Podcasts about Artful Dodger

My colleague Oliver Traldi recently published an essay called ‘Jane Austen's Virtuous Liberalism'. It's a very nice discussion of the ways in which Austen understand the challenges of character formation.Virtue, as Austen sees it, faces two tough challenges. First, people whose characters are not yet formed must see how to be virtuous rather than vicious. Then, the virtuous must somehow find a way to succeed in their struggles against the vicious without adopting vicious means.In this episode, Oliver and I discussed Austen's ideas of virtue, what that has to do with liberalism, the relationship between philosophy and literature more broadly, as well as poetry and ideas about the Great Books. We also talked about the Keira Knightly Pride and Prejudice. Yes, we both liked it. Here is why Oliver thinks Jane Austen is so popular among philosophers.TRALDI: And so I do think that even though she's not making arguments, she's not laying out philosophical theories, there is a level of precision in her thinking about virtue, which I do think is something that it took me a little aback.And I think it's part of why—one person who quote-tweeted my article was Daniel Kodsi, who's a friend of our colleague John Maier and his coauthor often. And he runs this magazine called The Philosophers' Magazine, which I had written before. And Daniel quote-tweeted my article with something like, “Add Oliver to the list of all the philosophers who love Austen.”OLIVER: And it's a long list.TRALDI: And I think it's a long list. And I do think this precision is part of it that she does, that it is—again, it's not like a philosophy journal article, but it is an intellectual sophistication that is often not present in novelists that we really appreciate.And here is an extract about Austen, Smith, and the wonderfully fertile period at the end of the eighteen century.TRALDI: But yes, I think it's obvious—without knowing the background, I'm sure there are scholarly questions about, how much Smith did Austen read? And they're both 250th—a lot was happening in 1775 and 1776.OLIVER: Those were great years. Those were the good old days.TRALDI: They were great years. In the great books syllabus, you get to the end of the 1700s and suddenly there's this—you have Smith, you have Kant, you have the American Revolution, you have the French Revolution, you have Burke. Rousseau is right before, Montesquieu is right before. I mean, it was a real—OLIVER: It's a great time.TRALDI: It was a great time. A lot was being done. And obviously, you know, I love the 1800s. I love the Romantics. But you could teach a whole great books course from 1750 to 1800, probably.OLIVER: You've also got all the dictionaries and all that kind of work going on as well. It's a very, very fertile—explorations.TRALDI: Yes, yes. There's all sorts of—yes, it was an amazing time.OLIVER: So did you, having read these two, Austen and Smith, close together—TRALDI: Yes, and I should say that my reading of Austen was much more careful than my reading of Smith.OLIVER: Sure, but you wrote this before you read Smith.TRALDI: Yes, absolutely.OLIVER: Or at least you fully conceived it. Do you see a lot of Smith in Austen?TRALDI: “A lot” might be—This was my favourite bit.TRALDI: Yes. But this is one of the great—I know we talked about this, but it's one of the great—you see this in Smith, you see this in Austen—commerce has its own virtues, and they are very traditional virtues. You have to be trustworthy. You have to be pleasant. You can't really be wholly self-interested in every moment because people have to be willing to deal with you given your—I mean, think about Yelp reviews or even just word of mouth. “Oh, that person screwed me over.”OLIVER: There's a discussion in one of Hayek's papers, which is—it's a very Smithian point he makes about, the nature of the knowledge problem means that it's not so much that I'm trying to get information about the thing you're trying to sell me, but I'm really trying to get information about you and whether you are someone I should be buying from. Which is exactly the project that the novelists and Smith—there's a sort of period between Smith and the early novelists, running through Austen to George Eliot, when they're all working on that problem together.TRALDI: Yes. I do think in Austen, it's often—the real puzzle is, how do you make out somebody else's character?OLIVER: Exactly.TRALDI: This is a phrase that Lizzy Bennet does use with regard to Darcy. And how do we actually figure out who the trustworthy and untrustworthy people are?OLIVER: And if you're too philosophical about that, in the sort of analytic sense, I think you can end up not paying enough attention to the particulars of that question.TRALDI: Yes.OLIVER: Because when you actually try and do it, it's really, really hard.TRALDI: Yes. And I think this is the sort of—reading Austen, you get a sense of—and there are very few philosophy papers on things like this. Reading Austen, you get a sense of, what sorts of details in a normal life are the ones that I can extract information from to make out somebody else's character?Oliver is an analytical, political philosopher. You can find out more about his work here. Here he is on Twitter. His Substack is orting. You can watch the episode on YouTube here.TranscriptHENRY OLIVER: Today I am talking to Oliver Traldi. Oliver is an assistant professor of philosophy at the University of Toledo in Ohio. He is my colleague on the Emerging Scholars Program at the Mercatus Center, and he's written a book about political beliefs as well as many other articles for magazines, online.He's got a Substack. He's maybe the most prominent political and epistemological young philosopher of his generation. [laughter] But most importantly for us, he is interested in Jane Austen and the idea of virtue. Oliver, welcome.OLIVER TRALDI: Thank you so much for having me.Reading Austen as a PhilosopherOLIVER: Let's just start—before we get to this article you've written, tell me about being a philosopher but reading Jane Austen, because she's often read and commented on by people who are not philosophers or who are only philosophers by acquaintance or whatever.TRALDI: Right.OLIVER: Is it different reading as a philosopher, do you think?TRALDI: I think yes and no. One thing as a philosopher, there are—contemporary philosophy, we have very exacting standards of rigor and clarity. And when we look for a theory, we want something that's been improved by hundreds of people and thousands of journal articles.And so, if you were to simply extract a theory of virtue from a novel and say, “Does this—is this the end-all, be-all of moral thinking?” obviously you're going to be disappointed. So I think as a philosopher, you have to look for other types of things, other types of sensitivities rather than logical sensitivity.You have to say, how sensitive is the author to the different types of situations where people's virtue can be exhibited or challenged? Or how sensitive is the author to the different types of pressures that a character's convictions can be put under, or the different sorts of compromises that they might have to make, or the different sorts of people who might not be virtuous who they might have to interact with and sort of, you know, contract with or avoid? And what are going to be the impacts of different kinds of choices in those situations?So the novelists, I think, tend—if they do it well, a novelist who's interested in morality will understand living morally probably better than a philosopher, while maybe not understanding, say, arguments about whether morality supervenes on reality or vice versa, or what grounds morality, or different theories of meta-ethics or whatever.OLIVER: I mean, there are obviously some novelists who do have a better appreciation of those things than others, we should say.TRALDI: Yes, I think that's absolutely true. And as I wrote in my article, I do think Austen in particular had an appreciation for this issue that you might call moral disarming or unilateral disarming. You know, does the moral person put themselves at a disadvantage relative to the immoral person? And then how do we actually help—how does morality survive?So that's a kind of philosophical question, but I tend to think—I taught last year—I think we've talked about this a bit. I taught in a great books program at Tulsa.OLIVER: This is the Jennifer Frey program.TRALDI: This is the ill-fated Jennifer Frey program. Jennifer—I don't know if you've met her, but she's an incredibly charismatic person. But somehow the program, despite being enormously successful, did not survive. You know, I was there for a year, and they decided that was long enough.OLIVER: [laughs] You don't think your arrival was the—TRALDI: No, no. I hope not. I most certainly hope not.OLIVER: No. General problems of higher education prevailed. Yes.TRALDI: Yes, many, many problems of higher education these days. But yes, so I think—what was I saying?OLIVER: Well, I think we're getting to this question of, you are not just a philosopher; you teach the great books.TRALDI: Right, exactly. The great books. That's where I was. Yes.Philosophy and the Great BooksOLIVER: So, one thing I'm interested in is that, you know, reading as a philosopher, you get a slightly different perspective on Austen. When you read other fiction, poetry, whatever, is there a benefit to you as a philosopher? Does it broaden you in some way?TRALDI: Yes. I think absolutely, it's broadening, but it's also focusing in a different way. You know, contemporary philosophy is often described or captured with the word epicycles. So what we mean when we say epicycles is, you have some major theory, which is supposed to answer some big question. And then your career as a philosopher—you're like three layers deep in the theory, in some sub-debate, and you're making some really fine-grained distinctions.And if you can make those distinctions successfully, you've had a really great career. But I think it's easy to forget, why are we doing—you know, what attracted us to philosophy? Why are we doing this to begin with?And the great novels, great books in general—one example I always use is the Book of Job. It doesn't really—it's not doing clear philosophy on the question of why do bad things happen to good people. But when you read it, you feel the question, why do bad things happen to good people? You get it, you know? You get why this is a question that people have worried about for thousands of years. You get why it calls out for an answer.You know, there's a lot of truth out there. I'm looking at a set of coat hangers, and I could count the coat hangers. But if you were given the decision, would I rather have an answer to how many coat hangers are across the room from me, or why do bad things happen to good people? You'd probably go with the latter one. There's somehow some kind of depth or importance to that question, right?And I think there's—a great novelist can often generate some vividity to these questions. They can show how these questions are part of a good life, asking these questions, trying to have these questions answered—or a not-so-good life.Certainly in Austen there are a lot of characters who learn to be more virtuous. Probably Emma is the clearest example. But you might also think of Marianne Dashwood. Really—OLIVER: Lizzy Bennet.TRALDI: Lizzy Bennet really learns to be a better person. I actually think her character is rather close to Emma in a lot of ways.OLIVER: Yes, I think Emma's sort of a clear rewrite of Lizzy in some—yes, yes.TRALDI: Yes, and in some ways more evocative, actually. Yes. I mean, we can talk about all these books. But yes, I think there's these things, even—obviously qua literature, they have other virtues, right? Which much philosophy doesn't have; very little philosophy has the literary virtues.But the philosophical virtue that a lot of literature does have is you see, okay, these are the—this is what a life is like. This is what making choices is like. These are the big questions when you decide how to live your life and what kinds of choices to make.And I think Austen—these questions are all through Austen, even though nobody has to murder anybody in Austen. Nobody has to make decisions about war and peace or about, you know, civilizational decline or civilizational progress or anything like that. These people making these small choices in a lot of ways. But those are the lives that most of us lead. And when you read Austen, you think, “Oh, okay, there's a virtuous and a vicious way to lead this kind of rather normal life.”The Good LifeOLIVER: The question of what is a good life, or what is a good life in a commercial society, maybe, is the sort of bedrock of what she's doing.TRALDI: Yes, I think so. And that's why I think Austen—you know, Austen wasn't on our syllabus at Tulsa, but she was certainly discussed. And the “what is a good life” question—to me, it's the big question that a great books program for college students should always come back to.If I didn't know what else to talk about, I would just say, “Well, we just read this book.” You know, we read these old biographies of Charlemagne from, like, Einhard—Notker the Stammerer and Einhard, his adopted son or whatever. I don't remember. But this is like 800s. I'm sure you know more about this stuff than I do.And I wasn't quite sure what to do with them because what do I know about Charlemagne? So I just said, “Does it seem like Charlemagne lived a good life?” And you know, you're off to the races. And I think that's important at that age, because that's the age at which—OLIVER: For the undergraduates?TRALDI: Yes. I think that's the age at which you're starting to make your own big decisions about what sort of life to lead. And I think for me, looking back to myself at that age, I think one thing I did wrong—at Tulsa I was in some ways as much a student as a teacher. I was rereading a lot of this stuff for the first time in decades. And some of it I was reading for the first time. As I told you, I was reading a lot of Austen for the first time for this essay.OLIVER: Right, right.TRALDI: And yes, it was stuff that I had thought about at a theoretical level, you know, like what are the ins and outs of this theory or this philosophical move or something like that. But you feel the question a bit differently when you're like, “Okay, I'm an adult. I have to decide whether to live in this way or that way.”The world is open to you. You could convert to Thomism [laughter] like so many have tried to have me do, or you could become a merchant after reading The Wealth of Nations. Or you could become a revolutionary after reading Marx, or you could become a Nietzschean. You know, there are all these choices open to you.OLIVER: Please don't become a Nietzchean.TRALDI: No, no. That is, I'm a—OLIVER: Keep your children out of school if that's going to be the result. [laughs]TRALDI: Yes. I'm a committed moralist, so I cannot, but he is—he made a comeback, that's for sure.Philosophy and PoetryOLIVER: Now, there's this obviously sort of long-running question in philosophy about, what is the relationship between philosophy and poetry? Are they antagonists, or are they in some way, you know, twins, and each provides one half of what is needed for a complete way of understanding the world? Do you have a position on this?TRALDI: Yes, I mean, I think they're what the kids call twinning.OLIVER: Twinning? [laughs]TRALDI: I think they're twinning. No, no, I think that means something different. I think that means when you're wearing the same outfit or something like that.OLIVER: So we're almost twinning with our stripes—yes, I see.TRALDI: We're almost. We actually—we are stripes and blue. Yes, we're closer than I would've expected.I would say closer to twins. There are a lot of claims that philosophy is at odds somehow with this or that. There's also this—certain people will say, “Well, ever since Socrates, philosophy has been at odds with politics.” And a big part of philosophy is, how do you survive? Well, I don't know. Nobody's trying to kill me. I