Podcast appearances and mentions of stuart jeffries

Starmer's war zone: the Prime Minister's perilous positionThis week, our new political editor Tim Shipman takes the helm and, in his cover piece, examines how Keir Starmer can no longer find political refuge in foreign affairs. After a period of globe-trotting in which the Prime Minister was dubbed ‘never-here Keir', Starmer's handling of international matters had largely been seen as a strength. But as tensions escalate in the Iran–Israel conflict, global events are beginning to create serious challenges. They threaten not only to derail the government's economic plans but also to deepen divisions within the Labour party, particularly between the leadership and much of the parliamentary party. Tim joined the podcast alongside The Spectator US editor Freddy Gray. (02:08)Next: is it a mistake to try and topple Iran's Supreme Leader?Justin Marozzi asks if we are seeing ‘an ominous mission creep in Israel's blistering attack on Iran'. Donald Trump has been calling for the ‘UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER' of Iran, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been directly addressing the Iranian people. The regime may be unpopular, but how realistic is the expectation of regime change? Marozzi joined the podcast alongside Michael Stephens, a Middle East expert at the defence and security thinktank Rusi. (19:07)And finally: should we embrace feeling shame?Stuart Jeffries reviews a new book by the French philosopher Frédéric Gros in the books section of the magazine this week. A Philosophy of Shame: A Revolutionary Emotion argues that shame should be embraced, rather than avoided. So, in an era of ‘cancel culture' and public shaming – not to mention some of the shamelessness exhibited by social media influencers – can ‘shame' be a good thing? Stuart joined the podcast to discuss. (34:31)Hosted by William Moore and Lara Prendergast.Produced by Oscar Edmondson and Patrick Gibbons.

Starmer's war zone: the Prime Minister's perilous positionThis week, our new political editor Tim Shipman takes the helm and, in his cover piece, examines how Keir Starmer can no longer find political refuge in foreign affairs. After a period of globe-trotting in which the Prime Minister was dubbed ‘never-here Keir', Starmer's handling of international matters had largely been seen as a strength. But as tensions escalate in the Iran–Israel conflict, global events are beginning to create serious challenges. They threaten not only to derail the government's economic plans but also to deepen divisions within the Labour party, particularly between the leadership and much of the parliamentary party. Tim joined the podcast alongside The Spectator US editor Freddy Gray. (02:08)Next: is it a mistake to try and topple Iran's Supreme Leader?Justin Marozzi asks if we are seeing ‘an ominous mission creep in Israel's blistering attack on Iran'. Donald Trump has been calling for the ‘UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER' of Iran, while Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been directly addressing the Iranian people. The regime may be unpopular, but how realistic is the expectation of regime change? Marozzi joined the podcast alongside Michael Stephens, a Middle East expert at the defence and security thinktank Rusi. (19:07)And finally: should we embrace feeling shame?Stuart Jeffries reviews a new book by the French philosopher Frédéric Gros in the books section of the magazine this week. A Philosophy of Shame: A Revolutionary Emotion argues that shame should be embraced, rather than avoided. So, in an era of ‘cancel culture' and public shaming – not to mention some of the shamelessness exhibited by social media influencers – can ‘shame' be a good thing? Stuart joined the podcast to discuss. (34:31)Hosted by William Moore and Lara Prendergast.Produced by Oscar Edmondson and Patrick Gibbons.

On this week's Spectator Out Loud: Damian Thompson argues that Papal succession plotting is a case of life mirroring art (1:26); Paola Romero reports on Venezuela's mix of Evita and Thatcher, Maria Corina Machado, and her chances of bringing down Nicolas Maduro (11:39); reviewing Richard Overy's book ‘Why war?', Stuart Jeffries reflects that war has as long a future as it has a past (17:38); Ysenda Maxtone Graham provides her notes on party bags (24:30); and, Nicholas Farrell ponders on the challenges of familial split-loyalties when watching the football in Italy (27:25).  Presented by Patrick Gibbons.

On this week's Spectator Out Loud: Damian Thompson argues that Papal succession plotting is a case of life mirroring art (1:26); Paola Romero reports on Venezuela's mix of Evita and Thatcher, Maria Corina Machado, and her chances of bringing down Nicolas Maduro (11:39); reviewing Richard Overy's book ‘Why war?', Stuart Jeffries reflects that war has as long a future as it has a past (17:38); Ysenda Maxtone Graham provides her notes on party bags (24:30); and, Nicholas Farrell ponders on the challenges of familial split-loyalties when watching the football in Italy (27:25).  Presented by Patrick Gibbons.

Physical cash is dying—but should we be worried about the consequences, or leave that to conspiracists and cranks who are concerned about digital payments? Author and journalist Stuart Jeffries joins Ellen Halliday to discuss what the payments of the future might look like, from cryptocurrency to Amazon wishlists, as well as an unusual group of rebels who are burning cash to make a point.Read Stuart's feature here. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ins Choi, the creator of the Netflix hit comedy series, Kim's Convenience, talks about getting past stereotypes, keeping audiences on edge and bringing his original Korean-Canadian stage version of the show to the Park Theatre in north London.Tom Sutcliffe asks author and journalist Rachel Cooke and children's author and representative of the Society of Authors Abie Longstaff about the impact of the cyberattack on the British Library. Do we need to set more films and tv series in the present? Critics Joe Queenan and Stuart Jeffries consider why so much of what we watch is set in the nostalgic past or a dystopian future.

High school debate is considered an ideal extracurricular activity for aspiring lawyers, politicians, or anyone seeking to learn the tools of effective communication and persuasion. But a slew of recent reports argue that high school debate is being captured by political ideology, rendering certain arguments off-limits, some debate topics undebatable, and ad hominem attacks fair game. Debate judges disclose their judging paradigms by saying things like, “I will listen to conservative-leaning arguments, but be careful,” or, “Before anything else, including being a debate judge, I am a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist. . . . I cannot check the revolutionary proletarian science at the door when I'm judging.” Some debates even devolve into personal attacks, spurred on by judges who say they “will consider indictments of an opponent on the basis that they have done [or] said something racist, gendered, [or] -phobic in their personal behavior.” On today's show, we're joined by two former high school debaters who are dismayed by these trends. James Fishback is the founder of Incubate Debate, which hosts free debate tournaments for students in Florida. Matthew Adelstein is a rising sophomore studying philosophy at the University of Michigan and publishes Bentham's Newsletter, a newsletter about utilitarianism. Show notes: Transcript of episode “Part I: At high school debates, debate is no longer allowed” by James Fishback “Part II: At high school debates, watch what you say” by James Fishback “How critical theory is radicalizing high school debate” by Maya Bodnick Nico's current reading list on critical theory: “Grand Hotel Abyss” by Stuart Jeffries and “America's Cultural Revolution” by Christopher F. Rufo www.sotospeakpodcast.com YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@freespeechtalk Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/freespeechtalk Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sotospeakpodcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/freespeechtalk/ Email us: sotospeak@thefire.org

Megyn Kelly joins Freddy Gray to take a look at the wider picture following Donald Trump's arrest. The presidential candidates' ratings have surged in the polls – has this rejuvenated Trump's campaign? Also on the show, Dan Hitchens and Andrew Doyle discuss the divisions in the Church of England; Charles Moore remembers former Chancellor and editor of The Spectator, Nigel Lawson; and Stuart Jeffries joins Lady Unchained to talk about the therapeutic nature of prison art.

