Some strong points, some questionable aspects

This course traces a broad historical arc. At over 23 hours, one cannot complain about value for money. I particularly like the way that the final lectures bring the story of ancient Mesoamerica right up to the present. The lecturer covers a broad range of civilizations and cultural phenomena.



Despite these strengths, I wish that another lecturer with comparable expertise had been chosen for this series. Barnhart's writing and delivery have a number of unattractive traits that, over time, cause annoyance--and even doubt about whether he is actually the person you would want to learn this subject matter from. A brief list of some of the ones that are most persistent (and, to my mind, most unflattering):



(1) Terrible pronunciation of the Spanish language. While I get that he probably studies indigenous languages, his wildly inaccurate gringo-isms are not what one expects from someone who is an expert in Mexican history.



(2) Routine generalizations about "the west" and "the western mind" vs. Mesoamerica--as though Mesoamerica is not in the Western Hemisphere, and as though all "western" civilizations across time thought the same way about time, nature, history, and governance. This is just lazy thinking.



(3) An Ivy-League inferiority complex. Subtle digs against Ivy League schools suggest someone who is resentful that he didn't make the cut. This is coupled with copious name-dropping of the lecturer's dissertation advisor and friends in the field who are more famous than he is. It casts an unattractive aura over lectures that are otherwise illuminating and interesting. Over the course of several lectures, it sometimes made me skip over the remainder of a chapter.



(4) He sometimes begins a series of sentences using the pronouns "it" and "they" when it is not clear to whom/what the pronoun refers, since in the previous sentences he is talking about a number of different people or things. This may be a case of inept editing, or it's just bad writing. Either way, it sometimes forces you to go back and listen to the same passage 2 or 3 times to piece together what is being argued.



(5) There are too many personal anecdotes about graduate school and family life. The latter are a particular turn-off. I have no interest in the social life, marital status, or child-rearing habits of an academic lecturer. People don't pay to hear stories about your kids or what you do or do not buy in the supermarket under the influence of Mayan numerology. Keep it professional.



(6) Occasionally, the series gets way too in-the-weeds about niche topics, usually when it comes to Mayan mathematics and geometry (a specialty of the lecturer). There are too many lectures on such topics, and not enough on social life in the Maya world. While you will learn about temple design at Calakmul, you will learn less than nothing about daily life there, and in several other places discussed in these lectures.



Over all, I would recommend getting a few foundational print books in the field (those of Michael Coe are a good place to start). You will learn much more, in far less time. Also, it seems to me that, given the number of unfamiliar place and people names dropped in any single lecture, you actually already need to know something about the topic if you are going to derive much benefit from this series.