think of myself as a decently committed philosopher.OLIVER: It seems to me this changed fundamentally in the Enlightenment and with the Romantics, and they see it all much more joined up. It's a sort of ancient-and-modern dynamic.TRALDI: Yes, there may be an ancient-and-modern distinction there. But yes, for me I don't see any kind of contradiction. Now, there are—and I think this comes out of what I said before—philosophical attempts to understand poetry. And certain kinds of literary and aesthetic devices do sometimes fall a little flat.The philosophical literature on metaphor, for instance—I think some theories of metaphor really don't get why people use metaphors. [laughter] So one of the most important theories of metaphor is that they're all just false, that it's like everybody who uses a metaphor is lying. This isn't the full theory. There are bells and whistles added.OLIVER: Sure, sure.TRALDI: But yes, so I think there's no contradiction. But at the same time, they are different modes in some ways, and people who do the one are often trying to do something different than the other.I do think that the desire for rigor and precision and clarity that philosophers have can be a little maddening to nonphilosophers, who see the pull of philosophical questions like, “What sort of life I should lead?” and then see, what do philosophers actually do?And we're doing all this modal logic and all these truth tables and all this very technical stuff that looks like math. And they say, “That can't possibly be the right way to think about how to live.” And it's true that there are these studies of—that suggest ethicists aren't actually very good people and things like that, although you have to wonder what is the background ethical theory that went into evaluating them.So yes, I don't think there's really a contradiction between philosophy and anything else. But certainly, there was a point in my life where I always come back to trying to write poetry and do poorly and then stop. But it was always something where I would say, “Okay, if I'm doing philosophy in the afternoon, I better wait till the evening to write poetry.” You have to sort of reboot and get into a different mode.OLIVER: Iris Murdoch used to write philosophy in the morning and novels in the afternoon. That kind of thing.TRALDI: Yes, I think that's very sensible.OLIVER: And she was upstairs for the one and downstairs for the other.TRALDI: Yes. That's even better, you know?Favorite PoetsOLIVER: Which poets do you like?TRALDI: Geez, I guess for an American, I like Wallace Stevens. I wasn't expecting this question. For a Brit, you know, I actually like Philip Larkin a lot.OLIVER: Oh, yes?TRALDI: I know—what is the opinion of Larkin? Is he considered—OLIVER: Very high.TRALDI: Very high? Okay.OLIVER: Some—there are some dissenters, but basically he's the guy.TRALDI: He's the guy, okay. Yes.OLIVER: Twentieth-century English poetry is like Auden, Larkin, Betjeman.TRALDI: Yes, Auden is—actually, my friend Jane Cooper just wrote something about Auden.OLIVER: Yes, Jane is excellent.TRALDI: Yes, Jane is really great.OLIVER: That was in the New Statesman if you want to look it up.TRALDI: That was in the New Statesman. Yes, yes, yes. But Auden, I don't know quite as well.I mean, poetry is—I think it's interesting the way that we receive poetry now. I think you were talking about this a few days ago, about things like poems appearing as inspirational quotes on social media or something like that, and whoever is the most quotable. And you felt like maybe Dostoevsky is very quotable.OLIVER: Dostoevsky has a sort of screenshot quality.TRALDI: Yes, yes.OLIVER: As does Martin Amis.TRALDI: Yes. So I—OLIVER: Whereas Philip Larkin in a funny way—you know, he has very short poems. You can get the whole poem on Twitter. Like, Robert Frost has that. But something like “The Whitsun Weddings,” it's quite hard to just take three lines out. The whole thing works as a—and that, so that poem gets less—TRALDI: Yes. Which is what you would expect from a good poem, really, that it would form a kind of whole.OLIVER: Exactly. If it's a three-page ode, it should have a continuous quality.TRALDI: Yes, it should have a kind of internal structure. Yes.OLIVER: There are some one-line things and—but I think it's notable that a poet like Wordsworth doesn't seem to get a lot of social media play. And I think probably that's one reason.TRALDI: So yes, I think Larkin is somebody who, I did see some shorter references to him, and I thought I'd better just go and look up a ton of poems by this guy. And Stevens was the same way.Death and Philip LarkinOLIVER: So, which Larkin do you like?TRALDI: You're really putting me on the spot here. [laughter] It has been a little while.OLIVER: I lied to you and said it would be about Jane Austen.TRALDI: Yes, now I'm completely screwed. Well, he has a bunch about death. He has one where death is a ship following you. And he has one where death is, like, a fruit that gets picked or something.OLIVER: Apple?TRALDI: Might be an apple.OLIVER: He decides not to throw the apple.TRALDI: There's one with sweetbreads in it. And now I'm really—OLIVER: The ship one, “Next, Please”—that's excellent.TRALDI: Yes.OLIVER: He sees the—it's like hearing the music coming, and then the ship.TRALDI: I forgot that that was the title. I forgot that that was the title.OLIVER: And then as the ship goes past, it leaves nothing in its wake. It's very sort of—very gloomy.TRALDI: It's very gloomy, yes. I think I read Larkin in a gloomy phase; it was like Larkin and Radiohead or something.OLIVER: But he's a good example of what you were saying before, that he won't think propositionally. He's logical in the sense that he's sort of orderly, and he goes from one thing to the next. But he's not being a philosopher.TRALDI: No, of course. Yes.OLIVER: But he's very preoccupied with the sorts of questions that philosophers are probing, but has a sort of very meaningful treatment of them.TRALDI: Yes.OLIVER: And I think in a way, the sharp response that you want from the reader in those questions, Larkin is better at provoking than someone like Bertrand Russell or some other contemporary of his.TRALDI: Yes, yes.OLIVER: Bertrand Russell's a bit earlier, but you know what I mean.TRALDI: No, I think that's exactly right. And I think that is why I'm a fan of the great books pedagogically and not—I don't know if Larkin will be called a great, you know, like, who knows? I don't really understand that designation, but tings like poetry and novels.OLIVER: The biggest dissenter was Harold Bloom, who said Philip Larkin's just a period piece. And he doesn't understand why everyone likes him.TRALDI: Oh, yes, well, I'm not on board with everything. Oh, I've also been—OLIVER: No, you're not very Bloomian.TRALDI: I'm not very Bloomian, I don't think.OLIVER: Either Allan or Harold.TRALDI: Yes. Well, I actually—this is very embarrassing, but I've actually never read The Closing of the American Mind, which I know is—OLIVER: But why should you? I'm not sure it's retained its—TRALDI: Well, it's certainly been received into my circle. But it is like a classic of anti-ideological—OLIVER: Sure. Have you read Adler, How to Read a Book, that kind of great books stuff?TRALDI: No. There's so many things that I haven't read. I mean, I'm just learning how to read. I learned how to read in Tulsa last year, [laughter] in Oklahoma, which is not where most people would go to learn how to read.Jane Austen and the Problem of MoralityOLIVER: So let's move to Jane Austen. Your thesis basically is, many moral theories face this problem that if I believe XYZ theory and you don't believe it, you can get the advantage of me. Because I'll always stick to my principles and you can just be a bad guy.TRALDI: Yes.OLIVER: So is morality screwed? This is what people say about liberalism. This is what you're arguing. And you think Jane Austen's got an answer to that?TRALDI: Yes, I think she has a kind of answer. And again, one decision I had to make while writing the essay was, am I going to go super—this is a completely philosophically rigorous and respectable answer? Or am I just going to kind of sketch it?OLIVER: Slum it in literary criticism? [laughter]TRALDI: Yes, I wouldn't put it quite that way, but—and I think I went for the latter, where I just wanted to kind of evoke the answer. And I think the answer has something to do with living in a large enough society where—and Austen I think is not the only person to give this answer. But you live in a large enough society where, when people see you acting well and somebody else acting poorly, the disadvantage that you have in that one interaction is outweighed by the advantages you have from the society that you gain from being seen to act well by many others.So one thing I didn't mention here, but a connection I made when I was first coming up with this idea, is that it's actually a lot like what Martin Luther King Jr. says about civil disobedience. So he says, you might think, if you're out there and the police are coming at you with bats, or the white supremacists are coming at you with bats or whatever, weapons or whatever, you might think, “I'm on the losing end of this interaction.”But actually what will happen is that this interaction will be seen by many others. And you, by keeping your calm, will be seen to be the virtuous one, and they, by being violent, will be seen to be the vicious ones. And this can only help your political cause. I'm probably abstracting some of the details of King's presentation.OLIVER: In a vulgar sense, this is the sort of “be the change you want to see” approach.TRALDI: Yes, but also, be the change you want other people to see. You know? Because that's how it gets saved from—and again, one of the ways in which this is not quite philosophically rigorous is because the philosopher can say, “Well, what about an example where nobody's going to see it? Or what about an example where the situation is set up that in doing the right thing, you're perceived to have done the wrong thing?” And you get back into tough problems. And that's why we have philosophy. You know, there's always going to be these puzzles.OLIVER: But we don't get the—I think this is what the novelists are helpful for. We don't get to set the conditions in our lives. You know, when you're doing a philosophical problem, you can just say, “Well, these are the conditions. What happens then?” And what Jane Austen is so good at is saying, “I'm going to take her and drop her in this house, and that's life. And she's just going to—she won't even know what the conditions are for a long time.” That's the novelist's preoccupation.TRALDI: Yes. Yes. It's interesting what you said about not even knowing what the conditions are. It's one thing I love, which is there in, I think, a lot of Austen—and it's done by a lot of my favorite novelists. I think Kazuo Ishiguro is really good at this. It's just novels where you see the characters' growing awareness of their circumstances and—OLIVER: Like in Klara and the Sun or something.TRALDI: Yes, or I think certainly in Never Let Me Go and in Remains of the Day, a lot of the action is in a situation where you understand what's going on better than the characters do.Clues and GamesTRALDI: And I think we talked about this the other day. In Austen, Emma, for example, is this sort of, like, halfway detective where she sees a lot of clues that could help her understand the nature of the life she's leading and the circumstances she's in, but she always misinterprets the clues. But on the other hand, it's not like she misses them entirely. She's kind of on the right track, and at least she's trying.OLIVER: And what I think Austen does so well in that book—I think it's her most important book—is that by putting us, without quite realizing it, with Emma's blinkers on, as it were, and only allowing our perspective to be her perspective, she makes us the detective.But whereas in a detective novel, you know, there's a funny little man and he is a detective, and he says, “Oh, there's a clue in this novel,” the read of—on the first read very often goes straight past what they must later realize to be a clue. And that is such a normal condition of life, that, “Oh, actually, that was one of the conditions, but you couldn't have known it. Sorry.” And you can only work it out in retrospect.TRALDI: Yes. In modern love, these are sometimes called red flags. [laughter] I think it's not quite a precise analogy, but yes, I think it's right. And I certainly—I had read Emma years ago and didn't really notice. As you say, on my first read, I didn't really notice, even having watched—I think it was the, what is it, the Kate Beckinsale version maybe, from ITV in like 1996 or something.It was really in reading it for this essay that I noticed that this feature that, starting on page 30 or 40 or so, there's a—and they're often in games. The clues are often in games. So very early on, Elton is playing some sort of poem game with Emma.OLIVER: The riddles, yes.TRALDI: The riddle game. And you know, Emma already misinterprets his riddles as being about Harriet rather than about her. But then there's also—the riddles also have some relation to things that happen much later.OLIVER: Then there's the anagram game at the end.TRALDI: There's the anagram game at the end. Yes, it's the—and I don't think there are many games like that in any of the other Austen.OLIVER: People play games, but we're not taken into them and have them narrated in that way.TRALDI: And they're not word games in general. There's card games and things like that. And you know, in Pride and Prejudice, Wickham has all these gambling debts and things like that.OLIVER: Yes.TRALDI: You know, in—I don't know if you know Whit Stillman, but for the same magazine a couple years ago I wrote about Whit Stillman, who's a sort of conservative filmmaker who's a huge Austen fan and brings in Austenian themes to a lot of his movies, but writes them about characters in the 1960s and '70s. And one of them was called The Last Days of Disco, for example, about—and some of the broader social themes he talks about are also there in Austen.So one thing that was just on the edges of my consciousness as I read through the novels for this essay was the question of the noble man versus the working man, which I think is very present in Austen and has something to do with her conception of virtue: that the virtuous person will be engaging in commerce in some way.OLIVER: Those moments of the noble and the virtuous man or whatever often take place in a shop, like the drapier in Emma or the jewelry shop in Sense and Sensibility.TRALDI: That's interesting. That's interesting.OLIVER: She's very careful to take us into a commercial situation and contrast.TRALDI: See, that is the sort of detail that I think a philosopher—I think we—the mere—the vibe of, “You're in a shop, and this means something.” I think this is something philosophers are—we can watch for the action; we can judge the characters' actions. But then there are these questions of atmosphere and milieu. And certain things happen in a shop; certain things happen at the seaside. In Persuasion there's an injury by the seaside.OLIVER: Yes. That's one of the most exciting scenes in Austen. Very dramatic.TRALDI: Yes, yes. I think actually Persuasion in some ways is quite different than her other books. It has a sort of—you know, in some ways it feels a little more like Frankenstein or Wuthering Heights at points. There's a little bit of a windblown, dark quality to it at times. It's a little bit bleaker. It's a little hard to explain why, but that's just a feeling that I had reading it that maybe had changed with some of the other literary tastes of the time.Artlessness in Austen's HeroinesOLIVER: Now, the quality that you focus on in the heroines, in this question of virtue defending itself against bad actors who break the rules, is artlessness.TRALDI: Yes. So this is a term Austen uses quite a bit, and almost always, she very much picks and chooses the characters who are going to receive this term. And I thought that this is