Podcasts about Iliad

It's desperate times for the Greek soldiers as Hector leads his warriors against them, determined to burn their ships and maroon them on the Trojan shore.  www.JayLeeming.com

On this episode, my guest is Stephen Jenkinson, culture activist and ceremonialist advocating a handmade life and eloquence. He is an author, a storyteller, a musician, sculptor and off-grid organic farmer. Stephen is the founder/ principal instructor of the Orphan Wisdom School in Canada, co-founded with his wife Nathalie Roy in 2010. Also a sought-after workshop leader, articulating matters of the heart, human suffering, confusions through ceremony.He is the author of several influential books, including Money and the Soul's Desires, Die Wise: A Manifesto for Sanity and Soul (2015), Come of Age: The Case for Elderhood in a Time of Trouble (2018), A Generation's Worth: Spirit Work While the Crisis Reigns (2021), and Reckoning (2022), co-written with Kimberly Ann Johnson. His most recent book, Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work, was released in August 2025. He is also involved in the musical project Nights of Grief & Mystery with singer-songwriter Gregory Hoskins, which has toured across North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand.Show Notes:* The Bone House of the Orphan Wisdom Enterprise* Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart's Work* The Wedding Industry* Romantic Sameness and Psychic Withering* The Two Tribes* The Roots of Hospitality* The Pompous Ending of Hospitality* Debt, And the Estrangement of the Stranger* More Than Human Hospitality* The Alchemy of the Orphan Wisdom SchoolHomework:Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work | PurchaseOrphan WisdomThe Scriptorium: Echoes of an Orphan WisdomTranscription:Chris: This is an interview that I've been wondering about for a long time in part, because Stephen was the first person I ever interviewed for the End of Tourism Podcast. In Oaxaca, Mexico, where I live Stephen and Natalie were visiting and were incredibly, incredibly generous. Stephen, in offering his voice as a way to raise up my questions to a level that deserve to be contended with.We spoke for about two and a half hours, if I remember correctly. And there was a lot in what you spoke to towards the second half of the interview that I think we're the first kind of iterations of the Matrimony book.We spoke a little bit about the stranger and trade, and it was kind of startling as someone trying to offer their first interview and suddenly hearing something [00:01:00] that I'd never heard before from Stephen. Right. And so it was quite impressive. And I'm grateful to be here now with y'all and to get to wonder about this a little more deeply with you Stephen.Stephen: Mm-hmm. Hmm.Chris: This is also a special occasion for the fact that for the first time in the history of the podcast, we have a live audience among us today. Strange doings. Some scholars and some stewards and caretakers of the Orphan Wisdom enterprise. So, thank you all as well for coming tonight and being willing to listen and put your ears to this.And so to begin, Stephen, I'm wondering if you'd be willing to let those who will be listening to this recording later on know where we're gathered in tonight?Stephen: Well, we're in... what's the name of this township?Nathalie: North Algona.Stephen: North Algona township on the borders, an eastern gate [00:02:00] of Algonquin Park. Strangely named place, given the fact that they were the first casualties of the park being established. And we're in a place that never should have been cleared - my farm. It should never have been cleared of the talls, the white pines that were here, but the admiralty was in need back in the day. And that's what happened there. And we're in a place that the Irish immigrants who came here after the famine called "Tramore," which more or less means "good-frigging luck farming."It doesn't technically mean that, but it absolutely means that. It actually means "sandy shore," which about covers the joint, and it's the only thing that covers the joint - would be sand. You have to import clay. Now, that's a joke in many farming places in the world, but if we wanted any clay, we'd have to bring it in and pay for the privilege.And the farm has been in [00:03:00] my, my responsibility for about 25 years now, pretty close to that. And the sheep, or those of them left because the coyotes have been around for the first time in their casualty-making way... They're just out here, I'm facing the field where they're milling around.And it's the very, very beginnings of the long cooling into cold, into frigid, which is our lot in this northern part of the hemisphere, even though it's still August, but it's clear that things have changed. And then, we're on a top of a little hill, which was the first place that I think that we may have convened a School here.It was a tipi, which is really worked very well considering we didn't live here, so we could put it up and put it down in the same weekend. [00:04:00] And right on this very hill, we were, in the early days, and we've replaced that tipi with another kind of wooden structure. A lot more wood in this one.This has been known as "The Teaching Hall" or "The Great Hall," or "The Hall" or "The Money Pit, as it was known for a little while, but it actually worked out pretty well. And it was I mean, people who've come from Scandinavia are knocked out by the kind of old-style, old-world visitation that the place seems to be to them.And I'd never really been before I had the idea what this should look like, but I just went from a kind of ancestral memory that was knocking about, which is a little different than your preferences, you know. You have different kinds of preferences you pass through stylistically through your life, but the ones that lay claim to you are the ones that are not interested in your [00:05:00] preferences. They're interested in your kind of inheritance and your lineage.So I'm more or less from the northern climes of Northern Europe, and so the place looks that way and I was lucky enough to still have my carving tools from the old days. And I've carved most of the beams and most of the posts that keep the place upright with a sort of sequence of beasts and dragons and ne'er-do-wells and very, very few humans, I think two, maybe, in the whole joint. Something like that. And then, mostly what festoons a deeply running human life is depicted here. And there's all kinds of stories, which I've never really sat down and spoken to at great length with anybody, but they're here.And I do deeply favour the idea that one day [00:06:00] somebody will stumble into this field, and I suppose, upon the remains of where we sit right now, and wonder "What the hell got into somebody?" That they made this mountain of timber moldering away, and that for a while what must have been, and when they finally find the footprint of, you know, its original dimensions and sort of do the wild math and what must have been going on in this sandy field, a million miles in away from its home.And wherever I am at that time, I'll be wondering the same thing.Audience: Hmm.Stephen: "What went on there?" Even though I was here for almost all of it. So, this was the home of the Orphan Wisdom School for more than a decade and still is the home of the Orphan Wisdom School, even if it's in advance, or in retreat [00:07:00] or in its doldrums. We'll see.And many things besides, we've had weddings in here, which is wherein I discovered "old-order matrimony," as I've come to call it, was having its way with me in the same way that the design of the place did. And it's also a grainery for our storage of corn. Keep it up off the ground and out of the hands of the varmints, you know, for a while.Well that's the beginning.Chris: Hmm. Hmm. Thank you Stephen.Stephen: Mm-hmm.Chris: You were mentioning the tipi where the school began. I remember sleeping in there the first time I came here. Never would I have thought for a million years that I'd be sitting here with you.Stephen: It's wild, isn't it?Chris: 12 years later.?: Yeah.Chris: And so next, I'd like to do my best in part over the course of the next perhaps hour or two to congratulate you on the release of [00:08:00] your new book, Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work.Stephen: Thank you.Chris: Mm-hmm. I'm grateful to say like many others that I've received a copy and have lent my eyes to your good words, and what is really an incredible achievement.For those who haven't had a chance to lay their eyes on it just yet, I'm wondering if you could let us in on why you wrote a book about matrimony in our time and where it stands a week out from its publication.Stephen: Well, maybe the answer begins with the question, "why did you write a book, having done so before?" And you would imagine that the stuff that goes into writing a book, you'd think that the author has hopes for some kind of redemptive, redeeming outcome, some kind of superlative that drops out the back end of the enterprise.And you know, this is [00:09:00] the seventh I've written. And I would have to say that's not really how it goes, and you don't really know what becomes of what you've written, even with the kind people who do respond, and the odd non-monetary prize that comes your way, which Die Wise gamed that.But I suppose, I wrote, at all partly to see what was there. You know, I had done these weddings and I was a little bit loathe to let go, to let the weddings turn entirely into something historical, something that was past, even though I probably sensed pretty clearly that I was at the end of my willingness to subject myself to the slings and arrows that came along with the enterprise, but it's a sweet sorrow, or there's a [00:10:00] wonder that goes along with the tangle of it all. And so, I wrote to find out what happened, as strange as that might sound to you. You can say, "well, you were there, you kind of knew what happened." But yes, I was witness to the thing, but there's the act of writing a book gives you the opportunity to sort of wonder in three-dimensions and well, the other thing I should say is I was naive and figured that the outfit who had published the, more or less prior two books to this one, would kind of inevitably be drawn to the fact that same guy. Basically, same voice, new articulation. And I was dumbfounded to find out that they weren't. And so, it's sort of smarted, you know?And I think what I did was I just set the whole [00:11:00] enterprise aside, partly to contend with the the depths of the disappointment in that regard, and also not wanting to get into the terrible fray of having to parse or paraphrase the book in some kind of elevator pitch-style to see if anybody else wanted to look at it. You know, such as my touchy sense of nobility sometimes, you know, that I just rather not be involved in the snarl of the marketplace any longer.So, I withdrew and I just set it aside but it wasn't that content to be set, set aside. And you know, to the book's credit, it bothered me every once in a while. It wasn't a book at the point where I was actually trying to engineer it, you know, and, and give it some kind of structure. I had piles of paper on the floor representing the allegation of chapters, trying to figure out what the relationship was [00:12:00] between any of these things.What conceivably should come before what. What the names of any of these things might be. Did they have an identity? Was I just imposing it? And all of that stuff I was going through at the same time as I was contending with a kind of reversal in fortune, personally. And so in part, it was a bit of a life raft to give me something to work on that I wouldn't have to research or dig around in the backyard for it and give me some sort of self-administered occupation for a while.Finally, I think there's a parallel with the Die Wise book, in that when it came to Die Wise, I came up with what I came up with largely because, in their absolute darkest, most unpromising hours, an awful lot of dying people, all of whom are dead now, [00:13:00] let me in on some sort of breach in the, the house of their lives.And I did feel that I had some obligation to them long-term, and that part of that obligation turned into writing Die Wise and touring and talking about that stuff for years and years, and making a real fuss as if I'd met them all, as if what happened is really true. Not just factually accurate, but deeply, abidingly, mandatorily true.So, although it may be the situation doesn't sound as extreme, but the truth is, when a number of younger - than me - people came to me and asked me to do their weddings, I, over the kind of medium-term thereafter, felt a not dissimilar obligation that the events that ensued from all of that not [00:14:00] be entrusted entirely to those relatively few people who attended. You know, you can call them "an audience," although I hope I changed that. Or you could call them "witnesses," which I hope I made them that.And see to it that there could be, not the authorized or official version of what happened, but to the view from here, so to speak, which is, as I sit where I am in the hall right now, I can look at the spot where I conducted much of this when I wasn't sacheting up and down the middle aisle where the trestle tables now are.And I wanted to give a kind of concerted voice to that enterprise. And I say "concerted voice" to give you a feel for the fact that I don't think this is a really an artifact. It's not a record. It's a exhortation that employs the things that happened to suggest that even though it is the way it is [00:15:00] ritually, impoverished as it is in our time and place, it has been otherwise within recoverable time and history. It has.And if that's true, and it is, then it seems to me at least is true that it could be otherwise again. And so, I made a fuss and I made a case based on that conviction.There's probably other reasons I can't think of right now. Oh, being not 25 anymore, and not having that many more books in me, the kind of wear and tear on your psyche of imposing order on the ramble, which is your recollection, which has only so many visitations available in it. Right? You can only do that so many times, I think. And I'm not a born writing person, you know, I come to it maniacally when I [00:16:00] do, and then when it's done, I don't linger over it so much.So then, when it's time to talk about it, I actually have to have a look, because the act of writing it is not the act of reading it. The act of writing is a huge delivery and deliverance at the same time. It's a huge gestation. And you can't do that to yourself, you know, over and over again, but you can take some chances, and look the thing in the eye. So, and I think some people who are there, they're kind of well-intended amongst them, will recognize themselves in the details of the book, beyond "this is what happened and so on." You know, they'll recognize themselves in the advocacy that's there, and the exhortations that are there, and the [00:17:00] case-making that I made and, and probably the praying because there's a good degree of prayerfulness in there, too.That's why.Chris: Thank you. bless this new one in the world. And what's the sense for you?Stephen: Oh, yes.Chris: It being a one-week old newborn. How's that landing in your days?Stephen: Well, it's still damp, you know. It's still squeaky, squeaky and damp. It's walking around like a newborn primate, you know, kind of swaying in the breeze and listening to port or to starboard according to whatever's going on.I don't know that it's so very self-conscious in the best sense of that term, yet. Even though I recorded the audio version, I don't think [00:18:00] it's my voice is found every nook and cranny at this point, yet. So, it's kind of new. It's not "news," but it is new to me, you know, and it's very early in terms of anybody responding to it.I mean, nobody around me has really taken me aside and say, "look, now I want to tell you about this book you wrote." It hasn't happened, and we'll see if it does, but I've done a few events on the other side of the ocean and hear so far, very few, maybe handful of interviews. And those are wonderful opportunities to hear something of what you came up with mismanaged by others, you know, misapprehend, you could say by others.No problem. I mean, it's absolutely no problem. And if you don't want that to happen, don't talk, don't write anything down. So, I don't mind a bit, you know, and the chances are very good that it'll turn into things I didn't have in mind [00:19:00] as people take it up, and regard their own weddings and marriages and plans and schemes and fears and, you know, family mishigas and all the rest of it through this particular lens, you know. They may pick up a pen or a computer (it's an odd expression, "pick up a computer"), and be in touch with me and let me know. "Yeah, that was, we tried it" or whatever they're going to do, because, I mean, maybe Die Wise provided a bit of an inkling of how one might be able to proceed otherwise in their dying time or in their families or their loved ones dying time.This is the book that most readily lends itself to people translating into something they could actually do, without a huge kind of psychic revolution or revolt stirring in them, at least not initially. This is as close as I come, probably, to writing a sequence of things [00:20:00] that could be considered "add-ons" to what people are already thinking about, that I don't force everybody else outta the house in order to make room for the ideas that are in the book. That may happen, anyway, but it wasn't really the intent. The intent was to say, you know, we are in those days when we're insanely preoccupied with the notion of a special event. We are on the receiving end of a considerable number of shards showing up without any notion really about what these shards remember or are memories of. And that's the principle contention I think that runs down the spine of the book, is that when we undertake matrimony, however indelicately, however by rote, you know, however mindlessly we may do it, [00:21:00] inadvertently, we call upon those shards nonetheless.And they're pretty unspectacular if you don't think about them very deeply, like the rice or confetti, like the aisle, like the procession up the aisle, like the giving away of someone, like the seating arrangement, like the spectacle seating arrangement rather than the ritual seating arrangement.And I mean, there's a fistful of them. And they're around and scholars aside maybe, nobody knows why they do them. Everybody just knows, "this is what a wedding is," but nobody knows why. And because nobody knows why, nobody really seems to know what a wedding is for, although they do proceed like they would know a wedding if they saw one. So, I make this a question to be really wondered about, and the shards are a way in. They're the kind of [00:22:00] breadcrumb trail through the forest. They're the little bits of broken something, which if you begin to handle just three or four of them, and kind of fit them together, and find something of the original shape and inflection of the original vessel, kind of enunciates, begins to murmur in your hands, and from it you can begin to infer some three-dimensionality to the original shape. And from the sense of the shape, you get a set sense of contour, and from the sense of contour, you get a sense of scale or size. And from that you get a sense of purpose, or function, or design. And from that you get a sense of some kind of serious magisterial insight into some of the fundament of human being that was manifest in the "old-order matrimony," [00:23:00] as I came to call it.So, who wouldn't wanna read that book?Chris: Mm-hmm.Thank you. Mm-hmm. Thank you, Stephen. Yeah. It reminds me, just before coming up here, maybe two weeks ago, I was in attending a wedding. And there was a host or mc, and initially just given what I was hearing over the microphone, it was hard to tell if he was hired or family or friends. And it turned out he was, in fact, a friend of the groom. And throughout the night he proceeded to take up that role as a kind of comedian.Audience: Mm-hmm.Chris: This was the idea, I guess. Mm-hmm. And he was buzzing and mumbling and swearing into the microphone, [00:24:00] and then finally minimizing the only remnant of traditional culture that showed up in the wedding. And his thing was, okay, so when can we get to the part where it's boom, boom, boom, right. And shot, shot, shot, whatever.Stephen: Right.Chris: There was so much that came up in my memories in part because I worked about a decade in Toronto in the wedding industry.Mm-hmm. Hospitality industry. Maybe a contradiction in terms, there. And there was one moment that really kind of summed it up. I kept coming back to this reading the book because it was everything that you wrote seemed to not only antithetical to this moment, but also an antidote.Anyways, it was in North Toronto and the [00:25:00] owner of the venue - it was a kind of movie theatre turned event venue - and there was a couple who was eventually going to get married there. They came in to do their tasting menu to see what they wanted to put on the menu for the dinner, for their wedding.And the owner was kind of this mafioso type. And he comes in and he sees them and he walks over and he says, "so, you're gonna get married at my wedding factory."Audience: Mm-hmm.Chris: In all sincerity.Stephen: Mm-hmm.Chris: Right.Without skipping a beat. Could you imagine?Stephen: Yeah.I could. I sure could.Chris: Yeah. Yeah.Stephen: I mean, don't forget, if these people weren't doing what the people wanted, they'd be outta business.Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: No, that's the thing. This is aiding and abetting. This is sleeping with the enemy, stylistically-speaking. [00:26:00] The fact that people "settle" (that's the term I would use for it), settle for this, the idea being that this somehow constitutes the most honest and authentic through line available to us is just jaw dropping. When you consider what allegedly this thing is supposed to be for. I mean, maybe we'll get into this, but I'll just leave this as a question for now. What is that moment allegedly doing?Not, what are the people in it allegedly doing? The moment itself, what is it? How is it different from us sitting here now talking about it? And how is it different from the gory frigging jet-fuelled aftermath of excess. And how's it different from the cursing alleged master of ceremonies? How can you [00:27:00] tell none of those things belong to this thing?And why do you have such a hard time imagining what doesAudience: Hmm mmChris: Well that leads me to my next question.Stephen: Ah, you're welcome.Chris: So, I've pulled a number of quotes from the book to read from over the course of the interview. And this one for anyone who's listening is on page 150. And you write Stephen,"Spiritually-speaking, most of the weddings in our corner of the world are endogamous affairs, inward-looking. What is, to me, most unnerving is that they can be spiritually-incestuous. The withering of psychic difference between people is the program of globalization. It is in the architecture of most things partaking of the internet, and it is in the homogeneity of our matrimony. [00:28:00] It is this very incestuous that matrimony was once crafted and entered into to avoid and subvert. Now, it grinds upon our differences until they are details.And so, this paragraph reminded me of a time in my youth when I seemed to be meeting couples who very eerily looked like each other. No blood or extended kin relation whatsoever, and yet they had very similar faces. And so as I get older, this kind of face fidelity aside, I continue to notice that people looking for companionship tend to base their search on similitude, on shared interests, customs, experiences, shared anything and everything. This, specifically, in opposition to those on the other side of the aisle or spectrum, to difference or divergence. And so, opposites don't attract anymore. I'm curious what you think this psychic [00:29:00] withering does to an achieve understanding of matrimony.Stephen: Well, I mean, let's wonder what it does to us, generally, first before we get to matrimony, let's say. It demonizes. Maybe that's too strong, but it certainly reconstitutes difference as some kind of affliction, some kind of not quite good enough, some kind of something that has to be overcome or overwhelmed on the road to, to what? On the road to sameness? So, if that's the goal, then are all of the differences between us, aberrations of some kind, if that's the goal? If that's the goal, are all the [00:30:00] differences between us, not God-given, but humanly misconstrued or worse? Humanly wrought? Do the differences between us conceivably then belong at all? Or is the principle object of the entire endeavor to marry yourself, trying to put up with the vague differences that the other person represents to you?I mean, I not very jokingly said years ago, that I coined a phrase that went something like "the compromise of infinity, which is other people." What does that mean? "The compromise of infinity, which is other people." Not to mention it's a pretty nice T-shirt. But what I meant by the [00:31:00] phrase is this: when you demonize difference in this fashion or when you go the other direction and lionize sameness, then one of the things that happens is that compromise becomes demonized, too. Compromise, by definition, is something you never should have done, right? Compromise is how much you surrender of yourself in order to get by. That's what all these things become. And before you know it, you're just beaten about the head and shoulders about "codependence" and you know, not being "true to yourself" as if being true to yourself is some kind of magic.I mean, the notion that "yourself is the best part of you" is just hilarious. I mean, when you think about it, like who's running amuck if yourself is what you're supposed to be? I ask you. Like, who's [00:32:00] doing the harm? Who's going mental if the self is such a good idea? So, of course, I'm maintaining here that I'm not persuaded that there is such a thing.I think it's a momentary lapse in judgment to have a self and to stick to it. That's the point I'm really making to kind of reify it until it turns ossified and dusty and bizarrely adamant like that estranged relative that lives in the basement of your house. Bizarrely, foreignly adamant, right? Like the house guest who just won't f**k off kind of thing.Okay, so "to thine own self be true," is it? Well, try being true to somebody else's self for ten minutes. Try that. [00:33:00] That's good at exercise for matrimony - being true to somebody else's self. You'll discover that their selves are not made in heaven, either. Either. I underscore it - either. I've completely lost track of the question you asked me.Chris: What are the consequences of the sameness on this anti-cultural sameness, and the program of it for an achieved understanding of matrimony.Stephen: Thank you. Well, I will fess up right now. I do so in the book. That's a terrible phrase. I swear I'd never say such a thing. "In my book... I say the following," but in this case, it's true. I did say this. I realized during the writing of it that I had made a tremendous tactical error in the convening of the event as I did it over the years, [00:34:00] and this is what it came to.I was very persuaded at the time of the story that appears in the chapter called "Salt and Indigo" in the book. I was very, very persuaded. I mean, listen, I made up the story (for what it's worth), okay, but I didn't make it up out of nothing. I made it up out of a kind of tribal memory that wouldn't quite let go.And in it, I was basically saying, here's these two tribes known principally for what they trade in and what they love most emphatically. They turn out to be the same thing. And I describe a circumstance in which they exchange things in a trade scenario, not a commerce scenario. And I'm using the chapter basically to make the case that matrimony's architecture derives in large measure from the sacraments of trade as manifest in that story. [00:35:00] Okay. And this is gonna sound obvious, but the fundamental requirement of the whole conceit that I came up with is that there are two tribes. Well, I thought to myself, "of course, there's always two tribes" at the time. And the two tribe-ness is reflected in when you come to the wedding site, you're typically asked (I hope you're still asked) " Are you family or friend of the groom or friend of the bride?" And you're seated "accordingly," right? That's the nominal, vestigial shard of this old tribal affiliation, that people came from over the rise, basically unknown to each other, to arrive at the kind of no man's land of matrimony, and proceeded accordingly. So, I put these things into motion in this very room and I sat people accordingly facing each other, not facing the alleged front of the room. [00:36:00] And of course, man, nobody knew where to look, because you raised your eyes and s**t. There's just humans across from you, just scads of them who you don't freaking know. And there's something about doing that to North Americas that just throws them. So, they're just looking at each other and then looking away, and looking at each other and looking away, and wondering what they're doing here and what it's for. And I'm going back and forth for three hours, orienting them as to what is is coming.Okay, so what's the miscalculation that I make? The miscalculation I made was assuming that by virtue of the seating arrangement, by virtue of me reminding them of the salt and indigo times, by virtue of the fact that they had a kind of allegiance of some sort or another to the people who are, for the moment, betrothed, that those distinctions and those affiliations together would congeal them, and constitute a [00:37:00] kind of tribal affiliation that they would intuitively be drawn towards as you would be drawn to heat on a cold winter's night.Only to discover, as I put the thing into motion that I was completely wrong about everything I just told you about. The nature of my error was this, virtually all of those people on one side of the room were fundamentally of the same tribe as the people on the other side of the room, apropos of your question, you see. They were card carrying members of the gray dominant culture of North America. Wow. The bleached, kind of amorphous, kind of rootless, ancestor-free... even regardless of whether their people came over in the last generation from the alleged old country. It doesn't really claim them.[00:38:00]There were two tribes, but I was wrong about who they were. That was one tribe. Virtually everybody sitting in the room was one tribe.So, who's the other tribe? Answer is: me and the four or five people who were in on the structural delivery of this endeavour with me. We were the other tribe.We didn't stand a chance, you see?And I didn't pick up on that, and I didn't cast it accordingly and employ that, instead. I employed the conceit that I insisted was manifest and mobilized in the thing, instead of the manifest dilemma, which is that everybody who came knew what a wedding was, and me and four or five other people were yet to know if this could be one. That was the tribal difference, if you [00:39:00] will.So, it was kind of invisible, wasn't it? Even to me at the time. Or, I say, maybe especially to me at the time. And so, things often went the way they went, which was for however much fascination and willingness to consider that there might have been in the room, there was quite a bit more either flat affect and kind of lack of real fascination, or curiosity, or sometimes downright hostility and pushback. Yeah.So, all of that comes from the fact that I didn't credit as thoroughly as I should have done, the persistence in Anglo-North America of a kind of generic sameness that turned out to be what most people came here ancestrally to become. "Starting again" is recipe for culture [00:40:00] loss of a catastrophic order. The fantasy of starting again. Right?And we've talked about that in your podcast, and you and I have talked about it privately, apropos of your own family and everybody's sitting in this room knows what I'm talking about. And when does this show up? Does it show up, oh, when you're walking down the street? Does it show up when you're on the mountaintop? Does it show up in your peak experiences? And the answer is "maybe." It probably shows up most emphatically in those times when you have a feeling that something special is supposed to be so, and all you can get from the "supposed to" is the allegation of specialness.Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: And then, you look around in the context of matrimony and you see a kind of febral, kind of strained, the famous bridezilla stuff, all of that stuff. [00:41:00] You saw it in the hospitality industry, no doubt. You know, the kind of mania for perfection, as if perfection constitutes culture. Right? With every detail checked off in the checkbox, that's culture. You know, as if everything goes off without a hitch and there's no guffaws. And in fact, anybody could reasonably make the case, "Where do you think culture appears when the script finally goes f*****g sideways?" That's when. And when you find out what you're capable of, ceremonially.And generally speaking, I think most people discovered that their ceremonial illiteracy bordered on the bottomless.That's when you find out. Hmm.Chris: Wow.Stephen: Yeah. And that's why people, you know, in speech time, they reach in there and get that piece of paper, and just look at it. Mm-hmm. They don't even look up, terrified that they're gonna go off script for a minute as [00:42:00] if the Gods of Matrimony are a scripted proposition.Chris: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Thank you for sharing that with us, that degree of deep reflection and humility that I'm sure comes with it.Stephen: Mea Culpa, baby. Yeah, I was, I got that one totally wrong. Mm-hmm. And I didn't know it at the time. Meanwhile, like, how much can you transgress and have the consequences of doing so like spill out across the floor like a broken thermometer's mercury and not wise up.But of course, I was as driven as anybody. I was as driven to see if I could come through with what I promised to do the year before. And keeping your promise can make you into a maniac.Audience: Hmm hmm.Chris: But I imagine that, you [00:43:00] know, you wouldn't have been able to see that even years later if you didn't say yes in the first place.Stephen: Oh, yeah. Yeah. And I wouldn't have been able to make the errors.Chris: Right.Stephen: Right. Yeah. I mean, as errors go, this is not a mortal sin. Right, right. And you could chalk it up to being a legitimate miscalculation. Well, so? All I'm saying is, it turns out I was there too, and it turns out, even though I was allegedly the circus master of the enterprise, I wasn't free and clear of the things we were all contending with, the kind of mortality and sort of cultural ricketiness that were all heirs to. That's how I translated it, as it turns out.So, PS there was a moment, [00:44:00] which I don't remember which setting it was now, but there was a moment when the "maybe we'll see if she becomes a bride" bride's mother slid up to me during the course of the proceedings, and in a kind of stage whisper more or less hissed me as follows."Is this a real wedding?"I mean, that's not a question. Not in that setting, obviously not. That is an accusation. Right. And a withering one at that. And there was a tremendous amount of throw-down involved.So, was it? I mean, what we do know is that she did not go to any of the weddings [00:45:00] that she was thinking of at the time, and go to the front of the room where the celebrant is austerely standing there with the book, or the script, or the well-intentioned, or the self-penned vows and never hissed at him or her, "is this a real wedding?"Never once did she do that. We know that.Right.And I think we know why. But she was fairly persuaded she knew what a real wedding was. And all she was really persuaded by was the poverty of the weddings that she'd attended before that one. Well, I was as informed in that respect as she was, wasn't I? I just probably hadn't gone to as many reprobate weddings as she had, so she had more to deal with than I did, even though I was in the position of the line of fire.And I didn't respond too well to the question, I have to say. At the moment, I was rather combative. But I mean, you try to do [00:46:00] what I tried to do and not have a degree of fierceness to go along with your discernment, you know, just to see if you can drag this carcass across the threshold. Anyway, that happened too.Chris: Wow. Yeah. Dominant culture of North America.Stephen: Heard of it.Chris: Yeah. Well, in Matrimony, there's quite a bit in which you write about hospitality and radical hospitality. And I wanted to move in that direction a little bit, because in terms of these kind of marketplace rituals or ceremonies that you were mentioning you know, it's something that we might wonder, I think, as you have, how did it come to be this [00:47:00] way?And so I'd like to, if I can once again, quote from matrimony in which you speak to the etymology of hospitality. And so for those interested on page 88,"the word hospitality comes from hospitaller, meaning 'one who cares for the afflicted, the infirm, the needy.' There's that thread of our misgivings about being on the receiving end of hospitality. Pull on it. For the written history of the word, at least, it has meant, 'being on the receiving end of a kind of care you'd rather not need.'"End quote.Stephen: That's so great. I mean, before you go on with the quote. It's so great to know that the word, unexamined, just kind of leaks upside, doesn't it? Hospitality, I mean, nobody goes "Hospitality, ew." [00:48:00] And then, if you just quietly do the obvious math to yourself, there's so much awkwardness around hospitality.This awkwardness must have an origin, have a home. There must be some misgiving that goes along with the giving of hospitality, mustn't there be? How else to understand where that kind of ickiness is to be found. Right? And it turns out that the etymology is giving you the beginnings of a way of figuring it out what it is that you're on the receiving end of - a kind of succor that you wish you didn't need, which is why it's the root word for "hospital."Chris: Hmm hmm. Wow.Audience: Hmm.Chris: May I repeat that sentence please? Once more."For the written history of the word, at least, it has meant, [00:49:00] 'being on the receiving end of a kind of care you'd rather not need.'"And so this last part hits home for me as I imagine it does for many.And it feels like the orthodoxy of hospitality in our time is one based not only in transaction, but in debt. And if you offer hospitality to me, then I owe you hospitality.Stephen: Right.Chris: I'm indebted to you. And we are taught, in our time, that the worst thing to be in is in debt.Stephen: Right?Chris: And so people refuse both the desire to give as well as the learning skill of receiving. And this is continuing on page 88 now."But there's mystery afoot with this word. In its old Latin form, hospice meant both 'host' and 'guest.'"Stephen: Amazing. One. Either one, This is absolutely amazing. We're fairly sure that there's a [00:50:00] acres of difference between the giver of hospitality and the receiver that the repertoire is entirely different, that the skew between them is almost insurmountable, that they're not interchangeable in any way. But the history of the word immediately says, "really?" The history of the word, without question, says that "host" and "guest" are virtually the same, sitting in different places, being different people, more or less joined at the hip. I'll say more, but you go ahead with what you were gonna do. Sure.Chris: "In it's proto Indo-European origins, hospitality and hospice is a compound word: gosh + pot. And it meant something like [00:51:00] 'stranger/guest/host + powerful Lord.'It is amazing to me that ancestrally, the old word for guest, host, and stranger were all the same word. Potent ceremonial business, this is. In those days, the server and the serve were partners in something mysterious. This could be confusing, but only if you think of guest, host, and stranger as fixed identities.If you think of them as functions, as verbs, the confusion softens and begins to clear. The word hospice in its ancient root is telling us that each of the people gathered together in hospitality is bound to the others by formal etiquette, yes, but the bond is transacted through a subtle scheme of graces.Hospitality, it tells us, is a web of longing and belonging that binds people for a time, some hithereto unknown to each other is a clutch of mutually-binding elegances, you could say. In its ancient practice, [00:52:00] hospitality was a covenant. According to that accord, however we were with each other. That was how the Gods would be with us. We learn our hospitality by being on the receiving end of Godly administration. That's what giving thanks for members. We proceed with our kin in imitation of that example and in gratitude for it."Mm-hmm.And so today, among "secular" people, with the Gods ignored, this old-time hospitality seems endangered, if not fugitive. I'm curious how you imagine that this rupture arose, the ones that separated and commercialized the radical relationships between hosts and guests, that turned them from verbs to nouns and something like strangers to marketplace functions.[00:53:00]Stephen: Well, of course this is a huge question you've asked, and I'll see if I can unhuge it a bit.Chris: Uhhuh.Stephen: Let's go right to the heart of what happened. Just no preliminaries, just right to it.So, to underscore again, the beauty of the etymology. I've told you over and over again, the words will not fail you. And this is just a shining example, isn't it? That the fraternization is a matter of ceremonial alacrity that the affiliation between host and guest, which makes them partners in something, that something is the [00:54:00] evocation of a third thing that's neither one of them. It's the thing they've lent themselves to by virtue of submitting to being either a host or a guest. One.Two. You could say that in circumstances of high culture or highly-functioning culture, one of the principle attributes of that culture is that the fundament of its understanding, is that only with the advent of the stranger in their midst that the best of them comes forward.Okay, follow that. Yeah.So, this is a little counterintuitive for those of us who don't come from such places. We imagine that the advent of strangers in the midst of the people I'm describing would be an occasion where people hide their [00:55:00] best stuff away until the stranger disappears, and upon the disappearance of the stranger, the good stuff comes out again.You know?So, I'm just remembering just now, there's a moment in the New Testament where Jesus says something about the best wine and he's coming from exactly this page that we're talking about - not the page in the book, but this understanding. He said, you know, "serve your best wine first," unlike the standard, that prevails, right?So again, what a stranger does in real culture is call upon the cultural treasure of the host's culture, and provides the opportunity for that to come forward, right? By which you can understand... Let's say for simplicity's sake, there's two kinds of hospitality. There's probably all kinds of gradations, [00:56:00] but for the purposes of responding to what you've asked, there's two.One of them is based on kinship. Okay? So, family meal. So, everybody knows whose place is whose around the table, or it doesn't matter - you sit wherever you want. Or, when we're together, we speak shorthand. That's the shorthand of familiarity and affinity, right?Everybody knows what everybody's talking about. A lot of things get half-said or less, isn't it? And there's a certain fineness, isn't it? That comes with that kind of affinity. Of course, there is, and I'm not diminishing it at all. I'm just characterizing it as being of a certain frequency or calibre or charge. And the charge is that it trades on familiarity. It requires that. There's that kind of hospitality."Oh, sit wherever you want."Remember this one?[00:57:00]"We don't stand on ceremony here.""Oh, you're one of the family now." I just got here. What, what?But, of course, you can hear in the protestations the understanding, in that circumstance, that formality is an enemy to feeling good in this moment, isn't it? It feels stiff and starched and uncalled for or worse.It feels imported from elsewhere. It doesn't feel friendly. So, I'm giving you now beginnings of a differentiation between how cultures who really function as cultures understand what it means to be hospitable and what often prevails today, trading is a kind of low-grade warfare conducted against the strangeness of the stranger.The whole purpose of treating somebody like their family is to mitigate, and finally neutralize their [00:58:00] strangeness, so that for the purposes of the few hours in front of us all, there are no strangers here. Right? Okay.Then there's another kind, and intuitively you can feel what I'm saying. You've been there, you know exactly what I mean.There's another kind of circumstance where the etiquette that prevails is almost more emphatic, more tangible to you than the familiar one. That's the one where your mother or your weird aunt or whoever she might be, brings out certain kind of stuff that doesn't come out every day. And maybe you sit in a room that you don't often sit in. And maybe what gets cooked is stuff you haven't seen in a long time. And some part of you might be thinking, "What the hell is all this about?" And the answer is: it's about that guy in the [00:59:00] corner that you don't know.And your own ancestral culture told acres of stories whose central purpose was to convey to outsiders their understanding of what hospitality was. That is fundamentally what The Iliad and The Odyssey are often returning to and returning to and returning to.They even had a word for the ending of the formal hospitality that accrued, that arose around the care and treatment of strangers. It was called pomp or pompe, from which we get the word "pompous." And you think about what the word "pompous" means today.It means "nose in the air," doesn't it? Mm-hmm. It means "thinks really highly of oneself," isn't it? And it means "useless, encumbering, kind of [01:00:00] artificial kind of going through the motions stuff with a kind of aggrandizement for fun." That's what "pompous" means. Well, the people who gave us the word didn't mean that at all. This word was the word they used to describe the particular moment of hospitality when it was time for the stranger to leave.And when it was mutually acknowledged that the time for hospitality has come to an end, and the final act of hospitality is to accompany the stranger out of the house, out of the compound, out into the street, and provision them accordingly, and wish them well, and as is oftentimes practiced around here, standing in the street and waving them long after they disappear from view.This is pompous. This is what it actually means. Pretty frigging cool when you get corrected once in a while, isn't it? [01:01:00] Yeah.So, as I said, to be simplistic about it, there's at least a couple of kinds, and one of them treasures the advent of the stranger, understanding it to be the detonation point for the most elegant part of us to come forward.Now, those of us who don't come from such a place, we're just bamboozled and Shanghai'ed by the notion of formality, which we kind of eschew. You don't like formality when it comes to celebration, as if these two things are hostile, one to the other. But I'd like you to consider the real possibility that formality is grace under pressure, and that formality is there to give you a repertoire of response that rescues you from the gross limitations of your autobiography.[01:02:00]Next question. I mean, that's the beginning.Chris: Absolutely. Absolutely. Mm-hmm. Thank you once again, Stephen. So alongside the term or concept of "pompe," in which the the guest or stranger was led out of the house or to the entrance of the village, there was also the consideration around the enforcement of hospitality, which you write about in the book. And you write that"the enforcement of hospitality runs the palpable risk of violating or undoing the cultural value it is there to advocate for. Forcing people to share their good fortune with the less fortunate stretches, to the point of undoing the generosity of spirit that the culture holds dear. Enforcement of hospitality is a sign of the eclipse of hospitality, typically spawned by insecurity, contracted self-definition, and the darkening of the [01:03:00] stranger at the door.Instead, such places and times are more likely to encourage the practice of hospitality in subtle generous ways, often by generously treating the ungenerous."And so there seems to be a need for limits placed on hospitality, in terms of the "pompe," the maximum three days in which a stranger can be given hospitality, and concurrently a need to resist enforcing hospitality. This seems like a kind of high-wire act that hospitable cultures have to balance in order to recognize and realize an honorable way of being with a stranger. And so I'm wondering if you could speak to the possibility of how these limits might be practiced without being enforced. What might that look like in a culture that engages with, with such limits, but without prohibitions?Stephen: Mm-hmm. That's a very good question. [01:04:00] Well, I think your previous question was what happened? I think, in a nutshell, and I didn't really answer that, so maybe see how I can use this question to answer the one that you asked before: what happened? So, there's no doubt in my mind that something happened that it's kind of demonstrable, if only with the benefit of hindsight.Audience: Right.Stephen: Or we can feel our way around the edges of the absence of the goneness of that thing that gives us some feel for the original shape of that thing.So you could say I'm trafficking in "ideals," here, and after a fashion, maybe, yeah. But the notion of "ideals," when it's used in this slanderous way suggests that "it was never like that."Chris: Mm-hmm.Stephen: And I suggest to you it's been like that in a lot of places, and there's a lot of places where it's still like that, although globalization [01:05:00] may be the coup de grâce performed upon this capacity. Okay. But anyway.Okay. So what happened? Well, you see in the circumstance that I described, apropos of the stranger, the stranger is in on it. The stranger's principle responsibility is to be the vector for this sort of grandiose generosity coming forward, and to experience that in a burdensome and unreciprocated fashion, until you realize that their willingness to do that is their reciprocity. Everybody doesn't get to do everything at once. You can't give and receive at the same time. You know what that's called? "Secret Santa at school," isn't it?That's where nobody owes nobody nothing at the end. That's what we're all after. I mean, one of your questions, you know, pointed to that, that there's a kind of, [01:06:00] what do you call that, teeter-totter balance between what people did for each other and what they received for each other. Right. And nobody feels slighted in any way, perfect balance, et cetera.Well, the circumstance here has nothing of the kind going with it. The circumstance we're describing now is one in which the hospitality is clearly unequal in terms of who's eating whose food, for example, in terms of the absolutely frustrated notion of reciprocity, that in fact you undo your end of the hospitality by trying to pay back, or give back, or pay at all, or break even, or not feel the burden of "God, you've been on the take for fricking hours here now." And if you really look in the face of the host, I mean, they're just getting started and you can't, you can't take it anymore.[01:07:00]So, one of the ways that we contend with this is through habits of speech. So, if somebody comes around with seconds. They say, "would you like a little more?"And you say, "I'm good. I'm good. I'm good." You see, "I'm good" is code for what? "F**k off." That's what it's code for. It's a little strong. It's a little strong. What I mean is, when "I'm good" comes to town, it means I don't need you and what you have. Good God, you're not there because you need it you knucklehead. You're there because they need it, because their culture needs an opportunity to remember itself. Right?Okay. So what happened? Because you're making it sound like a pretty good thing, really. Like who would say, "I think we've had enough of this hospitality thing, don't you? Let's try, oh, [01:08:00] keeping our s**t to ourselves. That sounds like a good alternative. Let's give it a week or two, see how it rolls." Never happened. Nobody decided to do this - this change, I don't think. I think the change happened, and sometime long after people realized that the change had had taken place. And it's very simple. The change, I think, went something like this.As long as the guest is in on it, there's a shared and mutually-held understanding that doesn't make them the same. It makes them to use the quote from the book "partners," okay, with different tasks to bring this thing to light, to make it so. What does that require? A mutually-held understanding in vivo as it's happening, what it is.Okay. [01:09:00] So, that the stranger who's not part of the host culture... sorry, let me say this differently.The culture of the stranger has made the culture of the host available to the stranger no matter how personally adept he or she may be at receiving. Did you follow that?Audience: A little.Stephen: Okay. Say it again?Audience: Yes, please.Stephen: Okay. The acculturation, the cultured sophistication of the stranger is at work in his or her strangerhood. Okay. He or she's not at home, but their cultural training helps them understand what their obligations are in terms of this arrangement we've been describing here.Okay, so I think the rupture takes place [01:10:00] when the culturation of one side or the other fails to make the other discernible to the one.One more time?When something happens whereby the acculturation of one of the partners makes the identity, the presence, and the valence of the other one untranslatable. Untranslatable.I could give you an example from what I call " the etiquette of trade," or the... what was the word? Not etiquette. What's the other word?Chris: The covenant?Stephen: Okay, " covenant of trade" we'll call it. So, imagine that people are sitting across from each other, two partners in a trade. Okay? [01:11:00] Imagine that they have one thing to sell or move or exchange and somebody has something else.How does this work? Not "what are the mechanics?" That can be another discussion, but, if this works, how does it work? Not "how does it happen?" How does it actually achieve what they're after? Maybe it's something like this.I have this pottery, and even though you're not a potter, but somebody in your extended family back home was, and you watched what they went through to make a fricking pot, okay?You watched how their hands seized up, because the clay leached all the moisture out of the hands. You distinctly remember that - how the old lady's hands looked cracked and worn, and so from the work of making vessels of hospitality, okay? [01:12:00] It doesn't matter that you didn't make it yourself. The point is you recognize in the item something we could call "cultural patrimony."You recognize the deep-runningness of the culture opposite you as manifest and embodied in this item for trade. Okay? So, the person doesn't have to "sell you" because your cultural sophistication makes this pot on the other side available to you for the deeply venerable thing that it is. Follow what I'm saying?Okay. So, you know what I'm gonna say next? When something happens, the items across from you cease to speak, cease to have their stories come along with them, cease to be available. There's something about your cultural atrophy that you project onto the [01:13:00] item that you don't recognize.You don't recognize it's valence, it's proprieties, it's value, it's deep-running worth and so on. Something happened, okay? And because you're not making your own stuff back home or any part of it. And so now, when you're in a circumstance like this and you're just trying to get this pot, but you know nothing about it, then the enterprise becomes, "Okay, so what do you have to part with to obtain the pot?"And the next thing is, you pretend you're not interested in obtaining the pot to obtain the pot. That becomes part of the deal. And then, the person on the making end feels the deep running slight of your disinterest, or your vague involvement in the proceedings, or maybe the worst: when it's not things you're going back and forth with, but there's a third thing called money, which nobody makes, [01:14:00] which you're not reminded of your grandma or anyone else's with the money. And then, money becomes the ghost of the original understanding of the cultural patrimony that sat between you. That's what happened, I'm fairly sure: the advent, the estrangement that comes with the stranger, instead of the opportunity to be your cultural best when the stranger comes.And then of course, it bleeds through all kinds of transactions beyond the "obvious material ones." So, it's a rupture in translatability, isn't it?Chris: You understand this to happen or have happened historically, culturally, et cetera, with matrimony as well?Stephen: Oh, absolutely. Yeah.Yeah. This is why, for example, things like the fetishization of virginity.Audience: Mm-hmm. [01:15:00]Stephen: I think it's traceable directly to what we're talking about. How so? Oh, this is a whole other long thing, but the very short version would be this.Do you really believe that through all of human history until the recent liberation, that people have forever fetishized the virginity of a young woman and jealously defended it, the "men" in particular, and that it became a commodity to trade back and forth in, and that it had to be prodded and poked at to determine its intactness? And this was deemed to be, you know, honourable behavior?Do you really think that's the people you come from, that they would've do that to the most cherished of their [01:16:00] own, barely pubescent girls? Come on now. I'm not saying it didn't happen and doesn't still happen. I'm not saying that. I'm saying, God almighty, something happened for that to be so.And I'm trying to allude to you now what I think took place. Then all of a sudden, the hymen takes the place of the pottery, doesn't it? And it becomes universally translatable. Doesn't it? It becomes a kind of a ghosted artifact of a culturally-intact time. It's as close as you can get.Hence, this allegation of its purity, or the association with purity, and so on. [01:17:00] I mean, there's lots to say, but that gives you a feel for what might have happened there.Chris: Thank you, Stephen. Thank you for being so generous with your considerations here.Stephen: You see why I had to write a book, eh?Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: There was too much bouncing around. Like I had to just keep track of my own thoughts on the matter.But can you imagine all of this at play in the year, oh, I don't know, 2022, trying to put into motion a redemptive passion play called "matrimony," with all of this at play? Not with all of this in my mind, but with all of this actually disfiguring the anticipation of the proceedings for the people who came.Can you imagine? Can you imagine trying to pull it off, and [01:18:00] contending overtly with all these things and trying to make room for them in a moment that's supposed to be allegedly - get ready for it - happy.I should have raised my rates on the first day, trying to pull that off.But anyway.Okay, you go now,Chris: Maybe now you'll have the opportunity.Stephen: No, man. No. I'm out of the running for that. "Pompe" has come and come and gone. Mm.Chris: So, in matrimony, Stephen, you write that"the brevity, the brevity of modern ceremonies is really there to make sure that nothing happens, nothing of substance, nothing of consequence, no alchemy, no mystery, no crazy other world stuff. That overreach there in its scripted heart tells me that deep in the rayon-wrapped bosom of that special day, the modern wedding is scared [01:19:00] silly of something happening. That's because it has an ages-old abandoned memory of a time when a wedding was a place where the Gods came around, where human testing and trying and making was at hand, when the dead lingered in the wings awaiting their turn to testify and inveigh."Gorgeous. Gorgeous.Audience: Mm-hmm.Chris: And so I'm curious ifStephen: "Rayon-wrapped bosom." That's not, that's not shabby.Chris: "Rayon-wrapped bosom of that special day." Yeah.So, I'm curious do you think the more-than-human world practices matrimony, and if so, what, if anything, might you have learned about matrimony from the more-than-human world?Stephen: I would say the reverse. I would say, we practice the more-than-human world in matrimony, not that the more-than-human world practices matrimony. We practice them, [01:20:00] matrimonially.Next. Okay. Or no? I just gonna say that, that's pretty good.Well, where do we get our best stuff from? Let's just wonder that. Do we get our best stuff from being our best? Well, where does that come from? And this is a bit of a barbershop mirrors situation here, isn't it? To, to back, back, back, back.If you're thinking of time, you can kind of get lost in that generation before, or before, before, before. And it starts to sound like one of them biblical genealogies. But if you think of it as sort of the flash point of multiple presences, if you think of it that way, then you come to [01:21:00] credit the real possibility that your best stuff comes from you being remembered by those who came before you.Audience: Hmm.Stephen: Now just let that sit for a second, because what I just said is logically-incompatible.Okay? You're being remembered by people who came before you. That's not supposed to work. It doesn't work that way. Right?"Anticipated," maybe, but "remembered?" How? Well, if you credit the possibility of multiple beginnings, that's how. Okay. I'm saying that your best stuff, your best thoughts, not the most noble necessarily. I would mean the most timely, [01:22:00] the ones that seem most needed, suddenly.You could take credit and sure. Why, why not? Because ostensibly, it arrives here through you, but if you're frank with yourself, you know that you didn't do that on command, right? I mean, you could say, I just thought of it, but you know in your heart that it was thought of and came to you.I don't think there's any difference between saying that and saying you were thought of.Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: So, that's what I think the rudiments of old-order matrimony are. They are old people and their benefactors in the food chain and spiritually speaking. Old people and their benefactors, the best part of them [01:23:00] willed to us, entrusted and willed to us. So, when you are willing to enter into the notion that old-order matrimony is older than you, older than your feelings for the other person, older than your love, and your commitment, and your willingness to make the vows and all that stuff, then you're crediting the possibility that your love is not the beginning of anything.You see. Your love is the advent of something, and I use that word deliberately in its Christian notion, right? It's the oncomingness, the eruption into the present day of something, which turns out to be hugely needed and deeply unsuspected at the same time.I used to ask in the school, "can you [01:24:00] have a memory of something you have no lived experience of?" I think that's what the best part of you is. I'm not saying the rest of you is shite. I'm not saying that. You could say that, but I am saying that when I say "the best part of you," that needs a lot of translating, doesn't it?But the gist of it is that the best part of you is entrusted to you. It's not your creation, it's your burden, your obligation, your best chance to get it right. And that's who we are to those who came before us. We are their chance to get it right, and matrimony is one of the places where you practice the gentle art of getting it right.[01:25:00] Another decent reason to write a book.Chris: So, gorgeous. Wow. Thank you Stephen. I might have one more question.Stephen: Okay. I might have one more answer. Let's see.Chris: Alright. Would I be able to ask if dear Nathalie Roy could join us up here alongside your good man.So, returning to Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart's Work. On page 94, [01:26:00] Stephen, you write that"hospitality of the radical kind is

