Professor
Robert Maniquis
2 of 3
Most Helpful Review
Extremely dull professor. I will forever remember him as one of the worst English professors I have taken in UCLA. He rambles on for hours about something that could have tersely been summarized within a couple of minutes. His lectures are disorganized, and he changes the reading material spontaneously. This man obviously possesses intellect, but he by no means sheds any of it on his students. Instead, by talking about every single work that has ever existed relevant to the day's topic, he is more frightening and overwhelming - by no means is he inspiring. I read a bunch of positive reviews of this professor, yet I wonder where they came from. I try to be as objective as possible, yet I do not see any of these amiable qualities in him when I took his class. He also dislikes the use of computers in class, so I would be careful with technology, even though surfing the web seems to be the only viable option to survive the dreadful monotony of two hours babbling. He is also extremely UNAPPROACHABLE. When going to his office hours, I came out confused and flustered. Not to mention he intimidated me enormously.
Extremely dull professor. I will forever remember him as one of the worst English professors I have taken in UCLA. He rambles on for hours about something that could have tersely been summarized within a couple of minutes. His lectures are disorganized, and he changes the reading material spontaneously. This man obviously possesses intellect, but he by no means sheds any of it on his students. Instead, by talking about every single work that has ever existed relevant to the day's topic, he is more frightening and overwhelming - by no means is he inspiring. I read a bunch of positive reviews of this professor, yet I wonder where they came from. I try to be as objective as possible, yet I do not see any of these amiable qualities in him when I took his class. He also dislikes the use of computers in class, so I would be careful with technology, even though surfing the web seems to be the only viable option to survive the dreadful monotony of two hours babbling. He is also extremely UNAPPROACHABLE. When going to his office hours, I came out confused and flustered. Not to mention he intimidated me enormously.
AD
Most Helpful Review
I took English 125 Violence in Literature with Professor Maniquis in the Spring of 2012 to satisfy the English major's critical theory requirement. Professor seemed intimidating in the first few minutes of the first class, but it quickly becomes apparent that he balances his intimidation with a genuine excitement for his students' educational pursuits. He truly cares about his students cultivating their own personal repertoire of world literary knowledge, and his class is functioned to operate with this in mind, i.e. that continually engaging with classic texts of world literature, and constantly dwelling on them, is an incredibly efficient way not only to succeed as an English major, but also to write well-crafted essays and research papers, to communicate one's thoughts adequately, and to concretize personal beliefs on topics as diverse as religion, epistemology, etc.--beliefs that can only be supported when one has taken a great deal of the body of their literature into account. Because of this, Professor Maniquis's intimidation is as a matter of fact an excitement at what he understands to be the potential that all of his students can strive for, and also a challenge to undertake that intellectual journey. The Professor himself shows in his own person that undertaking this journey is worthwhile because he is a genius, and his years of experience truly shine through in the classroom setting. His lectures function narratively--that is, they begin with a recap of everything his previous classes have gone over, systematized to the point where every class will begin with you understanding exactly where you are in the grand scheme of the entire ten weeks. From this, he branches into the topic of the day, generally introducing it but not delving straight into its intracacies right then and there. He will craft a sort of academic story, a tale of how our modern conception of whatever we happen to be talking about on any particular day came to be viewed how it is. This is what many take to be the "tangential" nature of Maniquis's lectures. They are indeed tangential, but the mistake is thinking that because they are tangential they must therefore lack an overarching structure and/or a coherent synthesis by the end--two things which they do indeed possess. I filled up an entire "UCLA" composition notebook that, by quarter's end, read almost like a novel from first page to last. I still use this notebook today for other courses because the topics that Maniquis discussed in English 125 can be applied to any course in the Humanities (however directly or indirectly) as well as life in general. If any one has ever individually theorized about the grand relation between religion, violence, terrorism, the power of the written and spoken word and the power of the human imagination to conceive of unimaginable terror, or if any one is curiously interested in any of these subjects, Professor Maniquis reconciles them all by quarter's end, giving students a new perspective in which to take into other courses, as well as which to approach life with. Speaking personally, I feel much more confident walking into classes with Maniquis's instruction resting in the back of my mind than I did beforehand. As to the particulars of the class, we were assigned a choice of either writing two short (4-6 pages) essays or one long (8-12 pages) essay. If we choose the option of two papers, one is submitted mid-quarter and the other the week after finals (this was in Spring quarter, so I'm not sure how he does it for, say, Winter quarter), meaning that we could work on the second essay AFTER the quarter AND the final had been completed. We could also rewrite the first essay to try and improve our grade, and if we are dilligent enough to do this, Maniquis will take such diligence into account in grading the second paper. He and his TA are tough graders. I got a B on my first one. But the comments that both of them leave are very helpful; no one will be left in the dark as to why they received the grade they did. The second option is if we want to wait until the end of the quarter to write one final essay, which is not advised because then we do not get feedback on how to construct essays for this class--in my case, for example, I would've gotten the B and been forced to remain content with that grade, lacking an opportunity to improve my class score on a subsequent essay. The Final consisted of two essay questions, each taking about 1.5 hours, to be written in class on the day of the final. We were given the questions ahead of time and told not to outline an entire essay, but to know the subject well enough to be able to write essays that didn't need to be outlined, because we would simply be familiar enough with the material. It was difficult refamiliarizing myself with the material, but it was nothing that a group study session