Podcasts about Jonathan Swift

What happens when a full-sized man who is cast adrift lands on an island full of tiny, often warring people? In this Jonathan Swift tale, we learn of Gulliver's troubles and eventual freedom. But what will he have to do to earn his liberty? Listen free, thanks to our friends at enVypillow.com and SierraSil.com.  Drift is free, thanks to our wonderful sponsors, enVy Pillow.com and SierraSil.com, both of whom generously offer discounts on all online purchases when you use the code drift.

Álvaro Enrigue and critic Maia Gil'Adí begin their conversation considering translation as a living process, one that is internal to the novel form. Álvaro, author of the trippy You Dreamed of Empires (Riverhead, 2024), explains how the opening letter to his translator Natasha mirrors the letter to his editor, Teresa, in Spanish, and how both letters become part of the fiction. Fitting for a novel that crosses Nahua and Mayan, Moctezuma and Cortés, Mexican history and the glam rock band T. Rex. The English translation—which Álvaro calls the book of Natasha—is longer, filled with changes and additions and revisions, and so translation becomes “another life for the book.” From the living book to its contents, Maia asks how You Dreamed of Empires blends the gorgeous and the grotesque, slapstick humor and extreme violence, historical detail and mischievous metafictional departures. Álvaro links his work to Season 9's theme of TECH by pointing out the novel's longstanding use as a tool to laugh about the powerful, to tell them that what they're saying is not true, and to articulate politics through contradiction and humor. After discussing the encounter of Moctezuma and Cortés (or really, of their translators, including a very magical bite of cactus) as the moment that changes everything in history, Álvaro makes a surprising historical swerve in his answer to this season's signature question. Mentions:Álvaro Enrigue, Sudden Death, You Dreamed of Empires, Now I SurrenderNahuaNatasha WimmerTeresa Ariño, AnagramaSergio Pitol, Enrique Vila-Matas, Javier Marías, Roberto BolañoMiguel de Cervantes, Don Quixote; Laurence Sterne; Jonathan Swift, Gulliver's TravelsOctavio Paz saying New Spain was a kingdom in One Earth, Four or Five Worlds: Reflections on Contemporary History, translated by Helen R. Lane.Edward SaidLèse-majestéT. Rex, “Monolith”Gonzalo GuerreroThe Colegio de Santa Cruz de TlatelolcoJosé Emilio PachecoMichel FoucaultMichelangeloSaint Paul, Epistle to the RomansNoam ChomskyTlaxcalas Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literature

In today's deeply divided world—marked by polarized politics, global tensions, and fractured communities—is the aspiration for "wholeness" realistic or even desirable? In this thought-provoking episode of Integral Edge, Keith Martin-Smith sits down with executive coach and consciousness explorer David Arrell to explore what it truly means to become whole, both personally and collectively, amid ongoing division and conflict. The conversation begins by acknowledging an uncomfortable truth: human beings have always "othered" one another, creating deep divisions over seemingly trivial differences—illustrated vividly through the satirical example of Jonathan Swift's kingdoms warring over how to crack an egg. Yet, as Keith and David unravel this tendency, they uncover a profound evolutionary logic behind our innate impulse to distrust and exclude "others" outside our tribe. From early hunter-gatherer societies protecting themselves from existential threats to vast empires maintaining cohesion through myths and collective identities, "othering" is a deeply ingrained survival strategy. But does this mean we're doomed to division forever? David introduces the concept of "fictive kinship," where humans form collective bonds through shared stories, myths, and identities, enabling large-scale cooperation across cultures and history. However, as our conversation shifts into a developmental perspective, the limitations and dangers of this instinctual "othering" become clear, especially when we regress into lower stages of consciousness during times of intense polarization. Drawing upon Integral Theory and the developmental frameworks of Robert Kegan and Terri O'Fallon, Keith and David discuss how the same moral teachings—like the Golden Rule—can be interpreted very differently depending on one's developmental stage. At a rule-based, "Amber" stage, the injunction to "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" often devolves into revenge-driven cycles. Yet at a more rational, individualistic "Orange" stage, it fosters genuine reciprocity and empathy. The crucial insight here is understanding how easily individuals at higher stages can regress, or "shadow crash," into these simpler and more combative perspectives when emotionally triggered—particularly visible in political polarization around figures like Donald Trump. Join Keith Martin-Smith and David Arrell in this timely and deeply reflective conversation as they offer practical wisdom, inspiring perspectives, and genuine hope for navigating—and ultimately transcending—the divisions that mark our contemporary moment.

Frank McGuinness - IMMA Collection: Art as Agency - Jonathan Swift: Savage Indignation

Denne udgivelse af Gullivers Rejser indeholder 1. bog - Rejse til Lilliput og 2. bog - Rejse til Brobdingnag kæmpernes land. Oprindeligt tæller Gullivers Rejser flere bøger, men det er kun de to første, der er udgivet på dansk.Jonathan Swift beskriver i nøje detaljer sine rejser, dette som en parodi på rejsebeskrivelsen som genre. Skønt Gullivers Rejser i Danmark er udgivet som børnebog, er den ikke kun en fantasifuld fortælling, men også et samfundssatirisk spejlbillede af datidens England. (Summary by Lulularsen)

Jonathan Swift (1667 - 1745)Translated by Franz Kottenkamp (1806 - 1858)Einer der Klassiker der Weltliteratur, der seit Generationen Groß und Klein fesselt: Lemuel Gulliver bereist ferne Länder und erlebt dabei unerhörte Abenteuer, er trifft auf phantastische Einwohner unbekannter, ferner Gegenden, wobei alle diese skurrilen Erlebnisse immer wieder satirisch die damalige (und auch unsere heutige) Gesellschaft reflektieren. Eine ungemein phantasiereiches Buch, das überaus unterhaltsam ist, allerdings auch jede Menge Stoff zum Nachdenken bietet und über ein reines Kinderbuch weit hinausgeht.

