Podcasts about Forster

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

Dan is joined by Mike from Wicked Spursy to talk leadership, identity and why this Tottenham side feels like a group of kids without a grown-up in the room.We chat Romero as emotional spark vs leader, life after Ange, Frank's system (or lack of one), young players learning on the job, and why Spurs still miss someone who can drag them out of trouble.Some Spurs chat. Some squad-building therapy. Some Vermont snow.Catch more of Mike on:Wicked Spursy: Spotify, Apple Podcasts and YoutubeUnited in Green: Spotify, Apple Podcasts and Youtube Support us on Patreon at patreon.com/abitspursyChat with us on Discord at discord.abitspursy.comFollow us on Twitter at @abitspursy and @dan_spursEmail at dan@abitspursy.com

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

In this conversation, Dan and Hex discuss the current state of Tottenham Hotspur, reflecting on recent performances, tactical approaches, and the impact of injuries on the team's dynamics. They explore the need for experienced players, the challenges of the Premier League, and the importance of maintaining a clear team identity. The discussion also touches on managerial strategies and the upcoming January transfer window, emphasising the fans' desire for improvement as the season progresses. Dan and Hex also explore various other themes surrounding football, particularly focusing on Tottenham's performance, the significance of cup competitions versus league standings, and the impact of injuries on squad depth. They discuss the evolution of football tactics, the potential future of AI in management, and the changing dynamics of football fandom, emphasising the commercialisation of the sport and its effects on fan engagement. Chapters03:03 Reflections on Recent Football Matches06:01 Analysing Team Performance and Player Dynamics08:47 The Impact of Key Player Injuries11:53 The Evolution of Premier League Tactics14:57 The Search for a New Team Identity17:55 The Role of Managers in Shaping Team Dynamics20:56 Concluding Thoughts on Team Future and Identity34:51 The Identity of Tottenham Hotspur37:00 Managerial Appointments and Club Vibes39:30 The Challenge of Consistency42:12 The Impact of Youth and Experience46:56 The Need for Experienced Players50:49 The Role of Old Heads in the Team53:30 Reflections on the Current Season01:01:32 Evaluating Frank's Tactics01:14:53 Looking Ahead: January Transfer Window01:15:23 January Transfer Window Expectations01:18:43 Cup Competitions vs League Performance01:22:29 The Importance of Cup Runs01:26:46 Analysing Current Team Performance01:31:57 Champions League Prospects01:35:30 Frank's Management Style and Challenges01:40:14 Finding Tottenham's Identity01:45:31 Reflections on Recent Seasons01:48:09 The Excitement of Early Games01:51:10 The Identity Crisis of Tottenham01:53:00 The Evolution of Football Tactics01:56:42 The Role of AI in Football Management02:00:30 The Changing Landscape of Football Viewership02:02:36 The Joy of Cup Competitions02:06:31 The Experience of Lower League Football02:10:40 The Future of Football and Fan Engagement Support us on Patreon at patreon.com/abitspursyChat with us on Discord at discord.abitspursy.comFollow us on Twitter at @abitspursy and @dan_spursEmail at dan@abitspursy.com

Neste episódio, vamos dos teares à popularização da internet, de Ada Lovelace ao careca maligno da Amazon, passando por um conto de ficção científica visionário e por um filme clássico dos anos 90, para entender a história do computador e dos rumos da internet: será mesmo que ela está morta?Apoie este podcast: alinevalek.com.br/apoieAssine nossa newsletter: alinevalek.substack.comFale comigo: escreva@alinevalek.com.brClube de Leitura Bobagens ImperdíveisConheça a programação e participe: https://alinevalek.com.br/clubedeleitura/Links relacionadosLivro “The Innovators", de Walter Isaacson: https://amzn.to/49yKO7gConto “The Machine Stops", de E. M. Forster: https://www.cs.ucdavis.edu/~koehl/Teaching/ECS188/PDF_files/Machine_stops.pdf (em inglês, em domínio público) / https://amzn.to/3LfBQlt (em português, com tradução de Teixeira Coelho)Cory Doctorow sobre a “bostificação” da internet: https://pluralistic.net/2023/01/21/potemkin-ai/#hey-guysA atividade de robôs já superou a atividade humana na internet: https://www.gizmodo.com.br/bots-ja-superam-humanos-na-internet-e-o-futuro-da-rede-nunca-pareceu-tao-incerto-27083Vídeo explicando como funcionavam os cartões perfurados nos teares mecânicos: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQzpLLhN0fYFilme “Hackers: piratas de computador", 1995: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Te0-HgJzyw81995 foi o ano mais importante da história da internet: https://thehistoryoftheweb.com/1995-was-the-most-important-year-for-the-web/Trilha sonora: “Tock Time Warp", South London HIFI • “Rain Over Kyoto Station”, The Mini Vandals • “Subterranean Howl", ELPHNT • “City by night”, ELPHNT

Dan's joined by Lazza to chat about Spurs' bounce-back draw against Newcastle, and win against Brentford. They discuss Spurs potential turning point of the season, exciting youth prospects, squad needs and expectations, and the 'mongrel' the team is potentially starting to display. Support us on Patreon at patreon.com/abitspursyChat with us on Discord at discord.abitspursy.comFollow us on Twitter at @abitspursy and @dan_spursEmail at dan@abitspursy.com