the night before and about 4 hours of private studying could get me through. I'm not sure if he gives out the essay questions in all his classes, but he did for ours because he wanted to make sure that we spent the bulk of our time writing the final paper(s). Weekly reading assignments are long and intense. Take notes, but more importantly, try and get an accurate sequence of the events laid out in your mind. He'll fill in the gaps during lecture. You can go to his office hours if you have questions. I never did, but I still got an A in the course, so he's not "that" type of professor. Try to do all of the reading so that you can pass the quizzes at the beginning of class. He didn't always have them and they weren't graded, but its worth our while to do the reading so that the essay writing will go well. He'll know if you don't know what you're talking about. This was the best English class I've taken at UCLA thus far (I transferred in as a Third year). I highly recomment Professor Maniquis. The reading is intense, but manageable. I know some people who didn't do it all and still got B's in the course, so the course is definitely passable.
I took English 125 Violence in Literature with Professor Maniquis in the Spring of 2012 to satisfy the English major's critical theory requirement. Professor seemed intimidating in the first few minutes of the first class, but it quickly becomes apparent that he balances his intimidation with a genuine excitement for his students' educational pursuits. He truly cares about his students cultivating their own personal repertoire of world literary knowledge, and his class is functioned to operate with this in mind, i.e. that continually engaging with classic texts of world literature, and constantly dwelling on them, is an incredibly efficient way not only to succeed as an English major, but also to write well-crafted essays and research papers, to communicate one's thoughts adequately, and to concretize personal beliefs on topics as diverse as religion, epistemology, etc.--beliefs that can only be supported when one has taken a great deal of the body of their literature into account. Because of this, Professor Maniquis's intimidation is as a matter of fact an excitement at what he understands to be the potential that all of his students can strive for, and also a challenge to undertake that intellectual journey. The Professor himself shows in his own person that undertaking this journey is worthwhile because he is a genius, and his years of experience truly shine through in the classroom setting. His lectures function narratively--that is, they begin with a recap of everything his previous classes have gone over, systematized to the point where every class will begin with you understanding exactly where you are in the grand scheme of the entire ten weeks. From this, he branches into the topic of the day, generally introducing it but not delving straight into its intracacies right then and there. He will craft a sort of academic story, a tale of how our modern conception of whatever we happen to be talking about on any particular day came to be viewed how it is. This is what many take to be the "tangential" nature of Maniquis's lectures. They are indeed tangential, but the mistake is thinking that because they are tangential they must therefore lack an overarching structure and/or a coherent synthesis by the end--two things which they do indeed possess. I filled up an entire "UCLA" composition notebook that, by quarter's end, read almost like a novel from first page to last. I still use this notebook today for other courses because the topics that Maniquis discussed in English 125 can be applied to any course in the Humanities (however directly or indirectly) as well as life in general. If any one has ever individually theorized about the grand relation between religion, violence, terrorism, the power of the written and spoken word and the power of the human imagination to conceive of unimaginable terror, or if any one is curiously interested in any of these subjects, Professor Maniquis reconciles them all by quarter's end, giving students a new perspective in which to take into other courses, as well as which to approach life with. Speaking personally, I feel much more confident walking into classes with Maniquis's instruction resting in the back of my mind than I did beforehand. As to the particulars of the class, we were assigned a choice of either writing two short (4-6 pages) essays or one long (8-12 pages) essay. If we choose the option of two papers, one is submitted mid-quarter and the other the week after finals (this was in Spring quarter, so I'm not sure how he does it for, say, Winter quarter), meaning that we could work on the second essay AFTER the quarter AND the final had been completed. We could also rewrite the first essay to try and improve our grade, and if we are dilligent enough to do this, Maniquis will take such diligence into account in grading the second paper. He and his TA are tough graders. I got a B on my first one. But the comments that both of them leave are very helpful; no one will be left in the dark as to why they received the grade they did. The second option is if we want to wait until the end of the quarter to write one final essay, which is not advised because then we do not get feedback on how to construct essays for this class--in my case, for example, I would've gotten the B and been forced to remain content with that grade, lacking an opportunity to improve my class score on a subsequent essay. The Final consisted of two essay questions, each taking about 1.5 hours, to be written in class on the day of the final. We were given the questions ahead of time and told not to outline an entire essay, but to know the subject well enough to be able to write essays that didn't need to be outlined, because we would simply be familiar enough with the material. It was difficult refamiliarizing myself with the material, but it was nothing that a group study session the night before and about 4 hours of private studying could get me through. I'm not sure if he gives out the essay questions in all his classes, but he did for ours because he wanted to make sure that we spent the bulk of our time writing the final paper(s). Weekly reading assignments are long and intense. Take notes, but more importantly, try and get an accurate sequence of the events laid out in your mind. He'll fill in the gaps during lecture. You can go to his office hours if you have questions. I never did, but I still got an A in the course, so he's not "that" type of professor. Try to do all of the reading so that you can pass the quizzes at the beginning of class. He didn't always have them and they weren't graded, but its worth our while to do the reading so that the essay writing will go well. He'll know if you don't know what you're talking about. This was the best English class I've taken at UCLA thus far (I transferred in as a Third year). I highly recomment Professor Maniquis. The reading is intense, but manageable. I know some people who didn't do it all and still got B's in the course, so the course is definitely passable.
