Podcast appearances and mentions of peter gottschalk

As usual there are spoilers ahead!If you want to read the full show notes you can click the episode on this page and scroll down. The Day the earth Stood Still was released in 1951 just like The Thing from Another World. And just like that film The Day the Earth Stood Still is based on a story from Astounding Science Fiction magazine. The flying saucer craze of 1947 has obviously made its impression on Hollywood and The Day the Earth Stood Still delivered a seamless sleek futuristic saucer along with an imposing shiny robot and a polite humanoid alien who comes in peace to deliver an ultimatum to a world wrangling with the atomic age. The Experts: Glyn Morgan is Curatorial Lead at the Science Museum in London and is a science fiction scholar. Peter Gottschalk is a Professor of Religion at Wesleyan University with a special interest in the South Asian region, empire and science. He also teaches a class called “Awesome Cinema”. Chapters 00:00 Introduction to the show and guests 02:22 Astounding magazine, The Manhattan project and the Peace Offensive 5:55 From pulps to peace: Sci-fi amid the red scare 11:28 The Flying Saucer 14:00 A benevolent invader and the United Nations 19:39 Gort the robot - Klaatu, Barada Nikto! 25:55 The sane scientist 29:06 Christian themes 34:36 Media frenzy 38:24 The 2008 remake 42:44 Bernard Hermann's seminal score 44:06 Legacy and recommendations NEXT EPISODE!Next episode we will be taking a closer look at The War of the Worlds (1953). You can check Just Watch to find out where it can be found in your region. It is available to buy or rent at many outlets including Apple TV. If you wanted to listen to the famous 1938 radio play from Orson Welles you can hear it here on YouTube. And if you want to hear Richard Burton's hypnotic reverberating voice in Jeff Wayne's Musical version of War of the Worlds you can hear that here on YouTube.  

Was gab es nicht schon für legendäre Mitgliederversammlungen beim HSV. Presse und Gäste wurden rausgeschmissen, Versammlungen um kurz vor Mitternacht abgebrochen, weil der Raum nicht länger gemietet war, als Konsequenz gab es dann eine Weile zwei Mitgliederversammlungen (Winter und Sommer) im Jahr. Es wurde diskutiert, gestritten und beleidigt Tonleiter rauf, Tonleiter runter. Gestern war es dann wieder so weit. Was da alles passiert ist, berichten Sven (@SvenGZ) und Tanja (@fschmidt77) nicht live aus der edel-optics-Halle in Wilhelmsburg, dafür reflektiert und ausgeschlafen. Spoiler: Es waren nicht so viele Mitglieder anwesend wie bei den Versammlungen rund um die Ausgliederung, und es gab auch nicht so viele Wortmeldungen und kontroverse Debatten wie in Wahljahren (also in diesem Falle HSV-Wahljahren, welche Rolle die anstehende Hamburger Bürgerschaftswahl bei der HSV-MV gespielt hat, hört Ihr im Podcast). Dieter Grzesik sprach nur kurz (und das sogar konstruktiv und zum Thema!), Konstantin Rogalla und Peter Gottschalk gar nicht dafür steht eine Generation Pöbelrentner in den Startlöchern. Wer das ist, wird Euch überraschen! Den HSV-Bericht zur MV findet ihr hier: hsv-ev.de/news/newsdetai Die Einzelheiten zur anstehenden Erhöhung der Mitgliedsbeiträge hat der e.V. hier zusammengefasst: hsv-ev.de/news/newsdetai Eine Anmerkung noch: An einer Stelle erzählt Tanja (mal wieder) Blödsinn: Lewis Holtby ist natürlich gerade mal ein gutes halbes Jahr weg, es erscheint nur viel länger. In diesem Sinne, denkt daran, wie immer gilt: LOVE HAMBURG HATE RACISM! Für Fragen, Kommentare oder Anregungen schreibt uns! Wir sind zu finden auf Twitter unter @HSVTalk, auf Facebook unter facebook.com/HSVTalk/ oder schreibt eine Mail an hsvtalk@web.de. Wenn Ihr uns über iTunes hört, lasst uns gerne eine Bewertung da, über mehr Sterne als der HSV hat, freuen wir uns besonders. Erzählt Euren Freunden von uns und nehmt Euch in Acht: Wer sich mit einer Meinung über den HSV aus dem Fenster lehnt, muss mit einer Einladung von uns rechnen!