The Trojan War is one of the great foundational stories of Western literature - a tale of gods and heroes, betrayal and siege, immortalised by Homer in the Iliad. But was it mere myth, or did it spring from real events in a real place?Today we're joined by Eric H. Cline, a professor of ancient history and archaeology at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C.. He digs into the evidence, from ancient poetry to archaeological discoveries at Troy, to explain whether there's historical truth behind the legend.Produced by James Hickmann and edited by Dougal Patmore.We'd love to hear your feedback - you can take part in our podcast survey here: https://insights.historyhit.com/history-hit-podcast-always-on.You can also email the podcast directly at ds.hh@historyhit.com. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We'll be visiting 8 lost cities over the next couple of weeks! This week we'll journey to an ancient city of mythic proportions that most thought to be fictional until it was actually discovered in the mid 1800s: Troy of Homer's Iliad fame. Next we'll make our way to southern Pakistan to explore the ruins of the completely unknown and yet stunningly advanced city of Mohenjo Daro. Then we'll hop the pond to the jungles of Guatemala to get lost in the sprawling Maya capital city of El Mirador. And finally, we'll revisit Pompeii, an ancient Roman time capsule completely preserved in volcanic ash. Support the show! Join the Patreon (patreon.com/historyfixpodcast)Buy some merchBuy Me a CoffeeVenmo @Shea-LaFountaineSources: The British Museum "The search for the lost city of Troy"BBC "Did the Trojan War actually happen?BBC "Pakistan's lost city of 40,000 people"National Geographic "Recovering the lost city of Mohenjo Daro"Smithsonian Magazine "El Mirador, the Lost City of the Maya"Wikipedia "El Mirador"History Fix Episode 18 "Pompeii"Shoot me a message!

