Podcasts about Knightley

“If I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more,” Jane Austen's well-known line from her classic novel, Emma, written in 1815. Readers will love Mr. Knightley, family friend, who does not hesitate to confront Emma Woodhouse when she is in the wrong. Mr. Knightley: You are materially changed since we talked on this subject before.Emma: I hope so – for at that time I was a fool.Emma befriends young Harriet and attempts to match her with Mr. Elton, coercing Harriet into turning down a proposal of marriage from Mr. Martin. Emma has a bit of a ‘my way or the highway' attitude where Harriet is concerned. Mr. Knightley calls her out because Mr. Martin is a good man. Throw into the mix charming Frank Churchill, the visiting stepson of Emma's governess Mrs. Weston, and things get even more interesting.There is wit and whimsy but as Shakespeare penned, “The course of true love never did run smooth.”Kate's one word summary was humility which leads to growth. Sheila's word was perspective. How we see or understand people is all about our perspective. Won't you dive into this classic with us as we connect to reflect? Blessings!

Lucy Kate Barnes, Trustee and Co-Founder of Lawyers Who Care Dr Rachel Knightley's guest at the Writers' Gym is her coaching client, award-winning advocate Lucy Kate Barnes. Lucy grew up on council estates. She went into care at 13 and fell off the "care cliff" at 16. Aged 18, she studies law at Surrey. She is now a barrister. Alongside her legal career, she set up charity Lawyers Who Care and is a vocal advocate for children's rights and social mobility for disadvantaged young people. She won Diversity Champion of the Year 2025 and was one of the Universities UK 100 Faces Campaign to celebrate the first in families to go to university.  Learn more about Lucy here:  Website: Lucykatebarnes.co.uk Substack: Theadvocatewithin.substack.co.uk  Instagram: @lucykatebarnes If you enjoyed listening to the Writers' Gym Podcast, head to our website at www.writersgym.com and follow us on instagram: @jointhewritersgym

Mr. Knightley is at Hartfield, and he has exciting news, but before he can reveal it, Miss Bates arrives and spills the beans: Mr. Elton is engaged. After four weeks in Bath, he has met a Miss Hawkins, and they are going to be married. Miss Bates is delighted at the prospect of a new neighbor in Highbury, while Emma is concerned about Harriet (and annoyed at Jane Fairfax's muted reaction to the news). But Harriet's attention is focused elsewhere, on a chance encounter with Mr. Martin, at least until Emma redirects her in a more appropriate direction. This week's Friday Favorites is big news for Highbury, and it's just the kind of news that will fill your mind and help you relax into a night of soft and peaceful sleep.-----Welcome to the Jane Austen Bedtime Stories podcast! Each episode is a section of a classic Jane Austen novel, read in soothing tones and set to calming music to help you fall asleep.With everything that is going on in the world, we find comfort in the familiar. For so many of us, Jane Austen's works are like a warm hug. So snuggle up under the covers and let the comforting words of Jane Austen lull you into sleep.-----Show your appreciation for the pod! Support the podcast: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://bedtimestoriespodcast.net/support⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -----Follow us on Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/janeaustenbedtimepod/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠-----Music ["Reverie"] by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. – www.scottbuckley.com.au

In the quiet village of Highbury, spirited Emma Woodhouse shares a long-standing friendship with her wise neighbor Mr. Knightley. When her confident judgments lead to misunderstandings and hurt feelings, his honest guidance becomes both her greatest challenge and her deepest comfort. This intimate retelling explores the tender journey from candid friendship to lasting love.

Rachel shares how a common phrase helps us cut through what we fear and focus on what we want — instead of getting caught up in unhelpful ‘what-ifs' that suppress the creative ones. If you enjoyed listening to the Writers' Gym Podcast, head to our websites at www.writersgym.com, www.rachelknightleycoaching.com, and follow us on instagram: @jointhewritersgym @rachelknightleycoaching

Helen Marshall, multi-award-winning author and academic  Dr Rachel Knightley is joined at the Writers' Gym by World Fantasy and British Fantasy Award winning author, Dr Helen Marshall. Helen is an Associate Professor of Creative Writing at the University of Queensland. She has won the World Fantasy Award, the British Fantasy Award and the Shirley Jackson Award for her three collections of short stories. Her debut novel The Migration argued for the need to remain hopeful, even in the worst circumstances. It was one of The Guardian's top science fiction books of the year. Her second novel The Lady, the Tiger and the Girl who Loved Death was released in 2025. Learn more about Helen Marshall here: https://helen-marshall.com/ Instagram: @hairside If you enjoyed listening to the Writers' Gym Podcast, head to our website at www.writersgym.com and follow us on instagram: @jointhewritersgym

Frank Churchill is not coming to Highbury. After all of Mr. Weston's excitement about his son's visit, Frank ended up postponing his plans. While Emma is too distracted to be too disappointed, when Mr. Knightley expresses critical opinion, she still feels compelled to defend Mr. Churchill. The resulting debate between the two is illustrative of both of their characters, and it's a perfect vignette of Austen's comfortable, familiar banter. This week's Friday Favorites will help you relax as you end your day and fall into a night of warm and gentle sleep.-----Welcome to the Jane Austen Bedtime Stories podcast! Each episode is a section of a classic Jane Austen novel, read in soothing tones and set to calming music to help you fall asleep.With everything that is going on in the world, we find comfort in the familiar. For so many of us, Jane Austen's works are like a warm hug. So snuggle up under the covers and let the comforting words of Jane Austen lull you into sleep.-----Show your appreciation for the pod! Support the podcast: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://bedtimestoriespodcast.net/support⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -----Follow us on Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/janeaustenbedtimepod/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠-----Music ["Reverie"] by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. – www.scottbuckley.com.au

Dr Rachel's Knightley's guest is Ramsey Campbell, defined by The Oxford Companion to English Literature as “Britain's most respected living horror writer”. The Washington Post sums up his work as “one of the monumental accomplishments of modern popular fiction”. In 2015 he was made an Honorary Fellow of Liverpool John Moores University for outstanding services to literature. His latest novels are Fellstones, The Lonely Lands, The Incubations, An Echo of Children and Ancestral.    His Brichester Mythos trilogy consists of The Searching Dead, Born to the Dark and The Way of the Worm. His most recent collections are Fearful Implications, a two-volume retrospective roundup (Phantasmagorical Stories) and The Village Killings and Other Novellas.    His non-fiction is collected as Ramsey Campbell, Probably and Ramsey Campbell, Certainly. Ramsey's Rambles collects his video reviews, and Six Stooges and Counting is an appreciation of the Three Stooges. Limericks of the Alarming and Phantasmal is a history of horror fiction in fifty limericks.    https://www.ramseycampbell.com

