Podcasts about Little Dorrit

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

In this episode we chat with the man who gave us the 1995 BBC adaptation of Pride and Prejudice—for many, the definitive Austen adaptation. A prolific author and screenwriter, Andrew Davies is also responsible for the 1996 ITV adaptation of Emma, Northanger Abbey (2007), Sense and Sensibility (2008), and the recent dramatization of Sanditon—not to mention adaptations of a host of other classic novels. Join us as we discuss Andrew's thoughts on adapting Austen's novels to film and, of course, Mr. Darcy in a wet shirt. Andrew Davies, prominent author and screenwriter, began his career writing radio plays and eventually moved into writing for television, film, and theater. He is also the author of several novels and children's books. In addition to the screen adaptations of Austen's novels mentioned above, he has dramatized television series such as Bleak House, House of Cards (ITV), Mr. Selfridge, Little Dorrit, To Serve Them All My Days, Vanity Fair, and War & Peace, in addition to films such as Bridget Jones's Diary, and Bridget Jones: The Edge of Reason. Andrew's work has garnered dozens of nominations and awards, and in 2002, he received the highest honor bestowed by the British Academy of Film and Television Arts, a BAFTA Fellowship, in recognition of his “outstanding achievement in the art forms of the moving image.” For a transcript and show notes, visit https://jasna.org/austen/podcast/ep18.Visit our website: www.jasna.orgFollow us on Instagram and FacebookSubscribe to the podcast on our YouTube channelEmail: podcast@jasna.org

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for April 17, 2024 is: circumlocution • ser-kum-loh-KYOO-shun • noun Circumlocution refers to the use of many words to say something that could be said more clearly and directly with fewer words. Usually encountered in formal speech and writing, circumlocution can also refer to speech that is intentionally evasive. // The judge coughed and pointed to her watch, clearly impatient with the attorney's tiresome circumlocutions in defense of his client. See the entry > Examples: “The slight stiltedness of her … English merges with the circumlocution of business-school lingo to produce phrases like ‘the most important aspect is to embrace a learning mind-set' and ‘I believe we're going to move forward in a positive way.'” — Noam Scheiber, The New York Times, 1 Oct. 2023 Did you know? In The King's English (1906), lexicographers H. W. Fowler and F. G. Fowler advised, “Prefer the single word to the circumlocution.” It's good advice: using more words than necessary to convey a point can confuse and annoy one's audience. Circumlocution itself combines two Latin elements: the prefix circum-, meaning “around,” and locutio, meaning “speech.” In essence, circumlocution may be thought of as “roundabout speech.” Since at least the early 16th century, English writers have used circumlocution with disdain, naming a thing to stop, or better yet, to avoid altogether. Charles Dickens used the word to satirize political runarounds in the 1857 novel Little Dorrit with the creation of the fictional Circumlocution Office, a government department that delayed the dissemination of information and just about everything else.

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever.Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Little Dorrit, one of the three great novels of Charles Dickens' last period, was produced in monthly installments from 1855 to 1857, and is considered one of his most profound. Dickens' father spent three months in Marshalsea Prison for debt, which made a lasting impact on his life. This story centers around life in Marshalsea Prison and, as always, society in general.Book One begins in the infamous Marseilles Prison in France, where two prisoners, Rigaud the French rogue and the ever cheerful Italian Cavaletto, share a cell. We meet them again later, but the scene shifts quickly to the English debtor's prison, The Marshalsea, where Mr. Dorrit is confined. His daughter Amy is born there, the only baby ever born in that prison. Tiny as a baby, she grows into a sweet-natured tiny adult, better known as “Little Dorrit.” The other inmates love and respect the child and the caring woman she becomes. Mr. Dorrit is also revered by them, and as the inmate with the longest term of imprisonment, he becomes “Father of the Marshalsea.”Enter Arthur Clennam, who meets Mr. Dorrit and Amy. He notes that she takes care of her father's every need, and also cooks, cleans, and mends the clothes of her older siblings. Arthur suspects that Dorrit was wrongly imprisoned, and begins investigating the case, which may involve his own family as well.In Book Two, Mr. Dorrit has been freed, and his family begins a new life. Arthur Clennam, now a dear friend of Little Dorrit, becomes partner with an engineer and inventor named Daniel Doyce, but a surprising event occurs which puts Arthur into prison. The twists and turns of fortune for himself, the Dorrit family and many others are changed forever. Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Dominic is joined by the award-winning author and food historian Pen Vogler who offers insightful reflections on how Charles Dickens used food as complex metaphors in his novels, that reflect the psychological and societal shifts during the Victorian era. The richly detailed food descriptions in works like A Christmas Carol and Little Dorrit reflect not just the era's celebrated dining etiquettes but sometimes Dickens' own discomfort in these settings.From Pen's new book Stuffed  there's also a hearty discussion on the role of food in society, particularly concerning feeding children, an issue highlighted more than ever during the pandemic. With a nod to the inspiring campaign by footballer Marcus Rashford, Pen finds parallels in Dickens' advocacy for children's rights and a nation's duty to nourish its future generations. We take a bite into history with the contentious debates in Parliament over this responsibility and the impact of land Enclosures on the food system.  Get ready also to rediscover the culinary history of forgotten ingredients like caraway seeds and dried broad beans.  Pen also promises a future Christmas episode. So sit back, savour the flavour of history, and let's dig in! Support the showIf you like to make a donation to support the costs of producing this series you can buy 'coffees' right here https://www.buymeacoffee.com/dominicgerrardHost: Dominic GerrardSeries Artwork: Léna GibertOriginal Music: Dominic GerrardThank you for listening!

Two boys from the Foundling Hospital are given the same name, with disastrous consequences in adulthood. Two associates, wishing to right the wrong, are commissioned to find a missing heir. Their quest takes them from fungous wine cellars in the City of London to the sunshine of the Mediterranean—across the Alps in winter. Danger and treachery would prevail were it not for the courage of the heroine and the faithful company servant.The story contains crafted descriptions, well-drawn and diverse characters, eerie and exotic backgrounds, mystery, semi-concealed identities, brinkmanship with death, romance, the eventual triumph of Good over Evil, and many other elements expected in classic Dickens.First published in 1867 there are thematic parallels with other books from Dickens' mature writings, including Little Dorrit (1857) and especially Our Mutual Friend (1865). The Listener will decide if this story yields insights into The Mystery of Edwin Drood (unfinished 1870).Wilkie Collins collaborated with Charles Dickens to produce this ‘Christmas' book and the stage play of the same name. In the book Collins assisted in Act 1 and Act 4; Collins scripted most of the stage play with Dickens' assistance. If this book were released today it would be splashed "THE BOOK OF THE FILM".Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Two boys from the Foundling Hospital are given the same name, with disastrous consequences in adulthood. Two associates, wishing to right the wrong, are commissioned to find a missing heir. Their quest takes them from fungous wine cellars in the City of London to the sunshine of the Mediterranean—across the Alps in winter. Danger and treachery would prevail were it not for the courage of the heroine and the faithful company servant.The story contains crafted descriptions, well-drawn and diverse characters, eerie and exotic backgrounds, mystery, semi-concealed identities, brinkmanship with death, romance, the eventual triumph of Good over Evil, and many other elements expected in classic Dickens.First published in 1867 there are thematic parallels with other books from Dickens' mature writings, including Little Dorrit (1857) and especially Our Mutual Friend (1865). The Listener will decide if this story yields insights into The Mystery of Edwin Drood (unfinished 1870).Wilkie Collins collaborated with Charles Dickens to produce this ‘Christmas' book and the stage play of the same name. In the book Collins assisted in Act 1 and Act 4; Collins scripted most of the stage play with Dickens' assistance. If this book were released today it would be splashed "THE BOOK OF THE FILM".Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Two boys from the Foundling Hospital are given the same name, with disastrous consequences in adulthood. Two associates, wishing to right the wrong, are commissioned to find a missing heir. Their quest takes them from fungous wine cellars in the City of London to the sunshine of the Mediterranean—across the Alps in winter. Danger and treachery would prevail were it not for the courage of the heroine and the faithful company servant.The story contains crafted descriptions, well-drawn and diverse characters, eerie and exotic backgrounds, mystery, semi-concealed identities, brinkmanship with death, romance, the eventual triumph of Good over Evil, and many other elements expected in classic Dickens.First published in 1867 there are thematic parallels with other books from Dickens' mature writings, including Little Dorrit (1857) and especially Our Mutual Friend (1865). The Listener will decide if this story yields insights into The Mystery of Edwin Drood (unfinished 1870).Wilkie Collins collaborated with Charles Dickens to produce this ‘Christmas' book and the stage play of the same name. In the book Collins assisted in Act 1 and Act 4; Collins scripted most of the stage play with Dickens' assistance. If this book were released today it would be splashed "THE BOOK OF THE FILM".Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Two boys from the Foundling Hospital are given the same name, with disastrous consequences in adulthood. Two associates, wishing to right the wrong, are commissioned to find a missing heir. Their quest takes them from fungous wine cellars in the City of London to the sunshine of the Mediterranean—across the Alps in winter. Danger and treachery would prevail were it not for the courage of the heroine and the faithful company servant.The story contains crafted descriptions, well-drawn and diverse characters, eerie and exotic backgrounds, mystery, semi-concealed identities, brinkmanship with death, romance, the eventual triumph of Good over Evil, and many other elements expected in classic Dickens.First published in 1867 there are thematic parallels with other books from Dickens' mature writings, including Little Dorrit (1857) and especially Our Mutual Friend (1865). The Listener will decide if this story yields insights into The Mystery of Edwin Drood (unfinished 1870).Wilkie Collins collaborated with Charles Dickens to produce this ‘Christmas' book and the stage play of the same name. In the book Collins assisted in Act 1 and Act 4; Collins scripted most of the stage play with Dickens' assistance. If this book were released today it would be splashed "THE BOOK OF THE FILM".Advertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