Welcome back to Snafu with Robin Zander. In this episode, I'm talking with Bobby Podesta, longtime Pixar animator and storyteller. We dig into why storytelling and art matter, and why finding your own voice is more important than copying anyone else. Bobby opens up about his journey as an artist, the imposter syndrome he's faced, and how he learned to create art in a style that's truly his. We talk about how he turned a written novel into a graphic novel, translating dialogue and descriptions into illustrations along the way. He shares lessons from his college design teacher about noticing the art all around us—not just in museums or galleries. We also explore how design and storytelling balance function and emotion, in ways you might not even realize in everyday life. Bobby's story shows that creativity isn't about perfection – it's about showing up and being authentic. He gives a fresh perspective on how storytelling shapes the way we see the world and connect with others. This episode is full of insights for anyone who cares about art, design, and telling stories that matter. 00:00 Start 03:13 The Importance of Human Connection in Storytelling Bobby on storytelling Background: 30 years in film, always thinking about story structure. Drama is about “what you're both keeping back and what you're waiting to surprise your audience with.” Steve Jobs anecdote Jobs builds suspense with “one more thing.” On stage, he asks: “Has anyone ever wondered what this small pocket is for?” (the tiny jeans pocket). Instead of something expected like a coin, he pulls out “the world's smallest iPod and people flip out.” Why it works: audience knows the pocket's size → no need to explain iPod's dimensions. Structure: setup → familiar norm → question → twist → payoff. Bobby's takeaway: “That's really good storytelling, man. It's really good storytelling.” “People call him a salesperson. Like he's a great salesman. He's a great storyteller. If you can tell a good story, you're pulling people in. That's the key.” Robin on storytelling & AI His work is making commercials and mini-docs for startups. Says video itself doesn't matter as much as impact: “What I care about is changing human behavior and changing human emotion.” Believes the value of human storytelling is timeless: “The value of sitting at Homer's feet and listening to him recite the Iliad is never going to go away.” Bobby on storytelling & art Storytelling = fundamental way to convey and connect. Sees it like art: “Art is a way to express your opinion and how you process the world around you in a manner that hopefully other people can experience and relate to.” Calls art his “oldest friend, who I've probably treated the worst… neglected, starved, and then expect it to show up and perform.” Believes everyone can create: “Art is not a zero-sum game… art is ultimately subjective because art is an opinion about how you see the world.” Goal of art/storytelling: help others “find some relationship to the world around them through it.” 06:01 Art as a Form of Expression Robin's setup Grew up between an artist mother and entrepreneur father – “perfect intersection” of art + business. Distinguishes museum art (“old, on walls”) from art that's “around us all the time.” Points out modern communicators (Musk, Trump) as powerful storytellers/branders – even if you disagree with the content, “that is great art in the form of good communication.” Asks: why do we separate “high” art (Iliad, museums) from everyday, cultural storytelling (Pixar, branding)? Art is everywhere Bobby uses the car-buying analogy to explain awareness: “You're looking for a midsize pickup and suddenly you see them everywhere. They didn't just appear. You're just paying attention.” Art works the same way – once you start noticing, you realize it's all around you. Lesson from a design teacher: “If it wasn't dug up or grown, it's designed.” Everything man-made carries intention – and therefore, art. Pushes back on the museum-only view of art: “Saying art is only in museums is like saying there are only cars at dealerships. There are cars everywhere. There's art everywhere.” Examples of art woven into daily life: Clothing, headphones, glasses Desks, chairs, pottery, textiles Buildings, skylines, sidewalk prints Freeway dividers, lamps Even tools: “Go get a hammer. The handle's probably painted a color. It may be a penny's worth of art, but it's art, man.” Definition of art: “All these things are working with that balance between functionality and making you feel something.” Even branding choices – a color, a shape – are designed to evoke feeling. Perspective shift: Once you adjust your lens, “there's a lot of art out there. It's really, really amazing.” 12:04 The Relationship Between Artist and Art Bobby compares practice to a relationship: “It's like the people that love you the most, sometimes you treat the worst.” Practice is like a loyal friend or character always waiting: Wants to be fed, but often ignored. Always ready to show up again. “It's like that little character that shows up and is always there to help you out.” Robin asks if practice is a character on his shoulder. Bobby: “It probably is… but I love it. If there's a napkin, I'll doodle.” Art as a shared childhood language: Everyone starts out drawing: “Have you ever met an adult who didn't draw as a kid? Everyone says yes.” Drawing is how children interpret the world. Family encouragement made “the artist” part of his identity. Becoming a writer: Took a UC Berkeley Extension class called “Finishing the Novel.” Professor's advice: “You're all taking classes. None of you are professionals. Go form a writers' group.” Writers' group provided accountability → led to a first draft. Draft → literary agent → graphic novel → published book. “Flash forward all these years later and I have a book that comes out… I guess I'm an author.” Lessons on growth and identity: Identity comes from practice and persistence, not instant recognition. Progress isn't linear: “The road is not a straight line.” Common trap: believing “I should have been there already.” Bobby reframes time: “You can often have what you want, or you can have something when you want it. But you can rarely have what you want when you want it.” Letting go of rigid timelines gives a better chance of arriving. 18:01 The Process of Creating a Graphic Novel Robin asks why this story, why now, and why as a debut novel. Bobby admits he had played with different story ideas before. Thought to himself: “If I only have one chance to do this, what story do I want to tell?” Origin spark: a daydream while driving. “What if an animal just jumped out in front of me?” What if it leapt into the air and flew away? “What if that animal was a reindeer?” Question: what would a reindeer be doing here? That “what if” became the seed of the story. Bobby folded parts of himself into the idea. Loves holiday stories and movies → wanted to write one. Describes storytelling as crafting from a “pantry of experiences.” Not autobiography or documentary, but infused with pieces of his life. Details of the novel: Protagonist is an 11-year-old girl in 1955 Colorado. Bobby: “I was neither alive in 1955, nor have I ever been an 11-year-old girl, nor have I found a flying reindeer — spoiler alert.” Still, fragments of his own experiences and emotions shape the narrative. Goal as an author: To blend reality with imagination. To create something unique, fresh, and able to stand on its own. 20:58 Visual Storytelling vs. Written Storytelling Robin asks about storytelling: what's similar between Steve Jobs' two-minute iPod reveal and a 350-page graphic novel? Bobby: scale is different, but fundamentals are the same. Both are about introducing an idea, building drama, and pulling the audience in. Events and books both follow arcs: setup → build → climax → resolution. “He doesn't start the event with that, he ends the event with that. That's the climax.” Storytelling has shape across mediums: Characters introduced → audience grows to care → surprises and turns → payoffs. Example: Steve Jobs' coin pocket reveal → set up, then payoff. In a book, the payoff may come 100 pages later instead of 30 seconds. Analogy: whether you play 30 seconds of a song or an hour-long concert, you're still using the same fundamentals of music. Robin shifts to Bobby's background as a visual storyteller. As an animator of 30 years, Bobby is comfortable with visual stories, while Robin is more comfortable with written ones. Robin compares Bobby's graphic novel to The Bone Compendium (which he revisits often) and contrasts with Heinlein novels he might attempt. Robin: making comics doesn't have to be like “my mother's artwork she slaved over for years.” It can be like newspaper comics compiled into story. Asks Bobby for advice on where to begin if he wanted to try sketching a visual story. Bobby's advice: Many people don't think visual storytelling is possible for them. Shares personal story: On his first post-college date with his wife (now 25 years married), he said he wanted to write a book. It took him 25 years to actually write one. Never thought of doing a graphic novel because his drawing style didn't look like Marvel or X-Men. Even as a professional artist, felt imposter syndrome Realization: it's not about imitating Spider-Man — it's about drawing in your own style. Art is your opinion expressed visually. Stick figures can work if they serve the story. Doesn't have to be polished airbrushed paintings. How his graphic novel came about: Originally wrote the story as a regular novel. Sent to publishers with just a few illustrations. All said no — except one, who said: “I love the illustrations. Would you consider making this a graphic novel?” Bobby: “All right.” Treated it as an invitation. Decided to draw in his own style. Practical process: Took all the dialogue he had already written. Turned descriptions into drawings. Book was already written in close third person, without inner thoughts → made translation easier. First pass: dialogue in speech bubbles, description drawn. Realized: “I guess this works.” Takeaway: You don't have to start by drawing an entire book from scratch. You can begin with writing, then translate description into visuals.   28:10 Resilience in the Face of Rejection Robin points out the sheer amount of work Bobby went through: writing a book, getting rejected repeatedly, reinventing it with illustrations, then turning it into a graphic novel only to be rejected again. Robin: “It's almost the literal definition of courage… getting back up and trying again.” Notes that outsiders might think: “30-year Pixar animator, easy for you.” But the reality was rejection after rejection. Asks: how do you come back? What is your relationship with practice that allows you to face no 50 times and keep going? Bobby on optimism and imagination: “I'm lucky that I happen to be what myself and other people probably call an optimistic person.” Describes himself as “an optimist with a vivid imagination” → always assuming, “Yeah, we'll figure this out.” Loves being middle-aged because experience gives perspective: you've seen enough to know you can recover. The arc of a career/life: Beginning stage: fearless. “I can do anything because I cannot die.” Willing to leap into anything: start a company, go broke, jump off a cliff → “We'll figure it out.” Middle stage: awareness of consequences. Relationships, responsibilities, failures and successes → “I don't know if I should do anything.” Weight of awareness can freeze you. Later stage: resilience. “I'm still here, I figured it out.” Confidence comes not from avoiding mistakes but from knowing: “I can recover from anything.” Personal examples: Bobby's two kids are both in college. He reflects on their application process: multiple schools, multiple options. His own experience was the opposite: Applied to only one school (CalArts). Barely got in. Supported by his single mother, who let him pursue art school. That early challenge taught him persistence and how to “figure it out.” The practice of persistence: Life and career filled with moments of trial and error. “That didn't work. Okay, maybe this. Well, that didn't work. Maybe this.” Sometimes progress feels like moving backwards before going forward again. Analogy: like a Roomba. Hits an obstacle → bounces, changes direction, keeps moving. “I don't know that equating myself to a robot vacuum is the best thing, but it eventually gets the whole job done.” 33:33 Storytelling Frameworks and Structures Bobby on classical story structure in his book: Book follows a traditional arc: opening, inciting incident (

