Paul Creamer

the problem is not that creamer gives everyone an a. the problem is not that he makes lame jokes and is generally just a cheesy guy with a (questionably fake?) smile, which is especially hard to take on a bad day. the problem is that creamer doesn't TEACH enough for a required first-year-english class, where most students don't know the difference between postmodernism and romanticism (or that flaubert wrote madame bovery, for that matter). therefore, he lets students spout off whatever bullshit they want to, sometimes for ten minutes, when most of what they're saying doesn't make sense and COMPLETELY ruins great literature (not so bad when it's homer--AWFUL when they butcher virginia woolf). he responds to all comments in the same way--with a (once again, fake?) smile and a nod and a "thank you." so one wonders why, if you even have an intelligent comment to make, that you should bother speaking when he's probably not even digesting what you're saying or even really commenting on it. if you're an english major, please, RUN to some other professor who can tell you something you don't know. otherwise, you'll probably want to kill yourself ten million times over (and this is not even the professor's fault...some of the things that these people say!)...unless you happen to have some especially brilliant people in your class. in which case, they probably can teach you more than cr…

Listen carefully. This guy is the angel of death for literature courses. One can be easily fooled into thinking that he's a good professor because of his kid-in-a- candy-store (and completely affected) enthusiasm about french literature of the middle ages. But don't fall into the trap. He's horrible, just horrible. Not only does he explicitly discourage students from visiting him in office hours (you know, on the off-chance that we might actually learn something) but he also actively discourages meaningful contributions to the "discussions". If you don't give him the response he's looking for, he couldn't care less what you have to say and if you deign to disagree with one of his extremely simplistic literary interpretations, he just shuts you down point-blank and changes the subject (it's almost funny actually...almost). He talks to his students as though they were all eleven-year-olds in a special day program. And he's probably the lamest person on the planet.

Prof. Creamer is one of the reasons why I have chosen to be a French major. He is truly dedicated to his students and has a true love of the french language and the literature stemming from it. His readings cover the "hit parade" of french novels, plays, and poems, but also include some very modern, very quirky works. He does call on people at random, but it is simply to get everyone involved. I found him to be generally very excited about what we had to say, even if it wasn't always the answer he was looking for. Prof. Creamer knows and loves his french, especially Proust and Baudelaire, and he wants his students to feel the same way. I can honestly say that, after a semester with him, I do have a greater appreciation for and increased knowledge of french lit. He's probably one of the best teachers, in the real sense of the word, that I've had.

Creamer's course was by far the best I've taken at Columbia. Although his teaching style may sometimes remind you of first or second grade, he will impart a great deal of knowledge and you'll have fun. Kinda nerdy sense of humor (you'll laugh because he's so ridiculous at times), but endearing and keeps you awake and interested during class. Cares a lot about his students - truly wants you to learn, be interested, and succeed in his class. Extremely lenient about paper deadlines (but he says that's different in undergrad courses). Class included a trip to the Cloisters - a wonderful opportunity to follow him around as he spoke at great length about the art - he has lots of interesting info to share.

Disgustingly sterile discussions, abhorrently sardonic "group work" assignments and anything somewhat poignant is basically just 'fluff,' Creamer's class can best be likened to a bloodbath of classical Western literature. Nothing is taught in this course that the "American Heritage Dictionary" could not offer to students. Basically guys Creamer reads off these retarded ency But as my friend says to me "If you just get a good grade, who cares?" its true he gives EVERYONE either an A or an A minus. So rest assured you little grade mongers that as long as you read the book or even read the spark notes or EVEN just BS the class you WILL get an A. The papers themselves are easy to bullshit. You can literally make not one interesting point and copy and paste spark notes for anything and still manage to ace it. The midterm is much of the same, he grades it with much reservation. I feel as if he's afraid to 'hurt' our feelings by not giving us good grades. Oh well, at least my GPA will be happy. But don't get me wrong if you're hoping to get anything out of the books, or anything out of your two hours and 46,000 tuition then get OUT of this class and go into another section, any other one, seriously. A baboon could make more sense than Creamer about literature. Oh and about the final, you know the coursewide final that is NOT written by Creamer. Well hey don't worry AT ALL because gue…

