Podcasts about Oedipus

What a lot of fun I had talking to Zena Hitz about Gulliver's Travels. As well as discussing Swift, slavery, genocide, rationality, Christianity, and science, Zena told me that good philosophy is like a box of cake mix and that a liberal education requires you to be freed of false expertise. I also took Zena on a detour to discuss Iris Murdoch, the Catherine Project, and modern philosophy. TRANSCRIPTHENRY OLIVER: Today I am talking to Zena Hitz. Zena is a tutor at St. John's College. She is a philosopher, the author of Lost in Thought. She runs the Catherine Project. She's famous on Twitter. We don't know how she does it all. Zena, welcome.ZENA HITZ: Thank you, Henry. It's great to be here.OLIVER: And we're talking about Gulliver's Travels because it is 300 years since it was published, and it's a book that you love.HITZ: A book that I've loved for a long time.First Encounter with Gulliver's TravelsOLIVER: So tell me, when did you first read it?HITZ: Well, it was an important moment for me. I was in high school, and I was admitted to a scholarship summer program which offered college courses at different campuses. There were some normal-looking college courses at normal-looking colleges. And then there was this course at St. John's called Science as Literature, Literature as Science. [laughs] It had this description that was just unbelievable. And I thought to myself, “This is the one, obviously the one to go to.”So I went, and we read books that no one in their right mind would assign to high school students now, and maybe not then. The fragments of Parmenides, Plato's Timaeus, selections from Aristotle's Physics, Gulliver's Travels. After reading a number of—preface to Ptolemy's Almagest, geocentric astronomy. And we read Gulliver's Travels after reading selections from Hooke's Micrographia, so the inventor of the microscope, and Galileo's Starry Messenger, which is one of the great first uses of the telescope to discover the nature of the moon and the satellites of Jupiter.So then we read Gulliver's Travels. We also read Emma and Flannery O'Connor and various other things. And one of the faculty who was running it said at one point, “Well, we thought we'd throw a bunch of things together and see what you could do, what you could make of it. We didn't actually have an idea of how these all fit together,” which I think was probably true.At any rate, I think I came to Gulliver's Travels thinking about these scientists who were looking at very large things and very small things, and thinking in general about the follies of human perception, whether that was shown in literature or philosophy or what have you, the ways in which human perception and knowledge don't work very well. And I think Swift is still one of the best people to—Gulliver's Travels is still one of the best books about that because it's in the mode of a travel diary, an eyewitness account.Gulliver is trained as a surgeon, by his own account. He at one point says he was a bit of a projector in his younger days, someone who undertook scientific projects. And he's a terrible observer, the worst imaginable observer, and Swift so brilliantly lets us see through his eyes, lets us see all the things he doesn't see. And I think it's not just about seeing and knowing. It has a very profound, I think, moral and political set of commitments. So it's a very humane book. It's social criticism, but from a point of view of a very deep humanity. So I've always loved the book for these reasons since then.I came back to it more recently because it is part of the curriculum at St. John's. So when I came back to teach there, I began to reread it. The other experience I had was that I wrote a long essay on it when I was an undergraduate. So those are my—I'm not any kind of expert. My knowledge of the historical context of the book is limited. It's not zero, but it's limited. But I have always loved it as an account of human understanding and its failures and the way that might impact how we live and how happy we can be.The Houyhnhnm ProblemOLIVER: Have you changed how you think about it as you've taught it?HITZ: I have not really changed the way I think about it. It gets more—like all of these books, the more you read them, the more comes out of them, the more details come up. Hilarious. The more jokes you get, the more . . .I think the one more recent insight I had was, I hadn't understood the full horror of the Houyhnhnms in the last book until relatively recently. I think that took me some time to really take on. It's one of the cases where Gulliver's misperceptions are a bit harder to see, and I think many readers just assume that Swift is endorsing the praise of the Houyhnhnms in some sense or other.OLIVER: There are some very serious critics in the past who have called them Swift's ideal beings. Which at this point in history seems unthinkable, but it has been a belief among serious readers.HITZ: Yes, yes. And also common among students. Yes, it's absolutely one of the wrongest opinions you could have about anything, I think.OLIVER: Why does Swift allow us to make that mistake? Are we bad readers out of the context, or has he made too good a job of his diversions and concealments and ironies?HITZ: That's a great question, and I'll just take a stab at it. I think that he has hit on a mode of misperception which is very deep to us, and it's something that we're much more guilty of. We could imagine that if we were in a place where everyone was small or everyone was large, we might make mistakes like Gulliver makes. But we all live, I think, in communities that are a bit like the Houyhnhnms. And so we are all very subject to these kinds of deceptions, and I think that's how he gets us.That's not to really excuse the bad readings because, you know, Gulliver does leave the land of the Houyhnhnms with a boat made out of human skin, which should—I think that moment should make you realize, if you haven't yet, that something is very seriously wrong with Gulliver. Gulliver has been kind of destroyed as a person by his travels, and especially by this last trip. But if you pass over that little detail, maybe you think, “Oh, wow, he found some very simple beings.”OLIVER: Well, there's also the great council where they debate the genocide of the Yahoos.HITZ: [laughs] Yes.OLIVER: And it directly contradicts several things Gulliver has come to believe about the Houyhnhnms, about the Yahoos, and about himself. And he's completely unaware of these contradictions and so in awe of the Houyhnhnms that he doesn't quite understand, I think, that he's accounting a genocide.HITZ: That's right. That's right.OLIVER: Even though he uses a phrase from Genesis that's very unmistakable. It's a sort of remarkable moment of—particularly to us, having had the 20th century. I think that's why Swift came back into favor in a way, because people used to say, Swift's unbearable view of human nature . . .This is a great bit in Boswell's Life of Johnson where, when they're traveling through Scotland, they're with a lady, and she says to Johnson, “Is any man naturally good?” And Johnson says, “No, no more than a wolf.” And Boswell says, “Well, sir, what about ladies?” And Johnson says, “God, no, absolutely not.” And this woman says, “Oh my God, this is worse than Swift,” utterly horrific view of human nature.But of course, we can actually say, did he go far enough? [laughter] I mean, Swift clearly understands something very real and deep. The council of genocide is horrifyingly familiar to us. And I think that's much to Swift's credit that he can see that, and to show that Gulliver would blind himself to it. And people still blind themselves to it, right?HITZ: That's right. And I wonder—you would know more about this than me because it is a bit of a historical question, but my understanding is that quite a lot of the savagery, the worst parts of rule over men that we see in Gulliver's Travels are pictures of Ireland in the 17th, 18th centuries. And I wonder if that took some time to reveal itself to the British, and in some ways it's still not really as known as it might be. We think of the colonial project as being something that was directed at India and Africa—OLIVER: Faraway countries.HITZ: —faraway countries where people looked really different. And we're not as familiar with the kinds of things that were done to the cuddly Irish with their nice music, and who we don't think of as being people that you would savagely oppress like that. So I think—OLIVER: So, I think partly the English are not interested in their own history in the way that they are expected to be. And partly the English interest in Irish history has become very focused on the more recent events. And it's very hard to get back past that. And it all becomes very complicated, and it's a sort of different country. So there's some of that, but I think generally we don't want to know what we did, yes.HITZ: Well, and I think in anglophone countries in general, there's going to be a history of something like that. To attribute it to the British is not to say that—I mean, Americans have chattel slavery and the genocide of the natives, and the Australians have their own situation. All of the anglophone countries have something like this on their conscience.I think that obscures the meaning of that final book. I think we don't recognize—and that's really to Swift's credit, to have a social critique that is so real and so deep that you may not even recognize yourself in the picture.Slavery in Gulliver's TravelsOLIVER: Yes. When I read it again—I read it as an undergraduate, but I really was actually more interested in the other parts of Swift's work. And I thought it was brilliant, and then I read it again. And it was more recently that—I didn't understand how I couldn't have seen it, but it's basically a book about slavery, as I come back to it.And in each of the books there is enslavement of a different sort. So, to begin with, Gulliver is the one being kept in a box or kept in a house, or he's chained up by the Lilliputians or Glumdalclitch.HITZ: Right. That's right.OLIVER: She's a very nice sort of master, as it were, [laughter] but he has that box that can be sealed, and the dwarf has him swiping at the wasps. And then the enslavement that the flying island has of the country below is like England and Ireland. And then in the final book, you know, the Houyhnhnms are whipping the Yahoos.HITZ: That's right.OLIVER: The slavery thing gets worse and worse as the book goes on. And one of the things that's clever is that it's funny when Gulliver is enslaved, right? When the wasps are let out and he has to—and Swift sort of does that clever thing where he undermines things by making it a joke at the end. By the book of the Houyhnhnms, there is really very little humor. And the twist at the end is always dark.Gulliver can't see that—he can see that he's a bit like the Yahoos. But he can't see that they've been enslaved in the way that he—the farmer wanted to take him around the kingdom and show him off, and he says, “I couldn't possibly have had children in that condition because I couldn't have it on my conscience that I had begotten a slave, someone born into slavery. I couldn't do that.”HITZ: Right.OLIVER: Then he's in the Houyhnhnms and he can't—it's quite remarkable.HITZ: [laughs] Yes. I don't think it's quite true that in the end there's no humor. I read it with some Catherine Project group a couple of years ago, and one of the readers pointed out that it's not obvious Gulliver isn't leaving his home and sitting out in the ocean and always landing on England every single time; just every time, he lands there.And there's something hilarious about an Englishman that discovers a place where there's all horses, [laughter] and his love of horses overwhelms him, and he becomes persuaded that they're the only rational beings that there are. I mean, that is funny.OLIVER: Yes, I agree. There's a lot of irony and stuff. But I think it's in Lilliput when he describes their manner of writing. And he says they don't write from left to right as we do in England, or from right to left, or up-down like the Chinese, but from one corner to the other, as the ladies do in England. This is very funny, dry humor, and that sort of thing is gone. And the things that surprise you at the end of a sentence or a paragraph are more like, “Oh, and of course I used Yahoo skin to cover the boat.” And you're like, oh my God, this is not a joke anymore.You know, in A Modest Proposal, he makes real humor out of those kind of horrors. And with the Houyhnhnms, I think he actually refuses the joke to make you feel the disgust, in a way.HITZ: Yes, that might be right. That might be right.Swift and PhilosophyOLIVER: What do you think about the idea that the Houyhnhnms are drawn from the Phaedrus and Socrates's idea of the soul with the two horses? And there's the good, rational horse and the vulgar, passionate horse, and the Yahoos are the other horse. You see what I mean?HITZ: Yes, yes.OLIVER: Is Swift showing us the two sides, and Gulliver's mistake is to prefer the one and not the—HITZ: Right, I think I have heard something like this before. I'm a bit skeptical. Swift doesn't strike me as someone who uses philosophy in quite that way. I think he's much more interested in Gulliver's—the Houyhnhnms' self-deception about the kinds of beings they are. They do not say “the thing which is not,” yet Gulliver's master hides from him this conversation about the genocide for quite some time. And maybe we don't know if he tells him quite the whole truth about it. So there's—OLIVER: And he also conceals the fact that the others don't like Gulliver because he's a partial—a reasonable Yahoo, as it were.HITZ: Right. So their self-deception, Gulliver's being taken in by their self-deception, the ways in which they—this is one of the ways that I think it's profound about the nature of slavery. And to cheer us all up, I'll make a Holocaust analogy, as you also did.When I was traveling in Germany some years ago, in one of their Holocaust museums, there was an image from a Nazi-era German newspaper of Jewish people living in complete squalor in the ghetto. And of course, they had forced them into squalor. But somehow they forced them into squalor, and then this reinforces the sense that they're these rat-like beings.And there's something very similar that the Houyhnhnms do to the Yahoos. They force them into this animal state, and then they say, “Oh God, look, these people are disgusting. They just don't know how to act.” That seems to me the kind of level at which Swift is working. He is interested in the nature of a human being, but not in the abstract Platonic sense, I don't think.He strikes me as someone who believes in common sense, common decency, basic freedom, and basic use of reason. And he finds in his time that there's distorting teachings, distorting ways of behavior that have gotten people far off track. To me, that's what it feels like it comes from. It doesn't feel like Plato is in the background to me.OLIVER: Is there an extent to which, though, it's a work of sort of anti-philosophy? As you say, Swift, he likes common sense. He likes ordinary reason, and he likes what he would call the revealed truth of Christianity. So he talks, in his sermons about people, it comes to you from God like a light. It's revealed to you. And he doesn't like this idea that the philosophers can work it all out.And in a way, that's the same sort of mistake that the scientists think they can discover all this stuff, and they go in these crazy ways. And the Houyhnhnms are a bit like that. If you had philosopher-kings, they would end up being perverted examples of rationality because they're ignoring the—so do you think it's anti-philosophy in a way? The book is saying, “No, no, I don't want philosophers”?Criticizing Elite Intellectual CultureHITZ: That's definitely a plausible reading. But it's hard to tell whether it's anti-philosophy or anti a particular style of thinking. It's worth pointing out, in that light, that Gulliver, when he arrives in the land of the Houyhnhnms, before he even meets a horse, he sees a Yahoo who, from what I can tell from the text, is trying to wave at him and say hello, who recognizes him. And he's horrified. He sees him instantly as a monster.So I think immediately upon landing, he sees the Yahoos as monstrous, and that tells me that he must already be off kilter. So he's not just corrupted by the Houyhnhnms; he's been somehow led off track, away from the capacity to recognize fellow human beings before that.And he's come from this—the third book is all about various kinds of inquiry, scientific endeavors, practical endeavors, talking to the greats of the past, necromancy, and various kinds of inquiry into wisdom or things like wisdom. And somehow that's the thing that seems to push him to the point where he can no longer tell what a human being is.OLIVER: One of my favorite parts is when he's with the wizards, and he asks to be shown Homer and Aristotle and all their commentators. And he says that there were vast rooms full of these commentators, endless numbers of them. But Homer and Aristotle didn't recognize any of them because they were all so ashamed of the terrible things they'd said about these great men's works that they kept themselves forever in a different part of the underworld. They couldn't bear the shame of being revealed to having told lies and said second-rate things.It's very, very funny. And I think that's another sort of angle on which the book says, “You're so tempted to make a comment and have an idea and be a philosopher, and you should just accept the revealed truth of what is known. Just stop it. Just stop it.” [laughter]HITZ: Well, I suppose maybe I would also put it this way, that Swift sees the condition of 18th-century Ireland, which is quite poor, very bad. And it's ruled in a savage way by the English, who have a quite flourishing intellectual culture, as it happens, at this time.So I think what he might be is not a critic of philosophy so much as a critic of intellectual culture. Because intellectual culture seems to not only not help with existential concerns like slavery and oppression and savage poverty, but even serves to mask and hide and create illusions behind it.So that's, I guess, how it strikes me, as a book that's hostile to what you'd now call elite intellectual culture. And I don't know how fundamental that critique is, in light of its inability to solve problems for real human beings or to obscure the causes of what's going on with real human beings.OLIVER: I think it's quite fundamental because outside of Gulliver's—I think this comes into Gulliver's Travels, but what he might have said more explicitly elsewhere is, there are people starving in the streets of Dublin. And we've got corrupt politicians and intellectuals saying all these things, but you know, here she is starving. You don't need to work that out. [laughter] There's no question—the reveal—just be a Christian and, like, for goodness' sake . . .HITZ: Yes.OLIVER: And when, for example, he talks to the king of Brobdingnag, and there's that wonderful satire of the English government and everything. And he says, “Those people understood mathematics and poetry and whatever, but I could never drive into their head any sense of the abstract or any of these speculative—they simply didn't know what that was. They didn't know what I was saying.” [laughter]And so in a way, his ideal government is anti-philosophical because it would just look at the human problem in front of it. It wouldn't do speculative science. It wouldn't think of itself as rational, all this Platonic stuff. It would just—she's in rags, she has bare feet, you know?HITZ: Yes, that's right.OLIVER: What do we need a philosopher-king? Like, what are you talking about?HITZ: Exactly.OLIVER: The priest understands this because he's there in the city doing it. And is there something of that in the book, that constant resistance of the cleverness of people who cannot see daily life?HITZ: I think that's absolutely true, and I think it's probably one of the things I love about the book, because I think this somehow gets to something in my own heart. Even though I'm a professional intellectual—I have been my whole life—the distance between the concerns of professional intellectuals and the concerns of living, real people in various parts of the world is very large.And it's even worse when, as it was when I was coming up in grad school, there's a ton of explicit concern and various operations underway to improve life for others, which have zero connection with anything that anyone actually does. So I think the Laputans, which is the beginning of the third book, when Gulliver—OLIVER: The flying island.HITZ: Yes, when Gulliver visits the people on the flying island, who have one eye towards the heavens and one eye pointed inward. And they study music and mathematics, and they live in a giant flying saucer, which has the—OLIVER: And the flappers.HITZ: That's right. [laughter] When someone needs to talk to them, someone flaps their ears so that they pay attention. And their wives all run off with working people because they can't bear to be treated the way they are by men like this. And the flying saucer is not just distant. It also has the power to crush the towns underneath it if it judges them to be rebellious.This image will stick with you for the rest of your life. I mean, it's absolutely perfect, and the perfect image of bad government of a kind when intellectual culture is prized. And it's hinted early on in the book in Lilliput, when the rulers in Lilliput have to do these elaborate dances with ropes.OLIVER: Oh, with the king and the chief minister hold the pole, funny angles, and if you get under it, you get a green ribbon or a red ribbon.HITZ: Exactly. [laughter] And they have these athletic contests of grace and various colored ribbons, and that determine how far you get in the halls of power.OLIVER: Yes. Are you a cabinet minister or a junior minister? Yes, yes.HITZ: Exactly. So there, it's all just a funny joke. But it develops, I think, into the Laputans, people who have kinds of expertise that are actually hostile to them doing any kind of humane governing. So yes, that seems right to me.Christianity in GulliverOLIVER: To what extent is it a Christian book?HITZ: That's an interesting question. I've never found a strong Christian element in it myself. There are satires of religious wars, both in Lilliput, where Lilliput's at war with its neighboring city. Oh, wait a second, there's two different disputes in Lilliput. One is about what side you cut your egg on.OLIVER: There are the Little-Endians and the Big-Endians,HITZ: Right. And then there's also one about heel size. So there's two different kinds of disputes.OLIVER: With the marvelous image that the king is a Short-Heeler. But they think that the heir to the throne might be favorable to the High-Heelers because he has one heel slightly higher than