I have heard Professor Scott referred to as a "cuddly teddy bear" more than a few times, which really makes me a bit upset. It's not quite the way to address any intellectual, and in doing so you are perpetuating an image of this professor as a non-serious intellectual, which is not in any sense of the word, true. (not to mention, possibly continuing the stereotype of the Caribbean as a non-serious place?)
Prof. Scott has interviewed some of the most prominent Caribbean scholars of our age, and certainly thinks critically about every issue that arises from the texts. Unlike other professors who rush by concepts unchallenged, he speaks and converses with you in the seminar, and allows himself to be challenged by the input you give to the discussion, which is (unlike what another reviewer said) the total opposite of egomaniacal. If you consider Prof. Scott egomaniacal, you have clearly not taken many classes in the anthropology department.
The Caribbean is currently underscored in the anthropological tradition, and is remembered by the white intellectuals that discussed the problem of the Caribbean (Mintz) and not the Caribbean intellectuals who discussed the problem themselves. (Why?) This is certainly a shame, and this is an excellent class for those who would like to get an applied understanding of the issues that arose from the anthropological crisis that emerged from the postcolonial movement. instead of talking about what might theoretically be done, it has a lot to do with the practical issues of how intellectuals from within the a recently post-emancipation state theorized and responded to the changes in society.