We continue our miniseries on the 1980s movies distributed by Miramax Films, with a look at the films released in 1988. ----more---- TRANSCRIPT   From Los Angeles, California, the Entertainment Capital of the World, it's The 80s Movies Podcast. I am your host, Edward Havens. Thank you for listening today.   On this episode, we finally continue with the next part of our look back at the 1980s movies distributed by Miramax Films, specifically looking at 1988.   But before we get there, I must issue another mea culpa. In our episode on the 1987 movies from Miramax, I mentioned that a Kiefer Sutherland movie called Crazy Moon never played in another theatre after its disastrous one week Oscar qualifying run in Los Angeles in December 1987.   I was wrong.   While doing research on this episode, I found one New York City playdate for the film, in early February 1988. It grossed a very dismal $3200 at the 545 seat Festival Theatre during its first weekend, and would be gone after seven days.   Sorry for the misinformation.   1988 would be a watershed year for the company, as one of the movies they acquired for distribution would change the course of documentary filmmaking as we knew it, and another would give a much beloved actor his first Academy Award nomination while giving the company its first Oscar win.   But before we get to those two movies, there's a whole bunch of others to talk about first.   Of the twelve movies Miramax would release in 1988, only four were from America. The rest would be a from a mixture of mostly Anglo-Saxon countries like the UK, Canada, France and Sweden, although there would be one Spanish film in there.   Their first release of the new year, Le Grand Chemin, told the story of a timid nine-year-old boy from Paris who spends one summer vacation in a small town in Brittany. His mother has lodged the boy with her friend and her friend's husband while Mom has another baby. The boy makes friends with a slightly older girl next door, and learns about life from her.   Richard Bohringer, who plays the friend's husband, and Anémone, who plays the pregnant mother, both won Cesars, the French equivalent to the Oscars, in their respective lead categories, and the film would be nominated for Best Foreign Language Film of 1987 by the National Board of Review. Miramax, who had picked up the film at Cannes several months earlier, waited until January 22nd, 1988, to release it in America, first at the Paris Theatre in midtown Manhattan, where it would gross a very impressive $41k in its first three days. In its second week, it would drop less than 25% of its opening weekend audience, bringing in another $31k. But shortly after that, the expected Oscar nomination for Best Foreign Language Film did not come, and business on the film slowed to a trickle. But it kept chugging on, and by the time the film finished its run in early June, it had grossed $541k.   A week later, on January 29th, Miramax would open another French film, Light Years. An animated science fiction film written and directed by René Laloux, best known for directing the 1973 animated head trip film Fantastic Planet, Light Years was the story of an evil force from a thousand years in the future who begins to destroy an idyllic paradise where the citizens are in perfect harmony with nature.   In its first three days at two screens in Los Angeles and five screens in the San Francisco Bay Area, Light Years would gross a decent $48,665. Miramax would print a self-congratulating ad in that week's Variety touting the film's success, and thanking Isaac Asimov, who helped to write the English translation, and many of the actors who lent their vocal talents to the new dub, including Glenn Close, Bridget Fonda, Jennifer Grey, Christopher Plummer, and Penn and Teller. Yes, Teller speaks. The ad was a message to both the theatre operators and the major players in the industry. Miramax was here. Get used to it.   But that ad may have been a bit premature.   While the film would do well in major markets during its initial week in theatres, audience interest would drop outside of its opening week in big cities, and be practically non-existent in college towns and other smaller cities. Its final box office total would be just over $370k.   March 18th saw the release of a truly unique film.    Imagine a film directed by Robert Altman and Bruce Beresford and Jean-Luc Godard and Derek Jarman and Franc Roddam and Nicolas Roeg and Ken Russell and Charles Sturridge and Julien Temple. Imagine a film that starred Beverly D'Angelo, Bridget Fonda in her first movie, Julie Hagerty, Buck Henry, Elizabeth Hurley and John Hurt and Theresa Russell and Tilda Swinton. Imagine a film that brought together ten of the most eclectic filmmakers in the world doing four to fourteen minute short films featuring the arias of some of the most famous and beloved operas ever written, often taken out of their original context and placed into strange new places. Like, for example, the aria for Verdi's Rigoletto set at the kitschy Madonna Inn in San Luis Obispo, where a movie producer is cheating on his wife while she is in a nearby room with a hunky man who is not her husband. Imagine that there's almost no dialogue in the film. Just the arias to set the moments.   That is Aria.   If you are unfamiliar with opera in general, and these arias specifically, that's not a problem. When I saw the film at the Nickelodeon Theatre in Santa Cruz in June 1988, I knew some Wagner, some Puccini, and some Verdi, through other movies that used the music as punctuation for a scene. I think the first time I had heard Nessun Dorma was in The Killing Fields. Vesti La Giubba in The Untouchables. But this would be the first time I would hear these arias as they were meant to be performed, even if they were out of context within their original stories. Certainly, Wagner didn't intend the aria from Tristan und Isolde to be used to highlight a suicide pact between a young couple killing themselves in a Las Vegas hotel bathroom.   Aria definitely split critics when it premiered at the 1987 Cannes Film Festival, when it competed for the festival's main prize, the Palme D'Or. Roger Ebert would call it the first MTV opera and felt the filmmakers were poking fun at their own styles, while Leonard Maltin felt most of the endeavor was a waste of time. In the review for the New York Times, Janet Maslin would also make a reference to MTV but not in a positive way, and would note the two best parts of the film were the photo montage that is seen over the end credits, and the clever licensing of Chuck Jones's classic Bugs Bunny cartoon What's Opera, Doc, to play with the film, at least during its New York run. In the Los Angeles Times, the newspaper chose one of its music critics to review the film. They too would compare the film to MTV, but also to Fantasia, neither reference meant to be positive.   It's easy to see what might have attracted Harvey Weinstein to acquire the film.   Nudity.   And lots of it.   Including from a 21 year old Hurley, and a 22 year old Fonda.   Open at the 420 seat Ridgemont Theatre in Seattle on March 18th, 1988, Aria would gross a respectable $10,600. It would be the second highest grossing theatre in the city, only behind The Unbearable Lightness of Being, which grossed $16,600 in its fifth week at the 850 seat Cinerama Theatre, which was and still is the single best theatre in Seattle. It would continue to do well in Seattle, but it would not open until April 15th in Los Angeles and May 20th in New York City.   But despite some decent notices and the presence of some big name directors, Aria would stiff at the box office, grossing just $1.03m after seven months in theatres.   As we discussed on our previous episode, there was a Dennis Hopper movie called Riders on the Storm that supposedly opened in November 1987, but didn't. It did open in theatres in May of 1988, and now we're here to talk about it.   Riders on the Storm would open in eleven theatres in the New York City area on May 7th, including three theatres in Manhattan. Since Miramax did not screen the film for critics before release, never a good sign, the first reviews wouldn't show up until the following day, since the critics would actually have to go see the film with a regular audience. Vincent Canby's review for the New York Times would arrive first, and surprisingly, he didn't completely hate the film. But audiences didn't care. In its first weekend in New York City, Riders on the Storm would gross an anemic $25k. The following Friday, Miramax would open the film at two theatres in Baltimore, four theatres in Fort Worth TX (but surprisingly none in Dallas), one theatre in Los Angeles and one theatre in Springfield OH, while continuing on only one screen in New York. No reported grosses from Fort Worth, LA or Springfield, but the New York theatre reported ticket sales of $3k for the weekend, a 57% drop from its previous week, while the two in Baltimore combined for $5k.   There would be more single playdates for a few months. Tampa the same week as New York. Atlanta, Charlotte, Des Moines and Memphis in late May. Cincinnati in late June. Boston, Calgary, Ottawa and Philadelphia in early July. Greenville SC in late August. Evansville IL, Ithaca NY and San Francisco in early September. Chicago in late September. It just kept popping up in random places for months, always a one week playdate before heading off to the next location. And in all that time, Miramax never reported grosses. What little numbers we do have is from the theatres that Variety was tracking, and those numbers totaled up to less than $30k.   Another mostly lost and forgotten Miramax release from 1988 is Caribe, a Canadian production that shot in Belize about an amateur illegal arms trader to Central American terrorists who must go on the run after a deal goes down bad, because who wants to see a Canadian movie about an amateur illegal arms trader to Canadian terrorists who must go on the run in the Canadian tundra after a deal goes down bad?   Kara Glover would play Helen, the arms dealer, and John Savage as Jeff, a British intelligence agent who helps Helen.   Caribe would first open in Detroit on May 20th, 1988. Can you guess what I'm going to say next?   Yep.   No reported grosses, no theatres playing the film tracked by Variety.   The following week, Caribe opens in the San Francisco Bay Area, at the 300 seat United Artists Theatre in San Francisco, and three theatres in the South Bay. While Miramax once again did not report grosses, the combined gross for the four theatres, according to Variety, was a weak $3,700. Compare that to Aria, which was playing at the Opera Plaza Cinemas in its third week in San Francisco, in an auditorium 40% smaller than the United Artist, grossing $5,300 on its own.   On June 3rd, Caribe would open at the AMC Fountain Square 14 in Nashville. One show only on Friday and Saturday at 11:45pm. Miramax did not report grosses. Probably because people we going to see Willie Tyler and Lester at Zanie's down the street.   And again, it kept cycling around the country, one or two new playdates in each city it played in. Philadelphia in mid-June. Indianapolis in mid-July. Jersey City in late August. Always for one week, grosses never reported.   Miramax's first Swedish release of the year was called Mio, but this was truly an international production. The $4m film was co-produced by Swedish, Norwegian and Russian production companies, directed by a Russian, adapted from a Swedish book by an American screenwriter, scored by one of the members of ABBA, and starring actors from England, Finland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States.   Mio tells the story of a boy from Stockholm who travels to an otherworldly fantasy realm and frees the land from an evil knight's oppression. What makes this movie memorable today is that Mio's best friend is played by none other than Christian Bale, in his very first film.   The movie was shot in Moscow, Stockholm, the Crimea, Scotland, and outside Pripyat in the Northern part of what is now Ukraine, between March and July 1986. In fact, the cast and crew were shooting outside Pripyat on April 26th, when they got the call they needed to evacuate the area. It would be hours later when they would discover there had been a reactor core meltdown at the nearby Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. They would have to scramble to shoot in other locations away from Ukraine for a month, and when they were finally allowed to return, the area they were shooting in deemed to have not been adversely affected by the worst nuclear power plant accident in human history,, Geiger counters would be placed all over the sets, and every meal served by craft services would need to be read to make sure it wasn't contaminated.   After premiering at the Moscow Film Festival in July 1987 and the Norwegian Film Festival in August, Mio would open in Sweden on October 16th, 1987. The local critics would tear the film apart. They hated that the filmmakers had Anglicized the movie with British actors like Christopher Lee, Susannah York, Christian Bale and Nicholas Pickard, an eleven year old boy also making his film debut. They also hated how the filmmakers adapted the novel by the legendary Astrid Lindgren, whose Pippi Longstocking novels made her and her works world famous. Overall, they hated pretty much everything about it outside of Christopher Lee's performance and the production's design in the fantasy world.   Miramax most likely picked it up trying to emulate the success of The Neverending Story, which had opened to great success in most of the world in 1984. So it might seem kinda odd that when they would open the now titled The Land of Faraway in theatres, they wouldn't go wide but instead open it on one screen in Atlanta GA on June 10th, 1988. And, once again, Miramax did not report grosses, and Variety did not track Atlanta theatres that week. Two weeks later, they would open the film in Miami. How many theatres? Can't tell you. Miramax did not report grosses, and Variety was not tracking any of the theatres in Miami playing the film. But hey, Bull Durham did pretty good in Miami that week.   The film would next open in theatres in Los Angeles. This time, Miramax bought a quarter page ad in the Los Angeles Times on opening day to let people know the film existed. So we know it was playing on 18 screens that weekend. And, once again, Miramax did not report grosses for the film. But on the two screens it played on that Variety was tracking, the combined gross was just $2,500.   There'd be other playdates. Kansas City and Minneapolis in mid-September. Vancouver, BC in early October. Palm Beach FL in mid October. Calgary AB and Fort Lauderdale in late October. Phoenix in mid November. And never once did Miramax report any grosses for it.   One week after Mio, Miramax would release a comedy called Going Undercover.   Now, if you listened to our March 2021 episode on Some Kind of Wonderful, you may remember be mentioning Lea Thompson taking the role of Amanda Jones in that film, a role she had turned down twice before, the week after Howard the Duck opened, because she was afraid she'd never get cast in a movie again. And while Some Kind of Wonderful wasn't as big a film as you'd expect from a John Hughes production, Thompson did indeed continue to work, and is still working to this day.   So if you were looking at a newspaper ad in several cities in June 1988 and saw her latest movie and wonder why she went back to making weird little movies.   She hadn't.   This was a movie she had made just before Back to the Future, in August and September 1984.   Originally titled Yellow Pages, the film starred film legend Jean Simmons as Maxine, a rich woman who has hired Chris Lemmon's private investigator Henry Brilliant to protect her stepdaughter Marigold during her trip to Copenhagen.   The director, James Clarke, had written the script specifically for Lemmon, tailoring his role to mimic various roles played by his famous father, Jack Lemmon, over the decades, and for Simmons. But Thompson was just one of a number of young actresses they looked at before making their casting choice.   Half of the $6m budget would come from a first-time British film producer, while the other half from a group of Danish investors wanting to lure more Hollywood productions to their area.   The shoot would be plagued by a number of problems. The shoot in Los Angeles coincided with the final days of the 1984 Summer Olympics, which would cut out using some of the best and most regularly used locations in the city, and a long-lasting heat wave that would make outdoor shoots unbearable for cast and crew. When they arrived in Copenhagen at the end of August, Denmark was going through an unusually heavy storm front that hung around for weeks.   Clarke would spend several months editing the film, longer than usual for a smaller production like this, but he in part was waiting to see how Back to the Future would do at the box office. If the film was a hit, and his leading actress was a major part of that, it could make it easier to sell his film to a distributor.   Or that was line of thinking.   Of course, Back to the Future was a hit, and Thompson received much praise for her comedic work on the film.   But that didn't make it any easier to sell his film.   The producer would set the first screenings for the film at the February 1986 American Film Market in Santa Monica, which caters not only to foreign distributors looking to acquire American movies for their markets, but helps independent filmmakers get their movies seen by American distributors.   As these screenings were for buyers by invitation only, there would be no reviews from the screenings, but one could guess that no one would hear about the film again until Miramax bought the American distribution rights to it in March 1988 tells us that maybe those screenings didn't go so well.   The film would get retitled Going Undercover, and would open in single screen playdates in Atlanta, Cincinnati, Dallas, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, Nashville, Orlando, St. Louis and Tampa on June 17th. And as I've said too many times already, no reported grosses from Miramax, and only one theatre playing the film was being tracked by Variety, with Going Undercover earning $3,000 during its one week at the Century City 14 in Los Angeles.   In the June 22nd, 1988 issue of Variety, there was an article about Miramax securing a $25m line of credit in order to start producing their own films. Going Undercover is mentioned in the article about being one of Miramax's releases, without noting it had just been released that week or how well it did or did not do.   The Thin Blue Line would be Miramax's first non-music based documentary, and one that would truly change how documentaries were made.   Errol Morris had already made two bizarre but entertaining documentaries in the late 70s and early 80s. Gates of Heaven was shot in 1977, about a man who operated a failing pet cemetery in Northern California's Napa Valley. When Morris told his famous German filmmaking supporter Werner Herzog about the film, Herzog vowed to eat one of the shoes he was wearing that day if Morris could actually complete the film and have it shown in a public theatre. In April 1979, just before the documentary had its world premiere at UC Theatre in Berkeley, where Morris had studied philosophy, Herzog would spend the morning at Chez Pannise, the creators of the California Cuisine cooking style, boiling his shoes for five hours in garlic, herbs and stock. This event itself would be commemorated in a documentary short called, naturally, Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe, by Les Blank, which is a must watch on its own.   Because of the success of Gates of Heaven, Morris was able to quickly find financing for his next film, Nub City, which was originally supposed to be about the number of Vernon, Florida's citizens who have “accidentally” cut off their limbs, in order to collect the insurance money. But after several of those citizens threatened to kill Morris, and one of them tried to run down his cinematographer with their truck, Morris would rework the documentary, dropping the limb angle, no pun intended, and focus on the numerous eccentric people in the town. It would premiere at the 1981 New York Film Festival, and become a hit, for a documentary, when it was released in theatres in 1982.   But it would take Morris another six years after completing Vernon, Florida, to make another film. Part of it was having trouble lining up full funding to work on his next proposed movie, about James Grigson, a Texas forensic psychiatrist whose was nicknamed Doctor Death for being an expert witness for the prosecution in death penalty cases in Texas. Morris had gotten seed money for the documentary from PBS and the Endowment for Public Arts, but there was little else coming in while he worked on the film. In fact, Morris would get a PI license in New York and work cases for two years, using every penny he earned that wasn't going towards living expenses to keep the film afloat.   One of Morris's major problems for the film was that Grigson would not sit on camera for an interview, but would meet with Morris face to face to talk about the cases. During that meeting, the good doctor suggested to the filmmaker that he should research the killers he helped put away. And during that research, Morris would come across the case of one Randall Dale Adams, who was convicted of killing Dallas police officer Robert Wood in 1976, even though another man, David Harris, was the police's initial suspect. For two years, Morris would fly back and forth between New York City and Texas, talking to and filming interviews with Adams and more than two hundred other people connected to the shooting and the trial. Morris had become convinced Adams was indeed innocent, and dropped the idea about Dr. Grigson to solely focus on the Robert Wood murder.   After showing the producers of PBS's American Playhouse some of the footage he had put together of the new direction of the film, they kicked in more funds so that Morris could shoot some re-enactment sequences outside New York City, as well as commission composer Phillip Glass to create a score for the film once it was completed. Documentaries at that time did not regularly use re-enactments, but Morris felt it was important to show how different personal accounts of the same moment can be misinterpreted or misremembered or outright manipulated to suppress the truth.   After the film completed its post-production in March 1988, The Thin Blue Line would have its world premiere at the San Francisco Film Festival on March 18th, and word quickly spread Morris had something truly unique and special on his hands. The critic for Variety would note in the very first paragraph of his write up that the film employed “strikingly original formal devices to pull together diverse interviews, film clips, photo collages, and” and this is where it broke ground, “recreations of the crime from many points of view.”   Miramax would put together a full court press in order to get the rights to the film, which was announced during the opening days of the 1988 Cannes Film Festival in early May. An early hint on how the company was going to sell the film was by calling it a “non-fiction feature” instead of a documentary.   Miramax would send Morris out on a cross-country press tour in the weeks leading up to the film's August 26th opening date, but Morris, like many documentary filmmakers, was not used to being in the spotlight themselves, and was not as articulate about talking up his movies as the more seasoned directors and actors who've been on the promotion circuit for a while. After one interview, Harvey Weinstein would send Errol Morris a note.   “Heard your NPR interview and you were boring.”   Harvey would offer up several suggestions to help the filmmaker, including hyping the movie up as a real life mystery thriller rather than a documentary, and using shorter and clearer sentences when answering a question.   It was a clear gamble to release The Thin Blue Line in the final week of summer, and the film would need a lot of good will to stand out.   And it would get it.   The New York Times was so enthralled with the film, it would not only run a review from Janet Maslin, who would heap great praise on the film, but would also run a lengthy interview with Errol Morris right next to the review. The quarter page ad in the New York Times, several pages back, would tout positive quotes from Roger Ebert, J. Hoberman, who had left The Village Voice for the then-new Premiere Magazine, Peter Travers, writing for People Magazine instead of Rolling Stone, and critics from the San Francisco Chronicle and, interestingly enough, the Dallas Morning News. The top of the ad was tagged with an intriguing tease: solving this mystery is going to be murder, with a second tag line underneath the key art and title, which called the film “a new kind of movie mystery.” Of the 15 New York area-based film critics for local newspapers, television and national magazines, 14 of them gave favorable reviews, while 1, Stephen Schiff of Vanity Fair, was ambivalent about it. Not one critic gave it a bad review.   New York audiences were hooked.   Opening in the 240 seat main house at the Lincoln Plaza Cinemas, the movie grossed $30,945 its first three days. In its second weekend, the gross at the Lincoln Plaza would jump to $31k, and adding another $27,500 from its two theatre opening in Los Angeles and $15,800 from a single DC theatre that week. Third week in New York was a still good $21k, but the second week in Los Angeles fell to $10,500 and DC to $10k. And that's how it rolled out for several months, mostly single screen bookings in major cities not called Los Angeles or New York City, racking up some of the best reviews Miramax would receive to date, but never breaking out much outside the major cities. When it looked like Santa Cruz wasn't going to play the film, I drove to San Francisco to see it, just as my friends and I had for the opening day of Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ in mid-August. That's 75 miles each way, plus parking in San Francisco, just to see a movie. That's when you know you no longer just like movies but have developed a serious case of cinephilea. So when The Nickelodeon did open the film in late November, I did something I had never done with any documentary before.   I went and saw it again.   Second time around, I was still pissed off at the outrageous injustice heaped upon Randall Dale Adams for nothing more than being with and trusting the wrong person at the wrong time. But, thankfully, things would turn around for Adams in the coming weeks. On December 1st, it was reported that David Harris had recanted his testimony at Adams' trial, admitting he was alone when Officer Wood stopped his car. And on March 1st, 1989, after more than 15,000 people had signed the film's petition to revisit the decision, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned Adams's conviction “based largely” on facts presented in the film.   The film would also find itself in several more controversies.   Despite being named The Best Documentary of the Year by a number of critics groups, the Documentary Branch of the  Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences would not nominate the film, due in large part to the numerous reenactments presented throughout the film. Filmmaker Michael Apted, a member of the Directors Branch of the Academy, noted that the failure to acknowledge The Thin Blue Line was “one of the most outrageous things in the modern history of the Academy,” while Roger Ebert added the slight was “the worst non-nomination of the year.” Despite the lack of a nomination, Errol Morris would attend the Oscars ceremony in March 1989, as a protest for his film being snubbed.   Morris would also, several months after Adams' release, find himself being sued by Adams, but not because of how he was portrayed in the film. During the making of the film, Morris had Adams sign a contract giving Morris the exclusive right to tell Adams's story, and Adams wanted, essentially, the right to tell his own story now that he was a free man. Morris and Adams would settle out of court, and Adams would regain his life rights.   Once the movie was played out in theatres, it had grossed $1.2m, which on the surface sounds like not a whole lot of money. Adjusted for inflation, that would only be $3.08m. But even unadjusted for inflation, it's still one of the 100 highest grossing documentaries of the past forty years. And it is one of just a handful of documentaries to become a part of the National Film Registry, for being a culturally, historically or aesthetically significant film.”   Adams would live a quiet life after his release, working as an anti-death penalty advocate and marrying the sister of one of the death row inmates he was helping to exonerate. He would pass away from a brain tumor in October 2010 at a courthouse in Ohio not half an hour from where he was born and still lived, but he would so disappear from the spotlight after the movie was released that his passing wasn't even reported until June 2011.   Errol Morris would become one of the most celebrated documentarians of his generation, finally getting nominated for, and winning, an Oscar in 2003, for The Fog of War, about the life and times of Robert McNamara, Richard Nixon's Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam War era. The Fog of War would also be added to the National Film Registry in 2019. Morris would become only the third documentarian, after D.A. Pennebaker and Les Blank, to have two films on the Registry.   In 1973, the senseless killings of five members of the Alday family in Donalsonville GA made international headlines. Four years later, Canadian documentarian Tex Fuller made an award-winning documentary about the case, called Murder One. For years, Fuller shopped around a screenplay telling the same story, but it would take nearly a decade for it to finally be sold, in part because Fuller was insistent that he also be the director. A small Canadian production company would fund the $1m CAD production, which would star Henry Thomas of E.T. fame as the fifteen year old narrator of the story, Billy Isaacs.   The shoot began in early October 1987 outside Toronto, but after a week of shooting, Fuller was fired, and was replaced by Graeme Campbell, a young and energetic filmmaker for whom Murder One would be his fourth movie directing gig of the year. Details are sketchy as to why Fuller was fired, but Thomas and his mother Carolyn would voice concerns with the producers about the new direction the film was taking under its new director.   The film would premiere in Canada in May 1988. When the film did well up North, Miramax took notice and purchased the American distribution rights.   Murder One would first open in America on two screens in Los Angeles on September 9th, 1988. Michael Wilmington of the Los Angeles Times noted that while the film itself wasn't very good, that it still sprung from the disturbing insight about the crazy reasons people cross of what should be impassable moral lines.   “No movie studio could have invented it!,” screamed the tagline on the poster and newspaper key art. “No writer could have imagined it! Because what happened that night became the most controversial in American history.”   That would draw limited interest from filmgoers in Tinseltown. The two theatres would gross a combined $7k in its first three days. Not great but far better than several other recent Miramax releases in the area.   Two weeks later, on September 23rd, Miramax would book Murder One into 20 theatres in the New York City metro region, as well as in Akron, Atlanta, Charlotte, Indianpolis, Nashville, and Tampa-St. Petersburg. In New York, the film would actually get some good reviews from the Times and the Post as well as Peter Travers of People Magazine, but once again, Miramax would not report grosses for the film. Variety would note the combined gross for the film in New York City was only $25k.   In early October, the film would fall out of Variety's internal list of the 50 Top Grossing Films within the twenty markets they regularly tracked, with a final gross of just $87k. One market that Miramax deliberately did not book the film was anywhere near southwest Georgia, where the murders took place. The closest theatre that did play the film was more than 200 miles away.   Miramax would finish 1988 with two releases.   The first was Dakota, which would mark star Lou Diamond Phillips first time as a producer. He would star as a troubled teenager who takes a job on a Texas horse ranch to help pay of his debts, who becomes a sorta big brother to the ranch owner's young son, who has recently lost a leg to cancer, as he also falls for the rancher's daughter.   When the $1.1m budgeted film began production in Texas in June 1987, Phillips had already made La Bamba and Stand and Deliver, but neither had yet to be released into theatres. By the time filming ended five weeks later, La Bamba had just opened, and Phillips was on his way to becoming a star.   The main producers wanted director Fred Holmes to get the film through post-production as quickly as possible, to get it into theatres in the early part of 1988 to capitalize on the newfound success of their young star.    But that wouldn't happen.   Holmes wouldn't have the film ready until the end of February 1988, which was deemed acceptable because of the impending release of Stand and Deliver. In fact, the producers would schedule their first distributor screening of the film on March 14th, the Monday after Stand and Delivered opened, in the hopes that good box office for the film and good notices for Phillips would translate to higher distributor interest in their film, which sorta worked. None of the major studios would show for the screening, but a number of Indies would, including Miramax. Phillips would not attend the screening, as he was on location in New Mexico shooting Young Guns.   I can't find any reason why Miramax waited nearly nine months after they acquired Dakota to get it into theatres. It certainly wasn't Oscar bait, and screen availability would be scarce during the busy holiday movie season, which would see a number of popular, high profile releases like Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, Ernest Saves Christmas, The Naked Gun, Rain Man, Scrooged, Tequila Sunrise, Twins and Working Girl. Which might explain why, when Miramax released the film into 18 theatres in the New York City area on December 2nd, they could only get three screens in all of Manhattan, the best being the nice but hardly first-rate Embassy 4 at Broadway and 47th. Or of the 22 screens in Los Angeles opening the film the same day, the best would be the tiny Westwood 4 next to UCLA or the Paramount in Hollywood, whose best days were back in the Eisenhower administration.   And, yet again, Miramax did not report grosses, and none of the theatres playing the film was tracked by Variety that week. The film would be gone after just one week. The Paramount, which would open Dirty Rotten Scoundrels on the 14th, opted to instead play a double feature of Clara's Heart, with Whoopi Goldberg and Neil Patrick Harris, and the River Phoenix drama Running on Empty, even though neither film had been much of a hit.   Miramax's last film of the year would be the one that changed everything for them.   Pelle the Conquerer.   Adapted from a 1910 Danish book and directed by Billie August, whose previous film Twist and Shout had been released by Miramax in 1986, Pelle the Conquerer would be the first Danish or Swedish movie to star Max von Sydow in almost 15 years, having spent most of the 70s and 80s in Hollywood and London starring in a number of major movies including The Exorcist, Three Days of the Condor, Flash Gordon,Conan the Barbarian, Never Say Never Again, and David Lynch's Dune. But because von Sydow would be making his return to his native cinema, August was able to secure $4.5m to make the film, one of the highest budgeted Scandinavian films to be made to date.   In the late 1850s, an elderly emigrant Lasse and his son Pelle leave their home in Sweden after the death of the boy's mother, wanting to build a new life on the Danish island of Bornholm. Lasse finds it difficult to find work, given his age and his son's youth. The pair are forced to work at a large farm, where they are generally mistreated by the managers for being foreigners. The father falls into depression and alcoholism, the young boy befriends one of the bastard children of the farm owner as well as another Swedish farm worker, who dreams of conquering the world.   For the title character of Pelle, Billie August saw more than 3,000 Swedish boys before deciding to cast 11 year old Pelle Hvenegaard, who, like many boys in Sweden, had been named for the character he was now going to play on screen.   After six months of filming in the summer and fall of 1986, Billie August would finish editing Pelle the Conquerer in time for it to make its intended Christmas Day 1987 release date in Denmark and Sweden, where the film would be one of the biggest releases in either country for the entire decade. It would make its debut outside Scandinavia at the Cannes Film Festival in May 1988, where it had been invited to compete for the Palme D'Or. It would compete against a number of talented filmmakers who had come with some of the best films they would ever make, including Clint Eastwood with Bird, Claire Denis' Chocolat, István Szabó's Hanussen, Vincent Ward's The Navigator, and A Short Film About Killing, an expanded movie version of the fifth episode in Krzysztof Kieślowski's masterful miniseries Dekalog. Pelle would conquer them all, taking home the top prize from one of cinema's most revered film festivals.   Reviews for the film out of Cannes were almost universally excellent. Vincent Canby, the lead film critic for the New York Times for nearly twenty years by this point, wouldn't file his review until the end of the festival, in which he pointed out that a number of people at the festival were scandalized von Sydow had not also won the award for Best Actor.   Having previously worked with the company on his previous film's American release, August felt that Miramax would have what it took to make the film a success in the States.   Their first moves would be to schedule the film for a late December release, while securing a slot at that September's New York Film Festival. And once again, the critical consensus was highly positive, with only a small sampling of distractors.   The film would open first on two screens at the Lincoln Plaza Cinemas in midtown Manhattan on Wednesday, December 21st, following by exclusive engagements in nine other cities including Los Angeles, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Seattle and Washington DC, on the 23rd. But the opening week numbers weren't very good, just $46k from ten screens. And you can't really blame the film's two hour and forty-five minute running time. Little Dorrit, the two-part, four hour adaptation of the Charles Dickens novel, had been out nine weeks at this point and was still making nearly 50% more per screen.   But after the new year, when more and more awards were hurled the film's way, including the National Board of Review naming it one of the best foreign films of the year and the Golden Globes awarding it their Best Foreign Language trophy, ticket sales would pick up.   Well, for a foreign film.   The week after the Motion Picture Academy awarded Pelle their award for Best Foreign Language Film, business for the film would pick up 35%, and a third of its $2m American gross would come after that win.   One of the things that surprised me while doing the research for this episode was learning that Max von Sydow had never been nominated for an Oscar until he was nominated for Best Actor for Pelle the Conquerer. You look at his credits over the years, and it's just mind blowing. The Seventh Seal. Wild Strawberries. The Virgin Spring. The Greatest Story Ever Told. The Emigrants. The Exorcist. The Three Days of the Condor. Surely there was one performance amongst those that deserved recognition.   I hate to keep going back to A24, but there's something about a company's first Oscar win that sends that company into the next level. A24 didn't really become A24 until 2016, when three of their movies won Oscars, including Brie Larson for Best Actress in Room. And Miramax didn't really become the Miramax we knew and once loved until its win for Pelle.   Thank you for joining us. We'll talk again soon, when Episode 117, the fifth and final part of our miniseries on Miramax Films, is released.     Remember to visit this episode's page on our website, The80sMoviePodcast.com, for extra materials about the movies we covered this episode.   The 80s Movies Podcast has been researched, written, narrated and edited by Edward Havens for Idiosyncratic Entertainment.   Thank you again.   Good night.