Utropstecknet kan både signalera ilska och glädje. Kulturskribenten Kristina Lindquist berättar utifrån egna erfarenheter om hur det också kan representera något mycket större än så. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna. Ursprungligen publicerad den 14 maj 2019.det väller liksom framen flod av grönska,av blad barroch fågelsång!Se där en talande rad ur Eva-Stina Byggmästars diktsamling ”Barrskogarnas barn” från 2014. I Byggmästars skogar finns inga skuggor, bara en yster och naivistisk naturlyrik från första till sista sidan – och just det: en massa utropstecken. ”Får poesi verkligen se ut såhär? Så uppsluppen!” skrev Svenska dagbladets kritiker Therese Eriksson i sin recension. För utropstecknet är ganska sällsynt i den kulturella offentligheten, och något av ett svart får i skriftspråket överhuvudtaget. Ända sedan 1800-talet har det enligt språkforskaren Siv Strömquist varnats för detta stöddiga skiljetecken, som inte sällan beskrivs som skrikigt och vulgärt. Jag minns hur en bekant som arbetade med att besvara allmänhetens brev på Rosenbad fick instruktionen att ersätta det alldeles korrekta utropstecknet i hälsningsfraserna med ett komma – utropstecknet var helt enkelt för ”familjärt” för statsförvaltningen. Och i TT-språkets skrivregler konstateras bara helt kort att utropstecknet bör användas ”sparsamt”.utropstecknets explicita tydlighet ställs mot ett rådande stilideal som upphöjer det vaga och outtalade.För tio år sedan skrev den brittiska journalisten Stuart Jeffries i The Guardian om en renässans för utropstecknet i den digitala tidsålderns kommunikation, där detta skiljetecken kan innebära den stora skillnaden mellan det avmätta och det förtjusta. ”Vi ses på konferensen [utropstecken]” förmedlar något helt annat än ”Vi ses på konferensen [punkt]”. Forskning visar också att kvinnor använder utropstecken i högre utsträckning än män, vilket språkforskaren Carol Waseleski förklarar med att utropstecknet kan utstråla vänlighet – vilket alltså anses utmärkande för kvinnors sätt att kommunicera.Men utropstecknets status som det mest förtalade bland skiljetecken rubbas nog inte så lätt. Det är en flåsig gaphals vi talar om – som gjord för det militära eller för samtidens råbarkade debatter i kommentarsfält och på Twitter. Jeffries tar i sin artikel upp kriminalförfattaren Elmore Leonard, som sagt att två eller tre utropstecken per hundratusen ord prosa möjligen kan passera, vilket innebär ungefär ett per medellång roman. Fantasyförfattaren Terry Pratchett låter en av sina romanfigurer säga att fler än ett i följd av detta skiljetecken är ett uttryck för en ”sjuk hjärna”, medan F. Scott Fitzgerald ansåg att den som överhuvudtaget använder det lika gärna kan skratta åt sina egna skämt. Herrarna har nog en poäng, och samtidigt kan utropstecknet som fenomen bevisligen ligga till grund både för litterär intrig och tidlös komedi.I den klassiska komediserien ”Seinfeld” kraschar förhållandet mellan Elaine och hennes författarkille för att han inte använder utropstecken i ett nedskrivet telefonmeddelande om en nyfödd bebis i bekantskapskretsen. Hon tycker att han struntar i hennes vänner, han tycker att hon är lite väl slampig med sina skiljetecken. I ett avsnitt av Sex and the city förvandlas ett utlovat utropstecken till ett frågetecken på omslaget till New York Magazine, som pryds av en osmickrande bild av huvudpersonen Carrie. Tidningsrubriken ”Singel och fantastisk?” formulerat som en fråga snarare än med utropstecknets sköna självsäkerhet får Carrie att ifrågasätta hela sin sorglösa livsstil.Utropstecknet är alltså ett tecken som både väcker och uttrycker känslor, och känslor får väl generellt sägas ha ganska låg status i vårt samhälle. Men kanske handlar frågan också om att utropstecknets explicita tydlighet ställs mot ett rådande stilideal som upphöjer det vaga och outtalade. I en illustrativ passage i romanen ”Argonauterna” fastnar författaren Maggie Nelson vid de tomma hakparenteser som den inflytelserika författaren Anne Carson gett som skriftliga intervjusvar i en tidning – och som signalerar ett slags tyst och sofistikerad återhållsamhet. Nelson skriver: ”Åsynen av Carsons hakparenteser fick mig genast att skämmas för min tvångsmässiga drift att lägga korten mer bestämt på bordet. Men ju mer jag tänkte på hakparenteserna, desto mer störde de mig. De tycktes göra en fetisch av det osagda”. Utropstecknet lägger verkligen korten bestämt på bordet, och tvingar fram ställningstaganden i en tid när det värsta man kan vara är tvärsäker – alldeles oavsett vad man är tvärsäker på. På senare tid har så kallad samtalsaktivism blivit på modet, det vill säga tekniken att genom diskussion och möten försöka motverka polarisering i samhället. Här tycks förmågan att förflytta sig vara viktigare än att syna innehållet i de – inte sällan extrema – åsikter som genom denna typ av samtal erbjuds en plattform. Rörligheten i ståndpunkter blir närmast ett bevis för ett rörligt intellekt, och då finns inte plats för några rigida utropstecken.All förundran är borta med honom, liksom den kraft som utropstecknet för med sig till det skrivna språket mellan människorna.Men låt oss återvända till känslorna. I den tidiga novellen ”Utropstecknet” skildrar Anton Tjechov en statstjänsteman som vid juletid konfronteras med att han under 40 yrkesår aldrig har använt ett utropstecken: ”Fördömt! När använder man egentligen utropstecken?” Den grammatiskt skolade hustrun får hjälpa till: Vid hälsningar och utrop och vid uttryck för jubel, indignation och ilska, upplyser hon. Den osalige tjänstemannen jagas av sina utropstecken, och ser hur människor omkring honom förvandlas till långa streck med en punkt under. För tänk om han på 40 år inte har upplevt en enda känsla som förtjänat ett utropstecken – vad säger det om hans liv?Jag tror – eller rättare sagt: jag vet – att det också kan gå åt andra hållet, så att de starkaste av känslor kan kortsluta användningen av detta känslotecken. Den grönländska poeten Naja Marie Aidt beskriver i den prosalyriska romanen ”Har döden tagit något ifrån dig så ge det tillbaka” om hur sorgen efter hennes vuxna son slog sönder all syntax och begriplighet i hennes formuleringar. ”inget språk möjligt språk dog med mitt barn”, skriver hon i en lång ordmassa helt utan skiljetecken. När mitt eget barn dog hände det något med mina utropstecken, och specifikt med dem. Utropstecknen försvann ur all skriven kommunikation, och har ännu inte återvänt. Det handlar inte bara om brist på glädje och entusiasm, utan om något som kanske står att finna i utropstecknets historiska rötter. I vår äldsta bevarade handledning i användandet av skiljetecken talas det om ”förundringstecken”, eller punctus admirativus. Utropstecknet hör i sitt ursprung alltså hemma inför skapelsens och varats mirakel. Och för den som sett all sådan skönhet i sin nyfödda sons knubbiga ansikte finns ingen förundran kvar på jorden, inte sedan han skickats iväg för gravsättning i en mönstrad pyjamas. All förundran är borta med honom, liksom den kraft som utropstecknet för med sig till det skrivna språket mellan människorna.Annat är det i nattens ordlösa klagan, där utropstecknen kastas mot en tom himmel utan svar. Jag läser Jobs bok i Gamla testamentet, och dess berättelse om mannen som inte bara förlorar sina barn och allt han äger utan också drabbas av svåra sjukdomar. Här finns naturligt nog en hel del förtvivlade utropstecken: ”Ropa bara! Finns det någon som svarar?”, som det står i femte kapitlet. Och lite längre fram:Om jag tänker: 'Det lättar när jag lagt mig,sömnen skall lindra min sorg',då skrämmer du mig med drömmar,förfärar mig med syner,så att jag hellre vill kvävas.Hellre döden än denna plåga!För utropstecknet må vara en flåsig gaphals som skrattar åt sina egna skämt i den politiska polariseringens tid. Men det kan också – både i sin närvaro och i sin frånvaro – bära på ett möjligt språk för det mänskliga livets yttersta gränser.Kristina Lindquist, kulturskribentLitteraturNaja Marie Aidt: ”Har döden tagit något ifrån dig så ge det tillbaka” (Wahlström & Widstrand, 2018)Bibeln. Job 5:1, 7:13-15 (2000)Eva-Stina Byggmästar: ”Barrskogarnas barn” (Wahlström & Widstrand, 2014)Stuart Jeffries: ”The joy of exclamation marks!” (The Guardian, 29/4 2009)Maggie Nelson: ”Argonauterna” (Modernista, 2016)Siv Strömquist: ”Skiljeteckensboken” (Morfem, 2013)Anton Tjechov: ”The exclamation mark” (Hesperus classics, 2008)