Please, please don't believe the positive reviews. I did and made a big mistake by taking this class. Creamer is really outgoing and seems nice at the beginning, but he is condescending and arrogant. But the worst thing about this class is that WE NEVER TALK ABOUT THE BOOKS. And it's French Lit!! Instead you do oral reports about whatever you want and talk about books that you never read. Even better, he'll call on you with questions about random things, like what is the Latin word for head. Also, he will never learn your name despite the fact that there are 10 people in the class. So learn to love your name tag. Creamer always breaks the class up into awful discussion groups and instead of asking about anything important, makes you discuss things like the syntax. As you sit in your 10th discussion group and the awkward silence grows, use this time to bond with other students about how much this class sucks. Or why it is he erases the board every 5 seconds.

If you have any faith in your own opinions concerning literature, don't take this class. Prof. Creamer has little interest in knowing how you interpret literature, and will go around the entire class asking one question, only waiting for the so-called "right" answer- his. He's fairly entertaining and tries different activities, but not an extremely motivating class.

I pretty much agree with the previous reviewer; Creamer focuses on very inconsequential points during class, and his group work questions (expect those pretty much every other class, if not more often) are things like, "explain the role of humor in Crime and Punishment" or "what is the role of women in Don Quixote?" i.e., questions that maybe, if really deeply examined, could come up with some interesting results, but not in the 10 minutes he gives us to work on them. time is better spent running downstairs to get something from the snack machine, because you can talk for 2 minutes and come up with "there is dark humor in crime and punishment," and that's about all that's necessary. easy grading too, though only if you stick EXACTLY to the asinine format he wants in papers. For example, all intros must a) bring the reader in with a "catchy sentece," b) state the problem (his paper prompts are more like series of short answer questions than actual prompts, and its basically impossible to form a coherent thesis), and c) state how you're going to solve the problem (for b and c, just restate his "prompt," pretty much). I once took the oh-so-risque liberty of "stating the problem" in question form, and he completely missed it, saying that I deviated from the format. Creativity strongly discouraged. As for his personality, it is true that he is not a horrible mean person. Some may e…

Professor Creamer is definately one of the best French professors - he makes the literature interesting with his knowledge and unstoppable enthusiasm, and he's extremely friendly and open. I definately got a lot out of the class - however, it's a bit more lecture based even though it's a small class - not as much discussion among students - though he still expects lots of class participation. Make sure to not doze off, 'cause he has a tendancy to call on people at whim, whether you're paying attention or not. He also really loves group work, which got kind of annoying as the semester went on when you just didn't feel like working w/ other people anymore. Overall a good class - be prepared for a lot of reading though, about a book a week - and he was pretty fair w/ grading.

Creamer (pronounced Kramer) was a disaster of a Lit Hum professor. Class discussions were shallow, superficial, repetitive, and overflowing with BS. Creamer takes it upon himself to involve everyone in discussion, which is an admirable goal, but his method is to call on everyone in the class in whatever order pops into his mind, whether or not a given person has anything to say at the moment. In addition, Creamer almost never challenges anyone to support their points with evidence, so everyone gets by with a minimum of effort and substance (myself included). On the occasions when someone actually has a point to make, Creamer quickly moves the discussion on to other topics, because, hey, he has to keep calling on people. His own contributions to the discussions aren't much better; he seems to have a gift for focusing on the least important aspects of a text to the exclusion of everything else. But classes are most agonizing when Creamer assigns group work: he puts 7 or 8 questions on the board, divides the class into as many groups, and gives the class ten or twenty minutes to discuss their question before they "report back" to the class. For these exercises, you can space out even more than usual (you only need to pay attention while your group is up), but Creamer's questions are generally vague, inconsequential, or both (even when a worthwhile topic comes up, you're not likel…