We continue our miniseries on the 1980s movies distributed by Miramax Films, with a look at the films released in 1988. ----more---- TRANSCRIPT   From Los Angeles, California, the Entertainment Capital of the World, it's The 80s Movies Podcast. I am your host, Edward Havens. Thank you for listening today.   On this episode, we finally continue with the next part of our look back at the 1980s movies distributed by Miramax Films, specifically looking at 1988.   But before we get there, I must issue another mea culpa. In our episode on the 1987 movies from Miramax, I mentioned that a Kiefer Sutherland movie called Crazy Moon never played in another theatre after its disastrous one week Oscar qualifying run in Los Angeles in December 1987.   I was wrong.   While doing research on this episode, I found one New York City playdate for the film, in early February 1988. It grossed a very dismal $3200 at the 545 seat Festival Theatre during its first weekend, and would be gone after seven days.   Sorry for the misinformation.   1988 would be a watershed year for the company, as one of the movies they acquired for distribution would change the course of documentary filmmaking as we knew it, and another would give a much beloved actor his first Academy Award nomination while giving the company its first Oscar win.   But before we get to those two movies, there's a whole bunch of others to talk about first.   Of the twelve movies Miramax would release in 1988, only four were from America. The rest would be a from a mixture of mostly Anglo-Saxon countries like the UK, Canada, France and Sweden, although there would be one Spanish film in there.   Their first release of the new year, Le Grand Chemin, told the story of a timid nine-year-old boy from Paris who spends one summer vacation in a small town in Brittany. His mother has lodged the boy with her friend and her friend's husband while Mom has another baby. The boy makes friends with a slightly older girl next door, and learns about life from her.   Richard Bohringer, who plays the friend's husband, and Anémone, who plays the pregnant mother, both won Cesars, the French equivalent to the Oscars, in their respective lead categories, and the film would be nominated for Best Foreign Language Film of 1987 by the National Board of Review. Miramax, who had picked up the film at Cannes several months earlier, waited until January 22nd, 1988, to release it in America, first at the Paris Theatre in midtown Manhattan, where it would gross a very impressive $41k in its first three days. In its second week, it would drop less than 25% of its opening weekend audience, bringing in another $31k. But shortly after that, the expected Oscar nomination for Best Foreign Language Film did not come, and business on the film slowed to a trickle. But it kept chugging on, and by the time the film finished its run in early June, it had grossed $541k.   A week later, on January 29th, Miramax would open another French film, Light Years. An animated science fiction film written and directed by René Laloux, best known for directing the 1973 animated head trip film Fantastic Planet, Light Years was the story of an evil force from a thousand years in the future who begins to destroy an idyllic paradise where the citizens are in perfect harmony with nature.   In its first three days at two screens in Los Angeles and five screens in the San Francisco Bay Area, Light Years would gross a decent $48,665. Miramax would print a self-congratulating ad in that week's Variety touting the film's success, and thanking Isaac Asimov, who helped to write the English translation, and many of the actors who lent their vocal talents to the new dub, including Glenn Close, Bridget Fonda, Jennifer Grey, Christopher Plummer, and Penn and Teller. Yes, Teller speaks. The ad was a message to both the theatre operators and the major players in the industry. Miramax was here. Get used to it.   But that ad may have been a bit premature.   While the film would do well in major markets during its initial week in theatres, audience interest would drop outside of its opening week in big cities, and be practically non-existent in college towns and other smaller cities. Its final box office total would be just over $370k.   March 18th saw the release of a truly unique film.    Imagine a film directed by Robert Altman and Bruce Beresford and Jean-Luc Godard and Derek Jarman and Franc Roddam and Nicolas Roeg and Ken Russell and Charles Sturridge and Julien Temple. Imagine a film that starred Beverly D'Angelo, Bridget Fonda in her first movie, Julie Hagerty, Buck Henry, Elizabeth Hurley and John Hurt and Theresa Russell and Tilda Swinton. Imagine a film that brought together ten of the most eclectic filmmakers in the world doing four to fourteen minute short films featuring the arias of some of the most famous and beloved operas ever written, often taken out of their original context and placed into strange new places. Like, for example, the aria for Verdi's Rigoletto set at the kitschy Madonna Inn in San Luis Obispo, where a movie producer is cheating on his wife while she is in a nearby room with a hunky man who is not her husband. Imagine that there's almost no dialogue in the film. Just the arias to set the moments.   That is Aria.   If you are unfamiliar with opera in general, and these arias specifically, that's not a problem. When I saw the film at the Nickelodeon Theatre in Santa Cruz in June 1988, I knew some Wagner, some Puccini, and some Verdi, through other movies that used the music as punctuation for a scene. I think the first time I had heard Nessun Dorma was in The Killing Fields. Vesti La Giubba in The Untouchables. But this would be the first time I would hear these arias as they were meant to be performed, even if they were out of context within their original stories. Certainly, Wagner didn't intend the aria from Tristan und Isolde to be used to highlight a suicide pact between a young couple killing themselves in a Las Vegas hotel bathroom.   Aria definitely split critics when it premiered at the 1987 Cannes Film Festival, when it competed for the festival's main prize, the Palme D'Or. Roger Ebert would call it the first MTV opera and felt the filmmakers were poking fun at their own styles, while Leonard Maltin felt most of the endeavor was a waste of time. In the review for the New York Times, Janet Maslin would also make a reference to MTV but not in a positive way, and would note the two best parts of the film were the photo montage that is seen over the end credits, and the clever licensing of Chuck Jones's classic Bugs Bunny cartoon What's Opera, Doc, to play with the film, at least during its New York run. In the Los Angeles Times, the newspaper chose one of its music critics to review the film. They too would compare the film to MTV, but also to Fantasia, neither reference meant to be positive.   It's easy to see what might have attracted Harvey Weinstein to acquire the film.   Nudity.   And lots of it.   Including from a 21 year old Hurley, and a 22 year old Fonda.   Open at the 420 seat Ridgemont Theatre in Seattle on March 18th, 1988, Aria would gross a respectable $10,600. It would be the second highest grossing theatre in the city, only behind The Unbearable Lightness of Being, which grossed $16,600 in its fifth week at the 850 seat Cinerama Theatre, which was and still is the single best theatre in Seattle. It would continue to do well in Seattle, but it would not open until April 15th in Los Angeles and May 20th in New York City.   But despite some decent notices and the presence of some big name directors, Aria would stiff at the box office, grossing just $1.03m after seven months in theatres.   As we discussed on our previous episode, there was a Dennis Hopper movie called Riders on the Storm that supposedly opened in November 1987, but didn't. It did open in theatres in May of 1988, and now we're here to talk about it.   Riders on the Storm would open in eleven theatres in the New York City area on May 7th, including three theatres in Manhattan. Since Miramax did not screen the film for critics before release, never a good sign, the first reviews wouldn't show up until the following day, since the critics would actually have to go see the film with a regular audience. Vincent Canby's review for the New York Times would arrive first, and surprisingly, he didn't completely hate the film. But audiences didn't care. In its first weekend in New York City, Riders on the Storm would gross an anemic $25k. The following Friday, Miramax would open the film at two theatres in Baltimore, four theatres in Fort Worth TX (but surprisingly none in Dallas), one theatre in Los Angeles and one theatre in Springfield OH, while continuing on only one screen in New York. No reported grosses from Fort Worth, LA or Springfield, but the New York theatre reported ticket sales of $3k for the weekend, a 57% drop from its previous week, while the two in Baltimore combined for $5k.   There would be more single playdates for a few months. Tampa the same week as New York. Atlanta, Charlotte, Des Moines and Memphis in late May. Cincinnati in late June. Boston, Calgary, Ottawa and Philadelphia in early July. Greenville SC in late August. Evansville IL, Ithaca NY and San Francisco in early September. Chicago in late September. It just kept popping up in random places for months, always a one week playdate before heading off to the next location. And in all that time, Miramax never reported grosses. What little numbers we do have is from the theatres that Variety was tracking, and those numbers totaled up to less than $30k.   Another mostly lost and forgotten Miramax release from 1988 is Caribe, a Canadian production that shot in Belize about an amateur illegal arms trader to Central American terrorists who must go on the run after a deal goes down bad, because who wants to see a Canadian movie about an amateur illegal arms trader to Canadian terrorists who must go on the run in the Canadian tundra after a deal goes down bad?   Kara Glover would play Helen, the arms dealer, and John Savage as Jeff, a British intelligence agent who helps Helen.   Caribe would first open in Detroit on May 20th, 1988. Can you guess what I'm going to say next?   Yep.   No reported grosses, no theatres playing the film tracked by Variety.   The following week, Caribe opens in the San Francisco Bay Area, at the 300 seat United Artists Theatre in San Francisco, and three theatres in the South Bay. While Miramax once again did not report grosses, the combined gross for the four theatres, according to Variety, was a weak $3,700. Compare that to Aria, which was playing at the Opera Plaza Cinemas in its third week in San Francisco, in an auditorium 40% smaller than the United Artist, grossing $5,300 on its own.   On June 3rd, Caribe would open at the AMC Fountain Square 14 in Nashville. One show only on Friday and Saturday at 11:45pm. Miramax did not report grosses. Probably because people we going to see Willie Tyler and Lester at Zanie's down the street.   And again, it kept cycling around the country, one or two new playdates in each city it played in. Philadelphia in mid-June. Indianapolis in mid-July. Jersey City in late August. Always for one week, grosses never reported.   Miramax's first Swedish release of the year was called Mio, but this was truly an international production. The $4m film was co-produced by Swedish, Norwegian and Russian production companies, directed by a Russian, adapted from a Swedish book by an American screenwriter, scored by one of the members of ABBA, and starring actors from England, Finland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States.   Mio tells the story of a boy from Stockholm who travels to an otherworldly fantasy realm and frees the land from an evil knight's oppression. What makes this movie memorable today is that Mio's best friend is played by none other than Christian Bale, in his very first film.   The movie was shot in Moscow, Stockholm, the Crimea, Scotland, and outside Pripyat in the Northern part of what is now Ukraine, between March and July 1986. In fact, the cast and crew were shooting outside Pripyat on April 26th, when they got the call they needed to evacuate the area. It would be hours later when they would discover there had been a reactor core meltdown at the nearby Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. They would have to scramble to shoot in other locations away from Ukraine for a month, and when they were finally allowed to return, the area they were shooting in deemed to have not been adversely affected by the worst nuclear power plant accident in human history,, Geiger counters would be placed all over the sets, and every meal served by craft services would need to be read to make sure it wasn't contaminated.   After premiering at the Moscow Film Festival in July 1987 and the Norwegian Film Festival in August, Mio would open in Sweden on October 16th, 1987. The local critics would tear the film apart. They hated that the filmmakers had Anglicized the movie with British actors like Christopher Lee, Susannah York, Christian Bale and Nicholas Pickard, an eleven year old boy also making his film debut. They also hated how the filmmakers adapted the novel by the legendary Astrid Lindgren, whose Pippi Longstocking novels made her and her works world famous. Overall, they hated pretty much everything about it outside of Christopher Lee's performance and the production's design in the fantasy world.   Miramax most likely picked it up trying to emulate the success of The Neverending Story, which had opened to great success in most of the world in 1984. So it might seem kinda odd that when they would open the now titled The Land of Faraway in theatres, they wouldn't go wide but instead open it on one screen in Atlanta GA on June 10th, 1988. And, once again, Miramax did not report grosses, and Variety did not track Atlanta theatres that week. Two weeks later, they would open the film in Miami. How many theatres? Can't tell you. Miramax did not report grosses, and Variety was not tracking any of the theatres in Miami playing the film. But hey, Bull Durham did pretty good in Miami that week.   The film would next open in theatres in Los Angeles. This time, Miramax bought a quarter page ad in the Los Angeles Times on opening day to let people know the film existed. So we know it was playing on 18 screens that weekend. And, once again, Miramax did not report grosses for the film. But on the two screens it played on that Variety was tracking, the combined gross was just $2,500.   There'd be other playdates. Kansas City and Minneapolis in mid-September. Vancouver, BC in early October. Palm Beach FL in mid October. Calgary AB and Fort Lauderdale in late October. Phoenix in mid November. And never once did Miramax report any grosses for it.   One week after Mio, Miramax would release a comedy called Going Undercover.   Now, if you listened to our March 2021 episode on Some Kind of Wonderful, you may remember be mentioning Lea Thompson taking the role of Amanda Jones in that film, a role she had turned down twice before, the week after Howard the Duck opened, because she was afraid she'd never get cast in a movie again. And while Some Kind of Wonderful wasn't as big a film as you'd expect from a John Hughes production, Thompson did indeed continue to work, and is still working to this day.   So if you were looking at a newspaper ad in several cities in June 1988 and saw her latest movie and wonder why she went back to making weird little movies.   She hadn't.   This was a movie she had made just before Back to the Future, in August and September 1984.   Originally titled Yellow Pages, the film starred film legend Jean Simmons as Maxine, a rich woman who has hired Chris Lemmon's private investigator Henry Brilliant to protect her stepdaughter Marigold during her trip to Copenhagen.   The director, James Clarke, had written the script specifically for Lemmon, tailoring his role to mimic various roles played by his famous father, Jack Lemmon, over the decades, and for Simmons. But Thompson was just one of a number of young actresses they looked at before making their casting choice.   Half of the $6m budget would come from a first-time British film producer, while the other half from a group of Danish investors wanting to lure more Hollywood productions to their area.   The shoot would be plagued by a number of problems. The shoot in Los Angeles coincided with the final days of the 1984 Summer Olympics, which would cut out using some of the best and most regularly used locations in the city, and a long-lasting heat wave that would make outdoor shoots unbearable for cast and crew. When they arrived in Copenhagen at the end of August, Denmark was going through an unusually heavy storm front that hung around for weeks.   Clarke would spend several months editing the film, longer than usual for a smaller production like this, but he in part was waiting to see how Back to the Future would do at the box office. If the film was a hit, and his leading actress was a major part of that, it could make it easier to sell his film to a distributor.   Or that was line of thinking.   Of course, Back to the Future was a hit, and Thompson received much praise for her comedic work on the film.   But that didn't make it any easier to sell his film.   The producer would set the first screenings for the film at the February 1986 American Film Market in Santa Monica, which caters not only to foreign distributors looking to acquire American movies for their markets, but helps independent filmmakers get their movies seen by American distributors.   As these screenings were for buyers by invitation only, there would be no reviews from the screenings, but one could guess that no one would hear about the film again until Miramax bought the American distribution rights to it in March 1988 tells us that maybe those screenings didn't go so well.   The film would get retitled Going Undercover, and would open in single screen playdates in Atlanta, Cincinnati, Dallas, Indianapolis, Los Angeles, Nashville, Orlando, St. Louis and Tampa on June 17th. And as I've said too many times already, no reported grosses from Miramax, and only one theatre playing the film was being tracked by Variety, with Going Undercover earning $3,000 during its one week at the Century City 14 in Los Angeles.   In the June 22nd, 1988 issue of Variety, there was an article about Miramax securing a $25m line of credit in order to start producing their own films. Going Undercover is mentioned in the article about being one of Miramax's releases, without noting it had just been released that week or how well it did or did not do.   The Thin Blue Line would be Miramax's first non-music based documentary, and one that would truly change how documentaries were made.   Errol Morris had already made two bizarre but entertaining documentaries in the late 70s and early 80s. Gates of Heaven was shot in 1977, about a man who operated a failing pet cemetery in Northern California's Napa Valley. When Morris told his famous German filmmaking supporter Werner Herzog about the film, Herzog vowed to eat one of the shoes he was wearing that day if Morris could actually complete the film and have it shown in a public theatre. In April 1979, just before the documentary had its world premiere at UC Theatre in Berkeley, where Morris had studied philosophy, Herzog would spend the morning at Chez Pannise, the creators of the California Cuisine cooking style, boiling his shoes for five hours in garlic, herbs and stock. This event itself would be commemorated in a documentary short called, naturally, Werner Herzog Eats His Shoe, by Les Blank, which is a must watch on its own.   Because of the success of Gates of Heaven, Morris was able to quickly find financing for his next film, Nub City, which was originally supposed to be about the number of Vernon, Florida's citizens who have “accidentally” cut off their limbs, in order to collect the insurance money. But after several of those citizens threatened to kill Morris, and one of them tried to run down his cinematographer with their truck, Morris would rework the documentary, dropping the limb angle, no pun intended, and focus on the numerous eccentric people in the town. It would premiere at the 1981 New York Film Festival, and become a hit, for a documentary, when it was released in theatres in 1982.   