I don't care much for Amis' comments....
However I am pretty insulted at the implication that creative writing is somehow inauthentic academically.
Creative writing courses producing great novelists. I think you'd be surprised...
For instance, Alumni of UEA's course include Ian McEwan, Kazuo Ishiguro and Tracy Chevalier...
If you're going to direct your wrath at people over-paid than Amis isn't your most obvious target. In any case my main problem with this topic comes down to the original poster's lack of research and frankly, over-blown comments. Given he/she is implying he/she is after postdoc posts this is somewhat ironic

Incidentally, for anyone who isn't aware of the well-publicized rift between Eagleton and Amis, it often descends into polemic, therefore it's difficult to take what the former says of the latter's salary as an indicator of any objectivity.

The quoted newspaper articles speak for themselves. They seem to agree with my assessment of Amis. Good novelists are good depite their going on creative writing courses. Talent cannot be bought with a student loan.

Again, a highly over-romanticized view of the Arts as entailing some sort of innate talent. Would a violinist be good 'despite' the tuition that has enabled him/her to be a concert performer?

The articles you cite entail an argument quite different from your origin argument regarding whether Amis should be a professor; you initially indicated consternation not at his salary, but at his title; would you now like to restate exactly what you were arguing?

My remarks on Amis are not based on Eagleton's view of him. He has reason to be bitter. My remarks are based on the many academics who have come out in protest at Eagleton's sacking. Free speech is very important. And to be sacked because you criticised Amis is ironic considering Amis's stand on free speech.I am no fan of Eagleton by the way, as I disagree with his political views.

My consternation was at his title, but someone came to his defence on that and I brought in his salary to further highlight the unfairness of his position.

I think playing an instrument does need innate talent also. If not then every one who had violin lessons would be a Paganini.

Incidentally Eagleton himself doesn't challenges Amis' salary; he quite clearly states his disbelief that Manchester can AFFORD to hire Amis.
Your argument is very unclear.
The RAE emphasis upon quantity rather than quality is undoubtedly problematic and has led to many injustices, but this and Manchester's financial position is something quite different from whether there should be a PROFESSOR Amis.
I think that is all I can be bothered to add.

Aside from imploring you not to twist my words. I didn't say being a concert violinist precluded innate talent, I was arguing for a combination of this and tuition... otherwise we might as well shut the Royal Northern College of Music right away.

My gripe is: a) that Amis is a professor merely because of his celebrity; and b) and he is paid so much for so little work merely because of this. It is a straightforward point. I’m sure many would see it as a reasonable one. I don’t know why you are getting so agitated by it.

Yes, training in the musical and performance arts is essential as talent in these areas can only be expressed through the body. And such training needs large spaces and equipment to facilitate learning, hence the importance of learning institutions that can provide these things.

However, writing fiction does not require a three-year course at degree level, simply because its demands for space and equipment are non-existent. Consequently, it can be learned from private study by reading a few books on the subject.

Not all the great writers did creative writing degrees. Writers such as Thomas Hardy, Jane Austen, Emily Bronte, William Wordsworth, William Blake, Samuel Taylor Coleridge didn’t. Creative writing courses are merely a symptom of the decadence creping into higher education, where you now even get degree and MA courses on writing for TV. This do-it-by-numbers approach to writing only produces mediocre work.

so what - that's life. famous people usually get paid a lot for not doing that much (just think of hollywood actors for instance). institutions that associate themselves with a famous person tend to profit from that in many ways.

what has all that got to do with "deserving" a position through education, hard work etc? both the university and amis are probably getting a good deal out of the situation by added publicity, attracting new students and so on. universities and celebrities have to earn money too.

No it isn't "life", it's an expression of a grossly unjust and unequal society. It doesn't have to be that way. Political will and action can change it.

mwaahahaa! i love idealists.