I was delighted to talk to the historian Helen Castor (who writes The H Files by Helen Castor) about her new book The Eagle and the Hart. I found that book compulsive, and this is one of my favourite interviews so far. We covered so much: Dickens, Melville, Diana Wynne Jones, Hilary Mantel, whether Edward III is to blame for the Wars of the Roses, why Bolingbroke did the right thing, the Paston Letters, whether we should dig up old tombs for research, leaving academia, Elizabeth I, and, of course, lots of Shakespeare. There is a full transcript below.Henry: Is there anything that we fundamentally know about this episode in history that Shakespeare didn't know?Helen: That's an extremely good question, and I'm tempted now to say no.Helen told me what is hardest to imagine about life in the fourteenth century.I think it's relatively easy to imagine a small community or even a city, because we can imagine lots of human beings together, but how relationships between human beings happen at a distance, not just in terms of writing a letter to someone you know, but how a very effective power structure happens across hundreds of miles in the absence of those things is the thing that has always absolutely fascinated me about the late Middle Ages. I think that's because it's hard, for me at least, to imagine.Good news to any publishers reading this. Helen is ready and willing to produce a complete edition of the Paston Letters. They were a bestseller when they were published a hundred years ago, but we are crying out for a complete edition in modern English.Henry: If someone wants to read the Paston Letters, but they don't want to read Middle English, weird spelling, et cetera, is there a good edition that they can use?Helen: Yes, there is an Oxford World's Classic. They're all selected. There isn't a complete edition in modern spelling. If any publishers are listening, I would love to do one. Henry: Yes, let's have it.Helen: Let's have it. I would really, really love to do that.Full TranscriptHenry: Today I am talking to the historian, Helen Castor. Helen is a former fellow of Sydney Sussex College in Cambridge. She has written several books of history. She is now a public historian, and of course, she has a Substack. The H Files by Helen CastorWe are going to talk mostly about her book, The Eagle and the Hart, which is all about Richard II and Henry IV. I found this book compulsive, so I hope you will read it too. Helen, welcome.Helen: Thank you very much for having me, Henry.Henry: You recently read Bleak House.Helen: I did.Henry: What did you think?Helen: I absolutely loved it. It was a long time since I'd read any Dickens. I read quite a lot when I was young. I read quite a lot of everything when I was young and have fallen off that reader's perch, much to my shame. The first page, that description of the London fog, the London courts, and I thought, "Why have I not been doing it for all these years?"Then I remembered, as so often with Dickens, the bits I love and the bits I'm less fond of, the sentimentality, the grotesquerie I'm less fond of, but the humour and the writing. There was one bit that I have not been able to read then or any of the times I've tried since without physically sobbing. It's a long time since a book has done that to me. I don't want to spoil it for anyone who hasn't read it, but--Henry: I'm sure I know what you mean. That's quite a sentimental passage.Helen: It is, but not sentimental in the way that I find myself objecting to. I think I really respond viscerally to this sentimentalising of some of his young women characters. I find that really off-putting, but I think now I'm a parent, and particularly I'm a parent of a boy [laughter]. I think it's that sense of a child being completely alone with no one to look after them, and then finding some people, but too late for a happy ending.Henry: Too late.Helen: Yes.Henry: You've been reading other classic novels, I think, Moby Dick?Helen: I'm in the middle of Moby Dick as we speak. I'm going very slowly, partly because I'm trying to savour every sentence. I love the sentence so much as a form. Melville is just astonishing, and also very, very funny in a way I hadn't expected to keep laughing out loud, sometimes because there is such humour in a sentence.Sometimes I'm just laughing because the sentence itself seems to have such audacity and that willingness to go places with sentences that sometimes I feel we've lost in the sort of sense of rules-based sentences instead of just sticking a semicolon and keep going. Why not, because it's so gorgeous and full of the joy of language at that point? Anyway, I'm ranting now, but--Henry: No, I think a lot of rules were instituted in the early 20th century that said you can and cannot do all these things, and writers before that point had not often followed those rules. I think what it has led to is that writers now, they can't really control a long sentence, in the sense that Melville and Dickens will do a long sentence, and it is a syntactically coherent thing, even though it's 60, 70 longer words. It's not just lots of stuff, and then, and then. The whole thing has got a beautiful structure that makes sense as a unit. That's just not obvious in a lot of writing now.Helen: I think that's exactly right. Partly, I've been reading some of the Melville out loud, and having just got onto the classification of whales, you can see I'm going very slowly. Those sentences, which are so long, but it's exactly that. If you read them out loud, and you follow the sense, and the punctuation, however irregular it might be in modern terms, gives you the breathing, you just flow on it, and the excitement of that, even or perhaps especially when one is talking about the classification of whales. Just joyful.Henry: Will we be seeing more very long sentences in your next book?Helen: I think I have to get a bit better at it. The habit that I was conscious of anyway, but became acutely so when I had to read my own audiobook for the first time is that I think I write in a very visual way. That is how I read because mostly it's silent.I discovered or rediscovered that often what I do when I want to write a very long sentence is I start the sentence and then I put a diversion or extra information within em dashes in the middle of the sentence. That works on the page because you can see spatially. I love that way of reading, I love seeing words in space.A lot of different kinds of text, both prose and poetry, I read in space like that. If you're reading to be heard, then the difficulty of breaking into a sentence with, whether it's brackets or em dashes or whatever, and then rejoining the sentence further down has its own challenges. Perhaps I ought to try and do less of that and experiment more with a Melvillian Dickensian onward flow. I don't know what my editor will think.Henry: What has brought you back to reading novels like this?Helen: I was wondering that this morning, actually, because I'm very aware having joined Substack, and of course, your Substack is one of the ones that is leading me further in this direction, very inspiringly, is discovering that lots of other people are reading and reading long novels now too. It reminded me of that thing that anyone with children will know that you have a baby and you call it something that you think only you have thought of, and then four years later, you call and you discover half the class is called that name. You wonder what was in the water that led everybody in that direction.I've just seen someone tweet this morning about how inspired they are by the builder next door who, on the scaffolding, is blasting the audiobook Middlemarch to the whole neighborhood.Henry: Oh my god. Amazing.Helen: It's really happening. Insofar as I can work out what led me as opposed to following a group, which clearly I am in some sense, I think the world at the moment is so disquieting, and depressing, and unnerving, that I think for me, there was a wish to escape into another world and another world that would be very immersive, not removed from this world completely. One that is very recognizably human.I think when I was younger, when I was in my teens and 20s, I loved reading science fiction and fantasy before it was such a genre as it is now. I'm a huge fan of Diana Wynne Jones and people like that.Henry: Oh, my god, same. Which one is your favorite?Helen: Oh, that is an impossible question to answer, partly because I want to go back and read a lot of them. Actually, I've got something next to me, just to get some obscurity points. I want to go back to Everard's Ride because there is a story in here that is based on the King's square. I don't know if I'm saying that right, but early 15th century, the story of the imprisoned King of Scotland when he was in prison in England. That one's in my head.The Dalemark Quartet I love because of the sort of medieval, but then I love the ones that are pure, more science fantasy. Which is your favorite? Which should I go back to first?Henry: I haven't read them all because I only started a couple of years ago. I just read Deep Secret, and I thought that was really excellent. I was in Bristol when I read it quite unwittingly. That was wonderful.Helen: Surrounded by Diana Wynne Jones' land. I only discovered many years into an obsession that just meant that I would read every new one while there were still new ones coming out. I sat next to Colin Burrow at a dinner in--Henry: Oh my god.Helen: I did sort of know that he was her son, but monstered him for the whole time, the whole course of sitting together, because I couldn't quite imagine her in a domestic setting, if you like, because she came up with all these extraordinary worlds. I think in days gone by, I went into more obviously imaginary worlds. I think coming back to it now, I wanted something big and something that I really could disappear into. I've been told to read Bleak House for so many decades and felt so ashamed I hadn't. Having done that, I thought, "Well, the whale."Henry: Have you read Diana Wynne Jones' husband's books, John Burrow? Because that's more in your field.Helen: It is, although I'm ashamed to say how badly read I am in medieval literary scholarship. It's weird how these academic silos can operate, shouldn't, probably don't for many, many people. I always feel I'm on horribly thin ground, thin ice when I start talking about medieval literature because I know how much scholarship is out there, and I know how much I haven't read. I must put John Burrow on my list as well.Henry: He's very readable. He's excellent.Helen: I think I can imagine, but I must go into it.Henry: Also, his books are refreshingly short. Your husband is a poet, so there's a lot of literature in your life at the moment.Helen: There is. When we met, which was 10 years ago-- Again, I don't think of myself as knowledgeable about poetry in general, but what was wonderful was discovering how much we had in common in the writing process and how much I could learn from him. To me, one of the things that has always been extremely important in my writing is the sentence, the sound of a sentence, the rhythm of a sentence folded into a paragraph.I find it extremely hard to move on from a paragraph if it's not sitting right yet. The sitting right is as much to do with sound and rhythm as it is to do with content. The content has to be right. It means I'm a nightmare to edit because once I do move on from a paragraph, I think it's finished. Obviously, my editor might beg to differ.I'm very grateful to Thomas Penn, who's also a wonderful historian, who's my editor on this last book, for being so patient with my recalcitrance as an editee. Talking to my husband about words in space on the page, about the rhythm, about the sound, about how he goes about writing has been so valuable and illuminating.I hope that the reading I've been doing, the other thing I should say about going back to big 19th-century novels is that, of course, I had the enormous privilege and learning curve of being part of a Booker jury panel three years ago. That too was an enormous kick in terms of reading and thinking about reading because my co-judges were such phenomenal reading company, and I learned such a lot that year.I feel not only I hope growing as a historian, but I am really, really focusing on writing, reading, being forced out of my bunker where writing is all on the page, starting to think about sound more, think about hearing more, because I think more and more, we are reading that way as a culture, it seems to me, the growth of audiobooks. My mother is adjusting to audiobooks now, and it's so interesting to listen to her as a lifelong, voracious reader, adjusting to what it is to experience a book through sound rather than on the page. I just think it's all fascinating, and I'm trying to learn as I write.Henry: I've been experimenting with audiobooks, because I felt like I had to, and I sort of typically hate audio anything. Jonathan Swift is very good, and so is Diana Wynne Jones.Helen: Interesting. Those two specifically. Is there something that connects the two of them, or are they separately good?Henry: I think they both wrote in a plain, colloquial style. It was very capable of being quite intellectual and had capacity for ideas. Diana Wynne Jones certainly took care about the way it sounded because she read so much to her own children, and that was really when she first read all the children's classics. She had developed for many years an understanding of what would sound good when it was read to a child, I think.Helen: And so that's the voice in her head.Henry: Indeed. As you read her essays, she talks about living with her Welsh grandfather for a year. He was intoning in the chapel, and she sort of comes out of this culture as well.Helen: Then Swift, a much more oral culture.Henry: Swift, of course, is in a very print-heavy culture because he's in London in 1710. We've got coffee houses and all the examiner, and the spectator, and all these people scribbling about each other. I think he was very insistent on what he called proper words in proper places. He became famous for that plain style. It's very carefully done, and you can't go wrong reading that out loud. He's very considerate of the reader that you won't suddenly go, "Oh, I'm in the middle of this huge parenthesis. I don't know how--" As you were saying, Swift-- he would be very deliberate about the placement of everything.Helen: A lot of that has to do with rhythm.Henry: Yes.Helen: Doesn't it? I suppose what I'm wondering, being very ignorant about the 18th century is, in a print-saturated culture, but still one where literacy was less universal than now, are we to assume that that print-saturated culture also incorporated reading out loud —Henry: Yes, exactly so. Exactly so. If you are at home, letters are read out loud. This obviously gives the novelists great opportunities to write letters that have to sort of work both ways. Novels are read out loud. This goes on into the 19th century. Dickens had many illiterate fans who knew his work through it being read to them. Charles Darwin's wife read him novels. When he says, "I love novels," what he means is, "I love it when my wife reads me a novel." [laughs]You're absolutely right. A good part of your audience would come from those listening as well as those reading it.Helen: Maybe we're getting back towards a new version of that with audiobooks expanding in their reach.Henry: I don't know. I saw some interesting stuff. I can't remember who was saying this. Someone was saying, "It's not an oral culture if you're watching short videos. That's a different sort of culture." I think, for us, we can say, "Oh yes, we're like Jonathan Swift," but for the culture at large, I don't know. It is an interesting mixed picture at the moment.Helen: Yes, history never repeats, but we should be wary of writing off any part of culture to do with words.Henry: I think so. If people are reporting builders irritating the neighbourhood with George Eliot, then it's a very mixed picture, right?Helen: It is.Henry: Last literary question. Hilary Mantel has been a big influence on you. What have you taken from her?Helen: That's quite a hard question to answer because I feel I just sit at her feet in awe. If I could point to anything in my writing that could live up to her, I would be very happy. The word that's coming into my head when you phrase the question in that way, I suppose, might be an absolute commitment to precision. Precision in language matters to me so much. Her thought and her writing of whatever kind seems to me to be so precise.Listening to interviews with her is such an outrageous experience because these beautifully, entirely formed sentences come out of her mouth as though that's how thought and language work. They don't for me. [chuckles] I'm talking about her in the present tense because I didn't know her, but I find it hard to imagine that she's not out there somewhere.Henry: She liked ghosts. She might be with us.Helen: She might. I would like to think that. Her writing of whatever genre always seems to me to have that precision, and it's precision of language that mirrors precision of thought, including the ability to imagine herself into somebody else's mind. That's, I suppose, my project as a historian. I'm always trying to experience a lost world through the eyes of a lost person or people, which, of course, when you put it like that, is an impossible task, but she makes it seem possible for her anyway and that's the road I'm attempting to travel one way or another.Henry: What is it about the 14th and 15th centuries that is hardest for us to imagine?Helen: I think this speaks to something else that Hilary Mantel does so extraordinarily well, which is to show us entire human beings who live and breathe and think and feel just as we do in as complex and contradictory and three-dimensional a way as we do, and yet who live in a world that is stripped of so many of the things that we take so much for granted that we find it, I think, hard to imagine how one could function without them.What I've always loved about the late Middle Ages, as a political historian, which is what I think of myself as, is that it has in England such a complex and sophisticated system of government, but one that operates so overwhelmingly through human beings, rather than impersonal, institutionalized, technological structures.You have a king who is the fount of all authority, exercising an extraordinary degree of control over a whole country, but without telephones, without motorized transport, without a professional police service, without a standing army. If we strip away from our understanding of government, all those things, then how on earth does society happen, does rule happen, does government happen?I think it's relatively easy to imagine a small community or even a city, because we can imagine lots of human beings together, but how relationships between human beings happen at a distance, not just in terms of writing a letter to someone you know, but how a very effective power structure happens across hundreds of miles in the absence of those things is the thing that has always absolutely fascinated me about the late Middle Ages. I think that's because it's hard, for me at least, to imagine.Henry: Good. You went to the RSC to watch The Henriad in 2013.Helen: I did.Henry: Is Shakespeare a big influence on this book? How did that affect you?Helen: I suppose this is a long story because Richard II and The Henriad have been-- there is Richard II. Richard II is part of The Henriad, isn't it?Henry: Yes.Helen: Richard II. Henry, see, this is-Henry: The two Henry IVs.Helen: -I'm not Shakespearean. I am. [laughs]Henry: No, it's Richard II, the two Henry IVs, and Henry V. Because, of course, Henry Bolingbroke is in Richard II, and it--Helen: Yes, although I never think of him as really the same person as Henry IV in the Henry IV plays, because he changes so dramatically between the two.Henry: Very often, they have a young actor and an old actor, and of course, in real life, that's insane, right?Helen: It's absolutely insane. I always separate Henry IV, parts I and II, and Henry V off from Richard II because it feels to me as though they operate in rather different worlds, which they do in lots of ways. My story with the Henry ad, now that we've established that I actually know what we're talking about, goes back to when I was in my teens and Kenneth Branagh was playing Henry V in Stratford. I grew up very near Stratford.At 15, 16, watching the young Branagh play Henry V was mind-blowing. I went a whole number of times because, in those days, I don't know how it is now, but you could go and get standing tickets for a fiver on the day. More often than not, if there were spare seats, you would get moved into some extraordinary stall seats at-- I was about to say halftime, I'm a football fan, at the interval.Henry V was the play I knew best for a long time, but at the same time, I'd studied Richard II at school. The Henry IV plays are the ones I know least well. I'm interested now to reflect on the fact that they are the ones that depart most from history. I wonder whether that's why I find them hardest to love, because I'm always coming to the plays from the history. Richard II and Henry V actually have a lot to show us about those kings. They bear very close relationships with a lot of the contemporary chronicles, whereas the Henry IV ones is Shakespeare doing his own thing much more.Particularly, as you've just said, making Henry IV way too old, and/or depending which angle we're looking at it from, making Hotspur way too young, the real Hotspur was three years older than Henry IV. If you want to make Hotspur and how-- your young Turks, you have to make Henry IV old and grey and weary with Northumberland.Back in 2013, the really intense experience I had was being asked to go for a day to join the RSC company on a school trip to Westminster Hall and Westminster Abbey at the beginning of their rehearsal process, so when David Tennant was playing Richard II and Greg Doran was directing. That was absolutely fascinating. I'd been thinking about Richard and Henry for a very long time. Obviously, I was a long way away from writing the book I've just written.Talking to actors is an extraordinary thing for a historian because, of course, to them, these are living characters. They want to know what's in their character's mind. They want to know, quite rightly, the chronological progression of their character's thought. That is something that's become more and more and more and more important to me.The longer I go on writing history, the more intensely attached I am to the need for chronology because if it hasn't happened to your protagonist yet, what are you doing with it? Your protagonist doesn't yet know. We don't know. It's very dramatically clear to us at the moment that we don't know what's happening tomorrow. Any number of outrageous and unpredictable things might happen tomorrow.The same certainly was true in Richard II's reign, goes on being true in Henry IV's reign. That experience, in the wake of which I then went to see Henry IV, parts 1 and 2 in Stratford, was really thought-provoking. The extent to which, even though I'd been working on this period for a long time, and had taught this period, I still was struggling to answer some of those questions.Then I'd just had the similarly amazing experience of having a meeting with the Richard II cast and director at the Bridge Theatre before the Nicholas Heitner production with Jonathan Bailey as Richard went on stage. That was actually towards the end of their rehearsal process. I was so struck that the actor playing Bolingbroke in this production and the actor playing Bolingbroke in the production back in 2013 both asked the same excellent first question, which is so hard for a historian to answer, which is at what point does Bolingbroke decide that he's coming back to claim the crown, not just the Duchy of Lancaster?That is a key question for Bolingbroke in Richard II. Does he already know when he decides he's going to break his exile and come back? Is he challenging for the crown straight away, or is he just coming back for his rightful inheritance with the Duchy of Lancaster? That is the million-dollar question when you're writing about Bolingbroke in 1399.It's not possible to answer with a smoking gun. We don't have a letter or a diary entry from Henry Bolingbroke as he's about to step on board ship in Boulogne saying, "I'm saying I'm coming back for the Duchy of Lancaster." The unfolding logic of his situation is that if he's going to come back at all, he's going to have to claim the crown. When he admits that to himself, and when he admits that to anybody else, are questions we can argue about.It was so interesting to me that that's the question that Shakespeare's Richard II throws up for his Bolingbroke just as much as it does for the historical one.Henry: Is there anything that we fundamentally know about this episode in history that Shakespeare didn't know?Helen: That's an extremely good question, and I'm tempted now to say no.Henry: When I left your book, the one thing I thought was that in Shakespeare, the nobles turn against Richard because of his excesses. Obviously, he really dramatizes that around the death of Gaunt. From your book, you may disagree with this, I came away thinking, well, the nobles wanted more power all the time. They may not have wanted the king's power, but there was this constant thing of the nobles feeling like they were owed more authority.Helen: I think the nobles always want more power because they are ambitious, competitive men within a political structure that rewards ambition and competition. The crucial thing for them is that they can only safely pursue ambition and competition if they know that the structure they're competing within will hold.The thing that keeps that structure rooted and solidly in place is the crown and the things that the crown is there to uphold, namely, particularly, the rule of law because if the rule of law starts to crumble, then the risk is that the whole structure collapses into anarchy. Within anarchy, then a powerful man cannot safely compete for more power because an even more powerful man might be about to roll into his estates and take them over. There have to be rules. There has to be fair competition. The referee is there on a football pitch for a reason.The king, in some senses, whether you want to see him as the keystone in an arch that supports a building or whether he's a referee on a football pitch, there are reasons why powerful men need rules because rules uphold their power. What goes wrong with Richard is that instead of seeing that he and the nobles have a common interest in keeping this structure standing, and that actually he can become more powerful if he works with and through the nobles, he sees them as a threat to him.He's attempting to establish a power structure that will not be beholden to them. In so doing, he becomes a threat to them. This structure that is supposed to stand as one mutually supportive thing is beginning to tear itself apart. That is why Richard's treatment of Bolingbroke becomes such a crucial catalyst, because what Richard does to Bolingbroke is unlawful in a very real and very technical sense. Bolingbroke has not been convicted of any crime. He's not been properly tried. There's been this trial by combat, the duel with Mowbray, but it hasn't stopped arbitrarily, and an arbitrary punishment visited upon both of them. They're both being exiled without having been found guilty, without the judgment of God speaking through this duel.Richard then promises that Bolingbroke can have his inheritance, even though he's in exile. As soon as Gaunt dies, Richard says, "No, I'm having it." Now, all of that is unlawful treatment of Bolingbroke, but because Bolingbroke is the most powerful nobleman in the country, it is also a warning and a threat to every other member of the political classes that if the king takes against you, then his arbitrary will can override the law.That diagnosis is there in Shakespeare. It's the Duke of York, who in reality was just a completely hopeless, wet figure, but he says, and I've got it written down, keep it beside me.Henry: Very nice.Helen: Kind of ridiculous, but here it is. York says to Richard, "Take Herford's rights away and take from time his charters and his customary rights. Let not tomorrow then ensue today. Be not thyself, for how art thou a king, but by fair sequence and succession?" In other words, if you interfere with, and I know you've written about time in these plays, it's absolutely crucial.Part of the process of time in these plays is that the rules play out over time. Any one individual king must not break those rules so that the expected process of succession over time can take place. York's warning comes true, that Richard is unseating himself by seeking to unseat Bolingbroke from his inheritance.Henry: We give Shakespeare good marks as a historian.Helen: In this play, yes, absolutely. The things he tinkers with in Richard II are minor plot points. He compresses time in order to get it all on stage in a plausible sequence of events. He compresses two queens into one, given that Richard was married to, by the time he fell, a nine-year-old who he'd married when he was six. It's harder to have a six-year-old making speeches on stage, so he puts the two queens into one.Henry: You don't want to pay another actor.Helen: Exactly.Henry: It's expensive.Helen: You don't want children and animals on stage. Although there is a wonderful account of a production of Richard II on stage in the West End in 1901, with the Australian actor Oscar Asche in it, playing Bolingbroke. The duel scene, he had full armour and a horse, opening night. It was a different horse from the one he rehearsed with. He gives an account in his autobiography of this horse rearing and him somersaulting heroically off the horse.Henry: Oh my god.Helen: The curtain having to come down and then it going back up again to tumultuous applause. You think, "Oscar, I'm wondering whether you're over-egging this pudding." Anyway, I give Shakespeare very good marks in Richard II, not really in the Henry IV plays, but gets back on track.Henry: The Henry IV plays are so good, we're forgiven. Was Richard II a prototype Henry VIII?Helen: Yes. Although, of course, history doesn't work forwards like that. I always worry about being a historian, talking about prototypes, if you see what I mean, but--Henry: No, this is just some podcast, so we don't have to be too strict. He's over-mighty, his sense of his relationship to God. There are issues in parliament about, "How much can the Pope tell us what to do?" There are certain things that seem to be inherent in the way the British state conceives of itself at this point that become problematic in another way.Helen: Is this pushing it too far to say Richard is a second son who ends up being the lone precious heir to the throne who must be wrapped in cotton wool to ensure that his unique God-given authority is protected? Also describes Henry VIII.Henry: They both like fancy clothes.Helen: Both like fancy clothes. Charles I is also a second son who has to step up.Henry: With wonderful cuffs and collars. He's another big dresser.Helen: And great patrons of art. I think we're developing new historical--Henry: No, I think there's a whole thing here.Helen: I think there is. What Henry does, of course, in rather different, because a lot has changed thanks to the Wars of the Roses, the power of the nobility to stand up independently of the crown is significantly lessened by the political effects of the Wars of the Roses, not at least that a lot of them have had their heads cut off, or died in battle, and the Tudors are busy making sure that they remain in the newly subjected place that they find themselves in.Henry then finds to go back to Hilary Mantel, a very, very able political servant who works out how to use parliament for him in rejecting those extra English powers that might restrain him. I do always wonder what Richard thought he was going to do if he'd succeeded in becoming Holy Roman Emperor, which I take very seriously as a proposition from Richard.Most other historians, because it's so patently ridiculous, if you look at it from a European perspective, have just said, "Oh, he got this idea that he wanted to become Holy Roman Emperor," but, of course, it was never going to happen. In Richard's mind, I think it was extremely real. Whether he really would have tried to give the English crown to Rutland, his favorite by the end of the reign, while he went off in glory to be crowned by the Pope, I don't know what was in his head. The difference with Henry is that the ambitions he eventually conceives are very England-focused, and so he can make them happen.Henry: Is there some sort of argument that, if the king hadn't won the Wars of the Roses, and the nobility had flourished, and their sons hadn't been killed, the reformation would have just been much harder to pull off here?[silence]Helen: I wonder what that would have looked like, because in a sense, the king was always going to win the Wars of the Roses, in the sense that you have to have a king. The minute you had someone left standing after that mess, that protracted mess, if he knew what he was doing, and there are arguments about the extent to which Henry VII knew what he was doing, or was doing something very different, whether or not he knew it was different, but there was always going to be an opportunity for a king to assert himself after that.Particularly, the extent to which the lesser landowners, the gentry had realized they couldn't just rely on the nobility to protect them anymore. They couldn't just follow their lord into battle and abdicate responsibility.Henry: Okay.Helen: That's an interesting--Henry: How much should we blame Edward III for all of this?Helen: For living too long and having too many sons?Henry: My argument against Edward is the Hundred Years' War, it doesn't actually go that well by the end of his reign, and it's cost too much money. Too many dukes with too much power. It's not that he had too many sons, he elevates them all and creates this insane situation. The war itself starts to tip the balance between the king and parliament, and so now you've got it from the dukes, and from the other side, and he just didn't manage the succession at all.Even though his son has died, and it really needs some kind of-- He allowed. He should have known that he was allowing a vacuum to open up where there's competition from the nobles, and from parliament, and the finances are a mess, and this war isn't there. It's just… he just leaves a disaster, doesn't he?Helen: I think I'd want to reframe that a little bit. Perhaps, I'm too much the king's friend. I think the political, and in some senses, existential dilemma for a medieval king is that the best of all possible worlds is what Edward achieves in the 1340s and the 1350s, which is, fight a war for reasons that your subjects recognize as in the common interest, in the national interest. Fight it over there so that the lands that are being devastated and the villages and towns that are being burned are not yours. Bring back lots of plunder. Everybody's getting richer and feeling very victorious.You can harness parliament. When things are going well, a medieval king and a parliament are not rivals for power. An English king working with parliament is more powerful than an English king trying to work without parliament. If things are going well, he gets more money, he can pass laws, he can enforce his will more effectively. It's win-win-win if you're ticking all those boxes.As you're pointing out, the worst of all possible worlds is to be fighting a war that's going badly. To fight a war is a big risk because either you're going to end up winning and everything's great, or if it's going badly, then you'd rather be at peace. Of course, you're not necessarily in a position to negotiate peace, depending on the terms of the war you've established.Similarly, with sons, you want heirs. You want to know the succession is safe. I think Edward's younger sons would argue with you about setting up very powerful dukes because the younger ones really-- York and Gloucester, Edmund of Langley and Thomas of Woodstock, really didn't have much in the way of an estate given to them at all, and always felt very hard done by about that. John of Gaunt is set up very well because he's married off to the heir of the Duke of Lancaster who's handily died, leaving only daughters.Henry: That's the problem, isn't it, creating that sort of impact? John of Gaunt is far too rich and powerful.Helen: You say that, except he's unfeasibly loyal. Without Gaunt, disaster happens much, much, much earlier. Gaunt is putting all those resources into the project of propping up the English state and the English crown for way longer than Richard deserves, given that Richard's trying to murder him half the time in the 1380s.Henry: [laughs] For sure. No, I agree with you there, but from Edward III's point of view, it's a mistake to make one very powerful son another quite powerful son next to-- We still see this playing out in royal family dynamics.Helen: This is the problem. What is the perfect scenario in a hereditary system where you need an heir and a spare, but even there, the spare, if he doesn't get to be the heir, is often very disgruntled. [laughs] If he does get to be the heir, as we've just said, turns out to be overconvinced of his own-Henry: Oh, indeed, yes.Helen: -specialness. Then, if you have too many spares, you run into a different kind of problem. Equally, if you don't have a hereditary system, then you have an almighty battle, as the Anglo-Saxons often did, about who's actually going to get the crown in the next generation. It's a very tricky--Henry: Is England just inherently unstable? We've got the Black Death, France is going to be a problem, whatever happens. Who is really going to come to a good fiscal position in this situation? It's no one's fault. It's just there wasn't another way out.Helen: You could say that England's remarkably-- See, I'm just playing devil's advocate the whole time.Henry: No, good.Helen: You could say England is remarkably stable in the sense that England is very unusually centralized for a medieval state at this point. It's centralized in a way that works because it's small enough to govern. It's, broadly speaking, an island. You've got to deal with the Scotts border, but it's a relatively short border. Yes, you have powerful nobles, but they are powerful nobles who, by this stage, are locked into the state. They're locked into a unified system of law. The common law rules everyone. Everyone looks to Westminster.It's very different from what the King of France has been having to face, which has been having to push his authority outward from the Île-de-France, reconquer bits of France that the English have had for a long time, impose his authority over other princes of the realm in a context where there are different laws, there are different customs, there are different languages. You could say that France is in a much more difficult and unstable situation.Of course, what we see as the tide of the war turns again in the early 15th century is precisely that France collapses into civil war, and the English can make hay again in that situation. If Henry V had not died too young with not enough sons in 1423, and particularly, if he'd left a son who grew up to be any use at all, as opposed to absolutely none-- what am I saying? I'm saying that the structure of government in England could work astonishingly well given the luck of the right man at the helm. The right man at the helm had to understand his responsibilities at home, and he had to be capable of prosecuting a successful war abroad because that is how this state works best.As you've just pointed out, prosecuting a successful war abroad is an inherently unstable scenario because no war is ever going to go in your direction the entire time. That's what Richard, who has no interest in war at all is discovering, because once the tide of war is lapping at your own shores, instead of all happening over there, it's a very, very different prospect in terms of persuading parliament to pay for it, quite understandably.You talk about the Black Death. One of the extraordinary things is looking at England in 1348, 1349, when the Black Death hits. Probably, something approaching half the population dies in 18 months. If you're looking at the progress of the war, you barely notice it happened at all. What does the government do? It snaps into action and implements a maximum wage immediately, in case [chuckles] these uppity laborers start noticing there are fewer of them, and they can ask for more money.The amount of control, at that stage at least, that the government has over a country going through an extraordinary set of challenges is quite remarkable, really.Henry: Did Bolingbroke do the right thing?Helen: I think Bolingbroke did the only possible thing, which, in some senses, equates to the right thing. If he had not come back, he would not only have been abandoning his own family, his dynasty, his inheritance, everything he'd been brought up to believe was his responsibility, but also abandoning England to what was pretty much by that stage, clearly, a situation of tyranny.The big argument is always, well, we can identify a tyrant, we have a definition of tyranny. That is, if a legitimate king rules in the common interest and according to the law, then a tyrant rules not in the common interest, and not according to the law. But then the thing that the political theorists argue about is whether or not you can actively resist a tyrant, or whether you have to wait for God to act.Then, the question is, "Might God be acting through me if I'm Bolingbroke?" That's what Bolingbroke has to hope, because if he doesn't do what he does in 1399, he is abandoning everything his whole life has been devoted to maintaining and taking responsibility for. It's quite hard to see where England would then end up, other than with somebody else trying to challenge Richard in the way that Henry does.Henry: Why was he anointed with Thomas Becket's oil?Helen: Because Richard had found it in the tower, [chuckles] and was making great play of the claims that were made for Thomas. This is one of the interesting things about Richard. He is simultaneously very interested in history, and interested in his place in history, his place in the lineage of English kings, going all the way back, particularly to the confessor to whom he looks as not only a patron saint, but as in some sense, a point of identification.He's also seeking to stop time at himself. He doesn't like to think about the future beyond himself. He doesn't show any interest in fathering an heir. His will is all about how to make permanent the judgments that he's made on his nobles. It's not about realistically what's going to happen after his death.In the course of his interest in history, he has found this vial of oil in the tower somewhere in a locked drawer with a note that says, "The Virgin gave this to Thomas Becket, and whoever is anointed with this oil shall win all his battles and shall lead England to greatness," et cetera. Richard has tried to have himself re-anointed, and even his patsy Archbishop of Canterbury that he's put in place after exiling the original one who'd stood up to him a bit.Even the new Archbishop of Canterbury says, "Sire, anointing doesn't really work like that. I'm afraid we can't do it twice." Richard has been wearing this vial round his neck in an attempt to claim that he is not only the successor to the confessor, but he is now the inheritor of this holy oil. The French king has had a holy oil for a very long time in the Cathedral of Reims, which was supposedly given to Clovis, the first king of France, by an angel, et cetera.Richard, who is always very keen on emulating, or paralleling the crown of France, is very, very keen on this. If you were Henry coming in 1399 saying, "No, God has spoken through me. The country has rallied to me. I am now the rightful king of England. We won't look too closely at my justifications for that," and you are appropriating the ceremonial of the crown, you are having yourself crowned in Westminster Abbey on the 13th of October, which is the feast day of the confessor, you are handed that opportunity to use the symbolism of this oil that Richard has just unearthed, and was trying to claim for himself. You can then say, "No, I am the first king crowned with this oil," and you're showing it to the French ambassadors and so on.If we are to believe the chroniclers, it starts making his hair fall out, which might be a contrary sign from God. It's a situation where you are usurping the throne, and what is questionable is your right to be there. Then, any symbolic prop you can get, you're going to lean on as hard as you can.Henry: A few general questions to close. Should we be more willing to open up old tombs?Helen: Yes. [laughs]Henry: Good. [laughs]Helen: I'm afraid, for me, historical curiosity is-- Our forebears in the 18th and 19th century had very few qualms at all. One of the things I love about the endless series of scholarly antiquarian articles that are-- or not so scholarly, in some cases, that are written about all the various tomb openings that went on in the 18th and 19th century, I do love the moments, where just occasionally, they end up saying, "Do you know what, lads? Maybe we shouldn't do this bit." [chuckles]They get right to the brink with a couple of tombs and say, "Oh, do you know what? This one hasn't been disturbed since 1260, whatever. Maybe we won't. We'll put it back." Mostly, they just crowbar the lid off and see what they can find, which one might regret in terms of what we might now find with greater scientific know-how, and et cetera. Equally, we don't do that kind of thing anymore unless we're digging up a car park. We're not finding things out anyway. I just love the information that comes out, so yes, for me.Henry: Dig up more tombs.Helen: Yes.Henry: What is it that you love about the Paston Letters?Helen: More or less everything. I love the language. I love the way that, even though most of them are dictated to scribes, but you can hear the dictation. You can hear individual voices. Everything we were saying about sentences. You can hear the rhythm. You can hear the speech patterns. I'm no linguistic expert, but I love seeing the different forms of spelling and how that plays out on the page.I love how recognizable they are as a family. I love the fact that we hear women's voices in a way that we very rarely do in the public records. The government which is mainly what we have to work with. I love Margaret Paston, who arrives at 18 as a new bride, and becomes the matriarch of the family. I love her relationship with her two eldest boys, John and John, and their father, John.I do wish they hadn't done that because it doesn't help those of us who are trying to write about them. I love the view you get of late medieval of 15th-century politics from the point of view of a family trying to survive it. The fact that you get tiny drops in letters that are also about shopping, or also about your sisters fall in love with someone unsuitable. Unsuitable only, I hasten to add, because he's the family bailiff, not because he isn't a wonderful and extremely able man. They all know those two things. It's just that he's a family bailiff, and therefore, not socially acceptable.I love that experience of being immersed in the world of a 15th-century gentry family, so politically involved, but not powerful enough to protect themselves, who can protect themselves in the Wars of the Roses in any case.Henry: If someone wants to read the Paston Letters, but they don't want to read Middle English, weird spelling, et cetera, is there a good edition that they can use?Helen: Yes, there is an Oxford World's Classic. They're all selected. There isn't a complete edition in modern spelling. If any publishers are listening, I would love to do one. [chuckles]Henry: Yes, let's have it.Helen: Let's have it. I would really, really love to do that. There are some very good selections. Richard Barber did one many years ago, and, of course, self-advertising. There is also my book, now more than 20 years old, about the Paston family, where I was trying to put in as much of the letters as I could. I wanted to weave the voices through. Yes, please go and read the Paston Letters in selections, in whatever form you can get them, and let's start lobbying for a complete modernized Paston.Henry: That's right. Why did you leave academia? Because you did it before it was cool.Helen: [laughs] That's very kind of you to say. My academic life was, and is very important to me, and I hate saying this now, because the academic world is so difficult now. I ended up in it almost by accident, which is a terrible thing to say now, people having to-- I never intended to be an academic. My parents were academics, and I felt I'd seen enough and wasn't sure I wanted to do that.I couldn't bear to give up history, and put in a PhD application to work with Christine Carpenter, who'd been the most inspiring supervisor when I was an undergraduate, got the place, thought, "Right, I'm just going to do a PhD." Of course, once you're doing a PhD, and everyone you know is starting to apply for early career jobs, which weren't even called early career jobs in those days, because it was a million years ago.I applied for a research fellowship, was lucky enough to get it, and then applied for a teaching job, utterly convinced, and being told by the people around me that I stood no chance of getting it, because I was way too junior, and breezed through the whole process, because I knew I wasn't going to get it, and then turned up looking for someone very junior.I got this wonderful teaching job at Sidney Sussex in Cambridge and spent eight years there, learned so much, loved working with the students. I was working very closely with the students in various ways, but I wasn't-- I'm such a slow writer, and a writer that needs to be immersed in what I was doing, and I just wasn't managing to write, and also not managing to write in the way I wanted to write, because I was becoming clearer and clearer about the fact that I wanted to write narrative history.Certainly, at that point, it felt as though writing narrative history for a general audience and being an early career academic didn't go so easily together. I think lots of people are now showing how possible it is, but I wasn't convinced I could do it. Then, sorry, this is a very long answer to what's [crosstalk] your question.Henry: That's good.Helen: I also had my son, and my then partner was teaching at a very different university, I mean, geographically different, and we were living in a third place, and trying to put a baby into that geographical [chuckles] setup was not going to work. I thought, "Well, now or never, I'll write a proposal for a book, a narrative, a book for a general readership, a narrative book about the Paxton family, because that's what I really want to write, and I'll see if I can find an agent, and I'll see if I," and I did.I found the most wonderful agent, with whose help I wrote a huge proposal, and got a deal for it two weeks before my son was due. At that point, I thought, "Okay, if I don't jump now, now or never, the stars are aligned." I've been a freelance medieval historian ever since then, touching every wood I can find as it continues to be possible. I am very grateful for those years in Cambridge. They were the making of me in terms of training and in terms of teaching.I certainly think without teaching for those years, I wouldn't be anywhere near as good a writer, because you learn such a lot from talking to, and reading what students produce.Henry: How do you choose your subjects now? How do you choose what to write about?Helen: I follow my nose, really. It's not very scientific.Henry: Why should it be?Helen: Thank you. The book, bizarrely, the book that felt most contingent, was the one I wrote after the Paston book, because I knew I'd written about the Pastons in my PhD, and then again more of it in the monograph that was based on my PhD. I knew having written about the Pastons in a very academic, analytical way, contributing to my analysis of 15th-century politics. I knew I wanted to put them at the center and write about them. That was my beginning point.The big question was what to do next, and I was a bit bamboozled for a while. The next book I ended up writing was She-Wolves, which is probably, until now, my best-known book. It was the one that felt most uncertain to me, while I was putting it together, and that really started from having one scene in my head, and it's the scene with which the book opens. It's the scene of the young Edward VI in 1553, Henry VIII's only son, dying at the age of 15.Suddenly, me suddenly realizing that wherever you looked on the Tudor family tree at that point, there were only women left. The whole question of whether a woman could rule was going to have to be answered in some way at that point, and because I'm a medievalist, that made me start thinking backwards, and so I ended up choosing some medieval queens to write about, because they've got their hands on power one way or another.Until very close to finishing it, I was worried that it wouldn't hang together as a book, and the irony is that it's the one that people seem to have taken to most. The next book after that grew out of that one, because I found myself going around talking about She-Wolves, and saying repeatedly, "The problem these queens faced was that they couldn't lead an army on the battlefield."Women couldn't do that. The only medieval woman who did that was Joan of Arc, and look what happened to her. Gradually, I realized that I didn't really know what had happened to her. I mean, I did know what--Henry: Yes, indeed.Helen: I decided that I really wanted to write about her, so I did that. Then, having done that, and having then written a very short book about Elizabeth I, that I was asked to write for Penguin Monarchs, I realized I'd been haunted all this time by Richard and Henry, who I'd been thinking about and working on since the very beginning of my PhD, but I finally felt, perhaps, ready to have a go at them properly.It's all been pretty organic apart from She-Wolves, which was the big, "What am I writing about next?" That took shape slowly and gradually. Now, I'm going to write about Elizabeth I properly in a-Henry: Oh, exciting.Helen: -full-scale book, and I decided that, anyway, before I wrote this last one, but I-- It feels even righter now, because I Am Richard II, Know Ye Not That, feels even more intensely relevant having now written about Richard and Henry, and I'm quite intimidated because Elizabeth is quite intimidating, but I think it's good, related by your subjects.[laughter]Henry: Have you read the Elizabeth Jenkins biography?Helen: Many, many years ago. It's on my shelf here.Henry: Oh, good.Helen: In fact, so it's one of the things I will be going back to. Why do you ask particularly? I need--Henry: I'm a big Elizabeth Jenkins fan, and I like that book particularly.Helen: Wonderful. Well, I will be redoubled in my enthusiasm.Henry: I look forward to seeing what you say about it. What did you learn from Christine Carpenter?Helen: Ooh. Just as precision was the word that came into my head when you asked me about Hilary Mantel, the word that comes into my head when you ask about Christine is rigor. I think she is the most rigorous historical thinker that I have ever had the privilege of working with and talking to. I am never not on my toes when I am writing for, talking to, reading Christine. That was an experience that started from the first day I walked into her room for my first supervision in 1987.It was really that rigor that started opening up the medieval world to me, asking questions that at that stage I couldn't answer at all, but suddenly, made everything go into technicolor. Really, from the perspective that I had been failing to ask the most basic questions. I would sometimes have students say to me, "Oh, I didn't say that, because I thought it was too basic."I have always said, "No, there is no question that is too basic." Because what Christine started opening up for me was how does medieval government work? What are you talking about? There is the king at Westminster. There is that family there in Northumberland. What relates the two of them? How does this work? Think about it structurally. Think about it in human terms, but also in political structural terms, and then convince me that you understand how this all goes together. I try never to lose that.Henry: Helen Castor, thank you very much.Helen: Thank you so much. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk/subscribe

