What do you think of David Gilmour's decision to keep female writers off his teaching list? - Macleans.ca

What do you think of David Gilmour’s decision to keep female writers off his teaching list?


Filed under:

What do you think of David Gilmour’s decision to keep female writers off his teaching list?

  1. Just another DWMW looking to sell books through controversy, not talent.

  2. It all depends on the deal Mr. Gilmour made with the university. If they let him pick the books, then he has every right to do so. If he wanted to choose books written by a man’s-man, I am surprised no mention was made of Hemingway, who was arguably the quintessential mans-man and a pretty good writer too.

  3. the guy obviously has no taste in literature, i mean he said the only female writer he enjoys is virginia woolfe, so why do we even care what one tenured idiot does with his course if he has already admitted to everyone he is a tasteless douchebag. its like smelling a bag marked ‘poop’ and being surprised by its smell.

    • He’s not tenured. He’s not a professor. He’s an invited instructor.

  4. What is this Gilmour Poll about? Where is the link giving background info?

  5. I would have voted, but there wasn’t a choice I could check. He’s limiting his students to his preference by sex, which isn’t fair to them, unless that’s his mandate. I’ve enjoyed his broadcast interviews in the past, not because of his sex, but because of his skill.

  6. Who is David Gilmour?

  7. He should be free to teach what he wishes, and students free to choose another class.

  8. A professor is hired to teach truths to the students, not only their opinion. Universities are not theatres for the professors’ egos. Not that many professors realize that. If he wants to teach only what he likes, then he should open his own school, at his own expense and voilà, he’ll have graduates with only one view of the world. Personally, I think the guy is just trying to rattle people and is in need of attention.

    • News flash: there are one helluva lot of university profs out there who spend their entire careers teaching only what they like — especially in the social sciences, humanities and law. It’s not like Gilmour is some anomaly in that respect. He was merely guilty of being honest about his bias.

  9. He should be free to teach what he feels is appropriate for his course, but by not including all sources he is missing out on some wonderful pieces of art. He is too inflexible and unable to accept new ideas to be an effective teacher. He is a mere instructor with a closed mind..

    • Which meant that, in today’s academia, he has lots of company.

  10. If it’s a mandatory first year English course then he should be teaching a variety, not just his whims. If it’s a 4th year elective course, then let him teach what he wants and students who are only interested in male writers can take his classes. I got stuck with a sci-fi-loving college instructor for my first year English class. It was miserable because I hate sci-fi. It was a year long course and all we read was Ray Bradbury. Boring. That shouldn’t be allowed. I feel like I was cheated. However, if an instructor wants to teach an *elective* of purely sci-fi, go for it. Then at least students can choose. As for Gilmour, if no one shows up for his class, then I guess he won’t have one, will he?