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

Dr Rachel Knightley is joined at the Writers' Gym by Lee Murray ONZM (Officer of the New Zealand Order of Merit) . Lee is a writer, editor, poet and screenwriter from Aotearoa New Zealand, a Shirley Jackson Award and five-time Bram Stoker Award® winner. A USA Today bestselling author with more than forty titles to her credit, including novels, collections, anthologies, nonfiction, poetry, and several books for children, Lee holds a New Zealand Prime Minister's Award for Literary Achievement in Fiction, and is an Honorary Literary Fellow of the New Zealand Society of Authors. Among her recent works are feature film Grafted (directed by Sasha Rainbow), horror anthology This Way Lies Madness (Flame Tree Press) co-edited with Dave Jeffery, and prose-poetry collection, NZSA Cuba Press Prize-winner Fox Spirit on a Distant Cloud (The Cuba Press).    Read more at https://www.leemurray.info/

Mr. Knightley has joined the family at Hartfield for dinner, to meet his newly-arrived brother and sister-in-law and their children. It's the perfect opportunity for him and Emma to make up after their disagreement about Harriet and Mr. Martin, which is good news, because it will take both of them to ensure that Mr. Woodhouse and Mr. John Knightley don't rub each other the wrong way. Luckily for them, the dinner merely brings talk of farming on one side, and the pros and cons of sea-bathing on the other, with minimal disagreement. The cozy, familiar scene is a perfect Friday Favorite to comfort you after a long and stressful week, so let it help you as you drift away into warm and peaceful sleep. -----Welcome to the Jane Austen Bedtime Stories podcast! Each episode is a section of a classic Jane Austen novel, read in soothing tones and set to calming music to help you fall asleep.With everything that is going on in the world, we find comfort in the familiar. For so many of us, Jane Austen's works are like a warm hug. So snuggle up under the covers and let the comforting words of Jane Austen lull you into sleep.-----Show your appreciation for the pod! Support the podcast: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://bedtimestoriespodcast.net/support⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -----Follow us on Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/janeaustenbedtimepod/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠-----Music ["Reverie"] by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. – www.scottbuckley.com.au

Christmas is approaching, and Mr. Elton and Harriet will have to wait, because Emma's sister is coming to town! Mr. and Mrs. John Knightley, along with their five children, have just arrived to spend the holidays at Hartfield, and the Woodhouses are delighted to see them. While Isabella's temper resembles her father's, Mr. John Knightley is a little sharper around the edges -- sometimes a little too sharp for Emma. Nonetheless, the full house is a joy for everyone. As the family settles in for the holidays, let this week's Friday Favorites help you settle into a night of restful and relaxing sleep. -----Welcome to the Jane Austen Bedtime Stories podcast! Each episode is a section of a classic Jane Austen novel, read in soothing tones and set to calming music to help you fall asleep.With everything that is going on in the world, we find comfort in the familiar. For so many of us, Jane Austen's works are like a warm hug. So snuggle up under the covers and let the comforting words of Jane Austen lull you into sleep.-----Show your appreciation for the pod! Support the podcast: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://bedtimestoriespodcast.net/support⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -----Follow us on Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/janeaustenbedtimepod/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠-----Music ["Reverie"] by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. – www.scottbuckley.com.au

Multi-award-winning novelist Lavie Tidhar is Dr Rachel Knightley's guest on the Writers' Gym Podcast. Lavie's work encompasses literary fiction (Maror, Adama, Golgotha and Six Lives), cross-genre classics such as Jerwood Prize winner A Man Lies Dreaming and World Fantasy Award winner Osama, and genre works like the Campbell and Neukom winner Central Station. His work has been translated into multiple languages. He lives in London.   https://lavietidhar.wordpress.com https://www.instagram.com/lavietidhar/?hl=en https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavie_Tidhar

Dr Rachel Knightley is joined by her client, award-winning true crime writer and researcher, Sarah Bax Horton. Sarah is currently appearing in Lucy Worsley's Victorian Murder Club on BBC2. The three-part miniseries is based on the subject of her second book Arm of Eve: Investigating the Thames Torso Murders (The History Press), for which she won the RBAM (Ripperology Books And More) Book of the Year 2024. Fascinated by genealogy, her discovery of a Whitechapel police ancestor inspired her identification of Jack the Ripper in One-Armed Jack: Uncovering the Real Jack the Ripper (Michael O'Mara Books). https://www.andrewlownie.co.uk/authors/sarah-bax-horton https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/bbc-lucy-worsley-victorian-murder-club-thames-torso-mystery-solved-b1264955.html https://www.instagram.com/sarahbaxhorton/?hl=en  

Dr Xavier Aldana Reyes joins Dr Rachel Knightley on the Writers' Gym Podcast, discussing how we turn interests and passions into writing careers. Xavi is Reader in English Literature and Film at Manchester Metropolitan University and a founding member of the Manchester Centre for Gothic Studies. His publications include the monographs Contemporary Body Horror (CUP, 2024), Horror Film and Affect (Routledge, 2016) and Body Gothic (UWP, 2014) and the edited collections Twenty-First-Century Gothic: An Edinburgh Companion (with Maisha Wester, EUP, 2019) and Horror: A Literary History (British Library, 2016). Xavier is co-president of the International Gothic Association and a founding member of the Horror Studies special interest group hosted by the British Association of Film, Television and Screen Studies.   https://www.waterstones.com/author/xavier-aldana-reyes/784113   https://www.routledge.com/authors/i14274-xavier-aldana-reyes

Mr. Knightley has called at Hartfield, and he has news that he's sure will excite Emma. Her little friend Harriet is about to be proposed to by Mr. Robert Martin. But Emma has one better, for she informs him that Harriet has already refused Mr. Martin's proposal. What follows is a vigorous disagreement between the two over the merits of Harriet marrying Mr. Martin. Though the sparring feels playful to Emma at first, she's left uneasy by Mr. Knightley's disapproval of her interference. But she distracts herself with thoughts of Mr. Elton and her confidence that he is well on his way to falling in love with Harriet instead. Our latest Friday Favorites brings us two protagonists who are evenly matched in wit, though perhaps not in maturity. As Emma and Mr. Knightley have it out, let them take you into another night of restful sleep.-----Welcome to the Jane Austen Bedtime Stories podcast! Each episode is a section of a classic Jane Austen novel, read in soothing tones and set to calming music to help you fall asleep.With everything that is going on in the world, we find comfort in the familiar. For so many of us, Jane Austen's works are like a warm hug. So snuggle up under the covers and let the comforting words of Jane Austen lull you into sleep.-----Show your appreciation for the pod! Support the podcast: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://bedtimestoriespodcast.net/support⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -----Follow us on Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/janeaustenbedtimepod/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠-----Music ["Reverie"] by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. – www.scottbuckley.com.au