With Achilles out of the fighting the Trojans drive the Greeks back to the beach, where they all are faced with hard choices as the story of Troy continues. www.JayLeeming.com

Episodio con un gran vivero en el que os hablamos nada más y nada menos que de doce juegos, la mayoría de ellos novedades, aunque alguna viejunada se cuela por medio. Ahí os va el menú: (0:02:51) Teto (0:08:50) Ichor (0:16:54) Six (0:24:35) Saltfjord (0:35:41) Weimar (0:57:38) Atlantis Exodus (1:12:54) Port Royal (1:21:28) Lunar Skyline (1:29:15) Four Dragons (1:34:53) Citizens of the Spark (1:42:05) La Cuenta (1:48:02) Iliad

Odysseus. The man we accused of being a failure all throughout the Iliad and the Posthomerica. But will we like him any better during his own spin-off show? Join us for an extra long episode hosted by Vince's sister the Jingle-Jangler- who has studied the Odyssey and can help us condense it. Will Vince get increasingly frustrated at the inconsistency of Greek omens? Will Cassie have to employ increasing levels of sarcasm against Odysseus' flaws? Will the hosts become enraged at Odysseus, misogyny in the Greek world and Greek mythology in general? Find out with us!NOTE: This episode is a bit of a longer one, so it has been split into three sections with musical interludes at 35:39 and 01:13:50 for those who need a break.Sources for this episode:TBA

Questions? Comments? Text Us!What does the ancient Hindu epic Mahabharata, often called “India's Iliad,” have to say about your life today? In this From God to Jerry to You, philosopher Jerry L. Martin shares what God revealed to him while praying through the pages of this vast epic and its centerpiece, the Bhagavad Gita.God's surprising message is clear: the purpose of life is not to escape through yoga, asceticism, or lofty philosophy, but to engage; to face sin, suffering, mortality, and the challenges of human existence.Jerry explores the story of the good king Yudi, who must wrestle with duty, saintliness, and the shocking truth that sometimes the morally imperfect is morally required. Krishna reminds him, and us, that true spirituality is not retreat but responsibility, even when choices carry painful costs. Jerry breaks down the word and meaning of swadharma, or personal duty: your unique calling in life. Drawing on the Bhagavad Gita, Dag Hammarskjöld's reflections, and Abigail Rosenthal's piercing question, “Does this task have my name on it?” Jerry invites you to discern your own path. Because only when you say “yes” to your calling does life take on true meaning.This conversation bridges East and West, scripture and modern life, divine revelation and personal reflection. Whether you are a seeker, a philosopher, or simply searching for guidance, this episode offers wisdom you won't want to miss.Other Series:The podcast began with the Dramatic Adaptation of the book and now has several series:The Life Wisdom Project – Spiritual insights on living a wiser, more meaningful life.From God to Jerry to You – Divine messages and breakthroughs for seekers.Two Philosophers Wrestle With God – A dialogue on God, truth, and reason.Jerry & Abigail: An Intimate Dialogue – Love, faith, and divine presence in partnership.What's Your Spiritual Story – Real stories of people changed by encounters with God.What's On Our Mind – Reflections from Jerry and Scott on recent episodes.What's On Your Mind – Listener questions, divine answers, and open dialogue. Stay ConnectedRead the book: God: An Autobiography, As Told to a Philosopher at godanautobiography.com or AmazonShare your questions and reflections: questions@godanautobiography.comSubscribe and listen free wherever you get podcastsShare Your Story | Site | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | YouTube

The Iliad is the world’s greatest epic poem—heroic battle and divine fate set against the Trojan War. Its beauty and profound bleakness are intensely moving, but great questions remain: Where, how, and when was it composed and why does it endure? To explore these questions is today’s guest, Robin Lane Fox, a scholar and teacher of Homer for over 40 years. He’s the author of “Homer and His Iliad” and he addresses these questions, drawing on a lifelong love and engagement with the poem. He argues that the poem is the result of the genius and single oral poet, Homer, and that the poem may have been performed even earlier than previously supposed a place, a date, and a method for its composition—subjects of ongoing controversy. Lane Fox considers hallmarks of the poem; its values, implicit and explicit; its characters; its women; its gods; and even its horses.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

My guest today on the Online for Authors podcast is Peter Gunn, author of the book The Amazons. Peter Gunn is a U.S. Air Force Veteran and served his country proudly for over two decades. His unique writing style comes from a love of poetry and considers himself to be a poet first before being a content writer.   In my book review, I stated The Amazons is a YA fiction that is a cross between historical fiction and fantasy - all done in verse! Peter invented LLP - linked-lyrical-poetry. LLP has the flavor of Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, Shakespeare's sonnets, and hip-hop/rap music. However, unlike Homer and Shakespeare, The Amazons is easy-to-read and understand.   The Amazons is a perfect introduction into epic poetry - but be sure to have a dictionary handy. In order to keep the rhyming scheme going, Peter relies on his extensive vocabulary (and a thesaurus or two!).   In addition to his unique style, I loved his storytelling and how he linked the history of England after the Napoleonic Wars to the fabled Amazons who supposedly lived in Peru. The story is fun, fast-paced, and filled with adventures. And for those who get hooked on the style, Peter has planned a series and is working on Books 2 and 3.   Subscribe to Online for Authors to learn about more great books! https://www.youtube.com/@onlineforauthors?sub_confirmation=1   Join the Novels N Latte Book Club community to discuss this and other books with like-minded readers: https://www.facebook.com/groups/3576519880426290   You can follow Author Peter Gunn Website: https://www.petergunn.net/ Tiktok: @petergunnpoetry   Purchase The Amazons on Amazon: Ebook: https://amzn.to/4lyT6if   Teri M Brown, Author and Podcast Host: https://www.terimbrown.com FB: @TeriMBrownAuthor IG: @terimbrown_author X: @terimbrown1   Want to be a guest on Online for Authors? Send Teri M Brown a message on PodMatch, here: https://www.podmatch.com/member/onlineforauthors   #petergunn #theamazons #linkedlyricalpoetry #LLP #YAfiction #terimbrownauthor #authorpodcast #onlineforauthors #characterdriven #researchjunkie #awardwinningauthor #podcasthost #podcast #readerpodcast #bookpodcast #writerpodcast #author #books #goodreads #bookclub #fiction #writer #bookreview *As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Anthony Scaramucci is the founder and managing partner of SkyBridge, a global alternative investment firm, and founder and chairman of SALT, a global thought leadership forum and venture studio. He is the host of the podcast Open Book with Anthony Scaramucci. A graduate of Tufts University and Harvard Law School, he lives in Manhasset, Long Island. Books mentioned in this episode: 1. King of Kings: The Iranian Revolution: A Story of Hubris, Delusion and Catastrophic Miscalculation by Scott Anderson 2. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory by Roald Dahl 3. The Iliad by Homer 4. The Odyssey by Homer 5. The Nazi Mind by Laurence Rees 6. Chaos: Charles Manson, the CIA, and the Secret History of the Sixties by Tom O'Neill 7. The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World by Niall Ferguson

Here are eight segments focusing on Professor Emily Wilson's work on The Iliad: 1/8. In her translation, The Iliad, Professor Emily Wilson addresses the complex question of "Who was Homer?" She explains that for centuries after the Mycenaean collapse, there was no writing in the Greek-speaking world, yet extraordinary oral stories of heroes like Achilles and cities like Troy were developed and retold by performing poets. Writing, borrowed from the Phoenicians, arrived in the 8th century BCE, leading to the monumental written poems like The Iliad and The Odyssey, which are sophisticated responses to this long oral tradition. 1578 JUPITER AND OLYMPIA

2/8. Professor Emily Wilson's translation of The Iliad presents a narrative for an audience already deeply familiar with the Trojan War. The poem deliberately avoids the war's traditional beginning (like the Judgment of Paris or Helen's abduction) and its end (the fall of Troy or Achilles's death). Instead, it intensely focuses on a month and a half of "Greeks versus Greeks," offering a sophisticated and often unexpected reshaping of familiar stories, inviting the audience to engage with the narrative with fresh eyes, much like watching a new production of a classic play.