Was gab es nicht schon für legendäre Mitgliederversammlungen beim HSV. Presse und Gäste wurden rausgeschmissen, Versammlungen um kurz vor Mitternacht abgebrochen, weil der Raum nicht länger gemietet war, als Konsequenz gab es dann eine Weile zwei Mitgliederversammlungen (Winter und Sommer) im Jahr. Es wurde diskutiert, gestritten und beleidigt Tonleiter rauf, Tonleiter runter. Gestern war es dann wieder so weit. Was da alles passiert ist, berichten Sven (@SvenGZ) und Tanja (@fschmidt77) nicht live aus der edel-optics-Halle in Wilhelmsburg, dafür reflektiert und ausgeschlafen. Spoiler: Es waren nicht so viele Mitglieder anwesend wie bei den Versammlungen rund um die Ausgliederung, und es gab auch nicht so viele Wortmeldungen und kontroverse Debatten wie in Wahljahren (also in diesem Falle HSV-Wahljahren, welche Rolle die anstehende Hamburger Bürgerschaftswahl bei der HSV-MV gespielt hat, hört Ihr im Podcast). Dieter Grzesik sprach nur kurz (und das sogar konstruktiv und zum Thema!), Konstantin Rogalla und Peter Gottschalk gar nicht dafür steht eine Generation Pöbelrentner in den Startlöchern. Wer das ist, wird Euch überraschen! Den HSV-Bericht zur MV findet ihr hier: hsv-ev.de/news/newsdetai Die Einzelheiten zur anstehenden Erhöhung der Mitgliedsbeiträge hat der e.V. hier zusammengefasst: hsv-ev.de/news/newsdetai Eine Anmerkung noch: An einer Stelle erzählt Tanja (mal wieder) Blödsinn: Lewis Holtby ist natürlich gerade mal ein gutes halbes Jahr weg, es erscheint nur viel länger. In diesem Sinne, denkt daran, wie immer gilt: LOVE HAMBURG HATE RACISM! Für Fragen, Kommentare oder Anregungen schreibt uns! Wir sind zu finden auf Twitter unter @HSVTalk, auf Facebook unter facebook.com/HSVTalk/ oder schreibt eine Mail an hsvtalk@web.de. Wenn Ihr uns über iTunes hört, lasst uns gerne eine Bewertung da, über mehr Sterne als der HSV hat, freuen wir uns besonders. Erzählt Euren Freunden von uns und nehmt Euch in Acht: Wer sich mit einer Meinung über den HSV aus dem Fenster lehnt, muss mit einer Einladung von uns rechnen! Du möchtest deinen Podcast auch kostenlos hosten und damit Geld verdienen? Dann schaue auf www.kostenlos-hosten.de und informiere dich. Dort erhältst du alle Informationen zu unseren kostenlosen Podcast-Hosting-Angeboten.