the other, and he walks with a wobbly gait.HITZ: [laughs] That's right. This, again, in Lilliput is just utterly hilarious, outrageous, very silly, obviously a parody of religious wars between different kinds of Christians. But it resurfaces towards the end. It's the Houyhnhnms, where he talks to the Master Horse—OLIVER: And the horse sort of pretends to this great rationality, simply can't understand that men would kill each other over the question of whether flesh is bread or bread is flesh.HITZ: That's right. That's right. That's right. So there's definitely disparaging remarks about religious wars. And as you're talking about it, where along with Swift's praise of common sense, there's a kind of basic Christian morality, which is that the poor and the suffering need attention. That all strikes me as Christian. Apart from that, I'm not sure. If you have a religious take, I'd be interested to hear it.OLIVER: I find it very interesting that Swift had quite strict beliefs. He was not in favor of Catholics. He thought Dissenters should be tolerated, but he wanted the Test Act. He was very particular about all these things. And in his other works, he's quite direct about that. But in this book, he achieves a kind of high ambivalence. And he's not a Little-Ender or a Big-Ender.HITZ: That's right.OLIVER: And he says the religious text on which this is based simply says that you must break the egg at the most convenient end.HITZ: [laughs] That's right.OLIVER: Now, of course, in reality, he's a Little-Ender, and he's very committed to the Reformation, and he thinks it's all terrible that they're not. And it's interesting that someone with such angry, insistent beliefs on the Anglican Church would take this ambivalent position.And he satirizes so much. But the anti-slavery stuff, the description of the Laputans bringing the island down, and then he says, “I've never seen so much want and misery, and there's a wild look in their eyes, and they're wearing rags.” I mean, this is Dublin, right? This is just, along with the slavery, this basic Christian concern for the oppressed, the poor, the suffering.HITZ: Yes, that's right.OLIVER: And so I don't quite know. It's almost like the book is saying, again with this anti-intellectual thing, all these doctrinal disputes and which church this and who believes that. And here we have slaves and poor people and beggars and starving people.HITZ: Right.OLIVER: Christianity should deal with that first. So is the implicit criticism of his fellow Christians, in a way, that they're more interested in these disputes than in the fact that there are enslaved people and suffering people and—you see what I mean?HITZ: Yes, that's right.OLIVER: And Gulliver—the Houyhnhnms are highly rational but not Christian, which is a significant omission. And by the end, are you supposed to wonder if Gulliver actually isn't very much of a Christian? Because he can see this suffering and not respond to it at all.HITZ: Right, when maybe the—is the best person in the book the King of Brobdingnag? Does that seem right? The person with the—at least who says the best things?OLIVER: He says the best things. I think the best person is Glumdalclitch. She shows real charity and real love towards him.HITZ: What about the Houyhnhnm, the one who likes him, who says, “Fare thee well, gentle Yahoo”? It's tear-jerking—OLIVER: Oh, the sorrel nag.HITZ: The sorrel nag. I can literally weep at that moment when she says, “Fare thee well, gentle Yahoo.”OLIVER: That's true. That's true. She and Glumdalclitch are maybe more similar characters. Yes, yes, yes.HITZ: They're similar characters. Okay.OLIVER: And they have that basic, you don't need to call it Christian. You don't need—it doesn't need theology.HITZ: Humane. I would call it humane. Yes.OLIVER: They have that basic love of their fellow. You know, Glumdalclitch doesn't say, “Oh, how amusing this little man is, or how entertaining, or I can make—” She says, “He must be cared for. He looks a bit like me. He must be cared for.”HITZ: Right.OLIVER: And the sorrel nag, again, has the love of the fellow creature.HITZ: That's right. That's right.OLIVER: So I think Swift might be bringing in this, what he thinks of as the revealed truth of Christianity. Like, you shouldn't need telling, you shouldn't need to argue. It's there.HITZ: Right. This is just me making things up, which is what I'm here for. We're podcasting. Yes.OLIVER: Yes, of course. Also, is that not what the philosophers would do? That's what Swift would say.HITZ: But if I was going to make something up, what I would say is something like this: that Swift to me, from the testimony of Gulliver's Travels, which is the book of his I really know the best. I don't know much about the rest of it. He has a level of self-awareness and sophistication. So, he knows that that religious difference is being used as a pretext. He knows that it is obscuring the suffering of these people. So, for the purposes of the book, he says, “Look, if you're a smart person, if you're a smart ruler, if you're an actually humane, intelligent, commonsensical ruler, you know that the fact that they have the wrong religious views is not a reason for them to be enslaved and oppressed and starved.” So that would be my suspicion.And that's why I think, to me, the religion is so light, because it's not really a religious problem. It's actually just a human problem and a political problem that is, how do you run your country so that these subject peoples are allowed to be free and develop themselves and be full human beings? That would be my made-up guess.Students' Views of GulliverOLIVER: What do undergraduates think? What is it that they find interesting in the book, and what do they like or dislike?HITZ: It's been a couple of years. I think they like this idea that—we all think travel is very broadening, a great way to think about the world. You know, you can learn so much about one's fellow human beings. And whatever else is going on in Gulliver's Travels, travel does not necessarily produce enlightenment.So I think they like the attention to the ways in which, even when we are trying to learn, we fail to learn. And the ways in which structures of learning, like traveling or studying science, might actually make you worse and not better, things like that. But it's not a book—I think it's fair to say it's not one of the favorite books of the undergraduates.OLIVER: Okay.HITZ: I think they find it a little bit distant, and I'm not sure why that is.OLIVER: Is it because it sort of looks like a novel, but it's not what we have come to expect a novel to be? And it sort of has that—HITZ: I think that's right.OLIVER: The pre–Jane Austen novel is kind of weird to us now.HITZ: Well, they love Don Quixote.OLIVER: Okay.HITZ: And that is a challenge of a similar kind. It's a novel which doesn't quite read like a novel, and the humor is kind of old. I mean, it's also true—undergraduates, in my experience, in general—I hope they'll forgive me for saying this on a podcast—they're not always good at comedy. They tend to think that serious things must be tragic.OLIVER: You can't get an A by making a joke.HITZ: Well, more that they have a sense that an intellectual life is something serious. It's serious.OLIVER: Oh, yes. Okay. And the syllabus slightly reinforces that, doesn't it?HITZ: Well, it's sort of self-reinforcing because we used to read more Aristophanes. We used to read Rabelais.OLIVER: If you do Shakespeare, it'll be the tragedies.HITZ: No, no, we do Shakespeare comedies.OLIVER: Oh, you do? Okay.HITZ: Yes. We have As You Like It and The Tempest. And do we have more tragedies? Maybe one more tragedy than comedy, but not a terrible imbalance.OLIVER: Well, that's good.HITZ: It's not Shakespeare-type comedy that's—maybe, correct me if I'm wrong, a Shakespeare comedy is something that ends in a marriage, more or less.OLIVER: More or less.HITZ: It's things that are funny—they don't necessarily think that humor is a way of thinking.OLIVER: Do they struggle with irony?HITZ: No, not usually. As long as it's serious irony, Anyway, I'm not sure why. I think I'm making things—I'm going too far out of the grounds for drawing conclusions.Favorite Parts of the BookOLIVER: Sure. Do you have a favorite passage?HITZ: One of my favorites is the part—is it Balnibarbi where they have people who try to speak with objects?OLIVER: Oh, yes, yes, yes.HITZ: And they have to carry around wagons full of things because they never know what you might want to talk about. [laughter] That's so weird. Because I think I spent a lot of time studying with philosophers, there's a bit of—something's on the nose about this.OLIVER: Yes.HITZ: You know, it's like, “No, you've got to say exactly—no, that's too imprecise. You have to say exactly what you mean.” Bernard Williams, the great philosopher, has something complaining about how contemporary philosophers are very controlling of their readers. They don't want anyone to make the slightest mistake about what they mean by a particular word. That's how the people who speak by objects strike me.OLIVER: Do you think that is a problem of contemporary philosophy?HITZ: Oh, sure. Yes, absolutely. Yes. The way Williams puts it is that when you write something, it should be like a cake mix, and the reader should be able to put their own egg and bake the cake themselves.OLIVER: Oh, I see. You mean like a box of mix, yes.HITZ: Yes, yes, exactly. It's like a box of cake mix. Whereas making the cake painstakingly and force-feeding it bite by bite to the reader is not actually an—OLIVER: Telling them how it tastes.HITZ: Telling them how it tastes is not an educational endeavor.OLIVER: When does this become too dominant in philosophy?HITZ: It's a feature of 20th-century analytic philosophy to be very careful with the meanings of words. And it's by no means universal; it's just a natural vice to the territory.Iris MurdochOLIVER: Is this a problem for someone like Iris Murdoch, or is it more the A. J. Ayer type?HITZ: No, it's the A. J. Ayer type, not Iris Murdoch. No, Iris Murdoch is heterodox outside of the—OLIVER: Do you like her philosophy?HITZ: I do, yes.OLIVER: What do you like about it? Platonic?HITZ: Now, see, I came here to talk about Swift. [laughter]OLIVER: I know, but you made such a good point about the satire of philosophers.HITZ: I like her writing for a more general educated audience, her not making assumptions about the philosophical training of her readers, and her use of Plato for sure, which is quite interesting and creative. She sort of ingests Plato and does something with it that I think is very interesting.OLIVER: Is she properly appreciated as a Platonist, or do you think there's more attention to be paid?HITZ: There's probably more attention to be paid, but she gets some attention. She gets some attention. I also don't think it was particularly helpful, these two books that came out a couple of years ago about Murdoch, Foot, Midgley, and Anscombe.OLIVER: Oh, yes, yes, yes. I only read one of those. It was quite good.HITZ: It might be quite good, but those four women are quite different from one another. So it's an example of where attention to identity could obscure as much as it—OLIVER: Well, one of the books was more about the ideas—they were both obviously about the ideas—and one of them was more about the fact that they were together in Oxford. And that they benefited from hanging out, talking, doing different sorts of work, sleeping with each other's husbands, et cetera.HITZ: Yes, all the good stuff.OLIVER: And from the more sociological point of view, it was very interesting to see that, actually, a lot of what Murdoch did was bound up with her friendships and relationships, in that the argument basically is, A. J. Ayer and the others get sent away because of the war. So these four women are actually—they've been banned from this seminar and told they're not allowed.Well, now they can sit around and do what they want to do. And it worked, and they all produced very interesting things. So from that point of view, I think it was—but I agree with you, Elizabeth Anscombe and Iris Murdoch are not the same. [laughter]HITZ: Not even particularly similar. I also feel like I've read enough of Murdoch's novels to have a sense of what the sociological situation was like.OLIVER: You like the novels?HITZ: I do like them, yes.OLIVER: Do you have favorites?HITZ: I can't remember the name of my favorite because I haven't read them for years. It's one of the things I read years ago, the one—I'd remember it if I saw the title. There's an LSD trip at the beginning of it.OLIVER: Oh, The Good Apprentice. I love that book.HITZ: The Good Apprentice, yes. I think that was my favorite. But I never fell in love with it. I just liked it, and I found it interesting, and I found the sociology interesting. Okay, this is what academics at this time period were doing.What to Pair with SwiftOLIVER: We got diverted.HITZ: “We” got diverted. [laughs]OLIVER: We did. If Swift is on a great books syllabus, what is it good to pair him with? If people are reading Swift, on or off a syllabus, do you think there are other—Hooker, you said, which I think would be interesting.HITZ: No, Hooke. It's Hooke.OLIVER: Hooke. Hooke. That's a very good point.HITZ: The guy who wrote Micrographia, who has the enormous picture of the flea.OLIVER: Yes, yes, yes. So that would be good. But any other? Is it worth reading Plato alongside him?HITZ: Well, I like to—he's on the list for something we called Life of the Mind Seminar at Catherine Project, which is our introduction to the life of the mind.OLIVER: And just to tell people, the Catherine Project—this is not a university. Anyone can join a seminar.HITZ: That's right. It's an open online readers community. Consists of small, high-quality conversations, mostly on Zoom, some in person.OLIVER: You could be some kid, an accountant, a dentist, whatever, and you come and do a—you've got a PhD running a seminar, and you get that experience.HITZ: Right. Some of them are peer led, so they're not necessarily PhDs running them. The reading groups are not necessarily run by PhDs. But the core program in which the Life of the Mind Seminar is—either a PhD or an ABD [all but degree] or someone with some academic experience is usually leading that. We have it there, and we have it there with a set of books that are meant to disorient rather than to orient.So one of the difficulties with reading great books with more or less random selections of adults is that people feel uncertain, out of place. And they bring expertise, real or fake, to the table, which makes it very difficult to have a conversation. It's usually fake expertise, for what it's worth.OLIVER: Give us an example of what you mean by fake expertise.HITZ: Well, so someone will have—we'll be, say, reading Hamlet. Someone will have taken a class on Shakespeare in college, and they'll say, “Actually, we're asking this question. But what I learned, my professor told me, is that Hamlet actually symbolizes—he has an Oedipus complex and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and then this is what this means, and this is what that means.” And then your conversation's over, because you need to focus just on the text that's shared between the—OLIVER: It's not a crossword puzzle.HITZ: Exactly. It's not a crossword puzzle, and it's not something where—or the other—people often, again, they feel a bit on their back feet. So they'll google a bunch of stuff about the author, and they'll start tossing out random facts about the book or about the author, about the context. And again, you don't get really into the meat of the book that way.So, Gulliver's Travels is there to help us think about ways in which we might not be expert in things we're expert. Ways in which we might think we understand something and not understand it. And ways in which people who, with every appearance of seriousness and scientific principle, can just say unbelievably stupid things.So it's a very, very good book for that, where in that sense, it's I think very good for any liberal education program. It's liberating that way. One of the things we need to be liberated from is false expertise.OLIVER: You're talking really about these secondhand opinions that you haven't interrogated and come to understand yourself.HITZ: Exactly. Exactly, exactly, exactly.OLIVER: This is what Mill says. Everything is new to someone, and the real genius is that you find it out.HITZ: Exactly.OLIVER: You don't get taught it. Yes, yes.HITZ: Exactly, exactly. So real learning is things you find for yourself. Anyway, that's what I like it with. As for pairing it, yes, I think it would just depend on what you were—I don't have a clear thought about that. I think it'd be good to pair it with Galileo's Starry Messenger and preface to Hooke's Micrographia.But you could also pair it with Emma. Be quite good, actually, because Emma is also about someone who really doesn't know what they're doing and has no idea. Thinks they know what's going on; they really have no idea what's going on.OLIVER: Yes. Hamlet as well, in fact.HITZ: I guess so. Does he not know what's going on?OLIVER: Who's diverting now? [laughter] Well, there's an interesting question, isn't there, about whether Hamlet has legitimate doubts. So he says, “This ghost could be a demon. I should be careful. I don't know what I'm doing. I'm going to pretend to be mad. I'm going to find out.” Or whether he just doesn't want to see the truth in front of him, and he quote-unquote “delays” because of that. I don't know if you have a view.HITZ: I don't think he's deluded. I think the problem is something different, but I haven't thought enough about it recently to know what his volitional obstacle is. But I don't think he's deluded. I think he sees what's going on, but there's something about acting that doesn't work for him.OLIVER: An internal—HITZ: Something internal. Something internal. In a way, I find the play very hard. I don't know what, for instance, what does that obstacle have to do with Ophelia? What's going on with that? Anyway, he's very mysterious, but I don't—yes, that'd be my sense, is that he's not—OLIVER: Do you buy this idea that he's a nihilist?HITZ: No, although he's definitely faced with something like nihilism. He has to look at it. And of course, the play does end with everyone dead, [laughs] so it's not obvious that he's wrong.Sympathy for GulliverOLIVER: This question hangs over Gulliver as well. Is the problem by the end that he's basically become a nihilist? His response to the Yahoos is to deny meaning, deny the possibility of meaning, to shut himself away.HITZ: He is a true misanthrope. He hates human beings and refuses to interact with them and in that sense, in some way, removes himself from any further mistakes. In another way, the mistake that he's in is so massive that that hardly seems like a consolation. But yes, he's definitely stuck, and he's stuck in a place where who he is—because he's a human being. We have to remember that.So he's in a place of total self-hatred and the hatred of his neighbor, what you'd call from the Christian perspective a total loss of charity. Is that nihilist? I don't know, but it's definitely bad. It's not a good state to be in. Maybe I don't know what you mean by nihilism exactly.OLIVER: Are we supposed to disapprove of him at the end or sympathize with him?HITZ: Disapprove, I think.OLIVER: Yes? You don't feel sorry for him?HITZ: I do a bit.OLIVER: But not much.HITZ: Well, should I?OLIVER: I have come to believe—yes, this is what I've come to feel in subsequent readings, is that Gulliver, as you say, is very mistaken. He thinks he understands things that he does not understand. He has the sort of pretense of rationality, but he lacks any sort of meta rationality to see what his limits are.And he becomes, therefore—he doesn't advocate genocide, and he doesn't take any pleasure in using Yahoo skin, but he's just completely null to it. There's a sort of void there where human feeling ought to be. And it's tragic for him. It's a tragic ending that he is so isolated. And we can't sympathize with him, as it were, but we can feel sort of awful that he's shriveled into this state rather than judging or blame.I think one of the persistent themes of the book is, as I say, this kind of basic love of fellow creature, the Glumdalclitch or the sorrel. And if you take that from the book, you will wish you could bring Gulliver back.HITZ: Right. What you're saying reminds me that there is an interesting parallel in Plato's dialogues that I hadn't thought of before, Plato's Parmenides, which is perhaps the most difficult Plato's dialogue. So it's a conversation between young Socrates and the philosopher Parmenides. The first third of it is relatively clear, some arguments against what people think of as Plato's theory of forms.Then there's an extensive, insane dialectical process where various theses about the connection between being and oneness are both argued for and then refuted, and argued for and then refuted, pages and pages and pages and pages of it. So this seems to be—it's Parmenides and Zeno who are running Socrates through this ringer.And the person at the very beginning of the dialogue who they have to go find, to tell him the story of how Socrates met Parmenides, used to study philosophy. But now he just trains horses. [laughs] One of my teachers pointed this out to me, and I've never been able to get over it, that he spent this time doing philosophy, and he's like, “You know what? I'm going to work with horses for the rest of my life. If I never hear another human voice, that's fine with me.”So I think that is an interesting parallel. And I think it is not really that uncommon to see people who are totally disillusioned with relating to humans, who then relate to animals instead, like they devote themselves to animals.OLIVER: But on that reading, it might be a disillusionment with philosophical humanity. It might be philosophy that's killed Gulliver's human feeling.HITZ: That's right. Well, I think that's one possibility, one very strong possibility. That's why I think the Houyhnhnms come after the Laputans. Going to the furthest reaches of his intellectual interests just destroys his humanity.But it doesn't seem like exhaustion in the same way that whoever, I can't remember his name, the character who relates the Parmenides, where you just think he must be exhausted from having heard more than one conversation like this. [laughter] And just in the stable with the horses eating oats, I mean, it's just delightful. It's just so peaceful, you know?OLIVER: Bucolic, pastoral, yes.HITZ: Yes, exactly. Exactly. Maybe you're right that we should be more sympathetic to someone in that situation.OLIVER: Well, next time you read it, you can tell me if you change your mind.HITZ: All right. I will tell you if I change my mind.OLIVER: Very good. Zena Hitz, thank you very much.HITZ: Thank you very much, Henry Oliver. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk

In this episode I am once again joined by Duncan Barford, occult practitioner, counsellor, and author of “Occult Experiments in the Home”. Duncan reflects on his training as a counsellor and the difficulties in sharing his occult interests in that context; his deep appreciation of Freud and Jung; and the links between psychoanalysis and mythic figures such as such as Uranus, Oedipus, and Narcissus. Duncan considers whether Buddhism is merely a useful fiction, offers advice for those interested in learning how tp use mythology to gain insight into life, and explains why the emphasis of his spiritual practice has shifted from awakening to psychological wellbeing. Duncan also talks about his new magical novel, “The Going Down”, describes its plot and messages, and reveals why he believes the practice of Pragmatic Dharma can accrue a profoundly dark karmic debt. … Video version: www.guruviking.com Also available on Youtube, iTunes, & Spotify – search ‘Guru Viking Podcast'. … Topics include: 00:00 - Intro 00:59 - Duncan's therapist hated the occult 02:58 - Misconceptions about Jungian therapy 04:19 - Psychopomp as therapist 04:25 - Freud, Jung, Skinner, Piaget, Rogers, and Carlyle 08:48 - Duncan was a fervent Freudian 09:35 - Freud vs trauma therapy 13:13 - What Freud did 15:58 - Buddhism's useful fiction 19:47 - Where Freud went wrong 21:50 - The castration complex 26:37 - Castration myths 27:58 - Freud and Duncan's childhood 30:40 - Universal or culturally specific? 32:15 - Oedipus, myth, and psychoanalysis 37:29 - Duncan's novel 38:36 - Writing “The Going Down” 41:11 - Plot summary 43:07 - A life-changing ancestor working 44:22 - Duncan's hope for the book 45:53 - Fiction and the occult 48:40 - Alan Chapman's dismay at the novel 49:22 - The dark, karmic debt of Pragmatic Dharma 54:38 - Meeting a Dark Goddess 56:15 - The myth of Persephone 59:49 - A change in Duncan's meditation practice 01:00:43 - This is the Underworld 01:02:34 - Bailey's and Steve's problems 01:03:55 - The Franklin's Tale 01:05:30 - How occultists interpret their life situations 01:09:12 - Is everyone psychotic? 01:10:45 - Using depression and panic as portals 01:12:16 - Duncan believes in everything 01:14:00 - Internal vs external integration 01:19:30 - Why you need mythic literacy 01:20:57 - How to learn more about myths 01:22:55 - Should you read myths? 01:25:07 - The myth of Narcissus 01:28:25 - Scholar vs poet 01:32:22 - Finishing a novel 01:34:06 - Narrative fashions in fiction 01:36:01 - Haunting quality 01:37:43 - A companion in the Underworld 
… Watch previous episodes with Duncan Barford: - https://www.guruviking.com/search?q=barford Read “The Going Down”: - https://godsandradicals.squarespace.com/bookstore/p/the-going-down-by-duncan-barford To find our more about Duncan Barford, visit: - https://www.duncanbarford.uk/ … For more interviews, videos, and more visit: - https://www.guruviking.com Music ‘Deva Dasi' by Steve James