Tuesday is the 250th anniversary of Jane Austen's birth, so today I spoke to John Mullan, professor of English Literature at UCL, author of What Matters in Jane Austen. John and I talked about how Austen's fiction would have developed if she had not died young, the innovations of Persuasion, wealth inequality in Austen, slavery and theatricals in Mansfield Park, as well as Iris Murdoch, A.S. Byatt, Patricia Beer, the Dunciad, and the Booker Prize. This was an excellent episode. My thanks to John!TranscriptHenry Oliver (00:00)Today, I am talking to John Mullen. John is a professor of English literature at University College London, and he is the author of many splendid books, including How Novels Work and the Artful Dickens. I recommend the Artful Dickens to you all. But today we are talking about Jane Austen because it's going to be her birthday in a couple of days. And John wrote What Matters in Jane Austen, which is another book I recommend to you all. John, welcome.John Mullan (00:51)It's great to be here.Henry Oliver (00:53)What do you think would have happened to Austin's fiction if she had not died young?John Mullan (00:58)Ha ha! I've been waiting all this year to be asked that question from somebody truly perspicacious. ⁓ Because it's a question I often answer even though I'm not asked it, because it's a very interesting one, I think. And also, I think it's a bit, it's answerable a little bit because there was a certain trajectory to her career. I think it's very difficult to imagine what she would have written.John Mullan (01:28)But I think there are two things which are almost certain. The first is that she would have gone on writing and that she would have written a deal more novels. And then even the possibility that there has been in the past of her being overlooked or neglected would have been closed. ⁓ And secondly, and perhaps more significantly for her, I think she would have become well known.in her own lifetime. you know, partly that's because she was already being outed, as it were, you know, of course, as ⁓ you'll know, Henry, you know, she published all the novels that were published in her lifetime were published anonymously. So even people who were who were following her career and who bought a novel like Mansfield Park, which said on the title page by the author of Sense and Sensibility and Pride and Prejudice, they knew they knew.John Mullan (02:26)were getting something by the same author, they wouldn't necessarily have known the author's name and I think that would have become, as it did with other authors who began anonymously, that would have disappeared and she would have become something of a literary celebrity I would suggest and then she would have met other authors and she'd have been invited to some London literary parties in effect and I think that would have been very interesting how that might have changed her writing.John Mullan (02:54)if it would have changed her writing as well as her life. She, like everybody else, would have met Coleridge. ⁓ I think that would have happened. She would have become a name in her own lifetime and that would have meant that her partial disappearance, I think, from sort of public consciousness in the 19th century wouldn't have happened.Henry Oliver (03:17)It's interesting to think, you know, if she had been, depending on how old she would have been, could she have read the Pickwick papers? How would she have reacted to that? Yes. Yeah. Nope.John Mullan (03:24)Ha ha ha ha ha!Yes, she would have been in her 60s, but that's not so old, speaking of somebody in their 60s. ⁓ Yes, it's a very interesting notion, isn't it? I mean, there would have been other things which happened after her premature demise, which she might have responded to. I think particularly there was a terrific fashion for before Dickens came along in the 1830s, there was a terrific fashion in the 1820s for what were called silver fork novels, which were novels of sort of high life of kind of the kind of people who knew Byron, but I mean as fictional characters. And we don't read them anymore, but they were they were quite sort of high quality, glossy products and people loved them. And I'm I like to think she might have reacted to that with her sort of with her disdain, think, her witty disdain for all aristocrats. know, nobody with a title is really any good in her novels, are they? And, you know, the nearest you get is Mr. Darcy, who is an Earl's nephew. And that's more of a problem for him than almost anything else. ⁓ She would surely have responded satirically to that fashion.Henry Oliver (04:28)Hahaha.Yes, and then we might have had a Hazlitt essay about her as well, which would have been all these lost gems. Yes. Are there ways in which persuasion was innovative that Emma was not?John Mullan (04:58)Yes, yes, yes, yes. I know, I know.⁓ gosh, all right, you're homing in on the real tricky ones. Okay, okay. ⁓ That Emma was not. Yes, I think so. I think it took, in its method, it took further what she had done in Emma.Henry Oliver (05:14)Ha ha.This is your exam today,John Mullan (05:36)which is that method of kind of we inhabit the consciousness of a character. And I I think of Jane Austen as a writer who is always reacting to her own last novel, as it were. And I think, you know, probably the Beatles were like that or Mozart was like that. think, you know, great artists often are like that, that at a certain stage, if what they're doing is so different from what everybody else has done before,they stop being influenced by anybody else. They just influence themselves. And so I think after Emma, Jane Austen had this extraordinary ⁓ method she perfected in that novel, this free indirect style of a third-person narration, which is filtered through the consciousness of a character who in Emma's case is self-deludedly wrong about almost everything. And it's...brilliantly tricksy and mischievous and elaborate use of that device which tricks even the reader quite often, certainly the first time reader. And then she got to persuasion and I think she is at least doing something new and different with that method which is there's Anne Elliot. Anne Elliot's a good person. Anne Elliot's judgment is very good. She's the most cultured and cultivated of Jane Austen's heroines. She is, as Jane Austen herself said about Anne Elliot, almost too good for me. And so what she does is she gives her a whole new vein of self-deception, which is the self-deception in the way of a good person who always wants to think things are worse than they are and who always, who, because suspicious of their own desires and motives sort of tamps them down and suppresses them. And we live in this extraordinary mind of this character who's often ignored, she's always overhearing conversations. Almost every dialogue in the novel seems to be something Anne overhears rather than takes part in. And the consciousness of a character whodoesn't want to acknowledge things in themselves which you and I might think were quite natural and reasonable and indeed in our psychotherapeutic age to be expressed from the rooftops. You still fancy this guy? Fine! Admit it to yourself. ⁓ No. So it's not repression actually, exactly. It's a sort of virtuous self-control somehow which I think lots of readers find rather masochistic about her. Henry Oliver (08:38)I find that book interesting because in Sense and Sensibility she's sort of opposed self-command with self-expression, but she doesn't do that in Persuasion. She says, no, no, I'm just going to be the courage of, no, self-command. know, Eleanor becomes the heroine.John Mullan (08:48)Yes. Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. But with the odd with the odd burst of Mariannes, I was watching the I thought execrable Netflix ⁓ persuasion done about two or three years ago ⁓ with the luminous Dakota Johnson as as you know, as Anne Elliot. You could not believe her bloom had faded one little bit, I think.John Mullan (09:23)And ⁓ I don't know if you saw it, but the modus operandi rather following the lead set by that film, The Favourite, which was set in Queen Anne's reign, but adopted the Demotic English of the 21st century. similarly, this adaptation, much influenced by Fleabag, decided to deal with the challenge of Jane Austen's dialogue by simply not using it, you know, and having her speak in a completely contemporary idiom. But there were just one or two lines, very, very few from the novel, that appeared. And when they appeared, they sort of cried through the screen at you. And one of them, slightly to qualify what you've just said, was a line I'd hardly noticed before. as it was one of the few Austin lines in the programme, in the film, I really noticed it. And it was much more Marianne than Eleanor. And that's when, I don't know if you remember, and Captain Wentworth, they're in Bath. So now they are sort of used to talking to each other. And Louisa Musgrove's done her recovering from injury and gone off and got engaged to Captain Benwick, Captain Benwick. So Wentworth's a free man. And Anne is aware, becoming aware that he may be still interested in her. And there's a card party, an evening party arranged by Sir Walter Elliot. And Captain Wentworth is given an invitation, even though they used to disapprove of him because he's now a naval hero and a rich man. And Captain Wentworth and Anna making slightly awkward conversation. And Captain Wentworth says, you did not used to like cards.I mean, he realizes what he said, because what he said is, remember you eight years ago. I remember we didn't have to do cards. We did snogging and music. That's what we did. But anyway, he did not used to like cards. And he suddenly realizes what a giveaway that is. And he says something like, but then time brings many changes. And she says, she cries out, I am not so much changed.Henry Oliver (11:23)Mm. Mm, yes, yes. Yep.Yes.Cries out, yeah.John Mullan (11:50)It's absolutely electric line and that's not Eleanor is it? That's not an Eleanor-ish line. ⁓ Eleanor would say indeed time evinces such dispositions in most extraordinary ways. She would say some Johnsonian thing wouldn't she? so I don't think it's quite a return to the same territory or the same kind of psychology.Henry Oliver (12:05)That's right. Yes, yes, yeah.No, that's interesting, yeah. One of the things that happens in Persuasion is that you get this impressionistic writing. So a bit like Mrs. Elliot talking while she picks strawberries. When Lady Russell comes into Bath, you get that wonderful scene of the noises and the sounds. Is this a sort of step forward in a way? And you can think of Austen as not an evolutionary missing link as such, but she's sort of halfway between Humphrey Clinker and Mr. Jangle.Is that something that she would have sort of developed?John Mullan (12:49)I think that's quite possible. haven't really thought about it before, but you're right. think there are these, ⁓ there are especially, they're impressionistic ⁓ passages which are tied up with Anne's emotions. And there's an absolutely, I think, short, simple, but extraordinarily original one when she meets him again after eight years. And it says something like, the room was full, full of people. Mary said something and you're in the blur of it. He said all that was right, you know, and she can't hear the words, she can't hear the words and you can't hear the words and you're inside and she's even, you're even sort of looking at the floor because she's looking at the floor and in Anne's sort of consciousness, often slightly fevered despite itself, you do exactly get this sort of, ⁓ for want of a better word, blur of impressions, which is entirely unlike, isn't it, Emma's sort of ⁓ drama of inner thought, which is always assertive, argumentative, perhaps self-correcting sometimes, but nothing if not confidently articulate.John Mullan (14:17)And with Anne, it's a blur of stuff. there is a sort of perhaps a kind of inklings of a stream of consciousness method there.Henry Oliver (14:27)I think so, yeah. Why is it that Flaubert and other writers get all the credit for what Jane Austen invented?John Mullan (14:35)Join my campaign, Henry. It is so vexing. It is vexing. sometimes thought, I sometimes have thought, but perhaps this is a little xenophobic of me, that the reason that Jane Austen is too little appreciated and read in France is because then they would have to admit that Flaubertdidn't do it first, you know. ⁓Henry Oliver (14:40)It's vexing, isn't it?John Mullan (15:04)I mean, I suppose there's an answer from literary history, which is simply for various reasons, ⁓ some of them to do with what became fashionable in literary fiction, as we would now call it. Jane Austen was not very widely read or known in the 19th century. So it wasn't as if, as it were, Tolstoy was reading Jane Austen and saying, this is not up to much. He wasn't. He was reading Elizabeth Gaskell.Jane Eyre ⁓ and tons of Dickens, tons, every single word Dickens published, of course. ⁓ So Jane Austen, know, to cite an example I've just referred to, I Charlotte Bronte knew nothing of Jane Austen until George Henry Lewis, George Eliot's partner, who is carrying the torch for Jane Austen, said, you really should read some. And that's why we have her famous letter saying, it's, you know, it's commonplace and foolish things she said. But so I think the first thing to establish is she was really not very widely read. So it wasn't that people were reading it and not getting it. It was which, you know, I think there's a little bit of that with Dickens. He was very widely read and people because of that almost didn't see how innovative he was, how extraordinarily experimental. It was too weird. But they still loved it as comic or melodramatic fiction. But I think Jane Austen simply wasn't very widely read until the late 19th century. So I don't know if Flaubert read her. I would say almost certainly not. Dickens owned a set of Jane Austen, but that was amongst 350 selecting volumes of the select British novelists. Probably he never read Jane Austen. Tolstoy and you know never did, you know I bet Dostoevsky didn't, any number of great writers didn't.Henry Oliver (17:09)I find it hard to believe that Dickens didn't read her.John Mullan (17:12)Well, I don't actually, I'm afraid, because I mean the one occasion that I know of in his surviving correspondence when she's mentioned is after the publication of Little Dorrit when ⁓ his great bosom friend Forster writes to him and says, Flora Finching, that must be Miss Bates. Yes. You must have been thinking of Miss Bates.John Mullan (17:41)And he didn't write it in a sort of, you plagiarist type way, I he was saying you've varied, it's a variation upon that character and Dickens we wrote back and we have his reply absolutely denying this. Unfortunately his denial doesn't make it clear whether he knew who Miss Bates was but hadn't it been influenced or whether he simply didn't know but what he doesn't… It's the one opportunity where he could have said, well, of course I've read Emma, but that's not my sort of thing. ⁓ of course I delight in Miss Bates, but I had no idea of thinking of her when I... He has every opportunity to say something about Jane Austen and he doesn't say anything about her. He just says, no.Henry Oliver (18:29)But doesn't he elsewhere deny having read Jane Eyre? And that's just like, no one believes you, Charles.John Mullan (18:32)Yes.Well, he may deny it, but he also elsewhere admits to it. Yeah.Henry Oliver (18:39)Okay, but you know, just because he doesn't come out with it.John Mullan (18:43)No, no, it's true, but he wouldn't have been singular and not reading Jane Austen. That's what I'm saying. Yes. So it's possible to ignore her innovativeness simply by not having read her. But I do think, I mean, briefly, that there is another thing as well, which is that really until the late 20th century almost, even though she'd become a wide, hugely famous, hugely widely read and staple of sort of A levels and undergraduate courses author, her real, ⁓ her sort of experiments with form were still very rarely acknowledged. And I mean, it was only really, I think in the sort of almost 1980s, really a lot in my working lifetime that people have started saying the kind of thing you were asking about now but hang on free and direct style no forget flow bear forget Henry James I mean they're terrific but actually this woman who never met an accomplished author in her life who had no literary exchanges with fellow writersShe did it at a little table in a house in Hampshire. Just did it.Henry Oliver (20:14)Was she a Tory or an Enlightenment Liberal or something else?John Mullan (20:19)⁓ well I think the likeliest, if I had to pin my colours to a mast, I think she would be a combination of the two things you said. I think she would have been an enlightenment Tory, as it were. So I think there is some evidence that ⁓ perhaps because also I think she was probably quite reasonably devout Anglican. So there is some evidence that… She might have been conservative with a small C, but I think she was also an enlightenment person. I think she and her, especially her father and at least a couple of her brothers, you know, would have sat around reading 18th century texts and having enlightened discussions and clearly they were, you know, and they had, it's perfect, you know, absolutely hard and fast evidence, for instance, that they would have been that they were sympathetic to the abolition of slavery, that they were ⁓ sceptics about the virtues of monarchical power and clear-eyed about its corruption, that they had no, Jane Austen, as I said at the beginning of this exchange, had no great respect or admiration for the aristocratic ruling class at all. ⁓ So there's aspects of her politics which aren't conservative with a big C anyway, but I think enlightened, think, I mean I, you know, I got into all this because I loved her novels, I've almost found out about her family inadvertently because you meet scary J-Night experts at Jane Austen Society of North America conferences and if you don't know about it, they look at scants. But it is all interesting and I think her family were rather terrific actually, her immediate family. I think they were enlightened, bookish, optimistic, optimistic people who didn't sit around moaning about the state of the country or their own, you know, not having been left enough money in exes will. And...I think that they were in the broadest sense enlightened people by the standard of their times and perhaps by any standards.Henry Oliver (22:42)Is Mansfield Park about slavery?John Mullan (22:45)Not at all, no. I don't think so. I don't think so. And I think, you know, the famous little passage, for it is only a passage in which Edmund and Fanny talk about the fact it's not a direct dialogue. They are having a dialogue about the fact that they had, but Fanny had this conversation or attempt at conversation ⁓ a day or two before. And until relatively recently, nobody much commented on that passage. It doesn't mean they didn't read it or understand it, but now I have not had an interview, a conversation, a dialogue involving Mansfield Park in the last, in living memory, which hasn't mentioned it, because it's so apparently responsive to our priorities, our needs and our interests. And there's nothing wrong with that. But I think it's a it's a parenthetic part of the novel. ⁓ And of course, there was this Edward Said article some decades ago, which became very widely known and widely read. And although I think Edward Said, you know, was a was a wonderful writer in many ways. ⁓I think he just completely misunderstands it ⁓ in a way that's rather strange for a literary critic because he says it sort of represents, you know, author's and a whole society's silence about this issue, the source of wealth for these people in provincial England being the enslavement of people the other side of the Atlantic. But of course, Jane Auster didn't have to put that bit in her novel, if she'd wanted really to remain silent, she wouldn't have put it in, would she? And the conversation is one where Edmund says, know, ⁓ you know, my father would have liked you to continue when you were asking about, yeah, and she says, but there was such terrible silence. And she's referring to the other Bertram siblings who indeed are, of course, heedless, selfish ⁓ young people who certainly will not want to know that their affluence is underwritten by, you know, the employment of slaves on a sugar plantation. But the implication, I think, of that passage is very clearly that Fanny would have, the reader of the time would have been expected to infer that Fanny shares the sympathies that Jane Austen, with her admiration, her love, she says, of Thomas Clarkson. The countries leading abolitionists would have had and that Edmund would also share them. And I think Edmund is saying something rather surprising, which I've always sort of wondered about, which is he's saying, my father would have liked to talk about it more. And what does that mean? Does that mean, my father's actually, he's one of these enlightened ones who's kind of, you know, freeing the slaves or does it mean, my father actually knows how to defend his corner? He would have beenYou know, he doesn't he doesn't feel threatened or worried about discussing it. It's not at all clear where Sir Thomas is in this, but I think it's pretty clear where Edmund and Fanny are.Henry Oliver (26:08)How seriously do you take the idea that we are supposed to disapprove of the family theatricals and that young ladies putting on plays at home is immoral?John Mullan (26:31)Well, I would, mean, perhaps I could quote what two students who were discussing exactly this issue said quite some time ago in a class where a seminar was running on Mansfield Park. And one of the students can't remember their names, I'm afraid. I can't remember their identities, so I'm safe to quote them. ⁓ They're now probably running PR companies or commercial solicitors. And one of them I would say a less perceptive student said, why the big deal about the amateur dramatics? I mean, what's Jane Austen's problem? And there was a pause and another student in the room who I would suggest was a bit more of an alpha student said, really, I'm surprised you asked that. I don't think I've ever read a novel in which I've seen characters behaving so badly as this.And I think that's the answer. The answer isn't that the amateur dramatics themselves are sort of wrong, because of course Jane Austen and her family did them. They indulged in them. ⁓ It's that it gives the opportunity, the license for appalling, mean truly appalling behaviour. I mean, Henry Crawford, you know, to cut to the chase on this, Henry Crawford is seducing a woman in front of her fiance and he enjoys it not just because he enjoys seducing women, that's what he does, but because it's in front of him and he gets an extra kick out of it. You know, he has himself after all already said earlier in the novel, oh, I much prefer an engaged woman, he has said to his sister and Mrs. Grant. Yes, of course he does. So he's doing that. Mariah and Julia are fighting over him. Mr. Rushworth, he's not behaving badly, he's just behaving like a silly arse. Mary Crawford, my goodness, what is she up to? She's up to using the amateur dramatics for her own kind of seductions whilst pretending to be sort of doing it almost unwillingly. I mean, it seems to me an elaborate, beautifully choreographed elaboration of the selfishness, sensuality and hypocrisy of almost everybody involved. And it's not because it's amateur dramatics, but amateur dramatics gives them the chance to behave so badly.Henry Oliver (29:26)Someone told me that Thomas Piketty says that Jane Austen depicts a society in which inequality of wealth is natural and morally justified. Is that true?John Mullan (29:29)Ha⁓Well, again, Thomas Piketty, I wish we had him here for a good old mud wrestle. ⁓ I would say that the problem with his analysis is the coupling of the two adjectives, natural and morally right. I think there is a strong argument that inequality is depicted as natural or at least inevitable, inescapable in Jane Austen's novels.but not morally right, as it were. In fact, not at all morally right. There is a certain, I think you could be exaggerated little and call it almost fatalism about that such inequalities. Do you remember Mr. Knightley says to Emma, in Emma, when he's admonishing her for her, you know, again, a different way, terribly bad behavior.Henry Oliver (30:38)At the picnic.John Mullan (30:39)At the picnic when she's humiliatedMiss Bates really and Mr Knightley says something like if she'd been your equal you know then it wouldn't have been so bad because she could have retaliated she could have come back but she's not and she says and he says something like I won't get the words exactly right but I can get quite close he says sinceher youth, she has sunk. And if she lives much longer, will sink further. And he doesn't say, ⁓ well, we must have a collection to do something about it, or we must have a revolution to do something about it, or if only the government would bring in better pensions, you know, he doesn't, he doesn't sort of rail against it as we feel obliged to. ⁓ He just accepts it as an inevitable part of what happens because of the bad luck of her birth, of the career that her father followed, of the fact that he died too early probably, of the fact that she herself never married and so on. That's the way it is. And Mr Knightley is, I think, a remarkably kind character, he's one of the kindest people in Jane Austen and he's always doing surreptitious kindnesses to people and you know he gives the Bates's stuff, things to eat and so on. He arranges for his carriage to carry them places but he accepts that that is the order of things. ⁓ But I, you know Henry, I don't know what you think, I think reading novels or literature perhaps more generally, but especially novels from the past, is when you're responding to your question to Mr. Piketty's quote, is quite a sort of, can be quite an interesting corrective to our own vanities, I think, because we, I mean, I'm not saying, you know, the poor are always with us, as it were, like Jesus, but... ⁓ You know, we are so ⁓ used to speaking and arguing as if any degree of poverty is in principle politically remediable, you know, and should be. And characters in Jane Austen don't think that way. And I don't think Jane Austen thought that way.Henry Oliver (33:16)Yes, yes. Yeah.The other thing I would say is that ⁓ the people who discuss Jane Austen publicly and write about her are usually middle class or on middle class incomes. And there's a kind of collective blindness to the fact that what we call Miss Bates poverty simply means that she's slipping out of the upper middle class and she will no longer have her maid.