Ally Wilkes joins Dr Rachel Knightley at the Writers' Gym to discuss the power of horror fiction to explore identity and the highs and lows of creating a writing life that works for the individual you are.     Ally's debut novel, All the White Spaces, was a Bram Stoker Award finalist, and her second novel, Where the Dead Wait, was one of Esquire's best horror books of 2023. Her short fiction has been published in numerous magazines and anthologies from publishers including Nightmare Magazine, Cosmic Horror Monthly, Flame Tree Press, Eerie River, and Nepenthe Press. Her next novel, Man Eater – set in the fevered jungles of the Amazon during the late Victorian orchid-hunting craze – will be published in February 2027.   Visit the Writers' Gym at writersgym.com   Find out more about Ally at:   Her website: https://allywilkes.com   Wikipedia:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ally_Wilkes   AM Heath: https://amheath.com/authors/ally-wilkes

We're sticking with Joe Wright + Keira Knightley as period romance month continues. This week: Atonement. A tragic romance, Atonement stars Knightley and James McAvoy as lovers separated by a false accusation of a crime and later World War II. Saoirse Ronan burst onto the scene with an Oscar-nominated turn in one of her first film roles. Also featuring Benedict Cumberbatch, Romola Garai, Vanessa Redgrave, and a very young Juno Temple. But, where does it stand in the great year of 2007? And, is it as good as Pride and Prejudice? What's your favorite Joe Wright film? Let us know at cinemaontappodcast@gmail.com

Dnes k nám dorazil herec, bavič a režisér Jakub Kohák. Probrali jsme zahraniční castingy a filmy ve kterých hrál, Okresní přebor, Evropu 2, režírování videoklipů a reklamních spotů.

Dr Rachel Knightley is joined by author and editor Jenny Rogers, one of the UK's most experienced executive coaches. Jenny's book, Are You Listening? published by Penguin Random House, tells human stories from the perspective of a coach: it tackles common human dilemmas such as how to overcome shame after a mistake, how to face disappointment and  bereavement, what it means to start a new career or recover a more honest self after making a fortune or after life as a celebrity. During her stint as a BBC TV producer she commissioned and edited many best-selling books including Delia Smith's Cookery Course and Madhur Jaffrey's Indian Cookery.    Recent titles include Personality Type: understanding yourself, getting more of what you want (2024) and Fearless Coaching (2025). She is currently working on a book for women in mid life. This will be published in 2026 by Short Books.   Her books range from Coaching for Health, co-written with Dr Arti Maini to titles on how to be an excellent facilitator, how to cook and eat healthily, how to navigate career crises and how to be a successful coach, with a 5th edition published in 2024 of the book many now regard world-wide as the ‘Bible' of coaching, Coaching Skills: The Definitive Guide to being a Coach. Jenny's philosophy as a writer is that, to adapt Dr Einstein's phrase, everything should be as simple as possible, but not more simple. Her aim is to tackle complex subjects in a way which makes them accessible.   Jenny was an early entrant to the world of coaching and has now been a coach for 35 years. As well as her own coaching, she trains and supervises other coaches. She was married for many years to the BBC Editor and journalist Alan Rogers. He died in 2010. She lives in central London close to her two sons and three grandchildren. She is a keen cook, filmgoer, walker and wannabe textile artist.   Find out more about Jenny at https://jennyrogerscoaching.com

Kayleigh Dobbs is an author, editor, and playwright from South Wales. She is the founder of Happy Goat Horror, a review site and podcast with a focus on independent horror. Her recent short story collection The End (Black Shuck Shadows) was a 2023 Imadjinn Award Finalist. This year she has presented and interviewed authors for World Fantasy Con and Edge-lit. https://happygoathorror.com/ Connect here: Instagram: @drrachelknightley Substack: Dr Rachel Knightley Facebook: Dr Rachel Knightley LinkedIn: Dr Rachel Knightley Twitter: @drrknightley

Andrew was for ten years the Director of the Creative Writing programme at UEA, where he taught for twenty years on the MA in Creative Writing. He is the author of the bestselling guidebook, The Art of Writing Fiction, recently reissued in an updated second edition, and the monograph Against Creative Writing. His first novel Pig was the winner of the Sunday Times Young Writer of the Year Award, a Betty Trask Award, the Authors' Club First Novel Award, a Scottish Arts Council Book Award and the Ruth Hadden Memorial Prize, and was shortlisted for five other awards. He has since published five other novels: Common Ground, Crustaceans, What I Know, Worthless Men and, most recently,Your Fault. Find Andrew on Instagram at @andrewcowan01   

It's a new year and it's time for a new favorite novel to help you get to sleep. Emma Woodhouse is handsome, clever, and rich, and has made it through her nearly twenty-one years in the world with very little to distress or vex her. But that all begins to change when her dear governess Miss Taylor gets married and leaves Hartfield, the Woodhouse's home. Though the new Mrs. Weston's home is only half a mile away, her departure is a big change for Emma, and prompts some unexpected feelings of grief. Luckily for her, her dear family friend and brother-in-law Mr. Knightley has stopped by to call on Emma and her father, which cheers her up, especially since she can take credit for matchmaking Miss Taylor and Mr. Weston. It's time to settle in with our next set of favorite characters, as this week's Friday Favorites brings us into the world of Highbury and takes you into the world of deep and restful slumber. -----Welcome to the Jane Austen Bedtime Stories podcast! Each episode is a section of a classic Jane Austen novel, read in soothing tones and set to calming music to help you fall asleep.With everything that is going on in the world, we find comfort in the familiar. For so many of us, Jane Austen's works are like a warm hug. So snuggle up under the covers and let the comforting words of Jane Austen lull you into sleep.-----Show your appreciation for the pod! Support the podcast: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://bedtimestoriespodcast.net/support⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ -----Follow us on Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/janeaustenbedtimepod/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠-----Music ["Reverie"] by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. – www.scottbuckley.com.au

Join me (Anna Stone) and guest host Clare Yeo as we discuss Jane Austen's Emma and the 1996 film adaptation starring Gwyneth Paltrow. In this episode, we will share what it is about this story that sticks with us, cringe over which character we compare ourselves to, and elaborate on why the side characters really make the movie.Follow on Instagram @stonestoptens and @classicallyclareFollow Clare on TikTok @classicallyclareEmail stonestoptens@gmail.comKeywordsEmma, Jane Austen, film adaptation, friendship, character growth, classic literature, Gwyneth Paltrow, Claire, movie review, themes, Emma, Jane Austen, Miss Bates, Knightley, film adaptation, character analysis, performance, soundtrack, period drama, casting