Across the 19th and 20th centuries, the Huxley family reshaped how we think about humanity and our relationship with the natural world. Within a family of scientists, educators, novelists, mystics, and filmmakers, two men led the way: ‘Darwin's Bulldog', the zoologist T.H. Huxley and his grandson and intellectual inheritor, the ecologist and conservationist, Julian Huxley.From religion to genetics, to human psychology, the Huxleys' impact was felt across some of the most controversial and significant topics of their day. In studies of the natural world, they contributed to the foundation of the new sciences of ecology and animal conservation.Adept at writing about themselves in painfully revealing, honest and unprecedented ways, the family's lives, marriages, successes and failures were also subject to their fascination with emotional, sexual, and psychological experience.At the RSA, leading historian of science Alison Bashford is joined by historian Thomas Dixon and writer Stuart Jeffries to discuss the impact of three generations of Huxleys, exploring how the roots of the Huxley legacy reach deep into scientific and cultural conversations we are still having today. #RSAhuxleyBecome an RSA Events sponsor: https://utm.guru/ueembDonate to The RSA: https://utm.guru/udNNBFollow RSA Events on Instagram: https://instagram.com/rsa_events/Follow the RSA on Twitter: https://twitter.com/RSAEventsLike RSA Events on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rsaeventsoff...

Sean Illing talks with Stuart Jeffries, journalist and author of Everything, All the Time, Everywhere, about why postmodernism is so hard to define, and why — as Jeffries argues — it's still a very active presence in our culture and politics today. They discuss whether our desire should be understood as subversive or as a tool of capitalism, how postmodernism is inextricably linked with neoliberalism, and how to navigate our current culture of ubiquitous consumption and entertainment. What should we watch on TV: Boris Johnson's resignation speech, or the reality show Love Is Blind? Host: Sean Illing (@seanilling), Interviews Writer, Vox Guest: Stuart Jeffries, author; feature writer, The Guardian References:  Everything, All the Time, Everywhere: How We Became Postmodern by Stuart Jeffries (Verso; 2021) "The post-truth prophets" by Sean Illing (Vox; Nov. 16, 2019) The Postmodern Condition by Jean-François Lyotard (Univ. of Minnesota Press; 1979, tr. 1984) Simulacra and Simulation by Jean Baudrillard (Univ. of Michigan Press; 1981, tr. 1983) Postmodernism: Style and Subversion, 1970–1990 (exhibition catalog, Victoria and Albert Museum, London, UK; Sept. 24, 2011 – Jan. 15, 2012) "Postmodernism: from the cutting edge to the museum" by Hari Kunzru (The Guardian; Sept. 15, 2011) "You're sayin' a foot massage don't mean nothin', and I'm sayin' it does" by James Wood (Guardian Supplement; Nov. 19, 1994) Enjoyed this episode? Rate Vox Conversations ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ and leave a review on Apple Podcasts. Subscribe for free. Be the first to hear the next episode of Vox Conversations by subscribing in your favorite podcast app. Support Vox Conversations by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts This episode was made by:  Producer: Erikk Geannikis Editor: Amy Drozdowska Engineer: Patrick Boyd Deputy Editorial Director, Vox Talk: Amber Hall Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this week's episode, Marina Hyde notes how following the rules is something MPs can ignore (1m42s), Simon Hattenstone interviews author Douglas Stuart (10m19s), Imogen West-Knights ponders the end of small portions (30m42s), and Stuart Jeffries questions whether there is hope for the soap (45m47s)

A hybrid topical episode for you this week. Twenty minutes on Ukraine (and when is a billionaire an oligarch?) then we talk technology news: Trump's new social media platform, Amazon in court for union busting, gamers get esports event moved from homophobic UAE, Disco Elysium's TV deal with Amazon, Barry Gardiner and the CEO of Airbus in sync, and more.  Plus, the repeal of the Vagrancy Act.   Our Patreon   Second Row Socialists on Twitter   Comradio on Twitter   Ukraine invasion: Student claims he was beaten and racially abused as he fled towards Polish border - Amrit Singh Mann for Sky News (2022)   SNL Afghanistan skit   When it comes to politics, the UK suffers from a chronic disease. It's called satire - Stuart Jeffries in The Guardian (2019)   Study: US is an oligarchy, not a democracy - BBC News website (2014)   Filter out 'unverified' accounts, tech giants told - BBC News website (2022)   Airbus CEO says hydrogen plane is ‘the ultimate solution' but cautions a lot of work lies ahead - Anmar Frangoul for CNBC (2022)   Let's think beyond electric vehicles and a few battery plants: we need hydrogen - Barry Gardiner at Labour List (2022)   Ep 68 - Comradio Film Club #3: Jaws feat. Jack Frayne-Reid

This week's Book Club podcast addresses one of the most misunderstood and vilified concepts in the culture wars: postmodernism. How did this arcane theoretical position escape from academia to become a social media talking point? What the hell is it anyway? What does Jeff Koons have to do with Foucault? Is postmodernism out to destroy capitalism, or is it capitalism incarnate? And what comes after postmodernism? Stuart Jeffries - author of Everything, All The Time, Everywhere: How We Became Postmodern - puts it all in quotes for us.

This week's Book Club podcast addresses one of the most misunderstood and vilified concepts in the culture wars: postmodernism. How did this arcane theoretical position escape from academia to become a social media talking point? What the hell is it anyway? What does Jeff Koons have to do with Foucault? Is postmodernism out to destroy capitalism, or is it capitalism incarnate? And what comes after postmodernism? Stuart Jeffries - author of Everything, All The Time, Everywhere: How We Became Postmodern - puts it all in quotes for us.

Georgina Godwin speaks to Stuart Jeffries about his latest book, ‘Everything, All the Time, Everywhere: How We Became Postmodern'. It is a unique history of postmodernism from the 1970s until today, exploring how behind the notion of the movement as escapism is the more sinister idea of its close relationship with neoliberalism.

Fan of the show? https://www.patreon.com/newleftradio (Support us on Patreon)! Postmodernism permeates our lives and has fundamentally changed our world. Entwined with neoliberalism, our societies and our lives and our governments have been changed by these two ideological movements. Our social safety nets and our socio-economic ladders have ben cut away and we have been left with a world that may be unsalvagable. Stuart Jeffries joins us to discuss and explore what this new type of capitalism means for our future. Links https://www.versobooks.com/books/3875-everything-all-the-time-everywhere (Buy Everything, All the Time, Everywhere) About Everything, All the Time, Everywhere: How We Became Postmodern Postmodernism stood for everything modernism rejected: fun, exuberance, irresponsibility. But beneath its glitzy surface, postmodernism had a dirty secret: it was the fig leaf for a rapacious new kind of capitalism. It was the forcing ground of “post truth,” by means of which western values were turned upside down. But where do these ideas come from and how have they impacted on the world? In this brilliant history of a dangerous idea, Stuart Jeffries tells a narrative that starts in the early 1970s and still dominates our lives today. He tells this history through a riotous gallery that includes, among others: David Bowie, the iPod, Madonna, Jeff Koons's the Nixon Shock, Judith Butler, Las Vegas, Margaret Thatcher, Grand Master Flash, I Love Dick, the RAND Corporation, the Sex Pistols, Princess Diana, Grand Theft Auto, Jean Baudrillard, Netflix, and 9/11. We are today scarcely capable of conceiving politics as a communal activity because we have become habituated to being consumers rather than citizens. Politicians treat us as consumers to whom they must deliver. Can we do anything other than suffer from buyer's remorse? About Stuart Jeffries Stuart Jeffries is a journalist and author. He was for many years on the staff of the Guardian, working as subeditor, TV critic, Friday Review editor and Paris correspondent. He now works as a freelance writer, mostly for the Guardian, Spectator, Financial Times and the London Review of Books. Stay connected with the latest from New Left Radio by https://newleft.us6.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=8227a4372fe8dc22bdbf0e3db&id=e99d6c70b4 (joining our mailing list) today! _________ Support this podcast