But it would take Morris another six years after completing Vernon, Florida, to make another film. Part of it was having trouble lining up full funding to work on his next proposed movie, about James Grigson, a Texas forensic psychiatrist whose was nicknamed Doctor Death for being an expert witness for the prosecution in death penalty cases in Texas. Morris had gotten seed money for the documentary from PBS and the Endowment for Public Arts, but there was little else coming in while he worked on the film. In fact, Morris would get a PI license in New York and work cases for two years, using every penny he earned that wasn't going towards living expenses to keep the film afloat.   One of Morris's major problems for the film was that Grigson would not sit on camera for an interview, but would meet with Morris face to face to talk about the cases. During that meeting, the good doctor suggested to the filmmaker that he should research the killers he helped put away. And during that research, Morris would come across the case of one Randall Dale Adams, who was convicted of killing Dallas police officer Robert Wood in 1976, even though another man, David Harris, was the police's initial suspect. For two years, Morris would fly back and forth between New York City and Texas, talking to and filming interviews with Adams and more than two hundred other people connected to the shooting and the trial. Morris had become convinced Adams was indeed innocent, and dropped the idea about Dr. Grigson to solely focus on the Robert Wood murder.   After showing the producers of PBS's American Playhouse some of the footage he had put together of the new direction of the film, they kicked in more funds so that Morris could shoot some re-enactment sequences outside New York City, as well as commission composer Phillip Glass to create a score for the film once it was completed. Documentaries at that time did not regularly use re-enactments, but Morris felt it was important to show how different personal accounts of the same moment can be misinterpreted or misremembered or outright manipulated to suppress the truth.   After the film completed its post-production in March 1988, The Thin Blue Line would have its world premiere at the San Francisco Film Festival on March 18th, and word quickly spread Morris had something truly unique and special on his hands. The critic for Variety would note in the very first paragraph of his write up that the film employed “strikingly original formal devices to pull together diverse interviews, film clips, photo collages, and” and this is where it broke ground, “recreations of the crime from many points of view.”   Miramax would put together a full court press in order to get the rights to the film, which was announced during the opening days of the 1988 Cannes Film Festival in early May. An early hint on how the company was going to sell the film was by calling it a “non-fiction feature” instead of a documentary.   Miramax would send Morris out on a cross-country press tour in the weeks leading up to the film's August 26th opening date, but Morris, like many documentary filmmakers, was not used to being in the spotlight themselves, and was not as articulate about talking up his movies as the more seasoned directors and actors who've been on the promotion circuit for a while. After one interview, Harvey Weinstein would send Errol Morris a note.   “Heard your NPR interview and you were boring.”   Harvey would offer up several suggestions to help the filmmaker, including hyping the movie up as a real life mystery thriller rather than a documentary, and using shorter and clearer sentences when answering a question.   It was a clear gamble to release The Thin Blue Line in the final week of summer, and the film would need a lot of good will to stand out.   And it would get it.   The New York Times was so enthralled with the film, it would not only run a review from Janet Maslin, who would heap great praise on the film, but would also run a lengthy interview with Errol Morris right next to the review. The quarter page ad in the New York Times, several pages back, would tout positive quotes from Roger Ebert, J. Hoberman, who had left The Village Voice for the then-new Premiere Magazine, Peter Travers, writing for People Magazine instead of Rolling Stone, and critics from the San Francisco Chronicle and, interestingly enough, the Dallas Morning News. The top of the ad was tagged with an intriguing tease: solving this mystery is going to be murder, with a second tag line underneath the key art and title, which called the film “a new kind of movie mystery.” Of the 15 New York area-based film critics for local newspapers, television and national magazines, 14 of them gave favorable reviews, while 1, Stephen Schiff of Vanity Fair, was ambivalent about it. Not one critic gave it a bad review.   New York audiences were hooked.   Opening in the 240 seat main house at the Lincoln Plaza Cinemas, the movie grossed $30,945 its first three days. In its second weekend, the gross at the Lincoln Plaza would jump to $31k, and adding another $27,500 from its two theatre opening in Los Angeles and $15,800 from a single DC theatre that week. Third week in New York was a still good $21k, but the second week in Los Angeles fell to $10,500 and DC to $10k. And that's how it rolled out for several months, mostly single screen bookings in major cities not called Los Angeles or New York City, racking up some of the best reviews Miramax would receive to date, but never breaking out much outside the major cities. When it looked like Santa Cruz wasn't going to play the film, I drove to San Francisco to see it, just as my friends and I had for the opening day of Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ in mid-August. That's 75 miles each way, plus parking in San Francisco, just to see a movie. That's when you know you no longer just like movies but have developed a serious case of cinephilea. So when The Nickelodeon did open the film in late November, I did something I had never done with any documentary before.   I went and saw it again.   Second time around, I was still pissed off at the outrageous injustice heaped upon Randall Dale Adams for nothing more than being with and trusting the wrong person at the wrong time. But, thankfully, things would turn around for Adams in the coming weeks. On December 1st, it was reported that David Harris had recanted his testimony at Adams' trial, admitting he was alone when Officer Wood stopped his car. And on March 1st, 1989, after more than 15,000 people had signed the film's petition to revisit the decision, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned Adams's conviction “based largely” on facts presented in the film.   The film would also find itself in several more controversies.   Despite being named The Best Documentary of the Year by a number of critics groups, the Documentary Branch of the  Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences would not nominate the film, due in large part to the numerous reenactments presented throughout the film. Filmmaker Michael Apted, a member of the Directors Branch of the Academy, noted that the failure to acknowledge The Thin Blue Line was “one of the most outrageous things in the modern history of the Academy,” while Roger Ebert added the slight was “the worst non-nomination of the year.” Despite the lack of a nomination, Errol Morris would attend the Oscars ceremony in March 1989, as a protest for his film being snubbed.   Morris would also, several months after Adams' release, find himself being sued by Adams, but not because of how he was portrayed in the film. During the making of the film, Morris had Adams sign a contract giving Morris the exclusive right to tell Adams's story, and Adams wanted, essentially, the right to tell his own story now that he was a free man. Morris and Adams would settle out of court, and Adams would regain his life rights.   Once the movie was played out in theatres, it had grossed $1.2m, which on the surface sounds like not a whole lot of money. Adjusted for inflation, that would only be $3.08m. But even unadjusted for inflation, it's still one of the 100 highest grossing documentaries of the past forty years. And it is one of just a handful of documentaries to become a part of the National Film Registry, for being a culturally, historically or aesthetically significant film.”   Adams would live a quiet life after his release, working as an anti-death penalty advocate and marrying the sister of one of the death row inmates he was helping to exonerate. He would pass away from a brain tumor in October 2010 at a courthouse in Ohio not half an hour from where he was born and still lived, but he would so disappear from the spotlight after the movie was released that his passing wasn't even reported until June 2011.   Errol Morris would become one of the most celebrated documentarians of his generation, finally getting nominated for, and winning, an Oscar in 2003, for The Fog of War, about the life and times of Robert McNamara, Richard Nixon's Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam War era. The Fog of War would also be added to the National Film Registry in 2019. Morris would become only the third documentarian, after D.A. Pennebaker and Les Blank, to have two films on the Registry.   In 1973, the senseless killings of five members of the Alday family in Donalsonville GA made international headlines. Four years later, Canadian documentarian Tex Fuller made an award-winning documentary about the case, called Murder One. For years, Fuller shopped around a screenplay telling the same story, but it would take nearly a decade for it to finally be sold, in part because Fuller was insistent that he also be the director. A small Canadian production company would fund the $1m CAD production, which would star Henry Thomas of E.T. fame as the fifteen year old narrator of the story, Billy Isaacs.   The shoot began in early October 1987 outside Toronto, but after a week of shooting, Fuller was fired, and was replaced by Graeme Campbell, a young and energetic filmmaker for whom Murder One would be his fourth movie directing gig of the year. Details are sketchy as to why Fuller was fired, but Thomas and his mother Carolyn would voice concerns with the producers about the new direction the film was taking under its new director.   The film would premiere in Canada in May 1988. When the film did well up North, Miramax took notice and purchased the American distribution rights.   Murder One would first open in America on two screens in Los Angeles on September 9th, 1988. Michael Wilmington of the Los Angeles Times noted that while the film itself wasn't very good, that it still sprung from the disturbing insight about the crazy reasons people cross of what should be impassable moral lines.   “No movie studio could have invented it!,” screamed the tagline on the poster and newspaper key art. “No writer could have imagined it! Because what happened that night became the most controversial in American history.”   That would draw limited interest from filmgoers in Tinseltown. The two theatres would gross a combined $7k in its first three days. Not great but far better than several other recent Miramax releases in the area.   Two weeks later, on September 23rd, Miramax would book Murder One into 20 theatres in the New York City metro region, as well as in Akron, Atlanta, Charlotte, Indianpolis, Nashville, and Tampa-St. Petersburg. In New York, the film would actually get some good reviews from the Times and the Post as well as Peter Travers of People Magazine, but once again, Miramax would not report grosses for the film. Variety would note the combined gross for the film in New York City was only $25k.   In early October, the film would fall out of Variety's internal list of the 50 Top Grossing Films within the twenty markets they regularly tracked, with a final gross of just $87k. One market that Miramax deliberately did not book the film was anywhere near southwest Georgia, where the murders took place. The closest theatre that did play the film was more than 200 miles away.   Miramax would finish 1988 with two releases.   The first was Dakota, which would mark star Lou Diamond Phillips first time as a producer. He would star as a troubled teenager who takes a job on a Texas horse ranch to help pay of his debts, who becomes a sorta big brother to the ranch owner's young son, who has recently lost a leg to cancer, as he also falls for the rancher's daughter.   When the $1.1m budgeted film began production in Texas in June 1987, Phillips had already made La Bamba and Stand and Deliver, but neither had yet to be released into theatres. By the time filming ended five weeks later, La Bamba had just opened, and Phillips was on his way to becoming a star.   The main producers wanted director Fred Holmes to get the film through post-production as quickly as possible, to get it into theatres in the early part of 1988 to capitalize on the newfound success of their young star.    But that wouldn't happen.   Holmes wouldn't have the film ready until the end of February 1988, which was deemed acceptable because of the impending release of Stand and Deliver. In fact, the producers would schedule their first distributor screening of the film on March 14th, the Monday after Stand and Delivered opened, in the hopes that good box office for the film and good notices for Phillips would translate to higher distributor interest in their film, which sorta worked. None of the major studios would show for the screening, but a number of Indies would, including Miramax. Phillips would not attend the screening, as he was on location in New Mexico shooting Young Guns.   I can't find any reason why Miramax waited nearly nine months after they acquired Dakota to get it into theatres. It certainly wasn't Oscar bait, and screen availability would be scarce during the busy holiday movie season, which would see a number of popular, high profile releases like Dirty Rotten Scoundrels, Ernest Saves Christmas, The Naked Gun, Rain Man, Scrooged, Tequila Sunrise, Twins and Working Girl. Which might explain why, when Miramax released the film into 18 theatres in the New York City area on December 2nd, they could only get three screens in all of Manhattan, the best being the nice but hardly first-rate Embassy 4 at Broadway and 47th. Or of the 22 screens in Los Angeles opening the film the same day, the best would be the tiny Westwood 4 next to UCLA or the Paramount in Hollywood, whose best days were back in the Eisenhower administration.   And, yet again, Miramax did not report grosses, and none of the theatres playing the film was tracked by Variety that week. The film would be gone after just one week. The Paramount, which would open Dirty Rotten Scoundrels on the 14th, opted to instead play a double feature of Clara's Heart, with Whoopi Goldberg and Neil Patrick Harris, and the River Phoenix drama Running on Empty, even though neither film had been much of a hit.   Miramax's last film of the year would be the one that changed everything for them.   Pelle the Conquerer.   Adapted from a 1910 Danish book and directed by Billie August, whose previous film Twist and Shout had been released by Miramax in 1986, Pelle the Conquerer would be the first Danish or Swedish movie to star Max von Sydow in almost 15 years, having spent most of the 70s and 80s in Hollywood and London starring in a number of major movies including The Exorcist, Three Days of the Condor, Flash Gordon,Conan the Barbarian, Never Say Never Again, and David Lynch's Dune. But because von Sydow would be making his return to his native cinema, August was able to secure $4.5m to make the film, one of the highest budgeted Scandinavian films to be made to date.   In the late 1850s, an elderly emigrant Lasse and his son Pelle leave their home in Sweden after the death of the boy's mother, wanting to build a new life on the Danish island of Bornholm. Lasse finds it difficult to find work, given his age and his son's youth. The pair are forced to work at a large farm, where they are generally mistreated by the managers for being foreigners. The father falls into depression and alcoholism, the young boy befriends one of the bastard children of the farm owner as well as another Swedish farm worker, who dreams of conquering the world.   For the title character of Pelle, Billie August saw more than 3,000 Swedish boys before deciding to cast 11 year old Pelle Hvenegaard, who, like many boys in Sweden, had been named for the character he was now going to play on screen.   After six months of filming in the summer and fall of 1986, Billie August would finish editing Pelle the Conquerer in time for it to make its intended Christmas Day 1987 release date in Denmark and Sweden, where the film would be one of the biggest releases in either country for the entire decade. It would make its debut outside Scandinavia at the Cannes Film Festival in May 1988, where it had been invited to compete for the Palme D'Or. It would compete against a number of talented filmmakers who had come with some of the best films they would ever make, including Clint Eastwood with Bird, Claire Denis' Chocolat, István Szabó's Hanussen, Vincent Ward's The Navigator, and A Short Film About Killing, an expanded movie version of the fifth episode in Krzysztof Kieślowski's masterful miniseries Dekalog. Pelle would conquer them all, taking home the top prize from one of cinema's most revered film festivals.   Reviews for the film out of Cannes were almost universally excellent. Vincent Canby, the lead film critic for the New York Times for nearly twenty years by this point, wouldn't file his review until the end of the festival, in which he pointed out that a number of people at the festival were scandalized von Sydow had not also won the award for Best Actor.   Having previously worked with the company on his previous film's American release, August felt that Miramax would have what it took to make the film a success in the States.   Their first moves would be to schedule the film for a late December release, while securing a slot at that September's New York Film Festival. And once again, the critical consensus was highly positive, with only a small sampling of distractors.   The film would open first on two screens at the Lincoln Plaza Cinemas in midtown Manhattan on Wednesday, December 21st, following by exclusive engagements in nine other cities including Los Angeles, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Seattle and Washington DC, on the 23rd. But the opening week numbers weren't very good, just $46k from ten screens. And you can't really blame the film's two hour and forty-five minute running time. Little Dorrit, the two-part, four hour adaptation of the Charles Dickens novel, had been out nine weeks at this point and was still making nearly 50% more per screen.   But after the new year, when more and more awards were hurled the film's way, including the National Board of Review naming it one of the best foreign films of the year and the Golden Globes awarding it their Best Foreign Language trophy, ticket sales would pick up.   Well, for a foreign film.   The week after the Motion Picture Academy awarded Pelle their award for Best Foreign Language Film, business for the film would pick up 35%, and a third of its $2m American gross would come after that win.   One of the things that surprised me while doing the research for this episode was learning that Max von Sydow had never been nominated for an Oscar until he was nominated for Best Actor for Pelle the Conquerer. You look at his credits over the years, and it's just mind blowing. The Seventh Seal. Wild Strawberries. The Virgin Spring. The Greatest Story Ever Told. The Emigrants. The Exorcist. The Three Days of the Condor. Surely there was one performance amongst those that deserved recognition.   I hate to keep going back to A24, but there's something about a company's first Oscar win that sends that company into the next level. A24 didn't really become A24 until 2016, when three of their movies won Oscars, including Brie Larson for Best Actress in Room. And Miramax didn't really become the Miramax we knew and once loved until its win for Pelle.   Thank you for joining us. We'll talk again soon, when Episode 117, the fifth and final part of our miniseries on Miramax Films, is released.     Remember to visit this episode's page on our website, The80sMoviePodcast.com, for extra materials about the movies we covered this episode.   The 80s Movies Podcast has been researched, written, narrated and edited by Edward Havens for Idiosyncratic Entertainment.   Thank you again.   Good night.