Good morning. ‘Her own thoughts and reflections were habitually her best companions.' So says Jane Austen of Fanny Price in Mansfield Park. But she could equally have said it of herself. Jane Austen's 250th birthday this week is being widely celebrated on this network. She was swathed in the practice of faith: her father and two of her brothers were ordained, and two visits to church on Sunday were her lifelong pattern. She certainly knew the shortcomings of religion: parodying the servility and self-importance of the parson Mr Collins, she says he ‘was not a sensible man, and the deficiency of nature had been but little assisted by education or society.' Her gift is to turn the interactions of family and community, and especially the elaborate dance and fragility of finding a marriage partner, into a whole moral universe. Her characters transcend their surroundings. One, Mr Bennet, says laconically, ‘For what do we live, but to make sport for our neighbours, and laugh at them in our turn?' Another, Mr Knightley, says poignantly to Emma Woodhouse, ‘If I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more.' It's a truth universally acknowledged that it's never been clear what it actually means to be a Christian. Some insist on adherence to specific doctrines. Others on obedience to identifiable moral codes. Others point to formation in a traditional culture. A woman of her time, Jane Austen's participation in worship and devotion was socially conventional. But she has her own answers to this perennial question. If she were to identify a favourite parable, my guess is she'd choose the story of the two sons, one of whom refused his father's request to go into the vineyard, but did; while his brother said, ‘I will,' but didn't. For Austen, Christianity's about actions not words. ‘Christian' is more of a verb than a noun. The many suitors are sifted out not by their protestations of love, but by their true character. Of Fanny Price, we're told, ‘She made herself indispensable to those she loved.' Which connects Jane Austen in a significant way to Christmas. For the Christmas story's not about what God says. It's about what God does. In Northanger Abbey, Isabella Thorpe exclaims, ‘There's nothing I would not do for those who are really my friends. I have no notion of loving people by halves. It's not my nature.' Coming in person as a vulnerable baby is communicating by action rather than by word. Maybe Jane Austen knew exactly what she thought being a Christian meant. It meant not loving by halves. Perhaps she's more of a theologian than she's usually given credit for.

In our latest episode, Marc and Vassilis discuss the evolving landscape of advertising and marketing, focusing on the impact of AI technologies. They explore how AI can outperform human copywriters in ad creation, the implications of Amazon's layoffs due to AI automation, and the changing nature of marketing jobs. The conversation also delves into the ethical concerns surrounding hyper-personalization in advertising, Google's new JourneyAware bidding strategy, and the importance of brand priming in consumer decision-making. The episode concludes with a creative Christmas campaign that exemplifies the blending of advertising and entertainment.Key Takeaways:AI can outperform human copywriters in ad creation.Amazon's layoffs signal a shift towards AI automation.Marketing jobs are evolving due to AI advancements.Hyper-personalization in advertising raises ethical concerns.Google's JourneyAware bidding focuses on user context.84% of purchases are decided before shopping begins.Word of mouth is a powerful influencer in marketing.Creative campaigns can effectively engage consumers.AI is reshaping the advertising landscape.Marketers must adapt strategies to leverage AI technologies.Chapters:00:00 - Introduction and Personal Updates02:45 - AI in Advertising: A Game Changer05:29 - The Impact of AI on Job Markets08:26 - The Future of Advertising: Automation and AI11:27 - Hyper-Personalization in Digital Marketing14:05 - Google's Journey-Aware Bidding: A New Era17:03 - Conclusion and Future Implications21:15 - The Complexity of Incremental Outcomes23:15 - Marketing Moments: Understanding Consumer Decisions28:14 - Influence and Receptivity in Marketing32:21 - Creative Advertising: Blurring Lines Between Entertainment and MarketingNews Links:Can genAI actually write better paid search ads than humans?https://www.linkedin.com/posts/nico-neumann-3021b32_can-genai-actually-write-better-paid-search-activity-7394635382283239424-vTRH/Amazon lays off hundreds across its ad tech, analytics, and sales teams — and says AI is the reason.https://www.marketingweek.com/amazon-layoffs-ai/ Will AI mean better adverts or 'creepy slop'? By MaryLou Costahttps://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckg4y4z169goGoogle Tests “Journey-Aware Bidding” — Search Gets a Little More… Emotional?https://searchengineland.com/google-tests-journey-aware-bidding-to-optimize-search-campaigns-464729The Marketing MomentHow Humans Decide - https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jameshurman_under-16-of-people-will-buy-your-product-activity-7394639418369880066-Biih/Ad of the WeekWaitrose serves up festive romcom starring Keira Knightley and Joe WilkinsonView ad here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWeYKBXmCRsPhil (Wilkinson) meets Keira at a Waitrose cheese counter, their shared love of food sparks a quirky romance. Classic rom-com beats: meet-cute, food montage, surprise domestic gesture (turkey pie under a tea towel) and a playful nod to the iconic cue-card scene from Love Actually (“Please say you don't have cue cards”) Directed by Molly Manners; emphasises food as the love-language centerpiece. Why it stands out:It blurs the line between advertising and entertainment, leaning into narrative, character and emotion rather than straightforward product-first messaging.It leverages star power (Knightley) plus comedic contrast (Wilkinson) to create “pop” and shareability.It uses the insight that food & shared meals = emotional currency in rom-coms (and by extension, in festive retail ads) — the brief treats the supermarket not just as backdrop but as the catalyst...

Josh and Aaron Sarnecky have returned for another podcast. This month their talking Pride & Prejudice for its 20th anniversary.Pride & Prejudice is a period romance film directed by Joe Wright. Based on the beloved Jane Austen novel, it is an adaptation by Deborah Moggach. Emma Thompson provided additional dialogue uncredited. It opened in U.S. theaters on November 23, 2005.Set in late 18th century England, the film follows Elizabeth (Keira Knightley), one of five Bennet daughters who needs marrying. Elizabeth becomes acquainted with Mr. Darcy (Matthew Macfadyen), whom she loathes. While Jane Bennet (Rosamund Pike) cozies up to Mr. Bingley (Simon Woods), Mr. Collins (Tom Hollander) has his eye on Elizabeth.Other characters include Mr. and Mrs. Bennet (Donald Sutherland and Brenda Blethyn), their other daughters Mary, Lydia, and Kitty (Talulah Riley, Jena Malone, and Carey Mulligan), Darcy's benefactor Lady Catherine de Bourgh (Judi Dench), and the duplicitous Mr. Wickham (Rupert Friend).Pride & Prejudice garnered praise from critics and made $129 million on a $28 million budget. At the Oscars, the film was nominated for Best Actress for Knightley, Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design, and Best Original Score. Josh and Aaron discuss their histories with Pride & Prejudice before going into the plot, performances, and cinematography. They also talk about the film living in the shadow of the 1995 miniseries and the upcoming Netflix adaptation.You can listen to last month's Anniversary Brothers on Static Shock.Pride & Prejudice is streaming on HBO Max.