On this week's episode, Lisa Bjurwald reports on the Swedish monarchy going woke (01:20); Douglas Murray argues that the culture wars fit the UK even less well than the US (07:00); and Stuart Jeffries interviews the world's first AI artist.Also on the podcast: a complaints letter to the Times after their March 2020 story that Carrie Symonds and Boris Johnson were considering giving their dog up for adoption. The letter, though never sent, was revealed on Friday.

La utopía en palabras de Eduardo Galeano no es una meta a alcanzar, sino una forma de hacer que nos movamos. El BAU nos lleva prometiendo cosas que nunca alcanzamos, mientras seguimos corriendo como pollos sin cabeza hasta que alguna pared nos pare. Con @desempleado666, @ y @iracundoisidoro. Dirige Txus Marcano. Bibliografía: The Entropy Law and the Economic Process por Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen. Colapso por Jarde Diamond. La economía en evolución. Historia y perspectivas de las categorías básicas del pensamiento económico de José Manuel Naredo. Dialéctica de la Ilustración. Obra completa 3 de Theodor W. Adorno (Escritor), Max Horkheimer (Escritor), Joaquín Chamorro Mielke (Traductor). El pentágono del poder. El mito de la máquina (vol. 2) de Lewis Mumford. El mito de la máquina. Técnica y evolución humana. Técnica y civilización de Lewis Mumford. Grand Hotel Abyss. The Lives of the Frankfurt School de Stuart Jeffries. Comunismo de lujo totalmente automatizado de Aaron Bastani. Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

In this episode, we heal the divide between analytic and continental philosophy by finally giving logical positivism its due. Dr. Liam Kofi Bright (London School of Economics, @lastpositivist) explains the socialist roots of some of the positivists, details their views on the role of science and knowledge in projects of social betterment, and defends the political importance of clarity. patreon.com/leftofphilosophy | @leftofphilReferences:Hans Hahn, Otto Neurath, and Rudolf Carnap, “The Scientific Conception of the World: The Vienna Circle,” at https://www.manchesterism.com/the-scientific-conception-of-the-world-the-vienna-circle/Otto Neurath, “Personal Life and Class Struggle.” In Empiricism and Sociology. Edited by Marie Neurath and Robert S. Cohen (Dordrecht-Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Company), 283-297.Rudolf Carnap, Lecture notes from “Philosophy-Opium for the Well-Educated.” Translated by Chris Lembeck.Rudolf Carnap, 1932/33. “Psychology in Physical Language.” In Erkenntnis 3: 107-142.Liam Kofi Bright, 2017. “Logical Empiricists on Race.” In Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 65: 9-18.Stuart Jeffries, “Bilston's revival: the pursuit of happiness in a Black Country town” at https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/aug/02/pursuit-happiness-black-country-town-bilstonLiam Kofi Bright, “Schlick’s Utopia” at http://sootyempiric.blogspot.com/2016/12/schlicks-utopia.htmlMusic: "Vintage Memories" by Schematist | schematist.bandcamp.com

On this episode, Juice 107.3 brekky hosts Chloe & Elerrina interview journalist Stuart Jeffries to raise awareness for child abuse. 12/01/2021 You can visit our website at www.juice1073.com.au Breaker: https://www.breaker.audio/good-taste-brekky-with-chloe-and-elerrina-on-juice-107-dot-3-1 Google Podcasts: https://www.google.com/podcasts?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy8xNDFjOTI2MC9wb2RjYXN0L3Jzcw== Overcast: https://overcast.fm/itunes1518864498/good-taste-brekky-with-chloe-and-elerrina-on-juice-107-3-gold-coast PocketCast:https://pca.st/omi391ca RadioPublic: https://radiopublic.com/good-taste-brekky-with-chloe-and-6BoonM Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Lv1qJEjaLhINBtILn59mw

感谢收听“普通读者”的第7期播客节目！ 这期我们聊了聊适合冬天读的书。 祝大家冬季读书快乐。 推荐书单 The Snow Child, by Eowyn Ivey （台版中译本《雪地裡的女孩》） If on a Winter's Night a Traveler，Italo Calvino（中译本《如果在冬夜，一个旅人》），卡尔维诺 A Christmas Memory, by Truman Capote（中译本《圣诞忆旧集》） The White Darkness, by David Grann 「昨夜のカレー、明日のパン」木皿泉（中译本《昨夜的咖喱，明日的面包》） 《草莓、极光与火焰》，西加奈子 One By One, by Ruth Ware Moominvalley in November，Tove Jansson（中译本《十一月的木民谷》） Dubliners, by James Joyce（中译本《都柏林人》） Good Morning, Midnight, by Lily Brooks-Dalton (中译本《永夜漂流》) Wenjack, by Joseph Boyden Grand Hotel Abyss : The Lives of the Frankfurt School, by Stuart Jeffries 《猎人笔记》，屠格涅夫 Moon of the Crusted Snow, by Waubgeshig Rice 《我的世纪，我的野兽》，曼德尔施塔姆 提到的书和影视剧： 电影《小偷家族》 电影《午夜天空》 电影《亚当一家的价值观》 电影《生存家族》 电影《森林深处》 日剧《昨夜的咖喱，明日的面包》 日剧《西瓜》 日剧《逃避虽可耻但有用》 日剧《金田一少年事件薄》 书《笑福面》，西加柰子 书《等待戈多》，贝克特 书《无人生还》，阿加莎 书《冷血》，杜鲁门 卡波特 书“The Great Whitness”纽约客链接：https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/02/12/the-white-darkness 书 “Lights Out”, by Ted Koppel 书 《小说理论》，卢卡奇 书《存在主义咖啡馆》， 莎拉 贝克韦尔 ================= 收听和订阅渠道： 小宇宙App，Apple Podcast, Anchor，Spotify，Pocket Casts， Google Podcast，Breaker， Radiopublic；网易云“普通-读者” 电邮：commonreader@protonmail.com 微博： 普通读者播客 欢迎关注三位主播的豆瓣： 堂本 https://www.douban.com/people/shiorireads/ H https://www.douban.com/people/jacintaH/ 徐慢懒 https://www.douban.com/people/77421773/ 片头音乐credit： Flipper's Guitar - 恋とマシンガン- Young, Alive, in Love - 片尾音乐credit：John Bartman - Happy African Village (Music from Pixabay)

Stuart Jeffries erzählt die Geschichte der Frankfurter Schule und ihrer Vertreter und geht dabei genau auf deren philosophischen Denkstrategien ein. Das ergibt eine flüssig geschriebene, durchaus kritische und äußerst informative Lektüre. Rezension von Andreas Puff-Trojan. Aus dem Englischen von Susanne Held Klett-Cotta Verlag ISBN 978-3-608-96431-8 510 Seiten 28 Euro