Most Helpful Review
After reading these evaluations I was disappointed to find myself regretting taking this class with Maniquis. The first class was intriguing I suppose, but Maniquis lacked energy and listening to him required extreme labor. Lectures were slow-paced which was fine, but drawn out with tangents. He spent more time talking about what we SHOULD know rather than what we did know, or came to learn. I found his lectures unorganized, unstructured, and often not worth the amount of time I put in. For the amount of reading assigned, very little of it was gone over. What is the use of encouraging us to be on our 3rd reading of XX if there is no incentive besides being lost in its own complexity? I also found Maniquis to be a bit condescending in answering questions or responding to comments. I didn't get his method of "pushing" students to higher limits of thinking, sorry. I am sure some students will like his teaching style, though from the amount of Facebooking and iChat-complaining I observed in class, I'm not confident a lot of other students will take another class with him.
After reading these evaluations I was disappointed to find myself regretting taking this class with Maniquis. The first class was intriguing I suppose, but Maniquis lacked energy and listening to him required extreme labor. Lectures were slow-paced which was fine, but drawn out with tangents. He spent more time talking about what we SHOULD know rather than what we did know, or came to learn. I found his lectures unorganized, unstructured, and often not worth the amount of time I put in. For the amount of reading assigned, very little of it was gone over. What is the use of encouraging us to be on our 3rd reading of XX if there is no incentive besides being lost in its own complexity? I also found Maniquis to be a bit condescending in answering questions or responding to comments. I didn't get his method of "pushing" students to higher limits of thinking, sorry. I am sure some students will like his teaching style, though from the amount of Facebooking and iChat-complaining I observed in class, I'm not confident a lot of other students will take another class with him.
Most Helpful Review
Professor Maniquis is not by any means the kind of person who can teach. He is a smart man, but a pompous and condescending man at that. He does not understand how to convey knowledge to a classroom full of students, which is evident through his lack of a lecture plan. His lectures consist of a conversation-like style, which is not revolutionary in the way that he approaches it. Professor Maniquis believes himself to be a genius, which is clearly proved to be false by taking his class. For him, teaching is a way of asserting authority, not conveying information, which reveals his insecurity. Because he can speak French, he takes pride in bringing up unknown French terms that he does not describe, which he pleasures in pronouncing in a French accent. His arrogance is obnoxious and a distraction from the learning experience. With all this said, unless you have no other option, do NOT take Maniquis.
Professor Maniquis is not by any means the kind of person who can teach. He is a smart man, but a pompous and condescending man at that. He does not understand how to convey knowledge to a classroom full of students, which is evident through his lack of a lecture plan. His lectures consist of a conversation-like style, which is not revolutionary in the way that he approaches it. Professor Maniquis believes himself to be a genius, which is clearly proved to be false by taking his class. For him, teaching is a way of asserting authority, not conveying information, which reveals his insecurity. Because he can speak French, he takes pride in bringing up unknown French terms that he does not describe, which he pleasures in pronouncing in a French accent. His arrogance is obnoxious and a distraction from the learning experience. With all this said, unless you have no other option, do NOT take Maniquis.
AD
Most Helpful Review
Unanimous sentiment in my discussion: this class freakin SUCKS. I would not recommend taking this class. Just don't do it. No one even goes to lecture because it's absolutely useless. He barely discusses the assigned reading, which puts you at a huge disadvantage because the amount of reading assigned is crazy. Even the TA's have agreed that the amount of reading is comparable to that of their graduate work. He expects graduate level analysis but does. not. lecture. He spent 45 minutes defining "irony" once and another time he spent a ridiculous amount of time talking about Sin City the movie. If your TA isn't good, then you're out of luck because you don't learn anything in this class at all. The grading for this class should be generous or at least understanding, given the fact that you aren't taught anything, but it isn't. Stay far away from Maniquis.
