I have written several times before (most recently on 23 Fenruary 2011) about special lectures I have attended, and my desire to see our students broaden their horizons beyond the subject they are studying.  I make no apologies for returning to the topic.  I have just returned from an exceptional lecture, but apart from its own intrinsic merits it has also set me thinking about what makes a good special lecture in different areas of endeavour.

The evening's lecture took place in the Cathedral, as part of the events marking the 400th anniversary of the completion of the King James Bible. The speaker was Gordon Campbell, Professor of Renaissance Studies at the University of Leicester, and he was speaking about the language of the King James translation.  It was a lecture full of humour (particularly at the start when it transpired that the Vice-Chancellor, introducing the speaker, had walked off with the latter's lecture notes), well-paced, accessible to a wide audience, but erudite in its foundations.  And it did what a good lecture should - it left me (and others I spoke to) wanting more.  But I also came home and took down a copy of the King James translation and followed up on various of the points about its language that the speaker had introduced.  I got to bed late, which is why I am writing this blog the following morning.

Musing over what I learned from Professor Cambell's lecture, I am coming to a view on what makes a good talk to a general audience.  When I think of the best lectures I have been to in Enginnering, in Science or in the more physical aspects of Medicine, they have opened my mind to things I didn't know.  They have shown new possibilities for the extension of our understanding of the world around us. They have sometimes left me with a sense of wonder.

Good general lectures in the Arts, the Humanities and the Social Sciences - and I would include here many lectures on applied aspects of Medicine - have thrown new light on things I knew or thought I knew.  They have come at the familiar from a different perspective and led me to question my understanding.  They have in many cases challenged things I have 'taken for granted' and thus often showed situations, artefacts and structures to be more complicated than I had thought. 

So it was with Campbell's lecture last night.  Familiar biblical texts (and many familiar everyday phrases that most people would not realise come from the King James Bible) were examined for their linguistic structure and the political motivations behind the words chosen by the translators.  A familiar book was opened up to new insights, at least for me (and for others in the audience who I spoke to afterwards).

I would be interested if others wanted to add their comments on my distinction between a good general lecture in the sciences and engineering (opening us up to new knowledge) and in the arts and social sciences (challenging our understanding of things we take for granted.)