Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Novelist David Gilmour: “I’m not interested in teaching books by women”

There are a few things that University of Toronto professor David Gilmour does not like: all Canadian writers, Chinese writers and female writers.

What does he like? Himself, it seems.

Also, dudes. Dudes can write.

In a recent interview with Hazlitt, an online magazine by Random House Canada, Gilmour said, “I’m not interested in teaching books by women.”

“What I teach is guys. Serious heterosexual guys.”

“Real guy-guys.”

He elaborates:

But I can only teach stuff I love. I can’t teach stuff that I don’t, and I haven’t encountered any Canadian writers yet that I love enough to teach.

I’m not interested in teaching books by women. Virginia Woolf is the only writer that interests me as a woman writer, so I do teach one of her short stories. But once again, when I was given this job I said I would only teach the people that I truly, truly love. Unfortunately, none of those happen to be Chinese, or women. Except for Virginia Woolf. And when I tried to teach Virginia Woolf, she’s too sophisticated, even for a third-year class. Usually at the beginning of the semester a hand shoots up and someone asks why there aren’t any women writers in the course. I say I don’t love women writers enough to teach them, if you want women writers go down the hall. What I teach is guys. Serious heterosexual guys. F. Scott Fitzgerald, Chekhov, Tolstoy. Real guy-guys. Henry Miller. Philip Roth.

Gilmour, whose novel “Extraordinary” is a finalist for the Giller prize, is under the impression that he teaches “only the best,” because he is, by his estimation, one of the best:

I got this job six or seven years ago, usually the University of Toronto doesn’t allow people to become professors without a doctorate. You have to have a doctorate to teach here, but they asked if I would teach a course, and I said I would. I’m a natural teacher, I was trained in television for many years. I know how to talk to a camera, therefore I know how to talk to a room of students. It’s the same thing. And my book ‘The Film Club’ is about teaching my son about life and the world through film.

by Anonymousreply 6810/08/2013

Wow, an asshole of the highest degree.

Unfortunately, academia is filled with assholes like this.

by Anonymousreply 109/26/2013

He has an ego problem.

by Anonymousreply 209/26/2013

He's an arrogant ass hat.

How prosaic his mind must be to venture through life unperturbed by influences that don't reinforce his own stagnant hegemony.

Then again, we're all capable of prejudice. For example, I only read authors who have talent and the insight to say something worthwhile. So my bigotry will extend to giving a generous berth to any of his mediocre scribblings.

by Anonymousreply 309/26/2013

Yes, he looks like a real guy-guy ... The Bea Arthur look is so butch on a man...

by Anonymousreply 409/26/2013

[quote] I was trained in television for many years. I know how to talk to a camera

Having seen the man on TV many times during his years with the CBC, this proves he's not only a smug bastard, but a liar. Watching him find a camera is like watching my grandmother trying to focus on the person talking to her when she couldn't see or hear them properly.

Also, this is the guy who, when his kid was on drugs on flunking out of school, made the big condition of doing so that he watch three movies a week and discuss them (see link).

by Anonymousreply 509/26/2013

I'm throwing out ALL my Pink Floyd CDs!

by Anonymousreply 609/26/2013

Does this mean YOU can list some important female writers?

That guy sounds like he BELONGS on Datalounge. None of you guys like women either.

by Anonymousreply 709/26/2013

"How prosaic his mind must be to venture through life unperturbed by influences that don't reinforce his own stagnant hegemony." R3

Nice. I'm afraid many academics I've met are like this. Sigh.

by Anonymousreply 909/26/2013

What kind of teacher only teaches about artists they like? I think Richard Wagner is an asshat. Does that mean if I taught about opera, I could pretend there is no such thing as Die Ring des Nibelungen, and that would be fine with the university? No wonder students are so ignorant.

by Anonymousreply 1009/26/2013

R4, did you read the comments he made at the link? Says he most dislikes "men who are afraid if their wives" and a bullying employer. Sounds like he has issues. And Bea Arthur is way more macho looking than he is.

by Anonymousreply 1109/26/2013

I've worked in academia for years, and I've fortunately never encountered an egomaniac of this order. I suspect it's because he perceives himself as special—"got the teaching job without a PhD"—a star hire who can indulge his whims and predispositions and make the class all about himself. The star hires I've known have taken their teaching jobs seriously. His university should cut him loose and hire a real teacher.

by Anonymousreply 1209/26/2013

Bet he takes up a lot of room on the subway.

by Anonymousreply 1309/26/2013

It has been my experience that universities are full of entitled arrogant pinheads. They are not the brilliant minds that they think they are. And they are grossly overpaid.

by Anonymousreply 1409/26/2013

But he's a Canadian writer himself, so ... ?

I have to confess I read one of this guy's books years ago and liked it. I'm sorry to see him getting so intolerant in his old age.

by Anonymousreply 1509/26/2013

Marcel Proust, now there's a real guy's guy, tee-hee.

by Anonymousreply 1609/26/2013

[quote]That guy sounds like he BELONGS on Datalounge. None of you guys like women either.

Congratulations on completely missing the point.