Utropstecknet kan både signalera ilska och glädje. Kulturskribenten Kristina Lindquist berättar utifrån egna erfarenheter om hur det också kan representera något mycket större än så. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna. det väller liksom fram en flod av grönska, av blad   barr och fågelsång! Se där en talande rad ur Eva-Stina Byggmästars diktsamling Barrskogarnas barn från 2014. I Byggmästars skogar finns inga skuggor, bara en yster och naivistisk naturlyrik från första till sista sidan och just det: en massa utropstecken. Får poesi verkligen se ut såhär? Så uppsluppen! skrev Svenska dagbladets kritiker Therese Eriksson i sin recension. För utropstecknet är ganska sällsynt i den kulturella offentligheten, och något av ett svart får i skriftspråket överhuvudtaget. Ända sedan 1800-talet har det enligt språkforskaren Siv Strömquist varnats för detta stöddiga skiljetecken, som inte sällan beskrivs som skrikigt och vulgärt. Jag minns hur en bekant som arbetade med att besvara allmänhetens brev på Rosenbad fick instruktionen att ersätta det alldeles korrekta utropstecknet i hälsningsfraserna med ett komma utropstecknet var helt enkelt för familjärt för statsförvaltningen. Och i TT-språkets skrivregler konstateras bara helt kort att utropstecknet bör användas sparsamt. utropstecknets explicita tydlighet ställs mot ett rådande stilideal som upphöjer det vaga och outtalade. För tio år sedan skrev den brittiska journalisten Stuart Jeffries i The Guardian om en renässans för utropstecknet i den digitala tidsålderns kommunikation, där detta skiljetecken kan innebära den stora skillnaden mellan det avmätta och det förtjusta. Vi ses på konferensen [utropstecken] förmedlar något helt annat än Vi ses på konferensen [punkt]. Forskning visar också att kvinnor använder utropstecken i högre utsträckning än män, vilket språkforskaren Carol Waseleski förklarar med att utropstecknet kan utstråla vänlighet vilket alltså anses utmärkande för kvinnors sätt att kommunicera. Men utropstecknets status som det mest förtalade bland skiljetecken rubbas nog inte så lätt. Det är en flåsig gaphals vi talar om som gjord för det militära eller för samtidens råbarkade debatter i kommentarsfält och på Twitter. Jeffries tar i sin artikel upp kriminalförfattaren Elmore Leonard, som sagt att två eller tre utropstecken per hundratusen ord prosa möjligen kan passera, vilket innebär ungefär ett per medellång roman. Fantasyförfattaren Terry Pratchett låter en av sina romanfigurer säga att fler än ett i följd av detta skiljetecken är ett uttryck för en sjuk hjärna, medan F.  Scott Fitzgerald ansåg att den som överhuvudtaget använder det lika gärna kan skratta åt sina egna skämt. Herrarna har nog en poäng, och samtidigt kan utropstecknet som fenomen bevisligen ligga till grund både för litterär intrig och tidlös komedi. I den klassiska komediserien Seinfeld kraschar förhållandet mellan Elaine och hennes författarkille för att han inte använder utropstecken i ett nedskrivet telefonmeddelande om en nyfödd bebis i bekantskapskretsen. Hon tycker att han struntar i hennes vänner, han tycker att hon är lite väl slampig med sina skiljetecken. I ett avsnitt av Sex and the city förvandlas ett utlovat utropstecken till ett frågetecken på omslaget till  New York Magazine, som pryds av en osmickrande bild av huvudpersonen Carrie. Tidningsrubriken Singel och fantastisk? formulerat som en fråga snarare än med utropstecknets sköna självsäkerhet får Carrie att ifrågasätta hela sin sorglösa livsstil. Utropstecknet är alltså ett tecken som både väcker och uttrycker känslor, och känslor får väl generellt sägas ha ganska låg status i vårt samhälle. Men kanske handlar frågan också om att utropstecknets explicita tydlighet ställs mot ett rådande stilideal som upphöjer det vaga och outtalade. I en illustrativ passage i romanen Argonauterna fastnar författaren Maggie Nelson vid de tomma hakparenteser som den inflytelserika författaren Anne Carson gett som skriftliga intervjusvar i en tidning  och som signalerar ett slags tyst och sofistikerad återhållsamhet. Nelson skriver: Åsynen av Carsons hakparenteser fick mig genast att skämmas för min tvångsmässiga drift att lägga korten mer bestämt på bordet. Men ju mer jag tänkte på hakparenteserna, desto mer störde de mig. De tycktes göra en fetisch av det osagda. Utropstecknet lägger verkligen korten bestämt på bordet, och tvingar fram ställningstaganden i en tid när det värsta man kan vara är tvärsäker alldeles oavsett vad man är tvärsäker på. På senare tid har så kallad samtalsaktivism blivit på modet, det vill säga tekniken att genom diskussion och möten försöka motverka polarisering i samhället. Här tycks förmågan att förflytta sig vara viktigare än att syna innehållet i de inte sällan extrema åsikter som genom denna typ av samtal erbjuds en plattform. Rörligheten i ståndpunkter blir närmast ett bevis för ett rörligt intellekt, och då finns inte plats för några rigida utropstecken. All förundran är borta med honom, liksom den kraft som utropstecknet för med sig till det skrivna språket mellan människorna. Men låt oss återvända till känslorna. I den tidiga novellen Utropstecknet skildrar Anton Tjechov en statstjänsteman som vid juletid konfronteras med att han under 40 yrkesår aldrig har använt ett utropstecken: Fördömt! När använder man egentligen utropstecken? Den grammatiskt skolade hustrun får hjälpa till: Vid hälsningar och utrop och vid uttryck för jubel, indignation och ilska, upplyser hon. Den osalige tjänstemannen jagas av sina utropstecken, och ser hur människor omkring honom förvandlas till långa streck med en punkt under. För tänk om han på 40 år inte har upplevt en enda känsla som förtjänat ett utropstecken vad säger det om hans liv? Jag tror eller rättare sagt: jag vet  att det också kan gå åt andra hållet, så att de starkaste av känslor kan kortsluta användningen av detta känslotecken. Den grönländska poeten Naja Marie Aidt beskriver i den prosalyriska romanen Har döden tagit något ifrån dig så ge det tillbaka om hur sorgen efter hennes vuxna son slog sönder all syntax och begriplighet i hennes formuleringar. inget språk möjligt språk dog med mitt barn, skriver hon i en lång ordmassa helt utan skiljetecken. När mitt eget barn dog hände det något med mina utropstecken, och specifikt med dem. Utropstecknen försvann ur all skriven kommunikation, och har ännu inte återvänt. Det handlar inte bara om brist på glädje och entusiasm, utan om något som kanske står att finna i utropstecknets historiska rötter. I vår äldsta bevarade handledning i användandet av skiljetecken talas det om förundringstecken, eller punctus admirativus. Utropstecknet hör i sitt ursprung alltså hemma inför skapelsens och varats mirakel. Och för den som sett all sådan skönhet i sin nyfödda sons knubbiga ansikte finns ingen förundran kvar på jorden, inte sedan han skickats iväg för gravsättning i en mönstrad pyjamas. All förundran är borta med honom, liksom den kraft som utropstecknet för med sig till det skrivna språket mellan människorna. Annat är det i nattens ordlösa klagan, där utropstecknen kastas mot en tom himmel utan svar. Jag läser Jobs bok i Gamla testamentet, och dess berättelse om mannen som inte bara förlorar sina barn och allt han äger utan också drabbas av svåra sjukdomar. Här finns naturligt nog en hel del förtvivlade utropstecken: Ropa bara! Finns det någon som svarar?, som det står i femte kapitlet. Och lite längre fram: Om jag tänker: 'Det lättar när jag lagt mig, sömnen skall lindra min sorg', då skrämmer du mig med drömmar, förfärar mig med syner, så att jag hellre vill kvävas. Hellre döden än denna plåga! För utropstecknet må vara en flåsig gaphals som skrattar åt sina egna skämt i den politiska polariseringens tid. Men det kan också både i sin närvaro och i sin frånvaro bära på ett möjligt språk för det mänskliga livets yttersta gränser. Kristina Lindquist, kulturskribent Litteratur Naja Marie Aidt: Har döden tagit något ifrån dig så ge det tillbaka (Wahlström & Widstrand, 2018) Bibeln. Job 5:1, 7:13-15 (2000) Eva-Stina Byggmästar: Barrskogarnas barn (Wahlström & Widstrand, 2014) Stuart Jeffries: The joy of exclamation marks! (The Guardian, 29/4 2009) Maggie Nelson: Argonauterna (Modernista, 2016) Siv Strömquist: Skiljeteckensboken (Morfem, 2013) Anton Tjechov: The exclamation mark (Hesperus classics, 2008)