like—it's not only her artless characters who face this question about how can morality survive, or how can virtue prevail, but I think they're the limit point.Like, if you really are unwilling to use—and I mentioned in the essay, when Darcy describes—I forget what; maybe it's him describing how he found Lydia and Wickham, or it's something to do with Wickham—he said, “I had to resort to arts.” So it must be, the “arts” back then means—one of the meanings of the term is dishonesty or subterfuge or something.OLIVER: Yes, if someone was artful, it could have—TRALDI: Yes, like the Artful Dodger.OLIVER: Exactly. Could have negative connotations for sure.TRALDI: Yes. And so the artless one, you know, they're missing something.So it's the question of, if you view—morality in a way means you're missing something, right? You've taken arts out of your arsenal. You've taken tools that could deal with certain situations, and you've just decided not to use them. So the question is, how can it be an advantage to have less tools?You know, we're here at Mercatus; the economists would tell you it's never advantageous to have fewer choices, right? There's no paradox of choice. It's never advantageous to have fewer choices. And so I think this is the—if morality is a kind of unilateral disarmament, artlessness is the clearest case of that.OLIVER: And you're seeing that in Fanny Price, Elinor—TRALDI: You see that in Fanny Price. You see that in Elinor. Harriet Smith is described as artless over and over again. And then there are these other characters who are described as artful, or other things that are mentioned as arts.I think Harriet, in a lot of ways, is the one who's most often described this way. And it's interesting because you think of Emma changing a lot in Emma, but Knightley actually shifts in his evaluation of Harriet, who he thought of as sort of an unserious person. And Knightley himself comes to recognize her artlessness as a kind of seriousness which makes her a good match, not ultimately for him, but for his dude, Robert.OLIVER: The farmer.TRALDI: The farmer, yes.OLIVER: He doesn't change his view of her social position, though.TRALDI: No, certainly not. But he does change his view of her character, basically. You know, her artlessness is not silliness. It has a sort of depth to it.And yes, certainly Fanny. In the Whit Stillman movie Metropolitan that's part of what set me on this, there's this whole discussion of the book Mansfield Park and this old Lionel Trilling essay about it where he says, how is it—there's this question about how modern people can even like Mansfield Park because we've sort of lost the notion of virtue being exciting or something.One of the most provocative lines to me in Austen was in Sense and Sensibility where it says that Elinor glories in Edward's integrity, which is an odd thing to glory in. You don't glory—nobody is on Instagram showing off their integrity, you know?OLIVER: It's like that René Gerard quote people like to pass around: “Everyone is on diet pills and nobody wants to be a saint.”TRALDI: I like that. That is very Instagrammable.OLIVER: Exactly. Exactly.TRALDI: That's very good, actually. I like that. Yes, so there's something provocative about the notion that virtue can be exciting, and in particular can be romantically exciting.The Importance of IntegrityOLIVER: Or even less than that. One thing I think is difficult for people interpreting Austen today is that virtue, whether it's exciting or romantically exciting, or the notion of integrity is of interest for its own sake.There's a lot of—you know, we have integrity as an organization. It's very important for me to have integrity as a professional. But there's not as much a sense of, just having integrity is the good life. We don't need to be complicated about this. That's just—you should just do that. And Austen's very firm on that all the way through.And criticism wants to pull her towards sometimes feminism, sometimes discussions of slavery, sometimes various other things. And she's just constantly sort of resisting that by saying, “I like integrity. I like good people. I don't think it's that hard.” It's a good line you've picked up on, I think.TRALDI: There's a character in The Wire who says, “A man's gotta have a code.” I think he's Omar, who murders the drug dealers and steals from them.OLIVER: I haven't seen it.TRALDI: So he says, “A man's gotta have a code.” And I think there is a—even in a character who in some ways is bad, we admire the integrity of having a code and sticking to it.There is this debate, I guess in moral philosophy, or at least on the outskirts of moral philosophy, about, “Well, if your code is wrong, maybe it's better not to stick to it.” I don't share that perspective. I think part of the good life is holding yourself to certain standards. And if those standards turn out to be wrong, the holding yourself is still of moral value, right? Not allowing yourself—OLIVER: It doesn't mean they're not adjustable.TRALDI: Yes, no, of course. If you decide the standards are wrong, and in Austen—OLIVER: It's sort of implicit in the idea of having standards that you will be honest and therefore accept when your standards need to be improved or whatever. Right?TRALDI: Yes, I think that's absolutely right. And in Austen we certainly see people shifting their standards. And I think one thing that I—of course, modern readers and watchers of Austen do not quite understand some of these things. But I think in Pride and Prejudice in particular, we're supposed to feel that Lizzy Bennet is quite hard on people and has to learn to improve herself in that way.OLIVER: We're delighted with her when she does that because we think it's sassy.TRALDI: Yes, exactly. If you go on YouTube, you can see all these, like, “Lizzy Bennet owning people's lives for 50 minutes,” these compilations of clips from the various movies or whatever. And she's obviously very, very clever.But she realizes—after coming to understand who Wickham is and feeling that she might not have another chance with Darcy, she comes to realize that she has had certain prejudices, which have made her blind to the realities of the world and blind to what might be her best options.So yes, I was saying I believe in integrity; that's all I was saying. And integrity obviously is adjustable, but I tend to think that it's better—even if the rule is wrong, it's better for the person who has it to hold themselves to it, rather than to adjust to try to get an advantage.And in philosophy, we have all sorts of terminology for these sorts of questions: “Are you an internalist or an externalist about reasons or about rules or whatever?” I think the more literary way to say it would just be that integrity is a virtue. And people should stick to their codes unless they see a good reason to change them.Austen and Adam SmithOLIVER: Now, you have recently been reading Adam Smith.TRALDI: Yes, I did read a lot of Adam Smith for this debate we had last week. Although I did a poor job because I had forgotten that the debate was about whether Smith was a philosopher or an economist. [laughter] I thought it was simply, is he a philosopher or not? So I put myself in the odd position of arguing that Adam Smith is not an economist.But yes, I think it's obvious—without knowing the background, I'm sure there are scholarly questions about, how much Smith did Austen read? And they're both 250th—a lot was happening in 1775 and 1776.OLIVER: Those were great years. Those were the good old days.TRALDI: They were great years. In the great books syllabus, you get to the end of the 1700s and suddenly there's this—you have Smith, you have Kant, you have the American Revolution, you have the French Revolution, you have Burke. Rousseau is right before, Montesquieu is right before. I mean, it was a real—OLIVER: It's a great time.TRALDI: It was a great time. A lot was being done. And obviously, you know, I love the 1800s. I love the Romantics. But you could teach a whole great books course from 1750 to 1800, probably.OLIVER: You've also got all the dictionaries and all that kind of work going on as well. It's a very, very fertile—explorations.TRALDI: Yes, yes. There's all sorts of—yes, it was an amazing time.OLIVER: So did you, having read these two, Austen and Smith, close together—TRALDI: Yes, and I should say that my reading of Austen was much more careful than my reading of Smith.OLIVER: Sure, but you wrote this before you read Smith.TRALDI: Yes, absolutely.OLIVER: Or at least you fully conceived it. Do you see a lot of Smith in Austen?TRALDI: “A lot” might be—OLIVER: Primarily from Theory of Moral Sentiments.TRALDI: So I would say that the notion of sympathy as being fundamentally part of how you recognize a good person seems to me to be there in Austen. The characters are—OLIVER: And this is the thing about awareness of other people and learning from that awareness.TRALDI: Awareness of other people and learning from other people and feeling other people's emotions. One thing that is related to sympathy in an odd way—and I think actually Austen and Smith conceive of it a bit differently, but that is there for both of them, in particular in Sense and Sensibility—is this notion of self-control or self-command.OLIVER: Self command. Yes. Yes.The Importance of Self-CommandTRALDI: Now, Smith gives a really odd argument about self command, which is that if you don't have control over your emotions, you will end up feeling or expressing something that other people can't sympathize with. And this is bad because sympathy is good, or something like that. I actually think it's a rather confused argument.OLIVER: I think what he's saying is that if you display a lack of self-command, then no matter what you are feeling, people find it difficult to deal with that sort of uncontrolled behavior. It's not the particular expression of feeling; it's the fact that you are a little unstable or—TRALDI: Yes, I think that's right.OLIVER: —a bit extra.TRALDI: I think what Smith doesn't do is explain quite how that's bad. But what I think is that actually, in Sense and Sensibility, it's a little bit the reverse, where actually Elinor and their mother, they do sympathize with Marianne. They do feel what she's feeling after—who's the other, the w guy in Sense and Sensibility? They're all w's.OLIVER: Oh, Willoughby.TRALDI: Willoughby, right, right. Not Wickham, Willoughby. When Willoughby—OLIVER: You can just say “the cad.”TRALDI: The cad. There's always a cad. So when the cad leaves, Marianne has all these emotions, and you really feel them. And Marianne also has a lack of self-command when Willoughby is there. There's this whole episode, which I didn't quite make the most of but felt very important, where they go to the house of this woman. They just sort of barge into this house, Willoughby and Marianne.And this is really supposed to show something about the relationship. If you and your partner barge into somebody's house, it can't be a good relationship somehow because it's leading you into bad actions. That's my sense of what that episode is supposed to show from the highest possible remove.OLIVER: I think, yes, and I think there are several other instances of that: when they ride in the carriage together, unaccompanied.TRALDI: Right, right.OLIVER: And there's a sort of general consternation about this. And Marianne sort of says, “Oh, well, how can it be a problem?” And they—part of the consternation is, you're breaking the rules in a very flagrant way, but also that you are assuming that it's okay because you'll get married. And this assumption is a very big one.TRALDI: Yes. And obviously there is this assumption that—she doesn't recognize quite how—she thinks her position is much more secure than it actually is, which is how it turns out in the book. But I think we're supposed to think that even if she were right about Willoughby's affection, which in a sense, she—Willoughby—OLIVER: No. Even if they do get married, she's broken the rules in a way that—TRALDI: She's broken certain rules in a way that is—but I think what's different from Smith is, there is sympathy from her family even though she lacks self-command. But that is precisely—so it's sort of a different theory of why self-command is good. It's precisely because her emotional state is actually draining for her family.And then Elinor says—when she learns that Elinor has actually been going through something—OLIVER: The same.TRALDI: —very similar, and maybe even rougher, in this whole thing with Lucy Steele telling her about this, you know, blah, blah, blah.OLIVER: Which is a beautiful name—to steal. I mean, it's great.TRALDI: It's an amazing—honestly, in some ways Sense and Sensibility may have been my favorite. I think it's just lovely.OLIVER: If I just wanted to just read one for fun, that's what I go to. I do, yes.TRALDI: Yes. And there's a lot—none of these things are quite perfectly in there. But I think honestly, everything that's in the other novels has a little part to play in Sense and Sensibility. You know, I think if I were to recommend just one, if somebody was like, “I have time for just one,” I might recommend Sense and Sensibility.But in the end, Marianne says—again, it's one of these amazingly evocative lines. Elinor says, “You didn't act that badly. Do you compare your conduct with Willoughby's?” And she says, “No, I compare it with—Elinor, I compare it with your conduct. You have this self-command.”And it's precisely the fact—it's not—and I think this is why philosophers do like Austen, because it's not—it's still literary, but there is a precision to her moral evaluations. It's precisely the fact that Elinor knew that her family loved her and didn't want to burden—it's all quite conscious. She didn't want to burden her family with her emotions. But you actually see that Elinor has this family trait of having very strong sentiment, which Marianne does, and simply also has this virtue of self-command.And that is—there are film adaptations and TV adaptations that demonstrate self-command, but it's a very hard thing to film. It's something you feel inside. It's a very hard—the actors have to be very good for you to see—you see pieces of it in some of the adaptations of Persuasion and some of the adaptations of Sense and Sensibility, but self-command is very hard to find.Austen AdaptationsOLIVER: Which adaptations do you like the best?TRALDI: I'm forgetting—I often like the long ones that I think were for the British ITV. So I like the—I think Kate Beckinsale was in the Emma one. Although I think there was one of Persuasion, which was also quite good. I like the one of Northanger Abbey. I don't think it's that good, but it's kind of cute, which I think it's probably the cutest of her long novels.Whit Stillman did a very loose adaptation of Lady Susan, which is hilariously funny at times, and also has Kate Beckinsale and some other great actors in it.OLIVER: Did you see the new Persuasion on Netflix a couple of years ago?TRALDI: No. No.OLIVER: It has that—is it Dakota Johnson, the actress, who's famous for other non-Austenian—Fifty Shades of Grey or whatever.TRALDI: Yes, and isn't she one of the Avengers or something like that?OLIVER: Something like that. But everyone was very upset that it was this terrible adaptation.TRALDI: Oh, yes.OLIVER: Didn't—it sort of killed all of Austen's words. She looks at the camera; she drinks from the bottle. I actually thought it was quite fun. On the basis that all adaptations are bad—TRALDI: I think if you allow some looseness, it can be quite fun. So for example, the 2005 Pride and Prejudice, I think if you're just sort of like, “Well, this is just somebody who was inspired by Pride and Prejudice,” you can have a lot of fun with the movie.OLIVER: I think as an interpretation of the book, that film is quite bad.TRALDI: Oh, yes. I think it's absolutely missing the mark.OLIVER: But in terms of like, the countryside and the house and the geese and the food, it's fantastic.TRALDI: Oh, yes. It's lovely to look at.OLIVER: The dresses, right? The clothes are amazing.TRALDI: And a lot of the—and the cast is honestly