→ Watch on YouTube → Detailed Show Notes → Timestamps: (00:00) A brief overview of these chapters.(06:25) The pride cycle explained.(11:29) The pride cycle illustrated in the Book of Judges.(15:56) Successive generations of Israelites forget God and the things he has done for them.(17:56) The theme of denigrating the northern tribes of Israel.(21:33) Othniel is the first judge. Ehud, the second judge, brings a “gift” to Eglon, the fat king of Moab.(27:24) Deborah is the third judge. How her story compares to the Ishtar myth.(36:51) Gideon is the fourth judge and humbly trusts in God.(47:43) Gideon refuses the invitation to be the king of Israel and teaches that Israel should make God their King.(53:20) Samson is the 7th judge and is blessed with great strength. His ultimate destruction is symbolic of the descent of the House of Israel. Other myths of the ancient world, those of Nergal and Oedipus, may indicate that Samson's story contains recontextualized tropes from older times.(1:11:00) Abimelech is the 5th judge and slays his seventy brothers.(1:14:15) Jephthah is the 6th judge and makes a rash vow and sacrifices his only daughter.(1:17:47) In the first epilogue Micah sets up a false religion.(1:19:59) In the second epilogue a Levite woman is horribly violated and killed. Civil war ensues among the Israelites. We see that if Christ isn't our King, we will be without civilization. → For more of Bryce Dunford’s podcast classes, click here. → Enroll in Institute → YouTube → Apple Podcasts → Spotify → Amazon Music → Facebook The post Ep 373 | Judges, Come Follow Me 2026 (May 25-31) appeared first on LDS Scripture Teachings.