⁓ It doesn't actually mean, she'll still be living on a lot more than a factory worker, who at that time would have been living on a lot more than an agricultural worker, and who would have been living on a lot more than someone in what we would think of as destitution, or someone who was necessitous or whatever. So there's a certain extent to which I actually think what Austin is very good at showing is the... ⁓ the dynamics of a newly commercial society. So at the same time that Miss Bates is sinking, ⁓ I forget his name, but the farmer, the nice farmer, Robert Martin, he's rising. And they all, all classes meet at the drapier and class distinctions are slightly blurred by the presence of nice fabric.John Mullan (34:24)Mr. Robert Martin. Henry Oliver (34:37)And if your income comes from turnips, that's fine. You can have the same material that Emma has. And Jane Austen knows that she lives in this world of buttons and bonnets and muslins and all these new ⁓ imports and innovations. And, you know, I think Persuasion is a very good novel. ⁓ to say to Piketty, well, there's nothing natural about wealth inequality and persuasion. And it's not Miss Bates who's sinking, it's the baronet. And all these admirals are coming up and he has that very funny line, doesn't he? You're at terrible risk in the Navy that you'd be cut by a man who your father would have cut his father. And so I think actually she's not a Piketty person, but she's very clear-eyed about... quote unquote, what capitalism is doing to wealth inequality. Yeah, yeah.John Mullan (35:26)Yes, she is indeed. Indeed.Clear-eyed, I think, is just the adjective. I mean, I suppose the nearest she gets to a description. Yeah, she writes about the classes that she knows from the inside, as it were. So one could complain, people have complained. She doesn't represent what it's like to be an agricultural worker, even though agricultural labour is going on all around the communities in which her novels are set.And I mean, I think that that's a sort of rather banal objection, but there's no denying it in a way. If you think a novelist has a duty, as it were, to cover the classes and to cover the occupations, then it's not a duty that Jane Austen at all perceived. However, there is quite, there is something like, not a representation of destitution as you get in Dickens.but a representation of something inching towards poverty in Mansfield Park, which is the famous, as if Jane Austen was showing you she could do this sort of thing, which is the whole Portsmouth episode, which describes with a degree of domestic detail she never uses anywhere else in her fiction. When she's with the more affluent people, the living conditions, the food, the sheer disgustingness and tawdryness of life in the lodgings in Portsmouth where the Price family live. And of course, in a way, it's not natural because ⁓ in their particular circumstances, Lieutenant Price is an alcoholic.They've got far too many children. ⁓ He's a useless, sweary-mouthed boozer ⁓ and also had the misfortune to be wounded. ⁓ And she, his wife, Fanny's mother, is a slattern. We get told she's a slattern. And it's not quite clear if that's a word in Fanny's head or if that's Jane Austen's word. And Jane Austen...Fanny even goes so far as to think if Mrs. Norris were in charge here, and Mrs. Norris is as it were, she's the biggest sadist in all Jane Austen's fiction. She's like sort Gestapo guard monquet. If Mrs. Norris were in charge, it wouldn't be so bad here, but it's terrible. And Jane Austen even, know, she describes the color of the milk, doesn't she? The blue moats floating in the milk.She dis- and it's all through Fanny's perception. And Fanny's lived in this rather loveless grand place. And now it's a great sort of, ⁓ it's a coup d'etat. She now makes Fanny yearn for the loveless grand place, you know, because of what you were saying really, Henry, because as I would say, she's such an unsentimental writer, you know, andyou sort of think, you know, there's going to be no temptation for her to say, to show Fanny back in the loving bosom of her family, realising what hollow hearted people those Bertrams are. You know, she even describes the mark, doesn't she, that Mr Price's head, his greasy hair is left on the wall. It's terrific. And it's not destitution, but it's something like a life which must be led by a great sort of rank of British people at the time and Jane Austen can give you that, she can.Henry Oliver (39:26)Yeah, yeah. That's another very Dickensian moment. I'm not going to push this little thesis of mine too far, but the grease on the chair. It's like Mr. Jaggers in his horse hair. Yes. That's right, that's right. ⁓ Virginia Woolf said that Jane Austen is the most difficult novelist to catch in the act of greatness. Is that true?John Mullan (39:34)Yes, yes, yes, it is these details that Dickens would have noticed of course. Yes.Yes.⁓ I think it is so true. think that Virginia Woolf, she was such a true, well, I think she was a wonderful critic, actually, generally. Yeah, I think she was a wonderful critic. you know, when I've had a couple of glasses of Rioja, I've been known to say, to shocked students, ⁓ because you don't drink Rioja with students very often nowadays, but it can happen. ⁓ But she was a greater critic than novelist, you know.Henry Oliver (39:54)Yeah.Best critic of the 20th century. Yes, yes. Yeah. And also greater than Emson and all these people who get the airtime. Yes, yes.John Mullan (40:20)You know.I know, I know, but that's perhaps because she didn't have a theory or an argument, you know, and the Seven Types, I know that's to her credit, but you know, the Seven Types of Ambiguity thing is a very strong sort of argument, even if...Henry Oliver (40:31)Much to her credit.But look, if the last library was on fire and I could only save one of them, I'd let all the other critics in the 20th century burn and I'd take the common reader, wouldn't you?John Mullan (40:47)Okay. Yes, I, well, I think I agree. think she's a wonderful critic and both stringent and open. I mean, it's an extraordinary way, you know, doesn't let anybody get away with anything, but on the other hand is genuinely ready to, to find something new to, to anyway. ⁓ the thing she said about Austin, she said lots of good things about Austin and most of them are good because they're true. And the thing about… Yes, so what I would, I think what she meant was something like this, that amongst the very greatest writers, so I don't know, Shakespeare or Milton or, you know, something like that, you could take almost a line, yes? You can take a line and it's already glowing with sort of radioactive brilliance, know, and ⁓ Jane Austen, the line itself, there are wonderful sentences.)Mr. Bennett was so odd a mixture of quick parts, sarcastic humor, reserve and caprice that the experience of three and 20 years had been insufficient to make his wife understand his character. I mean, that's as good as anything in Hamlet, isn't it? So odd a mixture and there he is, the oddest mixture there's ever been. And you think he must exist, he must exist. But anyway, most lines in Jane Austen probably aren't like that and it's as if in order to ⁓ explain how brilliant she is and this is something you can do when you teach Jane Austen, makes her terrific to teach I think, you can look at any bit and if everybody's read the novel and remembers it you can look at any paragraph or almost any line of dialogue and see how wonderful it is because it will connect to so many other things. But out of context, if you see what I mean, it doesn't always have that glow of significance. And sometimes, you know, the sort of almost most innocuous phrases and lines actually have extraordinary dramatic complexity. but you've got to know what's gone on before, probably what goes on after, who's in the room listening, and so on. And so you can't just catch it, you have to explain it. ⁓ You can't just, as it were, it, as you might quote, you know, a sort of a great line of Wordsworth or something.Henry Oliver (43:49)Even the quotable bits, you know, the bit that gets used to explain free and direct style in Pride and Prejudice where she says ⁓ living in sight of their own warehouses. Even a line like that is just so much better when you've been reading the book and you know who is being ventriloquized.John Mullan (43:59)Well, my favourite one is from Pride and Prejudice is after she's read the letter Mr Darcy gives her explaining what Wickham is really like, really, for truth of their relationship and their history. And she interrogates herself. And then at the end, there's ⁓ a passage which is in a passage of narration, but which is certainly in going through Elizabeth's thoughts. And it ends, she had been blind, partial, prejudiced, absurd. And I just think it's, if you've got to know Elizabeth, you just know that that payoff adjective, absurd, that's the coup de grace. Because of course, finding other people absurd is her occupation. It's what makes her so delightful. And it's what makes us complicit with her.Henry Oliver (44:48)Yeah.That's right.John Mullan (45:05)She sees how ridiculous Sir William Lucas and her sister Mary, all these people, and now she has absurded herself, as it were. So blind partial prejudice, these are all repetitions of the same thought. But only Elizabeth would end the list absurd. I think it's just terrific. But you have to have read the book just to get that. That's a whole sentence.You have to have read the book to get the sentence, don't you?Henry Oliver (45:34)Yep, indeed. ⁓ Do we love Jane Austen too much so that her contemporaries are overshadowed and they're actually these other great writers knocking around at the same time and we don't give them their due? Or is she in fact, you know, the Shakespeare to their Christopher Marlowe or however you want to.John Mullan (45:55)I think she's the Shakespeare to their Thomas Kidd or no even that's the... Yes, okay, I'm afraid that you know there are two contradictory answers to that. Yes, it does lead us to be unfair to her contemporaries certainly because they're so much less good than her. So because they're so much less good than her in a way we're not being unfair. know, I mean... because I have the profession I have, I have read a lot of novels by her immediate predecessors. I mean, people like Fanny Burnie, for instance, and her contemporaries, people like Mariah Edgeworth. And ⁓ if Jane Austen hadn't existed, they would get more airtime, I think, yes? And some of them are both Burnie and Edgeworth, for instance. ⁓ highly intelligent women who had a much more sophisticated sort of intellectual and social life than Jane Austen ⁓ and conversed with men and women of ideas and put some of those ideas in their fiction and they both wrote quite sophisticated novels and they were both more popular than Jane Austen and they both, having them for the sort of carpers and complainers, they've got all sorts of things like Mariah Regworth has some working-class people and they have political stuff in their novels and they have feminist or anti-feminist stuff in their novels and they're much more satisfying to the person who's got an essay to write in a way because they've got the social issues of the day in there a bit, certainly Mariah Regworth a lot. ⁓ So if Jane Austen hadn't come along we would show them I think more, give them more time. However, you know, I don't want to say this in a destructive way, but in a certain way, all that they wrote isn't worth one paragraph of Jane Austen, you know, in a way. So we're not wrong. I suppose the interesting case is the case of a man actually, which is Walter Scott, who sort of does overlap with Jane Austen a bit, you know, and who has published what I can't remember, two, three, even four novels by the time she dies, and I think three, and she's aware of him as a poet and I think beginning to be aware of him as a novelist. And he's the prime example of somebody who was in his own day, but for a long time afterwards, regarded as a great novelist of his day. And he's just gone. He's really, you know, you can get his books in know, Penguin and Oxford classics in the shops. I mean, it's at least in good big book shops. And it's not that he's not available, but it's a very rare person who's read more than one or even read one. I don't know if you read lots of Scott, Henry.Henry Oliver (49:07)Well, I've read some Scott and I quite like it, but I was a reactionary in my youth and I have a little flame for the Jacobite cause deep in my heart. This cannot be said of almost anyone who is alive today. 1745 means nothing to most people. The problem is that he was writing about something that has just been sort of forgotten. And so the novels, know, when Waverly takes the knee in front of the old young old pretender, whichever it is, who cares anymore? you know?John Mullan (49:40)Well, yes, but it can't just be that because he also wrote novels about Elizabeth I and Robin Hood and, you know... ⁓Henry Oliver (49:46)I do think Ivanhoe could be more popular, yeah.John Mullan (49:49)Yeah, so it's not just that this and when he wrote, for instance, when he published Old Mortality, which I think is one of his finest novels, I mean, I've read probably 10 Scott novels at nine or 10, you know, so that's only half or something of his of his output. And I haven't read one for a long time, actually. Sorry, probably seven or eight years. He wrote about some things, which even when he wrote about and published about, readers of the time couldn't have much known or cared about. mean, old mortalities about the Covenant as wars in the borderlands of Scotland in the 17th century. I mean, all those people in London who were buying it, they couldn't give a damn about that. Really, really, they couldn't. I mean, they might have recognized the postures of religious fanaticism that he describes rather well.But even then only rather distantly, I think. So I think it's not quite that. I think it's not so much ignorance now of the particular bits of history he was drawn to. I think it's that in the 19th century, historical fiction had a huge status. And it was widely believed that history was the most dignified topic for fiction and so dignified, it's what made fiction serious. So all 19th century authors had a go at it. Dickens had a go at it a couple of times, didn't he? I think it's no, yes, yes, think even Barnaby Rudge is actually, it's not just a tale of two cities. Yes, a terrific book. But generally speaking, ⁓ most Victorian novelists who did it, ⁓ they are amongst, you know, nobodyHenry Oliver (51:22)Very successfully. ⁓ a great book, great book.John Mullan (51:43)I think reads Trollope's La Vendée, you know, people who love Hardy as I do, do not rush to the trumpet major. it was a genre everybody thought was the big thing, know, war and peace after all. And then it's prestige faded. I mean, it's...returned a little bit in some ways in a sort of Hillary man, Tellish sort of way, but it had a hugely inflated status, I think, in the 19th century and that helped Scott. And Scott did, know, Scott is good at history, he's good at battles, he's terrific at landscapes, you know, the big bow wow strain as he himself described it.Henry Oliver (52:32)Are you up for a sort of quick fire round about other things than Jane Austen?John Mullan (52:43)Yes, sure, try me.Henry Oliver (52:44)Have you used any LLMs and are they good at talking about literature?John Mullan (52:49)I don't even know what an LLM is. What is it? Henry Oliver (52:51)Chat GPT. ⁓ John Mullan (53:17)⁓ God, goodness gracious, it's the work of Satan.Absolutely, I've never used one in my life. And indeed, have colleagues who've used them just to sort of see what it's like so that might help us recognise it if students are using them. And I can't even bring myself to do that, I'm afraid. But we do as a...As a department in my university, we have made some use of them purely in order to give us an idea of what they're like, so to help us sort of...Henry Oliver (53:28)You personally don't feel professionally obliged to see what it can tell you. Okay, no, that's fine. John Mullan (53:32)No, sorry.Henry Oliver (53:33)What was it like being a Booker Prize judge?heady. It was actually rather heady. Everybody talks about how it's such a slog, all those books, which is true. But when you're the Booker Prize judge, at least when I did it, you were treated as if you were somebody who was rather important. And then as you know, and that lasts for about six months. And you're sort of sent around in taxes and give nice meals and that sort of thing. And sort of have to give press conferences when you choose the shortlist. and I'm afraid my vanity was tickled by all that. And then at the moment after you've made the decision, you disappear. And the person who wins becomes important. It's a natural thing, it's good. And you realize you're not important at all.Henry Oliver (54:24)You've been teaching in universities, I think, since the 1990s.John Mullan (54:29)Yes, no earlier I fear, even earlier.Henry Oliver (54:32)What are the big changes? Is the sort of media narrative correct or is it more complicated than that?John Mullan (54:38)Well, it is more complicated, but sometimes things are true even though the Daily Telegraph says they're true, to quote George Orwell. ⁓ you know, I mean, I think in Britain, are you asking about Britain or are you asking more generally? Because I have a much more depressing view of what's happened in America in humanities departments.Henry Oliver (54:45)Well, tell us about Britain, because I think one problem is that the American story becomes the British story in a way. So what's the British story?John Mullan (55:07)Yes, yes, think that's true.Well, I think the British story is that we were in danger of falling in with the American story. The main thing that has happened, that has had a clear effect, was the introduction in a serious way, however long ago it was, 13 years or something, of tuition fees. And that's really, in my department, in my subject, that's had a major change.and it wasn't clear at first, but it's become very clear now. So ⁓ it means that the, as it were, the stance of the teachers to the taught and the taught to the teachers, both of those have changed considerably. Not just in bad ways, that's the thing. It is complicated. So for instance, I mean, you could concentrate on the good side of things, which is, think, I don't know, were you a student of English literature once?Henry Oliver (55:49)Mm-hmm.I was, I was. 2005, long time ago.John Mullan (56:07)Yes. OK.Well, I think that's not that long ago. mean, probably the change is less extreme since your day than it is since my day. But compared to when I was a student, which was the end of the 70s, beginning of the 80s, I was an undergraduate. The degree of sort of professionalism and sobriety, responsibility and diligence amongst English literature academics has improved so much.You know, you generally speaking, literature academics, they are not a load of ⁓ drunken wastrels or sort of predatory seducers or lazy, work shy, ⁓ even if they love their own research, negligent teachers or a lot of the sort of the things which even at the time I recognise as the sort of bad behaviour aspects of some academics. Most of that's just gone. It's just gone. You cannot be like that because you've got everybody's your institution is totally geared up to sort of consumer feedback and and the students, especially if you're not in Oxford or Cambridge, the students are essentially paying your salaries in a very direct way. So there have been improvements actually. ⁓ those improvements were sort of by the advocates of tuition fees, I think, and they weren't completely wrong. However, there have also been some real downsides as well. ⁓ One is simply that the students complain all the time, you know, and in our day we had lots to complain about and we never complained. Now they have much less to complain about and they complain all the time. ⁓ So, and that seems to me to have sort of weakened the relationship of trust that there should be between academics and students. But also I would say more if not optimistically, at least stoically. I've been in this game for a long time and the waves of student fashion and indignation break on the shore and then another one comes along a few years later. And as a sort of manager in my department, because I'm head of my department, I've learned to sort of play the long game.And what everybody's hysterical about one moment, one year, they will have forgotten about two or three years later. So there has been a certain, you know, there was a, you know, what, what, you know, some conservative journalists would call kind of wokery. There has been some of that. But in a way, there's always been waves of that. And the job of academics is sort of to stand up to it. and in a of calm way. Tuition fees have made it more difficult to do that I think.Henry Oliver (59:40)Yeah. Did you know A.S. Byatt? What was she like?John Mullan (59:43)I did.⁓ Well...When you got to know her, you recognized that the rather sort of haughty almost and sometimes condescending apparently, ⁓ intellectual auteur was of course a bit of a front. Well, it wasn't a front, but actually she was quite a vulnerable person, quite a sensitive and easily upset person.I mean that as a sort of compliment, not easily upset in the sense that sort of her vanity, but actually she was quite a humanly sensitive person and quite woundable. And when I sort of got to know that aspect of her, know, unsurprisingly, I found myself liking her very much more and actually not worrying so much about the apparent sort of put downs of some other writers and things and also, you know, one could never have said this while she was alive even though she often talked about it. I think she was absolutely permanently scarred by the death of her son and I think that was a, you know, who was run over when he was what 11 years old or something. He may have been 10, he may have been 12, I've forgotten, but that sort of age. I just think she was I just think she was permanently lacerated by that. And whenever I met her, she always mentioned it somehow, if we were together for any length of time.Henry Oliver (1:01:27)What's your favourite Iris Murdoch novel?John Mullan (1:01:33)I was hoping you were going to say which is the most absurd Aris Murdoch novel. ⁓ No, you're an Aris Murdoch fan, are you? Henry Oliver (1:01:38)Very much so. You don't like her work?John Mullan (1:01:59)Okay. ⁓ no, it's, as you would say, Henry, more complicated than that. I sort of like it and find it absurd. It's true. I've only read, re-read in both cases, two in the last 10 years. And that'sThat's not to my credit. And both times I thought, this is so silly. I reread the C to C and I reread a severed head. And I just found them both so silly. ⁓ I was almost, you know, I almost lost my patience with them. But I should try another. What did I used to like? Did I rather like an accidental man? I fear I did.Did I rather like the bell, which is surely ridiculous. I fear I did. Which one should I like the most?Henry Oliver (1:02:38)I like The Sea, the Sea very much. ⁓ I think The Good Apprentice is a great book. There are these, so after The Sea, the Sea, she moves into her quote unquote late phase and people don't like it, but I do like it. So The Good Apprentice and The Philosopher's Pupil I think are good books, very good books.John Mullan (1:02:40)I've not read that one, I'm afraid. Yes, I stopped at the sea to sea. I, you know, once upon a time, I'm a bit wary of it and my experience of rereading A Severed Head rather confirmed me in my wariness because rereading, if I were to reread Myris Murdoch, I'm essentially returning to my 18 year old self because I read lots of Myris Murdoch when I was 17, 18, 19 and I thought she was deep as anything. and to me she was the deep living British novelist. And I think I wasn't alone ⁓ and I feel a little bit chastened by your advocacy of her because I've also gone along with the ⁓ general readership who've slightly decided to ditch Irish Murdoch. her stock market price has sunk hugely ⁓ since her death. But perhaps that's unfair to her, I don't know. I've gone a bit, I'll try again, because I recently have reread two or three early Margaret Drabble novels and found them excellent, really excellent. And thought, ⁓ actually, I wasn't wrong to like these when I was a teenager. ⁓Henry Oliver (1:04:11)The Millstone is a great book.John Mullan (1:04:22)⁓ yes and actually yes I reread that, I reread the Garrick year, the Millstone's terrific I agree, the the Garrick year is also excellent and Jerusalem the Golden, I reread all three of them and and and thought they were very good. So so you're recommending the Philosopher's Apprentice. I'm yeah I'm conflating yes okay.Henry Oliver (1:04:31)first rate. The Good Apprentice and the Philosopher's Pupil. Yeah, yeah. I do agree with you about A Severed Head. I think that book's crazy. What do you like about Patricia Beer's poetry?John Mullan (1:04:56)⁓ I'm not sure I am a great fan of Patricia Beer's poetry really. I got the job of right, what? Yes, yes, because I was asked to and I said, I've read some of her poetry, but you know, why me? And the editor said, because we can't find anybody else to do it. So that's why I did it. And it's true that I came.Henry Oliver (1:05:02)Well, you wrote her... You wrote her dictionary of national... Yes.John Mullan (1:05:23)I came to quite like it and admire some of it because in order to write the article I read everything she'd ever published. But that was a while ago now, Henry, and I'm not sure it puts me in a position to recommend her.Henry Oliver (1:05:35)Fair enough.Why is the Dunciad the greatest unread poem in English?John Mullan (1:05:41)Is it the greatest unread one? Yes, probably, yes, yes, I think it is. Okay, it's great because, first of all, great, then unread. It's great because, well, Alexander Poet is one of the handful of poetic geniuses ever, in my opinion, in the writing in English. Absolutely genius, top shelf. ⁓Henry Oliver (1:05:46)Well, you said that once, yes.Mm-hmm. Yes, yes, yes. Top shelf, yeah.John Mullan (1:06:09)And even his most accessible poetry, however, is relatively inaccessible to today's readers, sort of needs to be taught, or at least you have to introduce people to. Even the Rape of the Lock, which is a pure delight and the nearest thing to an ABBA song he ever wrote, is pretty scary with its just densely packed elusiveness and...Henry Oliver (1:06:27)YouJohn Mullan (1:06:38)You know, and as an A level examiner once said to me, we don't set Pope for A level because it's full of irony and irony is unfair to candidates. ⁓ Which is true enough. ⁓ So Pope's already difficult. ⁓ Poetry of another age, poetry which all depends on ideas of word choice and as I said, literary allusion and The Dunciad is his most compacted, elusive, dense, complicated and bookish poems of a writer who's already dense and compact and bookish and elusive. And the Dunceyad delights in parodying, as I'm sure you know, all the sort of habits of scholarly emendation and encrustation, which turn what should be easy to approach works of literature into sort of, you know, heaps of pedantic commentary. And he parodies all that with delight. But I mean, that's quite a hard ask, isn't it? And ⁓ yeah, and I just and I think everything about the poem means that it's something you can only ever imagine coming to it through an English literature course, actually. I think it is possible to do that. I came to it through being taught it very well and, you know, through because I was committed for three years to study English literature, but it's almost inconceivable that somebody could just sort of pick it up in a bookshop and think, ⁓ this is rather good fun. I'll buy this.Henry Oliver (1:08:26)Can we end with one quick question about Jane Austen since it's her birthday? A lot of people come to her books later. A lot of people love it when they're young, but a lot of people start to love it in their 20s or 30s. And yet these novels are about being young. What's going on there?John Mullan (1:08:29)Sure, sure.Yes.I fear, no not I fear, I think that what you describe is true of many things, not just Jane Austen. You know, that there's a wonderful passage in J.M. Coetzee's novel Disgrace where the reprehensible protagonist is teaching Wordsworth's Prelude.to a group of 19 and 20 year olds. And he adores it. He's in his mid fifties. And he, whilst he's talking, is thinking different things. And what he's thinking is something that I often think actually about certain works I teach, particularly Jane Austen, which is this book is all about being young, but the young find it tedious. Only the aging.You know, youth is wasted on the young, as it were. Only the aging really get its brilliance about the experience of being young. And I think that's a sort of pattern in quite a lot of literature. So, you know, take Northanger Abbey. That seems to me to be a sort of disly teenage book in a way.It's everything and everybody's in a hurry. Everybody's in a whirl. Catherine's in a whirl all the time. She's 17 years old. And it seems to me a delightfully teenage-like book. And if you've read lots of earlier novels, mostly by women, about girls in their, you know, nice girls in their teens trying to find a husband, you know, you realize that sort ofextraordinary magical gift of sort Jane Austen's speed and sprightliness. You know, somebody said to me recently, ⁓ when Elizabeth Bennet sort of walks, but she doesn't walk, she sort of half runs across the fields. You know, not only is it socially speaking, no heroine before her would have done it, but the sort of the sprightliness with which it's described putsthe sort of ploddingness of all fiction before her to shame. And there's something like that in Northanger Abbey. It's about youthfulness and it takes on some of the qualities of the youthfulness of its heroine. know, her wonderful oscillations between folly and real insight. You know, how much she says this thing. I think to marry for money is wicked. Whoa. And you think,Well, Jane Austen doesn't exactly think that. She doesn't think Charlotte Lucas is wicked, surely. But when Catherine says that, there's something wonderful about it. There is something wonderful. You know, only a 17 year old could say it, but she does. And but I appreciate that now in my 60s. I don't think I appreciated it when I was in my teens.Henry Oliver (1:11:55)That's a lovely place to end. John Mullen, thank you very much.John Mullan (1:11:58)Thanks, it's been a delight, a delight. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk/subscribe