like—OLIVER: Yes, it's great.TRALDI: The cast is really, really great. And the parts as they are—OLIVER: Rosamund Pike is maybe the best Jane on TV.TRALDI: She's terrific. And who's the one who plays Kitty?OLIVER: Yes.TRALDI: Who is in—and the father is the guy from The Hunger Games. I forget his name, but I think the father is excellent in that. But of course, it's not exactly the father from Austen.OLIVER: No, no, no.TRALDI: But as a movie itself—but yes, I like a lot of these longer TV versions.One odd thing—they make these choices. So there is some scholarly apparatus brought to bear on some of them. So I think maybe it's Persuasion that there were multiple versions of, and some of the adaptations use pieces from the unpublished version, which are interesting. And as I was reading it, I had to Google around a bit and figure out these things.Austen's Moral PrecisionTRALDI: I was going to say about Austen's moral precision, the other place where I think this comes in—and I wrote a bit about this in the essay—is near the end of Mansfield Park, when—the names are what I'm worst at—when Edmund, right, is finally disillusioned with—OLIVER: Mary.TRALDI: With Mary Crawford?OLIVER: Mm-hmm.TRALDI: It's because there was this affair. There's always a sibling or a cousin who makes some horrible mistake, you know? So there was this affair, and Mary Crawford can only criticize it by saying that they weren't very prudent, you know, in prudential terms. They took a big risk. They made a bad decision. You know, they really screwed themselves over.OLIVER: They could have made it work. Yes.TRALDI: Yes. And Edmund realizes that she lacks moral fervor because he thinks the appropriate criticism should be a moral one. And as a psychological matter, it shouldn't even enter your head, I think is the idea. I'm extrapolating a bit, but if you see somebody acting this badly, to then say, “Well, geez, you're doing something that isn't in your interest”—for that to be your first thought indicates that your priorities are highly misplaced in a way that, to him, is quite unattractive.And this also struck me as a moment of—this is something we philosophers talk about. What is the distinction between prudence and morality? They both tell you what you should do, in some sense, but there's different—the shoulds have different forces, right? So Edmund has a certain moral precision and sensitivity which, actually, Fanny is basically the only person he knows—not that everybody in the house is a bad person; his father is a decent guy, and one of the aunts is okay, I think.But yes, there's a real sophistication to this evaluation. And it's funny to me that she actually used this as the—I mean, I suspect that even at the time there were readers who were just like, “Wait, I really don't get what the nature of Edmund's problem is here,” because it's not like Mary—Mary's not like, “Oh, yes, I support infidelity.” You know? She's not like— it's if you blinked, you might miss it, the mistake that Mary has made.And so I do think that even though she's not making arguments, she's not laying out philosophical theories, there is a level of precision in her thinking about virtue, which I do think is something that it took me a little aback.And I think it's part of why—one person who quote-tweeted my article was Daniel Kodsi, who's a friend of our colleague John Maier and his coauthor often. And he runs this magazine called The Philosophers' Magazine, which I had written before. And Daniel quote-tweeted my article with something like, “Add Oliver to the list of all the philosophers who love Austen.”OLIVER: And it's a long list.TRALDI: And I think it's a long list. And I do think this precision is part of it that she does, that it is—again, it's not like a philosophy journal article, but it is an intellectual sophistication that is often not present in novelists that we really appreciate.Every Word MattersOLIVER: I mean, one way people talk about the great books is to say that every word matters. And a lot of novelists will say that about their own. Well, you know, Elizabeth Bowen used to say, “What you're doing is to make everything count.” Austen is one of the examples where it's actually true. Every word is being used carefully.TRALDI: Yes. It's funny, this bears on another Twitter argument I had recently about this phrase logographic necessity. Basically, every word in a great book is there for a reason. I think that's right. Although you have to be careful about—if you were to say, “Well, every word in Plato is there for a reason, so you can't really say he's wrong about every—” you would be kind of abandoning the philosophical mission.OLIVER: I mean it in the sense of what you might call the artistic or structural integrity of the book. Not everything has to tell in the meaning sense. But it all holds as a unit for some—TRALDI: Yes. I think everything is there—there is what we could call an internal reason for everything to be there. Everything is there to hold together—OLIVER: Like the making of a piece of furniture or something.TRALDI: And I think you hear—I think this is one thing that—and not all classical music, but I think it's one thing that distinguishes classical music even from very good contemporary pop music or jazz or rock music, is that you have this sense of, “Yes, every note I hear basically is holding up a larger structure of some sort.”OLIVER: Yes. And Jane Austen is very Mozart in that way.TRALDI: Yes, I think that's right. Yes.Austen's Place in Great Books ProgramsOLIVER: So should Jane Austen have a bigger place on great books programs, based on all these things you've said about her?TRALDI: Yes, this is—so, there was actually a debate—I did not write the piece in response to this debate, but this is—OLIVER: Tanner Greer.TRALDI: Yes, there was—Tanner Greer weighed in on this, and my friend Circe. I think—OLIVER: I think they're just desperately wrong.TRALDI: You think they don't—that she—OLIVER: I think Emma is obviously a book that should be on one of these syllabuses. Maybe Sense and Sensibility.TRALDI: Yes. I think the ones I would consider are Emma, Sense and Sensibility, Mansfield Park. I do think they're actually longer than I realized, which is always—I mean, there are these very practical concerns with putting together a syllabus.OLIVER: Sure, sure. Although I want to ask you about that, because my response to a lot of these debates, which is maybe just because of where I studied, but just make them read more. And if they don't do the reading, that's their, you know—TRALDI: That's true. Well, I don't want to get into this too much. We already make them read a lot compared to—so for example, a year ago, I had my students read two novels in a week, which is more than most courses make college students read.OLIVER: But that's by no means unreasonable.TRALDI: No, no, of course, of course.OLIVER: You know.TRALDI: Well, exigencies of the teenage mind aside—OLIVER: Because I often think this, when people debate how things should be taught and why it's so important to keep these programs, and they'll talk about the importance of writing essays. And then it turns out the students maybe write one essay a semester. And I sort of think, well, who cares? All this rhetoric for one essay.TRALDI: Yes. I don't know if I'm really ever going to assign essays again. It just is—the age of AI is upon us.OLIVER: Sure. But you see what I mean.TRALDI: No, yes, I know exactly what you mean. And I do think reading a lot is the main part of—and certainly, you know, when I read all seven of these in two weeks, that's much more reading than I normally do, as well, to write this essay.OLIVER: But you didn't have to lie on the sofa afterwards with a cold compress. You were fine.TRALDI: In a way it was a really good two weeks. If you get to read—I mean, this is why we have good lives, right? If you get to read Jane Austen and you call that work, it's a nice life.OLIVER: So yes, will you be putting Emma on your program?TRALDI: I would definitely consider Emma. I would definitely consider Sense and Sensibility. I would consider Mansfield Park. I think these are the ones that have—the moral element is very prominent. But it's obviously there in all of her books.OLIVER: You can have a really good moral discussion about Mansfield Park, which is a bigger, broader thing than Pride and Prejudice, for example.TRALDI: Yes, I think so. I would definitely consider—in the 1800s there were—obviously the British novel of the 1800s was a big deal, and there's—OLIVER: [laughs] We did quite well, yes.TRALDI: You all did quite well. So the ones we did at Tulsa—we had Frankenstein and Wuthering Heights and The Picture of Dorian Gray. And then we had one Irish, The Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man. And I don't think anybody—if you replaced one of those with Emma or Mansfield Park, I don't think anybody would say, “Oh, you made a horrible call.”OLIVER: I think Tanner's point was that you simply don't have that many slots for an English novel that deals with these sorts of ideas, and that it should obviously be Middlemarch because that is the bigger novel. It's about bigger questions of society. It's about the whole—it's got more greatness in it, whereas Austen is sort of more about the individual.TRALDI: So I do think that this question of greatness—I think there are some people who read Austen and they think, “Well, this is—obviously it has all these sorts of themes, but it's not great. It has this littleness to it. It has this smallness to it.”OLIVER: It's domestic.TRALDI: That is not my reading of it. I think if that's the question, I don't feel that way. I think it pulls out these great themes about the nature of virtue and the nature of moral learning, becoming a better person, the nature of love. We read Sappho. We read the Symposium.To me, you read Wuthering Heights and you say, “Oh, this is a really big book because it's about society and how trauma gets passed down, and it has these horror elements, and it's very dark.” But actually, it's quite hard to figure out, how do we turn Wuthering Heights in a discussion about how to live? With Austen, it's just completely straightforward.OLIVER: [laughs] How not to live, maybe.TRALDI: Yes. In Austen, it's just completely straightforward. This is the discussion. This is what she had in mind as well, this question of how to live. So to me, Austen is completely—in terms of her successes as an artist, she belongs. In terms of her themes, she belongs. So I would not rule her out. I think she is absolutely a great, and who knows what that means, but I think she would be completely appropriate on any of these syllabi.Reading PlansOLIVER: Very good. And what will you read next?TRALDI: What will I read next? I mean, our—from the beginning, I'm thinking I should read some more poetry. It's been a while. Actually, speaking of—this is funny. Well, I want to get into William Empson. He had an odd life, which I think somebody should do like a movie about him or something.OLIVER: Yes, he'd make a great movie.TRALDI: I think Empson would be a good movie. So that might be—OLIVER: Are you going to read the poems or the criticism?TRALDI: Probably a little of both, but that's for a while from now. I think, you know, at the moment I'm back to reading philosophy. So what novel will I read next? That's a good question. What should I read next?OLIVER: If you like Jane Austen?TRALDI: Yes.OLIVER: Maybe read one of the people that she admired, like Samuel Richardson or Fanny Burney, someone like that.TRALDI: You know, I do think—you saying Samuel Richardson reminded me, I've read very little Samuel Johnson. I think reading some of the great critics, I think, writing this piece—OLIVER: Oh, Johnson, yes. You would like Johnson.TRALDI: I think I would like Johnson. I think I would like Empson. The history of literary criticism is something I have very, very little idea of.OLIVER: Oh, well, then, Johnson. I mean, he's the best.TRALDI: Yes, I think I should, I should definitely read Johnson.OLIVER: English literary criticism begins and ends with Samuel Johnson.TRALDI: You know what, this is a little different, but—I might have talked about this with you a little bit—I want to read The Fable of the Bees, Mandeville, because reading about Smith—a lot of the ideas that we think of as Smithian are actually Mandevillian, and he kind of moderated them.OLIVER: Well, he hated Mandeville.TRALDI: Yes.OLIVER: Very hard on him.TRALDI: Yes. So a lot—like the invisible hand, it's only a small part of Smith's thinking, but it was like the entirety of Mandeville's thinking, this sort of dynamic.OLIVER: Well, I think it means different things for them. I think Mandeville, in a funny way, is more philosophical in the sense you were saying, and trying to make these propositions. And Smith was saying, “Well, what about feelings? What about all these funny things that we can't account for? Like, look around. It's too messy.”TRALDI: No, that makes sense to me. Yes, I think between Mandeville and Smith, Mandeville is somebody who thought virtue was sort of like a con.OLIVER: A fool's game.TRALDI: Exactly. You're sort of a sucker if you try to be virtuous.OLIVER: I think he also just assumed that if you were commercial, you were obviously on the get.TRALDI: Yes. But this is one of the great—I know we talked about this, but it's one of the great—you see this in Smith, you see this in Austen—commerce has its own virtues, and they are very traditional virtues. You have to be trustworthy. You have to be pleasant. You can't really be wholly self-interested in every moment because people have to be willing to deal with you given your—I mean, think about Yelp reviews or even just word of mouth. “Oh, that person screwed me over.”OLIVER: There's a discussion in one of Hayek's papers, which is—it's a very Smithian point he makes about, the nature of the knowledge problem means that it's not so much that I'm trying to get information about the thing you're trying to sell me, but I'm really trying to get information about you and whether you are someone I should be buying from. Which is exactly the project that the novelists and Smith—there's a sort of period between Smith and the early novelists, running through Austen to George Eliot, when they're all working on that problem together.TRALDI: Yes. I do think in Austen, it's often—the real puzzle is, how do you make out somebody else's character?OLIVER: Exactly.TRALDI: This is a phrase that Lizzy Bennet does use with regard to Darcy. And how do we actually figure out who the trustworthy and untrustworthy people are?OLIVER: And if you're too philosophical about that, in the sort of analytic sense, I think you can end up not paying enough attention to the particulars of that question.TRALDI: Yes.OLIVER: Because when you actually try and do it, it's really, really hard.TRALDI: Yes. And I think this is the sort of—reading Austen, you get a sense of—and there are very few philosophy papers on things like this. Reading Austen, you get a sense of, what sorts of details in a normal life are the ones that I can extract information from to make out somebody else's character?In philosophy, we do ask, what is a good character and what is the good action in this sort of situation? What is the bad action in this sort of situation? But it's not for the philosopher to say, “Okay, in the sorts of situations you're likely to be in, what do you pay—where do you direct your attention to try to figure out these things about?”And it's not—I don't think Austen—it's not super subtle either. In Persuasion—I mentioned in the essay—in Persuasion, it starts out by saying Anne really cared about paying off the family's debts, and the rest of her family didn't give a s**t, you know? And it's sort of like, okay, so we just immediately are like, Anne's the sort of person who you might want to have a business transaction with because if she has a debt to you, she might actually pay it. And I forget if that's the exact detail, but it's something like that, you know?OLIVER: And there's also the novelist—Jane Austen is very good at what you don't see, which aga