All of human history has been leading up to Avengers: Endgame, a civilizational pinnacle that we are so fortunate to witness. Oxford, Mark, returning guest Millie (a friend and filmmaker who's appeared in episodes 41, 49, and 52) and first-time guest Mtume (also a friend and filmmaker) get together to talk about the last Avengers movie and the stan culture that not only follows Marvel, but also Game of Thrones and Star Wars. *WARNING: THIS EPISODE HAS SPOILERS (AVENGERS, GAME OF THRONES) Intro Music: "The Real Hero" by Alan Silvestri (Avengers: Endgame Soundtrack) Outro Music: "Avengers Main theme" by Alan Silvestri (played by Patrik Pietschmann: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UAm0aWvzFI8) Intro Voice Track: Audience reactions to Avengers: Endgame TWITTER: Mtume (@sircoregant) Millie (@onemillicentcho) Oxford (@oxford_kondo) Mark (@snbatman) REFERENCED RESOURCES: Let 'Game of Thrones' Be White: https://planamag.com/let-game-of-thrones-be-white-3b44ca16fc0 Grand Hotel Abyss by Stuart Jeffries: https://www.amazon.com/Grand-Hotel-Abyss-Frankfurt-School/dp/1784785687 SUBMISSIONS & COMMENTS: editor.planamag@gmail.com

Jos jokaisella kapitalismin vaiheella on oma sitä erityisesti määrittävä tunteensa, niin tällä hetkellä elämme ahdistuksen aikakautta. Tässä jaksossa pureudumme ahdistukseen: mikä ahdistaa ja miksi? Onko ahdistuksesta ulospääsyä? Lisäksi keskustelemme yhdestä tämän hetken kiinnostavimmasta feministisestä ilmiöstä, xenofeminismistä: “if nature is unjust, change nature!” Suositukset ja jaksossa mainitut tekstit: Helen Hester (2018) Xenofeminism. Polity Press. Laboria Cuboniks (2018) The Xenofeminist Manifesto. A Politics for Alienation. Verso. Laurie Penny (2017) The Globalized Jitters. Fighting for Change in an Anxious Age. Plan C (2014) We Are All Very Anxious. Stuart Jeffries (2017) Grand Hotel Abyss: The Lives of the Frankfurt School. Verso. True Crime -podcast The Teacher’s Pet (australialainen murha) Lisäksi: Äänestäkää meitä vuoden parhaaksi podcastiksi jakso.fi -äänestyksessä! Tulkaa myös Sanoin-festivaalille Korjaamolle 7.2. kannustamaan meitä podcast-battlessa!

Centrist business elites believe in an America that doesn't exist. Two guests this episode: first, @mollyesque talks about her piece "On Safari in Trump's America" for The Atlantic. Her article follows the centrist organization Third Way on a “listening tour” of the real America. Then @EricLevitz (35:52), who just published on op-ed in the New York Times entitled “America is not ‘center-right," sorts through research to argue that what Americans often mean when they say they are “moderate” is not the combination of superficial social progressivism and neoliberalism that Wall-Street-aligned Third Way types think they mean. Thanks to our supporters at Verso Books. Check out Grand Hotel Abyss: The Lives of the Frankfurt School by Stuart Jeffries versobooks.com/books/2501-grand-hotel-abyss Support us with $ at patreon.com/TheDig

