next »

[lemonbar]

I just did, at a conference where we both presented papers. This is the person who has written "the" book in my little subfield. He's very well-known, even outside of this subfield. Me, not so much, of course. But he knew of me before this conference because we published articles in an edited volume. There are not too many people who publish in my area of research and so we are a small community.

It didn't go well. He tore apart my paper in a public setting. I don't think most of his comments were valuable and I don't think the others at the presentation found much valuable in what he said either (this based on what was said to me personally after the session). I guess I am not so much concerned about that; people say all sorts of things about my work and I take some of it seriously and disregard what I don't find helpful or relevant. It was just awkward. And we had to interact afterwards in a social setting. I really did not know what to say to him. I felt like he wanted me to say something, because he came over to my group deliberately and stood next to me as if he wanted to initiate a conversation; but I just could not come up with anything to say.

Ugh. Not a good experience. Anyone else btdt? I can't seem to shake feeling down about it.

[mended_drum]

When I met the first of several big names in my field,  it went something like this:

Me:  I loved your book on Important Topic, especially chapter 3.

Him:  Thank you so much?  Do you have a car?

Me:  Not here, but my friend Grad Student X has one.  Why?

Him:  I need to get to Local Bar.  If you all would take me, I'll buy the first round.

So Big Name and eight grad students piled into a VW, went to Local Bar and let Big Name buy us drinks all night.

In my field, this is not terribly unusual behavior, though.

[locutus]

Do I know you lemonbar? I recently witnessed something similar to what you describe. I will say that you're probably not the first person that the Big Name has tore apart, and not the last.

[kedves]

The big names I've met in my tiny research field have been lovely.  I was surprised once when meeting a very big name in my much larger discipline by the extreme difference between the person's written and in-person character, tone, and personality.  I suppose being able to create a more likable persona in writing is a sign of an effective writer, but what a letdown.

It sounds as if you are taking this well, Lemonbar.  How strange.  Based on the interaction later, it sounds as if his perspective on what he was doing is probably not at all similar to the way his comments were received.

[no_quarter]

"It didn't go well. He tore apart my paper in a public setting. I don't think most of his comments were valuable and I don't think the others at the presentation found much valuable in what he said either (this based on what was said to me personally after the session). "

They probably weren't valuable, but used as a way of fending off the competition. This person while a "big name" must be insecure.

"It was just awkward. And we had to interact afterwards in a social setting. I really did not know what to say to him. I felt like he wanted me to say something, because he came over to my group deliberately and stood next to me as if he wanted to initiate a conversation; but I just could not come up with anything to say".

Because he probably wanted you to say something to give him attention. The only thing you could have done was ask him about the need for that type of critique instead of constructive feedback. He probably doesn't have this skill set. I would dust the dirt off of your shoulder and remember this when you are a big name- so that you don't make the same mistake.

Enjoy.

[untenured]

Ah, lemonbar.  How could the big name in your field commit such a sin?  Does he not know you are the esteemed founder of the critically important Oxford Round Table thread?  That alone merits genuflection.

I definitely empathize.  This sounds strange.  Perhaps Big Name was not on his game that day or going through some rough times like a divorce.  Also, it may be that your paper struck a nerve with BN and it came out.  What would give me solace is that it seemed the comments were not terribly helpful and the audience thought as much.  Getting angry at BN won't accomplish anything.  

With things like this I prefer to just lay it out.  His proximate location may have been an invitation to talk further.  Perhaps he felt guilt, who knows.  I would have sported a big smile and said, "So, BN, you really liked my paper didn't ya?"  This would be the perfect opening for BN to speak his thoughts.  If he is remorseful, helpful, or recognizes that you don't take it personally, then the conversation broke the ice and that is a good thing.  Who knows.  BN might think he is doing you a service through his public criticism.

If BN just attacks you further, simply agree with what he says, keep smiling, and avoid BN at further events.  You know he's a tool.

Untenured

[offthemarket]

I think there are a few routes to bignameship.  One route is to combat your way there, like your bigname.  Take this as a complement that you were worth savaging.  You must be some form of competition.  The bigname whose work is most closest to mine just ignores me.  On purpose.  Because he doesn't see that I'm worthy of an attack.

[zuzu_]

Channel those negative feelings into pity. What a sad man. Imagine the insecurity, the teeny tiny penis, or whatever issues would motivate someone (who is in a position of power/authority) to publicly tear down another with unhelpful, non-constructive criticism, and then hover around that person like an agressive alpha-dog in a social gathering.

[inthelab]

Channel those negative feelings into pity. What a sad man. Imagine the insecurity, the teeny tiny penis, or whatever issues would motivate someone (who is in a position of power/authority) to publicly tear down another with unhelpful, non-constructive criticism, and then hover around that person like an agressive alpha-dog in a social gathering.

I've had Kedves'experiences and have to agree with Zuzu_.
When you are BNIF (big name in field) OP, you'll also be known for your grace and charm.