Philip Larkin was terrified of death from an early age; Thomas Hardy contemplated what the neighbours would say after he had gone; and Sylvia Plath imagined her own death in vivid and controversial ways. The genre of self-elegy, in which poets have reflected on their own passing, is a small but eloquent one in the history of English poetry. In this episode, Seamus and Mark consider some of its most striking examples, including Chidiock Tichborne's laconic lament on the night of his execution in 1586, Jonathan Swift's breezy anticipation of his posthumous reception, and the more comfortless efforts of 20th-century poets confronting godless extinction.Non-subscribers will only hear an extract from this episode. To listen to the full episode, and all our other Close Readings series, subscribe:Directly in Apple Podcasts: https://lrb.me/applecrldIn other podcast apps: https://lrb.me/closereadingsldRead more in the LRB:Jacqueline Rose on Plath:⁠https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v24/n16/jacqueline-rose/this-is-not-a-biography⁠David Runciman on Larkin and his father:⁠https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v43/n03/david-runciman/a-funny-feeling⁠John Bayley on Larkin⁠https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v05/n08/john-bayley/the-last-romantic⁠Matthew Bevis on Hardy:⁠https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v46/n19/matthew-bevis/i-prefer-my-mare Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jo and Adam warmly welcome you to their Eggztra Special Easter Eggstravaganza, which they hope will make you hoppy and not (hot)cross. It's (hotcross) bun a funny old couple of weeks for satire, so leave it to our Eggsperts to pick out a few Eggstremely interesting Eggxamples to discuss. In this episode, Jo and Adam reflect of their Eggsperiences of watching the new series of Charlie Brooker's dystopian sci-fi satire show, Black Mirror and Apple TV's new cinema skewering satire The Studio and discuss the unexpected but highly welcome return of the hilarious podcast Dear Joan and Jericha. They also survey the satirical responses to J D Vance's first and very final meeting with the late Pope Francis, consider a very appropriate Eggstract from Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels, and share notes on the best ways to eat an Easter Egg. Happy Easter, one and all!