Send us a textIn today's episode, I'm chatting with Tessa Afshar. Tessa's award-winning novels have been on Publishers Weekly and CBA bestseller lists and have been translated into 13 languages. Winner of the ECPA Bronze Milestone award, the Christy, the INSPY, and the ECPA Christian Book Award for her Bible study, The Way Home. Tessa holds a Master of Divinity from Yale, where she served as co-chair of the Evangelical Fellowship for one year. Born in the Middle East to a nominally Muslim family, Tessa converted to Christianity in her twenties. She is a devoted wife, a mediocre gardener, and an enthusiastic cook of biblical recipes. We talked about the power of deep connections and how books can be a bridge to those relationships. Tessa shared how recreating biblical recipes has helped her bring her stories to life in new and meaningful ways. We also discussed how biblical fiction can make scripture feel more relatable and give readers something to strive for in their own lives. I especially loved her reflection:“I am more than what I do—and that is enough. I can rest in that.”Tessa also shared about her series on Queen Esther, her experiences growing up in the Middle East, and the way literature was taught there. We're here today to dive into her latest novel, The Royal Artisan. Episode Highlights:Using books as a tool for connection and spiritual growth.Cooking biblical recipes and bringing ancient stories to life.Finding rest and identity beyond productivity.Writing about Queen Esther and exploring courage in faith.Growing up in the Middle East and the role of literature in shaping worldview.Connect with Tessa:InstagramFacebookWebsiteBuy Tessa's booksShow NotesSome links are affiliate links, which are no extra cost to you but do help to support the show.Books and authors mentioned in the episode:Leo Tolstoy booksGone with the Wind by Margaret MitchellMy Friends by Fredrik BackmanBook FlightJane Eyre by Charlotte BronteEmbergold by Rachelle NelsonDear Mr. Knightley by Katherine Reay✨ Find Your Next Great Read! We just hit 175 episodes of Bookish Flights, and to celebrate, I created the Bookish Flights Roadmap — a guide to all 175 podcast episodes, sorted by genre to help you find your next great read faster.Explore it here → www.bookishflights.com/read/roadmapSupport the showBe sure to join the Bookish Flights community on social media. Happy listening! Instagram Facebook Website

Roll out the red carpet because this week we welcome the one and only Keira Knightley to the Happy Mum Happy Baby studio!She's known all around the world for her unforgettable roles in Pride and Prejudice, Love Actually, Pirates of the Caribbean and Bend It Like Beckham (just to name a few!). Now a proud mum of two, Keira sits down with Giovanna for a brilliantly unfiltered conversation about the highs and lows of motherhood.Expect laughter, honesty, and a whole lot of heart — this is Keira Knightley as you've never heard her before!Keira's debut children's book, I Love You Just The Same, is available now! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

DONATE PAYPAL: https://paypal.me/radiobaloneyHelp support the channel, it's greatly appreciated!Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/radio-baloney-the-richie-baloney-show--4036781/support.

We both really loved the show-don't-tell banter and unresolved sexual tension and really don't loved that the next book isn't out yet.

Előző epizódunkban Jane Austen Emma című regényéről beszélgettünk – már nem először, idei olvasásunkat azonban kedvenc írónőnk 250. születésnapja alkalmából elkezdett projektünk indokolja. Ugyanebből az okból most az Emma-adaptációkat vettük górcső alá: azt hittük, már mindent láttunk és tudjuk, ki a legjobb Mr. Knightley, de mi magunk is meglepődtünk a mostani verdikten! Ha szeretnétek tudni, … Bővebben: Emma adaptációk – a 273. epizód

Join the fiery crew of Pop & Politics as we dive headfirst into the liberal meltdown of the week! Our smart, edgy conservative hosts break down the "No Kings" protests sweeping the nation in 2025, where millions of triggered leftists hit the streets whining about President Trump's so-called "authoritarianism." But guess what? Trump clapped back like a boss with hilarious AI-generated videos of himself as "King Trump" dropping truth bombs (or something browner) on the crybabies – pure epic trolling that proves why he's unbeatable!Keira Knightley faces down transgender mob in interview about JK Rowling over her no-nonsense stance against trans ideology. Knightley's "sorry, not sorry" vibe has the woke mob fuming, but we're cheering – finally, a celeb not bowing to the gender cult! Plus, Robert DeNiro's unhinged rant calling Jewish Trump advisor Stephen Miller a "Nazi" and Trump's "Goebbels"? Don't miss our takedown of Bernie Sanders and the cackling hens on The View slamming Trump as a "tyrant" while ignoring their own party's failures. And the cherry on top: Karine Jean-Pierre's shameless claim she "never saw" Biden's obvious mental decline – even CBS hosts called BS! How blind (or complicit) can you be?#theview #trump #kieraknightley #nokings

RNIB Connect Radio's Toby Davey is joined again by Vidar Hjardeng MBE, Inclusion and Diversity Consultant for ITV News across England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Channel Islands for the next of his regular audio described theatre reviews. As we celebrate the 250 anniversary of Jane Austen's birth, we have a brand new stage adaptation of her comedy of manners with ‘Emma' presented by Bath Theatre Royal at the Birmingham Repertory Theatre with description by Professional Audio Describer Carolyn Smith About ‘Emma'  “I am going to take a heroine whom no one but myself will much like” The beautiful, high-spirited Emma Woodhouse is determined that she will never marry but loves to meddle in her friends and neighbours' relationships. When her confidante and former governess, Miss Taylor weds her fiancé Mr Weston, Emma, having introduced the couple, takes credit for the marriage and decides that a future in matchmaking lies ahead of her. So begins a comic journey through the lives and loves of Emma's acquaintances but as the romantic web she weaves amongst her friends becomes ever more entangled, will Emma herself get swept up in true love's wake…? Jane Austen's enduring comedy of manners is filled with memorable characters – the dashing Mr Knightley, Emma's friends Jane Fairfax and Harriet Smith, the mercenary Reverend Elton and his delightfully pretentious wife Augusta. This delightful new stage adaptation celebrates the 250th anniversary of Jane Austen‘s birth. To find out more about Bath Theatre Royal's production of Emma as it continues on it's UK tour do visit - https://www.theatreroyal.org.uk/events/emma/ And for more about access at the Birmingham Repertory Theatre do go to - https://www.birmingham-rep.co.uk/your-visit/accessibility/ (Image shows the RNIB Connect Radio logo. On a white background ‘RNIB' written in bold black capital letters and underlined with a bold pink line. Underneath the line: ‘Connect Radio' is written in black in a smaller font)

Esta semana, Majo se sumergió en el universo de Emma de Jane Austen para ver y analizar todas las adaptaciones al cine y la televisión. Desde las versiones clásicas de época hasta las reinterpretaciones modernas como Clueless, descubrimos cuál es la más fiel al libro, la mejor ambientación, la Emma más encantadora y la producción con mejor fotografía.Además, debatimos junto a nuestra comunidad en redes quién es el mejor Mr. Knightley, la Harriet Smith más entrañable, el Frank Churchill más convincente y la Jane Fairfax más elegante.Un episodio lleno de análisis, nostalgia y amor por Austen.

