POPULARITY
22 episodes with John Galsworthy
3 episodes with John Galsworthy
2 episodes with John Galsworthy
2 episodes with John Galsworthy
4 episodes with John Galsworthy
3 episodes with John Galsworthy
One-Act Play Collections - Book 3, Part 2 Title: One-Act Play Collections - Volume 3 Overview: This collection of ten one-act dramas features plays by Edward Goodman, Alice Gerstenberg, Arnold Bennett, John Galsworthy, Anton Chekhov, Frank Wedekind, Moliere, Theresa Helburn, John Kendrick Bangs, and Harold Brighouse. A one-act play is a play that has only one act and is distinct from plays that occur over several acts. One-act plays may consist of one or more scenes. The 20-40 minute play has emerged as a popular subgenre of the one-act play, especially in writing competitions. One-act plays make up the overwhelming majority of Fringe Festival shows including at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival. The origin of the one-act play may be traced to the very beginning of recorded Western drama: in ancient Greece, Cyclops, a satyr play by Euripides, is an early example. The satyr play was a farcical short work that came after a trilogy of multi-act serious drama plays. A few notable examples of one-act plays emerged before the 19th century including various versions of the Everyman play and works by Moliere and Calderon. One act plays became more common in the 19th century and is now a standard part of repertory theatre and fringe festivals. Published: Various Series: One-Act Play Collections List: One-Act Play Collections, Play #6 Author: Various Genre: Plays, Theater, Drama Episode: One-Act Play Collections - Book 3, Part 2 Book: 3 Volume: 3 Part: 2 of 2 Episodes Part: 5 Length Part: 3:27:06 Episodes Volume: 10 Length Volume: 5:45:58 Episodes Book: 10 Length Book: 5:45:58 Narrator: Collaborative Language: English Rated: Guidance Suggested Edition: Unabridged Audiobook Keywords: plays, theater, drama, comedy, hit, musical, opera, performance, show, entertainment, farce, theatrical, tragedy, one-act, stage show Hashtags: #freeaudiobooks #audiobook #mustread #readingbooks #audiblebooks #favoritebooks #free #booklist #audible #freeaudiobook #plays #theater #drama #comedy #hit #musical #opera #performance #show #entertainment #farce #theatrical #tragedy #one-act #StageShow Credits: All LibriVox Recordings are in the Public Domain. Wikipedia (c) Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. WOMBO Dream. Arielle Lipshaw.
One-Act Play Collections - Book 3, Part 1 Title: One-Act Play Collections - Volume 3 Overview: This collection of ten one-act dramas features plays by Edward Goodman, Alice Gerstenberg, Arnold Bennett, John Galsworthy, Anton Chekhov, Frank Wedekind, Moliere, Theresa Helburn, John Kendrick Bangs, and Harold Brighouse. A one-act play is a play that has only one act and is distinct from plays that occur over several acts. One-act plays may consist of one or more scenes. The 20-40 minute play has emerged as a popular subgenre of the one-act play, especially in writing competitions. One-act plays make up the overwhelming majority of Fringe Festival shows including at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival. The origin of the one-act play may be traced to the very beginning of recorded Western drama: in ancient Greece, Cyclops, a satyr play by Euripides, is an early example. The satyr play was a farcical short work that came after a trilogy of multi-act serious drama plays. A few notable examples of one-act plays emerged before the 19th century including various versions of the Everyman play and works by Moliere and Calderon. One act plays became more common in the 19th century and is now a standard part of repertory theatre and fringe festivals. Published: Various Series: One-Act Play Collections List: One-Act Play Collections, Play #5 Author: Various Genre: Plays, Theater, Drama Episode: One-Act Play Collections - Book 3, Part 1 Book: 3 Volume: 3 Part: 1 of 2 Episodes Part: 5 Length Part: 2:18:56 Episodes Volume: 10 Length Volume: 5:45:58 Episodes Book: 10 Length Book: 5:45:58 Narrator: Collaborative Language: English Rated: Guidance Suggested Edition: Unabridged Audiobook Keywords: plays, theater, drama, comedy, hit, musical, opera, performance, show, entertainment, farce, theatrical, tragedy, one-act, stage show Hashtags: #freeaudiobooks #audiobook #mustread #readingbooks #audiblebooks #favoritebooks #free #booklist #audible #freeaudiobook #plays #theater #drama #comedy #hit #musical #opera #performance #show #entertainment #farce #theatrical #tragedy #one-act #StageShow Credits: All LibriVox Recordings are in the Public Domain. Wikipedia (c) Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. WOMBO Dream. Arielle Lipshaw.
One-Act Play Collections - Book 2, Part 2 Title: One-Act Play Collections - Volume 2 Overview: This collection of eight one-act dramas features plays by Eugene O'Neill, George Bernard Shaw, John Galsworthy, Susan Glaspell, William Dean Howells, and John Millington Synge. It also includes a dramatic reading of a short story by Frank Richard Stockton. A one-act play is a play that has only one act and is distinct from plays that occur over several acts. One-act plays may consist of one or more scenes. The 20-40 minute play has emerged as a popular subgenre of the one-act play, especially in writing competitions. One-act plays make up the overwhelming majority of Fringe Festival shows including at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival. The origin of the one-act play may be traced to the very beginning of recorded Western drama: in ancient Greece, Cyclops, a satyr play by Euripides, is an early example. The satyr play was a farcical short work that came after a trilogy of multi-act serious drama plays. A few notable examples of one-act plays emerged before the 19th century including various versions of the Everyman play and works by Moliere and Calderon. One act plays became more common in the 19th century and is now a standard part of repertory theatre and fringe festivals. Published: Various Series: One-Act Play Collections List: One-Act Play Collections, Play #4 Author: Various Genre: Plays, Theater, Drama Episode: One-Act Play Collections - Book 2, Part 2 Book: 2 Volume: 2 Part: 2 of 2 Episodes Part: 4 Length Part: 2:03:59 Episodes Volume: 8 Length Volume: 4:22:04 Episodes Book: 8 Length Book: 4:22:04 Narrator: Collaborative Language: English Rated: Guidance Suggested Edition: Unabridged Audiobook Keywords: plays, theater, drama, comedy, hit, musical, opera, performance, show, entertainment, farce, theatrical, tragedy, one-act, stage show Hashtags: #freeaudiobooks #audiobook #mustread #readingbooks #audiblebooks #favoritebooks #free #booklist #audible #freeaudiobook #plays #theater #drama #comedy #hit #musical #opera #performance #show #entertainment #farce #theatrical #tragedy #one-act #StageShow Credits: All LibriVox Recordings are in the Public Domain. Wikipedia (c) Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. WOMBO Dream. Elizabeth Klett.
One-Act Play Collections - Book 2, Part 1 Title: One-Act Play Collections - Volume 2 Overview: This collection of eight one-act dramas features plays by Eugene O'Neill, George Bernard Shaw, John Galsworthy, Susan Glaspell, William Dean Howells, and John Millington Synge. It also includes a dramatic reading of a short story by Frank Richard Stockton. A one-act play is a play that has only one act and is distinct from plays that occur over several acts. One-act plays may consist of one or more scenes. The 20-40 minute play has emerged as a popular subgenre of the one-act play, especially in writing competitions. One-act plays make up the overwhelming majority of Fringe Festival shows including at the Edinburgh Fringe Festival. The origin of the one-act play may be traced to the very beginning of recorded Western drama: in ancient Greece, Cyclops, a satyr play by Euripides, is an early example. The satyr play was a farcical short work that came after a trilogy of multi-act serious drama plays. A few notable examples of one-act plays emerged before the 19th century including various versions of the Everyman play and works by Moliere and Calderon. One act plays became more common in the 19th century and is now a standard part of repertory theatre and fringe festivals. Published: Various Series: One-Act Play Collections List: One-Act Play Collections, Play #3 Author: Various Genre: Plays, Theater, Drama Episode: One-Act Play Collections - Book 2, Part 1 Book: 2 Volume: 2 Part: 1 of 2 Episodes Part: 4 Length Part: 2:18:08 Episodes Volume: 8 Length Volume: 4:22:04 Episodes Book: 8 Length Book: 4:22:04 Narrator: Collaborative Language: English Rated: Guidance Suggested Edition: Unabridged Audiobook Keywords: plays, theater, drama, comedy, hit, musical, opera, performance, show, entertainment, farce, theatrical, tragedy, one-act, stage show Hashtags: #freeaudiobooks #audiobook #mustread #readingbooks #audiblebooks #favoritebooks #free #booklist #audible #freeaudiobook #plays #theater #drama #comedy #hit #musical #opera #performance #show #entertainment #farce #theatrical #tragedy #one-act #StageShow Credits: All LibriVox Recordings are in the Public Domain. Wikipedia (c) Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. WOMBO Dream. Elizabeth Klett.
In this episode we discuss Hitchcock's early talkie, The Skin Game. Based on a popular play at the time, this 1931 drama deals with the feud between two wealthy families in England. Details: The Skin Game was released in 1931 by British International Pictures. Produced by John Maxwell. Script was written by Alfred Hitchcock and Alma Reville based on John Galsworthy's play. Starring Edmund Gwenn, Helen Haye, C.V. France, Jill Esmond, and Phyllis Konstam. Cinematography by John M. Cox. Ranking: 46 out of 52. Ranking movies is a reductive parlor game. It's also fun. And it's a good way to frame a discussion. We aggregated over 70 ranking lists from critics, fans, and magazines, and will be going through Alfred Hitchcock's films from “worst” to “best.” The Skin Game got 411 ranking points.