Television star Katey Sagal (Married with Children, Futurama, Sons of Anarchy) & writer Paul Gordon (2001 Tony Nominated Composer for Jane Eyre) pull back the curtain to talk about the new Off-Broadway Musical, The Gospel According to Heather.In this interview, they reveal:What they relate to most about the showTheir creative processesStage/Theatrical mishapsBest Advice they receivedOne rule they each live byIn The Gospel According to Heather, Heather Krebs just wants a boyfriend. But how can she even navigate her way through high school if she might be the New Messiah? A small town in Ohio grapples with politics, religion and teenage romance in this eclectic pop musical.The Gospel According to Heather plays at Theater 555 in NYC through the newly extended date of July 16, 2023.*This interview took place live at The Gospel According to Heather press event, where members of the media were given a sneak peak of this new Off-Broadway Musical. More on Katey Sagal:TV: The Connors, Rebel, Sons of Anarchy (Golden Globe Award), Superior Donuts, 8 Simple Rules, Futurama and Married with Children.FILM: Bleed For This, Pitch Perfect 2 and The Good Mother.Music: CDs Well..., Room, Covered and performs with her band The Reluctant Apostles.Books: Her first book, Grace Notes: My Recollections, was published in 2017 by Simon and Schuster.More on Paul Gordon:2001 Tony Award nominated composer for his musical Jane Eyre. Other works include Sense and Sensibility (winner of the 2015 Jeff Award for Best New Work), Daddy Long Legs (2009 Ovation Award, 2 Drama Desk Award nominations, Off-Broadway Alliance Award nomination and 3 Outer Critic Circle award nominations). He is the co-founder of StreamingMusicals.com, where his musicals Pride and Prejudice, Emma, Estella Scrooge, Being Earnest and No One Called Ahead can currently be streamed. Knight's Tale, written with John Caird, has had multiple productions in Japan. His other shows include: Stellar Atmospheres, Little Dorrit, Schwab's, Analog and Vinyl, The Front, Juliet and Romeo, Sleepy Hollow, First Night, The Circle, Ribbit, Greetings From Venice Beach and The Sportswriter. In his former life, Paul was a pop songwriter, writing several number one hits.Special Thanks:Richard Hillman PRTheme Song by Bobby CroninPodcast Logo by Liam O'DonnellEdited by Adam RothenbergMore Call Me Adam:Website: www.callmeadam.comFacebook: @CallMeAdamNYCInstagram: @CallMeAdamNYC