Dans cette féérie lyrique, Cendrillon, Barbe-Bleue ou encore la fée Morgane se rencontrent dans une mise en scène de Valérie Lesort. Un condensé d'une dizaine de contes de Charles Perrault. Tout commence dans une forêt un peu inquiétante où le Petit Poucet raconte à ses parents, éplorés, comment il s'est sauvé des griffes du méchant ogre Croquemitaine ! C'est alors que la fée Morgane apparaît et transforme notre héros en Prince charmant qui rencontrera Cendrillon, laquelle devra affronter Barbe-Bleue ou le démoniaque Holibrius… et se cacher sous une Peau d'âne pour leur échapper !  À l'origine, les contes de Charles Perrault ont été écrits entre 1691 et 1697. Ce sont des contes de tradition orale fortement inspirés par des contes populaires issus du patrimoine italien tel que le Pentameron. Les contes de fée sont alors très populaires dans les milieux mondains aristocratiques, mais il existe peu de versions pour enfants. Charles Perrault a l'idée d'« édulcorer » quelque peu ces contes, à l'origine affreusement cruels, et de les moraliser pour en faire des contes pour les enfants. Oubliés quelques décennies à la faveur des contes orientaux (Les Mille-et-une Nuits) ils connaissent un regain d'intérêt pendant la première moitié du XIXᵉ siècle : la mode est alors de lire des histoires aux enfants. Puis, les ballets, opéras, opérettes et plus tard les dessins animés inscrivent définitivement les contes dans le patrimoine.  Cette mise en scène loufoque et burlesque s'inscrit dans la tradition de l'opéra-comique du début du vingtième siècle. Elle est adaptée des livrets de Paul de Choudens et Arthur Bernède et de la musique de Félix Fourdrain.(début du XXᵉ siècle). À la manière d'un livre, les titres des chapitres défilent. Les personnages portent des costumes colorés créés en 2D aux couleurs vives. Quand on a cherché comment on allait raconter l'histoire de façon digeste, on était comme deux petites filles qui jouaient. J'aime bien aller vers la dérision et rire de certaines choses, mais j'aime aussi garder intact ce côté enfant.Le spectacle est produit par les Frivolités Parisiennes, une compagnie créée en 2012 qui allie danse, théâtre, chant et musique au service du répertoire lyrique léger français.  ► Invitée : Valérie Lesort, metteuse en scène, plasticienne, autrice et comédienne née en 1975. Elle a participé à de nombreuses créations au théâtre comme au cinéma ou à la télévision.   En 2015, elle adapte le roman de Jules Verne Vingt mille lieues sous les mers à la Comédie française et la Mouche de George Langelaan, en 2019, des spectacles qui obtiennent le Molière de la création visuelle. En 2022, les voyages de Gulliver de Jonathan Swift et en 2023, le Bourgeois Gentilhomme de Molière décrochent également plusieurs Molière dont celui de la mise en scène !  Son spectacle Les contes de Perrault est à voir à l'Athénée théâtre Louis Jouvet jusqu'au 17 avril Valérie Lesort produit également le spectacle-cabaret Que d'espoir ! au théâtre de l'Atelier à partir du 24 avril prochain.Programmation musicale :Les artistes Stranded Horse et Boubacar Cissokho avec le titre Le feu qui nous rend las. 