1001 Sherlock Holmes Stories & The Best of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
There are hundreds of Sherlock Holmes stories written by other authors, but only a handful are in the public domain. This one was written by Jules Castier wile in a German prison during WWI and published in 1920. The story was a part of a collection of pastiches Castier wrote mimicking famous authors of the time- and the publisher wrote to each author asking for a foreword- many responded. The book is rare- it is titled 'Rather Like....Some Endeavors to Assume the Mantle of the Great . In this podcast I ask anyone who gets the book to let us know which authors wrote forewards and to share a few with us- my email: 1001storiespodcast@gmail.com. Authors parodied are : F. Anstey, Arnold Bennett, Hall Caine, G. K. Chesterton, Joseph Conrad, Marie Corelli, Arthur Conan Doyle, John Galsworthy, Charles Garvice, Sir H. Rider Haggard, Henry Harland, Maurice Hewlett, Robert Hichens, E. W. Hornung, W. W. Jacobs, Henry James, Jerome K. Jerome, Rudyard Kipling, William Le Queux, W. J. Locke, Jack London, Leonard Merrick, Henry Seton Merriman, Henry Newbolt, Eden Philpotts, R. W. Service, George Bernard Shaw, Robert Louis Stevenson, Elizabeth von Arnim, E. Temple Thurston, Horace A. Vachell, H. G. Wells, Oscar Wilde and C. N. & A. M. Williamson. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
Joyce, Proust, Woolf och Eliot präglar modernismens gyllene år 1922. Men allt fokus på detta år har varit skadligt och gjort litteraturen mindre än vad den är, menar litteraturvetaren Paul Tenngart. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna.Det är ett välkänt faktum att flera av huvudfigurerna under modernismens viktigaste år, 1922, aldrig fick Nobelpriset i litteratur: James Joyce, Marcel Proust och Virginia Woolf – alla saknas de på listan över stockholmsprisade världsförfattare. Det är väl egentligen bara T.S. Eliot som både bidrog till de legendariska litterära experimenten 1922 och belönades av Svenska Akademien, även om han fick vänta i tjugofem år efter det att The Waste Land publicerades innan han fick priset 1948.Dessa luckor har gett upphov till stark kritik genom årens lopp, ibland rentav föraktfullt hån. Oförmågan att belöna Joyce, Proust och Woolf har setts som belägg för att Svenska Akademien är en inskränkt och obsolet sammanslutning långt ute – eller långt uppe – i den kulturella och geografiska periferin som aldrig borde ha fått uppdraget att dela ut världens viktigaste litterära pris.Vem var det då som fick Nobelpriset 1922? Jo, det gick förstås inte till någon modernist, utan till ett av de idag allra mest bortglömda författarskapen i prisets historia, den spanske dramatikern Jacinto Benavente. Benaventes realistiska dramatik förhåller sig på ett direkt sätt till samtidens sociala frågor och strävar efter en naturlig, icke-teatral dialog. Författarskapet ligger med andra ord långt ifrån högmodernismens eruption av formella experiment.Den litteraturhistoria som Nobelpriserna tecknar är en annan än den vanliga. Men det innebär inte att den är felaktig eller destruktiv. Tvärtom: Nobelprisets parallella historia ger ett lika uppfriskande som konstruktivt – ja, kanske rentav nödvändigt relativiserande – alternativ till den litteraturhistoriska normen.Det är ju faktiskt inte givet att den litteratur som Joyce, Proust, Woolf och Eliot producerade 1922 är bättre än all annan litteratur. Litterära värden är ju knappast naturgivna. Det blir inte minst tydligt när man tittar på vilka Nobelpris som har hyllats och vilka som har kritiserats genom åren. Beslutet att ge schweizaren Carl Spitteler 1919 års pris har i efterhand kritiserats i flera omgångar av internationella bedömare. Men på åttiotalet framstod detta överraskande val som ett av Svenska Akademiens allra bästa. Ett av de pris som de flesta har tyckt om men som enstaka kritiker har fnyst åt är T.S. Eliots. ”Framtiden kommer att skratta”, menade litteraturprofessorn Henri Peyre från Yale University 1951, ”åt det brist på perspektiv i vår tid som gör att vi uppfattar Eliot som en litterär talang av högsta rang.”Den västeuropeiska modernismen – med året 1922 som kronologiskt epicentrum – har under en lång tid lagt sig som en gigantisk blöt filt över hela den internationella litteraturhistorieskrivningen. Vad som hände under det tidiga 20-talet i Paris och London har blivit en grundmurad norm: då och där skrevs det bästa av det bästa. Aldrig tidigare och aldrig senare har litteraturen varit så modern. Hmm.Som inget annat år i världshistorien har universitetskurser och läroböcker tjatat sönder 1922 och dess litterära utgivning. Denna historieskrivning är inte bara slö och slentrianmässig, den är också ordentligt förminskande av en hel modern världshistoria där det skrivits litteratur på alla platser, på alla språk och i alla genrer.Denna kronologiska normativitet har också med all önskvärd tydlighet hjälpt till att gång på gång bekräfta och upprätthålla den västerländska kulturella hegemonin. Som den franska världslitteraturforskaren Pascale Casanova skriver: Västeuropa och USA har kommit att äga det moderna. Moderniteten har kommit att definieras som västerländsk, och det som definierats som modernt har betraktats som per definition bra. De få texter och författarskap som lyfts in i den moderna världslitteraturen från andra delar av världen har fått sin plats där för att de påminner om fransk, brittisk eller amerikansk modernism.Den här normativa litteraturhistorieskrivningen ger också en väldigt sned uppfattning om hur litteratur existerar i världen, och hur den utvecklas och förändras. Det var ju knappast så att läsarna 1922 hängde på låsen till bokhandlarna för att skaffa Joyces nya 900-sidiga experiment Ulysses och T.S. Eliots notförsedda friversdikt The Waste Land så fort dessa texter anlände från trycket. Nä, 1922 var de flesta läsande människor upptagna med andra författare, till exempel sådana som fick Nobelpriset under den perioden: den franske sedesskildraren Anatole France, den norska författaren till historiska romaner Sigrid Undset eller den italienska skildraren av sardiniskt folkliv Grazia Deledda.Än mer brett tilltalande var den litteratur som prisades på trettiotalet, då många kritiker i efterhand har tyckt att Svenska Akademien borde ha kunnat ha vett och tidskänsla nog att ge de inte helt lättillgängliga modernisterna Paul Valéry eller John Dos Passos priset. Då belönades istället Forsythe-sagans skapare John Galsworthy, då fick Roger Martin du Gard priset för sin stora realistiska romansvit om familjen Thibault, och då belönades Erik Axel Karlfeldt – som inte var någon gigant ute i världen, det medges, men mycket omtyckt av många svenska läsare.Det är också under den här tiden som det mest hånade av alla litterära Nobelpris delas ut, till Pearl S. Buck. Men Buck har fått en renässans på senare år. Hon var visserligen från USA, men levde stora delar av sitt liv i Kina och förde med sina lantlivsskildringar in det stora landet i öster i den prisvinnande litteraturen. Och i sin motivering lyfte Nobelkommittéen fram just dessa världsvidgande egenskaper: den amerikanska författarens romaner är ”avgjort märkliga genom äkthet och rikedom i skildringen och sällsynt kunskap och insikt i en för västerländska läsare föga känd och mycket svårtillgänglig värld”. Buck ger inblick i nya kulturella sammanhang, berikar den kulturellt sett högst begränsade västerländska litteraturen med motiv och tematik från en mångtusenårig kultur med en minst lika gedigen litterär tradition som den europeiska.Vad hade hänt om Nobelpriset istället hade gett postuma pris till Rainer Maria Rilke och Marcel Proust, och hunnit belöna Joyce och Woolf innan de dog i början av fyrtiotalet? Rilke, Proust, Joyce och Woolf hade ju knappast kunnat vara större och mer centrala än de redan är. Ingen skillnad där alltså. Men det hade varit mycket svårare för oss att hitta fram till Buck, du Gard, Galsworthy, Deledda, France – och till 1922 års stora litterära namn när det begav sig: Jacinto Benavente. Utan pris hade de alla varit helt undanskymda, osynliga, bortglömda. Nu ser vi dem fortfarande, tack vare den alternativa historieskrivning som Nobelprisets löpande och oåterkalleliga kanonisering skapar. Paul Tenngart, litteraturvetare och författareModernismåret 192227.1 Kafka påbörjar "Slottet".2.2 James Joyces "Ulysses" publiceras.Rainer Maria Rilke får feeling. På tre veckor skriver han hela "Sonetterna till Orfeus" samt avslutar "Duino-elegierna".18.5 Proust, Joyce, Stravinsky, Picasso, Satie med flera äter middag.18.10 BBC Startar26.10 Virginia Woolfs "Jacob's room" publiceras.18.11 Proust dör.15.12 T S Eliots "The waste land" utkommer i bokform.Andra händelser: Karin Boyes debutdiktsamling "Moln" utkommer; Katherine Mansfields "The garden party and other stories" publiceras; Birger Sjöbergs "Fridas bok" utkommer; F Scott Fitzgerald har ett produktivt år (det är också under 1922 som "Den store Gatsby", publicerad 1925, utspelar sig); Prousts "På spaning efter den tid som flytt" börjar publiceras på engelska; i december blir Hemingways portfölj med flera års skrivande stulen på Gare de Lyon.FototVirginina Woolf: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Virginia_Woolf_1927.jpgJame Joyce: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:James_Joyce_by_Alex_Ehrenzweig,_1915_cropped.jpgT S Eliot:https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:T_S_Elliot_-_Mar_1923_Shadowland.jpg
Abril Si te gusta lo que escuchas y deseas apoyarnos puedes dejar tu donación en PayPal, ahí nos encuentras como @IrvingSun 1. Los Buddenbrook – Thomas Mann 2. El sabueso de los Baskerville – Arthur Conan Doyle 3. El corazón de las tinieblas – Joseph Conrad 4. Cañas y barro – Vicente Blasco Ibáñez 5. El inmoralista – André Gide 6. Los embajadores – Henry James 7. El enigma de las arenas – Erskine Childers 8. La llama de la selva – Jack London 9. Sucesos memorables de un enfermo de los nervios – Daniel P. Shreber 10. Sonatas – Ramón María del Valle Inclán 11. Adriano VII – Frederick Rolfe 12. Nostromo – Joseph Conrad 13. La casa de la alegría – Edith Wharton 14. El profesor Unrat – Heinrich Mann 15. Solitud – Víctor Catalá 16. Los extravíos del colega Törless – Robert Musil 17. La saga de los Forsyle – John Galeworthy --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/irving-sun/message
The Island Pharisees
A Family Man : in three acts
The Forsyte Saga, Volume I. The Man Of Property
The Country House
The Complete Essays of John Galsworthy
Four Short Plays
Strife: A Drama in Three Acts
The Skin Game (A Tragi-Comedy)
Joy: A Play on the Letter "I"
The Mob: A Play in Four Acts
The Forsyte Saga, Volume III. Awakening To Let
The Forsyte Saga, Volume II. Indian Summer of a Forsyte In Chancery
Beyond
Tonight's sleep story is The Forsyte Saga by John Galsworthy. Published between 1906 and 1921, the books follow the Forsyte family, a "new money" upper middle class family navigating London society in the late 1870s to the early 20th century. In this episode, members of the Forsyte family gather to meet (and inspect) a possible new addition to the family.Interested in more sleepy content or just want to support the show? Join Just Sleep Premium here: https://justsleeppodcast.com/supportAs a Just Sleep Premium member you will receive:Ad-free and Intro-free episodesThe entire back catalogue of the podcast, ad and intro-freeThe entire audiobook of the Wizard of OzA collection of short fairy tales including Rapunzel and the Frog PrinceThe chance to vote on the next story that you hearThe chance to win readings just for youThanks for your support!Sweet Dreams...Intro Music by the Psychedelic Squirrel Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
March 20 2023 The Witch Daily Show (https://www.witchdailyshow.com) is talking Eostre Our sponsor today Is Witch Way Magazine (https://www.witchwaymag.com/) and ( Want to buy me a cup of coffee? Venmo: TonyaWitch - Last 4: 9226 Our quote of the day Is: ― “It was such a spring day as breathes into a man an ineffable yearning, a painful sweetness, a longing that makes him stand motionless, looking at the leaves or grass, and fling out his arms to embrace he knows not what.” ― John Galsworthy, The Forsyte Saga Headlines: (https://ny.eater.com/2023/1/23/23566279/foul-witch-robertas-opening-review) Other Sources: (https://www.tragicbeautiful.com/en-us/products/peppermint-herbal-alchemy) Thank you so much for joining me this morning, if you have any witch tips, questions, witch fails, or you know of news I missed, visit https://www.witchdailyshow.com or email me at thewitchdailypodcast@gmail.com If you want to support The Witch Daily Show please visit our patreon page https://www.patreon.com/witchdailyshow Mailing Address (must be addressed as shown below) Tonya Brown 3436 Magazine St #460 New Orleans, LA 70115
‘The Descent of Money: Literature, Inheritance, and Trust in Edith Wharton's The House of Mirth (1905) and John Galsworthy's The Man of Property (1906)'Rob Hawkes' paper argues that Edith Wharton's The House of Mirth (1905) and John Galsworthy's The Man of Property (1906) foreground, interrogate and enact questions of trust, both in their engagements with and departures from literary realism/naturalism and in their preoccupations with the value and power of money. Wharton's novel is saturated with the language of costs, payments, investments, and debts, while the first of Galsworthy's Forsyte novels presents ‘Forsyteism' as an inescapable set of hereditary traits. Both texts, furthermore, implicitly associate money with nature and imagine a ‘sense of property' as inherited in more ways than one, whilst simultaneously offering glimpses of a different understanding of money altogether: one that reveals surprising connections between literature, money, and trust.Visit our Patreon page here: https://www.patreon.com/MoLsuperstructure