Keira Knightley is the first one to say her new film The Woman in Cabin 10 (Netflix) is “rather tense.” That said, “part of the joy of making something that's sort of so tense and twisted and strange is when you're working with really lovely people, you can also have a bit of a giggle,” Knightley told Newsweek's H. Alan Scott. Knightley plays Laura Blacklock, a journalist on an assignment on a super yacht with billionaires who don't believe her when she stumbles on a gruesome secret. She says the film is “definitely playing with the idea of like, women are not believed,” but that gave her the opportunity to do something she's never done before. “Love being the hero, as well. It was very exciting.” In fact, she joked about telling a fellow actor, “'I don't care that you can run that fast. You don't get to catch me because I'm the hero, OK?'” [laughs] Looking back at her career, while she doesn't have the nostalgic relationship with her films that many fans have, she does look back on quite a few fondly, particularly Bend It Like Beckham. “There is still not another film about women's soccer. And it did have a place in that cultural landscape. And I think it did help to tell girls that it was okay to like soccer and play soccer.” Subscribe to my newsletter: https://www.newsweek.com/newsletter/the-culture/ Follow me: https://linktr.ee/halanscott Subscribe to Newsweek's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/newsweek See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Liliana Rampello"Un anno con Jane Austen"Neri Pozza Editorewww.neripozza.itJane Austen in purezza, nella musicale originalità della sua lingua polifonica, che ci guida, tra giorni e parole, con le sue donne, nei luoghi amati, in quella “Austenland” a cui sempre vorremmo ritornare.Quando Jane Austen a undici anni scriveva storielle per divertire i suoi fratelli nella canonica di Steventon, non avrebbe mai immaginato di diventare un'icona. O forse sì. Se JA presentisse di avere poco tempo davanti, non lo sapremo mai: la sorella Cassandra, amatissima, distrusse quasi tutti i suoi scritti privati. Non resta dunque che cercarla nei suoi sei romanzi, nell'intelligenza di Elizabeth Bennett sfidata dal sentimento, nell'amore fedele di Anne Elliot, nella saggia condotta di Mr Knightley, nella generosità di Elinor Dashwood o nel sogno di perfezione di Mr Darcy. In ogni caso, la creatrice del romanzo di formazione femminile rimane al centro di un mistero: come ha potuto, Miss Austen, dal salotto di un piccolo rettorato inglese di fine Settecento spalancare la stanza di ogni casa presente e futura? Come ha saputo dare vita a tante donne, protagoniste a modo loro del proprio destino, non vittime in un mondo patriarcale e classista, donne in cui si specchiano tante parti di noi? Il mondo che JA scandaglia col suo acutissimo sguardo è un universo intero di relazioni ed emozioni, che dopo oltre due secoli ci parla ancora. Ecco dunque 365 scene di matrimoni, balli, case, paesaggi, incipit gloriosi, finali concilianti; 365 giorni di madri, ragazze, sorelle, zie & zitelle, ecclesiastici, gentiluomini, padri, seduttori. Ecco la scrittrice non sempre compresa dai contemporanei ma adorata dai posteri, forse infelice in amore ma innamorata del suo lavoro. Jane Austen in purezza, nella musicale originalità della sua lingua polifonica, che ci guida, tra giorni e parole, con le sue donne, nei luoghi amati, in quella “Austenland” a cui sempre vorremmo ritornare.Liliana Rampello è critica letteraria e saggista. È curatrice dei due Meridiani che Mondadori ha dedicato a Jane Austen. Tra le sue pubblicazioni si segnalano Il canto del mondo reale, Virginia Woolf, La vita nella scrittura e Sei romanzi perfetti su Jane Austen.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

In this episode of The Kirk Miller Podcast, Kirk sits down with Aaron Knightley, an entrepreneur, speaker, and straight-talking mentor who helps people break free from the 9-to-5 grind and build a life they truly want. From humble beginnings to building his own platforms and programmes, Aaron's proof that your past does not define your future. We dive into: The mindset shift Aaron made to step away from convention and start living life on his own terms Why “no one's coming to save you” is a mantra that can transform your life The role of fear in driving real change — and how to use it as fuel instead of letting it hold you back The importance of surrounding yourself with the right people and building a network that lifts you higher What it really takes to build freedom, authenticity, and financial independence in the modern world Aaron's message is clear: authenticity wins, fear can fuel freedom, and the life you want is within reach if you're willing to commit and take action. Listen now to discover how you can break free and design a life aligned with your values. For more information on what was discussed in this episode head to https://kirkmiller.co.uk/programme/ The Kirk Miller Podcast is the show for business leaders and peak performers to get into the best physical and mental shape of their lives and unleash from within confidence they never thought possible.

In this weeks episode of the Success School podcast I'm joined by entrepreneur, author, investor and TikTok creator Aaron Knightley   Follow Matt Hall at:  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/matthallofficial/   Follow Aaron Knightley at: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/aaronknightleyofficial/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@aaron_knightley?lang=en   Join the Success School membership here:  https://join.successschoolgroup.co.uk/ss    This episode is sponsored by Dr. Tania King-Mohammad - The High Ticket Woman, #1 bestselling author of The High Ticket Method, and one of the most sought-after high-ticket sales experts in the game. If you're listening right now, you already know you're built for more. So here's your next move: grab her book The High Ticket Method (click here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/High-Ticket-Method%C2%AE%EF%B8%8F-Strategies-Multiply-Ethically/dp/1915771994/ref=sr_1_1?crid=1P344Q5XTFMEJ&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.PdgyrsSS3DsjXcYB9ZH7RSrXjPEH-gftv8X2GZVaJlQ.SS5fjwQkDa5XBFpZxXnxz17klnP2LGfF2qhDIJlZnRQ&dib_tag=se&keywords=dr+tania+king+mohammad&qid=1756248708&sprefix=dr+tania+king+mohammad%2Caps%2C87&sr=8-1) , then head to Instagram @freedomwithtania where she's dropping the kind of strategies and activations that will change the way you sell forever. Dr. Tania King-Mohammad - The High Ticket Woman and your go-to high-ticket sales expert. Go connect with her today, and thank me later.   This episode is also sponsored by Laura Robson and Back Pocket Office. Laura is a systems strategist and certified launch & funnel specialist who helps coaches, consultants and creators build business systems that give them more freedom. Laura is here to help sort all your tech and funnels for your so that you can focus on sales, marketing and delivering... and not have to stress about making sure the tech automations and systems are working. With over 14 years experience of workflow automation in the NHS and healthcare IT, she now brings that expertise to the online business world. Through Laura's signature Strategy–Build–Launch service, she can help you design and build the systems that keep your business running smoothly – from mapping out a clear customer journey to building the tech that supports it. Her approach is calm and collaborative – with a focus on creating beautifully simple systems that give you time back. So if tech has been the thing holding you back, Laura can help you build an online business that works for you. Find out more at www.backpocketoffice.co.uk or connect with Laura on the instagram here.

