Less building of straw-men in order to tear them down to make his "point."
I'm not sure, but I will think twice before returning to The Great Courses series.
No, but I would like to take his course, if only to have the chance to argue his basic premises with him.
This question is not really applicable to a lecture series.
I was very disappointed in this lecture series. I found more often than not that the speaker did little more than create straw-men in order to tear them apart, thus in his mind proving his arguments. Either I am way more knowledgeable than the common man in American history or this professor has been exposed to a wide number of extraordinarily stupid individuals. No one that I know or grew up with, to my knowledge or recollection believed even one-eighth of the dribble the professor try’s to pass off as common myths about American history. I was hoping for some in depth deconstruction of American myths, and while he does offer some interesting factual data in the course of his lectures, these little tidbits do little to bring the entire lecture series up to the caliber I expected when I purchased this series.
Let me be clear here; I do not in any way wish to imply that Professor Stoler isn't a well educated man, and I would guess that if I were to be in a class of his, we would have some very stimulating discussions, but being a student of history who thrives on the give and take between student and teacher, I found his lectures annoying due to the inability to call him on what I perceive to be his fallacies.
The story/plot line was fun, although a bit formulaic.
The introduction of Laslo.
The banter between the Fargos, usually a favorite part of the characters, but this time stale, forced and overdone.
the final battle.
no it was pretty standard. As I said I like the characters, this book just seemed a bit churned out, not as inspired as the others in the series.
As always Scott Brick does an outstanding job with the narration.
Report Inappropriate Content