Virginia Woolfs "Jacob's Room" betraktas ofta som en förstudie till hennes verkliga storverk. Det är dags att ändra på den uppfattningen, säger litteraturvetaren Karin Nykvist. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna.Vem är Jacob? Var är Jacob? Jag läser Virginia Woolfs roman Jacobs Room och frågorna kommer till mig, gång på gång. För jag får liksom inte kläm på honom, han glider hela tiden undan.Jag är inte ensam om att känna så. Redan på romanens första sida frågar sig hans mamma: var är den där besvärlige lille pojken? och skickar iväg hans bror för att leta. Ja-cob! Ja-cob! ropar brodern så som så många fler ska göra innan den korta berättelsen är slut.För inte är det mycket vi reda på om Jacob. Istället får vi veta vad andra tänker: när de betraktar honom, förälskar sig i honom, skriver brev om honom och skvallrar om honom. Huvudpersonen själv förblir ett slags gäckande frånvaro, även om vi följer tätt i hans spår: från en dag på stranden i den tidiga barndomen, till studierna i Cambridge, till rummet i London, till le grand tour i Italien och Grekland, och sist till det slutgiltiga försvinnandet, i det första världskrigets stora anonyma död.Så blir romanen till ett slag antibiografi: den tecknar fram ett liv som förblir preludier och skisser; den är en bildningsroman som inte går i mål.Och just däri ligger förstås dess storhet. För vad kan vi veta om en annan människa, eller ens om oss själva? Och hur kan vi fånga det där som är människans mest grundläggande begränsning och samtidigt hennes största och enda möjlighet: livet självt?Romanen är Virginia Woolfs tredje. Den kom ut under det år som ofta blir kallat vidunderligt när litteraturhistoria ska skrivas: 1922. Ur ett engelskspråkigt perspektiv är det nästan Året med stort Å. I februari gav James Joyce ut sin tegelsten Ulysses med hjälp av den modiga Sylvia Beach i Paris. I oktober publicerade T.S Eliot The Waste Land i sin egen tidskrift The Criterion. Och senare samma månad lät paret Woolf trycka upp Jacobs Room på det egna förlaget Hogarth Press.Virginia Woolf kallade själv Jacobs Room för ett experiment, och möjligen är det detta uttalande som får författaren Lawrence Norfolk att i förordet till min engelska utgåva utbrista att romanen saknar det självförtroende som kännetecknar Joyces och Eliots böcker. Självklart har han fel. För det första har en roman inga känslor alls. För det andra och så klart är detta viktigare kräver experimentet en stark och trygg självkänsla. Och det verkar inte som om Woolf skulle darrat på pennan någonstans eller på något sätt valt en försiktig väg här. Några år tidigare - 1919 hade hon skrivit så här om litteraturens nya uppgift: Låt oss skriva ner atomerna så som de dyker upp i vårt sinne, i den ordning de kommer, låt oss följa mönstret, hur osammanhängande och motsägelsefullt det än ter sig, som varje syn eller händelse ristar på medvetandet.Om Virginia Woolfs romaner saknade intrig var det för att livet självt saknar det: bättre då att registrera sinnenas intryck, som bildkonstnären.Woolf menade att litteraturen befann sig vid en skiljeväg, då, i början av tjugotalet. Själv stod hon för det nya, det som mer autentiskt och ärligt förmådde gestalta tillvaron. På andra sidan placerade hon författare som John Galsworthy han som skrev Forsytesagan och som snart skulle få Nobelpriset eller den framgångsrika Arnold Bennett, som skrev böcker i en traditionellt realistisk stil med tydliga huvudpersoner och en allvetande berättare och som till skillnad från Woolf sålde i drivor.Bennett var för övrigt en av alla dem som sågade Jacobs Room. Han menade att romanens gestalter omöjligt kunde få liv hos läsaren eftersom författaren, som han syrligt skrev var besatt av originalitet och smarthet.Woolf skulle snart hämnas och formulera sitt förslag på en ny estetik för romanen: i essän Mrs Brown and Mr Bennett från 1923 skriver hon om hur en tänkt kvinna på ett tåg, Mrs Brown, kan skildras litterärt på olika sätt beroende på författarens övertygelser. Woolf låter där den daterade Mr Bennett och hans gelikar tynga ner den stackars Mrs Brown till oigenkännlighet med en omständlig prosa, trots att hon förtjänar att gestaltas på ett helt annat sätt. Vi måste lära oss att stå ut med det krampaktiga, det obscena, det fragmentariska, misslyckandet, skriver Virginia Woolf. Något annat skulle vara att svika Mrs Brown.Här finns alltså en litteratursyn som bygger på en helt ny människosyn. I Virginia Woolfs värld kan ingen kan längre fångas in, paketeras, eller ges prydlig gestaltning. För att lyckas måste litteraturen misslyckas. Så kan världen skildras sant.Många kritiker har i efterhand betraktat Jacobs room som en förövning till de verkligt stora verken i Woolfs författarskap: hon skulle snart komma att skriva Mrs Dalloway och To the Lighthouse, Mot fyren..Men Jacobs Room är en storartad roman i sin egen rätt Och faktiskt är det den enda av Woolfs romaner som översattes till svenska medan hon själv levde bara en sån sak.Romanens grundtes är att även om vi i sällsynta ögonblick kan uppleva att vi verkligen ser och känner någon så är dessa stunder av absolut närvaro oerhört sällsynta. Istället är det frånvaron som kännetecknar våra liv och våra mänskliga mellanhavanden. Vi skriver, ringer, talar med, till och om varandra, utan att riktigt nå fram. Våra intryck av den rikt myllrande världen är flyktiga och övergående, även om de är fyllda av aldrig så mycket akut skönhet och känsla. Så kan de här stunderna skildras litterärt på samma sätt som impressionisterna tecknade solens förflyttningar över vatten: bara ögonblicket kan fångas, det undflyende.Den som vill filmatisera Jacobs Room borde ha ett lätt jobb: texten består av korta scener som avlöser varandra: vi är på stranden, så - klipp -vid Piccadilly, och klipp - på ett tåg på väg till Cambridge. Och så klipp på Akropolis i Aten.Och överallt alla dessa människor. Inte mindre än 156 namngivna personer befolkar Woolfs roman. Flera av dem får inte ens en halv sida. Alla dessa liv, som vi inte vet någonting om. Och där nånstans, ibland, Jacob, med en bok under armen.1922 var ett storartat litterärt år. Men alla de storverk som skrevs då gick de flesta förbi: både Woolf och Eliot ägnade sig ju åt egenutgivning i små upplagor, och Joyces Ulysses kom ut på ett litet och okänt förlag långt från den engelskspråkiga sfären. Jag läser vidare om Jacob. Och tänker på dagens litterära utgivning. Vilka böcker kommer att vara framtidens omistliga klassiker vilka författare den framtida historieskrivningens fixstjärnor? Ges de också ut på egna och obskyra förlag?Det enda vi säkert vet är att vi har absolut ingen aning. Men jag är allt lite avundsjuk på dem som i framtiden får läsa årets bästa böcker. Vår tids Jacobs Room.Karin Nykvist, litteraturvetare och kritikerFotnot: Jacob's Room finns översatt till svenska som Jacobs Rum av Siri Thorngren-Olin.
Un Día Como Hoy 14 de Agosto Nace: 1867: John Galsworthy, novelista y dramaturgo británico, premio Nobel de Literatura en 1932 (f. 1933). Fallece: 1951: William Randolph Hearst, periodista y editor estadounidense (n. 1863). 1981: Karl Böhm, director de orquesta y músico austriaco (n. 1894). 1994: Elías Canetti, escritor búlgaro nacionalizado británico, premio Nobel de Literatura en 1981 (n. 1905).
Joyce, Proust, Woolf och Eliot präglar modernismens gyllene år 1922. Men allt fokus på detta år har varit skadligt och gjort litteraturen mindre än vad den är, menar litteraturvetaren Paul Tenngart. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna.Det är ett välkänt faktum att flera av huvudfigurerna under modernismens viktigaste år, 1922, aldrig fick Nobelpriset i litteratur: James Joyce, Marcel Proust och Virginia Woolf alla saknas de på listan över stockholmsprisade världsförfattare. Det är väl egentligen bara T.S. Eliot som både bidrog till de legendariska litterära experimenten 1922 och belönades av Svenska Akademien, även om han fick vänta i tjugofem år efter det att The Waste Land publicerades innan han fick priset 1948.Dessa luckor har gett upphov till stark kritik genom årens lopp, ibland rentav föraktfullt hån. Oförmågan att belöna Joyce, Proust och Woolf har setts som belägg för att Svenska Akademien är en inskränkt och obsolet sammanslutning långt ute eller långt uppe i den kulturella och geografiska periferin som aldrig borde ha fått uppdraget att dela ut världens viktigaste litterära pris.Vem var det då som fick Nobelpriset 1922? Jo, det gick förstås inte till någon modernist, utan till ett av de idag allra mest bortglömda författarskapen i prisets historia, den spanske dramatikern Jacinto Benavente. Benaventes realistiska dramatik förhåller sig på ett direkt sätt till samtidens sociala frågor och strävar efter en naturlig, icke-teatral dialog. Författarskapet ligger med andra ord långt ifrån högmodernismens eruption av formella experiment.Den litteraturhistoria som Nobelpriserna tecknar är en annan än den vanliga. Men det innebär inte att den är felaktig eller destruktiv. Tvärtom: Nobelprisets parallella historia ger ett lika uppfriskande som konstruktivt ja, kanske rentav nödvändigt relativiserande alternativ till den litteraturhistoriska normen.Det är ju faktiskt inte givet att den litteratur som Joyce, Proust, Woolf och Eliot producerade 1922 är bättre än all annan litteratur. Litterära värden är ju knappast naturgivna. Det blir inte minst tydligt när man tittar på vilka Nobelpris som har hyllats och vilka som har kritiserats genom åren. Beslutet att ge schweizaren Carl Spitteler 1919 års pris har i efterhand kritiserats i flera omgångar av internationella bedömare. Men på åttiotalet framstod detta överraskande val som ett av Svenska Akademiens allra bästa. Ett av de pris som de flesta har tyckt om men som enstaka kritiker har fnyst åt är T.S. Eliots. Framtiden kommer att skratta, menade litteraturprofessorn Henri Peyre från Yale University 1951, åt det brist på perspektiv i vår tid som gör att vi uppfattar Eliot som en litterär talang av högsta rang.Den västeuropeiska modernismen med året 1922 som kronologiskt epicentrum har under en lång tid lagt sig som en gigantisk blöt filt över hela den internationella litteraturhistorieskrivningen. Vad som hände under det tidiga 20-talet i Paris och London har blivit en grundmurad norm: då och där skrevs det bästa av det bästa. Aldrig tidigare och aldrig senare har litteraturen varit så modern. Hmm.Som inget annat år i världshistorien har universitetskurser och läroböcker tjatat sönder 1922 och dess litterära utgivning. Denna historieskrivning är inte bara slö och slentrianmässig, den är också ordentligt förminskande av en hel modern världshistoria där det skrivits litteratur på alla platser, på alla språk och i alla genrer.Denna kronologiska normativitet har också med all önskvärd tydlighet hjälpt till att gång på gång bekräfta och upprätthålla den västerländska kulturella hegemonin. Som den franska världslitteraturforskaren Pascale Casanova skriver: Västeuropa och USA har kommit att äga det moderna. Moderniteten har kommit att definieras som västerländsk, och det som definierats som modernt har betraktats som per definition bra. De få texter och författarskap som lyfts in i den moderna världslitteraturen från andra delar av världen har fått sin plats där för att de påminner om fransk, brittisk eller amerikansk modernism.Den här normativa litteraturhistorieskrivningen ger också en väldigt sned uppfattning om hur litteratur existerar i världen, och hur den utvecklas och förändras. Det var ju knappast så att läsarna 1922 hängde på låsen till bokhandlarna för att skaffa Joyces nya 900-sidiga experiment Ulysses och T.S. Eliots notförsedda friversdikt The Waste Land så fort dessa texter anlände från trycket. Nä, 1922 var de flesta läsande människor upptagna med andra författare, till exempel sådana som fick Nobelpriset under den perioden: den franske sedesskildraren Anatole France, den norska författaren till historiska romaner Sigrid Undset eller den italienska skildraren av sardiniskt folkliv Grazia Deledda.Än mer brett tilltalande var den litteratur som prisades på trettiotalet, då många kritiker i efterhand har tyckt att Svenska Akademien borde ha kunnat ha vett och tidskänsla nog att ge de inte helt lättillgängliga modernisterna Paul Valéry eller John Dos Passos priset. Då belönades istället Forsythe-sagans skapare John Galsworthy, då fick Roger Martin du Gard priset för sin stora realistiska romansvit om familjen Thibault, och då belönades Erik Axel Karlfeldt som inte var någon gigant ute i världen, det medges, men mycket omtyckt av många svenska läsare.Det är också under den här tiden som det mest hånade av alla litterära Nobelpris delas ut, till Pearl S. Buck. Men Buck har fått en renässans på senare år. Hon var visserligen från USA, men levde stora delar av sitt liv i Kina och förde med sina lantlivsskildringar in det stora landet i öster i den prisvinnande litteraturen. Och i sin motivering lyfte Nobelkommittéen fram just dessa världsvidgande egenskaper: den amerikanska författarens romaner är avgjort märkliga genom äkthet och rikedom i skildringen och sällsynt kunskap och insikt i en för västerländska läsare föga känd och mycket svårtillgänglig värld. Buck ger inblick i nya kulturella sammanhang, berikar den kulturellt sett högst begränsade västerländska litteraturen med motiv och tematik från en mångtusenårig kultur med en minst lika gedigen litterär tradition som den europeiska.Vad hade hänt om Nobelpriset istället hade gett postuma pris till Rainer Maria Rilke och Marcel Proust, och hunnit belöna Joyce och Woolf innan de dog i början av fyrtiotalet? Rilke, Proust, Joyce och Woolf hade ju knappast kunnat vara större och mer centrala än de redan är. Ingen skillnad där alltså. Men det hade varit mycket svårare för oss att hitta fram till Buck, du Gard, Galsworthy, Deledda, France och till 1922 års stora litterära namn när det begav sig: Jacinto Benavente. Utan pris hade de alla varit helt undanskymda, osynliga, bortglömda. Nu ser vi dem fortfarande, tack vare den alternativa historieskrivning som Nobelprisets löpande och oåterkalleliga kanonisering skapar. Paul Tenngart, litteraturvetare och författareModernismåret 192227.1 Kafka påbörjar "Slottet".2.2 James Joyces "Ulysses" publiceras.Rainer Maria Rilke får feeling. På tre veckor skriver han hela "Sonetterna till Orfeus" samt avslutar "Duino-elegierna".18.5 Proust, Joyce, Stravinsky, Picasso, Satie med flera äter middag.18.10 BBC Startar26.10 Virginia Woolfs "Jacob's room" publiceras.18.11 Proust dör.15.12 T S Eliots "The waste land" utkommer i bokform.Andra händelser: Karin Boyes debutdiktsamling "Moln" utkommer; Katherine Mansfields "The garden party and other stories" publiceras; Birger Sjöbergs "Fridas bok" utkommer; F Scott Fitzgerald har ett produktivt år (det är också under 1922 som "Den store Gatsby", publicerad 1925, utspelar sig); Prousts "På spaning efter den tid som flytt" börjar publiceras på engelska; i december blir Hemingways portfölj med flera års skrivande stulen på Gare de Lyon.FototVirginina Woolf: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Virginia_Woolf_1927.jpgJame Joyce: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:James_Joyce_by_Alex_Ehrenzweig,_1915_cropped.jpgT S Eliot: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:T_S_Elliot_-_Mar_1923_Shadowland.jpg
Welcome to the Instant Trivia podcast episode 384, where we ask the best trivia on the Internet. Round 1. Category: English Lit 1: During his "Travels" , he visited the flying island of Laputa. Gulliver. 2: This Bronte sister died 1 year after the publication of her second novel, "The Tenant of Wildfell Hall". Anne Bronte. 3: She introduced Mr. and Mrs. Dalloway in her first novel, "The Voyage Out". Virginia Woolf. 4: On this fictional Sir Thomas More island, the interests of the individual are subordinate to those of society. Utopia. 5: This author of "The Forsyte Saga" published his first novel, "Jocelyn", under the pen name John Sinjohn. John Galsworthy. Round 2. Category: Ancient Vip's 1: Books about him were written by Plato and Xenophon, both students of his. Socrates. 2: This Hebrew king taxed his people into rebellion, which may not have been too wise. Solomon. 3: The period during which he ruled is often referred to as "The Golden Age of Athens". Pericles. 4: Uncle of Caligula and stepfather of Nero, this Roman emperor was poisoned by his wife, Nero's mother. Claudius. 5: In the 6th century B.C., he conquered Babylon and made Persia the greatest empire in the world. Cyrus the Great. Round 3. Category: Beatles Songs 1: Originally, this title woman was called Miss Daisy Hawkins, but that didn't sound lonely enough. Eleanor Rigby. 2: For Paul McCartney, this Beatles song title will become true on June 18, 2006. "When I'm Sixty-Four". 3: (Alex: Alright, let's go to Cheryl at the Santa Monica Pier for this) Today, we're all living in a yellow submarine; the Beatles found this colorful body of water in the song. Sea of Green. 4: "Let me hear your balalaikas ringing out, come and keep your comrade warm" here, the title of a '68 song. "Back in the U.S.S.R.". 5: He's "As blind as he can be, just sees what he wants to see". "Nowhere Man". Round 4. Category: Play This 1: This "avian" skateboarding legend has produced several high-flying video games for Activision. Tony Hawk. 2: It's off to Skull Island for Peter Jackson's official video game adaptation of this ape movie. King Kong. 3: In New Super Mario Bros., Mario can go head-to-head against this brother of his. Luigi. 4: Advent Children and Chains of Promethia are just 2 of the many episodes in this popular role-playing game. Final Fantasy. 5: DDR for short, this groovy game can help keep you in shape. Dance Dance Revolution. Round 5. Category: Mtv Movie Awards: Best Kiss 1: Gwyneth Paltrow and Joseph Fiennes won for this movie in 1999. Shakespeare in Love. 2: For a 2003 win, she locked lips with an upside-down Tobey Maguire in "Spider-Man". Kirsten Dunst. 3: (Hi, I'm Vivica Fox) In 1997 this actor and I won the MTV Movie Award for "Best Kiss" for the kiss we shared in "Independence Day". Will Smith. 4: 1998's winner's were Adam Sandler and Drew Barrymore for this film. The Wedding Singer. 5: Woody Harrelson and Demi Moore won for this 1994 film. Indecent Proposal. Thanks for listening! Come back tomorrow for more exciting trivia!