Grand Hotel Abyss is a majestic group biography exploring who the Frankfurt School were and why they matter today. Combining biography, philosophy and storytelling, Jeffries explores how the Frankfurt thinkers, including Walter Benjamin, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer and Herbert Marcuse, gathered in hopes of understanding the politics of culture during the rise of fascism. Their lives, like their ideas, profoundly, sometimes tragically, reflected and shaped the shattering events of the twentieth century. In conversation with Sarah Bakewell, the author of the critically acclaimed At the Existentialist Café, portraying the lives and ideas of the existentialists, Jeffries discussed how the Frankfurt School elaborated upon the nature and crisis of our mass-produced, mechanised society, and how much these ideas still tell us about our age of social media and runaway consumption. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Dirk Gently (TV series) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: , Dirk Gently Titlescreen of series 1, based on Gently's painted whiteboard. Genre / Created by () Written by Howard Overman Jamie Mathieson Directed by Damon Thomas Starring Composer(s) Country of origin United Kingdom Language(s) English No. of series 1 No. of episodes 3 (+ pilot) () Production Executive producer(s) Howard Overman Saurabh Kakkar () Brian Minchin () Eleanor Moran (BBC - Pilot) Jamie Laurenson (BBC - Pilot) Producer(s) Chris Carey Editor(s) Matthew Tabern Cinematography Ole Bratt Birkeland Camera setup Running time 60 minutes Production company(s) The Welded Tandem Picture Company Distributor Broadcast Original channel (repeats) Picture format Audio format Original run 16 December 2010 – 19 March 2012 Chronology Related shows External links Dirk Gently is a comedy detective drama TV series based on characters from the Dirk Gently novels by . The series was created by and stars as detective and as his Richard MacDuff. Recurring actors include as MacDuff's girlfriend Susan Harmison, as Dirk's nemesis DI Gilks and as Dirk's receptionist Janice Pearce. Unlike most detective series Dirk Gently features broadly comic touches and even some themes such as and . Dirk Gently operates his Holistic Detective Agency based on the "fundamental interconnectedness of all things", which relies on methods to uncover connections between seemingly-unrelated cases. He claims that he follows the principles of , and although the majority of his clients suspect he may be a conman he often produces surprising results. With the help of his assistant, Richard MacDuff, Dirk investigates a number of seemingly unrelated but interconnected cases. An hour-long loosely based on plot elements from Adams' 1987 novel was broadcast on on 16 December 2010 and was watched by 1.1 million viewers. Critical reception was generally positive. A full series of three one-hour episodes was subsequently commissioned in March 2011 and was broadcast on BBC Four in March 2012. The series is the first continuing drama series produced for the digital channel. The series is produced by and The Welded Tandem Picture Company for and shot in . The pilot was written by Howard Overman and directed by Damon Thomas. The full series was written by Overman, and Jamie Mathieson and directed by . The series along with the pilot episode was released on DVD on 26 March 2012 by ITV Studios Home Entertainment. An original television soundtrack album featuring music from the series composed by was released by 1812 Recordings on 5 March 2012. Contents Production Background The novel Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency has its origins in the incomplete 1979 television serial , featuring as the . Location filming in Cambridge had been completed, but a studio technicians' dispute at the BBC meant that studio segments were not completed, and the serial was never transmitted. As a result of the serial's cancellation, Adams reused a number of ideas from this script and his other Doctor Who scripts as the basis for a new novel, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, published in 1987. Adams published another, in 1988 and at the time of his death in 2001 was working on a third installment to be titled , fragments of which were published posthumously. Each novel features new characters and scenarios, although Dirk (real name Svlad Cjelli), his "ex-secretary" Janice Pearce and Sergeant, later Inspector, Gilks recur in each. The first Gently novel had previously been adapted into a stage play, and a BBC Radio 4 series by which was first broadcast in October 2007 and featured comedian in the title role. According to James Donaghy, Douglas Adams was frustrated that his Dirk Gently novels were never adapted for the screen. Announcement During - a convention - Ed Victor, a literary agent who represents Adams's estate announced that a television adaptation of Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency was in production. was announced to be playing Gently, with as MacDuff and as Susan. It is the first television adaptation of Adams' Dirk Gently series, although characters from the books had appeared in a 1992 episode of . Shooting on the pilot commenced early in October 2010 in Bristol. The director was Damon Thomas and the producer was Chris Carey. Although it was commissioned by the BBC, it was produced by with The Welded Tandem Picture Company. The pilot was first broadcast on on 16 December 2010 and was repeated a number of times during the next month. The pilot gained a commission on 31 March 2011 for a three-part series of one hour-long episodes broadcast on BBC Four in March 2012. The series is the first continuing drama series commissioned by BBC Four. Adaptation The screenplay of the pilot by is not a direct adaptation of the novel, but uses certain characters and situations from the novel to form the basis of a new drama centred around Dirk. Speaking about his interpretation, Howard Overman stated in an interview with Benji Wilson "I'm not even going to try to adapt the book: you can't adapt this story. Especially not on a BBC Four budget. We made the deliberate decision not to do a straight translation of the books. If we'd done that the fans would have felt badly let down, because you can never portray that world on the screen as well as it's been done in people's own imaginations...If you just do a straight adaptation like , people are always going to be quite brutal about it because it's never going to live up to their expectations." Dirk drives an old brown in the production. Stephen Mangan, writing a BBC blog on the programme stated "In my opinion, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency and The Long Dark Tea-Time Of The Soul are unfilmable as written...too much happens, there are too many ideas". The pilot concentrates on two relatively minor plot strands in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency: the disappearance of a cat, and the simultaneous disappearance of millionaire Gordon Way. Although time travel is involved in the solution, the novel's entire St Cedd's College / Electric Monk / Coleridge strand is omitted, although key words relating to these elements do appear on Dirk's whiteboard when it is first seen, though they are never subsequently referred to. Other elements from the book, such as the trapped sofa, are also absent and the setting is updated to 2010, with and replacing the answering machine messages in the book. There are changes to the characters too, one notable one being that Susan is Gordon's ex-girlfriend rather than his sister. Several additional elements from Adams's novels, in particular St Cedd's College, were later to appear in the full series. Interviewed about the series, Stephen Mangan noted that "All three episodes are very different in tone and you get a different Dirk with each one...He's on the run from the police in one of them and in another there's a bit of romance in the air, which for Dirk is a surprise because he's probably the most asexual character on TV... There seems to be a vogue for dark, realistic, gritty detective series, apart from perhaps . Dirk has so much humour in it. How many other detectives mix detection with quantum mechanics or drive a 30-year-old brown ?" Each episode of series one was written by different writers, who are mostly known for their contributions to science fiction and fantasy programmes; series creator Howard Overman also created and has written for , has previously written the Doctor Who stories ""/"" and wrote the film and has written scripts for . Cast , best known for his role in the television series , and subsequently , was cast in the main role as holistic detective . Mangan already knew the novel and the author's works, stating in a press release "I've been a fan of Douglas Adams ever since the Hitchhiker's radio series which I used to record as a child and listen to over and over again in my bedroom. It's such a thrill to now be playing one of his brilliant characters. Dirk is a chaotic, anarchic force of nature with a totally unique take on the world. He is described as 'lazy, untidy, dismissive and unreliable'. I've absolutely no idea why they thought I'd be right for the role." Cast alongside him were and , both of whom had previously worked with Mangan in Green Wing and respectively. Darren Boyd and Helen Baxendale returned for the full series, with the character of Richard MacDuff becoming Dirk's "partner/assistant" for each of the episodes. Other regular cast members are as Detective Inspector Gilks and as Dirk's secretary Janice Pearce. The programme pilot featured appearances from , , , . Episode one saw guest appearances by , , Ken Collard, and . Episode two featured roles for , , , Andrew Leung, and Bethan Hanks. Episode three features and . Filming at the was used as the fictional . Although the series is set in the London boroughs of and , the series was shot entirely in . Areas and buildings featured in the programme included the Guildhall, the Bottle Yard, St Thomas Street and the Greenbank area. The second series episode also featured extensive filming around the , with doubling as the fictional Cambridge College . The production's location manager, Rob Champion, noted that each location had to be chosen carefully to avoid featured giveaway clues to Bristol, in particular any building made of the local building material, limestone. He noted that "Episode 2 was the greatest challenge as it included two days material in a Robotic Laboratory. Bristol has such a thing...a joint venture between the two universities, with a very helpful professor, but its landlord was an American corporation with the most unimaginably anal restrictions on access. They basically didn't want us there and took the best part of two weeks to say so...We eventually settled upon a brand new building at the Bristol-Bath Science Park where they could not have been more helpful. All this on a BBC4 budget." Music The series's soundtrack was composed by . In creating the distinctive sound for the main titles and incidental music, Pemberton made use of a , a which is a cross between a and a piano. These instruments were produced in America between 1927 to 1972. The soundtrack also mixes in a harpsichord, synth, bass guitar and drums. A soundtrack album featuring music from the series was released by 1812 Recordings on 5 March 2012. Plot Dirk Gently (real name Svlad Cjelli) operates a Detective Agency based on the "fundamental interconnectedness of all things". To solve cases, Dirk relies on methods for example " navigation" (following people or vehicles who look like they know where they are going, in the hope that they will lead somewhere you want to be) or throwing a dart at a board of words to select the direction of his detection. By following up on apparently random occurences and whims, Dirk discovers connections between seemingly unrelated cases and often produces surprising results. He claims that he follows the principles of (although it is implied when he speaks to an expert in these fields that he doesn't really understand them); most people suspect he is just a conman and he rarely gets paid by clients and is therefore in almost permanent financial difficulty. In the pilot episode, Dirk bumps into a former university friend, Richard MacDuff, who has been made redundant from a job at an electricity board, and takes on a case for him. During the course of his investigation, Dirk hypnotises MacDuff and persuades him into investing his £20,000 redundancy money in his failing detective agency. MacDuff therefore becomes Dirk's partner in the business and "assistant" on investigations. Richard MacDuff's girlfriend, Dr Susan Harmison, was also at university with the pair and is deeply sceptical about Dirk's abilities. Also present at the Agency is Dirk's receptionist Janice Pearce, whom Dirk has not paid for years and who therefore refuses to do any work. Episodes No.TitleDirectorWriterViewing figuresOriginal air date 0 "" Damon Thomas 943 000 16 December 2010 When sets out to solve an apparently simple and harmless disappearance of a cat from an old lady's house, he unwittingly uncovers a double murder which, in turn, leads to a host of even more extraordinary events.  1 "Episode 1" Howard Overman 844 000 5 March 2012 Dirk discovers the connection between two unrelated cases - a client who believes are trying to kill him and another whose horoscopes appear to be coming true.  2 "Episode 2" Tom Shankland 561 000 12 March 2012 Dirk is called back to his old university to protect a valuable robot but within 24 hours it has been stolen and a dead body discovered, with Dirk and MacDuff the prime suspects.  3 "Episode 3" Tom Shankland Jamie Mathieson 592 000 19 March 2012 Dirk's old clients are being randomly murdered with Dirk as the only link. Rather than talk to the police, Dirk elects to leave the country but is waylaid by a series of seemingly unconnected events.  Reception Pilot Stephen Mangan plays the titular holistic detective in the series. The pilot episode gained 1.1m viewers (3.9% share) on BBC Four, which was over three times the channel's slot average. Critical reception for the pilot was largely positive. Several mentioned that it was only a loose adaptation of the novel, although the general consensus was that the essence of the original was maintained. Sam Wollaston in stated "Coming to it fresh, it's a neat story about aforementioned missing cat and time travel, with a smattering of quantum physics and the fundamental connectedness of things. With a lovely performance from Doreen Mantle as the old lady/murderer. Stephen Mangan's good in the title role, too – a teeny bit irritating perhaps, but then Mangan is a teeny bit irritating. So is Dirk Gently, though – it's perfect. Funny too. Quite funny." James Donaghy, also writing in The Guardian stated "Personally I hope Dirk Gently gets made into a full series. The programme shows promising glimpses, has a strong cast and Misfits already proves Overman can write. And a BBC4 adaptation feels like a good fit – Gently being exactly the kind of playground-of-the-imagination curio the BBC made its name indulging." published two reviews. Alice-Azania Jarvis was extremely positive, writing "...there wasn't very much you could fault about the production at all. Right down to the quirky camerawork and youthful, poppy soundtrack (who would have thought the Hoosiers could be so right in any situation?), the director, Damon Thomas, got it pretty spot-on. The result was a pleasingly festive-feeling adventure; part , part , part . And the best thing? There wasn't a Christmas tree in sight. Douglas Adams once claimed that Gently would make a better film character than his more famous hero, . Based on last night's experience, he may well have been right." John Walsh's review for was cooler about the adaptation, although he praised Mangan's performance: "Given the talent and style on display, it should have been a scream. In fact it all seemed a little moth-eaten. Though set in the modern day, it was staggeringly old-fashioned...You could overlook these faults, however, for the joy of Stephen Mangan's performance as the titular gumshoe. With his alarmed-spaniel eyes and jutting-jawed stroppiness, his geography teacher elbow-patches and Medusan hair, he radiates mess...His ineptness as a sleuth provided some fine comic moments. Paul Whitelaw in was also positive, although he noted "At times it felt forced, with a sense of trying slightly too hard when a touch more subtlety would have brought out the essential Adamsian eccentricity." Dan Owen of Obsessed with Film noted that the adaptation played with the idea of inexplicable situations: "Purists may grumble this isn't the Dirk Gently they wanted to see, but it's more accessible and practicable. And while Dirk Gently is certainly another gimmicky detective series (yawn), its details are unique and engrossing enough to shrug off the genre's clichés. In some ways it's a pastiche of whodunits, taking the genre's often tenuous explanations to an outrageous extreme." Paul Whitelaw in noted that "Although Adams's more ambitious concepts are sidelined in favour of a more prosaic - if nonetheless enjoyable - sci-fi mystery, Overman captures at least some of the wit and whimsy of his distinctive comic voice" going on to suggest "This modestly-budgeted pilot suggests potential for a series, so the deviation from Adams's originals makes sense. It also adds yet another very British oddball to the pantheon currently occupied by and . Series One Critical opinion to the full series was mildly positive. The adaptation from the Adams' novels was the focus of several reviews. Jane Simon, writing in The Mirror stated "It's just a shame creator Douglas Adams isn't around to see how Howard Overman has ­transferred Dirk to the screen. He'd definitely approve. Mark Braxton in the Radio Times likewise agreed that "Overman has plucked the comic essence of Adams from his novel...and worked it into a digestible, enjoyably eccentric format." AA Gill writing in the Sunday Times March 11, 2012 wrote 'Who'd have guessed that this would ever get recommissioned?...It has to get a nomination as the greatest waste of the most talent for the least visible purpose or reward." Others complained that the series was not an exact adaptation of the novels. Nigel Farndale in The Telegraph stated "I struggled with Dirk Gently...It had nothing to do with Stephen Mangan's considerable comedic talents, still less with Darren Boyd who plays MacDuff, the Dr Watson to Dirk's Holmes. It is more to do with my devotion to Douglas Adams, upon whose comic novel this series is based...in Douglas Adams, 90 per cent of the pleasure is in the prose, the narration, the felicities of language." Tom Sutcliffe in The Independent felt that the programme's qualities were "spread a little too thinly over a nonsensical thriller plot' and that "laughs... were far too widely spaced in a script that could have done with a lot more editing." Several critics compared the production with the big-budget BBC One detective series Sherlock, the second series of which was broadcast in January 2012. Writing in Metro, Keith Watson said "There's no doubt Sherlock has raised the detecting duo bar on TV...it's more than a match for Sherlock on the dialogue front, neatly catching the surreal humour that was the Adams trademark...but there was no disguising the fact that Dirk Gently was a five-star script being filmed on a one-star budget, making it look like a designer label knockoff when set against the production values lavished on Sherlock. Stuart Jeffries in , meanwhile, found a comparison between the tone of the series and 1960s spy/detective ; "Never since has there been anything so unremittingly silly on British television as Dirk Gently...Dainty harpsichord music tells us we're back in an era of TV misrule, in whose glory days John Steed, Mrs Peel and played fast and loose with viewers' intelligences." The first episode had 737,000 viewers and a 3% audience share but this fell to 415,000 and 2% share for the second episode.[] Series one, including the pilot episode, was released on DVD on 26 March 2012 by ITV Studios Home Entertainment. References ^ James Donaghy "", The Guardian, 16 December 2010 ^ Helena Cole, , SFX, 17 February 2012 ^ "", BBC Press Release, 31 March 2011 ^ Jason Deans, "", The Guardian, 31 March 2011 ^ "", BBC Cult, accessed 19 March 2012 ^ Chris Harvey, "", Daily Telegraph, 16 December 2010 . Retrieved 14 August 2007. News and New Projects page July 2007 of radio version Rob Hastings, "", The Independent, 6 October 2010 at the listing . 6 October 2010. Retrieved 10 October 2010. ^ . Retrieved 10 October 2010. ^ Benji Wilson, , The Telegraph, 5 March 2012 Mangan, Stephen (16 December 2010). . . Retrieved 20 December 2010. ^ Tom Chivers, "", Daily Telegraph, 17 December 2010 ^ "Stephen Mangan speaks about the return to our screens of Dirk Gently", Northampton Chronicle & Echo, 8 March 2012 Helena Cole, "", SFX, 17 February 2012 ^ , British Comedy Guide , Bristol Film Office, accessed 18 March 2012 , Bristol Film Office, accessed 18 March 2012 ^ , thecallsheet.co.uk, accessed 19 March 2012 , Daniel Pemberton's Twitterfeed, accessed 22 March 2012 ^ Stuart Jeffries, "", The Guardian, 5 March 2012 , accessed 22 March 2012 ^ , BBC Four, accessed 19 March 2012 . BARB. Retrieved 4 April 2012. Sam Wollaston "", The Guardian, 16 December 2010 Alice-Azania Jarvis "", The Independent, 17 December 2010 John Walsh, "", The Independent, Sunday, 19 December 2010 Keith Watson, "", Metro, 16 December 2010 Dan Owen, "", Obsessed with Film, 17 December 2010 Paul Whitelaw, "", The Scotsman, 13 December 2010 Jane Simon, "", The Mirror 12 March 2012 Mark Braxton, Radio Times, 5 March 2012 Nigel Farndale, , Daily Telegraph, 9 March 2012 Tom Sutcliffe, " ", The Independent 6 March 2012 Keith Watson, , Metro' 6 March 2012 , Digital Spy, 7 March 2012 External links , at the at the British Comedy Guide

Darker Projects in association with Infected Bookspresents David Moody's vision of apocalyptic horrorListen: Autumn TrailerAudio production, written, and directed by Paul Mannering. Post production by Matt Mclaren. Original music by Devin Anderson http://www.devinanderson.com Based on the book, Autumn, by David Moody.Autumn featured the voice talents of:David Ault as Michael Collins Rebecca McCarthy as Emma Mitchell Mark Kalita as Carl Henshawe Shane Harris as The Narrator Elie Hirschmann as Philip Evans Clym Angus as Stuart Jeffries Steve Anderson as Garner Colin Snow as Ralph Fiona Conn as The Teacher Zack Fester as The Boy Miles Reid as Jack Bynam Joan Hovey as Sandra Laura Post as Jenny and Kate