Unanimous sentiment in my discussion: this class freakin SUCKS. I would not recommend taking this class. Just don't do it. No one even goes to lecture because it's absolutely useless. He barely discusses the assigned reading, which puts you at a huge disadvantage because the amount of reading assigned is crazy. Even the TA's have agreed that the amount of reading is comparable to that of their graduate work. He expects graduate level analysis but does. not. lecture. He spent 45 minutes defining "irony" once and another time he spent a ridiculous amount of time talking about Sin City the movie. If your TA isn't good, then you're out of luck because you don't learn anything in this class at all. The grading for this class should be generous or at least understanding, given the fact that you aren't taught anything, but it isn't. Stay far away from Maniquis.
Most Helpful Review
Spring 2014 - The professor is a smart man who teaches the subject extremely well. However, I do wish that Maniquis could learn to be more sensitive about race, ethnicity, and disabilities. He often makes unnecessary, thoughtless, an insensitive comments on these sensitive issues. Thus, he shows his lack of understanding of the complexities that such matters entail; consequently, he often ends up insulting, belittling, and hurting others. Perhaps he should learn to bite his tongue or realize that teeth were made not only to bite but to placate the thoughtless tongue from uttering harsh and useless comments. If Maniquis were more sensitive and thoughtful, I would consider him to be not only a stellar professor but a remarkable man.
Spring 2014 - The professor is a smart man who teaches the subject extremely well. However, I do wish that Maniquis could learn to be more sensitive about race, ethnicity, and disabilities. He often makes unnecessary, thoughtless, an insensitive comments on these sensitive issues. Thus, he shows his lack of understanding of the complexities that such matters entail; consequently, he often ends up insulting, belittling, and hurting others. Perhaps he should learn to bite his tongue or realize that teeth were made not only to bite but to placate the thoughtless tongue from uttering harsh and useless comments. If Maniquis were more sensitive and thoughtful, I would consider him to be not only a stellar professor but a remarkable man.
Most Helpful Review
I took the Blake seminar with professor Maniquis this past winter, and believe me when i say.....WOW. such a valuable and truly worthwhile experience. If your only interested in an easy A and useless, regurgitated lectures then this is not your man. If however, you dream of a seminar experience that is both informative and personally relevant, then there is no better way to access the mind of William blake than through Maniquis's completely comprehensive approach. Rather than force details down your throat, Maniquis explores the overarching themes and really prophetic message behind Blake. I left class everyday bright eyed and bushy tailed...TAKE THIS COURSE, Blake's vision paired with Maniquis's informed analysis is something you won't wanna miss. He is one of the smartest and most provocative professors i have taken during my 4 years as an English major here at UCLA. His style is laid back and engaging, providing the ideal environment for those who truly wish to learn-not to plow blindly through midterms and finals. Professor Maniquis was ideal for the seminar style classroom setting, allowing his students to control a large part of the discussion while herding us towards the relevant points and core ideology behind Blake's work. Maniquis wasn't just about the facts, but about the philosophy-Take his course if your prepared to get a mental workout and really come to some stunning realizations about not only Blake, but life as a whole. Altogether a challenging and phenomenal course. Completely fair grading, just be engaged and attend class- One of the most valuable experiences and professors i have had in my time at UCLA.
I took the Blake seminar with professor Maniquis this past winter, and believe me when i say.....WOW. such a valuable and truly worthwhile experience. If your only interested in an easy A and useless, regurgitated lectures then this is not your man. If however, you dream of a seminar experience that is both informative and personally relevant, then there is no better way to access the mind of William blake than through Maniquis's completely comprehensive approach. Rather than force details down your throat, Maniquis explores the overarching themes and really prophetic message behind Blake. I left class everyday bright eyed and bushy tailed...TAKE THIS COURSE, Blake's vision paired with Maniquis's informed analysis is something you won't wanna miss. He is one of the smartest and most provocative professors i have taken during my 4 years as an English major here at UCLA. His style is laid back and engaging, providing the ideal environment for those who truly wish to learn-not to plow blindly through midterms and finals. Professor Maniquis was ideal for the seminar style classroom setting, allowing his students to control a large part of the discussion while herding us towards the relevant points and core ideology behind Blake's work. Maniquis wasn't just about the facts, but about the philosophy-Take his course if your prepared to get a mental workout and really come to some stunning realizations about not only Blake, but life as a whole. Altogether a challenging and phenomenal course. Completely fair grading, just be engaged and attend class- One of the most valuable experiences and professors i have had in my time at UCLA.
AD
2 of 3