Dans cette féérie lyrique, Cendrillon, Barbe-Bleue ou encore la fée Morgane se rencontrent dans une mise en scène de Valérie Lesort. Un condensé d'une dizaine de contes de Charles Perrault. Tout commence dans une forêt un peu inquiétante où le Petit Poucet raconte à ses parents, éplorés, comment il s'est sauvé des griffes du méchant ogre Croquemitaine ! C'est alors que la fée Morgane apparaît et transforme notre héros en Prince charmant qui rencontrera Cendrillon, laquelle devra affronter Barbe-Bleue ou le démoniaque Holibrius… et se cacher sous une Peau d'âne pour leur échapper !  À l'origine, les contes de Charles Perrault ont été écrits entre 1691 et 1697. Ce sont des contes de tradition orale fortement inspirés par des contes populaires issus du patrimoine italien tel que le Pentameron. Les contes de fée sont alors très populaires dans les milieux mondains aristocratiques, mais il existe peu de versions pour enfants. Charles Perrault a l'idée d'« édulcorer » quelque peu ces contes, à l'origine affreusement cruels, et de les moraliser pour en faire des contes pour les enfants. Oubliés quelques décennies à la faveur des contes orientaux (Les Mille-et-une Nuits) ils connaissent un regain d'intérêt pendant la première moitié du XIXᵉ siècle : la mode est alors de lire des histoires aux enfants. Puis, les ballets, opéras, opérettes et plus tard les dessins animés inscrivent définitivement les contes dans le patrimoine.  Cette mise en scène loufoque et burlesque s'inscrit dans la tradition de l'opéra-comique du début du vingtième siècle. Elle est adaptée des livrets de Paul de Choudens et Arthur Bernède et de la musique de Félix Fourdrain.(début du XXᵉ siècle). À la manière d'un livre, les titres des chapitres défilent. Les personnages portent des costumes colorés créés en 2D aux couleurs vives. Quand on a cherché comment on allait raconter l'histoire de façon digeste, on était comme deux petites filles qui jouaient. J'aime bien aller vers la dérision et rire de certaines choses, mais j'aime aussi garder intact ce côté enfant.Le spectacle est produit par les Frivolités Parisiennes, une compagnie créée en 2012 qui allie danse, théâtre, chant et musique au service du répertoire lyrique léger français.  ► Invitée : Valérie Lesort, metteuse en scène, plasticienne, autrice et comédienne née en 1975. Elle a participé à de nombreuses créations au théâtre comme au cinéma ou à la télévision.   En 2015, elle adapte le roman de Jules Verne Vingt mille lieues sous les mers à la Comédie française et la Mouche de George Langelaan, en 2019, des spectacles qui obtiennent le Molière de la création visuelle. En 2022, les voyages de Gulliver de Jonathan Swift et en 2023, le Bourgeois Gentilhomme de Molière décrochent également plusieurs Molière dont celui de la mise en scène !  Son spectacle Les contes de Perrault est à voir à l'Athénée théâtre Louis Jouvet jusqu'au 17 avril Valérie Lesort produit également le spectacle-cabaret Que d'espoir ! au théâtre de l'Atelier à partir du 24 avril prochain.Programmation musicale :Les artistes Stranded Horse et Boubacar Cissokho avec le titre Le feu qui nous rend las. 

The foundations of modern copyright law were laid on 10th April 1710, when the Statute of Anne came into effect. Before the Act, anyone could copy and sell books without giving a penny to the author; now, writers would be protected from being completely exploited by (British) publishers for an initial period of 14 years. Writers like Jonathan Swift and Daniel Defoe had earned respect as professionals, pushing for more control over their own work, and leading to a shift away from the Stationers' Company—a powerful guild that previously held a monopoly over publishing and censorship. In this episode, Arion, Rebecca and Olly explore how later writers like William Wordsworth would campaign for longer copyright duration; revisit the milestones that allowed the law to be applied to other creative endeavours, such as music and film; and reveal why you won't be hearing Martin Luther King Jr.'s "I Have a Dream" speech in many adverts for a few years yet… Further Reading: • ‘The Statute of Anne' (British Parliament, 1710): https://ipmall.law.unh.edu/sites/default/files/hosted_resources/lipa/copyrights/Statute%20of%20Anne%20_1710_.pdf • ‘Whose line is it anyway?' (The Sunday Times, 2012):  https://www.thetimes.com/article/7c5efe43-97d5-4d9f-b53f-5444bca12a2a • ‘IP BASICS: What is Intellectual Property?' (Intellectual Property Office UK, 2015): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYiXTKbdNr4 #Publishing #1700s #UK #Legal Love the show? Support us!  Join 

SUBCRIBE TO READING THE CITYOrder Tyler Wetherall's novel AmphibianAbout Reading the City "Reading the City" is a weekly newsletter of bookish events in and around NYC, a weekly diary of upcoming New York literary life on a need-to-know basis. No long blurbs, no reviews, just book events of all stripes. "Reading the City" links to the author's books, website, or social pages when possible. Tyler Wetherall, the founder and editor, is a believer in the  power of the literary community to raise each other up, champion one another, and help make the site an inclusive and welcoming space for all writers and readers. Tyler Wetherall is a  Brooklyn-based writer, editor, and teacher, and the author of No Way Home: A Memoir of Life on the Run (St. Martin's Press) and Amphibian (forthcoming from Virago).   She arrived in New York from London in 2014, knowing just three people. She  carried with her a manuscript she had  written alone in a Victorian outhouse at the end of her mother's garden in Devon. Her entire experience of the writerly life thus far was solitary—and pretty cold. She found herself in a  very special place called the Oracle Club (RIP) in Long Island City, and there  she met real life authors for the first time. After staying up late and  talking craft, drinking gin, and playing records, or reading poetry and howling into the night, she had  found her community, and through that community the practical and intellectual resources she needed to become an author myself. Photo credit:  Sammy DeighElizabeth Howard, Producer and Host of the Short Fuse Podcast Elizabeth Howard is the producer and host of the Short Fuse Podcast, conversations with artists, writers, musicians, and others whose art reveals our communities through their lens and stirs us to seek change. Her articles related to communication and marketing have appeared in European Communications, Investor Relations, Law Firm Marketing & Profit Report, Communication World, The Strategist, and the New York Law Journal, among others.  Her books include Queen Anne's Lace and Wild Blackberry Pie, (Thornwillow Press, 2011), A Day with Bonefish Joe (David Godine, 2015) and Ned O'Gorman:  A Glance Back (Easton Studio Press, 2016). She leads reading groups at the Center for Fiction in Brooklyn, New York.  @elizh24 on InstagramThe Arts Fuse The Arts Fuse was established in June, 2007 as a curated, independent online arts magazine dedicated to publishing in-depth criticism, along with high quality previews, interviews, and commentaries. The publication's over 70 freelance critics (many of them with decades of experience) cover dance, film, food, literature, music, television, theater, video games, and visual arts. There is a robust readership for arts coverage that believes that culture matters.The goal of The Arts Fuse is to treat the arts seriously, to write about them in the same way that other publications cover politics, sports, and business — with professionalism, thoughtfulness, and considerable attitude. The magazine's motto, from Jonathan Swift, sums up our editorial stance: “Use the point of your pen … not the feather.” The Arts Fuse has published over 7,000 articles and receives 60,000+ visits a month. This year they are celebrating their 5th birthday, a milestone for a small, independent magazine dedicated to covering the arts.Why The Arts Fuse? Its birth was a reaction to the declining arts coverage in newspapers, magazines, radio, and television. When the number of news pages shrink in the mainstream media, attention is paid. But the continual whittling down of arts coverage has been passed over in silence. Editor-in-Chief Bill Marx started the magazine to preserve the craft of professional arts criticism online, while also looking at new and innovative ways to evolve the cultural conversation and bring together critics, readers, and artists.Serious criticism, by talking about the strengths, weaknesses, and contributions of the arts, plays an indispensable role in the cultural ecology. Smaller, newer organizations need a response. When they are ignored as they are by the mainstream media, they fail to gain an audience. And without an audience, they fold, further weakening the entire ecosystem.Assist The Arts Fuse in their  mission: to keep arts and culture hale and hearty through dialogue rather than marketing.SUBSCRIBE to the weekly e-newsletterLIKE The Arts Fuse on Facebook, FOLLOW  on TwitterHELP  The Arts Fuse thrive by providing underwriting for the magazine. Even better — make a tax deductible donation.  

Na estante desta semana temos “Luto Sem Bússola”, o ensaio para uma despedida da viúva do escritor Javier Marías, Carme López Mercader; “Destroçados”, de Hanif Kureishi, o escritor tetraplégico que tem de ditar os seus textos; a “Singela Proposta e Outros Textos Satíricos”, de Jonathan Swift, na edição da Antígona, como forma de homenagem a Luís Oliveira, que morreu esta semana e que fundou uma das editoras de referência do panorama editorial português; e “Mania”, de Lionel Schriver, uma sátira às guerras culturais em curso.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What is the MAGA movement's aesthetic? According to the New York Times' Dan Brooks, it's an aesthetic captured by the generative AI video “Trump Gaza”. Childishly absurd, it's an aesthetic, Brooks suggests, of “bearded belly dancers, an Elon Musk look-alike on the beach and a golden statue of President Trump”. It's not reality, of course. There are neither bearded belly dancers nor golden statues of Trump in Gaza right now. It doesn't even resemble actual MAGA America. But as Brooks notes, the MAGA aesthetic - driven by AI generated visuals - is social and cultural “posturing”. It's the post-ironic irony of social media. Unseriously serious. Designed for Instagram and TikTok. Here are the five KEEN ON AMERICA takeaways in our conversation with Dan Brooks:* The MAGA style employs a unique form of irony - Brooks describes it as "unstable irony" rather than the "stable irony" of traditional satirists like Jonathan Swift or Stephen Colbert. This style mixes sincere statements with exaggerations and jokes in a way that makes it difficult to determine what's meant seriously.* Generative AI has been embraced by MAGA communities - The conversation highlights how conservative online communities have adopted AI technology for creating content (like the Gaza video discussed) at a higher rate than other groups, enabling them to produce visually impressive media quickly that aligns with their messaging style.* The relationship between politics and morality is shifting (duh) - Brooks contrasts his earlier writing about how social media "weaponized morality" with the MAGA approach, which he characterizes as "anti-moral" rather than amoral—a deliberate rejection of or reaction against perceived moralism in American politics.* Politics increasingly operates on "vibes" rather than facts - Brooks suggests that the "fact-based era in politics" may have been an illusion, with voters making decisions based on associations and cultural identity rather than policy specifics or factual information.* Contemporary American culture is saturated in irony - The conversation traces how irony has become embedded in American communication since the mid-90s, when even institutional messaging began adopting an ironic stance. Brooks notes that in current culture, "the worst thing you can be is cringe or overly sincere."Dan Brooks is a contributor to the New York Times Magazine, The Guardian, Harper's, Pitchfork, and other publications. He lives in Montana with his handsome dog.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for March 14, 2025 is: bamboozle • bam-BOO-zul • verb To bamboozle someone is to deceive, trick, or confuse them. // The salesperson bamboozled us into getting a more expensive item than we had planned to buy. See the entry > Examples: "'We're not trying to make a perfect film that's, like, got a twist: Oh my God, the coach is a ghost! We're not out to bamboozle audiences or get awards or anything,' [Taika] Waititi told Polygon. The director continued, 'We want to make a nice movie, a true story about a football team, and the only message is, "Be happy and don't live in the past."'" — Monica Mercuri, Forbes, 20 Feb. 2024 Did you know? In 1710, Irish author Jonathan Swift wrote an article on "the continual Corruption of our English Tongue" in which he complained of "the Choice of certain Words invented by some pretty Fellows." (Note that pretty originally meant "artful, clever.") Among the inventions Swift disliked was bamboozle, which was used by contemporary criminals. Beyond those who favored the word, little is known of its early days, but the word has clearly defied Swift's assertion that "All new affected Modes of Speech ... are the first perishing Parts in any Language." With its first syllable like a sound effect, bamboozle hints at mystification or magic when it is used to mean "to confuse, frustrate, or perplex," as in "The batters were bamboozled by the pitcher's dazzling curveball."

The life of this week's final Scriblerian, Thomas Parnell, rounds out the picture of the entire Scriblerus club as a fraternity of wildly brilliant men all carrying some great pain or wound. Some of them clearly write out of that wound, while others seem to write in spite of it. Parnell straddles the line, and today's poem is a fine example of his blending of bright energy with a sharp edge. Happy reading.Thomas Parnell (11 September 1679 – 24 October 1718) was an Anglo-Irish poet and clergyman who was a friend of both Alexander Pope and Jonathan Swift.He was born in Dublin, the eldest son of Thomas Parnell (died 1685) of Maryborough, Queen's County (now Portlaoise, County Laois), a prosperous landowner who had been a loyal supporter of Oliver Cromwell during the English Civil War and moved from Congleton, Cheshire to Ireland after the Restoration of Charles II. His mother was Anne Grice of Kilosty, County Tipperary: she also owned property in County Armagh, which she left to Thomas at her death in 1709. His parents married in Dublin in 1674. Thomas was educated at Trinity College, Dublin and collated as Archdeacon of Clogher in 1705. In the last years of the reign of Queen Anne of England he was a popular preacher, but her death put an end to his hope of career advancement. He married Anne (Nancy) Minchin, daughter of Thomas Minchin, who died in 1712, and had three children, two of whom died young. The third child, a girl, is said to have reached a great age. The marriage was a very happy one, and it has been said that Thomas never recovered from Nancy's early death.He spent much of his time in London, where he participated with Pope, Swift and others in the Scriblerus Club, contributing to The Spectator and aiding Pope in his translation of The Iliad. He was also one of the so-called "Graveyard poets": his 'A Night-Piece on Death,' widely considered the first "Graveyard School" poem, was published posthumously in Poems on Several Occasions, collected and edited by Alexander Pope and is thought by some scholars to have been published in December 1721. It is said of his poetry, "it was in keeping with his character, easy and pleasing, enunciating the common places with felicity and grace."-bio via Wikipedia This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit dailypoempod.substack.com/subscribe

Today's poem throws unambiguous shade on one of 18th-century England's most divisive politicians, and marks out Swift as one of the gutsiest Scriblerians. Happy reading. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit dailypoempod.substack.com/subscribe

Satire is a way to indirectly draw attention to societal issues, often through over the top humor. Join Dave and Greg as they discuss Swift's “A Modest Proposal” which served as the solution to the Irish Famine. The solution was so horrifyingly taboo that it may have changed the course of history.