Poet, novelist, translator, journalist, crime fiction writer, children's book author, teacher, math tutor: now here is a man who contains multitudes. Jerry Pinto joins Amit Varma in episode 314 of The Seen and the Unseen to talk about his life and learnings. (FOR FULL LINKED SHOW NOTES, GO TO SEENUNSEEN.IN.) Also check out: 1. Jerry Pinto on Instagram, Amazon and his own website. 2. Em and the Big Hoom -- Jerry Pinto. 3. The Education of Yuri -- Jerry Pinto. 4. Murder in Mahim -- Jerry Pinto. 5. A Book of Light -- Edited by Jerry Pinto. 6. Baluta -- Daya Pawar (translated by Jerry Pinto). 7. I Have Not Seen Mandu -- Swadesh Deepak (translated by Jerry Pinto). 8. Cobalt Blue -- Sachin Kundalkar (translated by Jerry Pinto). 9. The Life and Times of Shanta Gokhale -- Episode 311 of The Seen and the Unseen. 10. ‘Sometimes I feel I have to be completely invisible as a poet' -- Jerry Pinto's interview of Adil Jussawalla. 11. A Godless Congregation — Amit Varma. 12. The Rooted Cosmopolitanism of Sugata Srinivasaraju — Episode 277 of The Seen and the Unseen. 13. The Big Questions — Steven E Landsburg. 14. Unlikely is Inevitable — Amit Varma. 15. The Law of Truly Large Numbers. 16. The Gentle Wisdom of Pratap Bhanu Mehta — Episode 300 of The Seen and the Unseen. 17. Young India — Episode 83 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Snigdha Poonam). 18. Dreamers — Snigdha Poonam. 19. The Loneliness of the Indian Man — Episode 303 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Nikhil Taneja). 20. The History Boys -- Alan Bennett. 21. The Connell Guide to How to Write Well -- Tim de Lisle. 22. Thinking Better: The Art of the Shortcut -- Marcus Du Sautoy. 23. Dead Poet's Society -- Peter Weir. 24. A Mathematician's Apology -- GH Hardy. 25. The Man Who Knew Infinity -- Robert Kanigel. 26. David Berlinski and Martin Gardner on Amazon, and Mukul Sharma on Wikipedia.. 27. Range Rover -- The archives of Amit Varma's column on poker for The Economic Times. 28. Luck is All Around -- Amit Varma. 29. Stoicism on Wikipedia, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and Britannica. 30. House of the Dead —  Fyodor Dostoevsky. 31. Black Beauty -- Anna Sewell. 32. Lady Chatterley's Lover -- DH Lawrence. 33. Mr Norris Changes Trains -- Chistopher Isherwood. 34. Sigrid Undset on Amazon and Wikipedia. 35. Some Prefer Nettles -- Junichiro Tanizaki. 36. Things Fall Apart — Chinua Achebe. 37. Jane Austen and Thomas Hardy on Amazon. 38. Orientalism -- Edward Said. 39. Edgar Allan Poe, Nathaniel Hawthorne and Kurt Vonnegut on Amazon. 40. Johnny Got His Gun -- Dalton Trumbo. 41. Selected Poems -- Kamala Das. 42. Collected Poems -- Kamala Das. 43. In Which Annie Gives It Those Ones — Pradip Krishen. 44. Dance Dance For the Halva Waala — Episode 294 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Jai Arjun Singh and Subrat Mohanty). 45. Tosca -- Giacomo Puccini. 46. Civilisation by Kenneth Clark on YouTube and Wikipedia. 47. Archives of The World This Week. 48. Dardi Rab Rab Kardi -- Daler Mehndi. 49. Is Old Music Killing New Music? — Ted Gioia. 50. Mother India (Mehboob Khan) and Mughal-E-Azam (K Asif). 51. A Meditation on Form — Amit Varma. 52. Sara Rai Inhales Literature — Episode 255 of The Seen and the Unseen. 53. Collected Poems — Mark Strand. 54. Forgive Me, Mother -- Eunice de Souza. 55. Porphyria's Lover -- Robert Browning. 56. Island -- Nissim Ezekiel. 57. Paper Menagerie — Ken Liu. 58. Jhumpa Lahiri on Writing, Translation, and Crossing Between Cultures — Episode 17 of Conversations With Tyler. 59. The Notebook Trilogy — Agota Kristof. 60. Amitava Kumar Finds the Breath of Life — Episode 265 of The Seen and the Unseen. 61. The Blue Book: A Writer's Journal — Amitava Kumar. 62. Nissim Ezekiel on Amazon, Wikipedia and All Poetry. 63. Adil Jussawalla on Amazon, Wikipedia and Poetry International. 64. Eunice de Souza on Amazon, Wikipedia and Poetry International. 65. Dom Moraes on Amazon, Wikipedia and Poem Hunter. 66. WH Auden and Stephen Spender on Amazon. 67. Pilloo Pochkhanawala on Wikipedia and JNAF. 68. Arvind Krishna Mehrotra on Amazon, Wikipedia and Poetry Foundation. 69. Amar Akbar Anthony -- Manmohan Desai. 67. Ranjit Hoskote on Amazon, Instagram, Twitter, Wikipedia and Poetry International. 71. Arundhathi Subramaniam on Amazon, Instagram, Wikipedia, Poetry International and her own website. 72. The Red Wheelbarrow -- William Carlos Williams. 73. Mary Oliver's analysis of The Red Wheelbarrow. 74. A Poetry Handbook — Mary Oliver. 75. The War Against Cliche -- Martin Amis. 76. Seamus Heaney on Amazon, Wikipedia and Poetry Foundation. 77. The world behind 'Em and the Big Hoom' -- Jerry Pinto interviewed by Swetha Amit. 78. Jerry Pinto interviewed for the New York Times by Max Bearak. 79. Salman Rushdie, Amitav Ghosh and GV Desani on Amazon. 80. Episodes of The Seen and the Unseen on the creator ecosystem with Roshan Abbas, Varun Duggirala, Neelesh Misra, Snehal Pradhan, Chuck Gopal, Nishant Jain, Deepak Shenoy and Abhijit Bhaduri. 81. Graham Greene, W Somerset Maugham and Aldous Huxley on Amazon. 82. Surviving Men -- Shobhaa De. 83. Surviving Men -- Jerry Pinto. 84. The Essays of GK Chesterton. 85. The Life and Times of Nilanjana Roy — Episode 284 of The Seen and the Unseen. 86. City Improbable: Writings on Delhi -- Edited by Khushwant Singh. 87. Bombay, Meri Jaan -- Edited by Jerry Pinto and Naresh Fernandes. 88. The Life and Times of Urvashi Butalia — Episode 287 of The Seen and the Unseen. 89. Films, Feminism, Paromita — Episode 155 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Paromita Vohra). 90. Wanting -- Luke Burgis. 91. Kalpish Ratna and Sjowall & Wahloo on Amazon. 92. Memories and Things — Episode 195 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Aanchal Malhotra). 93. Ashad ka Ek Din -- Mohan Rakesh. 94. Anna Karenina -- Leo Tolstoy (translated by Constance Garnett). 95. Gordon Lish: ‘Had I not revised Carver, would he be paid the attention given him? Baloney!' -- Christian Lorentzen.. 96. Sooraj Barjatya and Yash Chopra. 97. The Life and Times of Mrinal Pande — Episode 263 of The Seen and the Unseen. 98. Don't think too much of yourself. You're an accident — Amit Varma. 99. Phineas Gage. 100. Georges Simenon on Amazon and Wikipedia.. 101. The Interpreter -- Amit Varma on Michael Gazzaniga's iconic neuroscience experiment. 102. The Life and Times of Abhinandan Sekhri — Episode 254 of The Seen and the Unseen.. 103. Madame Bovary -- Gustave Flaubert. 104. Self-Portrait — AK Ramanujan. 105. Ivan Turgenev, Ryu Murakami and Patricia Highsmith on Amazon. 106. A Clockwork Orange -- Anthony Burgess. 107. On Exactitude in Science — Jorge Luis Borges. 110. Playwright at the Centre: Marathi Drama from 1843 to the Present — Shanta Gokhale. 111. Kubla Khan -- Samuel Taylor Coleridge. 112. Girish Shahane, Naresh Fernandes, Suketu Mehta, David Godwin and Kiran Desai. 113. The Count of Monte Cristo -- Alexandre Dumas. 114. Pedro Almodóvar and Yasujirō Ozu. 115. The Art of Translation — Episode 168 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Arunava Sinha). 116. The Lives of the Poets -- Samuel Johnson. 117. Lives of the Women -- Various authors, edited by Jerry Pinto. 118. Lessons from an Ankhon Dekhi Prime Minister — Amit Varma. 119. On Bullshit — Harry Frankfurt. 120. The Facts Do Not Matter — Amit Varma. 121. Beware of the Useful Idiots — Amit Varma. 122. Modi's Lost Opportunity — Episode 119 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Salman Soz). 123. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala. 124. The Importance of Data Journalism — Episode 196 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Rukmini S). 125. Rukmini Sees India's Multitudes — Episode 261 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Rukmini S). 126. Pramit Bhattacharya Believes in Just One Ism — Episode 256 of The Seen and the Unseen. 127. Listen, The Internet Has SPACE -- Amit Varma.. 128. Fixing Indian Education — Episode 185 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Karthik Muralidharan). 129. The Reflections of Samarth Bansal — Episode 299 of The Seen and the Unseen. 130. The Saturdays -- Elizabeth Enwright. 131. Summer of My German Soldier -- Bette Greene. 132. I am David -- Anne Holm. 133. Tove Jannson and Beatrix Potter on Amazon. 134. The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings -- JRR Tolkien. 135. Darkness Visible: A Memoir of Madness -- William Styron. 136. An Unquiet Mind: A Memoir of Moods and Madness -- Kay Redfield Jamison. 137. Searching for Swadesh -- Nirupama Dutt.. 138. Parsai Rachanawali -- Harishankar Parsai. 139. Not Dark Yet (official) (newly released outtake) -- Bob Dylan.. 140. How This Nobel Has Redefined Literature -- Amit Varma on Dylan winning the Nobel Prize.. 141. The New World Upon Us — Amit Varma. 142. PG Wodehouse on Amazon and Wikipedia. 143. I Heard the Owl Call My Name -- Margaret Craven. 144. 84, Charing Cross Road -- Helen Hanff. 145. Great Expectations, Little Dorrit and Bleak House -- Charles Dickens. 146. Middlemarch -- George Eliot. 147. The Pillow Book -- Sei Shonagon. 148. The Diary of Lady Murasaki -- Murasaki Shikibu. 149. My Experiments With Truth -- Mohandas Gandhi. 150. Ariel -- Sylvia Plath. 151. Jejuri -- Arun Kolatkar. 152. Missing Person -- Adil Jussawalla. 153. All About H Hatterr -- GV Desani. 154. The Ground Beneath Her Feet -- Salman Rushdie. 155. A Fine Balance -- Rohinton Mistry. 156. Tales from Firozsha Baag -- Rohinton Mistry. 157. Amores Perros -- Alejandro G Iñárritu. 158. Samira Makhmalbaf on Wikipedia and IMDb. 159. Ingmar Bergman on Wikipedia and IMDb. 160. The Silence, Autumn Sonata and Wild Strawberries - Ingmar Bergman. 161. The Mahabharata. 162. Yuganta — Irawati Karve. 163. Kalyug -- Shyam Benegal. 164. The Hungry Tide -- Amitav Ghosh. 165. On Hinduism and The Hindus -- Wendy Doniger. 166. I, Lalla: The Poems of Lal Dĕd — Lal Dĕd (translated by Ranjit Hoskote). 167. The Essential Kabir -- Arvind Krishna Mehrotra. 168. The Absent Traveller -- Arvind Krishna Mehrotra. 169. These My Words: The Penguin Book of Indian Poetry -- Edited by Eunice de Souza and Melanie Silgardo. This episode is sponsored by CTQ Compounds. Check out The Daily Reader and FutureStack. Use the code UNSEEN for Rs 2500 off. Check out Amit's online course, The Art of Clear Writing. And subscribe to The India Uncut Newsletter. It's free! Episode art: ‘He is Reading' by Simahina.

