Appreciating (and Locating) the Less Prolific Scholars

At the risk of of offending people (so starting with the premise that no offense is intended to anyone), I've been thinking recently about how we value/appreciate those of our colleagues who are not prolific scholars and who may or may not be great teachers or administrative citizens, but who have a wealth of knowledge in their heads and are very generous about sharing it.  One comes across these folks on faculties and at conferences - people who are genuinely interested in the scholarly endeavor and who read a lot and generously share their thoughts with others, but don't necessarily write much.  I'm thinking a little bit about how we value these people in financial terms, although that's not my main objective.  I'm more interested in how much collegial appreciation and prestige they get within their own faculties and fields.  I've often had great comments on draft papers by people I didn't even know were interested in the area I was writing in (because they're not leading scholars whose work I regularly read), but who nevertheless have read a lot about it themselves.  I suppose the main problem with people who read a lot and know a lot, but don't necessarily write a lot themselves, is that they can be difficult to find.  If you're looking for comments on an idea or draft paper, you wouldn't necessarily seek them out if they're not on your list as people who have written in the area.  Is there any way to increase the visibility/appreciation of these kinds of folks?  I suppose if they engage in the blogosphere, that's one answer ie one way of finding someone who has thoughts on an issue but isn't regularly publishing scholarly articles.  Anything else?

Comments

[Michael Hoeflich]

I think that it's wonderful that you have made this post. Some of the greatest scholars have published little, eg. Aaron Director at Chicago. I often think we have become so publishing oriented that we forget that scholarship and publication are not the same thing. Thanks.

[Alfred Brophy]

Some of the very most valuable people on a faculty are folks who write little but think a lot, help others think about their work, and teach lots of students.

Related to this and especially to Mike Hoeflich's point, Lindsay Waters at Harvard University Press has been pushing the idea for a long time that we should write less and better. See, e.g., http://www.press.uchicago.edu/presssite/metadata.epl?mode=synopsis&bookkey=3618387

[Anthony S. Montagna]

I appreciated your post. I have been trying to break into academia for the past two and one half years. I spent the first half of my legal career practicing law, mostly on my own. I want to spend the second half of it teaching, researching and writing. However, I have found it extremely difficult to break into legal academia. However, I will be published this month by Duke. This will be my first publication, although I have written many articles for newspapers, etc. It is my hope that my practical experience and my talent for teaching, research and writing will be rewarded with a suitable professorship.

Anthony S. Montagna

[AstridT]

One of the finest professors I've had in law school is an infrequent publisher. If you want to learn more about his areas of interest, you have to ask, or note which topics in class really get him jazzed. He's an exceptional teacher and generous with his knowledge if you reach out to him for guidance on seminar topics and the like.

I get the feeling that his relatively low profile might hold him in lower esteem than his more prolific colleagues, which is a shame because he's so strong in the areas that students value.