When did religion begin in South Asia? Many would argue that it was not until the colonial encounter that South Asians began to understand themselves as religious. In Religion, Science, and Empire: Classifying Hinduism and Islam in British India (Oxford University Press, 2012), Peter Gottschalk, Professor of Religion at Wesleyan University, outlines the contingent and mutual coalescence of science and religion as they were cultivated within the structures of empire. He demonstrates how the categories of Hindu and Muslim were constructed and applied to the residents of the Chainpur nexus of villages by the British despite the fact that these identities were not always how South Asians described themselves. Throughout this study we are made aware of the consequences of comparison and classification in the study of religion. Gottschalk engages Jonathan Z. Smith’s modes of comparison demonstrating that seemingly neutral categories serve ideological purposes and forms of knowledge are not arbitrary in order. Here, we observe this work through imperial forms of knowledge production in South Asia, including the roles of cartographers, statisticians, artists, ethnographers, and photographers. In the end we witness the social consequences of British scientism and its effects on the construction of the category of religion in South Asia. In our conversation we discuss mapmaking, travel writing, Christian theology, the authority of positioning, the census, folklore studies, ethnographies, royal societies, museums, indigenous identifications, and theories for the study of religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When did religion begin in South Asia? Many would argue that it was not until the colonial encounter that South Asians began to understand themselves as religious. In Religion, Science, and Empire: Classifying Hinduism and Islam in British India (Oxford University Press, 2012), Peter Gottschalk, Professor of Religion at Wesleyan University, outlines the contingent and mutual coalescence of science and religion as they were cultivated within the structures of empire. He demonstrates how the categories of Hindu and Muslim were constructed and applied to the residents of the Chainpur nexus of villages by the British despite the fact that these identities were not always how South Asians described themselves. Throughout this study we are made aware of the consequences of comparison and classification in the study of religion. Gottschalk engages Jonathan Z. Smith’s modes of comparison demonstrating that seemingly neutral categories serve ideological purposes and forms of knowledge are not arbitrary in order. Here, we observe this work through imperial forms of knowledge production in South Asia, including the roles of cartographers, statisticians, artists, ethnographers, and photographers. In the end we witness the social consequences of British scientism and its effects on the construction of the category of religion in South Asia. In our conversation we discuss mapmaking, travel writing, Christian theology, the authority of positioning, the census, folklore studies, ethnographies, royal societies, museums, indigenous identifications, and theories for the study of religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When did religion begin in South Asia? Many would argue that it was not until the colonial encounter that South Asians began to understand themselves as religious. In Religion, Science, and Empire: Classifying Hinduism and Islam in British India (Oxford University Press, 2012), Peter Gottschalk, Professor of Religion at Wesleyan University, outlines the contingent and mutual coalescence of science and religion as they were cultivated within the structures of empire. He demonstrates how the categories of Hindu and Muslim were constructed and applied to the residents of the Chainpur nexus of villages by the British despite the fact that these identities were not always how South Asians described themselves. Throughout this study we are made aware of the consequences of comparison and classification in the study of religion. Gottschalk engages Jonathan Z. Smith’s modes of comparison demonstrating that seemingly neutral categories serve ideological purposes and forms of knowledge are not arbitrary in order. Here, we observe this work through imperial forms of knowledge production in South Asia, including the roles of cartographers, statisticians, artists, ethnographers, and photographers. In the end we witness the social consequences of British scientism and its effects on the construction of the category of religion in South Asia. In our conversation we discuss mapmaking, travel writing, Christian theology, the authority of positioning, the census, folklore studies, ethnographies, royal societies, museums, indigenous identifications, and theories for the study of religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When did religion begin in South Asia? Many would argue that it was not until the colonial encounter that South Asians began to understand themselves as religious. In Religion, Science, and Empire: Classifying Hinduism and Islam in British India (Oxford University Press, 2012), Peter Gottschalk, Professor of Religion at Wesleyan University, outlines the contingent and mutual coalescence of science and religion as they were cultivated within the structures of empire. He demonstrates how the categories of Hindu and Muslim were constructed and applied to the residents of the Chainpur nexus of villages by the British despite the fact that these identities were not always how South Asians described themselves. Throughout this study we are made aware of the consequences of comparison and classification in the study of religion. Gottschalk engages Jonathan