People are allowed to have their own literary preferences when it comes to their own personal reading.

But a lit teacher in a University shouldn't approach his teaching that way.

Gilmour is an asshat. Even if his comments were off hand and jokey, which he claims, it still reveals how he conducts his teaching. It also exposes him as not as intelligent as he thinks he is.

BTW, he's not actually a professor at the U of T. He wasn't hired in the English department. He's a writer and broadcaster (he used to review movies on CBC) and was hired to teach a few courses.

by Anonymousreply 1709/26/2013

He looks like a lesbian.

by Anonymousreply 1809/26/2013

In a round about way he is saying that the course he teaches is a waste of time. Students are best to spend their huge debt somewhere else.

by Anonymousreply 1909/26/2013

What a dick. What famous books has he written?

by Anonymousreply 2009/26/2013

A Canadian lit prof who refuses to teach Alice Munro should be fired.

by Anonymousreply 2109/26/2013

Maybe it is different where he is but in the UK any professor who dismissed George Eliot, Jane Austin, Mary Shelley,the Bronte sisters ect as not worthy of study would be laughed at and out of work.

Reading between the lines all he is capable of teaching is standard 20th century North American classics and he is a step away from saying Shakespeare isn't very interesting either because he would be out of his depth trying to give lectures on it.

I am guessing but maybe he has been told to broaden his classes and he isn't capable of it. None of the writers he mentioned are remotely difficult to study, there is more to this story than meets the eye.

by Anonymousreply 2309/26/2013

I'm not interested in reading books by David Gilmour.

by Anonymousreply 2409/26/2013

R22 No, professors should teach what are generally accepted to be the best books. One professor's opinion should not be the basis of an education.

You seem completely unaware that there are many major women writers in the accepted canon of Western Literature.

by Anonymousreply 2509/26/2013

R21 is right. Alice Munro may very well be the best short story writer in the world.

by Anonymousreply 2609/26/2013

He's a shitty teacher if all he can teach is stuff he loves.

by Anonymousreply 2709/26/2013

Now he's backtracking.

'There isn't a sexist bone in my body!'

by Anonymousreply 2809/27/2013

So when one seeks an education, their quest for knowledge is limited to subjects and figures determined by the personal tastes of their instructors? One's education is beholden to a teacher's likes and dislikes?

This guy is an arrogant asshole, misogynist and homophobe. He has no business teaching anyone anything.

by Anonymousreply 2909/27/2013

Teaching college-level lit is exactly the same thing as talking to a camera? If that were the case, his job would be superfluous, as anybody who wanted to learn about literature could get just as much from watching YouTube clips as from paying thousands for his class. Idiot.

by Anonymousreply 3109/27/2013

[quote]What I teach is guys. Serious [bold]heterosexual[/bold] guys. F. Scott Fitzgerald, Chekhov, Tolstoy. Real guy-guys. Henry Miller. Philip Roth.

Professors should teach what they think are the best books. If none of those books happen to be written by homosexuals, who cares?

Why is there an obligation to keep putting a step stool out so homosexuals feel validated?

by Anonymousreply 3209/27/2013

"Yes, he looks like a real guy-guy ... The Bea Arthur look is so butch on a man..."

LOL. Glad someone called him out on this.

"I can't say I blame him. Good for him."

You sound dumb. And self-loathing. Why are you defending this homophobe?

by Anonymousreply 3309/27/2013

[quote]I thought we were done with all of this artificial leveling of the playing field.

Well, we're not, Justice Scalia. What made you think that?Your answer can't include the words "black president", either.

by Anonymousreply 3509/27/2013

The issue is not that he should teach writings by women or gay people because they are women or gay, but that he should not exclude them because they are women or gay, R34. That is a big difference.

by Anonymousreply 3609/27/2013

No one is saying he "has" to teach anything but the best books. However, espousing the notion that only heterosexual men write "the best" books is flagrant chauvinism.

by Anonymousreply 3709/27/2013

What an asshole.

It's all well and good for a teacher to want to teach what he or she loves. But it's highly suspect for a teacher to say that there is only one female author he loves.

Perhaps he should read more.

by Anonymousreply 4009/27/2013

He is a sexist, homophobic asshole with issues about masculinity. Also, he is and ignorant idiot if he thinks Tolstoy or Flitzgerald were straight.

by Anonymousreply 4109/27/2013

Typical posturing, a Canadian Larry Summers. I wish people like this with their insane paranoia about political correctness, were all dead. They don't add anything to society, even a fresh perspective. His whole career is one long projection of mental illness and violence.

by Anonymousreply 4209/27/2013

Translation: "I can't teach what I don't understand."

by Anonymousreply 4309/27/2013

This guy is trapped in Gender Hell.

An obvious bottom when drunk enough to forget about his shitty childhood.

by Anonymousreply 4409/27/2013

'There isn't a sexist bone in my body!'

Nonsense. Look at his girlie hips.

by Anonymousreply 4509/27/2013

Probably has osteoparosis

by Anonymousreply 4609/27/2013

Teach whatever you want, Mister Macho Try-Hard. Since Miller and Roth bore me to tears, and I read my fill of some of the others in high school, I'd never go near your classes.