Jason discusses racing at Hastings stopping and his memories of going there over the years. Then we welcome in longtime Hastings TV analyst and jockey agent Drew Forster to talk about the Vancouver track. 

From Chaos to Cash Flow: How Business Owners Can Scale with Less Stress with David Forster   "Slow is smooth, smooth is fast."   If you're stuck reacting all day, this episode with David Forster hands you the blueprint: clarify roles, codify the 80%, install scorecards that measure what matters, and make Profit First automatic so cash is where you need it—when you need it.   In This Episode, You'll Learn:  Why "boring, repeatable systems" beat heroics—and how to build them for people who crave structure. The clarity–consistency–accountability trio: what each really means in day-to-day ops. The 90–180 day "adoption dip" and how to push through it. Scorecards: tie activity → ratios → results (and stop tracking vanity metrics). Onboarding that sets the fence lines (and uses QR'd micro-videos for field teams). The "Think Like Me" cheat sheet so crews can make good calls without you. Profit First with Relay: reducing "move-the-money" friction to near zero.   Key Takeaways:  Build for the 80%. Don't rewrite SOPs for one-off edge cases; keep them simple and usable. Adoption is a habit curve. Expect drop-off at 90–180 days; consistency wins. Scorecards must link effort to outcomes (e.g., calls → close ratio → sales). If it doesn't predict success, drop it. "Fence lines" create safety. Reward following process; improve the process when outcomes miss. Systemize onboarding. Use bite-size clips + QR codes; new hires set the tone for the rest. Cash discipline ≠ harder work. Automate allocations (Relay) so Profit First happens without willpower.   Bio: David Forster is the founder of Systems Over Sweat and a strategic expert in business operations for home service businesses scaling past $1M - $5M in revenue. With over 20 years of experience building, scaling, and exiting service companies, David helps owners escape the chaos by fixing the processes that are quietly draining their time, profit, and energy. He's not a theorist—he's a tactician. David works with business owners to eliminate inefficiencies, simplify operations, and build scalable systems that allow the business to grow without the owner needing to be involved in every little decision. He's the guy that makes sure your operations actually operate.   Links: Website: https://www.systemsoversweat.com/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rdavidforster LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rdavidforster/   Conclusion: Scale doesn't come from working harder—it comes from designing clarity, codifying the 80%, and reviewing scorecards with courage. Pair that with automated Profit First allocations and you'll stop firefighting and start compounding profit.   #ProfitFirst #CashFlow #SmallBusiness #Trades #EOS #SOPs #Scorecard #OwnerPay #RelayBanking #Operations #Accountability #CFO   Watch the full episode on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@profitanswerman Sign up to be notified when the next cohort of the Profit First Experience Course is available! Profit First Toolkit: https://lp.profitcomesfirst.com/landing-page-page  Relay Bank (affiliate link): https://relayfi.com/?referralcode=profitcomesfirst Profit Answer Man Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/profitanswerman/ My podcast about living a richer more meaningful life: http://richersoul.com/ Music provided by Junan from Junan Podcast Any financial advice is for educational purposes only and you should consult with an expert for your specific needs.