"the children dancing to the music of the band"

This week, we're joined by actor Claire Foy! We discuss her compelling performance in Sarah Polley's Women Talking (5:10), the painful journey of her character, Salome (7:50), and a pivotal scene from the film (11:50). [To skip ahead, the conversation around Women Talking ends at 15:10.] Then, Foy describes growing up in England (16:08), her path to drama school in Liverpool (21:49), and her on-screen debut in the BBC adaptation of Little Dorrit (26:24). On the back-half, she describes working with Nicolas Cage (31:00), balancing motherhood and her starring role in The Crown (33:57), the evolution she's witnessed in the film industry (39:12), and her lifelong appreciation of ordinary lives (44:47).See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Little Dorrit by Charles Dickens audiobook. Born in the Marshalsea Prison for Debtors, Amy—Little Dorrit—the daughter of the ruined, but self-respectful William Dorrit, has put her entire heart in caring for her dear father, until one day her humble path is crossed by Arthur Clennam. Their meeting proves providential not only for Amy's life, but for the whole Dorrit family, whose new rise will, in many ways, be also their fall. As in all his novels, in Little Dorrit Dickens ushers us into a fascinating and startlingly rich world of human characters and destinies, where virtue and nobility cross swords with vice and villainy, where strength and weakness intertwine with prejudice and magnanimity and where the author's inspired pen wields a compelling and unforgettable power over the readers.

Originally published as a serial from 1855 to 1857, Little Dorrit tells the story of Amy Dorrit who was born and raised in a debtors prison. Amy's life is changed when she meets Arthur Clennam, returning home from a 20-year period abroad. The GSMC Audiobook Series presents some of the greatest classic novels, Audiobooks, and theatrical presentations from a bygone era. The GSMC Audiobook Series collection is the embodiment of the best of the golden age of Audio Book. Let Golden State Media Concepts take you on a ride through classic Audiobooks read by some of the top Audiobook performers of all time. This compiled collection of classic Audiobooks from a wide variety of classic Novels. ***PLEASE NOTE*** GSMC Podcast Network presents these shows and Audiobook as historical content and have brought them to you unedited. Remember that times have changed, and some Audiobooks might not reflect the standards of today's politically correct society. The shows do not necessarily reflect the views, standards, or beliefs of Golden State Media Concepts or the GSMC Podcast Network. Our goal is to entertain, educate and give you a glimpse into the past.

Originally published as a serial from 1855 to 1857, Little Dorrit tells the story of Amy Dorrit who was born and raised in a debtors prison. Amy's life is changed when she meets Arthur Clennam, returning home from a 20-year period abroad. The GSMC Audiobook Series presents some of the greatest classic novels, Audiobooks, and theatrical presentations from a bygone era. The GSMC Audiobook Series collection is the embodiment of the best of the golden age of Audio Book. Let Golden State Media Concepts take you on a ride through classic Audiobooks read by some of the top Audiobook performers of all time. This compiled collection of classic Audiobooks from a wide variety of classic Novels. ***PLEASE NOTE*** GSMC Podcast Network presents these shows and Audiobook as historical content and have brought them to you unedited. Remember that times have changed, and some Audiobooks might not reflect the standards of today's politically correct society. The shows do not necessarily reflect the views, standards, or beliefs of Golden State Media Concepts or the GSMC Podcast Network. Our goal is to entertain, educate and give you a glimpse into the past.

Originally published as a serial from 1855 to 1857, Little Dorrit tells the story of Amy Dorrit who was born and raised in a debtors prison. Amy's life is changed when she meets Arthur Clennam, returning home from a 20-year period abroad. The GSMC Audiobook Series presents some of the greatest classic novels, Audiobooks, and theatrical presentations from a bygone era. The GSMC Audiobook Series collection is the embodiment of the best of the golden age of Audio Book. Let Golden State Media Concepts take you on a ride through classic Audiobooks read by some of the top Audiobook performers of all time. This compiled collection of classic Audiobooks from a wide variety of classic Novels. ***PLEASE NOTE*** GSMC Podcast Network presents these shows and Audiobook as historical content and have brought them to you unedited. Remember that times have changed, and some Audiobooks might not reflect the standards of today's politically correct society. The shows do not necessarily reflect the views, standards, or beliefs of Golden State Media Concepts or the GSMC Podcast Network. Our goal is to entertain, educate and give you a glimpse into the past.

Originally published as a serial from 1855 to 1857, Little Dorrit tells the story of Amy Dorrit who was born and raised in a debtors prison. Amy's life is changed when she meets Arthur Clennam, returning home from a 20-year period abroad. The GSMC Audiobook Series presents some of the greatest classic novels, Audiobooks, and theatrical presentations from a bygone era. The GSMC Audiobook Series collection is the embodiment of the best of the golden age of Audio Book. Let Golden State Media Concepts take you on a ride through classic Audiobooks read by some of the top Audiobook performers of all time. This compiled collection of classic Audiobooks from a wide variety of classic Novels. ***PLEASE NOTE*** GSMC Podcast Network presents these shows and Audiobook as historical content and have brought them to you unedited. Remember that times have changed, and some Audiobooks might not reflect the standards of today's politically correct society. The shows do not necessarily reflect the views, standards, or beliefs of Golden State Media Concepts or the GSMC Podcast Network. Our goal is to entertain, educate and give you a glimpse into the past.

Originally published as a serial from 1855 to 1857, Little Dorrit tells the story of Amy Dorrit who was born and raised in a debtors prison. Amy's life is changed when she meets Arthur Clennam, returning home from a 20-year period abroad. The GSMC Audiobook Series presents some of the greatest classic novels, Audiobooks, and theatrical presentations from a bygone era. The GSMC Audiobook Series collection is the embodiment of the best of the golden age of Audio Book. Let Golden State Media Concepts take you on a ride through classic Audiobooks read by some of the top Audiobook performers of all time. This compiled collection of classic Audiobooks from a wide variety of classic Novels. ***PLEASE NOTE*** GSMC Podcast Network presents these shows and Audiobook as historical content and have brought them to you unedited. Remember that times have changed, and some Audiobooks might not reflect the standards of today's politically correct society. The shows do not necessarily reflect the views, standards, or beliefs of Golden State Media Concepts or the GSMC Podcast Network. Our goal is to entertain, educate and give you a glimpse into the past.

Originally published as a serial from 1855 to 1857, Little Dorrit tells the story of Amy Dorrit who was born and raised in a debtors prison. Amy's life is changed when she meets Arthur Clennam, returning home from a 20-year period abroad. The GSMC Audiobook Series presents some of the greatest classic novels, Audiobooks, and theatrical presentations from a bygone era. The GSMC Audiobook Series collection is the embodiment of the best of the golden age of Audio Book. Let Golden State Media Concepts take you on a ride through classic Audiobooks read by some of the top Audiobook performers of all time. This compiled collection of classic Audiobooks from a wide variety of classic Novels. ***PLEASE NOTE*** GSMC Podcast Network presents these shows and Audiobook as historical content and have brought them to you unedited. Remember that times have changed, and some Audiobooks might not reflect the standards of today's politically correct society. The shows do not necessarily reflect the views, standards, or beliefs of Golden State Media Concepts or the GSMC Podcast Network. Our goal is to entertain, educate and give you a glimpse into the past.

Originally published as a serial from 1855 to 1857, Little Dorrit tells the story of Amy Dorrit who was born and raised in a debtors prison. Amy's life is changed when she meets Arthur Clennam, returning home from a 20-year period abroad. The GSMC Audiobook Series presents some of the greatest classic novels, Audiobooks, and theatrical presentations from a bygone era. The GSMC Audiobook Series collection is the embodiment of the best of the golden age of Audio Book. Let Golden State Media Concepts take you on a ride through classic Audiobooks read by some of the top Audiobook performers of all time. This compiled collection of classic Audiobooks from a wide variety of classic Novels. ***PLEASE NOTE*** GSMC Podcast Network presents these shows and Audiobook as historical content and have brought them to you unedited. Remember that times have changed, and some Audiobooks might not reflect the standards of today's politically correct society. The shows do not necessarily reflect the views, standards, or beliefs of Golden State Media Concepts or the GSMC Podcast Network. Our goal is to entertain, educate and give you a glimpse into the past.

After a first instalment packed with Snowdrops, Primulas and Cardamine, get ready for even more early-Spring inspiration from Organic Gardener Val Bourne, including Narcissi, Hamamelis, Hellebores and Hepaticas! In this episode we mention our https://www.getgardeningnow.co.uk/newsletter (new Newsletter). To sign up to it and read the first instlament which went out a few weeks ago, head here: https://www.getgardeningnow.co.uk/newsletter (https://www.getgardeningnow.co.uk/newsletter) PLANT LIST Narcissus 'Rijnveld's Early Sensation' Narcissus 'Candlepower' Narcissus 'Navarre' Narcissus 'Jumblie' Narcissus cyclamineus Chimonanthus praecox Hamamelis × intermedia 'Aurora' Hamamelis × intermedia 'Pallida' Prunus 'Kursar' Ribes laurifolium Galanthus 'South Hayes' Helleborus 'Penny's Pink' Helleborus 'Anna's Red' Polypodium cambricum Polypodium cambricum 'Richard Kayse' Hepatica 'Kilmeston Pink' Hepatica transsilvanica 'Elison Spence' Hepatica nobilis Hepatica x media 'Harvington Beauty' Hepatica transsilvanica Leucojum vernum var. vernum 'Green Lantern' Leucojum vernum var. vagneri 'Janus' Miersia chilensis Galanthus 'Bumblebee' Galanthus plicatus 'Diggory' Galanthus plicatus 'Golden Fleece' Galanthus 'Treasure Island' Galanthus gracilis Galanthus 'Little Dorrit' Galanthus 'Chantry Poppet' Galanthus 'Bambino' Galanthus 'Cherub' Galanthus nivalis 'Lady Putman' Cyclamen coum 'Tilebarn Elizabeth' Crocus heuffelianus Crocus rujanensis 'Belphoebe' Galanthus elwesii 'Broadwell'

It's a surprise drop, and it's jam-packed, y'all! Join Nana and Misan this week as we take on the greeting card-industrial complex, review a couple of recent romcoms*, and, for some reason, give our Super Bowl predictions (spoiler alert: we were wrong). Also, Hyun Bin and Son Ye-jin are getting married!!!! *Stream Marry Me on Peacock and I Want You Back on Amazon Prime --- Nana's HEA: https://www.amazon.com/Little-Dorrit/dp/B07C88V4J8 Misan's HEAs: https://www.jennyholiday.com/book/duke-actually/ https://www.viki.com/1tv/36677c-1-of-something --- Check out our website: https://www.heallyeah.com/ Find us on IG: @h.e.a.llyeah Email us at: heallyeah.podcast@gmail.com

Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 5 Title: Little Dorrit Overview: Little Dorrit is a novel by Charles Dickens, originally published in serial form between 1855 and 1857. The story features Amy Dorrit, the youngest child of her family, born and raised in the Marshalsea prison for debtors in London. Arthur Clennam encounters her after returning home from a 20-year absence, ready to begin his life anew. The novel satirizes some shortcomings of both government and society, including the institution of debtors' prisons, where debtors were imprisoned, unable to work, and yet incarcerated until they had repaid their debts. The prison, in this case, is the Marshalsea, where Dickens' own father had been imprisoned. Dickens is also critical of the impotent bureaucracy of the British government, in this novel in the form of the fictional "Circumlocution Office". Dickens also satirizes the stratification of society that results from the British class system. Published: 1857 Author: Charles Dickens Genre: Novel, Serial Novel, Social Criticism Novel, Novella, Bildungsroman, Fiction Novel Episode: Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 5 Part: 5 of 6 Length Part: 5:56:53 Book: 13 Length Book: 36:31:40 Episodes: 49 of 60 of 71 Narrator: Mil Nicholson Language: English Edition: Unabridged Audiobook Keywords: determination, persistence, kindness, human spirit, morality play, perception, discovery, hope, betrayal, deceit, social classes, reconciliation, growth, change, social ascent, class structure, exploitation, satire, debt, debtor prison, banks, financial collapse, bleakness Credits: All LibriVox Recordings are in the Public Domain. Wikipedia (c) Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. WOMBO Dream. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/support

Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 4 Title: Little Dorrit Overview: Little Dorrit is a novel by Charles Dickens, originally published in serial form between 1855 and 1857. The story features Amy Dorrit, the youngest child of her family, born and raised in the Marshalsea prison for debtors in London. Arthur Clennam encounters her after returning home from a 20-year absence, ready to begin his life anew. The novel satirizes some shortcomings of both government and society, including the institution of debtors' prisons, where debtors were imprisoned, unable to work, and yet incarcerated until they had repaid their debts. The prison, in this case, is the Marshalsea, where Dickens' own father had been imprisoned. Dickens is also critical of the impotent bureaucracy of the British government, in this novel in the form of the fictional "Circumlocution Office". Dickens also satirizes the stratification of society that results from the British class system. Published: 1857 Author: Charles Dickens Genre: Novel, Serial Novel, Social Criticism Novel, Novella, Bildungsroman, Fiction Novel Episode: Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 4 Part: 4 of 6 Length Part: 5:46:40 Book: 13 Length Book: 36:31:40 Episodes: 37 - 48 of 71 Narrator: Mil Nicholson Language: English Edition: Unabridged Audiobook Keywords: determination, persistence, kindness, human spirit, morality play, perception, discovery, hope, betrayal, deceit, social classes, reconciliation, growth, change, social ascent, class structure, exploitation, satire, debt, debtor prison, banks, financial collapse, bleakness Credits: All LibriVox Recordings are in the Public Domain. Wikipedia (c) Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. WOMBO Dream. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/support

Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 2 Title: Little Dorrit Overview: Little Dorrit is a novel by Charles Dickens, originally published in serial form between 1855 and 1857. The story features Amy Dorrit, the youngest child of her family, born and raised in the Marshalsea prison for debtors in London. Arthur Clennam encounters her after returning home from a 20-year absence, ready to begin his life anew. The novel satirizes some shortcomings of both government and society, including the institution of debtors' prisons, where debtors were imprisoned, unable to work, and yet incarcerated until they had repaid their debts. The prison, in this case, is the Marshalsea, where Dickens' own father had been imprisoned. Dickens is also critical of the impotent bureaucracy of the British government, in this novel in the form of the fictional "Circumlocution Office". Dickens also satirizes the stratification of society that results from the British class system. Published: 1857 Author: Charles Dickens Genre: Novel, Serial Novel, Social Criticism Novel, Novella, Bildungsroman, Fiction Novel Episode: Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 2 Part: 2 of 6 Length Part: 6:31:31 Book: 13 Length Book: 36:31:40 Episodes: 13 - 24 of 71 Narrator: Mil Nicholson Language: English Edition: Unabridged Audiobook Keywords: determination, persistence, kindness, human spirit, morality play, perception, discovery, hope, betrayal, deceit, social classes, reconciliation, growth, change, social ascent, class structure, exploitation, satire, debt, debtor prison, banks, financial collapse, bleakness Credits: All LibriVox Recordings are in the Public Domain. Wikipedia (c) Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. WOMBO Dream. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/support

Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 1 Title: Little Dorrit Overview: Little Dorrit is a novel by Charles Dickens, originally published in serial form between 1855 and 1857. The story features Amy Dorrit, the youngest child of her family, born and raised in the Marshalsea prison for debtors in London. Arthur Clennam encounters her after returning home from a 20-year absence, ready to begin his life anew. The novel satirizes some shortcomings of both government and society, including the institution of debtors' prisons, where debtors were imprisoned, unable to work, and yet incarcerated until they had repaid their debts. The prison, in this case, is the Marshalsea, where Dickens' own father had been imprisoned. Dickens is also critical of the impotent bureaucracy of the British government, in this novel in the form of the fictional "Circumlocution Office". Dickens also satirizes the stratification of society that results from the British class system. Published: 1857 Author: Charles Dickens Genre: Novel, Serial Novel, Social Criticism Novel, Novella, Bildungsroman, Fiction Novel Episode: Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 1 Part: 1 of 6 Length Part: 6:04:00 Book: 13 Length Book: 36:31:40 Episodes: 1 - 12 of 71 Narrator: Mil Nicholson Language: English Edition: Unabridged Audiobook Keywords: determination, persistence, kindness, human spirit, morality play, perception, discovery, hope, betrayal, deceit, social classes, reconciliation, growth, change, social ascent, class structure, exploitation, satire, debt, debtor prison, banks, financial collapse, bleakness Credits: All LibriVox Recordings are in the Public Domain. Wikipedia (c) Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. WOMBO Dream. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/support

Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 6 Title: Little Dorrit Overview: Little Dorrit is a novel by Charles Dickens, originally published in serial form between 1855 and 1857. The story features Amy Dorrit, the youngest child of her family, born and raised in the Marshalsea prison for debtors in London. Arthur Clennam encounters her after returning home from a 20-year absence, ready to begin his life anew. The novel satirizes some shortcomings of both government and society, including the institution of debtors' prisons, where debtors were imprisoned, unable to work, and yet incarcerated until they had repaid their debts. The prison, in this case, is the Marshalsea, where Dickens' own father had been imprisoned. Dickens is also critical of the impotent bureaucracy of the British government, in this novel in the form of the fictional "Circumlocution Office". Dickens also satirizes the stratification of society that results from the British class system. Published: 1857 Author: Charles Dickens Genre: Novel, Serial Novel, Social Criticism Novel, Novella, Bildungsroman, Fiction Novel Episode: Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 6 Part: 6 of 6 Length Part: 5:54:26 Book: 13 Length Book: 36:31:40 Episodes: 61 - 71 of 71 Narrator: Mil Nicholson Language: English Edition: Unabridged Audiobook Keywords: determination, persistence, kindness, human spirit, morality play, perception, discovery, hope, betrayal, deceit, social classes, reconciliation, growth, change, social ascent, class structure, exploitation, satire, debt, debtor prison, banks, financial collapse, bleakness Credits: All LibriVox Recordings are in the Public Domain. Wikipedia (c) Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. WOMBO Dream. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/support

Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 3 Title: Little Dorrit Overview: Little Dorrit is a novel by Charles Dickens, originally published in serial form between 1855 and 1857. The story features Amy Dorrit, the youngest child of her family, born and raised in the Marshalsea prison for debtors in London. Arthur Clennam encounters her after returning home from a 20-year absence, ready to begin his life anew. The novel satirizes some shortcomings of both government and society, including the institution of debtors' prisons, where debtors were imprisoned, unable to work, and yet incarcerated until they had repaid their debts. The prison, in this case, is the Marshalsea, where Dickens' own father had been imprisoned. Dickens is also critical of the impotent bureaucracy of the British government, in this novel in the form of the fictional "Circumlocution Office". Dickens also satirizes the stratification of society that results from the British class system. Published: 1857 Author: Charles Dickens Genre: Novel, Serial Novel, Social Criticism Novel, Novella, Bildungsroman, Fiction Novel Episode: Little Dorrit - Charles Dickens - Book 13, Part 3 Part: 3 of 6 Length Part: 6:18:08 Book: 13 Length Book: 36:31:40 Episodes: 25 - 36 of 71 Narrator: Mil Nicholson Language: English Edition: Unabridged Audiobook Keywords: determination, persistence, kindness, human spirit, morality play, perception, discovery, hope, betrayal, deceit, social classes, reconciliation, growth, change, social ascent, class structure, exploitation, satire, debt, debtor prison, banks, financial collapse, bleakness Credits: All LibriVox Recordings are in the Public Domain. Wikipedia (c) Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. WOMBO Dream. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/free-audiobooks/support

On Tuesday 23rd June 2020, WFT Vice-Chair Vanessa Gildea was in conversation with award-winning director Dearbhla Walsh about her directing career to date. The pair of filmmakers spoke about filming techniques, working in the industry and personal experiences - as well as taking questions from our WFT members and supporters. About Dearbhla Walsh: Dearbhla Walsh is from Tubbercurry, Co. Sligo. She is an award-winning director who has worked on drama series including most recently Tales from the Loop, The Handmaid's Tale, EastEnders, Shameless, Penny Dreadful, The Tudors and much to her nephew's delight the Netflix Marvel series The Punisher. She won the 2009 Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Directing for a Miniseries, Movie or Dramatic Special for Little Dorrit. She directed Roald Dahl's Esio Trot, starring Dustin Hoffman and Judi Dench, a television film adaptation of Roald Dahl's novel of the same name. She has also directed several art/dance films, funded by the Arts Council, in collaboration with Fearghus Ó Conchúir including Match and I'm Roger Casement. Walsh has been nominated for the Irish Film and Television Awards eight times and won twice for directing in 2011 and 2018 respectively. This event was supported by the BAI. https://wft.ie/

"I really want theater to reach in and grab my heart and squeeze. I want to feel something when I'm sitting there." We love to interview playwrights! We love to hear how they discovered playwriting and how they found themselves on this journey into the world of playwriting. We had the immense pleasure to talk to Marisela Treviño Orta and we know you will enjoy this episode, listeners. Marisela is an accidental playwright. She got her MFA in poetry from the University of San Francisco. Graduate of Iowa playwrights workshop, core writer at the playwrights center, and is currently working on a commission for Audible! Her play "Somewhere", which was commissioned by Temple University, will open Feb 1st. GLISTENS: Sam's Glisten - Joy Harjo "Book of poems" Sarah's Glisten - InsideOut Writers Marisela's Glisten - sushi at Hamasaku in LA ABOUT MARISELA TREVIÑO ORTA Marisela Treviño Orta is an accidental playwright. Originally from Lockhart, Texas, she found her way to the genre while completing an MFA in Writing at the University of San Francisco (USF) where she studied poetry exclusively. While a student at USF, Marisela became the Resident Poet of El Teatro Jornalero!, a social justice theatre company comprised of Latinx immigrants. Marisela's first play BRAIDED SORROW (2008 Su Teatro world premiere) won the 2006 Chicano/Latino Literary Prize in Drama and the 2009 Pen Center USA Literary Award in Drama. Her other plays include: AMERICAN TRIAGE (2012 Repertorio Español Nuestras Voces Finalist); GHOST LIMB (2017 Brava Theatre world premiere); HEART SHAPED NEBULA (2015 Shotgun Players world premiere); SHOE (2019 Kendeda Finalist); RETURN TO SENDER (2019 Nashville Children's Theatre world premiere); and WOMAN ON FIRE (2016 Camino Real Productions world premiere). In 2011, she began writing her cycle of grim Latinx fairy tales—fairy tales for adults inspired by Latinx mythology and folklore which include: THE RIVER BRIDE (2013 National Latino Playwriting Award Co-Winner, 2016 Oregon Shakespeare Festival world premiere); WOLF AT THE DOOR (2016 Kilroys List, 2018/2019 National New Play Network Rolling World Premiere); and ALCIRA. Marisela is an alum of the Iowa Playwrights Workshop, the Playwrights Foundation's Resident Playwright Initiative, a founding member of the Bay Area Latino Theatre Artists Network, and a member of the Latinx Theatre Commons' national Steering Committee. Last year she was selected as a Core Writer at The Playwrights' Center in Minneapolis. Marisela is also a member of the Goodman Theatre's 2018/2019 Playwrights Unit. Currently, Marisela is working on a new cycle of worst-case scenario plays—sci-fi thriller plays which include WMB (pronounced “womb”) and NIGHTFALL which she has been commissioned by Audible to adapt for their platform. She is also adapting Charles Dickens' Little Dorrit into a five-hour epic piece of theatre. Make sure to follow Marisela to learn more about her work and stay updated: twitter.com/mariselatorta _____________________________________________ Please support Beckett's Babies by reviewing, sharing an episode to your friends, or follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter: @beckettsbabies And as always, we would love to hear from you! Send us your questions or thoughts on playwriting and we might discuss it in our next episode. Email: contact@beckettsbabies.com For more info, visit our website: www.beckettsbabies.com --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/beckettsbabies/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/beckettsbabies/support

The Total Tutor Neil Haley wiill interview Freema Agyeman and Jocko Sims of NBC's New Amsterdam. Inspired by the oldest public hospital in America, this unique medical drama follows the brilliant and charming Dr. Max Goodwin, the institution's newest medical director, who sets out to tear up the bureaucracy and provide exceptional care. How can he help? Well, the doctors and staff have heard this before. Not taking "no" for an answer, Dr. Goodwin must disrupt the status quo and prove he will stop at nothing to breathe new life into this understaffed, underfunded and underappreciated hospital - the only one in the world capable of treating Ebola patients, prisoners from Rikers and the president of the United States under one roof - and return it to the glory that put it on the map. Freema Agyeman stars as Dr. Helen Sharpe on NBC's new drama "New Amsterdam."   Agyeman is best known for major roles on "Doctor Who," "The Carrie Diaries" and the Netflix cult hit "Sense8." A London native, she has also starred on "Law & Order: UK" and BBC1's "Survivors" and "Little Dorrit." Agyeman's other television credits include the leading role in Sky's TV movie "Rubenesque," CBBC's "Old Jack's Boat," BBC2's "Torchwood," BBC1's "Survivors," ITV's "The Bill," BBC's "Silent Witness" and "Casualty," ITV1's "The Bill" and "Crossroads," and Sky One's "Mile High."   Jocko Sims stars as Dr. Floyd Reynolds on the NBC drama "New Amsterdam."    

Heidi talks with Rebecca Eaton, The Emmy Award-winning producer of PBS's Masterpiece. Eaton has brought American audiences Hilary Mantel's Wolf Hall, the recent hits Sherlock, Poldark and Downton Abbey — the most-watched drama in PBS history — as well as high-profile titles such as Mr Selfridge, Endeavour, Wallander, Prime Suspect, Cranford, Little Dorrit, Inspector Lewis, and The Complete Jane Austen.