DESCRIPCIÓN LIBROS 00:02:20 La diosa blanca (Robert Graves) 00:06:15 Where the drowned girls go (Seanan McGuire) 00:09:40 El ascenso de la sombra. La rueda del tiempo #4 (Robert Jordan) 00:13:00 A la caza del amor (Nancy Mitford) 00:16:45 Fin de capítulo. Crónicas de de los Forsyte 7-9 (John Galsworthy) 00:22:35 El ocupante (Sarah Waters) DEL PAPEL A LA PANTALLA 00:25:45 Umbrella Academy PELÍCULAS 00:32:15 Death to 2021 00:35:30 Harry Potter 20th anniversary: return to Hogwarts 00:41:25 West Side Story (1961) 00:45:00 Silent night (2021) 00:49:45 The tender bar 00:51:50 Ghostbuster: Afterlife (2021) 00:54:00 No matarás 00:57:35 El poder del perro 01:00:15 El otro guardaespaldas 2 SERIES 01:06:00 Dexter: new blood 01:11:45 Landscapers 00:16:05 Whatt happened, Brittany Murphy 01:21:00 Raphaelismo 01:24:50 Yellowjackets (T1) 01:30:15 Un escándalo muy británico (T2) 01:33:45 Venga Juan (T3) 01:36:10 After life (T3) 01:39;40 A discovery of witches (T3) 01:41:30 Deberes: ACS Impeatchment 01:45:50 DESPEDIDA En este programa suenan: Radical Opinion (Archers) / Siesta (Jahzzar) / From the Back (Pat Lock & Party Pupils) / Place on Fire (Creo) / I saw you on TV (Jahzzar) / Bicycle Waltz (Goodbye Kumiko)
Poem of the Day To Winter William Blake Beauty of Words Evolution John Galsworthy
Daily Quote If you are working on something that you really care about, you don't have to be pushed. The vision pulls you. (Steve Jobs) Poem of the Day To Winter William Blake Beauty of Words Evolution John Galsworthy
PRESENTACIÓN LIBROS 00:02:20 Por si las voces vuelven (Angel Martín) 00:04:50 La broma infinita (David Foster Wallace) 00:10:45 Las piñas de la ira (Cathon) 00:12:00 Tiempos Precarios (Flavia Blondi) 00:15:00 Cassandra Darke (Posy Simmonds) 00:17:25 El fantasma de Anya (Vera Brosgoi) 00:19:00 Hay algo matando niños vol 1 & 2 (James Tynion & Werther Dell'Edera) 00:20:45 Nada. Novela gráfica (Claudio Stassi) 00:22:25 ¡Prepárate! (Vera Brosgoi) 00:24:50 Berlín, 1, 2 & 3 (Jason Lutes) 00:27:00 Strange Planet: The Sneaking, Hiding, Vibrating Creature (Nathan W Pyle) 00:29:15 Blue Lust. Vol 1-3 (Hinako) 00:31:45 La conferencia de los pájaros (miss Peregrine #5) 00:34:40 El canto del cisne. Crónicas de los Forsyte #6 (John Galsworthy) 00:36:50 Little moments of love - Snug - In love and pajamas (Catana Chetwynd) 00:38:50 Los límites de la Fundación. Fundación #6 (Isaac Asimov) 00:43:50 Deberes: Enseñanza Mágica Obligatoria. Vol 1-6 PELÍCULAS 00:46:00 Earwig y la bruja 00:48:50 Zoey's extraordinary Christmas 00:51:35 El caballero verde 00:54:20 The last duel 00:58:30 Madres paralelas 01:02:05 Orgullo y prejuicio y zombies 01:04:05 Spencer 01:07:15 Harold y Maude 01:09:05 Qué duro es el amor 01:10:25 Last night in Soho 01:12:50 Donde caben dos SERIES 01:15:15 Amor con fianza 01:18:40 El juego del calamar 01:21:20 ¿Dónde está Marta? 01:23:35 La vida sexual de las universitarias (T1) 01:26:25 Tiger King (T2) 01:28:15 The walking dead world beyond (T2) 01:32:40 The Great (T2) 01:34:55 La casa de papel (T5.2) 01:38:30 Fear the walking dead (T7) 01:40:40 Deberes: Vida perfecta (T2) / Brooklyn 99 (T8) / American Horror Story (T10) / The bite (T1) En este programa suenan: Radical Opinion (Archers) / Siesta (Jahzzar) / Place on fire (Creo) / I saw you on TV (Jahzzar) / Bicycle Waltz (Goodbye Kumiko)
PRESENTACIÓN LIBROS 00:02:05 Giganta (Jc Deveney & Núria Tamarit) 0:03:30 Una mujer un voto (Alicia Palmer & Montse Mazorriaga) 00:05:05 solas en Berlín (Nicolas Junker) 00:05:25 Laura y Dino (Alberto Mont) 00:09:35 Oryx y Crake & El año del diluvio. MaddAddam #1, #2 (Margaret Atwood) 00:13:25 el fuego nunca se apaga (Noelle Stevenson) 00:15:05 El dragón renacido. La rueda del tiempo #3 (Robert Jordan) 00:18:15 The Avant-Guards (Carly Uslin) 00:19:45 El portal de los obeliscos. La tierra desfragmentada #2 (N.K Jemisin) 00:22:05 Villanueva (Javi de Castro) 00:24:05 El destino del Tearling #3 (Erika Johansen) 00:26:00 La receta de la luna (Suzanne Walker) 00:28:45 La cuchara de plata. Crónicas de los Forsyte #5 (John Galsworthy) 00:30:20 Matemos al tío (Rohan O'Grady) 00:33:00 en un rincón del cielo nocturno & Lluvia al amanecer. Vol #1 & #2 (Nojico Hayakawa) 00:36:25 Agatha Raisin y el veterinario cruel (M.C. Beaton) 00:38:30 Deberes: laura Dean me ha vuelto a dejar (Mariko Tamaki) PELÍCULAS 00:40:55 Eternals 00:47:10 Tick, tick... boom! 00:53:40 Fuimos canciones 00:57:50 Dear Evan Hansen 01:00:30 El cover 01:02:00 The night house 01:03:40 Alerta Roja SERIES 01:06:20 Dolores: La verdad sobre el caso Wanninkhof 01:12:30 The bite 01:15:10 Ana Bolena 01:18:05 Y, the last man 01:21:10 Foundation (T1) 01:26:30 the Morning Show (T2) 01:29:55 Stargirl (T2) 01:31:35 Vida perfecta (T2) 01:34:50 American Crime Story (T3) 01:39:15 What we do in the shadows (T3) 01:42:50 Supergirl (T6) 01:45:45 Last week tonight with John Oliver (T8) COSAS QUE NOS HACEN FELICES 01:49:10 All too well ten minute version, the short film & I bet you think about me (Taylor Swift) 01:56:00 DESPEDIDA En este programa suenan: Radical Opinion (Archers) / Siesta (Jahzzar) / Pace on Fire (Creo) / I saw you on TV (Jahzzar) / Parisian (Kevin MacLeod) / Bicycle Waltz (Goodbye Kumiko)
PRESENTACIÓN LIBROS 00:02:50 How to save a life (Lynette Rice) 00:07:50 La gran cacería. La rueda del tiempo #2 (Robert Jordan) 00:11:00 La quinta estación. La tierra fragmentada #1 (N.K. Jesmin) 00:16:00 La invasión del Tearling #2 (Erika Johansen) 00:18:50 A tumba abierta (Joe Hill) 00:20:50 Billy Summers (Stephen King) 00:23:30 La herencia (Matthew López) 00:28:50 La muerte espera en Herons Park (Christianna Brand) 00:31:00 Canción del ocaso. Trilogía Escocesa #1 (Lewis Grassig Gibbon) 00:35:30 El mono blanco. Crónicas de los Forsyte #4 (John Galsworthy) 00:30:20 Testamento de juventud (Vera Brittain) 00:43:25 Por el bien del comandante (Constance Fenimore Woolson) 00:46:10 Oddball (Sarah Andersen) 00:48:15 Deberes: Carta blanca (Jordi Lafebre) PELÍCULAS 00:50:50 El cuento de la princesa Kaguya 00:54:00 El cuento de Marnie 00:57:40 Everybody's talking about Jamie 01:01:45 Diana: the musical 01:04:20 Britney vs Spears (2021) 01:09:50 Deberes: Old / Free Guy /Cinderella SERIES 01:15:25 La asistenta 01:17:35 Midnight Mass 01:20:10 Insiders 01:23:25 Secretos de un matrimonio 01:26:15 El tiempo que te doy 01:28:05 Only murders in the building (T1) 01:32:10 What if (T1) 01:34:20 Ted Lasso (T2) 01:37:20 The movies that made us (T2) 01:39:25 Evil (T2) 01:44:00 The goes wrong show (T2) 01:46:00 Truth be told (T2) 01:49:00 Locke & Key (T2) 01:51:55 You (3) 01:57:15 Queridos blancos (T4) 01:59:15 Riverdale (T5) 02:01:25 American horror story (T10) 02:05:00 The walking dead (T11A) 02:07:25 Deberes: American horror stories PODCASTS 02:09:45 Otra españolada 02:10:40 La ruina 02:11:45 Crónicas chulapas 02:13:20 DESPEDIDA En este programa suenan: Radical Opinion (Archers) / Siesta Jahzzar) / Place on fire (Creo / I saw you on TV (Jahzzar) / Parisian (Kevin MacLeod) / Bicycle Waltz (Goodbye Kumiko)
durée : 00:32:53 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Philippe Garbit - Nuit des sagas - Entretien 3/4 avec Anne Besson et Catherine Rihoit qui, pour la première, évoque les sagas dans la littérature jeunesse de fantasy et de science-fiction et, pour la seconde, la quintessence du genre avec "La Dynastie des Forsyte", saga victorienne de John Galsworthy. - invités : Catherine Rihoit auteur.; Anne Besson Professeur en Littérature comparée, UFR Lettres et Arts, Université d'Artois.
Jens Falk kommer äntligen tillbaka efter åtta månaders frånvaro från Poddarnas Podd. John Galsworthy får till sist sin dag i rampljuset och Jens delar med sig av sina bästa investeringstips.