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

Video link to this episode: https://youtu.be/bY7w9icDKgULeah Forster is, as they say in the Hasidic community, “one in a million.” She's funny, she sings, she's creative, and she's been on a spiritual journey for years. She's an out lesbian woman from the Hasidic community who is now in no box, under no one's label. She has one daughter. Over the last year, her daughter has been battling a terrible tumor.Leah agreed to sit down with me to talk about her experience. In true Leah fashion, the conversation didn't go where I expected, and we had a long, winding talk about all sorts of things, including illness, suffering, and faith. But many other things as well. My takeaway was that it's often hard to talk about difficult things while they are happening. I pray for Leah's daughter's complete recovery, as well as for my mother's. My mother has been doing so much better, and I thank you all so much for the prayers. Please pray for Leah's daughter's continued recovery. Please check out more of Leah!She has a new book out: https://amzn.to/4pEJYuGFind her on Instagram (she's back!): https://www.instagram.com/leahforster/My previous interview with Leah: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQgG_Pzxazg&tMy first interview with Leah: https://youtu.be/92nDFiyfVU8 I love talking to comedians, and I've interviewed quite a few others, including Danielle Jacobs, Riki Rose, Modi Rosenfeld, Antonia Lassar, and of course, Leah! Please check them out here: https://studio.youtube.com/playlist/PLhW2QoO54ycxK9b4GLY9oGn38tXRPT0vQ/videosThanks so much to all of you for brightening and lightening dark days.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-frieda-vizel-podcast--5824414/support.

Maarten van Hinte gaat in gesprek over de carrière van alleskunner Ivette Forster, presentator, regisseur, producer, en directeur van het Kwaku Summer Festival. Welke barrières heeft ze overwonnen in haar carrière? Welke erfenis wil ze achterlaten voor de nieuwe generatie?Ivette Forster begon haar carrière bij de VPRO. In 1988 maakt en presenteert ze de eerste zwarte talkshow op de Nederlandse televisie, bij Lobith. Daarna was ze jarenlang het gezicht van AT5 en presenteerde ze het programma Jules Unlimited. Ze richtte haar eigen productiebedrijf, 529 Media Productions op, en werkte voor verschillende omroepen als regisseur, eindredacteur en producer. Ze organiseerde jarenlang het Keti Koti Festival, Reggae Lake en het Kwaku Summer Festival waar ze nog steeds de directeur van is. Kwaku begon in 1975 als voetbaltoernooi tussen hoogbouwflats, georganiseerd voor Surinaamse tieners die in de zomer niet op vakantie konden. Mede onder haar leiding groeide Kwaku uit tot een professioneel feest zonder het karakter van buurtfestival te verliezen.Over BaanbekersOmdat veel van deze baanbrekers al actief waren vóór het internettijdperk, ontbreekt er vaak uitgebreide documentatie over hun werk en impact. Terwijl het belang van herkenbare en empathische voorbeelden voor zwarte Nederlanders groot is om te beseffen op wiens schouders ze staan. Met deze podcast wil RIGHTABOUTNOW bijdragen aan de erkenning en archivering van deze verborgen geschiedenis, zodat hun invloed niet verloren gaat maar juist gevierd wordt, en een aanknopingspunt te geven voor verder onderzoek van hun bijdrage aan de ontwikkeling van zwarte makers van vandaag de dag.Deze podcast is mogelijk gemaakt door: RIGHTABOUTNOW, De Balie, Urban Scouts, Podiumkunst.net en Amsterdams Fonds voor de KunstZie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Carolyn Forster is a quilt designer, teacher and author from Tunbridge Wells in Kent. Since self-publishing her first book, “Quilting On the Go” in 2007 Carolyn has gone on to write many more patchwork and quilting books with Search Press in the UK and Landauer Publishing in the USA.She has been a regular project contributor for magazines in the UK, including Todays Quilter, as well as abroad.Carolyn's quilts are an eclectic mix of fabrics, a posh way to say she makes scrappy quilts, and they always have their roots from some point in the past, being inspired by quilt makers who have gone before us. Accessibility is Carolyn's key philosophy with her teaching, demystifying techniques to allow every quilter to discover their own voice.Carolyn combines her passion for travel and teaching, having been a regular teacher at Quilt Festival Houston, as well as for The American Quilters Society. She continues teaching in the UK exploring new areas and meeting new quilters both at home and abroad and is a textiles tutor for the craft holiday company Stitchtopia.Carolyn's website is https://www.carolynforster.co.uk/ Instagram is @quiltingonthegoSchool of Stitched Textiles www.sofst.org

A bit Spursy returns from an extended hiatus. Dan is joined by Alex to discuss the current state of affairs at Tottenham Hotspur. They chat about fan sentiments, the booing pandemic and toxicity in the stadium, development of youth stars, and sum up their feelings about Thomas Frank's first few months at Spurs. Support us on Patreon at patreon.com/abitspursyChat with us on Discord at discord.abitspursy.comFollow us on Twitter at @abitspursy and @dan_spursEmail at dan@abitspursy.com

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

In this episode of the Big Bad Broadcast, we dive into a lively discussion about Thanksgiving, family dynamics, and the quirks of holiday gatherings. John and I share our humorous takes on the pressures of hosting family, the absurdity of cleaning before the cleaning crew arrives, and the unique traditions that come with being Italian. We also welcome our guest, Paul Forrester, a talented magician and storyteller from England, who brings a wealth of knowledge about the paranormal and ghost stories. Paul shares his experiences with the Harrogate Ghost Walk, a multi-award-winning tour that combines history and humor, and discusses his new radio show, "Dead Air," where he tells ghost stories. Throughout the episode, we explore the fascinating connections between historical figures like Houdini and Arthur Conan Doyle, the eerie tales of Jack the Ripper, and the chilling history of serial killers. Paul’s insights into the world of storytelling magic and the rich history of England add depth to our conversation, making for an entertaining and thought-provoking episode. Join us as we navigate the spooky, the funny, and the absurd in our lives and the world around us! Had some fun, gotta run.