Mark Strong has made a name for himself playing villains or stealing scenes (or both) in movies like "Sherlock Holmes," "Kick-Ass," "Zero Dark Thirty," "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy," "The Imitation Game," the list goes on. On this episode, he talks about his work in the theater, particularly two of his most celebrated performances for the stage: Eddie in "A View From The Bridge," and "Oedipus" (which just earned him a Tony nomination for Best Actor In A Play). He explains why he needs to understand a character fully before he can play it, why extensive research is often not necessary, why specifics in direction usually doesn't work for him, why trust is so important, how going bald changed everything for the better, and much much more. Back To One is the in-depth, no-nonsense, actors-on-acting podcast. In each episode, host Peter Rinaldi invites one working actor to do a deep dive into their unique process, psychology, and approach to the craft.  Subscribe to Back To One on Substack Follow Back To One on Instagram

On Tuesday 5th May, the nominations for the 79th Annual Tony Awards will be announced, celebrating the best of the 2026/2027 Broadway season.In today's video, Mickey-Jo and his stagey fiancé Aeron James are predicting which shows, performers and creatives might be nominated amidst a hugely busy year that included the likes of The Lost Boys, Titanique, Giant, Every Brilliant Thing, Oedipus, Cats the Jellicle Ball, Ragtime, Chess, Two Strangers (Carry a Cake across New York), Liberation, Death of a Salesman, and more.Check out this new episode for Mickey-Jo and Aeron's thoughts and make sure to comment down below with all of yours!check out Mickey-Jo's brand new free substack newsletter:www.mickeyjotheatre.substack.com•00:00 | introduction01:39 | plays and musicals07:43 | writers and directors16:48 | design / technical creatives25:10 | performances in plays31:54 | performances in musicals40:02 | conclusionAbout Mickey-Jo:As one of the leading voices in theatre criticism on a social platform, Mickey-Jo is pioneering a new medium for a dwindling field. His YouTube channel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠MickeyJoTheatre⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ is the largest worldwide in terms of dedicated theatre criticism, where he also share features, news and interviews as well as lifestyle content for over 95,000 subscribers. With a viewership that is largely split between the US and the UK he has been fortunate enough to be able to work with PR, Marketing, and Social Media representatives for shows in New York, London, Edinburgh, Hamburg, Toronto, Sao Pãolo, and Paris. His reviews and features have also been published by WhatsOnStage, for whom he was a panelist to help curate nominees for their 2023 and 2024 Awards as well as BroadwayWorldUK, Musicals Magazine and LondonTheatre.co.uk. Instagram/TikTok/X: @MickeyJoTheatre Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

You can catch Elysa's theater criticism in the New York Sun and New York Stage Review. You can catch Joe's theater criticism all over social media, especially at @overthinkingtheatre on TikTok. You can catch Dan's theater criticism by visiting Slant Magazine and Theatermania.  Follow The Present Stage on Instagram at @thepresentstage The Present Stage: Conversations with Theater Writers is hosted by Dan Rubins, a theater critic for Theatermania and Slant Magazine. You can also find Dan's reviews on Cast Album Reviews  and in The New Yorker's Briefly Noted column. The Present Stage supports the national nonprofit Hear Your Song. If you'd like to learn more about Hear Your Song and how to support empowering youth with serious illnesses to make their voices heard though songwriting, please visit www.hearyoursong.org Follow The Present Stage on Instagram at @thepresentstageThe Present Stage: Conversations with Theater Writers is hosted by Dan Rubins, a theater critic for Theatermania and Slant Magazine. You can also find Dan's reviews on Cast Album Reviews and in The New Yorker's Briefly Noted column.The Present Stage supports the national nonprofit Hear Your Song. If you'd like to learn more about Hear Your Song and how to support empowering youth with serious illnesses to make their voices heard though songwriting, please visit www.hearyoursong.org

Theatre director and writer Robert Icke talks to John Wilson about his formative creative influences. Described by Variety magazine as ‘the great hope of British theatre' and with his radical new versions of classic plays, Icke has built a reputation for revelatory productions. Born in Stockton on Tees in 1986, he made his name in 2015 with an epic new version of the Greek tragedy Oresteia, which he had adapted himself. It won several awards and, at 29, Icke became the youngest ever recipient of the Best Director award at the Olivier Awards. More acclaim followed for his 2017 production of Hamlet, starring Andrew Scott, his adaptation of the Arthur Schnitzler play The Doctor, and his new version of Oedipus which transferred to Broadway in 2025. His latest West End production is Romeo and Juliet, starring Sadie Sink of Stranger Things fame. Producer: Edwina Pitman

The_Oedipus_Story

We won the Webby Award for best tech podcast of 2026!!!I'm stunned! But Kwaku doesn't like it when I say stuff like that, because as he reminds me in this “FAFO Friday” edition, “sometimes good things happen to good people.” OK, I'll take it. We won! And now I need to prepare a five word speech to give. "FAFO Fridays Are My Favorite" comes to mind...But really, who could've predicted this? And also, are all predictions bunk? Kwaku just returned from a week at “Big TED” and he reports back that the talk everyone is talking about is “Beware the power of prediction” from philosopher and AI ethicist Carissa Véliz. What do the story of Oedipus and your insurance premiums have in common? They are both driven by self-fulfilling prophecies, according to Véliz and she warns us, on stage and in her new book, that we should we wary of false prophets — and of relying on AI-driven predictions. Some predictions are useful she says, e.g. weather forecasts are great because the weather doesn't care what you predict, but others become self-fulfilling prophecies: if an AI says someone is uninsurable and then you deny them insurance then yes, they are uninsurable, but were they before you (or your algorithm) said so? It all speaks to a powerlessness many of us feel. Speaking of which… Meta just rolled out employee surveillance that tracks keystrokes, mouse clicks, and periodic screenshots — to train AI on their employees' own jobs…. Someone threw a Molotov cocktail at Sam Altman's house… The anti-data-center backlash is getting physical. And (sorry) here's a prediction, if people don't start feeling like they have some agency, we're going to see more of this (especially in an election year). But as Kwaku puts it, we are the fuel. AI does nothing without us, so let's reclaim our agency, because…The Future Needs a Word. That's one of the five-word speech options we consider. I'm drawn to it, but not sold on it, so please share your own suggestions…---FutureAround.com is the home for Future Around & Find Out. Go there to subscribe to the newsletter and to contribute to the show. And, as always, please tell a friend about the show. That's how podcasts grow. 

"Alana meant Oedipus not Caligula and sends her deepest apologies to all the greek myth enjoyers"we look at skeleta one year on. Alva reads her review and sees if she still agrees.

What do the story of Oedipus and your insurance premiums have in common? They are both driven by self-fulfilling prophecies. Philosopher and TED Fellow Carissa Véliz traces the hidden power of prediction, from Roman emperors who banned prophets to the AI algorithms quietly making decisions about your life right now. We tend to associate predictions with knowledge, she says, but they're actually attempts to grab power. So the next time someone tells you a specific outcome is inevitable, remember: they aren't describing the future — they're selling it.Learn more about our flagship conference happening this April at attend.ted.com/podcast Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The award winning actress Lesley Manville has sparked debate after sharing her distaste towards being photographed or filmed during curtain calls.The actress, currently seen on stage at the National Theatre in Les Liaisons Dangereuses, recalled performing recently in Oedipus on Broadway and being insulted by the use of cameras during the show's bows.As someone who frequently films curtain calls, Mickey-Jo is sharing his thoughts and insights on this topic...check out Mickey-Jo's brand new substack newsletter:www.mickeyjotheatre.substack.com•00:00 | introduction02:54 | the problem09:58 | the origins17:32 | the ethics25:12 | conclusionAbout Mickey-Jo:As one of the leading voices in theatre criticism on a social platform, Mickey-Jo is pioneering a new medium for a dwindling field. His YouTube channel: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠MickeyJoTheatre⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ is the largest worldwide in terms of dedicated theatre criticism, where he also share features, news and interviews as well as lifestyle content for over 95,000 subscribers. With a viewership that is largely split between the US and the UK he has been fortunate enough to be able to work with PR, Marketing, and Social Media representatives for shows in New York, London, Edinburgh, Hamburg, Toronto, Sao Pãolo, and Paris. His reviews and features have also been published by WhatsOnStage, for whom he was a panelist to help curate nominees for their 2023 and 2024 Awards as well as BroadwayWorldUK, Musicals Magazine and LondonTheatre.co.uk. Instagram/TikTok/X: @MickeyJoTheatre Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week we discuss a horrific news story about a family in the midlands which in turn sets us down the tragic path of Oedipus. We also take a look at reports of a creature spotted in the skies above Reactor 4, a diving accident in Trinidad and why serial killers can't get it up.Join the current timeline on Patreon! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hello EICreatures, we're back, and so are TV producers! Did we ask for another dating show? No! Did we get one? YES!Netflix says ‘Age of Attraction is throwing out the rulebook — and birthdates — singles build connections based purely on chemistry, compatibility, and an undeniable spark that has nothing to do with the year they graduated from high school. In this dating experiment, there's only one question they can't ask: 'How old are you?''Filmed in Whistler Canada, the 40 singles meet at a retreat and take part in different activities to get to know each other… if they feel a special connection they can go to the 'promise room', exchange rings and commit to each other before they reveal their age to each other…Ellie Muir for the independent writes it's ‘an Oedipus complex disguised as a dating show' ‘Age, surprise surprise, turns out to be a bit more than that. Mommy and daddy issues are always the elephant in the room here, but rarely interrogated. The younger women lament the "immature" men in their own generation and seek out someone older with financial stability, while the older men — most of them with children from previous relationships — definitely signed up to this show with the sole intention of securing a 20-something girlfriend.' Has the pendulum swung back on the stigma around age gap relationships? Or does this show prove that they can indeed be very tricky territory?We hope you enjoy, as always please do rate, review and follow the show on your podcast player app! O, R, B xxAge Of AttractionNetflix's Age of Attraction is an Oedipus complex disguised as a dating showThe Myth of the 25-Year-Old Brain Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Continuing on on sec. 469-483 of Hegel's Phenomenology, finishing the analysis of Antigone and bringing in Oedipus to say why the conflict between types of law is both criminal and destined. We then turn to the aftermath: a society alienated from law but with legally recognized self-conscious individuals. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com. Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion. Sponsors: Get three months free of online payroll and benefits software for small businesses at gusto.com/pel. Get a $1/month e-commerce trial at shopify.com/pel. Go to HelloFresh.com/pel10fm to Get 10 free meals + a free Zwilling Knife with your third box.

El ego humano es una tragedia antigua.Los griegos la contaron en sus mitos.Los filósofos la describieron en sus libros.Y el apóstol Pablo la expuso con una palabra extraña: inflado.En este episodio exploramos la verdadera condición del ego humano:vacío, doloroso, ocupado y frágil.Desde las tragedias de Icarus, Narcissus y Oedipus, hasta la profunda reflexión de Augustine of Hippo sobre el alma curvada sobre sí misma, descubrimos algo inquietante:El ego no es la señal de un corazón fuerte.Es la reacción de un corazón vacío.Pero el evangelio propone algo radical:no inflar el ego, ni destruirlo… sino liberarnos de él.Una conversación sobre orgullo, identidad, tragedia humana y la libertad que nace cuando el corazón deja de girar alrededor de sí mismo.