Z. Smith’s modes of comparison demonstrating that seemingly neutral categories serve ideological purposes and forms of knowledge are not arbitrary in order. Here, we observe this work through imperial forms of knowledge production in South Asia, including the roles of cartographers, statisticians, artists, ethnographers, and photographers. In the end we witness the social consequences of British scientism and its effects on the construction of the category of religion in South Asia. In our conversation we discuss mapmaking, travel writing, Christian theology, the authority of positioning, the census, folklore studies, ethnographies, royal societies, museums, indigenous identifications, and theories for the study of religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When did religion begin in South Asia? Many would argue that it was not until the colonial encounter that South Asians began to understand themselves as religious. In Religion, Science, and Empire: Classifying Hinduism and Islam in British India (Oxford University Press, 2012), Peter Gottschalk, Professor of Religion at Wesleyan University, outlines the contingent and mutual coalescence of science and religion as they were cultivated within the structures of empire. He demonstrates how the categories of Hindu and Muslim were constructed and applied to the residents of the Chainpur nexus of villages by the British despite the fact that these identities were not always how South Asians described themselves. Throughout this study we are made aware of the consequences of comparison and classification in the study of religion. Gottschalk engages Jonathan Z. Smith’s modes of comparison demonstrating that seemingly neutral categories serve ideological purposes and forms of knowledge are not arbitrary in order. Here, we observe this work through imperial forms of knowledge production in South Asia, including the roles of cartographers, statisticians, artists, ethnographers, and photographers. In the end we witness the social consequences of British scientism and its effects on the construction of the category of religion in South Asia. In our conversation we discuss mapmaking, travel writing, Christian theology, the authority of positioning, the census, folklore studies, ethnographies, royal societies, museums, indigenous identifications, and theories for the study of religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When did religion begin in South Asia? Many would argue that it was not until the colonial encounter that South Asians began to understand themselves as religious. In Religion, Science, and Empire: Classifying Hinduism and Islam in British India (Oxford University Press, 2012), Peter Gottschalk, Professor of Religion at Wesleyan University, outlines the contingent and mutual coalescence of science and religion as they were cultivated within the structures of empire. He demonstrates how the categories of Hindu and Muslim were constructed and applied to the residents of the Chainpur nexus of villages by the British despite the fact that these identities were not always how South Asians described themselves. Throughout this study we are made aware of the consequences of comparison and classification in the study of religion. Gottschalk engages Jonathan Z. Smith’s modes of comparison demonstrating that seemingly neutral categories serve ideological purposes and forms of knowledge are not arbitrary in order. Here, we observe this work through imperial forms of knowledge production in South Asia, including the roles of cartographers, statisticians, artists, ethnographers, and photographers. In the end we witness the social consequences of British scientism and its effects on the construction of the category of religion in South Asia. In our conversation we discuss mapmaking, travel writing, Christian theology, the authority of positioning, the census, folklore studies, ethnographies, royal societies, museums, indigenous identifications, and theories for the study of religion. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When did religion begin in South Asia? Many would argue that it was not until the colonial encounter that South Asians began to understand themselves as religious. In Religion, Science, and Empire: Classifying Hinduism and Islam in British India (Oxford University Press, 2012), Peter Gottschalk, Professor of Religion at Wesleyan University, outlines the contingent and mutual coalescence of science and religion as they were cultivated within the structures of empire. He demonstrates how the categories of Hindu and Muslim were constructed and applied to the residents of the Chainpur nexus of villages by the British despite the fact that these identities were not always how South Asians described themselves. Throughout this study we are made aware of the consequences of comparison and classification in the study of religion. Gottschalk engages Jonathan Z. Smith's modes of comparison demonstrating that seemingly neutral categories serve ideological purposes and forms of knowledge are not arbitrary in order. Here, we observe this work through imperial forms of knowledge production in South Asia, including the roles of cartographers, statisticians, artists, ethnographers, and photographers. In the end we witness the social consequences of British scientism and its effects on the construction of the category of religion in South Asia. In our conversation we discuss mapmaking, travel writing, Christian theology, the authority of positioning, the census, folklore studies, ethnographies, royal societies, museums, indigenous identifications, and theories for the study of religion.

America's history of religious intolerance is shown in a talk be Wesleyan University Religious Studies Professor Peter Gottschalk.