3/8. In The Iliad, Professor Emily Wilson highlights the narrative's sophisticated literary techniques, comparing them to an English novel. The poem expertly navigates between an omniscient narrator and individual characters' points of view, delving into their minds. Wilson also notes the challenges of translating ancient Greek, citing, for example, the existence of three distinct words for "spear," each carrying specific connections that she endeavors to render dynamically into modern English. This intricate storytelling was a hallmark of 7th-century BCE Greek. 1200 TROY

4/8. Professor Emily Wilson's translation of The Iliad underscores the powerful, ancient tradition of women's lament, prominently featured in the poem's conclusion. Women like Helen, Hecuba, and Andromache are depicted not only weaving but primarily grieving for the dead and for their own bleak, often enslaved futures. Helen, uniquely, weaves the sufferings of the war and offers commentary on the Greeks, while Hecuba embodies both infinite grief and rage, a rare expression for women in Homeric society. 12TH BCE HITTITE BULL

5/8. After the death of Patroclus, Achilles undergoes a transformation in The Iliad, as translated by Professor Emily Wilson. Initially expressing rage through the violent sacrifice of Trojan youths at Patroclus's funeral pyre, Achilles later organizes funeral games. These games, with prizes for all participants and no deaths over competition, offer a new model for how men's competitiveness could coexist without societal destruction. His act of giving Agamemnon a prize without contest can be read as gracious maturity or a "sick burn".

6/8. Professor Emily Wilson emphasizes the pervasive and often ambiguous role of the gods in The Iliad. They interfere constantly, appearing in various disguises, and hold strong opinions. Though "deathless," gods like Aphrodite and Ares can be wounded and bleed "ichor" rather than blood, revealing their human-like flaws despite divine power. Figures like Hera cleverly outmaneuver Zeus, and Thetis, Achilles's mother, tirelessly advocates for her son, framing much of the poem's plot through her prayers to Zeus.

7/8. Professor Emily Wilson's translation of The Iliad powerfully conveys the vivid and often gory reality of Bronze Age combat. The poem meticulously details how men died, showing the brutality of warfare. A crucial aspect of Homeric battle culture, as highlighted by Wilson, is the understanding that once a warrior is dead, their body and armor must be protected and treated honorably. The desecration of corpses, like Achilles dragging Hector's body, is a profound act of humiliation, intended to further punish the enemy beyond death. 1599 ARMS FOR ACHILLES

8/8. The tragic death of Patroclus is a pivotal moment in The Iliad, rendered intensely by Professor Emily Wilson. Despite Achilles's warning, Patroclus, wearing Achilles's armor, pushes too far and is killed by Hector, with Apollo's intervention. This event unleashes Achilles's terrifying rage, propelling him back into battle in new, divine armor crafted by Hephaestus. Achilles's subsequent, relentless slaughter, even against the river god, is driven by his all-consuming quest to avenge Patroclus, culminating in the brutal confrontation with Hector. 1600 HECTOR

Welcome to Jake's Happy Nostalgia Show, the podcast where nostalgia comes alive!This week, we welcome actress, composer, and teaching artist Liz Filios! From 2010 to 2012, Liz brought joy to young viewers as one of the hosts of Sprout's morning block, The Sunny Side Up Show. Continuing her work with kids, she went on to create Storytime in the Zoom Room in 2020, a free interactive learning space for children and caretakers. Beyond her work in children's entertainment, Liz is an accomplished stage performer, with credits in productions like Into the Woods, Red Velvet, Vincent in Brixton, and An Iliad, where she was also a composer. Join us as we reminisce about her time on Sprout, explore her journey in the performing arts, and celebrate her dedication to inspiring and engaging audiences of all ages.Keep up with Liz!https://www.lizfilios.comhttps://www.facebook.com/lifilioshttps://www.youtube.com/@LizFilioshttps://www.instagram.com/lizfilios/Taping date: November 11, 2024Edited by: Chris Bixby (Co-Host)https://www.facebook.com/cbixby2000Be sure to check out our website, where you can learn more about the podcast and find how to follow the Happy Nostalgia team!https://jakeshappynostalgiashow.weebly.com/Listen to our podcast on Spotify and other audio platforms!https://open.spotify.com/show/1PdrRWSmUdQ3m2NpNR9lSkhttps://linktr.ee/JakesHappyNostalgiaShow

And now for something completely different. The Odyssey portion of our tour is over, and the Iliad portion will now begin. But wait! Wasn't the Iliad a poem about war? And isn't Aeneas supposed to do battle for Latium? So why is it all sunshine, butterflies, and love goddesses? Today we launch into Part II of the poem with a passage that has bamboozled scholars for centuries, and of course I will deliver the definitive interpretation so that everyone can stop arguing. Plus: a plot summary of what's to come, and advice on reading classic literature if you're having trouble understanding it. Check out our new Sponsor, Alithea Travel: https://www.alitheatravel.com/tours/strength-and-virtue Order Light of the Mind, Light of the World (and rate it five stars): https://a.co/d/2QccOfM Subscribe to be in the mailbag: https://rejoiceevermore.substack.com Listen to my sister's podcast, Storytime for Grownups: https://faithkmoore.com/storytime-for-grownups/ EPIC, the Musical: https://faithkmoore.com/storytime-for-grownups/ Stephen Fry, Odyssey: https://a.co/d/1rIbSBu Gareth Hinds, The Odyssey: A Graphic Novel: https://a.co/d/2kClqmN  

This week, as students in North America are returning to campus and settling into the rhythms of the fall semester, some of them are going to open their copies of Homer's epic poems of the Trojan War, the Iliad and Odyssey. They will read of the Trojan commander Hector's poignant farewell to his wife Andromache, of the Greek warrior Achilles' terrible rage, of Odysseus' long journey home, and of his wife in Ithaca, Penelope, who has endured his absence for some twenty years. For many students, these will be powerful stories—windows into an ancient world of honor and virtue and hubris—but for all that, distant stories. When read from the air-conditioned dorm room or plush campus library, the dust and blood and bronze of the Trojan War are abstract. But what happens when these same texts are read by young men and women who do know the weight of putting on armor, who have themselves kissed loved ones goodbye before departing for battle? Who must walk away from their own infant children in order to defend the country? What happens when the students who stand before Homer's text are not just dispassionately analyzing the soul of the warrior but are warriors themselves? Mosaic's editor Jonathan Silver speaks in this episode with Ido Hevroni, a professor of literature at Shalem College in Jerusalem. For over a decade, Hevroni has guided Shalem students through Homer's epics, watching them grapple with these eternal questions of personal pride and public duty, private love and public defense, glory and sacrifice. But now, after October 7, his students find themselves in active combat, and he finds that it is Homer who is helping to explain their own experience back to themselves. And it is their experience in the tanks and tunnels of Gaza that is teaching them to read Homer with new eyes. Hevroni recently wrote about teaching the Odyssey in the pages of Mosaic, and that essay was published in honor of Ido's own teacher, Amy Apfel Kass, z”l, whose yortsayt on the fifth of Elul falls on the day that this conversation was originally broadcast. This discussion, too, is dedicated to her memory.  

We love Gen Con so much, we couldn't fit everything into our Games of the Show episode. And Corey Thompson loves Gen Con so much that he became a part-owner of the giant North American gaming convention. Corey leads Above Board TV, cohosts the Board Games Insider podcast, co-owns Play to Z Games, and...lots more that will just take up way too much space to write all out. So he was the perfect guest to invite on our show to chat about about more Gen Con highlights -- and some of our recent and classic two-player favorites. Timeline: 3:48 - Going Analog's game pick: Panda Spin. 7:30 - Corey's game pick: Giberrers. 10:57 - Going Analog's topic: final Gen Con thoughts and highlights. 29:36 - Corey's topic: great two-player games (classic and new).

Today on Ascend: The Great Books Podcast, we are joined by Dcn. Garlick, Dr. Frank Grabowski, Thomas Lackey, and Dr. Joey Spencer to discuss the first part of Plato's Euthyphro—a dialogue on piety.Dr. Spencer is the diocesan Archivist for the Diocese of Tulsa, a tutor in Theology, and an expert in the theology of angels and demons.We discuss the context of the dialogue and move into conversations on piety as a political problem, the role of imitating the divine in Greek religion, an introduction to Plato's Ideas and its reception into Christianity, and even a brief aside on how angels understand Plato's Ideas.Check out thegreatbookspodcast.com for resources and schedule!Check out our COLLECTION OF WRITTEN GUIDES TO THE GREAT BOOKS.Check out THE ASCENT - a sister publication focusing on Christian spirituality, theosis, and sanctification - how does the soul ascend to God.From the guide:Why should you read the Euthyphro? The Euthyphro is fundamentally “a dialogue about piety,” as Dcn. Harrison Garlick describes it, serving as an exploration of what piety truly means through a conversation between Socrates and Euthyphro. Dr. Frank Grabowski emphasizes its value as “a wonderful introduction to Platonic philosophy, Platonic literature,” highlighting how it features Socrates as the central figure and showcases “the Socratic method” in a clear and engaging way. Moments of “Socratic irony” are also evident, adding depth to understanding Socrates' approach, while the dialogue introduces Plato's search for the Ideas.The dialogue is short and more straightforward, which makes it more ideal for first time readers than say the Republic or the Symposium. Its accessibility lies in its simplicity and a layered narrative, allowing readers to engage at their own intellectual level—focusing initially on key dilemmas but discovering more upon rereading—as Dcn. Harrison Garlick notes that “like most of Plato's narratives, the dialogues... bring layers... you can kind of grow with the text." For many, it's the first Platonic work encountered, often bundled with the Apology, Crito, and Phaedo as depictions of Socrates' last days.What is the historical context for the Euthyphro?The dramatic date of the Euthyphro is right before Socrates' trial and execution in 399 BC. The composition date is estimated at 380 BC, but all composition dates should be accepted lightly. The dialogue takes place outside of the King Archon's court, a remnant of Athens' monarchical past, where a judge adjudicates on religious matters. Plato offers a conversation about piety, within its political context, right before his master is tried and condemned for his impiety. As moderns, we do not see piety as a political virtue, but for the Greeks, piety a virtue of cohesion—it bound together the family, the polis, and the gods into one cosmic whole. It is this three-tiered piety that animated the Iliad, Aeschylus' Oresteia, and Sophocles' Antigone. King Archon's court is significant, because it underscores piety as a “political problem.” Impiety can destabilize the polis. Dr. Spencer suggests that Euthyphro sees Socrates as “being out of place,” which can be read as a euphemism for impiety or religious pollution, i.e., Socrates is the pollution of Athens. The question, however, is what is piety?What is the first...

Please enjoy listening in on the first seminar of the first Magnus Cohort! The 2027 Cohort began their three year journey with Dr. David Arias in September of 2024, and they will finish their third year in the summer of 2027! The 2028 Cohort will begin this September. Do you want to be apart of something like this? Find out how you can join the 2028 Cohort this Fall!  

Send us a textGUEST: JOSH BARZON, author, graphic designer, and content creator On X: @JoshuaBarzonThe claims of Scripture are far above and beyond any other book—inspired by God, without error, unchanging, unfailing. In a word, supernatural.The Bible says in 2 Peter 1:20-21: “know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.”Or how about Hebrews 4:12: “For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”Put together, God directed the authors what He wanted to communicate and God's Word powerfully accomplishes God's desires in the human heart.Now consider that the 66 books of the Bible were authored by 40 men over a span of 1500 years in three languages (Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic) on three continents (Africa, Asia, and Europe). The original manuscripts written by these 40 authors no longer exist but thousands of full or partial copies of the original books do exist. Nearly 25,000 copies of the New Testament alone exist. Compare that to Homer's Iliad with only 2000 copies. The existence of so many copies of Scripture allows them to be compared to each other to authenticate accuracy. In other words, more copies results in more certainty.The Bible has also been translated from its original languages into hundreds of languages, with dozens of translations and paraphrases in the English language alone—King James Version, Geneva Bible, New American Standard, English Standard Version, New International Version, and on and on.Taking all this into consideration, is the Bible we have in our English language today an accurate representation of what the authors of Scripture wrote or has there been significant loss of the text during its transmission from original manuscripts? And what about the many English versions—are they fully trustworthy to be considered the Word of God?Josh Barzon has done much research on the transmission and translations of the Bible. He was born in the Middle East and now lives in America, working as a content creator, graphic designer, and author of The Forgotten Preface: Surprising Insights on the Translation Philosophy of the King James Translators.He joins us to discuss the supernatural Scriptures and how God has preserved His Word precisely over the centuries so that can know when you read the Word of God, you can know you are hearing from the God of the Word.

What moonlit god comes down to punish the Greeks with his arrows? What stray dog is the first unlikely victim of Agamemnon's wrath, and what the heck is that boat full of onions and cabbages doing in this story? The story of the Iliad continues, as brought to life by performance storyteller Jay Leeming. www.JayLeeming.com    

Victor Davis Hanson and co-host Jack Fowler analyze Lee Zeldin's efforts to deregulate the EPA, California's energy crisis, the relevance of Homer's Iliad to modern warfare, and more.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Adam Hurrey is joined on the midweek Adjudication Panel by Charlie Eccleshare and David Walker. On the agenda: the nichest world record in football is shattered once again, Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink's ex-footballer/Strictly contestant spiel, the extinguishing of Celeste's five-year Sky Sports flame, why Dominic Calvert-Lewin to Leeds just feels so right, throwaway footballspeak in Homer's Iliad and the Robert Earnshaw of bedwetting. Meanwhile, the panel run through some niche Premier League predictions for 2025-26, including the first 10 guests on Monday Night Football. Sign up for Dreamland, the new members-only Football Clichés experience, to access our exclusive new show and much more: https://dreamland.footballcliches.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The Queen of the Olympian gods is swallowed whole by her father at birth and then marries her brother Zeus, who turns himself into a cuckoo to seduce her. Hera, or Juno to the Romans, has her triumphs. She adds the eyes to the tail feathers of her sacred bird the peacock by plucking them from the hundred-eyed monster Argos. And in the Iliad she dons a magic bra given to her by Aphrodite to persuade Zeus to support the Greeks against the Trojans. Her loyalty to the Greeks begins when Trojan prince Paris doesn't choose her as the most beautiful. She then devotes her life to persecuting him and his people. Perhaps a slight overreaction. But is Hera a monster or just mistreated by the undisputed worst husband of all time?At a packed out solo show recorded at the Hay Festival Natalie puts the case for and against.'Rockstar mythologist' Natalie Haynes is the best-selling author of 'Divine Might', 'Stone Blind', and 'A Thousand Ships' as well as a reformed comedian who is a little bit obsessive about Ancient Greek and Rome.Producer...Beth O'Dea

Classical Christian education is a generational journey - and in this BaseCamp Live episode, we get a rare, behind-the-scenes glimpse of how a love for the true, good, and beautiful is passed from parent to child. Dr. Louis Markos, professor, author, and longtime advocate for the great books, is joined by his son Alex, now a humanities teacher, to share how formative family habits, road-trip literature, and a Christian worldview shaped Alex's path from public school to a deep embrace of the classics.Together, they explore why Christians should read pagan literature, the difference between formation and information, and how ancient texts can lead students toward truth and scripture. With memorable stories - from Marcus Aurelius-inspired dance moves to processing grief through The Iliad - this conversation offers both encouragement and practical ideas for parents and educators seeking to form thoughtful, faithful young people.