New month means new theme with this month's theme being, "One for the money, two for the scares" where I will focus on twins within horror movies. And starting March off with the cult classic, 1987's "Blood Rage" with special guest Matt, Killer Horror Critic. The Mistress of the Menagerie and Matt discuss defense mechanisms, Oedipus complex, and abandonment issues. Come check it out!

El ego humano es una tragedia antigua.Los griegos la contaron en sus mitos.Los filósofos la describieron en sus libros.Y el apóstol Pablo la expuso con una palabra extraña: inflado.En este episodio exploramos la verdadera condición del ego humano:vacío, doloroso, ocupado y frágil.Desde las tragedias de Icarus, Narcissus y Oedipus, hasta la profunda reflexión de Augustine of Hippo sobre el alma curvada sobre sí misma, descubrimos algo inquietante:El ego no es la señal de un corazón fuerte.Es la reacción de un corazón vacío.Pero el evangelio propone algo radical:no inflar el ego, ni destruirlo… sino liberarnos de él.Una conversación sobre orgullo, identidad, tragedia humana y la libertad que nace cuando el corazón deja de girar alrededor de sí mismo.

El ego humano es una tragedia antigua.Los griegos la contaron en sus mitos.Los filósofos la describieron en sus libros.Y el apóstol Pablo la expuso con una palabra extraña: inflado.En este episodio exploramos la verdadera condición del ego humano:vacío, doloroso, ocupado y frágil.Desde las tragedias de Icarus, Narcissus y Oedipus, hasta la profunda reflexión de Augustine of Hippo sobre el alma curvada sobre sí misma, descubrimos algo inquietante:El ego no es la señal de un corazón fuerte.Es la reacción de un corazón vacío.Pero el evangelio propone algo radical:no inflar el ego, ni destruirlo… sino liberarnos de él.Una conversación sobre orgullo, identidad, tragedia humana y la libertad que nace cuando el corazón deja de girar alrededor de sí mismo.

"[A couple state of mind] is the capacity to be subjectively involved with both individuals, but then importantly, to be able to step back, find a third position, and try to understand what the couple are creating together. Although it's kind of obvious in a way, because surely, that's what a couple therapist is doing, they're trying to understand the couple relationship. It can have quite a powerful effect on the couple coming for help, because very often they're coming with a different state of mind. They're coming with a state of mind where the other one is felt to be the problem. Quite often, one partner feels brought by the other for treatment, and it's very much a kind of two-person interaction - 'You know, if you weren't this way or if you did this for me, then I would be happy'. What perhaps the couples don't  have is the capacity themselves to step back and observe what they're creating together - that's the couple state of mind. The couple state of mind is initially in the therapist. It's the couple therapist's analytic stance, if you like. But what I'm suggesting is that over time, this gets identified with and internalized by the couple into their relationship."    Episode Description: We begin by describing the nature of the 'couple state of mind' as it exists in the mind of the therapist and as it grows in the couple allowing them to reflect on their 'coupleness'. We consider the similarities and differences between this and the familiar analytic self-reflective capacities that develop in intensive individual treatment. Mary presents clinical examples of her countertransference inclinations that are evoked in working with those who are initially 'likable' or 'unpleasant', i.e., "I can't understand why they're together" and how that evolves into a deeper understanding of the nature of their 'togetherness'. She discusses fixed unconscious fantasies and projective identifications that are both defensive and creative. We also discuss how "curiosity is the opposite of narcissism" and how that vital ability lives in the therapist and in the couple. We close with recognizing that the couple's capacity for their own 'couple state of mind' is an indication of readiness for termination.   Our Guest: Mary Morgan, is a Psychoanalyst, Couple Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist, and a writer. She is a Fellow of the British Psychoanalytical Society, Senior Fellow of Tavistock Relationships and Honorary Member of the Polish Society for Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy. She is a consultant member of the International Psychoanalytic Association's Committee on Couple and Family Psychoanalysis, a member of the Editorial board of the International Journal of Psychoanalysis and a member of the International Advisory Board of the journal of Couple and Family Psychoanalysis. She worked for many years at Tavistock Relationships, London, where she was the Reader in Couple Psychoanalysis and Head of the MA and Professional Doctorate in Couple Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy. She currently has a private practice of individuals, couples, supervision, and teaching. Along with Andrew Balfour and Christopher Vincent in 2012, she co-edited How Couple Relationships Shape Our World: Clinical Practice, Research and Policy Perspectives. Her book A Couple State of Mind: Psychoanalysis of Couples – the Tavistock Relationships Model (2019) is available in several languages. Her latest book Couple Relations: A Contemporary Introduction was published in 2025 and is available as an audiobook. Recommended Readings: Morgan, M. (2019) A couple state of mind: psychoanalysis of couples and the Tavistock Relationships Model. London & New York: Routledge.   Morgan, M. (2025) Couple Relations: A Contemporary Introduction. London: Routledge.   Ruszczynski, S. & Fisher, J. V. (Eds.) (1995). Intrusiveness and Intimacy in the Couple. London: Karnac.   Fisher, J. (1999). The Uninvited Guest. Emerging from Narcissism towards Marriage. London: Karnac.   Grier, F. (Ed.) (2005a). Oedipus and the Couple. London: Karnac.   Morgan, M. (2019) Love, Hate, and Otherness in Intimate Relating. Couple and Family Psychoanalysis 9:15-21   Clulow, C. (2009) (Ed) Sex, Attachment and Couple Psychotherapy: Psychoanalytic Perspectives (pp. 75–101). London: Karnac.  

You want to remember something a certain way, but that memory can only preserve as long as you do not revisit it. In 2025, the BTTP fellas are at it again - rewatching a long-time favourite Vampire-Superhero-Action-Horror flick, Blade (1998). It's going to be a tough one. This episode, Anthon, Ian and Ben prepare to enter the Temple of Eternal Night and attempt to figure out the art of applying sun cream to stop yourself bursting into flames, assaulting uniformed police officers in broad daylight (with swords strapped to ones back) with no repercussions. Along the way, they are tested by the nebulous bromance between Frost and La Magra, the wildly tacked on inclusion of Oedipus themes and more! The answers may upset long term fans of the Day Walker! You have been warned.

Today I spoke with Dr. Louis Rothschild about his new book Rapprochement Between Fathers and Sons Breakdowns, Reunions, Potentialities (Karnac, 2024). Our conversation moved freely between theory, generational attitudes, thinkers, and personal vignettes. What is a good enough father? What is the difference between a man of achievement and a man of power? Who is the father of the mother's mind? What happens when a father enables holding? How is masculinity valued by other men? What is meant by phrases such as a “man's gotta do what a man's gotta do?” Why exactly do we need to “call the boy's father?” How is the father's role rendered invisible? These are some of the questions subsumed in the broader question of “Who nurtures and who is nurtured?” (And does the myth of the “self-made-man” indicate a man who exists without nurturing?) “What I'm arguing”, says Rothschild, “is that that sexist dichotomy is a mirage in its own right and that attachment strings needn't be severed. They can be reworked over the lifespan and this idea of having this clean tidy break and going off to live your life where liberating the kid from this regressive maternal bond is the path to individuation, I think that's just patently false.” Like an analyst, the book has been in formation for many years. “Percolating and distilling” as Dr. Rothschild says at the top of the interview. Motivated by the “way the culture was shifting” he sensed “that things I take for granted are actually a minority opinion.” Rothschild's survey of sons includes mythology; Oedipus scripture; Issac. As well as the sons of literature; Sendak's Max, Silverstein's Boy, White's Swan, and others. Affect rich case illustrations are also presented. The issues addressed in the book are the ones we are contending with in in analysis. They are the discussions we are having with our fathers, sons, and families. Rothschild's book is essential and meets the clinical moment. “Louis Rothschild's book is both an outstanding representative of ‘return to the father' and a unique explication of psychoanalytic thought on its own. This is a book of great literary elegance and impressive psychological wisdom.” Salman Akhtar, MD Christopher Russell, LP is a psychoanalyst in Chelsea, Manhattan. He is a member of the faculty and supervising analyst at The Center for Modern Psychoanalytic Studies and The New York Graduate School of Psychoanalysis. His primary theorists are Sándor Ferenczi and Hyman Spotnitz. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Today I spoke with Dr. Louis Rothschild about his new book Rapprochement Between Fathers and Sons Breakdowns, Reunions, Potentialities (Karnac, 2024). Our conversation moved freely between theory, generational attitudes, thinkers, and personal vignettes. What is a good enough father? What is the difference between a man of achievement and a man of power? Who is the father of the mother's mind? What happens when a father enables holding? How is masculinity valued by other men? What is meant by phrases such as a “man's gotta do what a man's gotta do?” Why exactly do we need to “call the boy's father?” How is the father's role rendered invisible? These are some of the questions subsumed in the broader question of “Who nurtures and who is nurtured?” (And does the myth of the “self-made-man” indicate a man who exists without nurturing?) “What I'm arguing”, says Rothschild, “is that that sexist dichotomy is a mirage in its own right and that attachment strings needn't be severed. They can be reworked over the lifespan and this idea of having this clean tidy break and going off to live your life where liberating the kid from this regressive maternal bond is the path to individuation, I think that's just patently false.” Like an analyst, the book has been in formation for many years. “Percolating and distilling” as Dr. Rothschild says at the top of the interview. Motivated by the “way the culture was shifting” he sensed “that things I take for granted are actually a minority opinion.” Rothschild's survey of sons includes mythology; Oedipus scripture; Issac. As well as the sons of literature; Sendak's Max, Silverstein's Boy, White's Swan, and others. Affect rich case illustrations are also presented. The issues addressed in the book are the ones we are contending with in in analysis. They are the discussions we are having with our fathers, sons, and families. Rothschild's book is essential and meets the clinical moment. “Louis Rothschild's book is both an outstanding representative of ‘return to the father' and a unique explication of psychoanalytic thought on its own. This is a book of great literary elegance and impressive psychological wisdom.” Salman Akhtar, MD Christopher Russell, LP is a psychoanalyst in Chelsea, Manhattan. He is a member of the faculty and supervising analyst at The Center for Modern Psychoanalytic Studies and The New York Graduate School of Psychoanalysis. His primary theorists are Sándor Ferenczi and Hyman Spotnitz. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychology

In the recent adaptation of the classical play "Oedipus," actor Mark Strong stars as the titular character, a politician who is about to win a major election. Audiences meet Oedipus in his campaign office with his family and his "wife," as disturbing revelations cause him to unravel. Strong discusses "Oedipus," running through February 8.