Thomas and Frank set sail for a rewatch of Pirates of the Caribbean The Curse of the Black Pearl. They talk first impressions, why the story pacing feels different today, and why Jack Sparrow still dominates pop culture. The conversation hits character arcs for Will Turner and Elizabeth Swann, the film's blend of practical effects and early CGI, sly nods to the Disneyland ride, and what modern blockbusters can learn from a character first adventure. Fun facts and a quick Hall of Fame debate wrap the voyage, plus a look ahead to Hacks and weekly Peacemaker coverage. Timestamps and Topics 00:00 Welcome and why this pick still matters 00:49 First impressions today versus memory 01:09 Fast plot recap and shifting alliances 04:02 Pacing talk and a slow first act 05:08 Misdirection, the curse, and keeping motives straight 06:03 Cast praise for Depp, Bloom, and Knightley 06:21 Jack Sparrow as career defining performance 07:50 Cartoon energy inside a live action Disney world 09:17 Tone and the Disney magic without the gore 10:15 Family action adventure that still plays for all ages 10:59 Will Turner as the straight man with real growth 12:20 The peg and the dog dynamic between Will and Jack 14:04 Bootstrap Bill and a changing view of pirates 16:06 Set design, practical work, and ride callouts 17:48 Ship battles and why they still pop 23:06 CGI that aged well and where it shows seams 25:19 Budgets, timelines, and quality control for VFX 27:21 Jerry Bruckheimer's fingerprints and franchise future 28:16 Would a non IP pirate movie hit today 30:37 What modern blockbusters can learn from this film 35:42 Romance that supports rather than drives the story 36:39 The trilogy era and that cliffhanger problem 40:19 Fun facts lightning round 47:50 Hall of Fame vote split 49:22 What is next Hacks S1E1 and weekly Peacemaker 50:16 Quick shout on Game Changer and why to watch 51:09 Outro and how to reach the show Key Takeaways • Jack Sparrow works because the comedy never undercuts danger and the character always dances on the edge • Will Turner is the emotional core and the only character with clear growth in this film • Practical effects enhanced by targeted CGI keep the world tactile and hold up better over time • The movie balances action, comedy, and light romance without losing stakes • Nods to the Disneyland ride help the setting feel lived in rather than digital • Modern blockbusters could benefit from character first design and teamwork focused climaxes • The sequel era of the mid 2000s chased cliffhangers that did not always serve casual viewers Memorable Quotes “Jack is our Bugs Bunny in this world.” “The comedy never undercuts the danger.” “Movies should just be fun and character first.” “One person needs to be the peg and one person is the dog that runs around the peg.” “I remember this more fondly than it played for me this time.” “Practical effects with just enough CGI is the sweet spot.” Call to Action Enjoy the episode Subscribe and drop a five star review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify Share the show with a friend and tag us with #ChallengeAcceptedLive Links and Resources • News we discuss across our shows is sourced at GeekFreaksPodcast.com Follow Us • Instagram: @challengeacceptedlive • TikTok: @challengeacceptedlive • Twitter: @CAPodcastLive Listener Questions Send your questions, challenges, or takes on Black Pearl to challengeacceptedgfx@gmail.com or DM us on socials. Include your name and city if you want a shoutout on the show. Apple Podcast tags Pirates of the Caribbean, The Curse of the Black Pearl, Captain Jack Sparrow, Johnny Depp, Orlando Bloom, Keira Knightley, Geoffrey Rush, Jerry Bruckheimer, Disney, movie review podcast, family adventure, practical effects, CGI, Disneyland ride, Peacemaker, Hacks HBO, Game Changer, Geek Freaks, Challenge Accepted Podcast

In this episode, we're unpacking so many juicy moments—from Frank Churchill's restless return to Highbury and the long-awaited ball at the Crown Inn to Harriet's shocking misadventure and Mr. Knightley's heroic turn on the dance floor. We'll explore Emma's ever-active imagination, Mrs. Elton's relentless meddling, and some subtle but oh-so-important moments between Emma and Mr. Knightley.  Plus, we'll chat about strawberry-picking at Donwell Abbey, and all the little details that make this part of the novel so rich and entertaining.  As a reminder, we've historically shared these “big book readalong” recap series in our patreon community, but to celebrate five years of podcasting, we're sharing it on the public feed! We're so excited to have all of you reading with us. To grab our reading schedule, go to our instagram page @novelpairingspod for our pinned post or subscribe to our free weekly substack newsletter where you'll get reminders and announcements at novelpairings.substack.com. This is our final season with Novel Pairings, but we are saving all of our episodes right here for you to return to, plus we're opening a shop for our exclusive classes and recap series. Stay tuned.  

In this episode, we're savoring the drama and intrigue of Emma, Volume Two, Chapters 9 through 18. The aftermath of the Cole's party has Emma rehashing every social triumph and misstep, from her jealousy over Jane Fairfax's piano skills to her playful gossip with Frank Churchill about the mysterious pianoforte.  Meanwhile, Mrs. Elton makes her grand entrance into Highbury society, leaving Emma unimpressed but the rest of the town charmed. Between witty banter, romantic musings, and subtle moments of humor (looking at you, Mr. Knightley), these chapters are packed with Austen's signature blend of sharp social commentary and entertaining drama.  As a reminder, we've historically shared these “big book readalong” recap series in our patreon community, but to celebrate five years of podcasting, we're sharing it on the public feed! We're so excited to have all of you reading with us. To grab our reading schedule, go to our instagram page @novelpairingspod for our pinned post or subscribe to our free weekly substack newsletter where you'll get reminders and announcements.  

Emma Woodhouse's story is nearing its end, but one crucial step remains - informing her father of her and Mr. Knightley's engagement. Now that Mrs. Weston's baby has safely arrived, Emma has no more excuses, and can even recruit Mrs. Weston to help make Mr. Woodhouse comfortable with the idea of poor Emma eventually getting married. And once the news is out to the Westons, it's only a matter of time before it makes it to the rest of Highbury. Everyone is delighted, save for the Eltons, of course. As Emma and Mr. Knightley make their way towards marriage, let their journey be your companion as you drift peacefully into another night of soft and restorative sleep. -----Welcome to the Jane Austen Bedtime Stories podcast! Each episode is a section of a classic Jane Austen novel, read in soothing tones and set to calming music to help you fall asleep.With everything that is going on in the world, we find comfort in the familiar. For so many of us, Jane Austen's works are like a warm hug. So snuggle up under the covers and let the comforting words of Jane Austen lull you into sleep.-----Help us keep this podcast free! Support the podcast: http://bedtimestoriespodcast.net/support -----Follow us on Instagram: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/janeaustenbedtimepod/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠-----Music ["Reverie"] by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. – www.scottbuckley.com.au

In this recap episode, we're discussing Volume One, Chapters 1-9 of Jane Austen's Emma. We take a deep dive into Emma Woodhouse's world, examining her relationships with key figures like Miss Taylor, Mr. Woodhouse, and the insightful Mr. Knightley. We explore how Emma's interactions with these characters set the stage for her matchmaking adventures. As we continue through the chapters, we meet the wider community of Highbury, including the mysterious Frank Churchill and the charming Harriet Smith. Emma's matchmaking ambitions quickly take center stage, leading her to meddle in Harriet's love life and sparking a significant conflict with Mr. Knightley. We analyze Austen's use of narrative techniques, and discuss the importance of riddles and social expectations in the novel. In a special bonus segment, we preview our upcoming Footnotes episode, where we compare and analyze the opening lines from all six of Austen's most famous novels. If you're interested in more literary analysis and Austen insights, be sure to check out the full episode and head to patreon.com/novelpairings for exclusive content! As a reminder, we've historically shared these “big book readalong” recap series in our patreon community, but to celebrate five years of podcasting, we're sharing it on the public feed! We're so excited to have all of you reading with us. To grab our reading schedule, go to our instagram page @novelpairingspod for our pinned post or subscribe to our free weekly substack newsletter where you'll get reminders and announcements.  