Hello Interactors,From election lies to climate denial, misinformation isn't just about deception — it's about making truth feel unknowable. Fact-checking can't keep up, and trust in institutions is fading. If reality is up for debate, where does that leave us?I wanted to explore this idea of “post-truth” and ways to move beyond it — not by enforcing truth from the top down, but by engaging in inquiry and open dialogue. I examine how truth doesn't have to be imposed but continually rediscovered — shaped through questioning, testing, and refining what we know. If nothing feels certain, how do we rebuild trust in the process of knowing something is true?THE SLOW SLIDE OF FACTUAL FOUNDATIONSThe term "post-truth" was first popularized in the 1990s but took off in 2016. That's when Oxford Dictionaries named it their Word of the Year. Defined as “circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief”, the term reflects a shift in how truth functions in public discourse.Though the concept of truth manipulation is not new, post-truth represents a systemic weakening of shared standards for knowledge-making. Sadly, truth in the eyes of most of the public is no longer determined by factual verification but by ideological alignment and emotional resonance.The erosion of truth infrastructure — once upheld by journalism, education, and government — has destabilized knowledge credibility. Mid-20th-century institutions like The New York Times and the National Science Foundation ensured rigorous verification. But with rising political polarization, digital misinformation, and distrust in authority, these institutions have lost their stabilizing role, leaving truth increasingly contested rather than collectively affirmed.The mid-20th century exposed truth's fragility as propaganda reshaped public perception. Nazi ideology co-opted esoteric myths like the Vril Society, a fictitious occult group inspired by the 1871 novel The Coming Race, which depicted a subterranean master race wielding a powerful life force called "Vril." This myth fed into Nazi racial ideology and SS occult research, prioritizing myth over fact. Later, as German aviation advanced, the Vril myth evolved into UFO conspiracies, claiming secret Nazi technologies stemmed from extraterrestrial contact and Vril energy, fueling rumors of hidden Antarctic bases and breakaway civilizations.Distorted truths have long justified extreme political action, demonstrating how knowledge control sustains authoritarianism. Theodor Adorno and Hannah Arendt, Jewish-German intellectuals who fled the Nazis, later warned that even democracies are vulnerable to propaganda. Adorno (1951) analyzed how mass media manufactures consent, while Arendt (1972) showed how totalitarian regimes rewrite reality to maintain control.Postwar skepticism, civil rights movements, and decolonization fueled academic critiques of traditional, biased historical narratives. By the late 20th century, universities embraced theories questioning the stability of truth, labeled postmodernist, critical, and constructivist.Once considered a pillar of civilization, truth was reframed by French postmodernist philosophers Michel Foucault and Jean Baudrillard as a construct of power. Foucault argued institutions define truth to reinforce authority, while Baudrillard claimed modern society had replaced reality with media-driven illusions. While these ideas exposed existing power dynamics in academic institutions, they also fueled skepticism about objective truth — paving the way for today's post-truth crisis. Australian philosophy professor, Catherine (Cathy) Legg highlights how intellectual and cultural shifts led universities to question their neutrality, reinforcing postmodern critiques that foreground subjectivity, discourse, and power in shaping truth. Over time, this skepticism extended beyond academia, challenging whether any authority could claim objectivity without reinforcing existing power structures.These efforts to deconstruct dominant narratives unintentionally legitimized radical relativism — the idea that all truths hold equal weight, regardless of evidence or logic. This opened the door for "alternative facts", now weaponized by propaganda. What began as a challenge to authoritarian knowledge structures within academia escaped its origins, eroding shared standards of truth. In the post-truth era, misinformation, ideological mythmaking, and conspiracy theories thrive by rejecting objective verification altogether.Historian Naomi Oreskes describes "merchants of doubt" as corporate and political actors who manufacture uncertainty to obstruct policy and sustain truth relativism. By falsely equating expertise with opinion, they create the illusion of debate, delaying action on climate change, public health, and social inequities while eroding trust in science. In this landscape, any opinion can masquerade as fact, undermining those who dedicate their lives to truth-seeking.PIXELS AND MYTHOLOGY SHAPE THE GEOGRAPHYThe erosion of truth infrastructures has accelerated with digital media, which both globalizes misinformation and reinforces localized silos of belief. This was evident during COVID-19, where false claims — such as vaccine microchips — spread widely but took deeper root in communities with preexisting distrust in institutions. While research confirms that misinformation spreads faster than facts, it's still unclear if algorithmic amplification or deeper socio-political distrust are root causes.This ideological shift is strongest in Eastern Europe and parts of the U.S., where institutional distrust and digital subcultures fuel esoteric nationalism. Post-Soviet propaganda, economic instability, and geopolitical tensions have revived alternative knowledge systems in Russia, Poland, and the Balkans, from Slavic paganism to the return of the Vril myth, now fused with the Save Europe movement — a digital blend of racial mysticism, ethnic nostalgia, and reactionary politics.Above ☝️is a compilation of TikTok videos currently being pushed to my 21 year old son. They fuse ordinary, common, and recognizable pop culture imagery with Vril imagery (like UFO's and stealth bombers) and esoteric racist nationalism, religious fundamentalism, and hyper-masculine mythologies. A similar trend appears in post-industrial and rural America, where economic decline, government distrust, and cultural divides sustain conspiratorial thinking, religious fundamentalism, and hyper-masculine mythologies. The alt-right manosphere mirrors Eastern Europe's Vril revival, with figures like Zyzz and Bronze Age Pervert offering visions of lost strength. Both Vril and Save Europe frame empowerment as a return to ethnic or esoteric power (Vril) or militant resistance to diversity (Save Europe), turning myth into a tool of political radicalization.Climate change denial follows these localized patterns, where scientific consensus clashes with economic and cultural narratives. While misinformation spreads globally, belief adoption varies, shaped by economic hardship, institutional trust, and political identity.In coal regions like Appalachia and Poland, skepticism stems from economic survival, with climate policies seen as elitist attacks on jobs. In rural Australia, extreme weather fuels conspiracies about government overreach rather than shifting attitudes toward climate action. Meanwhile, in coastal Louisiana and the Netherlands, where climate impacts are immediate and undeniable, denial is rarer, though myths persist, often deflecting blame from human causes.Just as Vril revivalism, Save Europe, and the MAGA manosphere thrive on post-industrial uncertainty, climate misinformation can also flourish in economically vulnerable regions. Digital platforms fuel a worldview skewed, where scrolling myths and beliefs are spatially glued — a twisted take on 'think globally, act locally,' where fantasy folklore becomes fervent ideology.FINDING TRUTH WITH FRACTURED FACTS…AND FRIENDSThe post-truth era has reshaped how we think about knowledge. The challenge isn't just misinformation but growing distrust in expertise, institutions, and shared reality. In classrooms and research, traditional ways of proving truth often fail when personal belief outweighs evidence. Scholars and educators now seek new ways to communicate knowledge, moving beyond rigid certainty or radical relativism.Professor Legg has turned to the work of 19th-century American philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce, whose ideas about truth feel surprisingly relevant today. Peirce didn't see truth as something fixed or final but as a process — something we work toward through questioning, testing, and refining our understanding over time.His approach, known as pragmatism, emphasizes collaborative inquiry, self-correction, and fallibilism — the idea that no belief is ever beyond revision. In a time when facts are constantly challenged, Peirce's philosophy offers not just a theory of truth, but a process for rebuilding trust in knowledge itself.For those unfamiliar with Peirce and American pragmatism, a process that requires collaborating with truth deniers may seem not only unfun, but counterproductive. But research on deradicalization strategies suggests that confrontational debunking (a failed strategy Democrats continue to adhere to) often backfires. Lecturing skeptics only reinforces belief entrenchment.In the early 1700's Britain was embroiled in the War of Spanish Succession. Political factions spread blatant falsehoods through partisan newspapers. It prompted Jonathan Swift, the author of Gulliver's Travels, to observe in The Art of Political Lying (1710) that"Reasoning will never make a man correct an ill opinion, which by reasoning he never acquired."This is likely where we get the more familiar saying: you can't argue someone out of a belief they didn't reason themselves into. Swift's critique of propaganda and public gullibility foreshadowed modern research on cognitive bias. People rarely abandon deeply held beliefs when confronted with facts.Traditionally, truth is seen as either objectively discoverable (classical empiricism) — like physics — or constructed by discourse and power (postmodernism) — like the Lost Cause myth, which recast the Confederacy as noble rather than pro-slavery. It should be noted that traditional truth also comes about by paying for it. Scientific funding from private sources often dictates which research is legitimized. As Legg observes,“Ironically, such epistemic assurance perhaps rendered educated folk in the modern era overly gullible to the written word as authority, and the resulting ‘fetishisation' of texts in the education sector has arguably led to some of our current problems.”Peirce, however, offered a different path:truth is not a fixed thing, but an eventual process of consensus reached by a community of inquirers.It turns out open-ended dialogue that challenges inconsistencies within a belief system is shown to be a more effective strategy.This process requires time, scrutiny, and open dialogue. None of which are very popular these days! It should be no surprise that in today's fractured knowledge-making landscape of passive acceptance of authority or unchecked personal belief, ideological silos reinforce institutional dogma or blatant misinformation. But Peirce's ‘community of inquiry' model suggests that truth can't be lectured or bought but strengthened through collective reasoning and self-correction.Legg embraces this model because it directly addresses why knowledge crises emerge and how they can be countered. The digital age has resulted in a world where beliefs are reinforced within isolated networks rather than tested against broader inquiry. Trump or Musk can tweet fake news and it spreads to millions around the world instantaneously.During Trump's 2016 campaign, false claims that Pope Francis endorsed him spread faster than legitimate news. Misinformation, revisionist history, and esoteric nationalism thrive in these unchecked spaces.Legg's approach to critical thinking education follows Peirce's philosophy of inquiry. She helps students see knowledge not as fixed truths but as a network of interwoven, evolving understandings — what Peirce called an epistemic cable made up of many small but interconnected fibers. Rather than viewing the flood of online information as overwhelming or deceptive, she encourages students to see it as a resource to be navigated with the right tools and the right intent.To make this practical, she introduces fact-checking strategies used by professionals, teaching students to ask three key questions when evaluating an online source:* Who is behind this information? (Identifying the author's credibility and possible biases)* What is the evidence for their claims? (Assessing whether their argument is supported by verifiable facts)* What do other sources say about these claims? (Cross-referencing to see if the information holds up in a broader context)By practicing these habits, students learn to engage critically with digital content. It strengthens their ability to distinguish reliable knowledge from misinformation rather than simply memorizing facts. It also meets them where they are without judgement of whatever beliefs they may hold at the time of inquiry.If post-truth misinformation reflects a shift in how we construct knowledge, can we ever return to a shared trust in truth — or even a shared reality? As institutional trust erodes, fueled by academic relativism, digital misinformation, and ideological silos, myths like climate denial and Vril revivalism take hold where skepticism runs deep. Digital platforms don't just spread misinformation; they shape belief systems, reinforcing global echo chambers.But is truth lost, or just contested? Peirce saw truth as a process, built through inquiry and self-correction. Legg extends this, arguing that fact-checking alone won't solve post-truth; instead, we need a culture of questioning — where people test their own beliefs rather than being told what's right or wrong.I won't pretend to have the answer. You can tell by my bibliography that I'm a fan of classical empiricism. But I'm also a pragmatic interactionist who believes knowledge is refined through collaborative inquiry. I believe, as Legg does, that to move beyond post-truth isn't about the impossible mission of defeating misinformation — it's about making truth-seeking more compelling than belief. Maybe even fun.What do you think? This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

De liliputiense no tenía nada. Jonathan Swift fue un gigante de la literatura y de la crítica social y política del siglo XVIII. A él, al autor de Los viajes de Gulliver, dedicamos el cronovisor de Jesús Callejo. Luego nos embarcamos en la recreación de los espectáculos romanos con fieras y gladiadores. Néstor Marqués, autor de Gladiadores. Espectáculos y ocio en la antigua Roma (Espasa 2024) nos lo cuenta. Celebramos este año 2025 el centenario del nacimiento de Paul Newman. Guillermo Balmori, editor de Notorius, la editorial de cine que cada pocas semanas nos propone sus novedades, nos acerca a la figura de este icono del séptimo arte. Y acabamos viajando a la Italia del Renacimiento para conocer a Leonardo Da Vinci. Acaba de ver la luz la biografía Vida de Leonardo (Alfaguara 2025) de Carlo Vecce quien nos cuenta en primera persona su visión del genio italiano

Este escritor irlandés escribía muchos de sus trabajos con seudónimo. Él era clérigo y no quería que lo identificaran, no por cobardía sino porque su vida corría peligro, con las mordaces críticas que aparecían en la prensa sobre políticos y personajes de la cultura de su época, a caballo entre el siglo XVII y XVIII. Jesús Callejo nos cuenta su historia en este nuevo viaje del cronovisor

Financial innovation often outpaces regulators' ability to keep up. This was the case in the 1700s, when the Irish satirist Jonathan Swift decided to give away no-interest, peer-to-peer loans which immediately bore fruit, spawned imitators, and provided liquidity to parts of Ireland where there had been none. Despite these benefits, it took more than a hundred years for Parliament to formalize the network that had sprung up. A similar phenomenon has happened recently in the U.S., where crypto's rise caught regulators unprepared. But now, as a pro-crypto President and Congress reshape Washington, the industry is hopeful that it can finally achieve what it needs for sustainable flourishing: regulatory clarity.We'll explore Swift's innovation before turning our attention to the regulatory and legal issues that have plagued the current crypto space, learning why America has had a uniquely difficult path to regulatory clarity, what's changing now that there's a new administration, and the many opportunities — for investors, businesses, and consumers — that regulatory clarity will unlock.