Today, I'm thrilled to announce my interview with Tony-winning director Julie Taymor. Tune in to hear some of the stories of her legendary career, including the visual motif of circles in THE LION KING, adapting the plot of the film, exploring artifice in THE TEMPEST on stage and on screen, working with Kathryn Hunter on A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM, practicing mask work in auditions, how studying myths in college influenced her later work, her pioneering work on the film FRIDA, why Shakespeare's dialogue is inherently visual, creating a new form of theater in Korea, finding ideographs for every production she directs, bringing THE HAGGADAH to life at the Public Theater, collaborating with Elliott Goldenthal, combining opera and musical theater in JUAN DARIEN, finding a visual take on M. BUTTERFLY, changing the ending of GROUNDED, her opera debut with OEDIPUS, honing her craft in Paris, Indonesia, and Japan, the modern relevance of SPIDER MAN: TURN OFF THE DARK, her new musical THE GRAND DELUSION, and so much more. Don't miss this fascinating conversation with a true visionary.

Our contemporary world is inescapably Greek. Whether in a word like “pandemic,” a Freudian state of mind like the “Oedipus complex,” or a replica of the Parthenon in a Chinese theme park, ancient Greek culture shapes the contours of our lives. Ever since the first Roman imitators, we have been continually falling under the Greeks' spell. But how did ancient Greece spread its influence so far and wide? And how has this influence changed us? In What the Greeks Did for Us (Yale UP, 2023), Tony Spawforth explores our classical heritage, wherever it's to be found. He reveals its legacy in everything from religion to popular culture, and unearths the darker side of Greek influence—from the Nazis' obsession with Spartan “racial purity” to the elitism of classical education. Paying attention to the huge breadth and variety of Hellenic influence, this book paints an essential portrait of the ancient world's living legacy—considering to whom it matters, and why. Tony Spawforth is emeritus professor of ancient history at Newcastle University. As well as leading cultural tours in Greece, he has presented eight documentaries for the BBC and has published thirteen books, including The Story of Greece and Rome. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

On Today's Show: Prager explores the complex legacy of Sigmund Freud with Peter Kramer, a professor of psychiatry at Brown University. They delve into Freud's impact on modern thought, discussing his ideas on the unconscious, the Oedipus complex, and the role of sex in shaping human behavior. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A Little Greek, A Little Sci-Fi 2025 kicked off my goal of reading the great books of Western Civilization. So in typical fashion I read a little Greek, a little sci-fi, and a smattering of everything else. Indiepub still factored into the list with some hits and misses, just like the tradpubs. As always, the goal we should all have isn’t quantity it’s quality. But quality doesn’t just mean classic great books, it means books you enjoy and changes you and allows you to experience escapism and learn more about God’s world as He is the ultimate storyteller. TIMELINE: 00:00:00 – Introduction 00:04:14 – The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis 00:07:06 – The God Frequency by Douglas Hemme 00:10:40 – Amorphous – Breaking the Mold by Steven Burgess 00:12:06 – Spectrum Multiview Christian Ethics Four Views edited by Steve Wilkens 00:18:18 – The Peace War by Vernor Vinge 00:22:37 – Greek for the Rest of Us by William D. Mounce 00:26:05 – The Iliad by Homer 00:32:09 – Peter Pan by J.M. Barrie 00:34:31 – Flight of the Eagles by Gilbert L. Morris 00:37:21 – Sundered by Ernie Laurence Jr. 00:38:55 – Horus Rising by Dan Abnett 00:41:37 – The Odyssey by Homer 00:43:17 – D’Aulaires’ Book of Greek Myths by Ingri d’Aulaire 00:44:46 – The Secret Door by Jenny Phillips 00:46:59 – Project Hail Mary by Andy Weir 00:49:34 – Passing the Torch An Apology for Classical Christian Education by Louis Markos 00:53:21 – The Core by Leigh A. Bortins 00:56:06 – Agamemnon by Aeschylus 00:59:10 – The Libation Bearers by Aeschylus 01:00:39 – The Eumenides by Aeschylus 01:02:29 – The Air We Breathe How We All Came to Believe in Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality by Glen Scrivener 01:05:11 – Adam of the Road by Elizabeth Janet Gray 01:07:00 – Maisie Dobbs by Jacqueline Winspear 01:09:45 – The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry 01:12:15 – Mr. Popper’s Penguins by Richard Atwater 01:13:37 – Oedipus Rex by Sophocles 01:16:36 – Oedipus at Colonus by Sophocles 01:18:39 – Antigone by Sophocles 01:21:12 – To Be Continued Next Week Books mentioned in this episode: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis Kindle Paperback Audible The God Frequency by Douglas Hemme Kindle Paperback Audible Amorphous – Breaking the Mold by Steven Burgess Kindle Paperback Spectrum Multiview Christian Ethics Four Views edited by Steve Wilkens Kindle  Paperback  CaveToTheCross Episodes – wwww.CaveToTheCross.com/ChristianEthics The Peace War by Vernor Vinge Kindle Paperback Greek for the Rest of Us by William D. Mounce Kindle Paperback The Iliad by Homer Kindle Paperback Audible Peter Pan by J.M. Barrie Kindle Paperback Audible Flight of the Eagles by Gilbert L. Morris Kindle Paperback Audible Sundered by Ernie Laurence Jr. Kindle Horus Rising by Dan Abnett Kindle Paperback  Audible The Odyssey by Homer Kindle Paperback  D’Aulaires’ Book of Greek Myths by Ingri d’Aulaire Kindle Paperback Audible The Secret Door by Jenny Phillips Paperback Project Hail Mary by Andy Weir Kindle Paperback Audible Passing the Torch An Apology for Classical Christian Education by Louis Markos Kindle Paperback Audible The Core by Leigh A. Bortins Kindle Paperback  Audible Agamemnon by Aeschylus Kindle Paperback The Libation Bearers by Aeschylus Kindle Paperback The Eumenides by Aeschylus Kindle Paperback The Air We Breathe How We All Came to Believe in Freedom, Kindness, Progress, and Equality by Glen Scrivener Kindle Paperback  Audible  Adam of the Road by Elizabeth Janet Gray Paperback Audible Maisie Dobbs by Jacqueline Winspear Kindle Paperback Audible The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry Kindle Paperback Mr. Popper’s Penguins by Richard Atwater Kindle  Paperback Audible Oedipus Rex by Sophocles Kindle Paperback Oedipus at Colonus by Sophocles Kindle Paperback Antigone by Sophocles Kindle Paperback All episodes, short clips, & blog – https://www.cavetothecross.com

Our contemporary world is inescapably Greek. Whether in a word like “pandemic,” a Freudian state of mind like the “Oedipus complex,” or a replica of the Parthenon in a Chinese theme park, ancient Greek culture shapes the contours of our lives. Ever since the first Roman imitators, we have been continually falling under the Greeks' spell. But how did ancient Greece spread its influence so far and wide? And how has this influence changed us? In What the Greeks Did for Us (Yale UP, 2023), Tony Spawforth explores our classical heritage, wherever it's to be found. He reveals its legacy in everything from religion to popular culture, and unearths the darker side of Greek influence—from the Nazis' obsession with Spartan “racial purity” to the elitism of classical education. Paying attention to the huge breadth and variety of Hellenic influence, this book paints an essential portrait of the ancient world's living legacy—considering to whom it matters, and why. Tony Spawforth is emeritus professor of ancient history at Newcastle University. As well as leading cultural tours in Greece, he has presented eight documentaries for the BBC and has published thirteen books, including The Story of Greece and Rome. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Our contemporary world is inescapably Greek. Whether in a word like “pandemic,” a Freudian state of mind like the “Oedipus complex,” or a replica of the Parthenon in a Chinese theme park, ancient Greek culture shapes the contours of our lives. Ever since the first Roman imitators, we have been continually falling under the Greeks' spell. But how did ancient Greece spread its influence so far and wide? And how has this influence changed us? In What the Greeks Did for Us (Yale UP, 2023), Tony Spawforth explores our classical heritage, wherever it's to be found. He reveals its legacy in everything from religion to popular culture, and unearths the darker side of Greek influence—from the Nazis' obsession with Spartan “racial purity” to the elitism of classical education. Paying attention to the huge breadth and variety of Hellenic influence, this book paints an essential portrait of the ancient world's living legacy—considering to whom it matters, and why. Tony Spawforth is emeritus professor of ancient history at Newcastle University. As well as leading cultural tours in Greece, he has presented eight documentaries for the BBC and has published thirteen books, including The Story of Greece and Rome. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literary-studies

Our contemporary world is inescapably Greek. Whether in a word like “pandemic,” a Freudian state of mind like the “Oedipus complex,” or a replica of the Parthenon in a Chinese theme park, ancient Greek culture shapes the contours of our lives. Ever since the first Roman imitators, we have been continually falling under the Greeks' spell. But how did ancient Greece spread its influence so far and wide? And how has this influence changed us? In What the Greeks Did for Us (Yale UP, 2023), Tony Spawforth explores our classical heritage, wherever it's to be found. He reveals its legacy in everything from religion to popular culture, and unearths the darker side of Greek influence—from the Nazis' obsession with Spartan “racial purity” to the elitism of classical education. Paying attention to the huge breadth and variety of Hellenic influence, this book paints an essential portrait of the ancient world's living legacy—considering to whom it matters, and why. Tony Spawforth is emeritus professor of ancient history at Newcastle University. As well as leading cultural tours in Greece, he has presented eight documentaries for the BBC and has published thirteen books, including The Story of Greece and Rome. Morteza Hajizadeh is a Ph.D. graduate in English from the University of Auckland in New Zealand. His research interests are Cultural Studies; Critical Theory; Environmental History; Medieval (Intellectual) History; Gothic Studies; 18th and 19th Century British Literature. YouTube channel. Twitter. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/art

Can you legally kiss your boss's son on New Year's Eve? What if I told you I only did it because I hate my boss(!). Plus, the fabulous Chandler Dean (Abolish Everything!) is here!!!Petty Crimes is hosted by Ceara Jane O'Sullivan and Griff Stark-EnnisHave a crime that should be heard in the Petty Crimes Court? Submit it to pettycrimespodcast@gmail.comJoin our Patreon for exclusive bonus eps, ad-free episodes, and more!Keep up with us on Instagram and TikTok for crime evidence, events, BTS and other general petty bullsh*t …This episode was produced and edited by Riley Madincea. Additional production support from Meghan Hinna.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Acclaimed actress Lesley Manville is taking Broadway by storm in "Oedipus," a 2,500 year-old play that still has the power to surprise people. Tickets for "Oedipus" at Studio 54 are available now. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

