Eric Foner

i'm not ashamed to admit it...i am in love with a 69-year-old man. (okay, i'm a little ashamed. i'm only 21.) i was in Foner's course on American radical movements last semester and it blew my mind. it was the only course where i genuinely enjoyed every lecture, because Foner is brilliant and his lectures were both accessible and entertaining. i also got a kick out of the fact that unlike many other professors (including ones at Barnard, who teach much smaller but still large introductory courses), he actually made a point of meeting with all of the students in that ENORMOUS lecture class who were registered with Disability Services and needed test accommodations forms signed. he was really congenial and very nice about it (considering he didn't really have interactions with most students in that course), so it was unexpected but very cool. but i digress. i somehow managed to convince him i was worthy of being in his seminar on Slavery and Emancipation; needless to say i was thrilled that i would get to bask in his glory, at such close range no less! if you have heard anything about Foner, you know that the Civil War and Abe Lincoln are his shit, so to be in a lecture devoted to these topics is such a treat (for lack of a better, less-hokey word). you can tell how much he loves this stuff and how he genuinely still gets something out of discussion with his students. the class…

Eric Foner may be the most impressive lecturer in the historical profession in the world. He's certainly the best I've had, and this comes from a history major who makes a point of filling her electives with 3000+ level history classes. People can say whatever they want about Foner's political predilections - and he's certainly far to the left of "mainstream America" (whatever that means), myself included. But Foner presents a compelling, fact-based interpretation of a profoundly important period in American history that proves far more objective than those who would seek to criticize him typically offer as an alternative.

Eric Foner teaches the most inconsequential aspects of American history as if they were the real thing. He does a good job of analyzing what radical Americans did in the past - not much - and presents a slanted view of their accomplishments. If you are interested in listening to academia discuss intellectual poseurs, militant populists, and communitarian ideologues who believe in living more "authentically", then by all means attend every one of his lectures. Foner is clever, a good lecturer, and knows his subject. The trouble is that the subject itself, for any serious student of history, is garbage.

Eric Foner has a cult following at Columbia, and although his lectures are interesting and he synthesizes well, this class was definitely not one of my favorite of all time and pales in comparison to the style of Alan Brinkley (with whom I took America Since 1945). A lot of this comes down to the assignments and the TA whom I had. My main complaint with this course was its often oppressive focus on historiography rather than the actual tracing and significance of historical events. So much time was spent talking about how authors perceived things and how authorsÂ’ points of views compared to each otherÂ’s that a lot of the importance of the material was lost. Granted, historiography and an awareness of the authorÂ’s perspective are useful skills to history students, but the concentration of time spent on such things in this class was far too much. For the paper, we had to read two works on the same subject and compare the authorsÂ’ analyses. Besides the fact that this was a god-awful amount of work that prevented me from doing well in my other classes, I found myself reading two books on a subject about which I was interested by just skimming for differences instead of indulging my curiosity on the topic. Thus, the paper became less interesting and more difficult to complete. The same was true about the books we read for the course—the section was spent talking about the auth…

Not so fast! I read the previous reviews. I can understand their awe, but can't agree with it. I am a histroy major who took foner three times, so I feel qualified to criticize him. Foner is obviously well aware of all the facts and the streams in U.S. history. If you read his books, it is easy to discern that he is of the radical wing of the progesssive side of issues. if you only take his class, however, Foner tends to present the consensus (read: bland and less controversial than a scintilliating course should be) approach to crucial historical controversies. He takes himself very seriously, lecturing as if he is giving a sermon, and Foner is not always immune to self-aggrandizement.

a book a week, many of which are hella long. each class one person writes three pages and presents on the week's reading. this is a seminar with the God of American history - one does not simply SKIP the reading for his seminar. 15 page final paper comparing 4 books. a huge pain in the butt to deal with, but oddly fulfilling nonetheless.

I'm in this class now, and I feel like the reviews from six years ago are just as applicable today. Professor Foner is an absolute leader in this field, and it is a privilege to take a class with him. Each lecture focuses on one pretty narrow topic, such as the Southern antebellum economy or Northern patriotism in 1863, and the class is impeccably organized. Every class, Professor Foner stands just next to the podium, and talks to the class very conversationally, glancing at his notes once or twice the whole class. He talks so easily, at the end of each class, it's hard to believe it's been 75 minutes. The class is wonderful, and Columbia is very lucky to have Professor Foner on faculty.

There's nothing new to say about Foner, he's brilliant and everyone knows it. This class, for those who have had plenty of American history, is interesting in that it covers the movements of the American left since the Revolutionary War...but there's little mention of the American right. Fitting for Columbia. Foner himself is from the radical tradition, so don't expect an unbiased class. The class is very left-wing oriented, which some people didn't like. Generally, if you're not a left-wing hippie/anarchist/communist, don't take this class.

Foner does deserve the praise and all the raves people give him. His erudition is quite impressive and I did not find him to be egoistic or prone to "self-aggrandizement" In fact, Foner was actually quite humble and spoke of many other great history scholars. His viewpoints are interesting, creative and unique. He will get you thinking in new ways. My only complaint is that the TA's grade everything and are quite unfair and unreasonable. My entire section and other sections shared this sentiment as well as other friends of mine who took his courses in the past. Given the large number of students he can't grade himself. Talking to the TA's about the grades is useless because they will never change them instead you are told that the average class grade was a B- so anything above consider yourself lucky. Grading for papers was even worse. Foner is a great prof but if you want anything close to an A prepare to be disappointed----even with breaking your A-S all semester

Definitely an engaging an humorous lecturer. I agree that he really demonstrates the complexities of history without romanticizing, as some professors tend to do when they're teaching on subjects they feel strongly about. While you may find some of the radical movements more boring than others, the class provides a good overview and still allows you to examine those you find interesting in more depth. Since Prof. Foner assigns all the TA's in the department, he naturally kept the most outstanding for himself. The discussion section for this class was the only productive section i've had in my three years here; Courtney was really good at focusing the discussing and leading us to draw connections between the movements.