It's raining cats & dogs......but not actual cats and dogs, right? Sources used during this research: https://www.historyextra.com/period/early-modern/why-do-we-say-raining-cats-and-dogs/ https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jonathan-Swift

Jonathan Swift, "Falsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it.” … never truer than in 2025 This week on the Colombia Calling podcast Emily Hart and Richard McColl tackle the issue of disinformation and fact-checking in Colombia and fortunately, we don't have to take on this task alone but are joined by two experts in the field. Laura Sarabia Rangel is the Editor of El Detector de Mentiras at La Silla Vacia and Jose Felipe Sarmiento joins us from ColombiaCheck and we get to pick their brains about the need for fact-checking, disinformation in Colombia and how one undertakes the process of finding the truth.  There have been so many circumstances where people and politicians have been saying things that are simply untrue, in Colombia specifically, about the health reform, the stigmatisation of indigenous communities or the denialism of the False Positives, to name a few.  So, we get to hear how Laura and Jose Felipe work, put some rumours and untruths to bed and discuss what readers and consumers can do to make sure they're consuming high quality media.  The Colombia Briefing is reported by Emily Hart. 

Jonathan Swift's 1726 tale of Houyhnhnms, Yahoos, Lilliputians and Struldbruggs is normally seen as a satire. But what if it's read as fantasy, and all its contradictions, inversions and reversals as an echo of the traditional starting point of Arabic fairytale: ‘It was and it was not'? In this episode Marina and Anna Della discuss Gulliver's Travels as a text in which empiricism and imagination are tightly woven, where fantastical realms are created to give different perspectives on reality and both writer and reader are liberated from having to decide what to think.Non-subscribers will only hear an extract from this episode. To listen to the full episode, and all our other Close Readings series, subscribe:Directly in Apple Podcasts: https://lrb.me/applecrffIn other podcast apps: https://lrb.me/closereadingsffFurther reading in the LRB:Terry Eagleton:https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v23/n16/terry-eagleton/a-spot-of-firm-governmentClare Bucknell: Oven-Ready Childrenhttps://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v39/n02/clare-bucknell/oven-ready-childrenThomas Keymer: Carry Up your Coffee Boldlyhttps://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v36/n08/thomas-keymer/carry-up-your-coffee-boldlyNext episode: Marco Polo's Il Milione and Italo Calvino's Invisible Cities.Marina Warner is a writer of history, fiction and criticism whose many books include Stranger Magic, Forms of Enchantment and Once Upon a Time: A Short History of Fairy Tale. She was awarded the Holberg Prize in 2015 and is a contributing editor at the LRB.Anna Della Subin's study of men who unwittingly became deities, Accidental Gods, was published in 2022. She has been writing for the LRB since 2014. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Unser Nachbarplanet Mars strahlt hell im Sternbild Zwillinge. Mars hat nur gut den halben Durchmesser der Erde. In einem Punkt aber ist er aber unserem Planeten voraus – Mars hat zwei Monde: Phobos und Deimos, Furcht und Schrecken. Lorenzen, Dirk www.deutschlandfunk.de, Sternzeit

Read by Christopher Kendrick Production and Sound Design by Kevin Seaman

The Thousand and One Nights is an ‘infinite text'; it has no fixed shape or length, no known author, and is transformed with each new translation. In this first episode of Fiction and the Fantastic, Marina Warner and Anna Della Subin explore two particularly mysterious stories taken from Yasmine Seale's new translation of the Nights. ‘The Porter and the Three Ladies of Baghdad' highlights the pleasures of dreaming, the power of language and the imagination's essential role in eroticism. ‘Abdullah of the Sea and Abdullah of the Land' demonstrates how the fantastic can help us imagine new ways of living.Non-subscribers will only hear an extract from this episode. To listen to the full episode, and all our other Close Readings series, subscribe:Directly in Apple Podcasts: https://lrb.me/applecrffIn other podcast apps: https://lrb.me/closereadingsffFurther reading in the LRB:Marina Warner: Travelling Texthttps://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v30/n24/marina-warner/travelling-textSteven Connor: One's Thousand One Nightinesshttps://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v34/n06/steven-connor/one-s-thousand-one-nightinessesWilliam Gass: A Book at Bedtimehttps://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v16/n21/william-gass/a-book-at-bedtime Marina Warner: ‘The Restless One'https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2024/june/the-restless-oneNEXT EPISODE: ‘Gulliver's Travels' by Jonathan Swift, out on Monday 10 February.Get the book: https://lrb.me/sealenightsffMarina Warner is a writer of history, fiction and criticism whose many books include Stranger Magic, Forms of Enchantment and Once Upon a Time: A Short History of Fairy Tale. She was awarded the Holberg Prize in 2015 and is a contributing editor at the LRB.Anna Della Subin's study of men who unwittingly became deities, Accidental Gods, was published in 2022. She has been writing for the LRB since 2014. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Marina Warner is joined by Anna Della Subin to introduce Fiction and the Fantastic, a new Close Readings series running through 2025. Marina describes the scope of the series, in which she will also be joined by Adam Thirlwell and Chloe Aridjis. Together, Anna Della and Marina discuss the ways the fiction of wonder and astonishment can challenge social conventions and open up new ways of living.The first episode will come out on Monday 13 January, on The Thousand and One Nights.Marina Warner is a writer of history, fiction and criticism whose many books include Stranger Magic, Forms of Enchantment and Once Upon a Time: A Short History of Fairy Tale. She was awarded the Holberg Prize in 2015 and is a contributing editor at the LRB.Anna Della Subin's study of men who unwittingly became deities, Accidental Gods, was published in 2022. She has been writing for the LRB since 2014.The first four texts:The Thousand and One Nights (Yasmine Seale's translation)Jonathan Swift, Gulliver's TravelsThe Travels of Marco Polo (no particular translation) and Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities (William Weaver translation)Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking-Glass Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

#354The Intersection of Puzzle and StoryInterview2024.07.05Narrative designer and pal of the program Beth Korth fills in for Ellen as guest host this week and next!Your nice hosts welcome famed designer Ron Gilbert (Monkey Island, Thimbleweed Park) into the clubhouse to discuss the virtues of inexperience, friction for its own sake, how it's all about story, and it's puzzles all the way down.The Intersection of Puzzle and StoryGame DesignNarrativeProductionReturn to Monkey Island will have a hint system because the internet exists now - Joshua Rivera, PolygonVerdant Skies - SteamClassic Game Postmortem: Maniac Mansion - GDC, YouTubeThe phrase "confederacy of dunces" derives from a Jonathan Swift quote.Examples of movies that feature a poorly-received genre twist include Serenity (2019), Remember Me (2010), and Safe Haven (2013).Ron GilbertGuestOwner of Terrible Toybox, the designer/creator of Monkey Island, The Cave, Pajama Sam and the designer/co-creator of Maniac Mansion, DeathSpank and Thimbleweed Park. Co-designer of Return to Monkey Island.External linkMastodon - @grumpygamer@mastodon.gamedev.placeBlog - Grumpy GamerStudio - Terrible Toybox

“He was a bold man who first ate an oyster,” observed Jonathan Swift; and in fact the first human interaction with the Atlantic Ocean was probably eating shellfish, traces of which can be found along the Western Cape of South Africa dating back 160,000 years ago. When humans began to finally live in numbers along the ocean coast, their culture changed. They took their food from it, and from the shoreline, and their metals from the rocks and marshes along its coast. In time they built boats capable of venturing along those coasts, and then gradually farther and farther out. All of this, my guest John Haywood argues, was foundational for what was to come. He writes:  The history of the pre-Columbian Atlantic is…the where and when that Europeans served their apprenticeships in ocean navigation, commerce and colonialism, and that saw them formulate the ideologies they used to justify their territorial claims and their exploitation of colonized peoples. When Europeans finally broke out onto the world's oceans in the sixteenth century, they already had everything they needed to secure global domination. John Haywood is a historian of the Vikings, and of the early maritime history of the North Atlantic. The author of numerous books, his latest is Ocean: A History of the Atlantic before Columbus.  

True Crime Tuesday presents Murder By Mail: A Global History of the Letter Bomb with Prof. Mitchel P. Roth! A late package from Amazon or USPS would be the least of your troubles on Christmas Eve! Imagine a deadly Yuletide greeting from a not so Christian fellow! The book, "Muder By Mail", unfolds the gripping history of weaponized mail, offering the first ever comprehensive exploration of this sinister phenomenon. Spanning two centuries, the book unveils the history of postal bombs, describing the evolution of both explosives and the postal services that facilitated their deadly use. From an eighteenth-century incident involving Jonathan Swift to modern acts of terror by groups like the IRA and the suffragettes and lone wolves such as the Unabomber, it uncovers the surprising ubiquity of mail bombs. This chronological account meticulously covers each decade, from early anarchists and world wars through the Cold War to the rise of the serial bomber. Astounding in scope, this book sheds light on the psychopathy, motivations and political implications behind murder by mail. On Today's TCT, Prof. Roth highlights some of the grizzly moments in human history where people have made that fateful decision to not only open these deadly "infernal machines", but also construct and send them!  He also talks about some of the most famous bomb builders in history and the psychology behind what makes one person want to blow another apart from far away and through the mail system, where innocents have a greater chance of getting hurt, than the actual target! Get your copy of "Murder By Mail..." here:   https://bit.ly/3DvijJW Check out Mitchel on X:  https://x.com/roth_mitchel PLUS: ALL-NEW DUMB CRIMES/STUPID CRIMINALS W/JESSICA FREEBURG! Order the three new books from Jessica here:  https://jessicafreeburg.com/books/ Jessica Freeburg and Ghost Stories Ink have a special holiday gift for you! If you sign up for their Manifestation Retreat at the Palmer House in Sauk Centre, MN. now, they will give you 30 percent off!  The event is family friendly and the tickets make a great holiday gift!  Sign up for the ghost Stories Inc. Paranormal Event here: https://jessicafreeburg.com/upcoming-events/ There are new and different (and really cool) items all the time in the Darkness Radio Online store at our website! . check out the Darkness Radio Store!   https://www.darknessradioshow.com/store/ #crime #truecrime #truecrimepodcasts #truecrimetuesday #mitchelproth #murderbymail #aglobalhistoryoftheletterbomb #reaktionbooks #letterbombs #infernaldevices #serialkillers #mailbomnbs #unabomber #tedkaczynski #roymoody #smileyfacebomber #cesarsayoc #alfrednobel  #IRA #suffragette #dynamite #c4 #semtex #murder #dumbcrimesstupidcriminals #TimDennis #jessicafreeburg #ghoststoriesink #floridaman #drugcrimes #foodcrimes #stupidcrimes #funnycrimes  #sexcrimes

True Crime Tuesday presents Murder By Mail: A Global History of the Letter Bomb with Prof. Mitchel P. Roth! A late package from Amazon or USPS would be the least of your troubles on Christmas Eve! Imagine a deadly Yuletide greeting from a not so Christian fellow! The book, "Muder By Mail", unfolds the gripping history of weaponized mail, offering the first ever comprehensive exploration of this sinister phenomenon. Spanning two centuries, the book unveils the history of postal bombs, describing the evolution of both explosives and the postal services that facilitated their deadly use. From an eighteenth-century incident involving Jonathan Swift to modern acts of terror by groups like the IRA and the suffragettes and lone wolves such as the Unabomber, it uncovers the surprising ubiquity of mail bombs. This chronological account meticulously covers each decade, from early anarchists and world wars through the Cold War to the rise of the serial bomber. Astounding in scope, this book sheds light on the psychopathy, motivations and political implications behind murder by mail. On Today's TCT, Prof. Roth highlights some of the grizzly moments in human history where people have made that fateful decision to not only open these deadly "infernal machines", but also construct and send them!  He also talks about some of the most famous bomb builders in history and the psychology behind what makes one person want to blow another apart from far away and through the mail system, where innocents have a greater chance of getting hurt, than the actual target! Get your copy of "Murder By Mail..." here:   https://bit.ly/3DvijJW Check out Mitchel on X:  https://x.com/roth_mitchel PLUS: ALL-NEW DUMB CRIMES/STUPID CRIMINALS W/JESSICA FREEBURG! Order the three new books from Jessica here:  https://jessicafreeburg.com/books/ Jessica Freeburg and Ghost Stories Ink have a special holiday gift for you! If you sign up for their Manifestation Retreat at the Palmer House in Sauk Centre, MN. now, they will give you 30 percent off!  The event is family friendly and the tickets make a great holiday gift!  Sign up for the ghost Stories Inc. Paranormal Event here: https://jessicafreeburg.com/upcoming-events/ There are new and different (and really cool) items all the time in the Darkness Radio Online store at our website! . check out the Darkness Radio Store!   https://www.darknessradioshow.com/store/ #crime #truecrime #truecrimepodcasts #truecrimetuesday #mitchelproth #murderbymail #aglobalhistoryoftheletterbomb #reaktionbooks #letterbombs #infernaldevices #serialkillers #mailbomnbs #unabomber #tedkaczynski #roymoody #smileyfacebomber #cesarsayoc #alfrednobel  #IRA #suffragette #dynamite #c4 #semtex #murder #dumbcrimesstupidcriminals #TimDennis #jessicafreeburg #ghoststoriesink #floridaman #drugcrimes #foodcrimes #stupidcrimes #funnycrimes  #sexcrimes

This bookunfolds the gripping history of weaponized mail, offering the first ever comprehensive exploration of this sinister phenomenon. Spanning two centuries, the book unveils the history of postal bombs, describing the evolution of both explosives and the postal services that facilitated their deadly use. From an eighteenth-century incident involving Jonathan Swift to modern acts of terror by groups like the IRA and the suffragettes and lone wolves such as the Unabomber, it uncovers the surprising ubiquity of mail bombs. This chronological account meticulously covers each decade, from early anarchists and world wars through the Cold War to the rise of the serial bomber. Astounding in scope, this book sheds light on the psychopathy, motivations and political implications behind murder by mail.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/houseofmysteryradio. Become a member at https://plus.acast.com/s/houseofmysteryradio. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Gerry Mullins, Jim Lucey and Brendan Twomey join Myles to discuss Jonathan Swift.