The Artful Dodger is a television series on Disney+ that is a historical medical drama set in 1850s Australia with Jack Dawkins, the Artful Dodger from the world of Oliver Twist. Jack is a former pick pocket now surgeon who is reacquainted with old partner in crime, Fagin, who is keen for Jack to resume old habits. The Artful Dodger takes pride in being one of the most historically accurate depictions of nineteenth century medicine and surgery. The hospital, surgical tools, and treatments are accurate portrayals of what we knew back then. We organised a discussion with its creator to take a deep dive into this entertaining show that both myself and Steve thoroughly enjoyed. This is the story of The Artful Dodger Our Special Guest: James McNamara who is the creator, showrunner, head writer, and executive producer of The Artful Dodger available on Disney+. Listen: This Medical Life podcast is available on all podcasting services and Spotify. Help support us on our donation page. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome back to We Needed Roads, where this week it's time to scrub up and dive straight into Artful Dodger Season 2 — and trust us… things get messy but also hilarious Neil has fully, unapologetically fallen in love with Fanny (we're not judging… much), while Marie is just grateful for a second series we never expected to see.But did Season 2 deliver the drama, the danger, and the comedy we wanted?Also this show has one of the best unhinged WTF moments we think we'll see all year!!! Let us know in the comments if you agree with us!⚠️ FULL SPOILERS AHEAD ⚠️If you love movies, TV, geek culture or listening to people passionately argue about films and TV… give us a LIKE, drop a COMMENT, and hit SUBSCRIBE so we can lurk in your algorithm foreverFollow We Needed Roads Podcast on the socials:

Kirt & Mr. Sal discuss Season 2 Episode 8 of The Artful Dodger in which Uriah's eggs are interrupted. Shoe Hammer some Show Hoppers into your day! Website: showhoppers.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/ShowHoppers Contact Us: showhopperspodcast@gmail.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Kirt & Mr. Sal interview James McNamara, the creator of The Artful Dodger. Youtube Video Link: https://youtu.be/UDsupNNUG7 Shoe Hammer some Show Hoppers into your day! Website: showhoppers.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/ShowHoppers Contact Us: showhopperspodcast@gmail.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Kirt & Mr. Sal discuss Season 2 Episode 7 of The Artful Dodger in which Flashbang is likened to a cabbage. Shoe Hammer some Show Hoppers into your day! Website: showhoppers.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/ShowHoppers Contact Us: showhopperspodcast@gmail.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

This special episode of TV Gold looks at the Australian comedy Deadloch.Podcast hosts Andrew Mercado and James Manning review the second season of the hit Prime Video series and also included in the episode after our review is an interview with the stars Kate Box and Madeleine. About Deadloch Season 2 (Prime, 6 episodes) Detectives Dulcie Collins (Kate Box) and Eddie Redcliffe (Madeleine Sami) are in Darwin to investigate the death of Eddie’s former policing partner Bushy. However, their plans are soon diverted when a body part is discovered in a remote town called Barra Creek. With the Northern Territory police force focused on a large-scale search for two missing backpackers, Dulcie and a very reluctant Eddie are tasked with identifying the John Doe. Sticky, sweaty and juggling comprehensive thrush infections, the detectives find themselves embroiled in a world of crocodile-fuelled tourism, overstretched Indigenous rangers, cagey locals, and seven-metre prehistoric predators – all of whom call Barra Creek’s stretch of land, and water, their home. As the humidity builds, and Eddie and Dulcie dig deeper, more questions arise for our duo – not only about the case, but the many secrets that lie beneath the surface of this small town. Who’s in Deadloch Season2: Returning to Deadloch are Kate Box, Madeleine Sami, Nina Oyama and Alicia Gardiner. Joining the cast for Season Two are Luke Hemsworth (The Terminal List: Dark Wolf, Thor: Love & Thunder), Steve Bisley (The Great Gatsby, Mystery Road: Origin, Mad Max), Shari Sebbens (The Sapphires, Top End Bub and The Office), acclaimed writer/director Jean Tong in their acting debut, Genevieve Morris (Bloom, No Activity), Byron Coll (Time Bandits, The Luminaries), Nikki Britton (How to Stay Married), Anthony J Sharpe (Joe v Carole, Human Error), Blake Pavey (Urvi Went to an All Girls School), Damien Garvey (The Survivors, The Artful Dodger), Ngali Shaw (The Twelve, Ladies in Black), Bev Killick (Savage River, Jones Family Christmas), Ling Cooper-Tang (Troppo, Apples Never Fall, Nautilus), Ursula Yovich (Top End Bub, Mystery Road), Syd Brisbane (High Country, Stateless), Ines English (Last Days of the Space Age, Ghosts Australia), Lennox Monaghan (Windcatcher), Reiden Corpus and Storm Murgha.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Kirt & Mr. Sal discuss Season 2 Episode 6 of The Artful Dodger in which a potato sack pile is, in fact, a bed. Shoe Hammer some Show Hoppers into your day! Website: showhoppers.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/ShowHoppers Contact Us: showhopperspodcast@gmail.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Total Freedom is a weekly radio show, on air on:Mio Radio (Turkey) Tuesday 03 PMSpace FM Romania (Romania) Tuesday 01 AMAIR GAY RADIO (France) Wednesday 10 PMJR.FM Radio Network (Usa) Friday 04 PMRadio Amistad 101.9 FM (Dominican Republic) Friday 11 PMDanceRadio.ca (Canada) Friday 03 AMBeats2dance Radio (Holland) Saturday 05 PMCUEBASE-FM (Germany) Monday 06 PMTempo Radio Mx (Mexico) Saturday 10 PMReloaded on iTunes: http://apple.co/1NijFVJ Tracklist :01 Artful Dodger feat. Craig David - Re-Rewind (Luca Guerrieri Bootleg)02 David Penn, Mr. Flip - All Gas, No Break (Extended)03 Horatio & Danmds - Loud Enough (Extended)04 Robin S - Luv 4 Luv (Stuart Ojelay Edit)05 Chris Bowl - No Romance06 Diego Donati & Frank Hernandez - Never Let Me Go (IDOL Club Mix)07 GENESI - Drillo (Extended Mix)08 NEMEZI & Alex Vanni - Never Falling Down (Extended Mix)09 PARISI & Fred again.. feat Eyelar - This is Real (Disappear) (Extended Mix)10 Pinto (NYC) - Dirty Old Disco (GENPOP Remix)11 Secret Floor - DANCE! (Extended Mix)12 Tough Love - Will You Answer (Extended)13 Delistic - The Funk Bassline (Extended Mix)14 Nando X - Imagination (Extended Mix)

Kirt & Mr. Sal discuss Season 2 Episode 5 of The Artful Dodger in which Governor Ed likes his bread buttered. Shoe Hammer some Show Hoppers into your day! Website: showhoppers.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/ShowHoppers Contact Us: showhopperspodcast@gmail.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Thomas Brodie-Sangster has sadly never starred on a show on TBS, but he's back with the second season of a Disney+/Hulu production—one that had Australia tuning in and sheds new light on a classic. In The Artful Dodger, Jack Dawkins (the Artful Dodger from Dickens' Oliver Twist) is now a doctor, wooing the governor's daughter, solving medical mysteries, and pulling off heists with his old criminal mentor and bad influence, Fagin (David Thewlis). On this podcast, we do our best to recap Season 2 while also discussing new characters, historical trivia, funny moments, weird plot decisions, reception, and so on and so forth. You know the deal. Tune in to hear our rating. Welcome to Today's Episode.

Oliver Twist’s Artful Dodger isn’t 13 anymore: He’s an adult. And being an adult comes with more grown-up problems. Read the full review. If you've enjoyed listening to Plugged In Reviews, please give us your feedback.

Oliver Twist's Artful Dodger isn't 13 anymore: He's an adult. And being an adult comes with more grown-up problems. Read the full review. If you've enjoyed listening to Plugged In Reviews, please give us your feedback. To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/1005/29?v=20251111

Kirt & Mr. Sal discuss Season 2 Episode 4 of The Artful Dodger in which Fagin has the celebratory bread. Shoe Hammer some Show Hoppers into your day! Website: showhoppers.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/ShowHoppers Contact Us: showhopperspodcast@gmail.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Kirt & Mr. Sal discuss Season 2 Episode 3 of The Artful Dodger in which Fagin did not receive his morning beetroot and pilchard sandwich. Shoe Hammer some Show Hoppers into your day! Website: showhoppers.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/ShowHoppers Contact Us: showhopperspodcast@gmail.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Hocus Focus Mix met Bastille, Ninetoes, John Summit, Hayla, Pommelien Thijs, Gregory Porter, Claptone, Artful Dodger & Craig David

Kirt & Mr. Sal discuss Season 2 Episode 2 of The Artful Dodger in which Fagin finds a nice, gamey onion. Shoe Hammer some Show Hoppers into your day! Website: showhoppers.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/ShowHoppers Contact Us: showhopperspodcast@gmail.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

"The Artful Dodger" (3:50) hat sich 2024 in unser Herz gespielt. Die Abenteuer-Romanze von Disney+ war nicht nur ein Spin-off von "Oliver Twist" sondern gleichzeitig auch ein großer Spaß mit dem tollen Hauptdarsteller-Duo Thoams Brodie-Sangster und David Thewlis. Nun ist ohne große Fanfaren die zweite Staffel gestartet und Roland und Rüdiger prüfen, ob der Unterhaltungsfaktor noch genau so hoch geblieben ist. Danach nimmt Holger den Platz von Roland ein und macht mit Rüdiger eine kleine Europa-Reise. Der erste Stopp ist Polen, wo Netflix mit "Bleikinder" (24:35) erneut eine Aufreger-Geschichte erzählt. 1974 gab es in Kattowitz gehäuft Bleivergiftungen von Kindern, die eine Ärztin zu einem Stahlwerk zurückverfolgte und dafür ins Visier des Regierungsapparats geriet. Netflix Spanien erzählt derweil mit "Salvador" (49:07) von einer rechtsradikalen Hooligan-Gruppierung, an die ein Rettungswagenfahrer gerät als er seine Tochter herausholen will. Und schließlich sprechen wir erneut über "The Pitt" (1:07:52), die mit der siebten Folge der zweiten Staffel erneut für ein besonderes Highlight sorgt indem sie einfühlsam von der Beweissicherung nach einer Vergewaltigung erzählt. Cold-Open-Frage: "Wer könnte aus dem Warner-Parmount-Netflix-Drama eine gute Serie machen?"

Hocus Focus Mix met Gorillaz, HAVEN, Jocelyn Brown, Luke Alessi, Chloé Caillet, Artful Dodger, Craig David & Hozier

Kirt & Mr. Sal discuss Season 2 Episode 1 of The Artful Dodger in which Governor Fox has marmalade just like Dear Cook used to make. Shoe Hammer some Show Hoppers into your day! Website: showhoppers.com Twitter: https://twitter.com/ShowHoppers Contact Us: showhopperspodcast@gmail.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

From childhood fantasy to building entire worlds in fabric, this episode reveals how costume design becomes character, story, and emotion on screen. In this rich, intimate conversation, host Catherine Baumgardner sits down with acclaimed costume designer Marion Boyce to explore how imagination, research, and relentless craftsmanship shape unforgettable characters. Boyce reflects on her childhood spent in fantasy worlds, tracing a direct line from early play and family textile heritage to a career designing for some of the most visually ambitious period dramas in film and television. The discussion dives deep into her work on The Artful Dodger, unpacking how color palettes, fabric choices, and historical underpinnings communicate power, class, rebellion, and constraint—often before a character speaks a single word. Boyce reveals why books and primary visual references still matter more than fast online searches, and how accuracy in silhouette, corsetry, and underpinnings is essential to keeping an audience emotionally grounded. From designing crinolines that physically shape a character's movement, to using color as metaphor for grief, danger, and desire, Boyce explains costume as active storytelling—not decoration. She also opens up about the intense realities of production schedules, the pressure of massive builds, collaboration with directors and actors, and the personal cost of creative obsession. The episode becomes a masterclass in costume design, world-building, and the unseen labor that makes cinematic storytelling feel truthful and alive. https://www.marionboycecostume.com/ The "Voice of Costume" is the first podcast created between working costume designers sharing stories, inspiration, struggles, and insights into the creative career of costume design. A behind-the-scenes podcast to showcase the voices of Costume Designers around the world. Listen in on this inspirational, one-on-one conversation with Catherine Baumgardner. Audio available wherever you get podcasts. https://voiceofcostume.com/

Justin catches up with Aussie stars Maia Mitchell and Susie Porter to chat about season 2 of their Disney+ (locally shot) series 'The Artful Dodger' - what we can expect this season, what we need to keep our eyes peeled for in the background shots and... tattoos?! Subscribe and follow for more!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