John Galsworthy's satirical discussion between himself and a college chum, now a repressed Church of England minister, on the puzzling definition of "Christian" marriage. If, in male-dominated Victorian society, God particularly rewards "suffering", in a "failed" marriage who is more deserving, the socially unconstrained husband or the narrowly restricted wife? And whose role is it, to judge? Adapted by Lance Davis. Performed by PNT Company members John Rafter Lee (Ken Follett Audiobooks) and Lance Davis. Sound by Dave Bennett. (13 minutes) --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/pntradio/support
Orwell explains in 1937 the disposition of the typical “socialist” living in England, and why it is so many people become averse to socialism because of these people alone, comprised of bourgeois intellectuals who have no actual affinity for the working classes, and working-class scribblers who work their way into the intellectual literati but are so hostile to everything that it seems they just want to burn it all down. Orwell questions, what is it these people, these “Socialists”, really want? When they seem to have no love for their fellow man. He suggests that, for many of them, socialism is a way to institute control on society, to implement order amongst those who do not share their cultural values. Orwell begins with descriptions of working conditions for miners in Industrial England, whom he went to live among and observe; it sounds like very difficult and back-breaking work, indeed, and their living conditions do not sound so great; many went without luxuries such as sheets, taken for granted across the world today for many years now. In the second part of the book, he gets to the meat on class and the reigning economic order of things; though I believe his beliefs that central planning and “socialism” are not the answer, he thoroughly explains issues of class, and why it is that socialism so quickly morphs into Fascism. He explains how the average socialist does not see what socialism would actually be as truly revolutionary – which, it is, in theory. The socialist, whether he is of proletarian origin or middle-class, imagines a World much like the existing one, except one maybe with less poverty, but still having the pub down the street, and the corner store selling all the wares you would want. In England, the bourgeois classes would disdain someone more “conservative”, who spoke of the superiority of England to other nations; but those same people would speak of the superiority of their own region in England to the other regions as if it were nothing. He outlines how little actual commitment to the idea of brotherhood and love for one another there is amongst the ranks of socialists, hateful men such as George Bernard Shaw who disdain the non-intellectual classes, and whose “radical” ideas “change to their opposite” at the first sight of “reality.” He explains the typical middle-class socialist as a 1937-era stereotypical Ultimate frisbee-playing type hippie, a “Sandal-wearer” who wants to go around doing yoga and ordering others about. As Dostoevsky points out, the normal human response to such a person is to give them the middle finger and to tell them to pound sand. If you look beyond the fact that Owell was not an economist, his argument is really that we ought to love our fellow man, which is in essence his argument for socialism. His illustration of class difference points out the inherent fact that humans have values. These value judgments are made from the conservative religious classes to the woke vegan-cheese eating, Prius driving classes. Orwell really argues for the need for mutual toleration, at the very least. * “A thousand influences constantly press a working man down into a passive role. He does not act, he is acted upon. He feels himself the slave of mysterious authority and has a firm conviction that “they” will never allow him to do this, that and the other. Once when I was hop-picking I asked the sweated pickers (they earn something under sixpence an hour) why they did not form a union. I was told immediately that “they” would never allow it. Who were “they” ? I asked. Nobody seemed to know; but evidently “they” were omnipotent.” * “A person of bourgeois origin goes through life with some expectation of getting what he wants... “educated” people tend to come to the front... their “education” is generally quite useless in itself, but they are accustomed to a certain amount of deference and consequently have the cheek necessary to a commander. That they will come to the front seems to be taken for granted...” * Thus, expectations of what ones role in society is inevitably has a role on how someone acts in it. Whether or not one is willing to try and buck authority has less to do with being educated, and more to do with ones mindset. This parallels some of the points made by Malcolm Gladwell in Outliars about children who learn to “come to the front” and insert themselves in situations that will further their interests. * "Talking once with a miner I asked him when the housing shortage first became acute in his district; he answered, ‘When we were told about it,' meaning that till recently people's standards were so low that they took almost any degree of overcrowding for granted. He added that when he was a child his family had slept eleven in a room and thought nothing of it, and that later, when he was grown-up, he and his wife had lived in one of the old-style back to back houses in which you not only had to walk a couple of hundred yards to the lavatory but often had to wait in a queue when you got there, the lavatory being shared by thirty-six people...” * On efforts to try to alleviate these conditions, there are premonitions of Arnade's Dignity. “...are definitely fine buildings. But there is something ruthless and soulless about the whole business. Take, for instance, the restrictions with which you are burdened in a Corporation house. You are not allowed to keep your house and garden as you want them—in some estates there is even a regulation that every garden must have the same kind of hedge. you are not allowed to keep poultry or pigeon. The Yorkshire miners are fond of keeping homer pigeons...” Thus, you can take the help, but it is a bargain with the devil where you can no longer determine how your own life is lived. * Of his time spent with the miners, who were of a different class and culture than him, “I cannot end this chapter without remarking on the extraordinary courtesy and good nature with which I was received everywhere. I did not go alone—I always had some local friend among the unemployed to show me round—but even so, it is an impertinence to go poking into strangers' houses and asking to see the cracks in the bedroom wall. Yet everyone was astonishingly patient and seemed to understand almost without explanation why I was questioning them and what I wanted to see. If any unauthorized person walked into my house and began asking me whether the roof leaked and whether I was much troubled by bugs and what I thought of my landlord, I should probably tell him to go to hell.” I think this mirrors experiences of traveling in the Midwest, of people who are extremely nice and generally welcoming, despite what is depicted in the media about their politics and thoughts. * On anonymity and the city, “Until you break the law nobody will take any notice of you, and you can go to pieces as you could not possibly do in a place where you had neighbours who knew you.” * “...you can't command the spirit of hope in which anything has got to be created, with that dull evil cloud of unemployment hanging over you...” * “It is a deadly thing to see a skilled man running to seed, year after year, in utter, hopeless idleness. It ought not to be impossible to give him the chance of using his hands and making furniture and so forth for his own home...” * “But no human being finds it easy to regard himself as a statistical unit. So long as Bert Jones across the street is still at work, Alf Smith is bound to feel himself dishonoured and a failure. Hence that frightful feeling of impotence and despair which is almost the worst evil of unemployment—far worse than any hardship, worst than the demoralisation of enforced idleness...” * “A human being is primarily a bag for putting food into; the other functions and faculties may be more godlike, but in point of time they come afterwards. A man dies and is buried, and all his words and actions are forgotten, but the food he has eaten lives after him in the sound or rotten bones of his children. I think it could be plausibly argued that changes of diet are more important than changes of dynasty or even of religion. The Great War, for instance, could never have happened if tinned food had not been invented. And the history of the past four hundred years in England would have been immensely different if it had not been for the introduction of root-crops and various other vegetables... and... non-alcoholic drinks... and... distilled liquors.” * “The ordinary human being would sooner starve than live on brown bread and raw carrots. And the peculiar evil is this, that the less money you have, the less inclined you feel to spend it on wholesome food... when you are unemployed, which is to say, when you are... bored and miserable, you don't want to eat dull wholesome food. You want something a little bit “tasty.”” When you have nothing else, you can at least have food that you enjoy. * “There exists in England a curious cult of Northernness, a sort of Northern snobbishness. A yorkshireman in the South will always take care to let you know that he regards you as an inferior... the North... is ‘real' life...”* “Here you have an interesting example of the Northern cult. Not only are you and I and everyone else in the South of England written off as "fat and sluggish," but even water, when it gets north of a certain latitude, ceases to be H2O and becomes something mystically superior. But the interest of this passage is that its writer is an extremely intelligent man of " advanced " opinions who would have nothing but contempt for nationalism in its ordinary form. Put to him some such proposition as "One Britisher is worth three foreigners," and he would repudiate it with horror. But when it is a question of North versus South, he is quite ready to generalise” * You have Americans who denounce people who are Patriotic, who denounce those who think that there are too many immigrants coming and taking the jobs, or whatever it is. But those same Americans, those "citizens of the World", are just as prejudiced against non-"multiculturalists." You don't see woke hipsters looking to saddle up with a can of Bud to watch some NASCAR and praise Jesus. They think that they are better, that their values are better, that everyone should go get an education and stop living in Indiana. So, each class of society has prejudice, it takes different forms. There is an inherently antagonistic relationship between the classes because each thinks its way of living is the right way. In a Democracy, in theory, we say that you are free to determine how to live for yourself. * “To be working class, the notion of staying at school till you are nearly grown-up seems merely contemptible and unmanly... there is much in the middle-class life that looks sickly and debilitating when you see it from a working-class angle.” Thus, the two different approaches to life and living. * “This scene is still reduplicated in a majority of English homes... Its happiness depends mainly upon one question—whether Father is in work. But notice that the picture I have called up, of a working-class family sitting round the coal fire... belongs only to our own moment... and could not belong either to the future or the past. Skip forward two hundred years into the Utopian future... In that age when there is no manual labour and everyone is ‘educated,'... The furniture will be made of rubber, glass and steel. If there are still such things as evening papers there will certainly be no racing news in them, for gambling will be meaningless in a world where there is no poverty and the horse will have vanished from the face of the earth. Dogs, too, will have been suppressed on grounds of hygiene. And there won't be so many children, either, if the birth-controllers have their way... Curiously enough it is not the triumphs of modern engineering, nor the radio... but the memory of working-class interiors... that reminds me that our age has not been altogether a bad one to live in.” Thus, everything that defines happiness and the meaning of life for the working classes is what the classes of progress want to kill. Progress says, your life is meaningless. * “To me in my early boyhood, to nearly all children of families like mind, “common” people seemed almost sub-human. They had coarse faces, hideous accents and gross manners, they hated everyone who was not like themselves, and if they got half a chance they would insult you in brutal ways. That was our view of them, and though it was false it was understandable. For one must remember that before the war there was much more overt class-hatred in England... in those days you were likely to be insulted simply for looking like a member of the upper classes... the time when it was impossible for a well-dressed person to walk through a slum street without being hooted at...” This, the inherent antagonism between the classes. * “If you treat people as the English working class have been treated during the past two centuries, you must expect them to resent it. On the other hand the children of shaby-genteel families could not be blamed if they grew up with a hatred of the working class, typified for them by prowling gangs...” * “I have dwelt on these subjects because they are vitally important. To get rid of class-distinctions you have got to start by understanding how one class appears when seen through the eyes of another... snobbishness is bound up with a species of idealism...” * “Suggest to the average unthinking person of gentle birth who is struggling to keep up appearances on four or five hundred a year that he is a member of an exploiting parasite class, and he will think you are mad...In his eyes the workers are not a submerged race of slaves, they are a sinister flood creeping upwards to engulf himself and his friends and his family and to sweep all culture and all decency out of existence. Hence that queer watchful anxiety lest the working class shall grow too prosperous... for miners to buy a motor-car, even one car between four or five of them, is a monstrosity, a sort of crime against nature.” The poor man of middle-class origin fears for the middle class who wants to sweep away everything that is dear to him, his meaningless learning and culture. * “Look at any bourgeois Socialist... he idealises the proletariat, but it is remarkable how little his habits resemble theirs. Perhaps once, out of sheer bravado, he has... [sat] indoors with his cap on, or even [drank] his tea out of the saucer... I have listened by the hour to [bourgeois Socialist] tirades against their own class, and yet never, not even once, have I met one who had picked up proletarian table-manners... Why should a man who thinks all virtue resides in the proletariat still take such pains to drink his soup silently? It can only be because in his heart he feels that proletarian manners are disgusting. So you see he is still responding to the training of his childhood, when he was taught to hate, fear, and despise the working class.” The working class “smells” indeed. * “In the war the young had been sacrificed and the old had behaved in a way which, even at this distance of time, is horrible to contemplate; they had been sternly patriotic in safe places while their sons went down like swathes of hay before the German machine guns. Moreover, the war had been conducted mainly by old men... by 1918 everyone under forty was in a bad temper with his elders... a general revolt against orthodoxy and authority... The dominance of ‘old men' was held to be responsible for every evil known to humanity, and every accepted institution... was derided merely because ‘old men' were in favour of it. For several years it was all the fashion to be a ‘Bolshie'... England was full of half-baked antinomian opinions. Pacifism, internationalism, humanitarianism of all kinds, feminism, free love, divorce-reform, atheism, birth-control—things like these were getting a better hearing than they would get in normal times... At that time we all thought of ourselves as enlightened creatures of a new age, casting off the orthodoxy that had been forced upon us by those detested ‘old men'. We retained, basically, the snobbish outlook of our class, we took it for granted that we could continue to draw our dividends or tumble into soft jobs, but also it seemed natural to us to be ‘agin the Government'.” Thus, the ebb and flow of left to right, and the lack of actual, genuine revolutionary spirit amongst the so-thought progressive classes. * Of his own insolence and class-bias as the protector of the 1% but disdainer of the 90%, “So to the shock-absorbers of the bourgeoisie, such as myself, ‘common people' still appeared brutal and repulsive. Looking back upon that period, I seem to have spent half the time in denouncing the capitalist system and the other half in raging over the insolence of bus-conductors" * Of smelling the sweat of other soldiers, “All I knew was that it