The myriad legacies of Jonathan Swift; and the mass hunger strike of 1923.

In today's poem, while everyone else is dressing up to become something terrible, the acerbic Jonathan Swift gives us a domestic horror story in reverse. Happy reading.Anglo-Irish poet, satirist, essayist, and political pamphleteer Jonathan Swift was born in Dublin, Ireland. He spent much of his early adult life in England before returning to Dublin to serve as Dean of St. Patrick's Cathedral, Dublin for the last 30 years of his life. It was this later stage when he would write most of his greatest works. Best known as the author of A Modest Proposal (1729), Gulliver's Travels (1726), and A Tale Of A Tub (1704), Swift is widely acknowledged as the greatest prose satirist in the history of English literature.-bio via Poetry Foundation Get full access to The Daily Poem Podcast at dailypoempod.substack.com/subscribe

Jonathan Swift's enduring satire Gulliver's Travels was first published on October 28, 1726 - though the true identity of the book's author was concealed from readers. A spoof of Daniel Defoe's popular Robinson Crusoe, the novel bleakly satirised British society, colonialism, and the monarchy, shocking as many readers as it entertained. In this episode, Arion, Rebecca and Olly reveal the tale's rebellious origins in Swift's social oeuvre; consider why children still relate to (abridged versions of) this highly specific political satire; and explain why Swift's creation lead directly to Yahoo! Mail…  Further Reading: • ‘Why Jonathan Swift wanted to ‘vex the world' with Gulliver's Travels' (The Conversation): https://theconversation.com/why-jonathan-swift-wanted-to-vex-the-world-with-gullivers-travels-94972 • 'Letter to Jonathan Swift' (John Gay, 1726): https://walleahpress.com.au/communion8-John-Gay.html • ‘Gulliver's Travels' (Paramount, 1939): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rehNT9wIjUg Love the show? Support us!  Join 

Vigilantes Inc. - America's New Vote Suppression Hitmen2 days agoTwo family dynasties, one Black, one White, on a 3-century collision course. Operatives of Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp secretively challenged Major Gamaliel Turner's right to a ballot, launching an investigative reporter's hunt to uncover and expose an astonishing vote suppression scheme that threatens to overturn the outcome of the 2024 presidential election.Greg Palast and his hat have been seen on over 2000 media appearances. Pacifica Radio Network broadcasts his weekly Election Crimes Bulletin.Palast is known for complex undercover investigations, spanning five continents, from the Arctic to the Amazon, from the Congo to California, using the skills he learned over two decades as an investigator of corporate fraud on behalf of the US Dept of Justice, 20 attorneys general and governments from England to Brazil.Palast, who earned his degree in finance at the University of Chicago studying under Milton Friedman, has led investigations of multi-billion-dollar frauds in the oil, nuclear, power and finance industries for governments on three continents, has an academic side: he is the author of Democracy and Regulation, a seminal treatise on energy corporations and government control, commissioned by the United Nations and based on his lectures at Cambridge University and the University of Sao Paulo.Palast is Patron of the Trinity College Philosophical Society, an honor previously held by Jonathan Swift and Oscar Wilde. His writings have won him the Financial Times David Thomas Prize.Palast won the George Orwell Courage in Journalism Award for his BBC documentary, Bush Family Fortunes. He has received the “Global Editors Award for Data Journalism” and “International Reporter of the Year” from the Association of Mexican Reporters.His bestsellers have been translated into two dozen languages and films broadcast worldwide.He has received the “Global Editors Award for Data Journalism” and “International Reporter of the Year” from the Association of Mexican Reporters.IMDB For movieRotten TomatoesMartin Sheen ArticleSave Your VoteGreg Palast WebsiteBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

Vigilantes Inc. - America's New Vote Suppression Hitmen4 hours agoTwo family dynasties, one Black, one White, on a 3-century collision course. Operatives of Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp secretively challenged Major Gamaliel Turner's right to a ballot, launching an investigative reporter's hunt to uncover and expose an astonishing vote suppression scheme that threatens to overturn the outcome of the 2024 presidential election.Greg Palast and his hat have been seen on over 2000 media appearances. Pacifica Radio Network broadcasts his weekly Election Crimes Bulletin.Palast is known for complex undercover investigations, spanning five continents, from the Arctic to the Amazon, from the Congo to California, using the skills he learned over two decades as an investigator of corporate fraud on behalf of the US Dept of Justice, 20 attorneys general and governments from England to Brazil.Palast, who earned his degree in finance at the University of Chicago studying under Milton Friedman, has led investigations of multi-billion-dollar frauds in the oil, nuclear, power and finance industries for governments on three continents, has an academic side: he is the author of Democracy and Regulation, a seminal treatise on energy corporations and government control, commissioned by the United Nations and based on his lectures at Cambridge University and the University of Sao Paulo.Palast is Patron of the Trinity College Philosophical Society, an honor previously held by Jonathan Swift and Oscar Wilde. His writings have won him the Financial Times David Thomas Prize.Palast won the George Orwell Courage in Journalism Award for his BBC documentary, Bush Family Fortunes. He has received the “Global Editors Award for Data Journalism” and “International Reporter of the Year” from the Association of Mexican Reporters.His bestsellers have been translated into two dozen languages and films broadcast worldwide.He has received the “Global Editors Award for Data Journalism” and “International Reporter of the Year” from the Association of Mexican Reporters.IMDB For movieRotten TomatoesMartin Sheen ArticleSave Your VoteGreg Palast WebsiteBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

Idiotas, imbéciles, cretinos, lelos, percebes o apollardaos, entre otras lindezas, para definir a esos individuos que consiguen complicar nuestras vidas conjurándose para lograrlo."La Conjura de los Necios” (“La Confederación de los Imbéciles”en realidad), de John K. Toole podria ser su libro de cabecera. Su autor no logró publicarlo en vida -se suicidó en parte por ello,- pero años despues arrasó en ventas antes de conseguir el Pulitzer. La estulticia no entiende de edades ni sectores pero el politico encuentra su oximorón en la palabra idiota (de “idiotes", individuo al que lo público le importa un bledo). De canciones sobre la torpeza amorosa como “Something Stupid”, a la idiotizacion mediática como Televisión (La Lógica demente)" en la BSO. "La inequívoca señal del genio: todos los necios se conjuran contra el" (Jonathan Swift). Puedes hacerte socio del Club Babel y apoyar este podcast: mundobabel.com/club Si te gusta Mundo Babel puedes colaborar a que llegue a más oyentes compartiendo en tus redes sociales y dejar una valoración de 5 estrellas en Apple Podcast o un comentario en Ivoox. Para anunciarte en este podcast, ponte en contacto con: mundobabelpodcast@gmail.com.

This week the guys are back to discuss Jonathan Swift. Everyone has heard of Gulliver's Travels and A Modest Proposal, but he has another work worth looking at: The Battle of the Books. Plus: the audience has voted on who the funniest co-host is. 

The Enthusiast: Anatomy of the Fanatic in Seventeenth-Century British Culture (Cornell UP, 2023) tells the story of a character type that was developed in early modern Britain to discredit radical prophets during an era that witnessed the dismantling of the Church of England's traditional means for punishing heresy. As William Cook Miller shows, the caricature of fanaticism, here called the Enthusiast began as propaganda against religious dissenters, especially working-class upstarts, but was adopted by a range of writers as a literary vehicle for exploring profound problems of spirit, soul, and body and as a persona for the ironic expression of their own prophetic illuminations. Taking shape through the public and private writings of some of the most insightful authors of seventeenth-century Britain-Henry More, John Locke, the Third Earl of Shaftesbury, Mary Astell, and Jonathan Swift, among others-the Enthusiast appeared in various guises and literary modes. By attending to this literary being and its animators, The Enthusiast establishes the figure of the fanatic as a bridge between the Reformation and the Enlightenment, showing how an incipient secular modernity was informed by not the rejection of religion but the transformation of the prophet into something sparkling, witty, ironic, and new. William Cook Miller is Assistant Professor of English at the University of Rochester. His work has appeared in the journals New Literary History and Studies in Philology. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The Enthusiast: Anatomy of the Fanatic in Seventeenth-Century British Culture (Cornell UP, 2023) tells the story of a character type that was developed in early modern Britain to discredit radical prophets during an era that witnessed the dismantling of the Church of England's traditional means for punishing heresy. As William Cook Miller shows, the caricature of fanaticism, here called the Enthusiast began as propaganda against religious dissenters, especially working-class upstarts, but was adopted by a range of writers as a literary vehicle for exploring profound problems of spirit, soul, and body and as a persona for the ironic expression of their own prophetic illuminations. Taking shape through the public and private writings of some of the most insightful authors of seventeenth-century Britain-Henry More, John Locke, the Third Earl of Shaftesbury, Mary Astell, and Jonathan Swift, among others-the Enthusiast appeared in various guises and literary modes. By attending to this literary being and its animators, The Enthusiast establishes the figure of the fanatic as a bridge between the Reformation and the Enlightenment, showing how an incipient secular modernity was informed by not the rejection of religion but the transformation of the prophet into something sparkling, witty, ironic, and new. William Cook Miller is Assistant Professor of English at the University of Rochester. His work has appeared in the journals New Literary History and Studies in Philology. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

The Enthusiast: Anatomy of the Fanatic in Seventeenth-Century British Culture (Cornell UP, 2023) tells the story of a character type that was developed in early modern Britain to discredit radical prophets during an era that witnessed the dismantling of the Church of England's traditional means for punishing heresy. As William Cook Miller shows, the caricature of fanaticism, here called the Enthusiast began as propaganda against religious dissenters, especially working-class upstarts, but was adopted by a range of writers as a literary vehicle for exploring profound problems of spirit, soul, and body and as a persona for the ironic expression of their own prophetic illuminations. Taking shape through the public and private writings of some of the most insightful authors of seventeenth-century Britain-Henry More, John Locke, the Third Earl of Shaftesbury, Mary Astell, and Jonathan Swift, among others-the Enthusiast appeared in various guises and literary modes. By attending to this literary being and its animators, The Enthusiast establishes the figure of the fanatic as a bridge between the Reformation and the Enlightenment, showing how an incipient secular modernity was informed by not the rejection of religion but the transformation of the prophet into something sparkling, witty, ironic, and new. William Cook Miller is Assistant Professor of English at the University of Rochester. His work has appeared in the journals New Literary History and Studies in Philology. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literary-studies

En empruntant l'artère principale d'Expo 64, on rencontre un géant en veste rouge et pantalon jaune avec ses bottes et son grand chapeau. Impossible de rater ce géant de fête foraine, c'est un passage obligé de l'exposition qui fait couler beaucoup d'encre. C'est Gulliver de passage en Suisse. Le Gulliver inventé par Jonathan Swift au XVIIIe siècle pour critiquer la société britannique. Au cours de ses voyages extraordinaires, Gulliver débusquait les paradoxes et les dysfonctionnements de sa propre civilisation. Un dispositif de satire repris pour la Suisse en 1964, par Charles Apothéloz et ses complices. Avec : Alexandra Walther, autrice de La Suisse s'interroge ou l'exercice de l'audace, paru aux éditions Antipodes, Olivier Lugon, historien, spécialiste de l'histoire des expositions et François Vallotton, historien tous deux co-directeurs de l'ouvrage Revisiter l'Expo 64 : acteurs, discours, controverses.

Today's episode on the Great Political Fictions is about Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels (1726) – part adventure story, part satire of early-eighteenth-century party politics, but above all a coruscating reflection on the failures of human perspective and self-knowledge. Why do we find it so hard to see ourselves for who we really are? What makes us so vulnerable to mindless feuds and wild conspiracy theories? And what could we learn from the talking horses?Tomorrow: Friedrich Schiller's Mary StuartFind out more about Past Present Future on our new website www.ppfideas.com where you can also join PPF+ to get bonus episodes and ad-free listening. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

With capital punishment in the offing, how can Gulliver escape the land of Lilliput?  Jonathan Swift, today on The Classic Tales Podcast.  Welcome to The Classic Tales Podcast. Thank you for listening.  The Vintage Episode for the week is “The Machine Stops”, by E.M. Forster. Be sure to check out this science fiction classic on Tuesday. If you enjoy the show, please become a monthly supporter, and help us continue to highlight these amazing stories.  Please go to http://classictalesaudiobooks.com and become a monthly supporter for as little as $5 a month. As a thank you gesture, we'll send you a coupon code every month for $8 off any audiobook order. Give more, and you get more! It's a great way to help us keep producing sparkling audiobook content. Go to http://classictalesaudiobooks.com and become a supporter today.   And now, A Voyage to Lilliput, part 3 of 3, from Gulliver's Travels by Jonathan Swift. Follow this link to become a monthly supporter:   Follow this link to subscribe to our YouTube Channel:   Follow this link to subscribe to the Arsène Lupin Podcast:    Follow this link to follow us on Instagram:   Follow this link to follow us on Facebook:   Follow this link to follow us on TikTok:    

Rapping on the top headlines and topics affecting the nation. First, Savage discusses President Biden's continued mental decline, reflecting on his important work with Alzheimer's. He summarized his research in his 1987 book Reducing the Risk of Alzheimer's. He concludes that any medical student could recognize that Biden's condition has progressed significantly since his inauguration. Why has Jill Biden allowed this to continue? How can we recover from Biden's rupturing of our borders and cities? Is America shot? How can we deport over 10 million illegal aliens? Then, Savage offers his coverage of the Super Bowl. He explains how we've devolved from Jonathan Swift to Taylor Swift... He recalls his own firsthand experience of the Super Bowl and how he walked out during Beyoncé's halftime performance in New Orleans. Don't miss Savage's hilariously funny take on the Taylor Swift drama and the media storm surrounding the pop star and football phenom's romance. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices