Podcast appearances and mentions of Stephen Greenblatt

Why do the same patterns keep showing up in completely different centuries? In this episode, Pulitzer Prize–winning historian Stephen Greenblatt joins Ryan to discuss how power, fear, ego, and insecurity keep producing the same patterns. They talk about why dangerous leaders do not look dangerous at first, how great thinkers learned to survive unstable rulers, and why some of the most important ideas in history had to be hidden inside art, literature, and fiction just to stay alive. Stephen Greenblatt is Cogan University Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University. He has written extensively on English Renaissance literature and acts as general editor of The Norton Anthology of English Literature and The Norton Shakespeare. He is the author of fourteen books, including The Swerve, winner of the Pulitzer Prize and National Book Award, and Will in the World, a Pulitzer Prize finalist.

This episode of The Common Reader podcast is a little different. I spoke to both Jeffrey Lawrence and Julianne Werlin about literature, politics, and the future of the academic humanities. Questions included: what do we mean when we talk about literature and markets? Can we leave politics out of literary discussion? Should we leave it out? If we can't leave it out, can we have nice friendly conversations about it? What is academic Marxism? We also talked about whether Stephen Greenblatt is too ideological and why universities are necessary to literary culture, academics on Substack. Julianne writes Life and Letters. Jeffrey writes Avenues of the Americas. Here is Julianne's interview in The Republic of Letters. Transcript (AI generated, will contain some errors)Henry Oliver (00:00)Today I am talking to Jeffrey Lawrence and Julianne Werlin.Jeffrey is a professor of English literature and comparative literature at Rutgers University. He specializes in the 20th and 21st century and he writes the sub stack, Avenues of America. Julianne probably needs no introduction to a sub stack audience. She writes Life and Letters, one of my favorite sub stacks. She's a professor of English at Duke University, where as well as specializing in early modern poetry, she is interested in sociological and demographic studies of literature.and we are going to have a big conversation about literature and markets, politics, what do we mean when we talk about literature and markets, can we leave politics out of literary discussion, should we leave it out, if we can't leave it out, can we have nice friendly conversations about it, and also maybe what is academic Marxism and what should it be and why is it so confusing? Jeffrey and Julianne, hello.Julianne (00:59)Hi.Jeffrey Lawrence (01:01)Hi, thanks for having us.Julianne (01:02)Yeah, thank you.Henry Oliver (01:04)I am going to start by referencing an interview that you did, Julianne, for Republic of Letters, which everyone has been reading. And you said, I've printed it out wrong, so I can't read the whole quote. But you said something like, you joined Substack because you wanted people to talk with and because you felt a lack of debate in your academic field. There are lots of good things about scholarship being slow and careful, but it also needs to be animated by debate and conversation.and a sense of the stakes of what we're doing, and that is eroding in the academy. So I want you both to talk about that. Why is that happening? How much of a problem is it? How much is Substack or the internet more generally the solution? What should we be doing? Why don't we go to Julianne first, because it's your quote.Julianne (01:54)Sure, I mean, won't go on too long ⁓ since I have already spoken about this, but my sense within English departments is, you know, they're becoming smaller, fewer people are taking our classes, we have much less of a role in public conversation and public debate, except as kind of a stalking horse for certain types of arguments. And certainly, if you are an early modernist, it's very hard to locate a kind of a...Henry Oliver (02:14)YouJulianne (02:25)discrete set of debates within early modern literature because there is so little public salience to literary fields. And I think this is happening in all literature. It's especially pronounced if you're working in the earlier periods. So my sense in joining SUBSTAC was that perhaps there will be debates by people who are not already so deep within the particular professional and disciplinary structures of a field that they canfind new points of connection between literature and public life along different ⁓ axes that we have maybe not explored adequately within English departments and are maybe becoming harder to explore as English departments contract and recede from public life.Henry Oliver (03:04)Mm-hmm.So we're bringing Milton back to the people and also finding out why they care about him at all. ⁓ What do you think about it, Geoff?Julianne (03:16)Well, hopefully. I mean, that's the goal.Jeffrey Lawrence (03:21)Great, ⁓ so I actually restacked that specific quote from Julianne because it resonated so much with me. Yeah, I mean, my sense is that as someone who works on 20th and 21st century literature, there is more crossover there, I would say, between sort of academic scholarship and public debate. But I really wanna just echo what Julianne said there, that ⁓ I have gotten the feeling that withinlet's call it like the legacy media. There are particular arguments that come from academia that are pushed forward and that become representative of the field of 20th and 21st century literature as a whole. And those kind of come to stand in for academic debate more generally. And I think it becomes very difficult. One of the things that I was noticing so much isthat the people who had access to those legacy journals, are places like the Atlantic, the New York Times, that those began to dominate the debates and people just aren't recognizing that in scholarships. So one of the things I particularly like about Substack is that I feel like although it has some of the same problems as social media more generally about kind of like who gets to participate and algorithmic culture and all of that sort of stuff.I did feel like the ideological diversity both left and right compared to the sort of a kind of monoculture, mono, you know, sort of academic argument that I found over and over in these legacy magazines, that Substack was the place where a lot of these debates are happening. And I only joined maybe four or five months ago, but for me,⁓ sort of just in terms of my relationship to the Academy, it's really changed my sense of what can be said and what's being said by academics.Henry Oliver (05:17)feels to me like in some way humanities academia needs deregulating because there's all sorts of things people can't feel like they can't say and can't do. But it's such a tangled mess that the easiest thing is for you all to just go to Substack and do it there and just try and avoid the bureaucracy because it's gone too far. But when you're on Substack...I feel like you're often faced with people saying, these English literature academics, it's all woke BS. They don't know anything. They've killed this, right? You're simultaneously in a kind of semi hostile environment. How do you, how does that seem to you?Julianne (05:56)Yeah, mean, that's certainly true. I think that we are avatars on Substack for a kind of authority that we feel in our own lives we do not possess in any way. So we're in this position where, you know, at least I feel this, I'm responding to comments that are, you know, very much, by people who very much feel that they're attacking authority figures. And I'm, you know, I'm just a person on the internet, you know, talking with them when I'm on Substack. What I like about it is precisely that it levels any kind of authority structures insofar as they exist, which is debatable at this phase. But that's not always the reality on Substack. I also feel there's an additional thing, again, as an early modernist, where you feel like, you you don't have...Henry Oliver (06:27)Yeah.Julianne (06:52)there's not a lot of interest by people who are kind of on the left in contemporary politics in the Renaissance. It's seen as kind of a conservative, canonical thing to study. And there's a lot of pushback. even within English departments, there's a lot of pushback ⁓ surrounding the idea that people should study Shakespeare or study Milton. It's seen as kind of old and fussy and conservative. And then at the same time, you go on the internet and you're the kind of ⁓ exemplar.Henry Oliver (06:59)Mmm. Yeah.Mmm.Julianne (07:22)of woke cultural discourse. So you feel like as a Renaissance scholar, you can't win. You're nobody's idea of what people should be doing intellectually or culturally.Henry Oliver (07:25)HahahaDo you think, someone asked me this the other day about why academics write in this funny way and why no one reads their books and all this. That was the way they phrased it. And I said, I think what you're saying is like, why is there no AC Bradley today? Because Shakespeare in tragedy, so I don't remember the number, of like quarter of a million copies or something that to us just feels like an insane number.Is there some legitimate criticism there that A.C. Bradley wrote in a way that, you know, your grandmother could understand? And a lot of what comes out of the Academy today is much more cut off from the ordinary reading experience.Julianne (08:18)Yeah, I mean, think that's not debatable. think there have been quantitative studies, ⁓ DH studies that have shown that academic prose has become more difficult. I think it's much more a consequence of how literary culture has become this sort of narrow and marginalized field that is preserved within academic debate and academic structures of argument and disciplinarity. Stephen Greenblatt certainly tries to benew A.C. Bradley and he does reach readers outside of academia but his audience is you know especially as a share of the population is not A.C. Bradley's audience and I don't think that's a fault of his prose. Well that's true.Henry Oliver (08:59)might be the fault of some of his ideas.Well, Jeff, I want to come to you on that. A.C. Bradley was not politically ideological. Maybe he's a crazy Hegelian and he's insane on that level. But is the problem that Stephen Greenblatt's just obviously kind of a bit cranky in some ideological way, is this a general problem of the modern humanities academia?Jeffrey Lawrence (09:24)Yeah, I mean, I tend to see the problem as it's kind of being a dual problem. One, I think, is the fact that we are facing in a lot of the academy a kind of scarcity politics. there are very, if you look at just academic hiring since the financial crisis in 2008, there's just much less of it that's happening. And so I think, I mean, part of what I see is this sense that there are certainI mean, we could say certain ideological lines that over the past 10 years, but even let's say over the past 15 years ⁓ have been the ones that have become dominant in the academy. And I think my problem is not that people connect politics to literature. I think that that's something that we all do to a certain degree. think the part of the problem is that we are now entering a situation in whichif you deviate from a particular political line, which I have sort of identified with the Democratic Party, because I think you can follow a foul of it to the right, you can also follow a foul of it to the left, then you are seen as someone who is saying something that is not in line with the contemporary academy. And I think it used to be that when there were many jobs and many different departments that you could go to,Henry Oliver (10:28)Mm, mm.Jeffrey Lawrence (10:48)there were fewer consequences for making those types of statements that were out of sync with the dominant. And now I think it's it's become very, very punitive. And this is also reinforced again by the fact that what public scholarship we do have tends to be in line with this because the institutions that are kind of the elite, I would say Ivy league.institutions are also the ones that are feeding people into ⁓ sort of that public legacy discourse.Henry Oliver (11:23)Let's talk about politics and literature because I don't like making literature political as such. But whenever I read, Julianne's probably read the Lisa Liebes substack. I don't know if you've got to that yet, Jeff. She's like, there should be no politics at all and it's all aesthetics, which I kind of sympathize with. But then it just makes me think like, well, what about Edmund Spenser?Like there's a certain extent to which a lot of poetry is political and we have to be political when we talk about it, otherwise we're just ignoring a big part of it. ⁓ So how do we solve that problem? Like are we like badly trained in thinking about politics in the humanities academy or is it like what's going on?have we got to a point where you can say there should be no politics about explicitly political writers?Julianne (12:19)Do you want to begin, Jeff?Jeffrey Lawrence (12:20)Yeah, I mean, I can just say briefly because I mean, I teach courses, a number of courses that are about politics and literature. I actually think, I mean, I started doing this in 2016, right after Trump's election. I taught Steve Bannon's film about the financial crisis alongside ⁓ the Big Short and a couple of kind of like trying to show kind of like the left and right responses. I mean, that's not literature, that's film, but many of thethe literary works that we look at in those courses. There are conservatives, there are more classic liberals, there are Marxists. I mean, my personal feeling is that we need to talk about politics and literature, that it is a fair, it is a reasonable object of study. The problem, I think, is partially when you act as if certain...certain political writers or certain topics are simply out of bounds for study. And so there was actually a post by Dan Silver today about why I teach conservative thinkers and a response from the points John Baskin saying, who would think that you wouldn't teach conservative thinkers in a sociology course? But I do think that it's become par for the course thatHenry Oliver (13:20)Mmm.Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.Jeffrey Lawrence (13:37)teaching someone, whether you're on the right and you're teaching someone who's a Marxist or you're a Marxist and you're teaching conservatives, that somehow this is kind an ethical failure. And I think that's a real problem of not assuming that what you're teaching is kind of necessarily what you believe in or talking about politics means necessarily taking an ideological stance.Julianne (14:04)Yeah, I think that's completely right. I think there's this very pervasive confusion between ⁓ talking about the politics of literature andarticulating an authoritative political perspective on that literature. Almost everybody who studies literature, especially in a historical context or in a contemporary context, honestly, is going to be talking about politics. Spencer, course, right? Milton. ⁓ How do you talk about somebody who was a literal revolutionary who wrote in favor of regicide and not talk about politics? You have to talk about politics.Henry Oliver (14:31)YouJulianne (14:37)⁓ But then there's become this confusion where people assume that if you are talking about the politics of literature, you have not just a political, but actually an ethical ⁓ teaching that you are imparting by way of that literature. And that if you're not doing that, you're somehow not talking about literature, you're not teaching the literature. That's the confusion that has been so devastating to us and I think so devastating to literary study.Henry Oliver (15:03)So what's the alternative? What should we be doing instead?Julianne (15:07)I I think that we should be talking about the politics of literature while acknowledging that literature raises political debates, not endless debates. know, there's not any given author is going to raise, you know, a certain salient set of questions that we can talk about, that we can debate and acknowledging that people historically have had different responses to these, that it has been used in different ways in different moments and that it is still used in different ways today. That doesn't mean that as intellectuals and scholars, we won't have our own positions that may inform our scholarshipin our writing and even our teaching, it just means that our positions do not shut down conversation and do not exhaust the range of possible positions.Henry Oliver (15:48)Yeah, and we should say, we're saying about, you you should teach conservative thought and stuff. I don't think either of you would identify as being on the right or conservative. So you're saying that from a, from that position. ⁓ How do we, how do we get out of this then? How do we leave politics at the door? Because when I read modern ⁓ literary scholarship, to me, it's either like very useful because it's not political.Julianne (16:01)Yeah.Henry Oliver (16:17)Or I just, as I did with that book that we all, or that Jeff and I, sort of disagreed about. I just find it almost unreadable because it's not scholarship anymore. It's just partisanship. How do we move past this? Like, what's the solution?Jeffrey Lawrence (16:33)I mean, if I can jump in just there, I mean, I would say one of the issues is having an ideological litmus test for scholars. And I think I see this in 20th and 21st century literature in a very strong way. And so what I would say is that, you know, allowing people to occupy different political positions, and I really meanJulianne (16:33)I mean, if I could jump in just there, I mean, I would say one of the issues is having an ideological litmus test for scholars. And I think I see this in 20th and 21st century literature in a very strong way. And so what I would say is that allowing people to occupy different political positions, and I really mean,Henry Oliver (16:36)Yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (17:03)like people who I know on the left because they're not toeing a particular line are also not welcome or are also kind of meat pushback in contemporary humanities departments that I think we need to get rid of that. And my thought about the Adam Kelly book, ⁓ the New Sincerity book is that to me, I think that what he's trying to do in that bookHenry Oliver (17:10)Yeah, yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (17:31)is to understand neoliberalism as an economic and political philosophy that has effects on culture and to try to understand how authors themselves are dealing with that in their prose.To me, that is somewhat different from the way that neoliberalism is occasionally bandied about in the academy, where it doesn't just, it isn't just another word for saying, okay, this is the Chicago school or the Austrian school, and we're gonna kind of take it seriously as a mode of thought. if just saying like, neoliberalism is like our ontological condition in the 21st century, and therefore everything is.necessarily an expression of neoliberalism and we don't need to necessarily define it. So I mean, I think that may be where the disagreement extends is that I think that ⁓ Adam Kelly is trying to sort of be precise about that politics in order to understand how contemporary writers generally on the left are using it. Whereas I think that the kind of more wishy washy version of that isHenry Oliver (18:37)Mm-hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (18:44)You know, just to say that neoliberalism is the air that we breathe. And there, I think I agree with you that it's just not super helpful.Henry Oliver (18:49)Mmm.Yeah, my problem with the book was that he would not tell you what did Hayek think or say. He would say Hayek was a cheerleader for the free market. Or he would not tell you what is the Gary Becker view of human capital. He would say human capital is an ideology that infuses itself into every aspect of your life so that you can no longer be separate from the market. And it's all this stuff, and it's like, well, that's nothing to do with Hayek and Gary Becker. ⁓Jeffrey Lawrence (19:19)Can I just,just one thing on that, is that, I mean, I did go back and I mean, he has these moments where he's talking specifically about Hayek and the road to serfdom and saying, I think that this is a worldview in which, he'll quote Hayek talking about the problem with representative democracy and say, the real moral choices are choices that are made in the market.To me, I think that that is to engage to a certain degree with the thought. It is true, I think, as often happens in scholarship that you have the people who are defining a phenomenon from the perspective that you may be interested in. So there are a number of people from the left who are criticizing neoliberalism. I see him as engaging a little bit more than you do.Henry Oliver (20:11)Mmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (20:11)in that in that direct thought and particularly compared to other humanities scholars who do I think what you're saying which is to just do that. So that's where I think I see him as doing.Henry Oliver (20:18)sure, yeah.I guess you could summy critique up as being like, if this is the good version, things are worse than I thought. Yeah. Yeah. So from here, let's go to the question of what is academic Marxism?Jeffrey Lawrence (20:27)Okay, well.Henry Oliver (20:35)Because I think a lot of people think that there's a lot of Marxism in the academy and that if they're not woke, they're Marxists or maybe they're both, right? And ⁓ personally, I spend a lot of time trying to work out what these Marxists think and it's quite confusing. And there seem to be lots of, and Julianne, you and I have talked about this, all the different, some Marxists aren't Marxists, as it were. tell us, give us a quick overview of how Marxist things really are.Julianne (21:04)Yeah, I mean it's a very complicated question to answer.because Marxism is too, well, debatably a living tradition. ⁓ And there's a huge amount of disagreement about what constitutes Marxism, ⁓ what is a legitimate form of Marxism, what is not, where do the boundaries lie, what is reconcilable with other schools of thought, what is not. But I think the big picture is that beginning, even in the 60s, Marxism moved into academia. This is a story that is told very inflectionallyHenry Oliver (21:11)youJulianne (21:37)and Perry Anderson's considerations on Western Marxism, where he argues that in the West, Marxism becomes alienated from actual political, economic, and social movements. It moves into academia. And as a result, it becomes much more philosophical, much more abstruse, much less concerned with the traditional concerns of Marxism, labor and the politics of labor and the politics and economics of labor. And that this continues and is accelerated, in fact, in the Cold War. So what you get atthe same time, you have something called the cultural turn in history and in sociology, ⁓ the rise of what is, debatably called identity politics. so Marxism remains a current within that, but it's far less of an influential current as time goes by. ⁓ And I think that many, many people...use the word Marxism and would say that there are Marxist influences in their work, but they're not viewing it as a kind of systematic approach to economics or to economic history. And so at that point, I do think you have to ask, well, what does Marxism actually mean? There are certainly people that work with, you know, ideas that they refer to as Marxist, but that have implications that to my mind are entirely antithetical to Marxism. And so I kind of feelas somebody who does work within what I would call the historical materialist tradition.⁓ in a very sort of straightforwardly economic sense, know, are markets becoming more efficient in Renaissance England? Those kinds of questions. How much does bread cost? How much do books cost? Those kinds of questions. ⁓ If you're interested in that tradition within Marxist thought, you feel that it's actually really incredibly peripheral within academia in comparison to, say, the politics of gender ⁓ or other considerations of that kind. And there's just not always sensitivityHenry Oliver (23:16)Mm-hmm.Julianne (23:35)to whether these different schools of thought actually cohere in any meaningful or deep way. What would you say, Jeff?Jeffrey Lawrence (23:44)Yeah, that's, I mean, just to pick up on that, think that that's really helpful in that trajectory, which I also, know, the Perry Anderson, a lot of people who have talked about how Marxism.moves into the academy after the 1960s, I think it is just really important to say it becomes a different thing. And I think part of the confusion, Henry, may also be that it's like, so the Christopher Ruffo version of this is it's like, it's all Marxism, it's all everywhere. But then I think that becomes, it's so broad a definition of Marxism that what we're really talking about is aof progressive politics or sort of an amalgam of different ideas that may have some roots in Marxism of previous periods, but really don't, as Julianne is saying, really don't align with like Marxist thought or Marxian thought as such. And also as someone who does take that tradition very seriously, I think a lot about Silvia Federici, who's a feminist, know, a Marxist feminist. Like these are people who are absolutely steeped.in a Marxist political tradition. And in some ways, these are figures that may be very important to the contemporary tradition. But if you actually read what they're writing, it's like, it's an extremely watered down version that we get in the academy in part, and I'll just end with this, in part because to Julianne's point, I think it like when Marxism also becomesHenry Oliver (24:59)Mmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (25:10)a kind of one discourse among many that you are using in what are often very bourgeois institutions, then it becomes a kind of intellectual tool and sometimes even an intellectual weapon, as many of these things are, where the question of how it relates to practical politics, working class politics,politics outside of the academy becomes sort of secondary. And so then really we're not talking about someone who's a Marxist as in they're like fighting for the working class. You're talking about someone who's just using Marx as a tool, which is fine, but that certainly shouldn't give them any sort of like, you know, moral high ground when speaking from the position of the left is my view.Henry Oliver (25:53)Is there some inherent aspect of literature that means it has been more amenable to Marxist study of any description than it has been to, you know, ⁓systems of thought that come more from a kind of Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek tradition. Because it's very striking to me how few liberals and libertarians they're currently, publicly currently, I know a lot of them keep it to themselves, some of them have said as much to me. ⁓ But is there some good literary reason for this? Or is it just an institutional ⁓ problem?Julianne (26:33)That's an interesting question. ⁓ I mean, there are sort of traditional reasons for this in thatMarxism from, you know, in Marxist writing from very early on was interested in the relationship between culture and historical change. So there's a very, even by the time you get to the beginning of the 20th century, there's already a very well developed materialist tradition for thinking about cultural change and cultural transformation over the long run in a way that I don't think is true ⁓ of rival ideologies. Not that there isn't great literary work, but that there's not the sameHenry Oliver (27:09)Sure, sure, sure.Julianne (27:11)kind of sense of a methodological tradition. So there's a lot of momentum there.⁓ But in terms of more intrinsic reasons, I don't know. I mean, it doesn't seem obvious. Certainly at other times and places, we haven't had the situation that we have now. I often find myself thinking of, know, Piketty's arguments, which this does not pertain to Marxism, but this does pertain to the ⁓ difference between the political parties in the US, which is just that ⁓ education has become the means of differentiating between two rival elites, you know, not...Henry Oliver (27:27)Mm.Julianne (27:47)a difference between a working class and an elite, but two rival elites that are actually distinguished by the university itself. So as long as the university plays that structural role, it seems unlikely that its politics are going to drift to the other side, because that is actually precisely what the university has become. ⁓ I don't know, what do you think, Jeff?Jeffrey Lawrence (28:06)Yeah, I mean, it's a really good question. I mean, I share the sense that, I mean, I think that there is an extraordinary ⁓ Marxist literary tradition that goes back to, you know, sort of Lukacs and these debates, Adorno, Horkheimer. These are critics that are important to me, cultural studies with people like Stuart Hall and Raymond Williams. I mean, they very much, I think, were, though,Henry Oliver (28:20)Mm-hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (28:30)That was a kind of insurgent force, we could say, within the academy that has now become, I would say, almost entirely dominant. I personally, mean, one of the things when I was writing my first book was on US and Latin American literature. I was very interested in a certain liberal tradition that comes from, you know, John Dewey. We would now say that, I mean, it's not the liberalism of, you know, Milton Friedman and von Hayek, but it is,Dewey, think, was for many people the most important philosopher, aesthetic philosopher of the early part of the 20th century. And he was a sort of radical liberal who thought a lot about the liberal tradition. I people like Lionel Trilling with the liberal imagination, these were, I think, writers who were very important.Henry Oliver (29:16)Mm-hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (29:19)in a particular moment. And I guess, you this is, you may see this as a dodge, I, Henry, but I definitely feel like these are books that are really important to my formation and whether or not I associate with a certain particular strain of contemporary ⁓ liberalism, I don't tend to think of myself necessarily in those terms. And so,Henry Oliver (29:26)HahahaJeffrey Lawrence (29:43)I think we really should be reading those because those types of people, people like John Dewey, people like Lionel Trilling, know, Philip Rav, these kind of mid-century intellectuals, they were really engaging in major debates and they were foundational for the field, even if now I think there may be some desire to take distance from them.Henry Oliver (30:07)It's the bigger problem that we should just get back to more for literature as literature.And once we allow a kind of methodological approach from one tradition or another, we're just no longer really studying literature. We're using literature to, like I had a professor once and they said an essay about Anglo-Saxon poetry with some Harold Bloom quote saying, none of this is any good. It's like the great age before the flood, that kind of thing. And I basically wrote an essay saying, yes, that's correct. And she did not like that. And I said, look, I bet you don't actually love anyof this poetry. I bet you don't care about any of this. You know, I just sort of... And she said, that's not the point. The point is that we can use it to impose the... You we can use it as a way of dealing with the ideas we want to deal with and having methodological... And I was just like, I'm never coming back. You know, goodbye. And that to me is kind of... Is that the more foundational problem, right? Some people want to take a kind of...Northrop Frye, Christopher Ricks, literature as literature approach, and some people want to have an extra literary methodology. Be it Freudian, be it feminist, be it identity politics, be it whatever. And that is the bigger sort of division here, and is the solution to just say Shakespeare is Shakespeare and you can keep the other stuff for your other classes.Julianne (31:33)Well, I don't know because, I mean, in terms of what actually goes into the classroom, I think that's a different question. I don't teach very much theory in the classroom. ⁓ But I don't think that we can just say that because the ability to say, you know, these are great works, this is part of a canon, it came with its own set of ideological commitments that are now...Henry Oliver (31:40)Show. Show, show, show.Julianne (31:57)sort of vanishing, right? So we need some kind of framework for making sense of why we read literary history at all, what its coherence is, what its shape is, what its structure is. A lot of those frameworks were implicit. didn't, you know, they were articulated, they didn't need to be articulated every single time because they were so woven into the whole system of education. As that becomes increasingly untrue, I think we do find ourselves in a position where we need to explain why we care about this object literature at all.in the first place. And I don't think just saying, you know, literature for literature's sake without situating it within some kind of wider account of culture really works. I don't know that situating it within some wider account of culture really works either in terms of persuading anyone, but I don't think you can say to people, look, Shakespeare is Shakespeare, we have to read him because he's great. I think you need to...Jeffrey Lawrence (32:45)Mm-hmm.Henry Oliver (32:45)HahahaJulianne (32:53)have an argument about the place that Shakespeare has in culture ought to have ⁓ because that is increasingly not true.Henry Oliver (33:02)So I mostly agree, but it is very striking to me. I mean, I sort of half agree. It is very striking to me that the just read it because it's great argument is winning a lot of ⁓ admirers on the internet, while some version of what you've just said is sort of dying in the academy. And I'm not saying that therefore that's a decisive factor and we should just do this. But in terms of getting people interested,that does see something on the internet among the new humanities culture on Substack and other places, does just seem to be resistant to these methodologies and ideology, right? Do you see what I'm saying? ⁓Jeffrey Lawrence (33:43)Can I, I mean, yeah, Imean, I would say, and we may just disagree on this, but I agree with Julianne that, I mean, the ideological context of a work, the historical context of work seems incredibly important. I saw Henry, yeah, yeah. And so I think that there, yeah, yeah, but I think that's not, I mean, I think we can't totally gloss over that because all three of us have had long educational sort of,Henry Oliver (33:58)sure, yeah. We're all historicists, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (34:11)a long educational formation that has allowed us to even have this conversation, let alone read these works. I, you you, you, I think you had a post about this on, on Austin about like, you know, sort of there, there are certain things that are helpful for you to know in order, once you're going into work. I think that that's different from the thing that you're pointing to and where I think I would agree with you, which is that when, when methodology becomes the TrumpHenry Oliver (34:15)Yes.Yeah, yeah, yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (34:41)card over literature. think that that is that is an important cultural shift. And I think we are now at the point in which this is my formulation for it. It's like if you're just going to read literature for, you know, for a particular political thing, for Marxism, let's say, in order to understand, you know, sort of like a Marxist conception of society, why not just read Marxism?Henry Oliver (34:42)Hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (35:11)like Marxist theory. mean, so I do think that that is a real problem and the failure, and to be fair to humanities scholars, this is, has been a big debate over the past five or 10 years. I think it's just more contested in the academic space than it is on Substack, where I think Substack is kind of demonstrating to my mind also that some of the more frank, I, I sweat, some of the more BS, yeah.Henry Oliver (35:11)Yes.Say what you want.Jeffrey Lawrence (35:39)Some of the more b******t arguments that I see about like, ⁓ well, there aren't X people, like there aren't white men who are writing and reading, and then you just see the tremendous number of people who are reading, they may just feel alienated from certain ways of doing things. And that, I think, that's a wide range of people. And I think it's a wide range of people who are turned off by certain things in the academy.Henry Oliver (35:49)yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (36:07)I think a lot of that though has to do with a general problem that we need people in literary studies who deeply care about literature, regardless of what ideological thing, you know, where they're coming from. And if you are always just interested in the methodology that you're bringing to it, as opposed to literature, then this is going to be a long-term problem because people are going to start asking, why is it that we are reading literature?Henry Oliver (36:34)To what extent is that the basic problem that the universities have right now? To me that just seems to be it's that, right?Julianne (36:39)I think that's a huge problem. Yeah, I think it's a huge problem.Yeah, it's a huge problem. guess, you know, while sort of agreeing with you and definitely agreeing with Jeff, I guess what I would say to sort of refine what I was saying earlier is, no, I don't think you should study the methodologies instead of studying literature. Of course not.⁓ But the questions that the methodologies ask are really basic to the questions that we need to ask about the study of literature. So it's not that you should be studying Marxism or feminism or this or that instead of studying literature, but I don't think you can...totally do away with the questions of, what is this thing? What is its role in culture? What does it mean? Why do we study it over long, long periods of time? ⁓ It is, it has become very hard to make that, that case. And it's not that I think making that case explicitly is going to win converts as opposed to talking about the literature itself. In the end, it's going to be the literature itself, if it's going to be anything at all. But to have an account of the meaning of what we're doing, even for our own sakes, we do need to be thinking about questions like what is this thing?and why, right, which are supposed to be questions that methods help us ask.Jeffrey Lawrence (37:53)And can I just add to that kind of the, I mean, a word that we haven't used so far is specialization. And I think to a certain degree, like what may unite us in this conversation is a sense too, that like, that literature is not just like this particular corner that you're studying and that you're interested in because it's your field. And so,Henry Oliver (38:13)Mmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (38:16)Those type of turf battles, I think, are also really important to this. The sense that your topic is the thing that you specifically focus on and the difficulty of communicating that is an issue. And also just the sense that, like, I mean, my sense is you can be interested in history and sociology. Julianne and I are both interested in that. And also literature, so that it doesn't, I mean, part of it is, I think, restoring the notion that a kind of broadHenry Oliver (38:19)Yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (38:46)like intellectual training is not a liability, but is actually something that you need in order to understand literature and that heightens your appreciation.Henry Oliver (38:57)Somewhere in one of Iris Murdoch's interviews, she talks about the state of literary undergraduates today, because obviously she was married to John Bailey and had a lot of, and this is like in the 80s or something, ⁓ and she said, well, they're not interested in just reading the literature and understanding the history of it anymore. They want to have all these crazy theories.It's very striking when you see stuff like that from 50 years ago. Did the cannon wars ever end? Did we ever change the arguments? In some ways, is this not just the Harold Bloom thing? It's still going, right? And one route out that I think you've identified is just ⁓ be broader. Just read more outside your own area.The people who everyone loves on Twitter, like CS Lewis and Harold Bloom, are the ones who weren't in their public facing work. They weren't narrow specialists. CS Lewis would do everything from some random Latin medieval writer to Jane Austen. And in a way, is that what we need? We just need to have more of that appreciation of the long history of literature.Jeffrey Lawrence (40:10)I mean, just one thing, then Julianna, I'd be curious to like from like a ⁓ 20th and 21st century perspective. Like I agree with that, but I also think that like that was Toni Morrison as well. I mean, talking about the classics, mean, part of the problem I think is that we have these readings of figures that become then sort of symbolic or totemic of.Henry Oliver (40:23)Yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (40:33)like a contemporary, you know, whatever that may be, an identity category or whatever it may be. Whereas if you actually read Toni Morrison, absolutely voracious, absolutely thinking about like, you know, the classics, you know, thinking through Greek drama, ⁓ know, Faulkner, you know, ⁓ master's thesis on the outsider in Faulkner and Virginia Woolf. I mean, I think some of this also has to dowith something that has happened very specifically in the past 10 years of also subjecting figures of the past who were interested in that more Catholic notion of culture to these kind of like very selective readings. I mean, it's true of James Baldwin. I thought about this a lot. Like a lot of these figures who just didn't want to be boxed in in a particular identity way get then taken up asHenry Oliver (41:11)Hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (41:26)kind of figures for that when actually, mean, in some ways they were, you know, I'm sure Toni Morrison and Harold Bloom wouldn't have agreed on everything, but there was actually, I mean, but really there is actually more alignment there than like the 2025 reading of them would give credit for.Henry Oliver (41:40)Yeah, yeah, yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (41:47)Yeah, don't know, Julianne, if yeah.Julianne (41:49)Yeah, no, mean, I obviously I agree so, so entirely with.everything you're saying, but especially with your comments about longer literary histories, more capacious reading, know, longer, wider. Obviously you read cross linguistically and do work cross linguistically. So both broader and longer literary histories, much more than kind of a focus on methodology. Part of the reason I'm defending methodology here is because methodology, if used well, forces you outside of disciplinary specialization or can, has that capacity. In my field, the problem is not thatpeople are adhering to big sweeping methodologies anymore. In my field, the problem is that the big questions have almost disappeared, replaced by, in many cases, extremely excellent, detailed, narrow, pointillist empiricist work. I think that work is...valuable and it's foundational, but you can't have a field that just has that. You have to have something that makes the field cohere. You have to have questions that the field coheres around. know, and increasingly, I'm a historicist. I got into this because I love this kind of like, ⁓ you know,tell me everything about this particular edition of the Fairy Queen. ⁓ I love that kind of thing. ⁓ And yet at the same time, there is part of me that is starting to wonder.Henry Oliver (43:09)YouJeffrey Lawrence (43:10)YouJulianne (43:17)is it actually more relevant even for being a Renaissance literary scholar to have read every single person writing in England in 1592 and then maybe instead of Dante or going the other way, right? Instead of...Richardson or Voltaire. Like maybe we should be reading more Voltaire instead of every non-entity. And I'm guilty of this because my whole project is every non-entity who published a book in 1592. So this is very much self-critique. But that more capacious sense, and that more capacious sense exactly as Jeff says, is very much aligned with how writers themselves, especially great writers, approach literature. I teach Toni Morrison in my Shakespeare class sometimes because she has a short play on Desdemona.Jeffrey Lawrence (43:47)If you ⁓Henry Oliver (44:06)So we're obviously all going to await your blog about the different editions of the Fairy Queen and your favorite things about each of them. Just give us some examples of what the big questions would be and what these empirical questions that people are. Just make it sort of concrete for us what you're talking about there.Julianne (44:11)Hawell i mean there are a lot of people who have big ideas ⁓that maybe make their way into their own work, that show up in the introduction of their own work, but that are not defining the field in a meaningful way. There are a few debates that think are actually happening within my field that are interesting, like the extent to which ⁓ Renaissance literature should be understood on national versus international lines. I think that's quite an active one that's very interesting. ⁓ But I think a lot of books written in the Renaissance, and I don't wantHenry Oliver (44:39)Mm-hmm.Julianne (45:03)topoint to any one book because these are all you know good books and books that I like but a lot of books will be have a very narrow date range a set there you know the typical organization of a book in literary studies is to have a sort of thematic topic not always thematics sometimes it'sbook historical or cultural, but ⁓ often it will be a thematic topic. Say a topic like ⁓ shame in Renaissance literature, right? So you'll take shame in Renaissance literature. This is fictional. This isn't anybody's book. If it is accidentally somebody's book, I apologize. Shame in Renaissance literature, okay? And then you'll have this ⁓ contextualizing introduction where you might bring in a bit of Foucault and you might bring in various other theorists.Henry Oliver (45:23)Mm-hmm.Sure, sure,Jeffrey Lawrence (45:39)YouJulianne (45:52)But you will also go very, very deeply into, say, sermons, right, the sermon literature. And then you'll have five chapters. you know, one will be like Shakespeare play, and then maybe one will be Spencer. And then maybe one will be somebody, you know, more marginal or be Ben Johnson or there'll be Webster, you know. ⁓ And then you will put them, you know, this is the method of New Hizorizis. You'll put them beside legal documents and you'll put them beside sermons and you'll put them beside other very, very contextualized and often very well contextualized.works from the period. But you won't write a book that is like, you know, literature and shame, you know, across three centuries ⁓ that would then maybe potentially think about, you know, is there a fundamentally different way that drama versus the novel represent shame? Does this help us understand long range debates about interiority? And again, it's not that nobody ever does this. It's that the feelI feel English literature used to be more aligned over around these kind of shared long-term questions and debates and they're much less aligned around them now because of specialization and because of the sort of dynamic of know decline and and narrowing of prospects that Jeff has mentioned.Henry Oliver (47:11)A lot of people complain about the administrators, the way funding is done, the way you can only get funding for certain types of work, career structures, all these structural factors that make life either difficult as an academic or just force you into certain decisions and activities. ⁓ To what extent is writing on Substack actually going to be a beneficial solution?to get around those problems and to what extent is it just going to be a sort of useful addition and is going to be very stimulating for you all but might not, you know, might not actually change things. What's your sense of that?Jeffrey Lawrence (47:54)This was something I've thought about this a lot because I wrote for the Chronicle of Higher Education. think Julianne and I have both write or have written for the Chronicle and something that was on the public humanities and I very specifically this is 2022 or 2023 said like, sub stack is not going to be the solution. Partially and my point there was something that I still believe to a certain extent which is thatas someone who has worked in different public humanities ⁓ programs, as someone who knows to a certain degree the publishing industry in the US and Latin America and has done work on that, I think that it's hard to ⁓ exaggerate the degree to which funding for this type of research, it's just really expensive and the existing funding models that exist for something like Substack or I mean any other sort of ⁓platform economy, even public humanities projects, it's just really hard to do. So I'm much more in favor. So I think Substack is really important as a venue. I think that as a potential model for, you know, a sustainable model for doing academic scholarship, I see a lot more limitations. And that's why I've said, I mean, I think in some ways, if the types of conversations that happen on Substack,could be then imported back into our fields. Like, I don't think we should just destroy the institutions and get rid of these departments. I think that there needs to be a sort of infusion of these types of debates that are happening on Substack in the university, because the universities have funding, you know, have funding. And I think it's partially about fighting for that, this kind of holistic thing that we've been talking about up to this point.Julianne (49:49)Yeah, I completely agree. That's my view as well. I don't think that Substack's funding model would actually be good for scholarship. I'm not saying that you couldn't get a few people making it viable, but for a scholarship as a whole, I think it would be terrible for scholarship as a whole. At the same time, for the reasons we've been discussing here, we need to be talking with other people and not just with people in our subfield of a subfield of a subfield. And Substack is great for that.Henry Oliver (50:18)I sometimes think that if you can draw a distinction between scholarship and criticism, the academy can keep the scholarship and the criticism needs to come outside. You can all still write it, right? But it needs to be done in a way that is free of all the institutional incentives and constraints and just all that problem and you can all just be free to say other things online.Jeffrey Lawrence (50:43)I mean, just very quickly on that, I mean, I do think that in my personal case, because I came to Substack partially because I had a very bad experience with a kind of ⁓ a piece that I had pitched to like a venue that was, you know, sort of like progressive venue where I felt like I was saying things about contemporary author that everyone else was saying, right? It was a kind of public secret, a kind of critique of this writer.And I felt like it was not going to be published in any of those venues and in the Academy itself, that would be a problem. And not because this was something that even, you know, sort of ⁓ departed so much from things that people would say, but just because of kind of like the power structures. And since I've been on Substack, I've had multiple people, particularly with the first Substack piece that I wrote, but with other ones as well.Henry Oliver (51:11)Mmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (51:35)people in academia telling me, thank you for saying this. And also I'm reading your sub stack as an academic right now. But I also, do think that there remains, I mean, it's changing, but I do think that there's speaking of shame, like there are people who they're just not sure as graduate students.what they can say and what they can't say. And I think that's a real issue. So I agree, criticism is important, but even for scholarships too, I think that there need to be taboos that are broken in order for scholarship, as Julianne said, to kind of like return to that more sort of vibrant feel that it once had.Julianne (52:20)Yeah, I think that's right. Obviously those taboos are less present in my field than in yours because the contemporary stakes are much less clear. ⁓ And sometimes I'm jealous of people who work in the contemporary field because there are stakes. And then I hear things like what you just said and I'm no longer so jealous. But yeah, no, do think that...Henry Oliver (52:35)YouJeffrey Lawrence (52:35)YouJulianne (52:46)People, even beyond what you would think that they would plausibly need to be, people are very cautious and graduate students especially are very cautious and even having the example of people saying things publicly is incredibly important and helpful.Henry Oliver (53:02)It's interesting how many PhD students there are on Substack. There are several English literature PhD students and I find it amazing actually that they're writing a Substack ⁓ rather than writing something academic. This to me is a very clear signal of something is changing, right? Something important is changing.Jeffrey Lawrence (53:28)I would say it's pragmatic too. I mean, I don't think that there's any reason people shouldn't graduate students. I don't think that they necessarily need to have a substack, but I also, I just think that there's a kind of recognition that, you know, especially at this moment, mean, frankly, with a lot of this does have to do with the Trump administration and kind of the way that it's been directed very specifically at, you know, sort of the humanities andHenry Oliver (53:47)Mm-hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (53:53)So I do think that there's a kind of sense that the hiring isn't happening. And so it's like, well, why am I going to invest in this very small possibility of getting an, an academic job or even better yet, I'm going to build my own audience. I'm going to talk about these things because that's going to empower me at the moment in which I'm actually looking for jobs. So I, I, I'm like, I agree with you that I think it's just like, ⁓ it's a pretty astonishing thing.in the sense of the sort of initiative, but it also kind of makes sense given the world that exists.Julianne (54:30)Yeah, mean, you know, our graduate students are not.coming in, I'm sure yours are the same way, they're not coming in thinking they're going to get jobs ⁓ anymore. So they're coming in thinking, I have six years to build the kind of intellectual life to become the kind of writer and the kind of thinker that I want to be. And that's the priority, much more than anything sort of pragmatic about what they might do in terms of future career prospects, because most of them have absolutely no idea. It's much more about how can I find an intellectual community? How can I become the kindintellectual I want to be. And if academia is not going to be their home long term for that, it cannot be in academia. It has to be elsewhere. In addition, now that there are fewer conferences, journals, you know, are delayed by years. That was another thing that got me on Substack is I wrote a review.And I wrote the review as soon as I got the book. I wrote the review that I was asked to review. Then like, you know, six weeks, sent it back. ⁓ It took four years for the review to appear in that journal. And I was like, why, how can we possibly have a conversation when this journal has just been sitting on this copy edited review until they could find a slot for it in their, you know, in this day and age? How can that be the case? You know, so I think, you know, that's also part of what's going on.Henry Oliver (55:49)Yes.So are you running introduction to sub-stack classes for your graduate students? This is not yet, yes.Julianne (55:59)No, not yet, not yet.Jeffrey Lawrence (56:00)Yeah, yeah. I mean,interestingly, we had an event with Lincoln Michelle, who's a very popular at Rutgers, who's a very popular Substack writer. I mean, that was one of our, was a hugely well attended event. I mean, I do think, and it doesn't necessarily need to be just Substack, but I think public intellectual work, think graduate students and also undergraduates, they want to understand this because they know ⁓Henry Oliver (56:08)Mm-mm.Jeffrey Lawrence (56:29)precisely what Julianne said, that it's not gonna work for them to just stay in their lane and keep the blinders on and keep going. Even if they want a career in academia, they know that they need to be involved in these other things. so, I mean, to the extent that I think we can do that in our institutions and give them a sense of what's going on, I mean, definitely we're thinking about that at Rutgers.Henry Oliver (56:55)If the humanities goes into some sort of terminal decline and there are fewer departments and the student numbers never recover and all these blah blah blah, all these bad things, ⁓ does it matter?Julianne (57:08)Well, for what? mean...Jeffrey Lawrence (57:10)Ha ha.Henry Oliver (57:10)Well, because everyone talksabout it like, the humanities are dying, this is terrible. And I'm like, what's the problem? We had like English literature was the number one subject for undergraduates, and now it's not, right? What is the actual problem if the humanities are in this terminal decline? No, I get that it's all bad for you. Yeah, no, for all of you, of course, right? But like, what's the what's the actual problem here? Yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (57:27)You mean besides the jobs of, mean, because part of that, right, right, Yeah, for us. But for society.Henry Oliver (57:38)Obviously when someone doesn't have a job or can't get a job, like of course, of course. But can you give us a succinct explanation of why people who are not involved in it should care about the decline of the humanities or should recognize that it's something that we don't want to happen in some way?Julianne (57:56)I mean, I think the sort of simplest thing is that we still do have, it's fading, but we still do have some shared cultural literary heritage ⁓ or basis. Yeah, I don't use the word heritage since it's a kind of nationally charged word, but some kind of shared basis that allows us to talk with each other about literature. ⁓ And most of this, think, is predicated not on the university, but on the high school canon.Henry Oliver (58:11)Sure.Julianne (58:25)is an extension of that. So I think our number one thing should be the high school curriculum. ⁓ But then our number two thing should be ⁓ ensuring that people have some kind of foundation in, you know, a...as wide a range as we can give them of literary texts that they get in university because that is the basis of a shared literary culture. I don't think you get, you know, I don't think you get a wider literary culture where people can talk about things, ⁓ you know, like 18th century books or, you know, 19th or 20th century books across the world ⁓ without having some kind of institutional basis, having some kind of shared institutional structure that people have passed through. Otherwise, what you will get is people, you know, picking up thingsyou know, a bit here, a bit there. Some of them will be so unfamiliar that they will be put off by it. Some of them maybe won't. ⁓ But you won't get anything like a common culture. And for me, that's sort of intrinsically good. But there is also this kind of idealistic ⁓ democratic aspect to this that you got in the mid-20th century in the post-war expansion of higher education and also the expansion of public education. This idea that you would have a citizenship thatbe participating in intellectual, philosophical, and political culture at a very high level. I don't see how you get that without having some kind of shared institutional basis for it.Jeffrey Lawrence (59:50)Yeah, mean, would just, yeah, I think everything and then maybe the only like word that I would use that you didn't use there is just kind of like literacy. mean, cultural literacy, but actual literacy, because I do think that beyond the culture wars, like the one thing that I think I'd like across the political spectrum is that there is this sense that a certain ability to read and to engage in civic life is declining.⁓ And so, yeah, I mean, I think that reading all sorts of texts is important and having cultural literacy is important to having an informed citizenry. So that to me seems like the reason for doing it. But as Julianne says, and maybe this doesn't totally answer the question, because I do think some of these are perhaps like for us at the college level, it's a little bit downstream of these sort of.broader issues, which is one more reason I think that making the case about why we should care about literature is also on us. It shouldn't just be assumed, as you're saying, Henry, that because we want jobs that this is good for everyone. I think we need to make that case.Henry Oliver (1:01:05)Will you be making that case on Substack?Jeffrey Lawrence (1:01:09)Yeah, mean, don't know, I mean, I think, you know, sort of more and more, I do think that, you know, that we need to be doing this. I mean, for me, everything that's happened over the past couple of years, I think the way my sense of kind of like the failure of a certain liberal project after the Trump election, you know, last year was really important to me in saying there is a way that we're going about the assumptions that we have aboutHenry Oliver (1:01:10)HahahaJulianne (1:01:11)ThankJeffrey Lawrence (1:01:38)literacy and what we should be doing and the role of academic scholarship. I mean, that I feel like was a turning point, at least personally for me. And I think engaging in places like Substack, but just generally in like public culture, to me, seems like it's just like it is the one avenue that we have. So yes, I guess.Henry Oliver (1:02:00)If your colleagues are listening and you both want to say something to them to encourage them onto Substack, what would you say?Julianne (1:02:10)Jeff, your colleagues, ⁓ do they subscribe to your Substack? Because one of the things that has happened is at first nobody, you know, I told a couple friends, but nobody else knew about this. But now more and more members of my department have subscribed to my Substack, which feels like, which does make it feel sort of high stakes in a different way. Has that happened to you?Henry Oliver (1:02:28)YouJeffrey Lawrence (1:02:32)I'm still pretty under the radar. ⁓ I have some colleagues, I know that there's some graduate students who also read it, ⁓ I mean, and colleague is a small thing. I'm more like, you my colleagues, have a great relationship with my department. I talk to them and sort of, but I think it's more like colleagues in general in terms of the academy that is important.Right? mean, and it again, I don't think it necessarily has to be sub-stacked, but it just shouldn't be Twitter. mean, I think that the long form writing that one finds in the debates for me, at least this is where it's happening right now. And so that would be my pitch is that I just think that the debates that are happening are better than they are anywhere else on the internet.Henry Oliver (1:03:18)Thank you both. I thought this was very interesting and I hope it encourages more of your peers to come and join us on Substack 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

Award-winning narrator Grover Gardner joins AudioFile's Michele Cobb to tell listeners about narrating one of our picks for Best Nonfiction & Culture audiobooks of 2025: Rick Atkinson's Revolutionary War epic, THE FATE OF THE DAY: The War for America, Fort Ticonderoga to Charleston, 1777-1780. Gardner shares how he kept the energy up in this sprawling account of the second installment of Atkinson's Revolutionary War trilogy, which takes place just after the Battle of Trenton. Together they discuss various challenges, especially when narrating Atkinson's unique use of lists, and how impressive it was to understand the enormous, and still timely task, of winning our independence. Read AudioFile's review of the audiobook: Published by Random House Audio AudioFile's 2025 Best Nonfiction & Culture Audiobooks are: DARK RENAISSANCE by Stephen Greenblatt, read by Edoardo Ballerini THE FATE OF THE DAY by Rick Atkinson, read by Grover Gardner and the author  FOOD FOR THOUGHT written and read by Alton Brown MOTHER EMANUEL by Kevin Sack, read by William DeMeritt ORIGINAL SINS by Eve L. Ewing, read by Robin Miles, Eve L. Ewing WE THE PEOPLE written and read by Jill Lepore Explore the full list of 2025 Best Audiobooks on our website.   Support for our podcast comes from Dreamscape, an award-winning audiobook publisher with a catalog that includes authors L.J. Shen, Freida McFadden, and Katee Robert. Discover your next great listen at dreamscapepublishing.com.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Christopher Marlowe (1564-1593) was born into relative obscurity and died in mysterious circumstances at the age of 29. And yet, somehow this ambitious cobbler's son brought about a spectacular explosion of English literature, language, and culture. In this episode, Jacke talks to Stephen Greenblatt about his book Dark Renaissance: The Dangerous Times and Fatal Genius of Shakespeare's Greatest Rival, which illuminates both Marlowe's times and the origins and significance of his work. PLUS author Eric Marshall White (Johannes Gutenberg: A Biography in Books) stops by to discuss his choice for the last book he will ever read. Join Jacke on a trip through literary England (signup closing soon)! The History of Literature Podcast Tour is happening in May 2026! Act now to join Jacke and fellow literature fans on an eight-day journey through literary England in partnership with ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠John Shors Travel⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Scheduled stops include The Charles Dickens Museum, Dr. Johnson's house, Jane Austen's Bath, Tolkien's Oxford, Shakespeare's Globe Theater, and more. Find out more by emailing jackewilsonauthor@gmail.com or masahiko@johnshorstravel.com, or by contacting us through our website ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠historyofliterature.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Or visit the ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠History of Literature Podcast Tour itinerary⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠John Shors Travel⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. The music in this episode is by Gabriel Ruiz-Bernal. Learn more at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠gabrielruizbernal.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Help support the show at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠patreon.com/literature ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠or ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠historyofliterature.com/donate ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. The History of Literature Podcast is a member of Lit Hub Radio and the Podglomerate Network. Learn more at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠thepodglomerate.com/historyofliterature⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From his possible espionage work for the Elizabethan state to his open flirtations with atheism and subversive sexual themes, the brief life of playwright Christopher Marlowe tells us much about the shadowy edges of 16th-century England. Stephen Greenblatt joins Elinor Evans to discuss the subversive, dangerous life of 'Kit', who became both a collaborator and rival of his contemporary, William Shakespeare. (Ad) Stephen Greenblatt is the author of Dark Renaissance: The Dangerous Times and Fatal Genius of Shakespeare's Greatest Rival, Christopher Marlowe (Bodley Head, 2025). Buy it now from Amazon: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Dark-Renaissance-Dangerous-Shakespeares-Christopher/dp/1847927130/?tag=bbchistory045-21&ascsubtag=historyextra-social-histboty. The HistoryExtra podcast is produced by the team behind BBC History Magazine. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

My *utterly electric* convo with one of the great non-fiction writers and scholars of our time, Stephen Greenblatt. Stephen is the Pulitzer Prize winning/bestselling author of some of my favorite books EVER about literary history (including The Swerve), and he's out now with Dark Renaissance, about the troubled, complex genius of Shakespeare's top rival, Chris Marlowe. We discussed (1) how Marlowe, the same age as the Bard, was a far more important writer than Shakespeare when he was stabbed to death at 29; (2) how Elizabethan London was a North Korea-like tinderbox of political repression and censorship; and (3) how Greenblatt's entire career has been guided by a profound desire to communicate with the great spirits long deceased. Order Mark's novel Bunyan and Henry. All episodes of The Thoughtful Bro aired live originally on A Mighty Blaze. The Thoughtful Bro is proudly sponsored by Libro.fm and Writer's Bone.

The Elizabethan playwright Christopher Marlowe is known as Shakespeare's greatest rival. But in his new book Dark Renaissance, historian Stephen Greenblatt makes the case that Marlowe paved the way for Shakespeare. In today's episode, Greenblatt joins NPR's Ari Shapiro for a conversation about what made Marlowe a “lost soul,” how the playwright navigated a world of intense censorship, and evidence that points to his role as a spy.To listen to Book of the Day sponsor-free and support NPR's book coverage, sign up for Book of the Day+ at plus.npr.org/bookofthedayLearn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Christopher Marlowe and William Shakespeare were both born in 1564, rising from working-class origins finding success in the new world of the theater. But before Shakespeare transformed English drama, Marlowe had already done so—with Tamburlaine the Great and the introduction of blank verse to the stage. As Stephen Greenblatt argues in his new biography, Dark Renaissance: The Dangerous Times and Fatal Genius of Shakespeare's Greatest Rival, virtually everything in the Elizabethan theater can be seen as “pre- and post-Tamburlaine.” Shakespeare learned from Marlowe, borrowed from him, and even tried to outdo him. Beyond his theatrical innovation, Marlowe was a poet, provocateur, and likely spy whose turbulent life was cut tragically short. In this episode, Greenblatt explores Marlowe's audacious works, his entanglements with power and secrecy, and his lasting influence on Shakespeare and the stage. From the Shakespeare Unlimited podcast. Published September 23, 2025. © Folger Shakespeare Library. All rights reserved. This episode was produced by Matt Frassica. Garland Scott is the executive producer. It was edited by Gail Kern Paster. We had help with web production from Paola García Acuña. Leonor Fernandez edits our transcripts. Final mixing services are provided by Clean Cuts at Three Seas, Inc. Stephen Greenblatt is Cogan University Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University. He has written extensively on English Renaissance literature and acts as general editor of The Norton Anthology of English Literature and The Norton Shakespeare. He is the author of fourteen books, including The Swerve, winner of the Pulitzer Prize and National Book Award, and Will in the World, a Pulitzer Prize finalist.

Bookwaves/Artwaves is produced and hosted by Richard Wolinsky. Links to assorted local theater & book venues   Prof. Stephen Greenblatt:  Christopher Marlowe, Shakespeare's Greatest Rival Stephen Greenblatt, in conversation with Richard Wolinsky about his book Dark Renaissance: The Dangerous Times and Fatal Genius o Shakespeare's Greatest Rival, recorded September 11, 2025. Stephen Greenblatt is a literary historian and an expert on Shakespeare and the Elizabethan era. Among his other books are  Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy in Renaissance England, Hamlet in Purgatory, Shakespeare's Freedom, and most recently Tyrant: Shakespeare in Politics. He is Cogan University Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University. In this interview, recorded the day after Charlie Kirk's assassination and the day before the capture of his murderer, when the American right wing had declared war on Democrats and “the left,” Stephen Greenblatt discusses political violence in Elizabethan times and today, along with his op-ed in the New York Times, “We Are Watching a Scientific Superpower Destroy Itself.” Guest Link The focus of the interview, though, is on the life and work of Christopher Marlowe (1564-1593), the playwright (Doctor Faustus, The Jew of Malta, Edward II), intellectual and spy, whose work influenced William Shakespeare and who could be called the Bard's “rival.”   Review of the national touring production of  “Shucked”  at the Curran Theatre through October 5, 2025. . The post September 18, 2025: Stephen Greenblatt: “Dark Renaissance,” the life and times of Christopher Marlowe appeared first on KPFA.

Republicans have long railed against “cancel culture” and blamed the left for seeking to curb free speech. Now, they are catching criticism on the same grounds in the wake of Charlie Kirk's assassination – and potentially going further by having government officials involved. Also: today's stories, including how Charlie Kirk's allies are vowing to continue his political legacy, how some Syrians are taking steps to build a democratic legislature, and our review of “Dark Renaissance: The Dangerous Times and Fatal Genius of Shakespeare's Greatest Rival," by Stephen Greenblatt. Join the Monitor's Ira Porter for today's news.

Republicans have long railed against “cancel culture” and blamed the left for seeking to curb free speech. Now, they are catching criticism on the same grounds in the wake of Charlie Kirk's assassination – and potentially going further by having government officials involved. Also: today's stories, including how Charlie Kirk's allies are vowing to continue his political legacy, how some Syrians are taking steps to build a democratic legislature, and our review of “Dark Renaissance: The Dangerous Times and Fatal Genius of Shakespeare's Greatest Rival," by Stephen Greenblatt. Join the Monitor's Ira Porter for today's news.

Stephen Greenblatt, in conversation with Richard Wolinsky about his book Dark Renaissance: The Dangerous Times and Fatal Genius o Shakespeare's Greatest Rival, recorded September 11, 2025. Stephen Greenblatt is a literary historian and an expert on Shakespeare and the Elizabethan era. Among his other books are  Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy in Renaissance England, Hamlet in Purgatory, Shakespeare's Freedom, and most recently Tyrant: Shakespeare in Politics. He is Cogan University Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University. In this interview, recorded the day after Charlie Kirk's assassination and the day before the capture of his murderer, when the American right wing had declared war on Democrats and “the left,” Stephen Greenblatt discusses political violence in Elizabethan times and today, along with his op-ed in the New York Times, “We Are Watching a Scientific Superpower Destroy Itself.” Guest Link The focus of the interview, though, is on the life and work of Christopher Marlowe (1564-1593), the playwright (Doctor Faustus, The Jew of Malta, Edward II), intellectual and spy, whose work influenced William Shakespeare and who could be called the Bard's “rival.” The post Stephen Greenblatt: “Dark Renaissance,” the life and times of Christopher Marlowe appeared first on KPFA.

Dark Renaissance by Stephen Greenblatt is a riveting look into the mysterious life of the brilliant and oft-misunderstood writer, Christopher Marlowe. Stephen joins us to talk about writing for the stage, literacy in the 1500s, the freedom of the theater, living in a time of extremes and more with cohost Jenna Seery. This episode of Poured Over was hosted by Jenna Seery and mixed by Harry Liang.                     New episodes land Tuesdays and Thursdays (with occasional Saturdays) here and on your favorite podcast app. Featured Books (Episode): Dark Renaissance by Stephen Greenblatt Tamburlaine by Christopher Marlowe Dr. Faustus by Christopher Marlowe The Jew of Malta by Christopher Marlowe Edward II by Christopher Marlowe Will in the World by Stephen Greenblatt

Guest: Stephen Greenblatt is the John Cogan University Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University.  His numerous books include The Swerve: How the World Became Modern, which won a Pulitzer Prize and a National Book Award. His latest is Second Chances: Shakespeare and Freud co authored with Adam Phillips.  He is also the general editor of The Norton Shakespeare. The post Stephen Greenblatt on Shakespeare and Freud appeared first on KPFA.

On this week's show, longtime hosts Julia, Stephen, and Dana are all together in-person to talk about Mountainhead, the new HBO Max movie from Jesse Armstrong, creator of Succession. Then, they dig into the new Amazon Prime series Overcompensating. Finally, they talk about the new PR junket, full of spicy food and odd quizzes, inspired by this Vulture article by Nicholas Quah.  Endorsements: Dana: The Pulitzer Prize winning book, The Swerve: How the World Became Modern by Stephen Greenblatt.  Julia: Restauranteur Keith McNally's memoir, I Regret Almost Everything.  Stephen: Sarah Beckwith's piece in The New Yorker, “Returning to the Scene of My Brutal Rape.” and the novel 2666 by Roberto Bolaño. Podcast production by Benjamin Frisch. Want more Culture Gabfest? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the Culture Gabfest show page. Or, visit slate.com/cultureplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this week's show, longtime hosts Julia, Stephen, and Dana are all together in-person to talk about Mountainhead, the new HBO Max movie from Jesse Armstrong, creator of Succession. Then, they dig into the new Amazon Prime series Overcompensating. Finally, they talk about the new PR junket, full of spicy food and odd quizzes, inspired by this Vulture article by Nicholas Quah.  Endorsements: Dana: The Pulitzer Prize winning book, The Swerve: How the World Became Modern by Stephen Greenblatt.  Julia: Restauranteur Keith McNally's memoir, I Regret Almost Everything.  Stephen: Sarah Beckwith's piece in The New Yorker, “Returning to the Scene of My Brutal Rape.” and the novel 2666 by Roberto Bolaño. Podcast production by Benjamin Frisch. Want more Culture Gabfest? Subscribe to Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. Subscribe now on Apple Podcasts by clicking “Try Free” at the top of the Culture Gabfest show page. Or, visit slate.com/cultureplus to get access wherever you listen. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I spoke to Samuel Arbesman about late bloomers. He asked many splendid questions no-one has asked before. With Mark Crowley I discussed some practical aspects of late blooming. On December 5th I am talking to professor Stephen Greenblatt and psychoanalyst Adam Philips about their new book Second Chances, which combines Shakespeare and late blooming. What more could I ask for?I was delighted to talk to Marion Turner, the J.R.R. Tolkien professor of English Language and Literature at Oxford. We talked about how the printing press affected the English language, the effect of science and technology on Chaucer's poetry, how Chaucer influenced Shakespeare, Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, and plenty more. I could have kept asking questions for another hour! Marion recommends translations of Chaucer (Wright or Coghill), talks about the invention of the iambic pentameter, and discusses Chaucer and the question of influence. I recommend Marion's book Chaucer: A European Life to you all. Remember, you can read a transcript on the webpage version. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk/subscribe

The desire for a second chance provides the engine for many of Shakespeare's plays. In their new book, Second Chances: Shakespeare and Freud, Shakespeare scholar Stephen Greenblatt and psychologist Adam Phillips argue that this fascination with the second chance links Shakespeare with one of his biggest 20th century fans: Sigmund Freud. Shakespeare helped Freud think about second chances—why we desire them so deeply, and why, sometimes, we push them away. Host Barbara Bogaev talks with Greenblatt and Phillips about how reading Freud alongside Shakespeare can help illuminate both writers' insights into human nature. Second Chances: Shakespeare and Freud is available from Yale University Press. From the Shakespeare Unlimited podcast. Published May 21, 2024. © Folger Shakespeare Library. All rights reserved. This episode was produced by Matt Frassica. Garland Scott is the associate producer. It was edited by Gail Kern Paster. Ben Lauer is the web producer. Leonor Fernandez edits our transcripts. We had technical help from Rob Double at London Broadcast and Voice Trax West in Studio City, California. Final mixing services provided by Clean Cuts at Three Seas, Inc.

For our Talmud class this week, we read the classic short story If Not Higher, written by the Yiddish writer I.L. Peretz (1852-1915). Dr. Stephen Greenblatt, a proud alum of the Temple Emanuel Hebrew School, and a University Professor at Harvard, where he is the world's preeminent Shakespeare scholar, teaches us If Not Higher before Neilah on Monday night.   As you read this story, consider these questions: What is the theory of goodness, decency, menschlikeit that the rabbi in the story embodies? Do you consider the rabbi's posture an adequate response to the pain in our world? When we read Unetaneh Tokef this year, there is so much pain: who by fire (Maui), who by water (Libya), who an untimely end (the victims of Russia's evil war against Ukraine). The list goes on. If that is our world, and it is, sadly, does Peretz offer us a response that is commensurate to the problem? What is the role of ritual, halakhah, Jewish law, in the rabbi's life, and how does it relate to how he acts? What is the relationship between his piety and his decency? What is not included, not covered, not addressed, by this rabbi's example? How does the rabbi's move affect systemic problems like poverty (the problem he addresses in the story). Consider this text from Deuteronomy 15 that aspires to a world without poverty but concludes that poverty will always exist. This story is iconic. Does it speak to you?

The Merchant of Venice is one of Shakespeare's most gripping and challenging plays. Labeled as a comedy in Shakespeare's First Folio, today it resonates as tragedy as well, thanks to its most unforgettable character: the Jewish moneylender Shylock. Shylock experiences humiliation and oppression at the hands of the Venetian Christians, particularly the merchant Antonio. But when Antonio must borrow money from Shylock to help his beloved friend Bassanio woo the wealthy Portia, Shylock finds his dearest enemy in his power — and we see what harvest hatred reaps. In this course, you'll learn the story of The Merchant of Venice, hear the play's key speeches performed and analyzed by world-class Shakespearean actors and literary scholars, and witness how this comedy plumbs the difficulty and discomfort that shadow our most hostile and our happiest relationships. In Part 1, you'll be guided through a detailed account of the story with commentary by Stephen Greenblatt, John Cogan University Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University. Professor Greenblatt discusses the complicated historical context behind Shakespeare's representation of Venice and of Shylock, and the role Shylock comes to play in Shakespeare's comedy. This summary is told using the language of the play itself, placing key quotations in context to help you understand where these lines come from and what they mean.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/literary-studies

The Merchant of Venice is one of Shakespeare's most gripping and challenging plays. Labeled as a comedy in Shakespeare's First Folio, today it resonates as tragedy as well, thanks to its most unforgettable character: the Jewish moneylender Shylock. Shylock experiences humiliation and oppression at the hands of the Venetian Christians, particularly the merchant Antonio. But when Antonio must borrow money from Shylock to help his beloved friend Bassanio woo the wealthy Portia, Shylock finds his dearest enemy in his power — and we see what harvest hatred reaps. In this course, you'll learn the story of The Merchant of Venice, hear the play's key speeches performed and analyzed by world-class Shakespearean actors and literary scholars, and witness how this comedy plumbs the difficulty and discomfort that shadow our most hostile and our happiest relationships. In Part 1, you'll be guided through a detailed account of the story with commentary by Stephen Greenblatt, John Cogan University Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University. Professor Greenblatt discusses the complicated historical context behind Shakespeare's representation of Venice and of Shylock, and the role Shylock comes to play in Shakespeare's comedy. This summary is told using the language of the play itself, placing key quotations in context to help you understand where these lines come from and what they mean.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/performing-arts

Wir lesen unser erstes Sachbuch und geraten in eine ausführliche Diskussion.

Queen Elizabeth I (1533-1603) was one of the longest-reigning monarchs in all of British history, but she was also a gifted poet. In this episode, we discuss "On Monsieur's Departure," a poem that is inspired by Petrarchan conventions and gives insight into the public and private selves of a powerful queen. (For the text of the poem, scroll to the bottom.) In this episode, we attempt to describe the magnificence of some of Queen Elizabeth's portraiture. To learn more, visit the National Portrait Gallery of London (https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/research/programmes/making-art-in-tudor-britain/case-studies/the-queens-likeness-portraits-of-elizabeth-i): To learn more about Petrarch and his poems that were such an enormous influence on English poets of the sixteenth century, please read this book (https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674663480&content=toc), which provides Petrarch's original poems in Italian and Robert Durling's stunning translations into English. To learn more about what it meant to "fashion a self" in the Renaissance, see Stephen Greenblatt's foundational work on this idea (https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/R/bo3680145.html) . On Monsieur's Departure BY QUEEN ELIZABETH I I grieve and dare not show my discontent, I love and yet am forced to seem to hate, I do, yet dare not say I ever meant, I seem stark mute but inwardly do prate. I am and not, I freeze and yet am burned, Since from myself another self I turned. My care is like my shadow in the sun, Follows me flying, flies when I pursue it, Stands and lies by me, doth what I have done. His too familiar care doth make me rue it. No means I find to rid him from my breast, Till by the end of things it be supprest. Some gentler passion slide into my mind, For I am soft and made of melting snow; Or be more cruel, love, and so be kind. Let me or float or sink, be high or low. Or let me live with some more sweet content, Or die and so forget what love ere meant.

You are surrounded by witchcraft every day, but in a much more subtle form than in previous centuries.  Find out how you can learn to "spot it in the wild."  Our hosts will also provide media recommendations for those searching for thought-provoking content:"The Rise and Fall of the Gospel Coalition" - podcast documentary by AD Robles (Episode 1)"The Wolf Street Report" - podcast by Wolf Richter"Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare" - biography by Stephen Greenblatt

Thomas Dabbs speaks with Stephen Greenblatt of Harvard University about Greenblatt's recent work on Shakespeare, the Bible, and Lucretius.

Myths are widely seen as little more than lies. We're constantly told by experts in media and society that myths are for debunking and even ridicule.Yet despite clear evidence frequently presented by doctors, journalists and scientists, many of us believe in legends and myths. In this episode of "How Do We Fix It?", we explore the power of myths and legends: Why they are essential in making sense of life. Bestselling author of "The Swerve", "The Rise and Fall of Adam and Eve" and other books, Harvard Humanities professor Stephen Greenblatt, is our guest. Using the origin story of Adam and Eve and other accounts in The Bible, we discuss the enormous appeal of foundation stories to raise questions about human existence and explain our fears, desires and morality. At their best popular legends and myths can bring our communities together and improve cooperation and understanding. But at their worst they can promote hatred and lead us to believe in dangerous fantasies. "Some are good for us, while others are not. But it's often difficult to sort out which ones are in each category," says Professor Greenblatt. Note: this interview was first published in 2017. Recommendation: During and after his trip to Florence, Richard has been listening to lecture series about the Italian Renaissance. They include the Great Courses series by Professor Kenneth Bartlett. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This 15th episode of the SIMM-podcast is a reflective one.  The main guest in this episode is sociologist Hartmut Rosa (16'30->45'54).  Lukas Pairon interviews him on his book ‘Resonance – A Sociology of Our Relationship to the World', but we also hear interviews with musicians Tom Pauwels (2'33->6'50), Chrissy Dimitriou (6'56->8'40), Michael Schmidt (8'46->14'40 + 23'20->24'35 + 28'56->31'10) and Filip Verneert (14'48->16'13).Hartmut Rosa is Professor of Sociology and Social Theory at the Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, and director of the Max Weber Center for Advanced Cultural and Social Studies in Erfurt, both in Germany.Following his now classical ‘Social Acceleration', Hartmut Rosa invites us in his book ‘Resonance' to reflect on and consider the alternative relationship of being in resonance with the world.  It was first published in German in 2016 and later translated in different languages. The French translation appeared in 2018, and the English version was released in 2019.  Hartmut Rosa was the keynote speaker at the 7th international SIMM-posium organized from 12 to 14th December 2022 at the London based Guildhall School of Music and Drama, in collaboration with the Copenhagen Rhythmic Music Conservatory and the research network SIMM. The recording of his keynote can be found here on Vimeo and here on YouTube.Referenced during this podcast-episode: anechoic chamber, 'Breathcore' by Michael Schmidt, Luciano Berio's 'Sequenze', Anne Teresa De Keersmaeker, 'En Atendant' by Rosas, Morton Feldman's 'Crippled Symmetry', Stephen Greenblatt's 'The Swerve', Guildhall School of Music and Drama, Ictus, Ircam, Emmanuel Levinas, Emmanuelle Lizère, George Herbert Mead, Mozarteum, participatory sense-making, SIMM-research-seminar London (September 2022)contact: info@simm-platform.eu / www.simm-platform.eu

Hello friends,It's a new Monday of a new year. Hope yours is fantastic. And however it is, and wherever you are, here's some Jane Austen podcasting to power your Monday. Louis Menand is a New Yorker writer and a Harvard professor who tries to get his Harvard students to read and understand and appreciate the stories of Jane Austen, among other classic authors - that's his day job. He co-teaches and co-founded a year-long freshman Humanities course at Harvard, with author and professor Stephen Greenblatt - the course is called “Humanities 10: An Introductory Humanities Colloquium.” Menand says that the conversations in that popular Harvard class - and also the ways we read Jane Austen - are getting more global in scope, and more historical. Our perspectives, you might say, are expanding. This conversation is the last of our Season 2 series of podcast episodes - you can listen to the entire series on Spotify and Apple,  or play/stream them straight from the Austen Connection website. It was a New Yorker article Louis Menand wrote in September 2020 that captured our attention: Titled “How to Misread Jane Austen,” the piece examines current books and thinking about Austen, and how she is interpreted in today's world. The ideas of Austen scholars like Helena Kelly, author of Jane Austen, the Secret Radical, and Tom Keymer, author of Jane Austen: Writing, Society, Politics, are explored.Menand is himself the author of several books uniting history, culture, and ideas: His latest is The Free World: Art and Thought in the Cold War. We interrupted Menand's book tour to see if he'd like to take a break from the Cold War to talk with us about Jane Austen. Lucky for us - he welcomed the diversion.Menand says Austen is important not just as an early, seminal novelist in English, but also as an innovator. You have to understand Austen to understand groundbreaking experimentalists like James Joyce. Like anyone teaching Austen, Menand and his colleagues also have to get creative in the effort to convince their students about the relevancy of the Regency world. Drawing from wedding and marriage announcements in the New York Times and the New York Daily News, professors Menand and Greenblatt get their freshmen students to see that we're all inhabiting a world of status and class, and money and marriage, that we have to navigate. In this conversation, Menand discussed the Courtship Plot and how part of understanding marriage in Austen is understanding math in Austen. That specific Regency-era formula for capital, interest rates, and income is key to decoding the motivations and the stakes influencing Austen's heroes and heroines. We also talked about the novel Emma. For Professor Menand, this novel is really about Frank Churchill and Jane Fairfax. As many of you know, I very much agree!Enjoy this conversation!—--And, thank you for tuning in, friends.Please let us know any comments or back-talk you have for us on any of the dialogue here - about math, marriage, money, and Austen. And: Jane Fairfax and Frank Churchill and Emma. And, who out there is teaching Jane Austen?As a journalism professor who has never taught literature, it'd be wonderful to hear how you take on the challenge of making Austen relevant and engaging to students today - whether at the high school, college, or graduate level. Any special tricks? New approaches? General philosophy? Get in touch, teachers. You can simply reply or email us at austenconnection@gmail.com - or comment here: Meanwhile, thanks for listening.Have a wonderful, safe, first week of this hopeful 2022,Yours truly,Plain Jane Cool linksLouis Menand's The Free World Helena Kelly's Jane Austen, the Secret Radical Tom Keymer's Jane Austen: Writing, Society, Politics If you are contributing as a paid subscriber to the Austen Connection, you are a member of the Charlotte Lucas Loyalty Club - and you rock. Thank you! If you appreciate this podcast, project, and the labor that goes into creating it, and would like to support the work, you can contribute as a paid subscriber and join the Charlotte Lucas Loyalty Club. You are also very welcome to sign up for the newsletter and join this community for free. The Austen Connection is free and available to everyone. Thank you for being here.  Get full access to The Austen Connection at austenconnection.substack.com/subscribe

Whether you realize it or not, the majority of us fashion ourselves. According to Wikipedia, Self-fashioning, a term introduced by Stephen Greenblatt, is used to describe the process of constructing one's identity and public persona according to a set of socially acceptable standards. You curate your in-person and digital person and while you may not be an influencer or content creator, you probably have developed a persona. In this bonus episode, I talk about what is probably the biggest true crime story of the year. I didn't want to frame this as, "you never know what's happening behind the perfect pictures" because that is common knowledge and that doesn't really help anyone because most people put on their best face for the internet. I explore if this was just a case of "missing white woman syndrome", but I think there was a lot more to why her story received so much attention. I appreciated that Gabby received widespread media attention and that various agencies acted quickly on her case. Unfortunately that is not the case for all missing and murdered people. While she was not found alive, I have seen her loved ones advocate for other missing people since her death. I linked below some resources, please feel free to reach out to me if you think an organization or resource should be added. Resources: https://gabbypetitofoundation.org/ http://blackandmissinginc.com https://indianlaw.org/issue/Ending-Violence-Against-Native-Women https://ncadv.org https://www.thehotline.org Sources: https://people.com/human-interest/authorities-ramp-up-search-for-lauren-cho-nj-woman-who-went-missing-near-joshua-tree/ https://www.insideedition.com/death-of-angela-tramonte-who-died-hiking-with-cop-previously-disciplined-for-lying-ruled-accidental https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/daniel-robinson-missing-geologist-search-1270669/ https://www.metroweekly.com/2021/08/lesbian-couple-shot-dead-in-utah-after-alerting-friends-to-creepy-guy-near-their-campsite/ https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/death-woman-found-after-hiking-date-phoenix-officer-ruled-accident-n1278150 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_white_woman_syndrome --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/mostfashionablecrime/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/mostfashionablecrime/support

Whether you realize it or not, the majority of us fashion ourselves. According to Wikipedia, Self-fashioning, a term introduced by Stephen Greenblatt, is used to describe the process of constructing one's identity and public persona according to a set of socially acceptable standards. You curate your in-person and digital person and while you may not be an influencer or content creator, you probably have developed a persona. In this bonus episode, I talk about what is probably the biggest true crime story of the year. I didn't want to frame this as, "you never know what's happening behind the perfect pictures" because that is common knowledge and that doesn't really help anyone because most people put on their best face for the internet. I explore if this was just a case of "missing white woman syndrome", but I think there was a lot more to why her story received so much attention. I appreciated that Gabby received widespread media attention and that various agencies acted quickly on her case. Unfortunately that is not the case for all missing and murdered people. While she was not found alive, I have seen her loved ones advocate for other missing people since her death. I linked below some resources, please feel free to reach out to me if you think an organization or resource should be added. Resources: https://gabbypetitofoundation.org/ http://blackandmissinginc.com https://indianlaw.org/issue/Ending-Violence-Against-Native-Women https://ncadv.org https://www.thehotline.org Sources: https://people.com/human-interest/authorities-ramp-up-search-for-lauren-cho-nj-woman-who-went-missing-near-joshua-tree/ https://www.insideedition.com/death-of-angela-tramonte-who-died-hiking-with-cop-previously-disciplined-for-lying-ruled-accidental https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/daniel-robinson-missing-geologist-search-1270669/ https://www.metroweekly.com/2021/08/lesbian-couple-shot-dead-in-utah-after-alerting-friends-to-creepy-guy-near-their-campsite/ https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/death-woman-found-after-hiking-date-phoenix-officer-ruled-accident-n1278150 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_white_woman_syndrome --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/mostfashionablecrime/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/mostfashionablecrime/support

In this episode of the AITJ podcast, we talk to Mai Aye about her career as a machine learning architect, why liberal arts can be useful to people in tech, books that reframe AI's place in the world, and more! ---- 00:00 Intro 01:18 Mai's Education and Career Journey 04:55 Liberal Arts in the Tech Industry 08:22 Data "Scientist" vs. "Engineer" vs "Architect" 12:46 Building a good pipeline 15:55 Nassim Taleb's "Antifragility" in the AI world. 21:35 The Importance of Outliers 25:38 "The Swerve" by Stephen Greenblatt 28:09 Developing Empathy in your Code and Products 32:39 The Excitement of working in AI Healthcare 35:13 Closing / Credits ---- Mai Aye, Snr. Machine Learning Architect - Fuse Program at Cardinal Health https://www.linkedin.com/in/maiaye Melissa Drew, Associate Editor at AI Time Journal https://www.linkedin.com/in/m-drew/ Our website - https://www.aitimejournal.com/ --- Sponsor our podcast! With options of sponsoring your own podcast interview or multiple episodes with your 30-second ad featured pre, mid, and post-roll throughout your sponsored episode(s), this is a great opportunity to invite listeners to explore your company and brand. To learn more, please visit https://store.aitimejournal.com --- Do you want to be interviewed by AI Time Journal? Complete the Interview Inquiry Form at https://www.aitimejournal.com/interview-inquiries and we will contact you if you are a good fit!

Stephen Greenblatt, 2004 Stephen Greenblatt, in conversation with Richard Wolinsky about his book Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare, recorded in 2005. Stephen Greenblatt is a literary historian and an expert on Shakespeare. Among his other books on Shakespeare are  Shakespearean Negotiations: The Circulation of Social Energy in Renaissance England, Hamlet in Purgatory, Shakespeare's Freedom, and most recently Tyrant: Shakespeare in Politics, set in motion by his feelings about the Trump presidency. Host Richard Wolinsky interviewed Stephen Greenblatt twice afterward, for his award-winning best-seller, The Swerve: How the World Became Modern, and in 2016 for The Rise and Fall of Adam and Eve. Will in the World focuses on William Shakespeare's life, and how that life and the events in his world affected his work. The interview looks at, among other plays, Hamlet, Romeo and Juliet, MacBeth and Richard III and gives a brief overview of London in the waning days of the 1500s.   The post Stephen Greenblatt, “Will in the World,” 2005 appeared first on KPFA.

In Episode 16, the final episode of Season One of this podcast, Clio walks Cornelia Street (again) to ponder history, power, and traffic lights with reference to Stephen Greenblatt's Renaissance Self-Fashioning and John Strausbaugh's The Village.  Get in touch with comments, questions, or just to say hi at studiesintaylorswift@gmail.com. Music: "Happy Strummin" by Audionautix. Cover art by Finley Doyle. 

The Merchant of Venice is one of Shakespeare's most gripping and challenging plays. Labeled as a comedy in Shakespeare's First Folio, today it resonates as tragedy as well, thanks to its most unforgettable character: the Jewish moneylender Shylock. Shylock experiences humiliation and oppression at the hands of the Venetian Christians, particularly the merchant Antonio. But when Antonio must borrow money from Shylock to help his beloved friend Bassanio woo the wealthy Portia, Shylock finds his dearest enemy in his power — and we see what harvest hatred reaps. In this course, you'll learn the story of The Merchant of Venice, hear the play's key speeches performed and analyzed by world-class Shakespearean actors and literary scholars, and witness how this comedy plumbs the difficulty and discomfort that shadow our most hostile and our happiest relationships.  In Part 1, you'll be guided through a detailed account of the story with commentary by Stephen Greenblatt, John Cogan University Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University. Professor Greenblatt discusses the complicated historical context behind Shakespeare's representation of Venice and of Shylock, and the role Shylock comes to play in Shakespeare's comedy. This summary is told using the language of the play itself, placing key quotations in context to help you understand where these lines come from and what they mean. 

On this episode, we have Stephen Greenblatt, an author with high accolades! Stephen is Cogan University Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University. He is the author of fourteen books, including Tyrant: Shakespeare on Politics; The Rise and Fall of Adam and Eve; and The Swerve: How the World Became Modern. He is General Editor of The Norton Anthology of English Literature and of The Norton Shakespeare. His honors include the 2016 Holberg Prize from the Norwegian Parliament, the 2012 Pulitzer Prize and the 2011 National Book Award for The Swerve. He was recently inducted into the British Academy. We talk about the inspiration he had in writing the book, The Swerve. Tony, Stew, and Stephen discuss about the variations in Lucretius' poem and the impact transcription could have on this poem. You'll also learn about how Lucretius was ahead of his time but also alone in his thoughts, as the concepts he wrote about were the exact opposite of the thinkings of the people of that time. This episode is full of information and taught in a way that anyone can learn from!   Find Stephen on IG @harvardenglish! Find us on IG @s.h.a.p.e.shifters

Today's guest is Allison Scott, who works as Senior Acquisitions Editor in the book publishing arm of ASCD, a Washington, DC-based nonprofit education association that provides professional learning products and services for K-12 educators. That is quite a mouthful! What it boils down to is that Allison works on books that help teachers and school administrators in the K-12 system do their job better. For non-US listeners, K-12 means from kindergarten to 12th grade, and includes children aged roughly between 5 and 18 years old. This is the first time I'm interviewing a publishing professional who's not active in the trade publishing world. But not only did I want to interview Allison because we have a special connection that I'll mention at the beginning of the interview, I also wanted to learn more about her specialty field, which was completely unknown territory for me before I interviewed her. Always be learning! Curious to hear more? Listen to my conversation with Allison Scott. NB: Allison wanted to make the correction that her company, ASCD, provided professional learning services in Saudi Arabia. During the interview she had mistakenly said that it was the UAE. Allison's book recommendations: - Stephen Greenblatt, The Swerve - Ling Ma, Severance About Allison: Allison Scott is a Senior Acquisitions Editor in the book publishing arm of ASCD, a DC-based nonprofit education association that provides professional learning products and services for K-12 educators. For the past thirteen years, Allison has worked in this area of academic publishing, searching out education experts and developing books that help teachers and school administrators so their jobs better.

Show Notes and Links to Edoardo Ballerini's Work and Allusions/Texts from Episode   On Episode 42, Pete talks with Edoardo Ballerini about a myriad of topics, all revolving around art and creativity in some way. They discuss Edoardo's artistic upbringing, language and translation, his writing for film and other forms, his acting, his award-winning narration of audiobooks and newspaper articles, his literary inspiration, and much more. Edoardo Ballerini, described on multiple occasions as “The Golden-Voiced Edoardo Ballerini,” is a two time winner of the Audiobook Publishers Association's Best Male Narrator Audie Award (2013, Beautiful Ruins, by Edoardo Ballerini; 2019, Watchers by Dean Koontz). He has recorded nearly 300 titles, including classic works by Tolstoy, Dante, Stendhal, Kafka, Calvino, Poe, Emerson, Whitman and Camus, best-sellers by James Patterson and David Baldacci, modern masterpieces by Tom Wolfe, Karl Ove Knausgaard, and André Aciman, and spiritual titles by The Dalai Lama and Thich Nhat Hahn. On screen, Ballerini is best known for his role as junkie "Corky Caporale" on The Sopranos (HBO) and as the star chef in the indie classic Dinner Rush. He has appeared in over 50 films and tv shows, including a series regular role in the critically acclaimed Quarry, (Cinemax)  and recurring roles in Boardwalk Empire (HBO), 24 (Fox) and Elementary (CBS). Ballerini's work as a narrator has garnered international attention. Articles on his work and career have appeared in The New York Times (US), The Guardian (UK), Aftenposten (Norway) and MediaPost (US), among others. In 2019 he recorded Robert Alter's translation of The Hebrew Bible in its entirety. In 2020 he added Leo Tolstoy's War and Peace to his growing list of titles. He is also a two time winner of the Society of Voice Arts Award, and was recently named a “Golden Voice” by AudioFile Magazine, an honorific bestowed to only 35 narrators in the magazine's 20 year history. Other authors Edoardo has voiced include Chuck Palahniuk, Eve Ensler, Carson McCullers, Jay McInerney, Stephen Greenblatt, Jeffrey Deaver, Danielle Steel, Chuck Palahniuk, Louis L'Amour, Adriana Trigiani, Isabel Allende, Stieg Larsson, James Salter, Paul Theroux and Jodi Picoult. Besides narrating audiobooks, Edoardo  is also a regular contributor to Audm, where he narrates the best in long-form journalism for The New York Times, The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, Atlantic Monthly, The London Review of Books, and many other publications. He is a graduate of Wesleyan University and lives in New York. Edoardo Ballerini reads an excerpt from Martin Eden by Jack London Edoardo Ballerini's Personal Website Edoardo Ballerini on Italics-”The Voice of God” Video Edoardo Ballerini Profile in The New York Times: "The Voice of God. (And Knausgaard, Whitman, Machiavelli..." May 13, 2020 Edoardo Ballerini reads Beautiful Ruins, Chapter One-YouTube excerpt -at about 4:35, Edoardo describes his life growing up among family in New York and Milan, as well as growing up with artsy and creative parents and their parents' artistic friends   -at about 6:45, Edoardo talks about his dual identities as Italian-American (or “Italian AND American”), as well as his love of language being fueled by growing up bilingual/multilingual   -at about 9:35, Edoardo talks about his reading interests as a kid, including myths, followed by a “dip away” into math and science, and then a return to poetry in high school and then his interest in being a writer in late adolescence   -at about 11:25, Edoardo talks about the importance of “place” in his writing, acting, and other art   -at about 14:05, Edoardo talks about the literature that has given him “chills at will,” especially the “book that changed [his] life”-Joyce's Ulysses   -at about 17:10, Edoardo talks about being a man of many talents and interests, and he hones in on audiobook narration and the importance and tough balance of being an interprete as an audiobook narrator   -at about 21:05, Edoardo talks about what it means on a daily basis to be a “creative”   -at about 24:25, Edoardo talks about his mom's influence on him as she was a photo historian, especially with regard to him becoming an actor, a visual and literary medium   -at about 25:55, Edoardo talks about his beginnings as an actor   -at about 27:45, Edoardo talks about his beautiful interaction with Aaliyah during the filming of Romeo Must Die   -at about 29:40, Edoardo talks about his run of four episodes on The Sopranos, including the incredible circumstances involved in filming a crucial scene with Michael Imperioli as a relapsing Christopher Moltisanti   -at about 34:45, Edoardo talks about his role as Ignatius D'Alessio in Boardwalk Empire, including how the run ended   -at about 36:25, Edoardo talks about the movie in which he starred and that he directed, Good Night, Valentino   -at about 44:05, Edoardo talks about how he got started as an audiobook narrator about 10 years ago, which coincided with the growth of the iPod, iPhone, Audible.com, etc.   -at about 47:35, Edoardo talks about continuity and recording long books   -at about 49:50, Edoardo talks about “one of the luckiest breaks of [his] life” in getting to narrate (and doing a stellar and award-winning job) Jess Walter's Beautiful Ruins   -at about 54:00, Edoardo talks about his love for Martin Eden by Jack London, the wonderful recent Italian movie adaption, and Edoardo's recording of Martin Eden on audiobook   -at about 1:01:50, Edoardo thrills with a reading from Martin Eden   -at about 1:03:25, Edoardo talks future projects and laughs in response to The New York Times dubbing his voice “The Voice of God…”   You can now subscribe to the podcast on Apple Podcasts, and leave me a five-star review. You can also ask for the podcast by name using Alexa, and find the pod on Spotify and on Amazon Music. Follow me on IG, where I'm @chillsatwillpodcast, or on Twitter, where I'm @chillsatwillpo1. This is a passion project of mine, a DIY operation, and I'd love for your help in promoting what I'm convinced is a unique and spirited look at an often-ignored art form. The intro song for The Chills at Will Podcast is “Wind Down” (Instrumental Version), and the other song played on this episode was “Hoops” (Instrumental)” by Matt Weidauer, and both songs are used through ArchesAudio.com.

This week, Rabbi Jonah Steinberg, executive director of Harvard Hillel, talks with Harvard humanities professor Stephen Greenblatt and Isaac Longobardi '21 about adversity as it plays out in the odyssey of the Biblical Joseph, Shakespeare's characters, and our modern world.

On the 244th birthday of the United States of America, the BXC brothers tackle some of their favorite biographies (excluding autobiographies, that's an episode for another day). Also discussed: what makes a compelling biography and how favorite biographies usually align with personal interests. BOOKS DISCUSSED/MENTIONED/RECOMMENDED IN THIS EPISODE: From John Current read: 'The Devil's Highway: A True Story,' Luis Alberto Urrea Recommended biographies: 'John Adams' by David McCullough; 'Wisdom and Innocence: A Life of G. K. Chesterton' by Joseph Pearce; 'Will in the World: How Shakespeare Became Shakespeare' by Stephen Greenblatt; Life of St. Columba by Adomnan of Iona; 'Truman' by David McCullough; 'The Man Who Went into the West: A Life of R. S. Thomas' by Byron Rodgers, 'Leadership in Turbulent Times,' Doris Kearns Goodwin Next read: 'Go Down, Moses,' William Faulkner From Jude Current read: 'Dancing in the Dark: A Cultural History of the Great Depression,' Morris Dickstein Recommended biographies: 'The Seven Mountains of Thomas Merton' by Michael Mott; 'Melville: His World and His Work' by Andrew Delbanco; 'Van Gogh: The Life' by Steven Naifeh and Gregory White Smith; 'One Matchless Time,' Jay Parini; 'The True Adventures of John Steinbeck, Writer' by Jackson Benson Next read: 'The Exorcist,' William Peter Blatty

Robert Paxton talks about the history of fascism and why it is relevant in contemporary America. Paxton is a political scientist and historian specializing in the World War II era. He is a professor emeritus at Columbia University. Support KPFA!! Click Here to Donate!!! BOOK: Anatomy of Fascism $100 Book: Tyrant: Shakespeare on Politics by Stephen Greenblatt $100 Book: Barracoon: The Story of the Last Black Cargo Edited by Deborah Plant $100 COMBO: All three books $250 Letters and Politic “The Tyranny Pack” MP3 CD  $100 The post Fund Drive Special – The Anatomy of Fascism appeared first on KPFA.

A conversation with Stephen Greenblatt talking about the psychological roots, and the twisted consequences of tyranny from the study of Shakespeare's tyrannical leaders: Richard III, Macbeth, Lear, Coriolanus, and the societies they rule over. Guest: Stephen Greenblatt is a Professor of the Humanities at Harvard University, a world-renowned Shakespeare scholar, and the author of several books including his latest Tyrant: Shakespeare on Politics. About the book: Stephen Greenblatt illuminates the ways in which William Shakespeare delved into the lust for absolute power and the catastrophic consequences of its execution. In his book, Greenblatt delivers his own critique of the current occupant of the White House, amazingly, he doesn't even have to mention his name. We all know it! The parallels seem obvious.   Support your Radio Station!! Click Here to Donate to KPFA!!! BOOK: Tyrant: Shakespeare on Politics by Stephen Greenblatt $100 Book: Barracoon: The Story of the Last Black Cargo Edited by Deborah Plant $100 Book: Anatomy of Fascism $100 COMBO: All three books $250 Letters and Politic “The Tyranny Pack” MP3 CD  $100 The post Fund Drive Special – What Can Trump Learn from Shakespeare's Tyrannical Leaders appeared first on KPFA.

It creeps into everything from exercise to pore size, from diet to personal finance, from relationships to parenting style: guilt that we're not good enough, fit enough, smart enough. And as we peruse Instagram, all we see is the perfection of others reflecting our own failures back at us. Why do we spend so much time feeling guilty? Should we? Guests: Devorah Baum, Lucas Mann, Thomas Curran , Stephen Greenblatt, Susan Bandes

We Need Your Support, Donate to KPFA Today!!! Book: The Darkening Age by Catherine Nixey $150 [The role of Christianity in the elimination of classical polytheism and art] Best of Letters and Politics 2018 Book Collection includes: Tyrant by Stephen Greenblatt, How Fascism Works by Jason Stanley, The Darkening Age by Catherine Nixey, Barracoon by Zora Neal Hurston, and A Radical History of the World by Neil Faulkner  $500 MP3 CD Best of Letters & Politics 2018 Pack $100 Best of Letters and Politics 2018 Book Collection + MP3 CD $550.   The post Fund Drive Special – Best of Letters and Politics 2018 appeared first on KPFA.

Support KPFA, Donate Today!!! BOOK Barracoon: The Story of the Last “Black Cargo” by Zora Neale Hurston Edited by Deborah G. Plant $150 Best of Letters and Politics 2018 Book Collection includes: Tyrant by Stephen Greenblatt, How Fascism Works by Jason Stanley, The Darkening Age by Catherine Nixey, Barracoon by Zora Neal Hurston, and A Radical History of the World by Neil Faulkner $500 MP3 CD Best of Letters & Politics 2018 Pack $100 Best of Letters and Politics 2018 Book Collection + Best of Letters & Politics MP3 CD $550     The post Fund Drive Special – Best of Letters and Politics 2018 Book Collection and Interviews appeared first on KPFA.

Support our Work, Donate to KPFA today! Letters and Politics is offering its best work of 2018 Book How Fascism Works: The Politics of Us and Them by Jason Stanley $150 Best of Letters and Politics 2018 Book Collection includes: Tyrant by Stephen Greenblatt, How Fascism Works by Jason Stanley, The Darkening Age by Catherine Nixey, Barracoon by Zora Neal Hurston, and A Radical History of the World by Neil Faulkner $500 MP3 CD Best of Letters & Politics 2018 Pack $100 Best of Letters and Politics 2018 Book Collection + Book Collection $550   The post Fun Drive Special – The Best of Letters and Politics 2018 appeared first on KPFA.

Letters and Politics is offering the 5 best books we have reviewed in 2018 Pack for $500. Tyrant: Shakespeare on Politics by Stephen Greenblatt, Harvard University professor, and a world-renowned Shakespeare scholar. Stephen Greenblatt illuminates the ways in which William Shakespeare delved into the lust for absolute power and the catastrophic consequences of its execution. In his book, Greenblatt delivers his own critique of the current occupant of the White House, amazingly, he doesn't even have to mention his name. We all know it! The parallels seem obvious. How Fascism Works by Jason Stanley, is Professor of Philosophy at Yale University. The Darkening Age: The Christian Destruction of the Classical World by Catherine Nixey.  Barracon: The Story of the Last “Black Cargo” by Zora Neale Hurston, Deborah G. Plant, Alice Walker (Foreword). A Radical History of the World by Neil Faulkner. MP3 CD Best of Letters & Politics 2018 Pack $100 Letters & Politics Mondo Pack (Includes all L+P Packs) USB$200 Best of Letters and Politics 2018 Book Collection + USB$650 The post Fun Drive Special – Top 2018 Book Collection appeared first on KPFA.

Following his National Book Award and Pulitzer Prize celebrated The Swerve, in the elaborately readable The Rise and Fall of Adam and Eve Stephen Greenblatt explores reasons why the story of Genesis has seized the imagination.

In this episode of The Archive Project, Stephen Greenblatt examines religious censorship and Lucretius's influence on Shakespeare, among others.

The true story of the historical detective whose work uncovered the 1000 year-old poem that shook the early Christian world and marked the beginning of the Renaissance...