contact
Barry Mauer
Erin O'Connor
Print Culture
Clancy Ratcliff
Matthias Rip
A.G. Rud
Amardeep Singh
Steve Shaviro
Thanks ... Zombie
Vera Tobin
Chuck Tryon
University Diaries
Classics
Michael Hendry
David Meadows
Religion
AKM Adam
Ryan Overbey
Telford Work (moribund)
Library Science
Norma Bruce
Music
Kyle Gann
ionarts
Tim Rutherford-Johnson
Greg Sandow
Scott Spiegelberg
Biology/Medicine
Pradeep Atluri
Bloviator
Anthony Cox
Susan Ferrari (moribund)
Amy Greenwood
La Di Da
John M. Lynch
Charles Murtaugh (moribund)
Paul Z. Myers
Respectful of Otters
Josh Rosenau
Universal Acid
Amity Wilczek (moribund)
Theodore Wong (moribund)
Physics/Applied Physics
Trish Amuntrud
Sean Carroll
Jacques Distler
Stephen Hsu
Irascible Professor
Andrew Jaffe
Michael Nielsen
Chad Orzel
String Coffee Table
Math/Statistics
Dead Parrots
Andrew Gelman
Christopher Genovese
Moment, Linger on
Jason Rosenhouse
Vlorbik
Peter Woit
Complex Systems
Petter Holme
Luis Rocha
Cosma Shalizi
Bill Tozier
Chemistry
"Keneth Miles"
Engineering
Zack Amjal
Chris Hall
University Administration
Frank Admissions (moribund?)
Architecture/Urban development
City Comforts (urban planning)
Unfolio
Panchromatica
Earth Sciences
Our Take
Who Knows?
Bitch Ph.D.
Just Tenured
Playing School
Professor Goose
This Academic Life
Other sources of information
Arts and Letters Daily
Boston Review
Imprints
Political Theory Daily Review
Science and Technology Daily Review