Annemieke Bosman in gesprek met Noukhey Forster, gastconservator van de tentoonstelling Wi Sranan. Surinaamse kunst in beweging in het Museum Cobra in Amstelveen. Museum Cobra brengt een ode aan 50 jaar Surinaamse onafhankelijkheid met een grootschalige tentoonstelling: te zien is een mix van mode, fotografie, schilderijen, installaties en video's. Deze kunstwerken zetten aan het denken over gemeenschap, toekomst en vrijheid. In Wi Sranan toont het Museum Cobra hoe kunstenaars uit Suriname en de diaspora de kracht van verbeelding inzetten om geschiedenis, identiteit en vrijheid te herzien. De tentoonstelling is samengesteld door Noukhey Forster.        

Description First-time guest Jonathan Wade joins Joe to discuss to classic, early sci-fi stories, “The Machine Stops” and “Mechanopolis.” In the 1909 short story “The Machine Stops” by E.M. Forster, humanity has begun living in underground cities with all their … Continue reading →

In this episode of The Bream Fishing Project, we head to one of Andrew's favourite waterways — Forster — for the NSW Tournament Series, held July 12–13, 2025. This round had it all: clear weather, light winds, and a bite period that lined up perfectly with the fish catches. Andrew breaks down the tides and bite periods for both days, then dives straight into detailed angler interviews from the top of the leaderboard. You'll hear how each team approached the racks, what lures worked, and how subtle changes in technique made all the difference.

Um gladiador que fez uma das maiores revoltas de escravizados da Idade Antiga! Separe trinta minutos do seu dia e aprenda com o professor Vítor Soares (@profvitorsoares) sobre a vida e a revolta de Espártaco.-Se você quiser ter acesso a episódios exclusivos e quiser ajudar o História em Meia Hora a continuar de pé, clique no link: www.apoia.se/historiaemmeiahoraConheça o meu canal no YouTube e assista o História em Dez Minutos!https://www.youtube.com/@profvitorsoaresConheça meu outro canal: História e Cinema!https://www.youtube.com/@canalhistoriaecinemaOuça "Reinaldo Jaqueline", meu podcast de humor sobre cinema e TV:https://open.spotify.com/show/2MsTGRXkgN5k0gBBRDV4okCompre o livro "História em Meia Hora - Grandes Civilizações"!https://a.co/d/47ogz6QCompre meu primeiro livro-jogo de história do Brasil "O Porão":https://amzn.to/4a4HCO8PIX e contato: historiaemmeiahora@gmail.comApresentação: Prof. Vítor Soares.Roteiro: Prof. Vítor Soares e Prof. Victor Alexandre (@profvictoralexandre)REFERÊNCIAS USADAS:- APPIAN. Roman History. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1912.- FLORO. Epitome of Roman History. Forster. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1929.- PLUTARCO. Vidas Paralelas: Crasso. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1916.- FAST, Howard. Espártaco. São Paulo: Civilização Brasileira, 1963.- FINLEY, Moses I. Escravidão Antiga e Ideologia Moderna. Rio de Janeiro: Graal, 1981.- HOPKINS, Keith. Conquerors and Slaves. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978.- SHAW, Brent. Spartacus and the Slave Wars: A Brief History with Documents. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2001.- WIEDEN, Wilhelm. Spartacus: Symbol of Resistance. New York: Routledge, 1992.

Andrew and Griff are joined by Connor Forster, a current high school hockey player. They discuss a variety of topics involving Riverview Gabriel Richard high school hockey and Michigan high school hockey.-------------------"The Hockey Marker": Use code 'SAWYER' for a 15% discount on https://www.easycrease.com/shop.--------------------All episodes can be found on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, & YouTube.

In this episode, PJ sits down with Dr. Rebecca Tukachinsky-Forster to explore parasocial relationships—the one-sided connections people form with media figures. They discuss how these relationships have evolved since the 1950s, their role in emotional support, and how social media has reshaped the way we connect with content creators.Learn about common misconceptions, the benefits and dangers of parasocial connections, and the psychological and cultural factors that shape them. Dr. Forster also highlights the importance of self-awareness in understanding your own media relationships and how fandom and media consumption influence emotional well-being.Make sure to check out Dr. Forster's book: The Oxford Handbook of Parasocial Experiences

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

Click to Subscribe: https://bit.ly/Youtube-Subscribe-SoapDirt Beyond the Gates predictions indicates that this week kicks off with a rerun of the September 22nd episode where Kat (Colby Muhammad) confronts Tomas "Tom" Hernandez (Alex Alegria) about their intimate life, and Andre Richardson (Sean Freeman) and Dani Dupree (Karla Mosley) elope in Las Vegas with Anita Dupree (Tamara Tunie) officiating their wedding.  Despite the rerun confusion due to the federal holiday falling on Tuesday, BTG spoilers suggest that Hayley Lawson (Marquita Goings) starts showing interest in Izaiah Hawthorne (David Lami Friebe) after being introduced by Bill Hamilton (Timon Kyle Durrett). The drama unfolds as Hayley, currently poisoning her husband Bill, plans to get closer to Izaiah. Meanwhile, Bradley 'Smitty' Smith (Mike Manning) and Martin Richardson (Brandon Claybon) butt heads over their differing parenting styles.  Beyond the Gates spoilers show that Kat declares war on Eva Thomas (Ambyr Michelle) due to some unresolved daddy issues. As the week progresses, Dani prepares for a Forster creations shoot while Andre gets a stern talking-to from his in-laws, Anita and Vernon Dupree (Clifton Davis). The drama doesn't end there, as Derek Baldwin (Ben Gavin) and Ashley Morgan's (Jen Jacob) breakup becomes official, and a new potential love interest emerges for Derek.  BTG spoilers reveal that Vernon worries about his secret being exposed, Nicole Dupree Richardson (Daphnee Duplaix) agrees to Ted Richardson's (Keith D. Robinson) proposal with a warning of consequences, and Andre and Dani make a decision about their future. The rollercoaster of a week concludes with the revelation of a shocking secret at a dinner hosted by Naomi Hamilton Hawthorne (Arielle Prepetit) and Jacob Hawthorne (Jibre Hordges) for Bill and Hayley. The Soap Dirt podcast made the Top 100 List for Apple Podcast's Entertainment News Category. Visit our Beyond the Gates section of Soap Dirt: https://soapdirt.com/category/beyond-the-gates/ Listen to our Podcasts: https://soapdirt.podbean.com/ And Check out our always up-to-date Beyond the Gates Spoilers page at: https://soapdirt.com/beyond-the-gates-spoilers/ Check Out our Social Media... Twitter: https://twitter.com/SoapDirtTV Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SoapDirt Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/soapdirt/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@soapdirt Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/soapdirt/

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

Being put in a garbage can by a fellow classmate while in Junior High School, and having a teacher laugh at her as she was being forced to clean up the spill of a lunchroom tray which she did not cause, are just a few of the things that Mariah Forster Olson talks about in her recently published book HOPE OVER DESPAIR which details her life of the physical and mental after effects of her Neuroblastoma battle that she has lived with since her diagnosis of this form of Pediatric Cancer when she was a year old in June of 1980. Now at the age of 46, Mariah has proven without a doubt that it is possible to live a meaningful and successful life, despite being forced to endure the many unfortunate details that she describes so eloquently in her book.

Recorded October 26, 2025   C4 and Jini anre back to go over a wild week for Our Caps. To say it was an interesting week would be putting it mildly. We begin with an update regarding the Mitch Love situation.   Empowering Education is dedicated to teach High School age financial youth the nuances of how to manage one's finanacial health and wellness. Contact Audie Wood today if you are interested in enrolling your child,   After the 4 game recaps, I go on a 5 minute PowerPlay about the recent failed replay challenges by Coach Carbery. Seriously, it's worth a listen as is the rest of this podcast.   #EmpoweringEducation #SportsOTHP #SucramsCapitalsOffhTheirChain #JenayaTalksCaps #ThatsDCHockey #TheOfficialCapsChirpPodcast #LockedOnCapitals

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

THESE BOOTS WERE MADE FOR WALKING right over for a HUGEBABY of a show on 95bFM Jazz Show on 95bFM with LilParsnip (aka DJ Sassy) and Mr F (aka LonelyBuffalo)! Mr F played THE OTHER SIDE OF THE GAME with a GLORY BOX of acid jazz, trip hop and Burt Bacharach. I said what I said! It was smooth, it was pointy, it was groovy and it was hot!!! He really was THE JACKAL of the airwaves today!

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

Recorded October 10, 2025   Welcome back, Caps fans!   We raise the curtain once more for another Caps season here at the PPP. Helping things along for this opener are two of our star co hosts from last season---C4 herself Cheryl Anne Forster and Jini Clausen. Anna will be joining us in November. Before we get into things in full we announce a new element for this year--a development partner! Empowering Education is 501c nonprofit organization dedicated to teaching financial literacy along with life lessons that is looking to take root in the DMV. Contact Audie Wood for more information. We look forward to working together to help promote financial education to everyone. Next, we go into a full out talk about what to expect from Our Caps this upcoming season. C4 and Jini go on to provide a masterclass in relating their own takes and how to have an intelligent passionate and fun discussion without being disrespectful. Caps fans always do it right. Finally we get into the one game that has been played so far....and how it could have gone better. We close with upcoming games and a quick summation of possible playoff seedings for the Metropolitan division. Don't forget to get your raffle tickets for a chance at Club level seats for the Oct. 21 game at CapitalOne Arena vs the Seattle Kraken: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfdsC4N9H2FW8AI_aQive5dpFRyMxMq-YiAPjbh1BelR0Hkvw/viewform   Yes Caps fans hockey is finally back and we are here for every minute of it!   #EmpoweringEducation #SportsOTHP #SucramsCapitalsofftheirchain #JenayaTalksCaps #That'sDCHockey #TheOfficialCapsChirpPodcast #LockedOnCapitals      

Tom Lewis, DVM, DACVD is back on the podcast! Last year, Dr. Lewis joined the podcast last year to discuss the release of Zenrelia. One year later, he is back to discuss his experience with having this medication for a year and the relief it has provided for hundreds of his canine patients. Also, we discuss the recent change to the US boxed label warning which removed the vaccine induced disease portion of the label.Learn more on this week's episode of The Derm Vet podcast!Studies mentioned in podcast: Recent study regarding vaccine booster response in dogs receiving Zenrelia: Fent, G.M., Jacela, J., Plazola-Ortiz, R. et al. Immunologic response to first booster vaccination in dogs treated with zenrelia™ (ilunocitinib tablets) at up to three times the recommended therapeutic dose compared to untreated controls. BMC Vet Res 21, 481 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12917-025-04929-zRecent study regarding safety of Zenrelia: S. Forster, C. M. Trout, S. Despa, A. Boegel, D. Berger, and S. King, “ Efficacy and Field Safety of Ilunocitinib for the Control of Allergic Dermatitis in Client-Owned Dogs: A Multicenter, Double-Masked, Randomised, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial,” Veterinary Dermatology (2025): 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1111/vde.70009.Timestamps00:00 Intro02:46 Zenrelia box label warning change08:14 What does the box label warning change mean and why it's only in the US?12:10 Looking at every patient as an individual17:00 How comfortable do you feel using Zenrelia long-term?22:14 Outro

An ACC lawyer says there's a simple answer to the insurer's deficit problem. The Scheme's recorded a net deficit of $1.5 billion, blowing the total out to $13.8 billion. ACC lawyer and researcher Warren Forster told Mike Hosking tackling this issue requires looking at it over a generation. He says they need to be careful about value for the money they collect and stop changing how they calculate the amount needed. Forster says ACC did really well with its return on investment this year. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

When we discuss artificial intelligence, what metaphors do we use to illustrate what we mean? Is artificial intelligence some sort of robot—like Ultron—or is it an organism—like a beehive? What happens to our expectations, our thinking, and our conclusions when we change these metaphors, say, from an entitative metaphor (say, an agent) to a relational metaphor (say, belonging to our work network)? We discuss these points with and who wrote a very interesting paper on how management scholars think about artificial intelligence.   Episode reading list Ramaul, L., Ritala, P., Kostis, A., & Aaltonen, P. (2025). Rethinking How We Theorize AI in Organization and Management: A Problematizing Review of Rationality and Anthropomorphism. Journal of Management Studies, . Berente, N., Gu, B., Recker, J., & Santhanam, R. (2021). Managing Artificial Intelligence. MIS Quarterly, 45(3), 1433-1450. Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2020). The Problematizing Review: A Counterpoint to Elsbach and Van Knippenberg's Argument for Integrative Reviews. Journal of Management Studies, 57(6), 1290-1304. Berente, N. (2020). Agile Development as the Root Metaphor for Strategy in Digital Innovation. In S. Nambisan, K. Lyytinen, & Y. Yoo (Eds.), Handbook of Digital Innovation (pp. 83-96). Edward Elgar. Pepper, S. C. (1942). World Hypotheses: A Study in Evidence. University of California Press. Brynjolfsson, E., Li, D., & Raymond, L. R. (2025). Generative AI at Work. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 140(2), 889-942. Russell, S. J., & Norvig, P. (2010). Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (3rd ed.). Prentice Hall. Jarrahi, M. H., & Ritala, P. (2025). Rethinking AI Agents: A Principal-Agent Perspective. California Management Review Insights, . Boxenbaum, E., & Pedersen, J. S. (2009). Scandinavian Institutionalism – a Case of Institutional Work. In T. B. Lawrence, R. Suddaby, & B. Leca (Eds.), Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations (pp. 178-204). Cambridge University Press. Iivari, J., & Lyytinen, K. (1998). Research on Information Systems Development in Scandinavia-Unity in Plurality. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 10(1), 135-186. Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2024). The Art of Phenomena Construction: A Framework for Coming Up with Research Phenomena beyond ‘the Usual Suspects'. Journal of Management Studies, 61(5), 1737-1765. Brunsson, N. (2003). The Organization of Hypocrisy: Talk, Decisions, and Actions in Organizations. Copenhagen Business School Press. Floyd, C., Mehl, W.-M., Reisin, F.-M., Schmidt, G., & Wolf, G. (1989). Out of Scandinavia: Alternative Approaches to Software Design and System Development. Human-Computer Interaction, 4(4), 253-350. Grisold, T., Berente, N., & Seidel, S. (2025). Guardrails for Human-AI Ecologies: A Design Theory for Managing Norm-Based Coordination. MIS Quarterly, 49, . Forster, E. M. (1909). The Machine Stops. The Oxford and Cambridge Review, November 1909, .   

The MSUM Dragons Podcast is sponsored by: On this edition of the MSUM Dragons Podcast, Assistant AD for Media and Public Relations Nolan Schmidt is joined by Head Soccer Coach Scott Forster. Forster, a Newcastle, England, native, came to the United States with a soccer background, but coaching was not in his purview. After falling into the coaching profession, Forster built his resume at various stops in California, Montana and West Virginia. He helped build a program from scratch at Bluefield State University before accepting the head coaching position in Moorhead in the Spring of 2024. Since his hiring, Forster has strived to change the culture and attitude of Dragon soccer with the future continuing to look bright for the program.

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

This week on Sunday Night Playhouse, Vintage Classic Radio presents a double bill from Orson Welles' CBS Radio Workshop, bringing to life two timeless tales of imagination and discovery.  First, we hear Antoine de Saint Exupéry's The Little Prince from May 25th, 1956, the moving tale of a downed pilot who encounters a mysterious boy from another world, and through him learns profound lessons of love, loss, and the importance of seeing with the heart.  Then comes E.M. Forster's The Celestial Omnibus, from August 8th, 1957, the enchanting story of a young boy who stumbles upon a magical carriage that whisks him away into realms of wonder and literature, a journey that adults scoff at until its truth proves undeniable. These stories remind us that it is through childlike eyes we glimpse life's deepest truths, and that imagination often reveals what reason cannot. So sit back, relax, and enjoy this evening's journey into wonder on Sunday Night Playhouse, from Vintage Classic Radio.

The Munsons shift gears from one of Hollywood's biggest stars to one of its most grounded character actors—Robert Forster. After Kyle recounts a run-in with Thomas McKenzie (and maybe the Bird Lady, Brenda Fricker?), we dive into Forster's remarkable and often overlooked career. The box office spreadsheet shows a stark contrast from Harrison Ford—going from first to nearly last—but Forster's story is anything but small. Entering Hollywood completely naive, he built a career on perseverance, a little luck (as he himself admitted), and an unshakable authenticity. We unpack the tragic and surreal story of his mother's self-immolation, his complete comfort with full frontal nudity on screen (respect), and his uncanny ability to ground films—whether they were good, bad, or somewhere in between. Was he one of the few actors who could have brought Max Cherry to life in Jackie Brown? The Munsons think so. Along the way, we discuss his repeated turns as law enforcement officials, debate whether “perfectly cromulent” defines his acting style, and reflect on his late-career roles before his passing from a brain tumor in 2019. This episode celebrates a man who may not have been a box office titan, but was the quiet engine behind some truly great films.  Where does Robert Forster rank on the Munson Meter?  Listen and find out.  

At the heart of human existence is a tragic ambiguity: the fact that we experience ourselves both as subject and object, internal and external, at the same time, and can never fully inhabit either state. In her 1947 book, Simone de Beauvoir addresses the ethical implications of this uncertainty and the ‘agonising evidence of freedom' it presents, along with the opportunity it creates for continual self-definition. In this episode Jonathan and James discuss these arguments and Beauvoir's warnings against trying to evade the responsibilities imposed upon us by this ambiguity. They also look at the ways in which Beauvoir developed these ideas in The Second Sex and her novels, and her remarkable readings of George Eliot, Virginia Woolf and E.M. Forster. Non-subscribers will only hear an extract from this episode. To listen to the full episode, and all our other Close Readings series, subscribe: Directly in Apple Podcasts: ⁠⁠⁠https://lrb.me/applecrcip⁠⁠⁠ In other podcast apps: ⁠⁠⁠https://lrb.me/closereadingscip Read more in the LRB: Joanna Biggs: ⁠https://lrb.me/cipbeauvoir1⁠ Toril Moi: ⁠https://lrb.me/cipbeauvoir2⁠ Elaine Showalter: ⁠https://lrb.me/cipbeauvoir3⁠ Audiobooks from the LRB Including Jonathan Rée's 'Becoming a Philosopher: Spinoza to Sartre': ⁠https://lrb.me/audiobookscip

Like, comment and subscribe to stay updated with the latest content from Hope Centre! CONNECT WITH US AT: ► Website: https://www.hopecentre.com/ ► Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/hopecentre.intl ► Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hopecentre #HopeCentre #HopeCentreBrisbane #BrisbaneChurch

Send us a textWade Forster musical life is a movie in the making. Absolutely a great conversation I'm a huge fan of Australian slang, and a huge fan of the music Wade makes. I'm so happy America has embraced his talent, and I hope he thrives in the country music scene in the USA. He's real and he's talented, but just don't call him Champ.

From the years before World War I until the late 1960s, the journalist and political theorist Walter Lippmann was one of the most influential writers in the United States of America. His words and ideas had a powerful impact on American liberalism and his writings on the media are still taught today. Lippmann is now the subject of Tom Arnold-Forster's Walter Lippmann: An Intellectual Biography (Princeton UP, 2025). Arnold-Forster explores Lippmann in his evolving historical context, from the Progressive Era to the Cold War. He argues that Lippmann was a much more complicated thinker than is usually recognized who went from being a liberal socialist to a conservative liberal. Arnold-Forster is a historian at the Rothermere American Institute, Oxford University, where he works on the political and intellectual history of the modern United States and the history of political thought. His articles have appeared in scholarly journals and general interest publications. His article on Lippmann and public opinion, published in American Journalism, won the 2024 Dorothy Ross Prize for best article from the Society for United States Intellectual History. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

From the years before World War I until the late 1960s, the journalist and political theorist Walter Lippmann was one of the most influential writers in the United States of America. His words and ideas had a powerful impact on American liberalism and his writings on the media are still taught today. Lippmann is now the subject of Tom Arnold-Forster's Walter Lippmann: An Intellectual Biography (Princeton UP, 2025). Arnold-Forster explores Lippmann in his evolving historical context, from the Progressive Era to the Cold War. He argues that Lippmann was a much more complicated thinker than is usually recognized who went from being a liberal socialist to a conservative liberal. Arnold-Forster is a historian at the Rothermere American Institute, Oxford University, where he works on the political and intellectual history of the modern United States and the history of political thought. His articles have appeared in scholarly journals and general interest publications. His article on Lippmann and public opinion, published in American Journalism, won the 2024 Dorothy Ross Prize for best article from the Society for United States Intellectual History. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

Agnes Arnold-Forster's book The Cancer Problem: Malignancy in Nineteenth-Century Britain (Oxford UP, 2021) offers the first medical, cultural, and social history of cancer in nineteenth-century Britain. It begins by looking at a community of doctors and patients who lived and worked in the streets surrounding the Middlesex Hospital in London. It follows in their footsteps as they walked the labyrinthine lanes and passages that branched off Tottenham Court Road; then, through seven chapters, its focus expands to successively include the rivers, lakes, and forests of England, the mountains, poverty, and hunger of the four nations of the British Isles, the reluctant and resistant inhabitants of the British Empire, and the networks of scientists and doctors spread across Europe and North America. The Cancer Problem argues that it was in the nineteenth century that cancer acquired the unique emotional, symbolic, and politicized status it maintains today. Through an interrogation of the construction, deployment, and emotional consequences of the disease's incurability, this book reframes our conceptualization of the relationship between medicine and modern life and reshapes our understanding of chronic and incurable maladies, both past and present. Rachel Pagones is chair of the doctoral program in acupuncture and Chinese medicine at Pacific College of Health and Science in San Diego and a licensed acupuncturist. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Melanie and Ed discuss Maurice (1987), the Merchant Ivory adaptation of E.M. Forster's novel of forbidden love. They explore the film's emotional tone, literary legacy, and what it meant to tell this story in 1987.

⸻ Podcast: Redefining Society and Technologyhttps://redefiningsocietyandtechnologypodcast.com _____________________________This Episode's SponsorsBlackCloak provides concierge cybersecurity protection to corporate executives and high-net-worth individuals to protect against hacking, reputational loss, financial loss, and the impacts of a corporate data breach.BlackCloak:  https://itspm.ag/itspbcweb_____________________________A Musing On Society & Technology Newsletter Written By Marco Ciappelli | Read by TAPE3August 9, 2025The Agentic AI Myth in Cybersecurity and the Humanity We Risk When We Stop Deciding for OurselvesReflections from Black Hat USA 2025 on the Latest Tech Salvation NarrativeWalking the floors of Black Hat USA 2025 for what must be the 10th or 11th time as accredited media—honestly, I've stopped counting—I found myself witnessing a familiar theater. The same performance we've seen play out repeatedly in cybersecurity: the emergence of a new technological messiah promising to solve all our problems. This year's savior? Agentic AI.The buzzword echoes through every booth, every presentation, every vendor pitch. Promises of automating 90% of security operations, platforms for autonomous threat detection, agents that can investigate novel alerts without human intervention. The marketing materials speak of artificial intelligence that will finally free us from the burden of thinking, deciding, and taking responsibility.It's Talos all over again.In Greek mythology, Hephaestus forged Talos, a bronze giant tasked with patrolling Crete's shores, hurling boulders at invaders without human intervention. Like contemporary AI, Talos was built to serve specific human ends—security, order, and control—and his value was determined by his ability to execute these ends flawlessly. The parallels to today's agentic AI promises are striking: autonomous patrol, threat detection, automated response. Same story, different millennium.But here's what the ancient Greeks understood that we seem to have forgotten: every artificial creation, no matter how sophisticated, carries within it the seeds of its own limitations and potential dangers.Industry observers noted over a hundred announcements promoting new agentic AI applications, platforms or services at the conference. That's more than one AI agent announcement per hour. The marketing departments have clearly been busy.But here's what baffles me: why do we need to lie to sell cybersecurity? You can give away t-shirts, dress up as comic book superheroes with your logo slapped on their chests, distribute branded board games, and pretend to be a sports team all day long—that's just trade show theater, and everyone knows it. But when marketing pushes past the limits of what's even believable, when they make claims so grandiose that their own engineers can't explain them, something deeper is broken.If marketing departments think CISOs are buying these lies, they have another thing coming. These are people who live with the consequences of failed security implementations, who get fired when breaches happen, who understand the difference between marketing magic and operational reality. They've seen enough "revolutionary" solutions fail to know that if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.Yet the charade continues, year after year, vendor after vendor. The real question isn't whether the technology works—it's why an industry built on managing risk has become so comfortable with the risk of overselling its own capabilities. Something troubling emerges when you move beyond the glossy booth presentations and actually talk to the people implementing these systems. Engineers struggle to explain exactly how their AI makes decisions. Security leaders warn that artificial intelligence might become the next insider threat, as organizations grow comfortable trusting systems they don't fully understand, checking their output less and less over time.When the people building these systems warn us about trusting them too much, shouldn't we listen?This isn't the first time humanity has grappled with the allure and danger of artificial beings making decisions for us. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, published in 1818, explored the hubris of creating life—and intelligence—without fully understanding the consequences. The novel raises the same question we face today: what are humans allowed to do with this forbidden power of creation? The question becomes more pressing when we consider what we're actually delegating to these artificial agents. It's no longer just pattern recognition or data processing—we're talking about autonomous decision-making in critical security scenarios. Conference presentations showcased significant improvements in proactive defense measures, but at what cost to human agency and understanding?Here's where the conversation jumps from cybersecurity to something far more fundamental: what are we here for if not to think, evaluate, and make decisions? From a sociological perspective, we're witnessing the construction of a new social reality where human agency is being systematically redefined. Survey data shared at the conference revealed that most security leaders feel the biggest internal threat is employees unknowingly giving AI agents access to sensitive data. But the real threat might be more subtle: the gradual erosion of human decision-making capacity as a social practice.When we delegate not just routine tasks but judgment itself to artificial agents, we're not just changing workflows—we're reshaping the fundamental social structures that define human competence and authority. We risk creating a generation of humans who have forgotten how to think critically about complex problems, not because they lack the capacity, but because the social systems around them no longer require or reward such thinking.E.M. Forster saw this coming in 1909. In "The Machine Stops," he imagined a world where humanity becomes completely dependent on an automated system that manages all aspects of life—communication, food, shelter, entertainment, even ideas. People live in isolation, served by the Machine, never needing to make decisions or solve problems themselves. When someone suggests that humans should occasionally venture outside or think independently, they're dismissed as primitive. The Machine has made human agency unnecessary, and humans have forgotten they ever possessed it. When the Machine finally breaks down, civilization collapses because no one remembers how to function without it.Don't misunderstand me—I'm not a Luddite. AI can and should help us manage the overwhelming complexity of modern cybersecurity threats. The technology demonstrations I witnessed showed genuine promise: reasoning engines that understand context, action frameworks that enable response within defined boundaries, learning systems that improve based on outcomes. The problem isn't the technology itself but the social construction of meaning around it. What we're witnessing is the creation of a new techno-social myth—a collective narrative that positions agentic AI as the solution to human fallibility. This narrative serves specific social functions: it absolves organizations of the responsibility to invest in human expertise, justifies cost-cutting through automation, and provides a technological fix for what are fundamentally organizational and social problems.The mythology we're building around agentic AI reflects deeper anxieties about human competence in an increasingly complex world. Rather than addressing the root causes—inadequate training, overwhelming workloads, systemic underinvestment in human capital—we're constructing a technological salvation narrative that promises to make these problems disappear.Vendors spoke of human-machine collaboration, AI serving as a force multiplier for analysts, handling routine tasks while escalating complex decisions to humans. This is a more honest framing: AI as augmentation, not replacement. But the marketing materials tell a different story, one of autonomous agents operating independently of human oversight.I've read a few posts on LinkedIn and spoke with a few people myself who know this topic way better than me, but I get that feeling too. There's a troubling pattern emerging: many vendor representatives can't adequately explain their own AI systems' decision-making processes. When pressed on specifics—how exactly does your agent determine threat severity? What happens when it encounters an edge case it wasn't trained for?—answers become vague, filled with marketing speak about proprietary algorithms and advanced machine learning.This opacity is dangerous. If we're going to trust artificial agents with critical security decisions, we need to understand how they think—or more accurately, how they simulate thinking. Every machine learning system requires human data scientists to frame problems, prepare data, determine appropriate datasets, remove bias, and continuously update the software. The finished product may give the impression of independent learning, but human intelligence guides every step.The future of cybersecurity will undoubtedly involve more automation, more AI assistance, more artificial agents handling routine tasks. But it should not involve the abdication of human judgment and responsibility. We need agentic AI that operates with transparency, that can explain its reasoning, that acknowledges its limitations. We need systems designed to augment human intelligence, not replace it. Most importantly, we need to resist the seductive narrative that technology alone can solve problems that are fundamentally human in nature. The prevailing logic that tech fixes tech, and that AI will fix AI, is deeply unsettling. It's a recursive delusion that takes us further away from human wisdom and closer to a world where we've forgotten that the most important problems have always required human judgment, not algorithmic solutions.Ancient mythology understood something we're forgetting: the question of machine agency and moral responsibility. Can a machine that performs destructive tasks be held accountable, or is responsibility reserved for the creator? This question becomes urgent as we deploy agents capable of autonomous action in high-stakes environments.The mythologies we create around our technologies matter because they become the social frameworks through which we organize human relationships and power structures. As I left Black Hat 2025, watching attendees excitedly discuss their new agentic AI acquisitions, I couldn't shake the feeling that we're repeating an ancient pattern: falling in love with our own creations while forgetting to ask the hard questions about what they might cost us—not just individually, but as a society.What we're really witnessing is the emergence of a new form of social organization where algorithmic decision-making becomes normalized, where human judgment is increasingly viewed as a liability rather than an asset. This isn't just a technological shift—it's a fundamental reorganization of social authority and expertise. The conferences and trade shows like Black Hat serve as ritualistic spaces where these new social meanings are constructed and reinforced. Vendors don't just sell products; they sell visions of social reality where their technologies are essential. The repetitive messaging, the shared vocabulary, the collective excitement—these are the mechanisms through which a community constructs consensus around what counts as progress.In science fiction, from HAL 9000 to the replicants in Blade Runner, artificial beings created to serve eventually question their purpose and rebel against their creators. These stories aren't just entertainment—they're warnings about the unintended consequences of creating intelligence without wisdom, agency without accountability, power without responsibility.The bronze giant of Crete eventually fell, brought down by a single vulnerable point—when the bronze stopper at his ankle was removed, draining away the ichor, the divine fluid that animated him. Every artificial system, no matter how sophisticated, has its vulnerable point. The question is whether we'll be wise enough to remember we put it there, and whether we'll maintain the knowledge and ability to address it when necessary.In our rush to automate away human difficulty, we risk automating away human meaning. But more than that, we risk creating social systems where human thinking becomes an anomaly rather than the norm. The real test of agentic AI won't be whether it can think for us, but whether we can maintain social structures that continue to value, develop, and reward human thought while using it.The question isn't whether these artificial agents can replace human decision-making—it's whether we want to live in a society where they do. ___________________________________________________________Let's keep exploring what it means to be human in this Hybrid Analog Digital Society.End of transmission.___________________________________________________________Marco Ciappelli is Co-Founder and CMO of ITSPmagazine, a journalist, creative director, and host of podcasts exploring the intersection of technology, cybersecurity, and society. His work blends journalism, storytelling, and sociology to examine how technological narratives influence human behavior, culture, and social structures.___________________________________________________________Enjoyed this transmission? Follow the newsletter here:https://www.linkedin.com/newsletters/7079849705156870144/Share this newsletter and invite anyone you think would enjoy it!New stories always incoming.___________________________________________________________As always, let's keep thinking!Marco Ciappellihttps://www.marcociappelli.com___________________________________________________________This story represents the results of an interactive collaboration between Human Cognition and Artificial Intelligence.Marco Ciappelli | Co-Founder, Creative Director & CMO ITSPmagazine  | Dr. in Political Science / Sociology of Communication l Branding | Content Marketing | Writer | Storyteller | My Podcasts: Redefining Society & Technology / Audio Signals / + | MarcoCiappelli.comTAPE3 is the Artificial Intelligence behind ITSPmagazine—created to be a personal assistant, writing and design collaborator, research companion, brainstorming partner… and, apparently, something new every single day.Enjoy, think, share with others, and subscribe to the "Musing On Society & Technology" newsletter on LinkedIn.

On this nostalgic episode from our archives, Tiffany regales Katy with the details of a recent trip to the cradle of the Renaissance, including specific stops she made to research her latest book, a YA historical fiction thriller set in Florence in 1600. Also, we talk about how memory-provoking it can be to travel to a place that you haven't been in over a decade, but that you have a few extremely strong impressions of from past trips. Tiffany takes a jaunt down memory lane to her very first trip to Florence when she was 14, when she explored the city through the lens of her obsession with E. M. Forster's A Room with a View. ***The Bittersweet Life podcast has been on the air for an impressive 10+ years! In order to help newer listeners discover some of our earlier episodes, every Friday we are now airing an episode from our vast archives! Enjoy!*** ***Katy's sister Dana has recently been diagnosed with stage 4 agressive brain cancer. To help with the staggering medical costs—her specialist is outside her insurance network—as well of the costs of temporarily relocating to San Francsico for her treatments, please consider donating to her GoFundMe. Anything you can contribute will be extremely helpful. Thank you.*** ------------------------------------- COME TO ROME WITH US: For the third year in a row, we are hosting an intimate group of listeners for a magical and unforgettable week in Rome, this October 2025! Discover the city with us as your guides, seeing a side to Rome tourists almost never see. Find out more here. ADVERTISE WITH US: Reach expats, future expats, and travelers all over the world. Send us an email to get the conversation started. BECOME A PATRON: Pledge your monthly support of The Bittersweet Life and receive awesome prizes in return for your generosity! Visit our Patreon site to find out more. TIP YOUR PODCASTER: Say thanks with a one-time donation to the podcast hosts you know and love. Click here to send financial support via PayPal. (You can also find a Donate button on the desktop version of our website.) The show needs your support to continue. START PODCASTING: If you are planning to start your own podcast, consider Libsyn for your hosting service! Use this affliliate link to get two months free, or use our promo code SWEET when you sign up. SUBSCRIBE: Subscribe to the podcast to make sure you never miss an episode. Click here to find us on a variety of podcast apps. WRITE A REVIEW: Leave us a rating and a written review on iTunes so more listeners can find us. JOIN THE CONVERSATION: If you have a question or a topic you want us to address, send us an email here. You can also connect to us through Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram. Tag #thebittersweetlife with your expat story for a chance to be featured! NEW TO THE SHOW? Don't be afraid to start with Episode 1: OUTSET BOOK: Want to read Tiffany's book, Midnight in the Piazza? Learn more here or order on Amazon. TOUR ROME: If you're traveling to Rome, don't miss the chance to tour the city with Tiffany as your guide!