Gil Anidjar

Genuinely the best professor I have ever taken at Columbia. The classes are very conversational. It's like a piggybacking debate and he is such an insightful professor. A lot of the things he says in class you also find yourself reflecting about them outside of class too. I would take this class 20 times over if I could.

Gil had an interesting teaching style. He always asked for questions at the beginning of lecture, but didn't always seem to get around to answering them. He just kind of talked about what he had planned and then if something was related to a question, would point that out. I guess he took questions to encourage participation, but I had no motivation to ask a question because I didn't think it would be answered. Pretty much everything he said was interesting, though. TOO MUCH reading. There weren't many assignments so reading was basically the only thing we had to do, but it was impossible to get through it all. I ended up doing very little of it on a weekly basis and then doing what was necessary for the midterm and final paper. The only reason I'm hesitant to say I'd recommend is because Gil added an attendance policy after the drop deadline, and students could only miss 2 classes. That was pretty annoying for someone who hadn't been missing very often, but wanted the option when necessary.

This course is not one to have expectations of, and, to his credit, Prof. Anidjar is very up front about this fact. His lectures appear to be improvised, and are usually based off of whatever questions from students he can scrounge up--promulgated usually by the 25% of your grade that comes from class participation. The texts are exceedingly difficult and his lectures have to be reflected upon, but if you're willing to really think about them it's probably worth your time. The review sessions held before the midterm and the final by TAs were essential to understanding the course, but attendance is also important--even though at times it feels futile. He said in one class, and it became a theme, "it is impossible to evaluate a class until five years after it ends," so perhaps this review is futile. That's kind of how the whole thing goes, anyway.

This course was on neither Jews nor Arabs. Don't bother taking it if you're looking for a course that, in some way, fits that description. If you are, however, looking for a course on unicorns or forks (I'm not even kidding) you might consider taking Gil's class. Most classes were spent doing deconstructive readings of texts which would end up branching out into abstract, philosophical discussions which no one, not even those participating, actually followed. This is where the extensive discussions on unicorns came up. Three classes were spent on one word in Said's Orientalism. The week after, we actually zoomed out and read the sentence from which the word came. If close readings of texts are your thing... enjoy! If not, this course will most likely baffle you. I could probably BS my way through some contrived explanation of how this approach to reading texts somehow relates to Jews and Arabs but... you'd have to be under the influence of something to buy it No syllabus. He verbally tells you which books to buy but don't even bother purchasing them-- you'll only end up reading a sentence in most anyway. Gil himself is actually quite approachable and nice. Despite feeling slightly misled by the course title, I actually enjoyed the class. That also might have had something to do with the A- at the end of a semester of NO WORK with the exception of a 5-page paper (which I threw…

He's no walk in the park (try Derrida or Freud!). I was confused by him, but that should not necessitate that he was confusing. It takes time to work on the level with him. He's moving very slowly. So slowly that I never caught up to him. He can handle silence. He listens well. He'll appear to say things that he did not say, hence people calling him mean. He sticks to his guns unless there's a strong enough point to convince him otherwise. His thought provocations are reason enough to stand in the classroom if there aren't any chairs.

while he may be condescending to some, he's a genius, and you'll be thankful you took him down the line. you will not get away with saying any bs in this class. every comment you make will be meticulously picked apart and decimated if need be. lots of work, but worth it.

Great guy. He is not condescending in any way, in fact you get a feeling like he is “one of the guys”. Always available after class and understands if you have serious domestic issues that may require extension on any assignment. He does not impose any political views (in fact I have no idea what his political views are) but engages in class discussions. If you are at Columbia to learn, take his class.

Going into the class, I was scared of him. He seemed intimidating. That was the biggest misconception. He is a chiller. The GOAT. Sweetie. Wholesome asf. Go Gil!!!!! He is intellectual and yaps a lot.

A lot of weekly reading Midterm paper on 3 readings Final take-home paper

Well, for a professor that turned up in "America's 101 most dangerous professors", or whatever, I was expecting at least one psychotic episode in class, or maybe just a good solid racial slur, but got neither. What I did get however was a well instructed lecture. Here's How Professor Aninijar runs things: First, he comes in and trys to get everyone that is in the class to get an easy A to peace out, but being incredibly boring the first two classes. After the drop deadline, and half of the class vacated, he starts instructing. He does so by mentioning some news article or current event. This story, that is articulated very casually, is then used as an anchor exhibit for say.. Foucalt, or some other reading we are focusing on that week. We did'nt cover a rolodex of the world religions in this class because as the class trys to communicate, the dividing done to these religions, filed away in these nice names, is a warp on religion itself. Something to know before taking this professor's classes: He does not give a flying f*ck about what your idea of a "normal" course is, or how bad it will ruffle your feathers to do something out of the box.