En esta nueva crítica, nos metemos de lleno en la segunda temporada de The Artful Dodger, una serie que regresa más de dos años después y que, sinceramente, no vuelve siendo exactamente la misma. Y lo digo en el mejor sentido posible. En este programa os cuento por qué esta temporada se siente como un salto adelante, no solo a nivel de producción, sino sobre todo en la forma en la que trabaja a sus personajes, sus conflictos y sus relaciones. Sin spoilers, como siempre, hablamos de cómo la serie decide tomarse más en serio a Jack Dawkins, a Belle Fox y, por supuesto, a un Fagin que sigue siendo el auténtico corazón oscuro de la historia. Comentamos cómo el tiempo ha jugado a favor de la serie, cómo se vuelve más madura, más reflexiva y más ambiciosa, y por qué ya no se conforma con ser solo una aventura histórica con romance y crimen. Aquí hay decisiones difíciles, personajes que evolucionan y un mundo que se expande sin perder el foco. También reflexiono sobre lo que cambia respecto a la primera temporada, qué funciona mejor, qué riesgos asume la serie y por qué esta segunda entrega puede convencer incluso a quienes se quedaron tibios con su debut. En definitiva, un análisis sin spoilers, desde la experiencia personal, pensado para ayudarte a decidir si The Artful Dodger merece tu tiempo y para entender por qué esta temporada se siente como algo más que una simple continuación. Únete a nuestro chat de telegram en el que miles de personas hablamos cada día de series: - Telegram – Grupo de debate: https://telegram.me/fueradeseries - Telegram – Canal de noticias: https://t.me/noticiasfds Síguenos en nuestras plataformas y podcast sobre series: - Apple Podcast - https://podcasts.apple.com/es/podcast/fuera-de-series/id288039262 - Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/3RTDss6AAGjSNozVOhDNzX?si=700febbf305144b7&nd=1 - iVoox - https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-fuera-series_sq_f12063_1.html Redes Sociales - Twitter: https://twitter.com/fueradeseries - Facebook: https://facebook.com/fueradeseries - Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/fueradeseries/ - Youtube: https://youtube.com/fueradeseries Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jack Dawkins versucht in Staffel 2 von „The Artful Dodger“ seiner kriminellen Vergangenheit zu entkommen. Doch alte Feinde, neue Gesetze und eine gefährliche Liebe machen den Neuanfang in Australien zum riskanten Spiel. Hier entlang geht's zu den Links unserer Werbepartner: https://detektor.fm/werbepartner/was-laeuft-heute ➡️ Artikel zum Nachlesen: https://detektor.fm/kultur/was-laeuft-heute-the-artful-dodger-staffel-2

Jack Dawkins versucht in Staffel 2 von „The Artful Dodger“ seiner kriminellen Vergangenheit zu entkommen. Doch alte Feinde, neue Gesetze und eine gefährliche Liebe machen den Neuanfang in Australien zum riskanten Spiel. Hier entlang geht's zu den Links unserer Werbepartner: https://detektor.fm/werbepartner/was-laeuft-heute ➡️ Artikel zum Nachlesen: https://detektor.fm/kultur/was-laeuft-heute-the-artful-dodger-staffel-2

Jack Dawkins versucht in Staffel 2 von „The Artful Dodger“ seiner kriminellen Vergangenheit zu entkommen. Doch alte Feinde, neue Gesetze und eine gefährliche Liebe machen den Neuanfang in Australien zum riskanten Spiel. Hier entlang geht's zu den Links unserer Werbepartner: https://detektor.fm/werbepartner/was-laeuft-heute ➡️ Artikel zum Nachlesen: https://detektor.fm/kultur/was-laeuft-heute-the-artful-dodger-staffel-2

TV super-fan Steve Molk returns to the podcast to discuss the upcoming season of the Artful Dodger, episode 5 of the new season of The Pitt, the new Marvel series Wonder Man, and the 50th anniversary celebration of The Muppet Show. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Comedian Matt Forde pops in to tell us How To Win The World Cup, his new talkSPORT podcast. Actor Thomas Brodie Sangster drops by to tell us all about season two of The Artful Dodger on Disney+.Join Chris and the Class Behind The Glass live from the rock n roll tower every morning from 0630! Watch all the stars live on the FREE Virgin Radio UK app. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to episode 15 of Your Mum Loves Garage with DJ Lunge based in Melbourne, Australia. This one is full of old school 2step vocal garage. Let me know what you think of the show. Find me on Instagram @djlunge ⚡️Like the Show? Click the [Repost] ↻ button so more people can hear it!

First Look At "The Artful Dodger" Season 2 https://whatsondisneyplus.com/first-look-at-the-artful-dodger-season-2/   #DisneyPlus  VISIT ONLINE -  http://www.WhatsOnDisneyPlus.com If you enjoy our content, please consider supporting it via our Patreon or as a YouTube Channel Membership from as little as $2 a month and get access to exclusive content and much more.

First Look At "The Artful Dodger" Season 2 https://whatsondisneyplus.com/first-look-at-the-artful-dodger-season-2/   #DisneyPlus  VISIT ONLINE -  http://www.WhatsOnDisneyPlus.com If you enjoy our content, please consider supporting it via our Patreon or as a YouTube Channel Membership from as little as $2 a month and get access to exclusive content and much more.

First Look At "The Artful Dodger" Season 2 https://whatsondisneyplus.com/first-look-at-the-artful-dodger-season-2/   #DisneyPlus  VISIT ONLINE -  http://www.WhatsOnDisneyPlus.com If you enjoy our content, please consider supporting it via our Patreon or as a YouTube Channel Membership from as little as $2 a month and get access to exclusive content and much more.

**Lancey B's The Funktion Replay On traxfm.org. This Week Lance Featured Soul/Boogie/Contemporary Soul/ Dance Classics From MF Robots, Ace Watkins, Craig David, Outkast, A Tribe Called Quest, The Funk Soul Brothers & Bebo Best, Craig David, STR4TA, Boogie Down productions, Jared Oates, The Wayne Johnson Music, Flwr Chyld, Artful Dodger, Keisha Jackson, Jaedyn Randell, Jafunk & More #originalpirates #soulmusic #contemporarysoul #70smusic #80smusic #disco #danceclassics Catch Catch Lancey B's The Funktion Every Tuesday From 12:00PM UK Time On www.traxfm.org Listen Live Here Via The Trax FM Player: chat.traxfm.org/player/index.html Mixcloud LIVE :mixcloud.com/live/traxfm Free Trax FM Android App: play.google.com/store/apps/det...mradio.ba.a6bcb The Trax FM Facebook Page : https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100092342916738 Trax FM Live On Hear This: hearthis.at/k8bdngt4/live Tunerr: tunerr.co/radio/Trax-FM Radio Garden: Trax FM Link: http://radio.garden/listen/trax-fm/IEnsCj55 OnLine Radio Box: onlineradiobox.com/uk/trax/?cs...cs=uk.traxRadio Radio Deck: radiodeck.com/radio/5a09e2de87...7e3370db06d44dc Radio.Net: traxfmlondon.radio.net Stream Radio : streema.com/radios/Trax_FM..The_Originals Live Online Radio: liveonlineradio.net/english/tr...ax-fm-103-3.htm**

Time to Get Up with an Artful Dodger - we'll show you something THIS stud starter did last night that I was sure would never be done again! Meanwhile - why Eagles why - after their mini-bye - do the Birds have to fly this Sunday to silence the deafening din in and out of Philly? Plus - oh my goodness, did you hear what the big man in big d said about his defense? It's possible today the D stands for - delusional!! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hocus Focus Mix met Bastille, Ninetoes, John Summit, Hayla, Pommelien Thijs, Gregory Porter, Claptone, Artful Dodger & Craig David

Hocus Focus Mix met Bastille, Ninetoes, John Summit, Hayla, Pommelien Thijs, Gregory Porter, Claptone, Artful Dodger & Craig David

Welcome to Club M.O.C.! Get ready to vibe with Metro Beatz with a fresh new selection of funky soulful house tracks for 2025. This weekend we have music from artists such as Bob Sinclar, Junior Lopez, Chris Lake, Ghost Town DJs, Sam Frandisco, Artful Dodger, Craig David, Tom Ferry & more. Enjoy the show! Tune in to the electrifying rhythms of Club M.O.C. every Friday night at midnight, exclusively on mocradio.com. Join us as we take you on a musical journey like no other. Prepare to be swept away by the irresistible fusion of funky vibes and soulful melodies. Mark your calendars and get ready to elevate your weekend nights with the freshest tunes!

DJ Глюк - Techno Dance 2025 2 @ DJ Глюк 1. Artful Dodger, Craig David - Re-Rewind (CHANNE Edit) 2. Summum, HUSA - Don't Stop (Original Mix) 3. Deeper Purpose & GUZ (NL) - Don't Waste My Time (Extended) 4. INNDRIVE, Scheid & Melina Mattos – Moonlight (Extended Mix) 5. Notyourgirl - Poppin' (Extended Mix) 6. Milady - Catchy (Extended Mix) 7. Mau P - People Talk People Sing (Original Mix) 8. Bokard, Kevin Borges - I Don't Need (Original Mix) 9. Paul Richard - Bring It (Extended Mix) 10. BRANDON (DE) & SLIM TONY - No Second Guessing (Original Mix) 11. Nicola Fasano, REDEEM - To the Back (Extended) 12. ATFC & Lisa Millett - Bad Habit (Clüb De Combat Extended Remix) 13. Dhany, Benassi Bros - Hit My Heart (TR3NACRIA Extended Remix)

The Otto Legacy. An Award Winning Documentary. High End Fashion. Gracie Otto is one of the Ottos—you know, Barry and Miranda Otto, Australian cinematic royalty. But she has carved out her own space in the industry. She’s the director behind The Other Guy, Deadloch, The Artful Dodger, and Heartbreak High. However, it’s her most recent film, the AACTA-winning documentary Otto by Otto, that pulls back the curtain on the Otto family. What began as a project documenting her father, Barry, as he prepared to premiere a one-man show became something far more personal. Through her lens, Gracie realised she was capturing the unfolding reality of her dad’s Alzheimer’s diagnosis. What You’ll Hear: How Otto by Otto became a heartbreaking portrait of her father, Barry Otto The highs and lows of a career in Australian film and theatre The challenge of documenting a loved one’s Alzheimer’s diagnosis in real time How and why she never stops working THE END BITS: You can watch Otto By Otto on Stan. Listen to more No Filter interviews here and follow us on Instagram here. Discover more Mamamia podcasts here. Feedback: podcast@mamamia.com.au Share your story, feedback, or dilemma! Send us a voice message, and one of our Podcast Producers will get back to you ASAP. Rate or review us on Apple by clicking on the three dots in the top right-hand corner, click Go To Show then scroll down to the bottom of the page, click on the stars at the bottom and write a review Our studio is styled with furniture from Fenton and Fenton visit. CREDITS: Host: Kate Langbroek Guest: Gracie Otto Executive Producer: Naima Brown Senior Producer: Grace Rouvray Audio Producer: Jacob Round Mamamia acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the Land we have recorded this podcast on, the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation. We pay our respects to their Elders past and present, and extend that respect to all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures.Become a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome to the world of Hexagonia 01. [HEXAGON] G-POL - Renegade Master (Don Diablo Edit)02. ALEXA PERL - All The Ladies ft. Katie Holmes-Smith03. Butch - Get High With You ft. Life On Planets04. Alexis Knox X Coal Minors - Shine A Light05. Jason Herd X Lisanse - Gotta Keep Pushing On06. [HΞXHIBITION] KuKs - Fast Money07. AVAION X Oskar Med K - I Can't Find You08. Artful Dodger, Craig David - Re-Rewind (CHANNE Edit)09. ID X ID - You Know How To Love Me10. DJ Burgerhead - Take It Higher11. [FUTURE] Abstunee - Astral Echoes12. [DEMODAY TRACK] Goleen - Groover 99'13. Innellea, TH;EN, Carlo Whale - Inside Your Mind14. KVSH & Future Skies - DNA15. Ali Salahov - Bassline Vandal16. Dillon Nathaniel - Vibe Generator17. Average Citizens - Chit Chat18. CHAN - Lights On19. Chris Lorenzo - Appetite20. GUI2IN - Bodyonbody ft. Gaddi21. [CHILL TIME] Ayokay & Oliver River - Heartbeat