822 Barry Adamson - Oedipus Schmoedipus

In this episode of Half Hour, we take a deeper dive into the 2025 Broadway production of Oedipus at Studio 54, directed by Robert Icke and starring Mark Strong and Lesley Manville. We break down the plot and concept, looking at how the production reframes Sophocles' tragedy as an election-night political drama and what that does to the story's sense of inevitability and fate. The conversation covers the direction and translation, the use of contemporary political language, and how the staging shapes the tension of the evening. We discuss the scene work, highlight standout moments from Strong and Manville, and consider whether modernizing a classic in this way clarifies or complicates its themes. We also speculate on where this production might go after its New York run and what it suggests about the future of updating Greek tragedy for Broadway audiences.  Follow and connect with all things @HalfHourPodcast on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠TikTok⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, and ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Share your thoughts on this production in the comments on Spotify, and let us know what you would like us to cover next. If you enjoy these post-show conversations, follow Half Hour and leave a rating and review so more theater lovers can find the podcast. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Is time running out for Venezuela's Nicolas Maduro? Christiane asks Colombia's former president Ivan Duque why he supports Trump's aggressive stance against the country next door. And while the U.S. president has his eye on Latin America, the White House is snubbing Europe again, opting not to send Secretary of State Marco Rubio to a NATO foreign minister meeting. Julianne Smith, former US Ambassador to NATO, speaks to Christiane about transatlantic tension, and those marathon peace talks between Trump's team and Putin that appeared to produce nothing.  Plus, Oedipus on Broadway! Christiane speaks to stars Lesley Manville and Mark Strong about modernizing the 2,5000-year-old Greek tragedy, and playing a mother and son in love. From the archives, we revisit a 1988 mutiny in a New Jersey monastery, and remember legendary playwright Tom Stoppard.   Air date: December 6, 2025   Guests: Ivan Duque Julianne Smith Lesley Manville & Mark Strong Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

1139. In this bonus discussion with Martha Barnette back in March, we look at Martha's pivotal twelve-year journey with a polyglot tutor who transformed her understanding of ancient Greek, starting with the etymology of "Oedipus." We also look at her beekeeping adventures, including the unknown-to-me history of the term 'queen bee' and a unique book on spotting them.Martha Barnette's websiteMartha's book, “Friends with Words: Adventures in Languageland”Martha's podcast, "A Way with Words"

The Regime of the Brother is a book of psychoanalytic feminist theory (particularly leaning on Lacan), explaining why we no longer live in an Oedipal patriarchy, but rather live in a 'sham-Oedipus' regime of the brother. Neo-totemism, the primal hoard, the narcissistic ego as a consequence of failed symbolic castration and, consequently, no entry into the symbolic order. Make sense? Either way, you should listen to me and Stephen G Adubato talk about this book!Cracks in Postmodernity (very, very highly recommended!): https://cracksinpomo.substack.com/Stephen on X: @stephengadubatoVERY IMPORTANT INFORMATIONContact: jack.bcfh@gmail.comJack has published a novel called Tower!Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Tower-Jack-BC-ebook/dp/B0CM5P9N9M/ref=monarch_sidesheetThe first nine chapters of Tower are available for free here: jackbc.substack.comOur Patreon: www.patreon.com/TheBookClubfromHellJack's Substack: jackbc.substack.comLevi's website: www.levioutloud.comJoin our Discord (the best place to interact with us): https://discord.gg/nbRkVeztEQWatch us on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0n7r1ZTpsUw5exoYxb4aKA/featuredX: @bookclubhell666Jack on X: @supersquat1Levi on X: @optimismlevi

 Listen to the Show Right Click to Save GuestsThe City Theatre Other Desert CitiesColor Arc Productions Stories about Unique Jobs What We Talked About  

Stars announced for anniversary ‘Laramie Project,’ ‘Hazbin Hotel’ on Broadway to stream, Matt reviews ‘Oedipus’ Since 2016, “Today on Broadway” has been the first and only daily podcast recapping the top theatre headlines every Monday through Friday. Any and all feedback is appreciated:Grace Aki: grace@broadwayradio.com | @ItsGraceAkiMatt Tamanini: matt@broadwayradio.com | @BroadwayRadio Patreon: BroadwayRadiohttps://www.patreon.com/broadwayradio For read more

Laura and Xhafer may be sick and tired, but all the more reason to chat BSG with friends. Laura calls out Starbuck's toxic masculinity. Xhafer gives a shoutout to his spreadsheet homies. This episode covers Battlestar Galactica Season 3, Episode 5: Collaborators. Discord: https://discord.gg/MUHKDDk6TNMerch: https://www.etsy.com/shop/WhatHappenedHerePods

This episode is primer on Oedipus and why this tragic mythical king is so important to psychology.___SubstackCorporate Speaking How to Build a Healthy Brain* Unprocessed: What Your Diet is Doing to Your Brain* Original music by Juan Iglesias *Affiliate links The information shared on this podcast is for educational and informational purposes only and is not a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of a qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition or treatment. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you heard on this podcast. Reliance on any information provided here is solely at your own risk. Remember, your health is unique to you, so consult your healthcare provider for guidance tailored to your personal needs.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/strongerminds. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week we cover the MASSIVE BGs midseason update, along with the announcement of Hearthstone's upcoming expansion Across the Timelines featuring new and returning heroes from across Hearthstone's history! That's right we talk a bit of Hearthstone! And then we crash it all down with our perfect rating system.  Here is the newsletter I write that releases every Sunday morning! https://stormraige.substack.com/ Logo Created By: Nate Wolfe. Modifications by Gingersaurous Theme Song By: Se7enist. https://open.spotify.com/artist/5kmsQa4jBfiUwWLqOp64GX? You can buy merch here: https://blizzlet.myspreadshop.com/all

Today, Katie is joined by Ayurvedic Practitioner, Reiki Master and friend of the podcast Angelica Neri. They explore the many facets of feminine energy, our body's innate wisdom and the courage it takes to soften our ego and forgive. Together, they share personal stories of healing, forgiveness and reconnecting with intuition through somatic movement and creative expression. With warmth and raw honesty, this episode invites you to deepen and honor your personal journey toward balance, embodied spirituality and the nurturing embrace of the Divine Mother. Ready to dive deeper into the Divine Feminine? Join Katie and The Shakti School on Monday, October 6th, at 11 am ET for a FREE live webinar called Divine Feminine Ayurveda 101. Click here to sign up! In this episode about somatic movement and much more, you'll hear: ~ Registration for the 2026 class of our Ayurveda School is now open! Click here to learn more and enroll. ~ What exactly is feminine energy? ~ How Angelica and Katie connect to their feminine ~ Living from the thinking mind vs the body ~ Finding your way back to your feminine intuition ~ The Rishtis of yoga ~ Attachment theory ~ How Angelica brings creativity and somatic movement into her yoga classes ~ Exploring and liberating the body through somatic movement ~ The importance of kindergarten vibes in middle age ~ White Tara ~ The Divine Mother archetype ~ Angelica's powerful hospice experiences ~ Breaking generational cycles ~ Powerful personal stories of healing paternal relationships ~ The Oedipus complex ~ Healing through forgiveness ~ Softening the ego ~ The true goal of enlightenment ~ The art of not reacting ~ Practical spiritual practices to heal our polarized world ~ Katie and Angelica's current somatic movement practices ~ Cultivating an authentic connection to spirituality ~ Sign up for our free mini-course about Women's Wisdom and Ayurveda!   Connect with Angelica Neri and The Shakti School: ~ Follow Angelica on Instagram ~ Listen to Angelica's The Divine Feminine Healer's Podcast ~ Follow The Shakti School on Instagram and Facebook ~ 2026 Chakra Yoga Nidra Retreat: Deep dive into the chakras with Katie as your guide in the Bahamas in spring 2026! ~ Read Katie's latest book, Glow-Worthy!   Find the full show notes here: https://theshaktischool.com/ep-224-forgiveness-somatic-movement-death-and-the-divine-mother-with-angelica-neri/

What is the story behind the writing of Oedipus, the notorious king of Thebes who murdered his father and unwittingly married his mother? Was it based on a real historical event? What are Oedipus' cursed mythic origins in Thebes? Who was Sophocles, the legendary Greek playwright? Why was the play a product of 5th century Athens; its rivalries with other greek city states such as Thebes, a raging plague, and the tyrant Pericles? What horrifying events unfold in Oedipus? It is the greatest tragedy of all time? And, how did it later come to influence Sigmund Freud's unnerving interpretation of the deepest desires of the  subconscious….?  Join Tom and Dominic as they discuss one of the most famous Greek myths of all time: Oedipus; unravelling this disturbing tragedy, delving into its meaning today, and exploring the historical context behind it all.  ______ Try Adobe Express for free now at https://www.adobe.com/uk/express/spotlight/designwithexpress?sdid=HM85WZZV&mv=display&mv2=ctv or by searching in the app store. Learn more at https://www.uber.com/onourway ______ Join The Rest Is History Club: Unlock the full experience of the show – with exclusive bonus episodes, ad-free listening, early access to every series and live show tickets, a members-only newsletter, discounted books from the show, and access to our private Discord chatroom. Sign up directly at therestishistory.com For more Goalhanger Podcasts, head to www.goalhanger.com _______ Twitter: @TheRestHistory @holland_tom @dcsandbrook Producer: Theo Young-Smith Assistant Producer: Tabby Syrett + Aaliyah Akude  Video Producer: Jack Meek Executive Producers: Jack Davenport + Tony Pastor Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Reviews are in for ‘Art’ on Broadway, Times Square casino officially not happening, full cast for ‘Oedipus’ announced Since 2016, “Today on Broadway” has been the first and only daily podcast recapping the top theatre headlines every Monday through Friday. Any and all feedback is appreciated:Grace Aki: grace@broadwayradio.com | @ItsGraceAkiMatt Tamanini: matt@broadwayradio.com | @BroadwayRadio read more

Steven Rinella talks with BHA's Western Policy and Conservation Manager Devin O'Dea, Brody Henderson, Randall Williams, Cory Calkins, Phil Taylor, and Corinne Schneider. Topics Discussed: Steve gets the short end of the stick with a wafer cone, twice; a hot tip on using hydrogen peroxide to remove blood from fabric; an organic mass; subscribe to The MeatEater Kids Podcast feed to catch our fresh drop of Season 3; a crawfish Oedipus complex drama; mountain lions killing six times more deer because black bears steal their; the highest density concentration of bears in the world; more bear-human conflict; how the Humane Society of the US shockingly has police powers; California's screwy laws against hunting bears and the effort to fight them; and more. Connect with Steve and The MeatEater Podcast Network Steve on Instagram and Twitter MeatEater on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and YoutubeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Oedipus complex is probably Sigmund Freud’s most famous theory – that every little boy or girl goes through a phase where they want to kill one parent and, well, do things with the other. Good thing Freud just made it up.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this interview episode Sebastian speaks with podcaster, author, and host of Let's Talk About Myths, Baby Liv Albert. Liv has spent the last 8 years and 700 episodes of her podcast exploring the nuances of Greek and Roman mythology. Sebastian and Liv dive deep into the world of classical myth and talk about the myriad ways that the ancients understood their legendary tradition. In this free flowing conversation the podcasters get into their thoughts on mythical characters like Medea, Oedipus, Medusa, and Helen of Troy. Tune-in and find out how dragon chariots, ghost Helen's, and smack-talkin' playwrights all play a role in the story.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.