was lower-class sweat that I was smelling, and the thought of it made me sick.” * On the wrongness of foreign occupation, “...no modem man, in his heart of hearts, believes that it is right to invade a foreign country and hold the population down by force. Foreign oppression is a much more obvious, understandable evil than economic oppression... people who live on unearned dividends without a single qualm of conscience, see clearly enough that it is wrong to go and lord it in a foreign country where you are not wanted. The result is that every Anglo-Indian is haunted by a sense of guilt... All over India there are Englishmen who secretly loathe the system of which they are part..” * On the inhumanity of prisons and capital punishment, “I had begun to have an indescribable loathing of the whole machinery of so-called justice... It needs very insensitive people to administer it. The wretched prisoners squatting in the reeking cages of the lock-ups... the women and children howling when their menfolk were led away under arrest—things like these are beyond bearing when you are in any way directly responsible for them. I watched a man hanged once; it seemed to me worse than a thousand murders... the worst criminal who ever walked is morally superior to a hanging judge.” * "… I worked out an anarchistic theory that all government is evil, that the punishment always does more harm than the crime and that people can be trusted to behave decently if only you will let them alone. This of course was sentimental nonsense. I see now as I did not see then, that it is always necessary to protect peaceful people from violence. In any state of society where crime can be profitable you have got to have a harsh criminal law and administer it ruthlessly; the alternative is Al Capone. But the feeling that punishment is evil arises inescapably in those who have to administer it.” * “I had reduced everything to the simple theory that the oppressed are always right and the oppressors are always wrong: a mistaken theory, but the natural result of being one of the oppressors yourself” regarding his feelings in Colonial Burma * “I had carried my hatred of oppression to extraordinary lengths. At that time failure seemed to me to be the only virtue. Every suspicion of self-advancement, even to ‘succeed' in life to the extent of making a few hundreds a year, seemed to me spiritually ugly, a species of bullying.” * On the inescapable nature of class difference, echoes Dostoevsky in Dead House. “I washed at the kitchen sink, I shared bedrooms with miners, drank beer with them, played darts with them, talked to them by the hour together. But though I was among them, and I hope and trust they did not find me a nuisance, I was not one of them, and they knew it even better than I did. However much you like them, however interesting you find their conversation, there is always that accursed itch of class-difference... It is not a question of dislike or distaste, only of difference, but it is enough to make real intimacy impossible... I found that it needed tactful manoeuvrings to prevent them from calling me ‘sir'; and all of them... softened their northern accents for my benefit. I liked them and hoped they liked me; but I went among them as a foreigner, and both of us were aware of it.” * Of the sentimentalist (John Galsworthy) vs. Reality... “But is it so certain that he really wants it overthrown? On the contrary, in his fight against an immovable tyranny he is upheld by the consciousness that it is immovable. When things happen unexpectedly and the world-order which he has known begins to crumble, he feels somewhat differently about it... This is the inevitable fate of the sentimentalist. All his opinions change into their opposites at the first brush of reality.” Another version of this same quote, “...the opinions of the sentimentalist change into their opposites at the first touch of reality.” * “For in the last resort, the only important question is. Do you want the British Empire to hold together or do you want it to disintegrate?” The answer for man, maybe most, is no; the status quo is just fine. * “The alternative is to throw the Empire overboard and reduce England to a cold and unimportant little island where we should all have to work very hard and live mainly on herrings and potatoes. That is the very last thing that any left-winger wants. Yet the left-winger continues to feel that he has no moral responsibility for imperialism. He is perfectly ready to accept the products of Empire and to save his soul by sneering at the people who hold the Empire together.”* Of the propensity for words to attempt as a substitute for action, “Hence the temptation to believe that it [class difference] can be shouted out of existence with a few scoutmasterish bellows of goodwill... Let's pal up and get our shoulders to the wheel and remember that we're all equal...” * “For me to get outside the class bracket I have got to suppress not merely my private snobbishness, but most of my other tastes and prejudices as well. I have got to alter myself so completely that at the end I should hardly be recognisable...” People have standards, and this is to be human. * “For it is not easy to crash your way into the literary intelligentsia if you happen to be a decent human being... being the life and soul of cocktail parties and kissing the bums of verminous little lions” * “I have pointed out that the left-wing opinions of the average ‘intellectual' are mainly spurious. From pure imitativeness he jeers at things which in fact he believes in... It is only when you meet someone of a different culture from yourself that you begin to realise what your own beliefs really are... This at any rate is what he says,... the bourgeoisie are ‘dead' (a favourite word of abuse nowadays and very effective because meaningless), bourgeois culture is bankrupt, bourgeois “values” are despicable, and so on...” * On trying to break down class barriers, “If you secretly think of yourself as a gentleman and as such the superior of the greengrocer's errand boy, it is far better to say so than to tell lies about it. Ultimately you have got to drop your snobbishness, but it is fatal to pretend to drop it before you are really ready to do so.” * “Any Socialist, he probably felt, could be counted on to have something eccentric about him... I have here a prospectus from another summer school which states its terms per week and then asks me to say ‘whether my diet is ordinary or vegetarian'. They take it for granted, you see, that it is necessary to ask this question. This kind of thing is by itself sufficient to alienate plenty of decent people. And their instinct is perfectly sound, for the food-crank is by definition a person willing to cut himself off from human society in hopes of adding five years on to the life of his carcase; that is, a person but of touch with common humanity.” * On how “socialist” literature is incomprehensible to normal people, “You can see the same tendency in Socialist literature, which, even when it is not openly written de haut en bos, is always completely removed from the working class in idiom and manner of thought... As for the technical jargon of the Communists, it is as far removed from the common speech as the language of a mathematical textbook.” * “…no genuine working man grasps the deeper implications of Socialism. Often, in my opinion, he is a truer Socialist than the orthodox Marxist, because he does remember, what the other so often forgets, that Socialism means justice and common decency... His vision of the Socialist future is a vision of present society with the worst abuses left out, and with interest centering round the same things as at present—family life, the pub, football, and local politics.” * Of Orthodoxy, “One of the analogies between Communism and Roman Catholicism is that only the ‘educated' are completely orthodox. The most immediately striking thing about the English Roman Catholics—I don't mean the real Catholics, I mean the converts… is their intense self-consciousness. Apparently they never think, certainly they never write, about anything but the fact that they are Roman Catholics; this single fact and the self-praise resulting from it form the entire stock-in-trade of the Catholic literary man. But the really interesting thing about these people is the way in which they have worked out the supposed implications of orthodoxy until the tiniest details of life are involved. Even the liquids you drink, apparently, can be orthodox or heretical; hence the campaigns… against tea and in favour of beer... tea-drinking' is ‘pagan', while beer-drinking is ‘Christian', and coffee is ‘the puritan's opium'... [W]hat I am interested in here is the attitude of mind that can make even food and drink an occasion for religious intolerance. A working-class Catholic would never be so absurdly consistent as that. He does not spend his time in brooding on the fact that he is a Roman Catholic, and he is not particularly conscious of being different from his non-Catholic neighbours. Tell an Irish dock-labourer in the slums of Liverpool that his cup of tea is ‘pagan', and he will call you a fool... It is only the ‘educated' man, especially the literary man, who knows how to be a bigot.” * “The underlying motive of many Socialists, I believe, is simply a hypertrophied sense of order. The present state of affairs offends them not because it causes misery, still less because it makes freedom impossible, but because it is untidy; what they desire, basically, is to reduce the world to something resembling a chessboard… Take the plays of a lifelong Socialist like Shaw. How much understanding or even awareness of working class life do they display? Shaw himself declares that you can only bring a working man on the stage ‘as an object of compassion… At best his attitude to the working class is the sniggering Punch attitude... he finds them merely contemptible and disgusting. Poverty and, what is more, the habits of mind created by poverty, are something to be abolished from above, by violence if necessary; perhaps even preferably by violence. Hence his worship of “Great” men and appetite for dictatorships...” * “The truth is that, to many people calling themselves Socialists, revolution does not mean a movement of the masses with which they hope to associate themselves; it means a set of reforms which ‘we', the clever ones, are going to impose upon ‘them', the Lower Orders.” * “The ordinary man may not flinch from a dictatorship of the proletariat, if you offer it tactfully; offer him a dictatorship of the prigs, and he gets ready to fight.” * “This, then, is the superficial aspect of the ordinary man's recoil from Socialism... The whole thing amounts to a kind of malaise produced by dislike of individual Socialists... Is it childish to be influenced by that kind of thing? Is it silly? Is it even contemptible? It is all that, but the point is that it happens, and therefore it is important to keep it in mind.”* “Work, you see, is done ‘to provide us with leisure'. Leisure for what? Leisure to become more like Mr Beevers, presumably.” Regarding the disdain for work of progressives, and the love of the machine. (John Beevers, World Without Faith). * “The truth is that many of the qualities we admire in human beings can only function in opposition to some kind of disaster, pain or difficulty...” * “The truth is that when a human being is not eating, drinking, sleeping, making love, talking, playing games, or merely lounging about—and these things will not fill up a lifetime—he needs work and usually looks for it, though he may not call it work. Above the level of a third- or fourth-grade moron, life has got to be lived largely in terms of effort. For man is not, as the vulgarer hedonists seem to suppose, a kind of walking stomach; he has also got a hand, an eye, and a brain. Cease to use your hands, and you have lopped off a huge chunk of your consciousness...” * “The nomad who walks or rides, with his baggage stowed on a camel or an ox-cart, may suffer every kind of discomfort, but at least he is living while he is traveling; whereas for the passenger in an express train or a luxury liner his journey is an interregnum, a kind of temporary death.” A good analogy for cycling vs. Cars. * “They [Socialists] have never made it sufficiently clear that the essential aims of Socialism are justice and liberty. With their eyes glued to economic facts, they have proceeded on the assumption that man has no soul, and explicitly or implicitly they have set up the goal of a materialistic Utopia. As a result Fascism has been able to play upon every instinct that revolts against hedonism and a cheap conception of ‘progress'. It has been able to pose as the upholder of the European tradition, and to appeal to Christian belief, to patriotism, and to the military virtue...” The Socialist and Communist seek to dismiss all those things which normal men hold dear, and tell them they are not men, and that what they desire in their soul is wrong or false. * On Fascism, a good analysis that could be applied to modern China, “...it is quite easy to imagine a world-society, economically collectivist—that is, with the profit principle eliminated—but with all political, military, and educational power in the hands of a small caste of rulers and their bravos. That or something like it is the objective of Fascism. And that, of course, is the slave-state, or rather the slave-world; it would probably be a stable form of society, and the chances are, considering the enormous wealth of the world if scientifically exploited, that the slaves would be well-fed and contented. It is usual to speak of the Fascist objective as the ‘beehive state', which does a grave injustice to bees. A world of rabbits ruled by stoats would be nearer the mark. It is against this beastly possibility that we have got to combine.” * On accepting the blessings of your Orthodox leaders vs. Actually evaluating something on its merits, “an incensed reader wrote to say, ‘Dear Comrade, we don't want to hear about these bourgeois writers like Shakespeare. Can't you give us something a bit more proletarian?' etc., etc. The editor's reply was simple. ‘If you will turn to the index of Marx's Capital,' he wrote, ‘you will find that Shakespeare is mentioned several times.' And please notice that this was enough to silence the objector. Once Shakespeare had received the benediction of Marx, he became respectable. That is the mentality that drives ordinary sensible people away from the Socialist movement.” * Orwell wonders of his status in society as a relatively poor writer, “Economically I belong to the working class, but it is almost impossible for me to think of myself as anything but a member of the bourgeoisie. And supposing I had to take sides, whom should I side with, the upper class which is trying to squeeze me out of existence, or the working class whose manners are not my manners” * “But if you are constantly bullying me about my ‘bourgeois ideology', if you give me to understand that in some subtle way I. am an inferior person because I have never worked with my hands, you will only succeed in antagonizing me. For you are telling me either that I am inherently useless or that I ought to alter myself in some way that is beyond my power.” Echoing Dostoevsky and how progressives antagonize the people whom they should be trying to persuade. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit underconsumed.substack.com
Today we will be exploring John Galsworthy, a British novelist. His inspiration in art came from the huge amount of museums and historical buildings that have in England. His ideas still connect with the ideas we have nowadays and can be connected with modern art. We will also look at modern exhibitions of art surrounding ourselves in this current time.
A stunning episode of The Studios, Year by Year: a great year for Universal, 1934, gives us The Black Cat, the one big studio success of Edgar G. Ulmer, icon of marginal filmmaking; and James Whale’s under-discussed One More River, based on the novel by John Galsworthy. Elise concocts a reading to justify her early, confused understanding of The Black Cat as being about WWII rather than WWI. Then we continue to weave our auteur theory about Whale’s interest in women’s experience of oppression related to sexual shame. As the Year of the Code continues, two more movies that should never have gotten made: Satan worshipping, flaying old friends alive, virgin sacrifice, marital rape, striking wives with riding crops, and executing demonic cats with knives is what Universal is all about in 1934. And wait for next episode, when we tell you what the original script of Stahl’s Imitation of Life included to trigger Breen! Time Codes: 0h 01m 00s: The Back Cat [dir. Edgar G. Ulmer] 0h 44m 58s: One More River [dir. James Whale] +++ * Check out our Complete Upcoming Episode Schedule (now projected into 2023) * Find Elise’s latest film piece on Billy Wilder and 1930s Romantic Comedy *And Read lots of Elise’s Writing at Bright Wall/Dark Room, Cléo, and Bright Lights.* Follow us on Twitter at @therebuggy Write to us at therebuggy@gmail.com Theme Music: “What’s Yr Take on Cassavetes?” – Le Tigre
John Galsworthy, the Nobel Prize winning playwright and novelist who gave us "The Forsyte Saga", tells the story of an immigrant cobbler in 19th Century London. Performed by PNT company member John Rafter Lee . Adaptation by Lance Davis. (20 min.)
In this episode we discuss Hitchcock's often overlooked adaptation of John Galsworthy's play. "The Skin Game" stars Edmund Gwenn as fearless entrepreneur and features an elaborate auction scene that set the template for similar sequences in director's later movies.
LION FEUCHTWANGER - paralela, alegorie, překládá indická, španělská a řecká dramata, přítel B. Brechta, židovského původu - seznam zakázaných autorů, Díla ŽID SÜSS - bohatý, na vrcholu - závist ostatních - pravém popraven, JOSEPHUS FLAVIUS - trilogie o židovském povstání, ŽIDOVKA Z TOLEDA - láska židovské dívky ke křesťanskému chlapci -španělský středověk GOYA - rozporuplná osobnost španělského malíře - období feudalismu, LIŠKY NA VINICI - historický román Ludvík XVI, Marie Antoinetta - Francie x boj o nezávislost USA Benjamin Franklin, BLÁZNOVA MOUDROST - neslavné části života slavného filozofa J. J. Rousseau WILLIAM FAULKNER- Jih USA, NEODPOČÍVEJ V POKOJI, DIVOKÉ PALMY, ABSALOME, ABSALOME! - zapření rodiny kvůli černošskému původu manželky, HERMANN HESSE - nobelova cena, syn misionářů, HRA SE SKLENĚNÝMI PERLAMI -uzavřená inteligence pěstuje umění a vědu jako hru, STEPNÍ VLK - hrdina - spořádaný měšťák, v nitru stepní vlk - ukryto mnoho osobností, ANTOINE DE SAINT-EXUPÉRY - pilot, filozof, hrabě - KURÝR NA JIH, NOČNÍ LET - z leteckého prostředí, CITADELA - nedokončený filozofický román - názor nba život a na svět, MALÝ PRINC - ich- i er-forma, homodiegetický vypravěč (součástí děje), na základě příhody s Prévotem (havárie na Sahaře, hrozba dehydratatce) - filozofická pohádka, prohozené archetypy - liška důvěřivá, had moudře radí, sám ilustroval, ZEMĚ LIDÍ - autobiografie, VIRGINIE WOOLFOVÁ - experimentální britská autorka, impresionistické obrazy, feministka - eseje VLASTNÍ POKOJ, TŘI GUINEJE - aby mohla být žena svéprávná, musí mít 3000 £ měsíčně, z intelektuální rodiny, klub literátů Bloomsbury, 1941 - bombardování - deprese - sebevražda, metoda proudu vědomí, PANÍ DALLOWAYOVÁ - 1 den stárnoucí ženy, připravuje se na večírek s ministrem, úhel několika postav, K MAJÁKU - paní Ramsayová (srov. Paní Dallowayová) - 1 rodinný den u moře, oslava krásy života, po 10 letech se syn k majáku, na který hledí, opravdu doplaví, úhel pohledu více postav, povídky SKVRNA NA ZDI - krouží okolo jednoho bodu, ZAHRADY V KEW - zachycení dojmů z okolí, ROBINSON JEFFERS - znechucení 1. světovou válkou - nsa mysu Sur - nezkažená příroda x sebedestruktivní technická civilizace HŘEBEC GROŠÁK - míšenka Kalifornie, hráč Johny - v kartách vyhraje hřebce grošáka, chce znásilnit Kalifornii. Ta se ukreje ke koni do ohrady - Johny končí život pod kopyty koně, FRANCIS SCOTT FITZGERALD - autor ztracené generace, "jazzového věku", bohatší manželka Zelda - později psychicky nemocná - ona pijí, zchudnou NA PRAHU RÁJE - 1. úspěšně dílo, román o změně hodnot ve společnosti po válce, NĚŽNÁ JE NOC - psychiatr léčí bohatou dívku Nicole, nakonec se s ní ožení, VELKÝ GATSBY - Vypravěč Nick Carrawy, Daisy, Tom, Gatsby - zamilován do Daisy - nikdy jí nedosáhne - tragická smrt, ztráta iluzí, POVÍDKY JAZZOVÉHO VĚKU, ŽABCI A FILOZOFOVÉ, JOHN STEINBECK -sezónní zemědělec na rančích, Jih, ztracená generace, Nobelova cena, TOULAVÝ AUTOBUS - 1 den skupiny cestujících autobusem, TOULKY S CHARLEYM - toulky s vozem Rosinanta a psem Charleym, HROZNY HNĚVU - stěhování oklahomských zemědělců - sucho - paralela Exodus, osídlování USA, sám se zúčastnil, Pulitzerova cena, O MYŠÍCH A LIDECH - novela - slabomyslný hromotluk Lenda - ma rad hebká zvířata - dráždivá manželka majitele ranče - vražda - hrozí zlynčování - přítel Jiří Lendu zastřelí, NA VÝCHOD OD RÁJE - paralela - občanská válka, 1. světová válka x Kain a Ábel, NA PLECHÁRNĚ - žádost vojáků, hospodářská krize - chudina - párty pro Doktora - nevydaří se - udělají znovu THEODOR DREISER - AMERICKÁ TRAGÉDIE - muž zabije těhotnou milenku - brání mu ve sňatku s bohatší dívkou JOHN GALSWORTHY - zakladatel PEN klubu, humanista, pacifista, Nobelova cena, SÁGA RODU FORSYTŮ - trilogie, 4 generace,Soames Forsyte - majetnický, lpí na tradicích, tyran (typizovaná postava podobně jako H. Mann - Profesor Neřád), MODERNÍ KOMEDIE - pokračování 3. a 4. generace Forsytů, KONEC KAPITOLY - příbuzný rod Cherrelů, STEFAN ZWEIG - novela AMOK
Sometimes I feel like... a motherless child. No, really: Sometimes I feel like I've been looking in almost all the wrong places for confirmations and traces of my Ur-existential Christian faith. One's been "trolling" almost one's whole life through Truffaut and Dinesen and Kafka and Isherwood and Seneca and H.G. Wells and Stephen King and Val Lewton and Rod Serling and and John Galsworthy and, golly, even Michael Reeves -- *panning for Christian gold! * What I mean is, one can make a lifetime of gathering Christian-sounding crumbs from a master's table, i.e., the above artists and philosophers, while never seeing that the whole loaf is actually right in front of you. I'm thinking of The Chain (1949) by Paul Wellman or I'd Climb the Highest Mountain with Susan Hayward (1951) or George Eliot's first novella "Janet's Repentance" or Passing of the Third Floor Back by Jerome K. Jerome. What?!? Well, it turns out there are some conscious Christian masterpieces out there, which were very successful in their day but have been almost completely smothered, in the reception, by This World. I mean, who has ever heard of The Chain by Paul Wellman? Yet it is simply the most touching story of a young Episcopal minister in Jericho, Kansas, who preaches and acts out Grace in a stratified and complacent city with great sacrifice yet great success. The Chain is a must read! Yet it's been almost completely buried, as have been many other works like it, by "the World, the Flesh and the Devil". Hope this cast gives you some new reading, and some fresh heart! Podcast 292 is dedicated to David Browder.
Three short plays: "The Interview" by Jim Thompson; "The Prague Winter" by Rebecca Bates; and "The Sun" by John Galsworthy, updated by Robert Arnold. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Three short plays: "The Interview" by Jim Thompson; "The Prague Winter" by Rebecca Bates; and "The Sun" by John Galsworthy, updated by Robert Arnold.
A long forgotten tale of terror from John Galsworthy. Open the vault door, sit by the fire, and join me for this short foray into the macabre... Got a request? Or perhaps a submission? Or maybe you just want to say hi! Drop us a line at ghastlytales@gmail.com Support the Show by: Donating via Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/MichaelWhitehouse Buying a book: https://www.amazon.com/Michael-Whitehouse/e/B00D791RUI Reviewing us on your site of choice. Watch us on Youtube!: http://www.youtube.com/ghastlytales Our Website: http://www.vaultofghastlytales.com Stalk us on Social Media: http://www.facebook.com/ghastlytalespresents https://twitter.com/Ghastly_Tales Follow Michael Whitehouse's Work: http://www.michael-whitehouse.com https://www.facebook.com/Michael.Whitehouse.Author http://www.twitter.com/horrorofmike
John Galsworthy! Elizabeth Jane Howard! Circadian novels! Find out what that means, and much more, in episode 41. Guys, it was SUPER hot when we were recording this podcast. It’s rather cooler now that I’m editing, but I rather
Early in her career, novelist Virginia Woolf (1882-1941) wrote a critical essay in which she set forth her views of what fiction can and should do. The essay was called “Modern Fiction” (1919), and it has served critics and readers as a guide to Modernism (and Woolf) ever since. But while it’s easy to follow her arguments about the authors who became giants in the world of literature such as Joyce and Chekhov, it’s less easy to understand her statements about the authors she criticized, contemporary best sellers H.G. Wells, Arnold Bennett, and John Galsworthy. What was behind her savage criticism of these three? What does her animosity tell us about Woolf’s views of fiction? Professor Andrea Zemgulys of the University of Michigan joins Jacke to help him figure this out. Then a pair of children’s book experts (Jacke Wilson Jr. and Jacke Wilson Jr. Jr.) join Jacke in the studio to discuss buying holiday books for children. Show Notes: Contact the host at jackewilsonauthor@gmail.com or by leaving a voicemail at 1-361-4WILSON (1-361-494-5766). You can find more literary discussion at jackewilson.com and more episodes of the series at historyofliterature.com. Check out our Facebook page at facebook.com/historyofliterature. Music Credits: “Handel – Entrance to the Queen of Sheba” by Advent Chamber Orchestra (From the Free Music Archive / CC by SA). “Quirky Dog,” “Sweeter Vermouth, and “Monkeys Spinning Monkeys” by Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com) Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
The film Groundhog Day tells the story of a cynical Pittsburgh TV weatherman who is sent to cover the annual Groundhog Day event in the isolated small town of Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, when he finds himself caught in a time loop, forced to repeat the same day again and again...and again. Now it's been made into a musical by the same team behind Matilda the Musical, including composer and lyricist Tim Minchin. So how successful is the Old Vic's adaptation? Matt Wolf reviews.Samira talks to the Spanish film director Pedro Almodovar, famous for outrageous comedies (Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown) and female-focused dramas (Volver, All About My Mother), whose latest film, Julieta, is his most serious yet.Charlotte Dujardin won her third Olympic gold earlier this week by retaining her individual dressage title. She performed her latest gold-winning ride to music written especially by composer Tom Hunt for the games in Rio. Tom talks about how he conceived and wrote the music for Charlotte and her horse, Valegro. Actor Bertie Carvel discusses his directorial debut Strife, John Galsworthy's rarely staged political drama, which charts the progress of an industrial strike and the fight between a factory's workers and the company's board of directors. Presenter: Samira Ahmed Producer: Angie Nehring.
Boy, do we need a miracle. Such things really happen. As in Booth Tarkington, and as in John Galsworthy. As in me and you. And as in: The Buckinghams.
Years ago, I recorded a stack of old Xmas stories. Don't think I ever posted them. Since I didn't manage to get a Christmas episode done this year, I figured I'd put these up. The quality is low, since they were recorded befor I knew much about sound editing.
John Galsworthy's play "A Bit O'Love" (1915) and his novel "Saint's Progress" (1919) diagnose the problem and also the possibility inherent in parish ministry, and especially within parish clergy. Galsworthy gives his readers a shattering exercise but also a hopeful one. So we just want to say: Goodbye, Columbus !
You may not know who John Galsworthy is, but you probably know his work. Who hasn't seen some production of The Forsyte Saga? Galsworthy was one of the most popular and famous British writers of the early 20th century (the Edwardian Era). He left an enormous body of work, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1932. But Galsworthy was also what we might call a “public humanitarian,” that is, he used his high profile and influence in a great, good cause. The focus of his effort was disabled solders returning from World War I. We, of course, are well acquainted with the remarkable destructive power of modern weaponry. Not a week goes by (alas) in which we do not hear about a soldier being wounded by mines, grenades, artillery fire or bombs (often of the “roadside” variety). But we also have come to expect that soldier, no matter how grievously wounded, will receive medical treatment that will stand at least a fighting chance of saving their lives. And indeed, many wounded soldiers do survive incredibly severe injuries and return to our world. The generation that fought and suffered World War I–or as they called it “The Great War”–were really not familiar with any of this. Europeans and Americans of the nineteenth century were surely used to wars, but they were generally short and decided by pivotal battles (Waterloo, Gettysburg, Sedan). But the Great War was different. Millions of men lived for years at the “front” and under the shells. Many died there and many more were wounded. Thanks to advances in medical knowledge (and particularly the discovery of the germ theory of disease), a goodly proportion of the wounded survived. This presented a new problem: How to re-integrate wounded men into society? This became Galsworthy's cause. The course of his efforts on the part of wounded soldiers is detailed with great skill and care by Jeffrey Reznick in his John Galsworthy and the Disabled Soldiers of the Great War (Manchester UP, 2009). Reznick shows us Galsworthy attempting to create the modern infrastructure of veterans' care: special hospitals, rehabilitation programs, work-transition agencies and so on. And we get to read Galsworthy's writing on the subject, both non-fiction and fiction. All this give us–or gave me–a new understanding of Galsworthy's literary work. Galsworthy was a great man. But as it turned out he was greater than I knew. We should thank Jeff for bringing his good-works to our attention. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven't already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
You may not know who John Galsworthy is, but you probably know his work. Who hasn’t seen some production of The Forsyte Saga? Galsworthy was one of the most popular and famous British writers of the early 20th century (the Edwardian Era). He left an enormous body of work, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1932. But Galsworthy was also what we might call a “public humanitarian,” that is, he used his high profile and influence in a great, good cause. The focus of his effort was disabled solders returning from World War I. We, of course, are well acquainted with the remarkable destructive power of modern weaponry. Not a week goes by (alas) in which we do not hear about a soldier being wounded by mines, grenades, artillery fire or bombs (often of the “roadside” variety). But we also have come to expect that soldier, no matter how grievously wounded, will receive medical treatment that will stand at least a fighting chance of saving their lives. And indeed, many wounded soldiers do survive incredibly severe injuries and return to our world. The generation that fought and suffered World War I–or as they called it “The Great War”–were really not familiar with any of this. Europeans and Americans of the nineteenth century were surely used to wars, but they were generally short and decided by pivotal battles (Waterloo, Gettysburg, Sedan). But the Great War was different. Millions of men lived for years at the “front” and under the shells. Many died there and many more were wounded. Thanks to advances in medical knowledge (and particularly the discovery of the germ theory of disease), a goodly proportion of the wounded survived. This presented a new problem: How to re-integrate wounded men into society? This became Galsworthy’s cause. The course of his efforts on the part of wounded soldiers is detailed with great skill and care by Jeffrey Reznick in his John Galsworthy and the Disabled Soldiers of the Great War (Manchester UP, 2009). Reznick shows us Galsworthy attempting to create the modern infrastructure of veterans’ care: special hospitals, rehabilitation programs, work-transition agencies and so on. And we get to read Galsworthy’s writing on the subject, both non-fiction and fiction. All this give us–or gave me–a new understanding of Galsworthy’s literary work. Galsworthy was a great man. But as it turned out he was greater than I knew. We should thank Jeff for bringing his good-works to our attention. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
You may not know who John Galsworthy is, but you probably know his work. Who hasn’t seen some production of The Forsyte Saga? Galsworthy was one of the most popular and famous British writers of the early 20th century (the Edwardian Era). He left an enormous body of work, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1932. But Galsworthy was also what we might call a “public humanitarian,” that is, he used his high profile and influence in a great, good cause. The focus of his effort was disabled solders returning from World War I. We, of course, are well acquainted with the remarkable destructive power of modern weaponry. Not a week goes by (alas) in which we do not hear about a soldier being wounded by mines, grenades, artillery fire or bombs (often of the “roadside” variety). But we also have come to expect that soldier, no matter how grievously wounded, will receive medical treatment that will stand at least a fighting chance of saving their lives. And indeed, many wounded soldiers do survive incredibly severe injuries and return to our world. The generation that fought and suffered World War I–or as they called it “The Great War”–were really not familiar with any of this. Europeans and Americans of the nineteenth century were surely used to wars, but they were generally short and decided by pivotal battles (Waterloo, Gettysburg, Sedan). But the Great War was different. Millions of men lived for years at the “front” and under the shells. Many died there and many more were wounded. Thanks to advances in medical knowledge (and particularly the discovery of the germ theory of disease), a goodly proportion of the wounded survived. This presented a new problem: How to re-integrate wounded men into society? This became Galsworthy’s cause. The course of his efforts on the part of wounded soldiers is detailed with great skill and care by Jeffrey Reznick in his John Galsworthy and the Disabled Soldiers of the Great War (Manchester UP, 2009). Reznick shows us Galsworthy attempting to create the modern infrastructure of veterans’ care: special hospitals, rehabilitation programs, work-transition agencies and so on. And we get to read Galsworthy’s writing on the subject, both non-fiction and fiction. All this give us–or gave me–a new understanding of Galsworthy’s literary work. Galsworthy was a great man. But as it turned out he was greater than I knew. We should thank Jeff for bringing his good-works to our attention. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
You may not know who John Galsworthy is, but you probably know his work. Who hasn’t seen some production of The Forsyte Saga? Galsworthy was one of the most popular and famous British writers of the early 20th century (the Edwardian Era). He left an enormous body of work, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1932. But Galsworthy was also what we might call a “public humanitarian,” that is, he used his high profile and influence in a great, good cause. The focus of his effort was disabled solders returning from World War I. We, of course, are well acquainted with the remarkable destructive power of modern weaponry. Not a week goes by (alas) in which we do not hear about a soldier being wounded by mines, grenades, artillery fire or bombs (often of the “roadside” variety). But we also have come to expect that soldier, no matter how grievously wounded, will receive medical treatment that will stand at least a fighting chance of saving their lives. And indeed, many wounded soldiers do survive incredibly severe injuries and return to our world. The generation that fought and suffered World War I–or as they called it “The Great War”–were really not familiar with any of this. Europeans and Americans of the nineteenth century were surely used to wars, but they were generally short and decided by pivotal battles (Waterloo, Gettysburg, Sedan). But the Great War was different. Millions of men lived for years at the “front” and under the shells. Many died there and many more were wounded. Thanks to advances in medical knowledge (and particularly the discovery of the germ theory of disease), a goodly proportion of the wounded survived. This presented a new problem: How to re-integrate wounded men into society? This became Galsworthy’s cause. The course of his efforts on the part of wounded soldiers is detailed with great skill and care by Jeffrey Reznick in his John Galsworthy and the Disabled Soldiers of the Great War (Manchester UP, 2009). Reznick shows us Galsworthy attempting to create the modern infrastructure of veterans’ care: special hospitals, rehabilitation programs, work-transition agencies and so on. And we get to read Galsworthy’s writing on the subject, both non-fiction and fiction. All this give us–or gave me–a new understanding of Galsworthy’s literary work. Galsworthy was a great man. But as it turned out he was greater than I knew. We should thank Jeff for bringing his good-works to our attention. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
You may not know who John Galsworthy is, but you probably know his work. Who hasn't seen some production of The Forsyte Saga? Galsworthy was one of the most popular and famous British writers of the early 20th century (the Edwardian Era). He left an enormous body of work, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1932. But Galsworthy was also what we might call a “public humanitarian,” that is, he used his high profile and influence in a great, good cause. The focus of his effort was disabled solders returning from World War I. We, of course, are well acquainted with the remarkable destructive power of modern weaponry. Not a week goes by (alas) in which we do not hear about a soldier being wounded by mines, grenades, artillery fire or bombs (often of the “roadside” variety). But we also have come to expect that soldier, no matter how grievously wounded, will receive medical treatment that will stand at least a fighting chance of saving their lives. And indeed, many wounded soldiers do survive incredibly severe injuries and return to our world. The generation that fought and suffered World War I–or as they called it “The Great War”–were really not familiar with any of this. Europeans and Americans of the nineteenth century were surely used to wars, but they were generally short and decided by pivotal battles (Waterloo, Gettysburg, Sedan). But the Great War was different. Millions of men lived for years at the “front” and under the shells. Many died there and many more were wounded. Thanks to advances in medical knowledge (and particularly the discovery of the germ theory of disease), a goodly proportion of the wounded survived. This presented a new problem: How to re-integrate wounded men into society? This became Galsworthy's cause. The course of his efforts on the part of wounded soldiers is detailed with great skill and care by Jeffrey Reznick in his John Galsworthy and the Disabled Soldiers of the Great War (Manchester UP, 2009). Reznick shows us Galsworthy attempting to create the modern infrastructure of veterans' care: special hospitals, rehabilitation programs, work-transition agencies and so on. And we get to read Galsworthy's writing on the subject, both non-fiction and fiction. All this give us–or gave me–a new understanding of Galsworthy's literary work. Galsworthy was a great man. But as it turned out he was greater than I knew. We should thank Jeff for bringing his good-works to our attention. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven't already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/medicine
You may not know who John Galsworthy is, but you probably know his work. Who hasn’t seen some production of The Forsyte Saga? Galsworthy was one of the most popular and famous British writers of the early 20th century (the Edwardian Era). He left an enormous body of work, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1932. But Galsworthy was also what we might call a “public humanitarian,” that is, he used his high profile and influence in a great, good cause. The focus of his effort was disabled solders returning from World War I. We, of course, are well acquainted with the remarkable destructive power of modern weaponry. Not a week goes by (alas) in which we do not hear about a soldier being wounded by mines, grenades, artillery fire or bombs (often of the “roadside” variety). But we also have come to expect that soldier, no matter how grievously wounded, will receive medical treatment that will stand at least a fighting chance of saving their lives. And indeed, many wounded soldiers do survive incredibly severe injuries and return to our world. The generation that fought and suffered World War I–or as they called it “The Great War”–were really not familiar with any of this. Europeans and Americans of the nineteenth century were surely used to wars, but they were generally short and decided by pivotal battles (Waterloo, Gettysburg, Sedan). But the Great War was different. Millions of men lived for years at the “front” and under the shells. Many died there and many more were wounded. Thanks to advances in medical knowledge (and particularly the discovery of the germ theory of disease), a goodly proportion of the wounded survived. This presented a new problem: How to re-integrate wounded men into society? This became Galsworthy’s cause. The course of his efforts on the part of wounded soldiers is detailed with great skill and care by Jeffrey Reznick in his John Galsworthy and the Disabled Soldiers of the Great War (Manchester UP, 2009). Reznick shows us Galsworthy attempting to create the modern infrastructure of veterans’ care: special hospitals, rehabilitation programs, work-transition agencies and so on. And we get to read Galsworthy’s writing on the subject, both non-fiction and fiction. All this give us–or gave me–a new understanding of Galsworthy’s literary work. Galsworthy was a great man. But as it turned out he was greater than I knew. We should thank Jeff for bringing his good-works to our attention. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
You may not know who John Galsworthy is, but you probably know his work. Who hasn’t seen some production of The Forsyte Saga? Galsworthy was one of the most popular and famous British writers of the early 20th century (the Edwardian Era). He left an enormous body of work, for which he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1932. But Galsworthy was also what we might call a “public humanitarian,” that is, he used his high profile and influence in a great, good cause. The focus of his effort was disabled solders returning from World War I. We, of course, are well acquainted with the remarkable destructive power of modern weaponry. Not a week goes by (alas) in which we do not hear about a soldier being wounded by mines, grenades, artillery fire or bombs (often of the “roadside” variety). But we also have come to expect that soldier, no matter how grievously wounded, will receive medical treatment that will stand at least a fighting chance of saving their lives. And indeed, many wounded soldiers do survive incredibly severe injuries and return to our world. The generation that fought and suffered World War I–or as they called it “The Great War”–were really not familiar with any of this. Europeans and Americans of the nineteenth century were surely used to wars, but they were generally short and decided by pivotal battles (Waterloo, Gettysburg, Sedan). But the Great War was different. Millions of men lived for years at the “front” and under the shells. Many died there and many more were wounded. Thanks to advances in medical knowledge (and particularly the discovery of the germ theory of disease), a goodly proportion of the wounded survived. This presented a new problem: How to re-integrate wounded men into society? This became Galsworthy’s cause. The course of his efforts on the part of wounded soldiers is detailed with great skill and care by Jeffrey Reznick in his John Galsworthy and the Disabled Soldiers of the Great War (Manchester UP, 2009). Reznick shows us Galsworthy attempting to create the modern infrastructure of veterans’ care: special hospitals, rehabilitation programs, work-transition agencies and so on. And we get to read Galsworthy’s writing on the subject, both non-fiction and fiction. All this give us–or gave me–a new understanding of Galsworthy’s literary work. Galsworthy was a great man. But as it turned out he was greater than I knew. We should thank Jeff for bringing his good-works to our attention. Please become a fan of “New Books in History” on Facebook if you haven’t already. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Radio City Playhouse. November 15, 1948. Program #15. NBC net. "The First and The Last". Sustaining. A judge convicts an innocent man to protect his brother, a murderer. The program is also known as, "NBC Short Story." Harry W. Junkin (host, director), John Galsworthy (author), Bob Warren (announcer), John Stanley, Ian Martin, Nelson Olmsted (adaptor).10 Volumes, 1000's of Hours of Listening over 5000 Shows From the best of OTR Purchase Today an Save, $70.49 Free Shipping for Complete 10 DVD Set or $7.95 for individual DVD Go To Old Time Radio Network and order today
Because memorials aren’t really a lamentation of death as much as they are a celebration of life, I want to emphasize that this episode is not at all sad. In it, I read several poems by celebrated writers (Robinson Jeffers, John Galsworthy, Eugene O'Neill, William Cowper), who memorialize their lost animal companions with whom they lived and loved. May you find joy and solace in their words.
Three short plays: "The Interview" by Jim Thompson; "The Prague Winter" by Rebecca Bates; and "The Sun" by John Galsworthy, updated by Robert Arnold.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
