I can't abide this bloke. Even when he's on sure ground, like when attacking this £18k university, he mucks it up.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... f-comments

He doesn't like Grayling, you see. He reaches the end of the article without noticing he's not contributed anything to the main issue- ie whether this is indeed the thin end of a nasty wedge. His eruditeness says "might be", which anyone could say.

He doesn't like Dawkins either.

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n20/terry-eagl ... ispunching

Not that I think The God Delusion is that good, but that review is incomprehensible in parts. See also Grayling's response- perhaps not unconnected to the current article.

Any fans?

I don't know his rent-paying media work, but his guide to reading poetry is very readable indeed. And he seems to dislike Martin Amis. So he can't be all bad.

I don't always agree with what he has to say, but he's a distinctive voice. One of the few public intellectuals (and God, I hate that phrase) around today who doesn't subscribe to wishy-washy establishment liberalism.

I thought the Dawkins article was largely excellent, by the by, only a few areas where I disagree with him. But then again I'm the kind of person who thinks Derrida deserved his honorary degree from Cambridge.