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for January 14, 2025 is: deus ex machina • DAY-us-eks-MAH-kih-nuh • noun A deus ex machina is a character or thing that suddenly enters the story in a novel, play, movie, etc., and solves a problem that had previously seemed impossible to solve. // The introduction of a new love interest in the final act was the perfect deus ex machina for the main character's happy ending. See the entry > Examples: "The poultry thieves in Emma provide a particularly humorous example of deus ex machina: the arrival of a poultry thief into the surrounding area (on the penultimate page of the novel, no less) and his theft of Mrs. Weston's turkeys frightens Mr. Woodhouse enough to consent to Emma's marriage and to allow Mr. Knightley to move into Hartfield." — Inger Sigrun Bredkjær Brodey, Jane Austen & the Price of Happiness, 2024 Did you know? The New Latin term deus ex machina is a translation of a Greek phrase and means literally "a god from a machine." Machine, in this case, refers to the crane (yes, crane) that held a god over the stage in ancient Greek and Roman drama. The practice of introducing a god at the end of a play to unravel and resolve the plot dates from at least the 5th century B.C.; Euripides (circa 484-406 B.C.) was one playwright who made frequent use of the device. Since the late 1600s, deus ex machina has been applied in English to unlikely saviors and improbable events in fiction or drama that bring order out of chaos in sudden and surprising ways.

IT'S LETTER DAY! It's 2 PM before the soirée! Anne and Harville discuss women's vs. men's constancy, Wentworth writes Anne a kicker of a letter, and they FINALLY talk about their feelings for each other.Topics discussed include internal panic, Wentworth's attempts to attach himself to Louisa, whether Anne was right to be persuaded by Lady Russell, Wentworth's pride, and whether hazelnuts poop Nutella.Glossary of Terms and Phrases:innoxious (adj.): having no adverse effect. innocuous. not injurious to physical or mental health.Glossary of People, Places, and Things: The Notebook, Amanda Fagan - Half Agony, Half Hope, Veronica Mars, The Good Place, How I Met Your Mother, Spongebob, Kacey Musgraves - Happy & Sad, BeyoncePatron Study Questions:Adrianna: How does the conversation between Anne and Harville resemble the hazelnut conversation from earlier in the novel, and does this parallel show the development of Anne, Wentworth, and their relationship?Avi: In this chapter, there is a discussion between Anne and Captain Harville about the feelings of men versus women. From this discussion, and from the other books you have read, what do you think Jane Austen is saying about the perception of women in her society?Ghenet: OH BABY THIS CHAPTER! 1. What does Mrs. Croft and Mrs. Musgrove's conversation about engagements show us about society and about Anne and Wentworth, their feelings and their own engagement? Why does this conversation get them so in their feels? 2. Where does the ‘half agony half hope' proposal rank for you in other main character proposals from the books you've read so far (ie Edward, Darcy, Knightley etc)!Anna: If Mrs. Croft represents the best case scenario for what Anne's life would have been if she'd married Wentworth all those years ago, Mrs. Smith in many ways represents the worst-case scenario (widowed with no income, cut off from helpful connections, etc.). Does seeing both outcomes affect your opinion on Anne's original decision all those years ago? How do you think that affect's Anne's ultimate opinion on her actions?  Becca's Study Questions: Topics discussed include Austen's beliefs on constancy and moving on, the letter's role in the story, Wentworth's heartbreak playlist and his journey through the book.Quote: "I am half agony, half hope."Questions Moving Forward: What will Anne's family say? What will happen with Elliot and Mrs. Smith?Who wins the chapters? WENTWORTHNext Episode: Volume 2 Chapter 12 / Chapter 24Our show art was created by Torrence Browne, and our audio is produced by Graham Cook. For bios and transcripts, check out our website at podandprejudice.com. Pod and Prejudice is transcribed by speechdocs.com. To support the show, check out our Patreon!Instagram: @podandprejudiceTwitter: @podandprejudiceFacebook: Pod and PrejudiceYoutube: Pod and PrejudiceMerch store: https://www.teepublic.com/stores/pod-and-prejudice?ref_id=23216

Ep. 678: End of Emma | Chapters 53-END / Volume 3, Chapters 17-END Book talk begins at 10:23. Emma and Mr. Knightley are finally engaged, but that's just the start. Will Emma break the news to her father without drama? Meanwhile, Harriet's surprising engagement to Mr. Martin stirs up even more intrigue, and Frank Churchill and Jane's reunion has us all feeling…awkward?

Ep. 675: Not So Secret History | Chapter 49 / Volume 3, Chapter 13 Book talk begins at 13:23. "If I loved you less, I might be able to talk about it more." Tell us we're not the ONLY ones squealing over what may be the most romantic sentence in CraftLit history.  We've hit the turning point in the story here. Harriet is in love with Knightley. Knightley certainly seems to be in love with Harriet. And Emma's heartbroken. The tension begins to unwind in this chapter, but not without leaving a few knots for Emma to untangle.. --------------------------------------------------------------- • • • • •   *CraftLit's Socials* • Find everything here: https://www.linktr.ee/craftlitchannel • Join the newsletter: http://eepurl.com/2raf9  • Podcast site: http://craftlit.com • Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CraftLit/ • Facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/craftlit • Pinterest: https://www.pinterest.com/craftlit/ • TikTok podcast: https://www.tiktok.com/@craftlit • Email: heather@craftlit.com • Previous CraftLit Classics can be found here: https://bit.ly/craftlit-library-2023   *SUPPORT THE SHOW!* • CraftLit App Premium feed bit.ly/libsynpremiumcraftlit (only one tier available) • PATREON:   https://patreon.com/craftlit (all tiers, below) ——Walter Harright -  $5/mo for the same audio as on App ——Jane Eyre - $10/mo for even-month Book Parties ——Mina Harker - $15/mo for odd-month Watch Parties *All tiers and benefits are also available as* —*YouTube Channel Memberships*  —*Ko-Fi* https://ko-fi.com/craftlit  —*NEW* at CraftLit.com — Premium Memberships https://craftlit.com/membership-levels/ *IF you want to join a particular Book or Watch Patry but you don't want to join any of the above membership options*, please use PayPal.me/craftlit or CraftLit @ Venmo and include what you want to attend in the message field. Please give us at least 24 hours to get your message and add you to the attendee list.     • Download the FREE CraftLit App for iOS or Android (you can call or email feedback straight from within the app) • Call 1-206-350-1642