▁had ▁not ▁pulled ▁out ' ▁and ▁res igned ▁on ▁ 2 5 ▁May ▁only ▁nine ▁days ▁after ▁her ▁election . ▁ ▁Let ters ▁to ▁British ▁newsp apers ▁critic ised ▁media ▁handling ▁of ▁the ▁election . ▁An ▁open ▁letter ▁to ▁the ▁Times ▁Liter ary ▁Supp lement , ▁compla ined ▁of ▁unf air ▁media ▁purs uit ▁of ▁Wal c ott ' s ▁past , ▁a ▁letter ▁in ▁The ▁Guardian ▁compla ined ▁of ▁un just ▁den igration ▁of ▁P adel , ▁claim ing ▁she ▁was ▁" just ly ▁held ▁in ▁high ▁regard " ▁for ▁her ▁poetry ▁and ▁teaching , ▁and ▁a ▁letter ▁to ▁The ▁Times ▁claimed ▁that ▁" O x ford ▁has ▁missed ▁out ▁for ▁the ▁worst ▁of ▁reasons . ▁' One ▁can ▁only ▁spec ulate ▁why ▁so ▁many ▁male ▁voices ▁were ▁loud ▁in ▁condem ning ▁P adel ▁but ▁silent ▁with ▁respect ▁to ▁Wal c ott . ▁I ▁attended ▁a ▁course ▁taught ▁by ▁Ruth ▁P adel : ▁she ▁was ▁inspir ational , ▁involved , ▁enthus i astic ▁and ▁interested ▁in ▁her ▁students . ▁Perhaps ▁it ▁was ▁un wise ▁of ▁her ▁to ▁email ▁journal ists ▁but ▁if ▁Wal c ott ' s ▁past ▁is ▁" ir re levant ▁to ▁his ▁suit ability ▁to ▁fill ▁the ▁post ▁of ▁Professor ▁of ▁Po etry ", ▁so ▁is ▁P adel ' s ▁" un w is dom ". ▁That ▁Wal c ott ▁removed ▁the ▁decision ▁from ▁the ▁elect or ate ▁was ▁his ▁own ▁choice . ▁P adel ▁should ▁not ▁have ▁been ▁made ▁to ▁pay ▁for ▁his ▁decision ▁to ▁confront ▁neither ▁his