No Flannery O'Connor, Isak Dinesen, Dawn Powell, Patricia Highsmith, Marguerite Yourcenar, Edith Wharton or George Eliot (just for starters)?

I pity his sorry ass.

by Anonymousreply 4709/27/2013

This is why people who haven't actually studied literature should not be teaching it at the university-level.

That said, if he were a legitimate teacher, he could and should teach whatever he wants that makes academic sense. So, teaching 19th Victorian novelists and ignoring Austen would be absurd. Teaching any survey course which ignores key authors because they are women would be intellectually dishonest.

However, if he wanted to teach a course on men's literature - from an academic perspective - in the same way that women's literature or feminism is taught, go ahead.

The problem with his position is not the exclusion of women authors, it's the emotionally infantile rationale which lacks any credible basis.

by Anonymousreply 4809/27/2013

So, he posts here, right?

Anti frau is anti frau....

by Anonymousreply 4909/27/2013

Btw isn't there some kind of objective curriculum he must follow in teaching. I find it strange that he can just "choose" what books they're gonna read. I'm not from US, so I don't know, but in my country it would be unthinkable

by Anonymousreply 5009/27/2013

R7 That's not true. I'm a guy and Sarah Waters is my favorite contemporary novelist. I don't know how anyone can hate anyone else based on status (race, gender, etc.).

And the gay/lesbian movement would not be where it is today if it weren't for the support of straight women. They were the first to listen, to understand, empathize, and defend us.

by Anonymousreply 5109/27/2013

r30 [quote]I can't say I blame him. Good for him.

I'm sure you hate women like aids, but he's talking about gays too.

by Anonymousreply 5209/27/2013

[quote]Who are your favourite prose authors? Tolstoy, Proust, Chekhov, Truman Capote and Scott Fizgerald

Truman Capote? Now, he's a REAL man's man.

by Anonymousreply 5309/27/2013

The Film Club is a poorly written, pompous, self-deluded, self-satisfied book--a memoir that seems designed to show what an enlightened parent he is, but in reality shows what a self-satisfied asshole he is.

by Anonymousreply 5409/27/2013

Does he feel masculine? Because he certainly doesn't look it. It's obvious that he's painfully overcompensating. To everyone but him that is.

by Anonymousreply 5509/27/2013

He screens "Last Tango in Paris" for his predominantly female classes because he's an old goat scoping out the twentysomething pussy.

by Anonymousreply 5609/27/2013

Hemingway tried not to be a fag, too, Professor.

He ended up putting a gun in his mouth.

by Anonymousreply 5709/27/2013

Here's his "excuse":

[quote] "This was an interview I gave sort of over the shoulder. I was having a conversation, in French, with a colleague while this young woman was doing this interview."

Can you say pompous asshole in French? Let me help you: gros connard pretentieux.

by Anonymousreply 5810/08/2013

I don't read books by women. They bore me and don't speak to me at all. Why do you queens all have your panties in a knot. Big fucking deal.

by Anonymousreply 5910/08/2013

What if he taught a class and nobody came?

by Anonymousreply 6010/08/2013

One of the greatest American novels from the late 20th century is "The Color Purple."

It will stand the test of time....Roth will not.

by Anonymousreply 6110/08/2013

[quote]I don't read books by women. They bore me and don't speak to me at all.

No one gives a shit about your short-sighted misogyny, except maybe your mom. Unless you're also a university literature professor? No? You're not? Of course not. We didn't think so.

by Anonymousreply 6210/08/2013

I had written a long, indignant post.

Then I realized R4 covered the wit and R43 the wisdom.

by Anonymousreply 6310/08/2013

r62 big yawn

by Anonymousreply 6410/08/2013

At least R59 shows his self-awareness at R64.

by Anonymousreply 6510/08/2013

I can't imagine picking up a book, or hearing about one, then realizing it's written by a woman and rejecting it on that basis. What sort of mindset does that?

by Anonymousreply 6610/08/2013

It took r48 until someone actually read the article(s).

He is not a professor, he is a lecturer. This is a bullshit 1% culture club appointment that happens all the time.

As much as he is an arrogant asshole, he is implicitly stating that he is not a professional educator because he is saying that he can only teach what he likes. A professor would not have this problem.

He is upfront about this with his students, so anyone with personal or educational objections can avoid the course.

BTW, I'm not condoning his views. I'm Canadian and quite familiar with his TV interviews. His ego, bias, and immaturity were on full display for his whole CBC career.

by Anonymousreply 6710/08/2013

I tend to prefer male writers myself. There are many women writers that I admire and books by women that make my best of list.

One thing I have noticed is, when there is a book by a woman writer that is among my favorites it tends to be the only book or one of a few by that author that I even want to read.

Jane Smiley, A Thousand Acres and The Greenlanders are among my favorite books. I hate the rest of them.

Amy Tan, The Kitchen God's Wife is my favorite and I found the others ones that I did not finish.

by Anonymousreply 6810/08/2013
Need more help? Click Here.

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed

recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!