We're on our way to Gen Con! And here are the games we're most excited about (as well as the ones that are getting the most buzz online). You'll also here where to find us in Indy, where we plan to eat, and how we plan to survive the Best Four Days in Gaming. 00:45 - Releases in the second half of the year. 02:23 - Preparing for Crowds at Gen Con - New Cart Policy 08:15 - Food Trucks 11:15 - Where Will We Be? 19:59 - The Games of Gen Con (BGG Preview: https://boardgamegeek.com/geekpreview/77/gen-con-2025-preview) 20:54 - Vantage 23:27 - Forest Shuffle: Dartmoor 23:54 - Lost Ruins of Arnak: Adventure Chest 24:23 - Gwent: The Legendary Card Game 25:26 - Lightning Train 26:32 - Sea Salt and Paper: Extra Pepper 27:11 - Luthier 28:00 - Fliptoons 28:36 - Ruins 30:10 - Nature 30:53 - Rebel Princess Deluxe: Happily Never After 32:00 - Ace of Spades 33:35 - Galactic Cruise 34:31 - Pirates of Maracaibo: Commanders 34:43 - Soda Jerk 36:25 - Point Galaxy 37:04 - Compile Main 2 38:08 - Star Wars Battle of Hoth 38:41 - Galileo Galilei 39:21 - Propolis 39:48 - Final Girl: Shriek 41:32 - VIVO 42:08 - Spooktacular 43:57 - Horrified: Dungeons & Dragons 45:16 - Evergreen: Cherry Blossoms and Bamboo 45:22 - EXIT Advent Calendar: The Intergalactic Race 46:27 - Suna Valo 47:12 - Kronologic: Cuzco 1450 47:44 - Wine Cellar 49:22 - Shackleton Base 49:58 - Knitting Circle 50:36 - Ra: Traders 51:08 - Iliad 51:26 - Gibberers 51:48 - Cat and the Tower 52:42 - Ham Helsing 53:25 - The Four Doors 54:07 - Raising Chicago 54:24 - High Tide 54:39 - If Then 54:59 - Hyperstar Run 55:20 - Jungo 55:43 - Holiday Hijinks 10, 11, 12, Endangered Rescue 2, Journey to Tir na nOg 56:01 - Above and Below: Haunted 56:20 - The Peak Team 57:17 - Our Advice for Surviving Gen Con Questions? Tales of Horror? tom@dicetower.com

Hey hey BATT Family! GenCon 2025 is ONE WEEK AWAY! That means that it is perfect timing to get out the GenCon preview list. We recorded this list on July 9th when there were 499 games on the list. While another 70 or so were added since then, we're all still extremely happy with our lists and will still be looking for these games in particular. Scott, Jason, and Mark have all gathered to make sure that we're telling you about 30 different games that we are excited to check out and hopefully bring home from the con in one way or another. We hope that you enjoy this episode and you let us know what you're looking forward to on BlueSky or by emailing us at boardallthetimegaming@gmail.com. As a reminder, Mark and Jason will be teaching Vantage at the Stonemaier/MeepleSource booth at location 2909 this year and Scott will be demoing it in the play hall not too far away on Thursday and Friday mornings. Come say hi! --- This episode's segments: 00:00:00 - Intro  00:02:02 - Honorable Mentions 00:08:40 - List Selection Criteria 00:11:24 - Scott's 10 (Guild Lands) 00:12:29 - Jason's 10 (Tinco) 00:13:20 - Mark's 10 (Habemus Papam) 00:14:50 - Scott's 9 (Ace of Spades) 00:16:06 - Jason's 9 (Alibis) 00:16:47 - Mark's 9 (Escape from the Moon) 00:17:45 - Scott's 8 (Gibberers) 00:19:17 - Jason's 8 (Sprocketforge) 00:20:42 - Mark's 8 (Ofrenda) 00:22:10 - Scott's 7 (Mythical Dice) 00:23:19 - Jason's 7 (Zenith) 00:24:40 - Mark's 7 (Spooktacular) 00:26:22 - Scott's 6 (Solar Gardens) 00:27:52 - Jason's 6 (Unstoppable) 00:29:44 - Mark's 6 (Four Doors) 00:31:30 - Scott's 5 (Petiquette) 00:33:43 - Jason's 5 (Grand Central Skyport) 00:36:20 - Mark's 5 (Pillars of Heracles) 00:37:34 - Scott's 4 (Digit Code) 00:39:26 - Jason's 4 (Journey to Tir na Nog, Blessings and Burdens) 00:40:59 - Mark's 4 (12 Rivers) 00:42:53 - Scott's 3 (Temple Code) 00:44:47 - Jason's 3 (Pillars of Fate) 00:46:05 - Mark's 3 (How to Save a World) 00:48:15 - Scott's 2 (Kronologic: Cuzco 1450) 00:50:44 - Jason's 2 (Dark Quarter) 00:52:25 - Mark's 2 (Iliad) 00:54:30 - Scott's 1 (FlipToons) 00:58:00 - Jason's 1 (Vantage) 01:01:20 - Mark's 1 (Timber Town) 01:03:38 - Final Thoughts  01:05:39 - Outro --- Notes! 1) Mark failed to actually say the name of his number nine. The game being discussed is "Escape from the Moon". 2) Scott failed to correctly say the name of his number eight! We were on fire at this point, but in our defense it was almost 2am when we started recording all this! His number eight is actually Gibberers from Hobby Japan. 3) Mark has since played Zenith. IT'S SO, SO GOOD GUYS. 4) We've gotten some preview copies of Pillars of Fate and the other retail IV games that you'll be getting reviews of VERY SHORTLY. Mark likes Pillars A LOT. It's a good thing too, because he's gotta pick up the copy he already bought! --- You can email us at boardallthetimegaming@gmail.com. We can be found at www.boardallthetime.com and on Facebook at Board All The Time.  We're on BlueSky now and loving it! At this point it really feels like BlueSky is for board gaming, so definitely check us out on there at https://bsky.app/profile/boardallthetime.bsky.social If you'd like to help support the show and assist with the hosting costs, you can do so with our Ko-Fi: https://ko-fi.com/boardallthetime Our Discord server, which is still in Beta, can be joined at https://discord.gg/VbRWEpc6 We'd like to thank our sponsors as well: Robin's Nerd Supply: www.robinsnerdsupply.com Eco Owl Press: www.ecoowlpress.com  We'd also like to thank SoulProdMusic for the intro/outro music. 

PREVIEW: FALL OF TROY: Author Eric Cline, "After 1177 BC," presents analysis that separates Homer's historical and fanciful elements in the Iliad. More to come. 1300 AMBROSIAN ILLIAD

Rachel Christopher brings a poet's heart and a scholar's mind to the stage eight times a week as Hermione Granger in Harry Potter and the Cursed Child. In this conversation, she opens up about her lifelong love of language, her background in translating ancient Greek poetry, and the deeply personal connection she feels to storytelling—both on stage and off. Whether she's talking about her time at Epcot or reflecting on how imagination shaped her childhood, Rachel reveals just how much joy and intention she pours into her work. From cooking lamb meatballs and tending to her city garden to revisiting classic Greek texts, Rachel's passions outside of theater are just as vibrant as the characters she portrays. She shares what it means to step into the legacy of Hermione, how theater expands what we imagine is possible, and why making space for community and curiosity is at the heart of her artistry. Rachel Christopher is an actor and poet currently playing Hermione Granger in Harry Potter and the Cursed Child on Broadway. Her stage credits include For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Suicide / When the Rainbow Is Enuf and Jaja's African Hair Braiding. Her screen credits include The Girl on the Train and The Upside. A graduate of Vassar College, she double-majored in drama and classics, and has collaborated on stage adaptations of The Aeneid and The Iliad. This episode is powered by WelcomeToTimesSquare.com, the billboard where you can be a star for a day. Connect with Rachel: Instagram: @rachel_e_christopher Connect with The Theatre Podcast: Support the podcast on Patreon and watch video versions of the episodes: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Patreon.com/TheTheatrePodcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Twitter & Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@theatre_podcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook.com/OfficialTheatrePodcast⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TheTheatrePodcast.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Alan's personal Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠@alanseales⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Email me at feedback@thetheatrepodcast.com. I want to know what you think. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

People groups, power, hierarchy, and othering—big themes in Homer's Odyssey and Iliad. In this episode we learn from Dr. Jackie Murray about what race was and wasn't in Ancient Greek literature. We see how gender and class intersected with race. We'll learn about a Greek novel The Aethiopica, what a metic was, and what this all has to do with some recent Hollywood controversies.Transcript and episode show notesWomen Who Went Before is written, produced, and edited by Rebekah Haigh and Emily Chesley.Music is composed and produced by Moses Sun.Sponsored by the Center for Culture, Society, and Religion, the Program in Judaic Studies, the Stanley J. Seeger Center for Hellenic Studies, and the Committtee for the Study of Late Antiquity at Princeton University.Views expressed on the podcast are solely those of the individuals, and do not represent Princeton University.

What defines a hero? Is it the glorious rage of a warrior like Achilles, or the cunning resilience of a survivor like Odysseus? In this episode, we journey back to ancient Greece to explore the two foundational models of heroism in Western literature: Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. We'll stand on the battlefields of Troy to analyze Achilles's quest for eternal glory (kleos) and then sail the treacherous seas with Odysseus on his arduous ten-year journey home (nostos). Discover how one hero lives for battle, while the other lives by his wits. Plus, in our "Focus on Language" segment, you'll learn essential vocabulary to discuss these epics, including terms like hubris, archetype, arduous, and the famous "Achilles' heel." You'll also get a speaking challenge designed to make you a more sophisticated and compelling storyteller. To unlock full access to all our episodes, consider becoming a premium subscriber on Apple Podcasts or Patreon. And don't forget to visit englishpluspodcast.com for even more content, including articles, in-depth studies, and our brand-new audio series and courses now available in our Patreon Shop!

Send us a textPlato called Homer "the educator of all Greece." But what is a Homeric education? What were the Greeks learning from their supreme bard? Furthermore, the phrase "Homeric education" contains within it a second meaning as well. What kind of education were Homer's heroes getting? In other words, how did Achilles become Achilles? In this episode, we take a close look at Chapter One of A History of Education in Antiquity, in which Henri-Irénée Marrou describes the character of Homeric education, in both its senses, focusing in both cases on "words and deeds," the two fields of excellence every hero must master. Additionally, Jonathan tries to convince Ryan that Iliad Book 9, central to Marrou's explanation of Homeric education, is a story about the triumph of rhetoric.Henri-Irénée Marrou's A History of Education in Antiquity: https://bookshop.org/a/25626/9780299088149Robin Lane Fox's Homer and His Iliad: https://bookshop.org/a/25626/9781541600447Robert Drews's Militarism and the Indo-Europeanizing of Europe: https://bookshop.org/a/25626/9780367886004Caroline Alexander's translation of the Iliad: https://bookshop.org/a/25626/9780062046291Thomas à Kempis' The Imitation of Christ: https://bookshop.org/a/25626/9780141191768New Humanists is brought to you by the Ancient Language Institute: https://ancientlanguage.com/Come read Homer with us. Starting in September, we launch Homer Seminar, a book-by-book sequence of courses reading and discussing Homer's epics, all in Ancient Greek: ancientlanguage.com/homer-seminarLinks may have referral codes, which earn us a commission at no additional cost to you. We encourage you, when possible, to use Bookshop.org for your book purchases, an online bookstore which supports local bookstores.Music: Save Us Now by Shane Ivers - https://www.silvermansound.com

In Part 2 of our discussion on Homer's Iliad, translator Emily Wilson returns to discuss the red and gold cover design of the Norton Library edition, recount her decision to recreate a new translation of the epic, and give a performance in the original ancient Greek. Emily Wilson is a professor of classical studies at the University of Pennsylvania. She has been named a Fellow of the American Academy in Rome in Renaissance and early modern studies, a MacArthur Fellow, and a Guggenheim Fellow. In addition to Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, she has also published translations of Sophocles, Euripides, and Seneca. She lives in Philadelphia.To learn more or purchase a copy of the Norton Library edition of The Iliad, go to https://wwnorton.com/books/9781324102076. Learn more about the Norton Library series at https://wwnorton.com/norton-library.Have questions or suggestions for the podcast? Email us at nortonlibrary@wwnorton.com or find us on Twitter at @TNL_WWN and Bluesky at @nortonlibrary.bsky.social. 