[al_wallace]

I was at a conference once and grabbed some breakfast at the student union. It was quite early so the place was mostly empty and I was alone. I had my nerd badge on for the conference and was in the process of reviewing for my talk I was going to give later that day. I heard a voice that said, "mind if I join you?" and I looked up to discover a very big name in my field (e.g. a couple of Pulitzer prizes under his belt and a "Times Magazine top 25 most influential people" listing). I said, "sure" and then quietly freaked out in my head trying to think what I would say to this guy. We ended up talking about the different methodological problems with our respective research for over an hour. I was amazed at the number of questions he had and his breadth of knowledge as well. Later that day he gave a great keynote address before receiving (yet another) award. My lasting impression was of a guy that never lost his passion for what he did and seemed to revel in the minutia of science. He was also visibly uncomfortable getting his award.  

[bibliothecula]

Ms. Mentor calls this "peacocking." It happens in every field, at every conference. Ignore it. People know he's a jerk. It can be brutal, but don't rise to his bait, and stay professional if he tries to engage you.

[the_honey_badger]

I've had this happen twice (yes, I am a "lucky" s.o.b.).  The first was a classic case of going on too long with too much venom and whatever influence he would have had over audience opinion was completely lost. The sense that a "big name" had *attacked* a graduate student was the buzz that came out of that session. I got a lot of "what a jerk!" comments from strangers and some nicely delivered sympathy from equally or almost-as-big-names.

The second was an evisceration that felt petty and unfair during the session. It wasn't delivered with the venomous glee of the one mentioned above but it was unpleasant for me.  A couple of years later, when revising the dissertation in its final stages for a book, I ran across the notes a friend had taken for me at that session.  I realized with the distance of time that my own perspective had changed and I had eventually worked around to changing most of what the commentator had targeted. Not always in the direction she suggested but apparently those *were* problematic sections as I saw myself much later.  Those areas I had not revised, I realized five years on, could actually be chalked up to my presentation editing (i.e., 20 minute version of a long chapter left a lot of room for sketchy case-making on my part). 

Sometimes people are way out of bounds for a variety of reasons and you have to just try to move on. If you are fortunate, they make asses of themselves while attacking you. But, sometimes, they have a point that you may not realize until later----keep some notes for when the sting of public vivisection wanes and look coldly and hard at those comments and see if you might find a nugget of useful critique you can use to supplant Big Name in the constellation of your field.

[lemonbar]

I guess what bothered me most about his comments is that the thing that he said was wrong about my paper was not, in actuality, wrong at all (according to everything I have read on the topic -- and he has read the same things). He was wrong about what he was saying. He made the same argument in his much awarded book, which was also wrong.

Furthermore, he talked about a certain type of source as not containing any information that was relevant to the topic I was addressing; yet, he cited that source in his book as being the place where he got a lot of information about the topic. I have read and re-read his book, and I cannot figure out where in this particular source he got the information that he discusses. It is just not there. And, I did not cite this source in my paper. So, I don't know why he was even talking about it in the first place.

It made me look like I did not know what I was talking about. And while I did address some of his points, I did not feel it to be the time or place to get into esoteric arguments about sources and debates that really had little direct relevance to my paper or the conference. I wasn't going to argue with him, especially because, basically, I could not address his points without criticizing his use of sources and his reading of debates in his book. And there was no way I was going to open up that can of worms. Not in a public situation like that. Believe me, I am not the only one who has made this critique of his work. But it has always been done privately -- no one has ever publicly questioned him and I doubt anyone ever will. 

I don't know if he was "peacocking" -- I guess the thought had crossed my mind. But I'm a not anyone that requires such treatment. I doubt I will ever achieve his heights; and I am no one for him to worry about. I suppose my paper probably did strike a nerve, probably because it simply said something different from his book.

I have enjoyed all the stories here though, both good and bad. I guess my only comfort is I probably won't see him again anytime soon. 

[larryc]

I did not feel it to be the time or place to get into esoteric arguments about sources and debates that really had little direct relevance to my paper or the conference. I wasn't going to argue with him, especially because, basically, I could not address his points without criticizing his use of sources and his reading of debates in his book. And there was no way I was going to open up that can of worms.

I prefer to call it a can o' whoop ass. And I think you should have opened it, but oh well.

[mad_doctor]

Here's how my first brush with celebrity went.

As a third-year Ph.D. student, at the big conference for my field...

mad_phdcandidate:  OOoo...  Dr. Demigod.  I'm mad_phdcandidate.  I've been a fan of your Really Big Theory.
Dr. Demigod:  Really?  Which one?
mad_phdcandidate (not remembering either that there was more than one, or Dr. Demigod's co-authors):  err, uhhh... Theory A.
Dr. Demigod:  Oh, I really don't believe any of that anymore.  I've moved on to Theory E.

The meeting actually went very well except for my initial awkwardness and ignorance.  Dr. Demigod was very pleasant, encouraging, and wished me well.  I learned from that experience never to talk to another scholar about hu's own work unless I am thoroughly familiar with it.