Disappointing。 I'm glad it was only 12 sections。 As it was， I ended up skimming the last half of several sections and just reading the transcript for those。 I think this professor and I have very different ideas of what constitutes "notorious。" I'm thinking infamy and mayhem， conspiracies and high crimes。 He seems to be thinking gossipy and raw sewage。 （Literal sewage， not metaphorical sewage。） At the same time， how does one manage to make Oscar Wilde come off as dull？ Unfortunately， while the p Disappointing。 I'm glad it was only 12 sections。 As it was， I ended up skimming the last half of several sections and just reading the transcript for those。 I think this professor and I have very different ideas of what constitutes "notorious。" I'm thinking infamy and mayhem， conspiracies and high crimes。 He seems to be thinking gossipy and raw sewage。 （Literal sewage， not metaphorical sewage。） At the same time， how does one manage to make Oscar Wilde come off as dull？ Unfortunately， while the professor seems well-informed on the subject， and parts of the course were mildly interesting， his delivery was less than dynamic。 Also， his artificial and repetitive hand gestures quickly became distracting and annoying。 Vent: What IS it with recent GC presenters and the weird hand gestures？ It comes off looking like some bizarre form of kinesthetic Tourette's。 Someone is ripping a lot of public speakers off by telling them no one will listen to them unless they are pretending to conduct Schoenburg with an invisible orchestra。 Rule One may start off as "Use your hands when speaking to appear dynamic and lively，" but the rest of that rule is "in a natural， instinctive manner。" /vent 。。。more