Vanessa Cominsky joins Case and Sam to RAGE against this awkward historical epic! Overview Podcast hosts Case Aiken and Sam Alicea provide a framework for discussing the 2004 film Troy, highlighting its connection to early 2000s epic films like Gladiator and 300. Vanessa Cominsky, a guest and classics major, notes a 4-year professional bond with Case stemming from shared academic interests. David Benioff, the film's screenwriter, is discussed in relation to his later work on Game of Thrones and identified issues in narrative depth. Whitewashing criticism surfaces regarding the film's predominantly white cast, despite its story set in a historically diverse region. Analysis reveals a lack of clear passage of time, compressing the depicted 10-year Trojan War into a brief narrative span. Costume design receives praise for historical accuracy while the film's runtime discrepancies are critiqued, with the director's cut deemed excessive. Thematic exploration includes Agamemnon's characterization as a villain symbolizing US imperialism, contrasting with sympathetic portrayals of the Trojans. Sean Bean's potential as Odysseus is noted but criticized for underutilization, while Peter O'Toole's Priam provides limited but impactful performance. Improvement suggestions include altering the title to better reflect Achilles' journey and revising the narrative structure to enhance character development. Upcoming initiatives include a scholarship program for women in wine, launched by Vanessa Cominsky's nonprofit Vin Vitalite in 2025. @vminsky @womenofwinedc Www.vinVitalité.org (Pronounced vinn vitahlihtay) Notes ️ Podcast Introduction & Setup (00:00 - 02:45) Hosts Case Aiken and Sam Alicea introduce the 'Another Pass' podcast, discussing movie analysis and improvements. Guest Vanessa Cominsky introduced as Case's coworker from wine/spirits industry and fellow classics major. Discussion of 4-year professional relationship and bonding over classics background. Movie Context & Background (02:45 - 09:38) Analysis of 2004 film Troy as adaptation loosely based on oral tradition. Discussion of movie within context of early 2000s epic films including Gladiator, 300, and Lord of the Rings trilogy. David Benioff identified as screenwriter, connecting to later Game of Thrones writing style issues. Observation that Odysseus character tells audience he's clever but never demonstrates intelligence in actual scenes. Political interpretation: movie reflects 2004 centrist liberal perspective on Middle Eastern conflicts with 'support the troops' messaging. Film Production & Casting Analysis (09:38 - 19:22) Vanessa's personal connection: used movie for high school Latin convention project and senior thesis. Whitewashing criticism - movie depicts conflict between Greece and Middle East with entirely white cast. Brad Pitt as main marketing draw playing Achilles in peak popularity period. Case's viewing experience in Rome during classics trip, creating nostalgic connection to material. Story Structure & Adaptation Choices (19:22 - 28:32) Movie covers broader Trojan War story rather than just Iliad, including Trojan Horse sequence not in original epic. Brian Cox as Agamemnon praised as perfect casting choice despite whitewashing issues. Discussion of movie's approach to gods - humans take credit for actions rather than divine intervention. ️ Character Analysis - Heroes and Villains (28:32 - 38:14) Agamemnon positioned as main villain representing US imperialism, while Trojans portrayed sympathetically. Hector vs Achilles juxtaposition works well as respective champions of each side. Orlando Bloom as Paris criticized as too whiny and lacking roguish charm needed for character. Eric Bana as Hector praised as everyone's 'big brother' figure and moral center. Production Design & Technical Elements (38:14 - 47:42) Costume design highly praised for historical accuracy and visual distinction between Greeks and Trojans. Director's cut vs theatrical cut - director's cut too long at 3 hours 16 minutes with unnecessary gore. Runtime issues - theatrical cut feels rushed while director's cut is excessive. War Portrayal & Geographic Issues (47:43 - 56:37) Time compression problem - 10-year war feels like weeks or months with no passage of time indicated. Troy's geography poorly established - unclear city layout and siege logistics. Siege warfare portrayed as single-direction battle rather than comprehensive blockade. Thematic Elements & Religious Context (56:38 - 01:05:46) Gods' role minimized to hint at divine influence without direct intervention. Moral philosophy embedded in Achilles-Briseis conversations about mortality and divinity. Historical accuracy questioned regarding Bronze Age vs Classical Greek terminology and social structures. Casting and Performance Critique (01:05:46 - 01:15:32) Sean Bean as Odysseus underutilized despite perfect casting choice. Peter O'Toole as Priam noted as big casting choice but limited screen time. James Cosmo casting questioned as underused Trojan general. Improvement Proposals - Sam's Pitch (01:15:32 - 01:26:16) Title change to 'The Wrath of Achilles' to better reflect actual story focus. Sean Bean expansion - more scenes showing passage of time and war strategy. Runtime reduction - cut Trojan perspective to focus on Greek side and Achilles' journey. Narrative structure - use Odysseus as storyteller/narrator rather than voiceover. Improvement Proposals - Vanessa's Pitch (01:26:16 - 01:36:20) Scope change to focus on Achilles from moment Odysseus recruits him. Character development - establish Greek power structure and vassal relationships. Agamemnon characterization - emphasize him as villain representing imperialism more clearly. Improvement Proposals - Casey's Pitch (01:36:20 - 01:45:13) Geographic clarity - establish Troy's layout and siege positioning with additional CG shots. Time passage - visual indicators and dialogue establishing years-long conflict. Battle variety - different environments including sea battles and raids on surrounding areas. Violence balance - between theatrical cut's sanitization and director's cut's excess. Final Discussion & Wrap-up (01:45:13 - 02:05:58) David Benioff background revealed as Goldman Sachs executive's son, explaining Hollywood access. Vanessa's organization - Vin Vitalite, DC women in wine industry nonprofit with 501(c)(3) status. Scholarship program launching 2025 for women in wine industry. Next episode preview - Highlander 2: The Quickening.  

This episode is a special preview of the Kingdom of Pylos exhibit at the Getty Villa ahead of the livestream on June 27. Step into the Late Bronze Age with special guest Claire Lyons, curator of antiquities at the Getty. She provides insight on the exhibit, from the collaborative efforts that went into putting it together to details about some of the fascinating Mycenaean artifacts that will be on display.Most of the artifacts on display come from the tomb of the Griffin Warrior, a completely intact burial discovered in 2015 that changed what archaeologists knew about Mycenean Greece. We'll explore the archaeological site where this important discovery was made known as the Palace of Nestor, its role in ancient Pylos, and the legendary King Nestor from Homer's Iliad and Odyssey.TranscriptsFor transcripts of this episode head over to: https://archpodnet.com/tpm/16LinksSee photos related to episode topics on InstagramLoving the macabre lore? Treat your host to a coffee!Pylos regional Archaeological ProjectSmithsonian: "This 3,500-Year-Old Greek Tomb Upended What We Thought We Knew About the Roots of Western Civilization"Book - The Kingdom of Pylos: Warrior-Princes of Mycenaean GreeceVideo - Flint Dibble on his experience excavating the tomb of the Griffin WarriorArchPodNetAPN Website: https://www.archpodnet.comAPN on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/archpodnetAPN on Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/archpodnetAPN on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/archpodnetAPN ShopAffiliatesMotion

"I haven't decided yet, but I'mgonnagetyouback." From ancient Greek epics to Mean Girls, revenge has evolved dramatically in literature, and Taylor Swift's discography is no exception. This week on AP Taylor Swift, we explore how Taylor serves revenge with a smile, examining the sweet saccharine fantasy of "Speak Now," the cutting indifference of "I Forgot That You Existed," and the delicious ambiguity of "I'm Gonna Get You Back." Whether it's ruining a wedding or simply moving on, we dive into how revenge fantasies reveal character, power dynamics, and the satisfying evolution from teenage retaliation to adult agency. Because sometimes the best revenge is living well; and sometimes it's writing a song about forgetting someone exists. Subscribe to get new episode updates: aptaylorswift.substack.com/subscribe Stay up to date at aptaylorswift.com    Mentioned in this episode:  The Iliad, Homer The Princess Bride The Odyssey, Homer Hamlet, Shakespeare Count of Monte Cristo Wuthering Heights Mean Girls Mad Men John Tucker Must Die   *** Episode Highlights:  [00:46] All about revenge [07:48] “Speak Now,” Speak Now  [20:34] “I Forgot That You Existed,” Lover [29:44] “imgonnagetyouback,” The Tortured Poets Department   Follow AP Taylor Swift podcast on social!  TikTok → tiktok.com/@APTaylorSwift Instagram → instagram.com/APTaylorSwift YouTube → youtube.com/@APTaylorSwift Link Tree →linktr.ee/aptaylorswift Bookshop.org → bookshop.org/shop/apts Libro.fm →  tinyurl.com/aptslibro Contact us at aptaylorswift@gmail.com  Affiliate Codes:  Krowned Krystals - krownedkrystals.com use code APTS at checkout for 10% off!  Libro.fm - Looking for an audiobook? Check out our Libro.fm playlist and use code APTS30 for 30% off books found here tinyurl.com/aptslibro   This podcast is neither related to nor endorsed by Taylor Swift, her companies, or record labels. All opinions are our own. Intro music produced by Scott Zadig aka Scotty Z. ***  

In this episode of Crack the Book, we take a look at Week Fourteen of Ted Gioia's Humanities Course, covering Virgil's The Aeneid (Books 1–2), Ovid's Metamorphoses (Book 1), and selections from The Portable Roman Reader. The focus is on key texts from Roman literature, their historical context, and their connections to earlier Greek works, providing an overview of their content and significance.Key Discussion Points: Virgil's The Aeneid (Robert Fagles' Translation): Written between 29–19 BCE, The Aeneid serves as Rome's foundational epic, modeled on Homer's Iliad and Odyssey. Book 1 opens with Aeneas, a Trojan survivor, shipwrecked on Carthage's shore due to Juno's interference, meeting Queen Dido, an exile from Tyre. Book 2 recounts Troy's fall, including the Trojan Horse stratagem and Aeneas' escape with his father Anchises and son Ascanius, losing his wife Creusa. The text emphasizes Aeneas' pietas (duty to gods, family, state). Divine rivalries, notably Juno's grudge from the Judgment of Paris and Venus' protection of Aeneas, drive the narrative. The Fagles translation includes maps and a glossary for accessibility. Ovid's Metamorphoses (David Raeburn's Translation): Composed around 8 CE, Metamorphoses is a 15-book poem chronicling transformations from creation to Ovid's era. Book 1 covers the creation of the cosmos from Chaos, the division into four elements (fire, water, earth, air), and humanity's decline from the Golden to Iron Age. It includes a flood narrative with Deucalion and Pyrrha and the story of Io, transformed into a cow by Jupiter to evade Juno. The Raeburn edition organizes vignettes with titled sections for clarity. The Portable Roman Reader (Basil Davenport, Ed.): Published in 1951, this anthology includes poetry from Rome's Republic, Augustan, and later Empire periods. Catullus (c. 60s–50s BCE) offers direct, personal verses, translated by Byron. Horace (65–8 BCE) writes complex, philosophical odes, less accessible due to style. Martial (c. 38–104 CE) provides epigrams on public life, including two elegies for a deceased young girl. Davenport's notes contextualize each era, and the anthology features prose by Livy, Caesar, and Tacitus for future study. Contextual Notes: The texts reflect Rome's engagement with Greek literary traditions, adapting gods' names (e.g., Hera to Juno) and themes. The course's schedule prioritizes rapid coverage to identify key works and connections.Takeaways:I loved this week so much! It felt great to come "home" to Rome. I've got specific ideas about how to approach each of these books, but in my opinion they are all worth the time for certain people. The music was gorgeous, arias and overtures from Puccini and Verdi! You must listen...check out my link below. And the cave paintings were worth examining as well, especially the handprints from Indonesia. See that link below, too.This is a year-long challenge! Join me next week for WHATEVER IS NEXTLINKSTed Gioia/The Honest Broker's 12-Month Immersive Humanities Course (paywalled!)My Amazon Book List (NOT an affiliate link)Spotify Play List of Puccini and Verdi without wordsCave...

Hello friends! This time I am introducing you to Peter Gunn, who tells a magical miracle story from his childhood. To say that it changed everything would be the understatement of the century...but there we are! But in the here and now, Peter is doing some seriously groovy work re-imagining the epics (think Beowulf, The Iliad, The Odyssey et al) into poems that put forth female protagonists and female change-makers. It's all so delightful, I could NOT wait to talk to him! To read more about Peter and his endless well of creativity, visit his website here! To check out The Amazons, click here! I need to thank Peter for being such a gracious guest, and good laugher! We had a great time recording the interview! Please do remember to rate and review and share the podcast...it's good for what ails all of us! Your bit of beauty are a few images from one of my favorite comics, Mouse Guard! Written and illustrated by David Petersen it'll be sure to convince you to leave the mouse traps alone...and remember that each and every one of us (human and animal alike) are just trying to get through this world in one piece! xo

Hello friends! This time I am introducing you to Peter Gunn, who tells a magical miracle story from his childhood. To say that it changed everything would be the understatement of the century...but there we are! But in the here and now, Peter is doing some seriously groovy work re-imagining the epics (think Beowulf, The Iliad, The Odyssey et al) into poems that put forth female protagonists and female change-makers. It's all so delightful, I could NOT wait to talk to him! To read more about Peter and his endless well of creativity, visit his website here! To check out The Amazons, click here! I need to thank Peter for being such a gracious guest, and good laugher! We had a great time recording the interview! Please do remember to rate and review and share the podcast...it's good for what ails all of us! Your bit of beauty are a few images from one of my favorite comics, Mouse Guard! Written and illustrated by David Petersen it'll be sure to convince you to leave the mouse traps alone...and remember that each and every one of us (human and animal alike) are just trying to get through this world in one piece! xo

In Part 1 of our discussion on Homer's Iliad, we welcome translator Emily Wilson to discuss Homer's life as an "author," the meaning of free will in the context of intervention from gods, and how the relationship between Achilles and Patroclus shapes the climax of the epic. Emily Wilson is a professor of classical studies at the University of Pennsylvania. She has been named a Fellow of the American Academy in Rome in Renaissance and early modern studies, a MacArthur Fellow, and a Guggenheim Fellow. In addition to Homer's Iliad and Odyssey, she has also published translations of Sophocles, Euripides, and Seneca. She lives in Philadelphia.To learn more or purchase a copy of the Norton Library edition of The Iliad, go to https://wwnorton.com/books/9781324102076.  Learn more about the Norton Library series at https://wwnorton.com/norton-library.Have questions or suggestions for the podcast? Email us at nortonlibrary@wwnorton.com or find us on Twitter at @TNL_WWN and Bluesky at @nortonlibrary.bsky.social. 

In the sixth episode of this season, I examine two Italian cinema adaptations of Homer's Iliad: 1911's "The Fall of Troy" (La Caduta di Troia) and 1962's "The Fury of Achilles" (L'ira di Achille). Are the Italians more interested in scale or storytelling? Listen and find out. The conversation on how an Italian treatment on this epic compares with an American one will continue in the season finale. Subscribe on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dear-reader-a-jane-eyre-podcast/id1585429797 Don't use iTunes? Use this link for your podcast catcher: https://feeds.feedburner.com/dear-reader-podcast Also available on Spotify, Amazon Music and Google Podcasts Follow DEAR READER on TWITTER: https://twitter.com/batgirltooracle Put down your comics, pick up your first editions, and subscribe to DEAR READER!

It might not always be true, but money talks. Trey answers questions on Congressional authority to raise the debt ceiling and the Pentagon funding flights to Guantanamo Bay amid the migrant crisis. Plus, he reveals who he believes to be the true hero in Greek poet Homer's “Iliad”.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Mut and Birdman in-studio. Justin gives his review of The Godfather (00:08:00). A conspiracy theorist calls Barstool gay (00:29:30). Coleman is reading Iliad right now (00:32:45). Mut confirms he will be on Chasing Greens next week (00:57:40). Big Bang Theory is too inappropriate for Mut.You can find every episode of this show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or YouTube. Prime Members can listen ad-free on Amazon Music. For more, visit barstool.link/kminshow