This week on RITY... The mini theme is Mayday! Songs with titles that are a cry for help... A brand new song from Sammy Hagar that pays tribute to his former bandmate, Eddie Van Halen... Who would have thought that driving down Lake Shore Drive while high on cocaine would inspire a hit song!... Who was Chicken Man and why was he blown up by a nail bomb?... Deep cuts from Artful Dodger, Orion The Hunter, Spys, Little Village, Bill Wyman's Rhythm Kings, and much more!... For more info on the show, visit reelinwithryan.com

Episode 969-Jason Interviews James Aquilone & Zac Atkinson: THE OMEGA ELEVEN – THE METROPOLIS JOB Monstrous BooksTIME TRAVEL. HEISTS. HISTORY'S GREATEST HEROES & VILLAINS.The Omniverse is collapsing. Dimensions are merging.The time traveller Doctor Omega and his companion, the 14-year-old Jack Dawkins, also known as the Artful Dodger, head to the technologically advanced city of Metropolis in desperate need of a new spaceship.At the same time, the duo begin to assemble an elite and unusual band of thieves and rogues to aid them in their quest to save the Omniverse — and steal some shit.Meanwhile, dark forces gather to stop the Eleven from their impossible mission...THE METROPOLIS JOB is the second issue in Monstrous Books' epic comic book series.Back It: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/manbomb/omega-eleven-2Like & Subscribe on Youtube www.youtube.com/@comicsforfunandprofit5331Patreon https://www.patreon.com/comicsfunprofit Merch https://comicsfunprofit.threadless.comYour Support Keeps Our Show Going On Our Way to a Thousand EpisodesDonate Here https://bit.ly/36s7YeLAll the C4FaP links you could ever need  https://beacons.ai/comicsfunprofit Listen To the Episode Here: https://comcsforfunandprofit.podomatic.com/

Well, Matt Mullenix is back, this time as one of the cohort of falconers participating in Game Hawker Edition. Matt trapped a passage jack merlin this season, and we begin the episode discussing the backstory associated with Matt's acquisition of "Artie the Artful Dodger". We then turned our attention to Matt's experience with "Artie's" training, beginning with feeding on the fist and hooding, and culminating with "Artie's" first free flight and then his first kill while Matt was on the road visiting friends in Texas and hawking in Liberal, Kansas at the NAFA meet. On returning home, Matt leads us through his time over the Christmas and New Year's break. We conclude the episode with "Artie" dominating his quarry and forcing Matt to work hard for the chaos created by each flush, which undoubtedly led to attracting the attention of at least one of the members of the local free-living raptors also engaged in securing a meal.

Do you have to have a dream? Or is incrementalism the answer to leading a flourishing life? This week, creative polymath Tim Minchin, joins host Lloyd Vogelman on the couch for an unfiltered conversation that digs into the personal side of the Principle of Charity.Tim MinchinIn addition to two decades of award-winning live performance and multiple recorded specials, Tim is the composer and lyricist of smash-hit stage musicals, Matilda and Groundhog Day.He is also a screenwriter (of the award-winning Upright, in which he stars alongside House of The Dragon's Milly Alcock), and a screen actor, (Atticus Fetch in Californication, Friar Tuck in Robin Hood 2014, Darius Cracksworth in Disney's The Artful Dodger).He is a public speaker, and a book of his commencement speeches, You Don't Have to Have a Dream, was recently published by Penguin Random House. Stage roles include his acclaimed Judas in the 2014 UK / Australian Arena Tour of Jesus Christ Superstar, and Rosencrantz in the Sydney Theatre Company's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. He is a voice actor, has published two children's books and a graphic novel, and sometimes get into trouble for criticising fundamentalists of all stripes. His 2020 studio album, Apart Together, peaked at #2 on the ARIA charts.Among many accolades, he has won two Olivier Awards for Best Musical, a British Composers Award for Best Score, a Logie for Best Supporting Actor, an ACTAA for best TV comedy performance, an Edinburgh Comedy Award for best Newcomer, a Whats On Stage Award for Best Actor in a Musical, The Richard Dawkins Award for Science Communication, and an Order of Australia for Services to the Arts and the Community. He has been nominated for some Tonys and a Grammy. CREDITSYour hosts are Lloyd Vogelman and Emile Sherman This podcast is proud to partner with The Ethics CentreFind Lloyd @LloydVogelman on Linked inFind Emile @EmileSherman on Linked In and XThis podcast is produced by Jonah Primo and Sabrina OrganoFind Jonah at jonahprimo.com or @JonahPrimo on Instagram Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Three years after his first appearance on Principle of Charity, the effervescent Tim Minchin returns for this first, and very special spotlight episode for 2025. Emile, Lloyd and Tim reflect on the principle of charity itself, and how themes explored in Tim's latest book You Don't Have To Have a Dream (Penguin Random House) relate to its application in our lives. What role can the scientific method, kindness and authenticity play in helping us consider the viewpoints of those with whom we most disagree, and lead flourishing lives? Tim MinchinIn addition to two decades of award-winning live performance and multiple recorded specials, Tim is the composer and lyricist of smash-hit stage musicals, Matilda and Groundhog Day.He is also a screenwriter (of the award-winning Upright, in which he stars alongside House of The Dragon's Milly Alcock), and a screen actor, (Atticus Fetch in Californication, Friar Tuck in Robin Hood 2014, Darius Cracksworth in Disney's The Artful Dodger).He is a public speaker, and a book of his commencement speeches, You Don't Have to Have a Dream, was recently published by Penguin Random House. Stage roles include his acclaimed Judas in the 2014 UK / Australian Arena Tour of Jesus Christ Superstar, and Rosencrantz in the Sydney Theatre Company's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. He is a voice actor, has published two children's books and a graphic novel, and sometimes get into trouble for criticising fundamentalists of all stripes. His 2020 studio album, Apart Together, peaked at #2 on the ARIA charts.Among many accolades, he has won two Olivier Awards for Best Musical, a British Composers Award for Best Score, a Logie for Best Supporting Actor, an ACTAA for best TV comedy performance, an Edinburgh Comedy Award for best Newcomer, a Whats On Stage Award for Best Actor in a Musical, The Richard Dawkins Award for Science Communication, and an Order of Australia for Services to the Arts and the Community. He has been nominated for some Tonys and a Grammy. CREDITSYour hosts are Lloyd Vogelman and Emile Sherman This podcast is proud to partner with The Ethics CentreFind Lloyd @LloydVogelman on Linked inFind Emile @EmileSherman on Linked In and XThis podcast is produced by Jonah Primo and Sabrina OrganoFind Jonah at jonahprimo.com or @JonahPrimo on Instagram Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

James Wallace was once the most revered philanthropist in the New Zealand arts community. His world started crumbling when a young man accused him of sexual assault. After a six-year legal battle - and more victims came forward - Wallace was convicted of multiple crimes and out of ways to keep his identity secret. This is the story of a disgraced knight's rise and fall, his crimes and punishment - and his survivors.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

As a long time host of Play School, Luke's probably spent more time entertaining kids than any of us ever will! But beyond that, he's an amazingly accomplished actor… from getting his start on the kids show Lift Off! back in the early 90s, to being a regular on the awesome Redfern Now and more recently in the big budget adaption of The Artful Dodger on Disney+, not to mention a tonne of amazing theatre over the years. Luke is super generous and frank in this chat, talking openly about what it was like to have a kid really young, the powerful role his mum played in his life, and also talking honestly about his new blended family, the amazing joy that has brought him and his two sons and the deep love he has for his step-daughters... but also some of the unique challenges they have all had to navigate.   As you'll hear, Luke brings such positivity and fun to his parenting, but it's also obvious he understands that tenacity and sacrifice is a big part of it too… We get the feeling Luke leaves it all on the field when it comes to dadding. It was beautiful to hear him talk with such passion, and we are sure you'll agree. PS - we recorded this episode a while ago, and Luke has since tied the knot and made his blended family official!  Huge congrats to Luke!!   Luke is in a bunch of stuff at the moment, including The Artful Dodger on Disney + and you'll soon find him in the upcoming season 2 of SCRUBLANDS on Stan (and of course on Play School) Thanks as always to you guys for listening - you can get in touch at howotherdadsdad.com — And big thanks to HERTZ who are back as our exclusive sponsor in season 3.  And just like us, Hertz are all about making memories and having adventures.  So if you need a great car to complete your next family getaway, head to hertz.com.au/hodd for a great discount. Terms and conditions do apply.  See the website for details on these, as some exclusions do apply.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Maia Mitchell & Cierra Ramirez came by to talk about the finale of Good Trouble, 10 years since the fosters debuted, The Artful Dodger, Australia and more! You can always leave us a voicemail - (262) 515-9224! Info on Beyond Sleep Here Follow Us On Social! TikTok Twitter Instagram Facebook Follow Zach Follow Dan Follow Cameron Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Maia Mitchell & Cierra Ramirez came by to talk about the finale of Good Trouble, 10 years since the fosters debuted, The Artful Dodger, Australia and more!You can always leave us a voicemail - (262) 515-9224!Info on Beyond Sleep HereFollow Us On Social!TikTokTwitterInstagramFacebookFollow ZachFollow DanFollow Cameron

In this episode, we play cupid for our picks for February, advising you on the crush-worthy content worth flirting with (smooch), what you'll want to give your last name to (marry), and what you should steer clear of like a shadow-seeing groundhog (kill).Relevant links: Our full show notes are at knoxandjamie.com/541Today is the last day to get our Princess Collection for our annual Patreon subscribers! Own them forever via knoxandjamie.com/annualSmooches: book- Sex, Lies, & Sensibility by Nikki Payne | book- NIghtwatching by Tracy Sierra | movie- Drive-Away Dolls | album- What Now by Brittany Howard | tv- The Traitors | tv- Survivor Marries: tv- Shogun | tv- Mr. & Mrs. Smith | book- Fluke by Brian Klaas | tv- Lisa Frankenstein (see also: Diablo Cody's IMDb)Kills: tv- The Walking Dead: The Ones Who LiveReminder: Our Patreon supporters can get full access to this week's The More You Know news segment. This week we discussed Elle King, eating meals in the shower, and more. Become a partner.Fun bonus: We were on the Currently Reading podcastGreen lights:Jamie: series- The Artful Dodger, book- Everyone On This Train Is a Suspect by by Benjamin StevensonKnox: movie- American FictionEpisode sponsors: FACTOR: Get 50% off your first box and 2 free wellness shots at factormeals.com/popcastpod50 and use code popcastpod50. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.