Podcast appearances and mentions of Leo Tolstoy

What I privilege it was to connect with Dr. Ruwan M. Jayatunge M.D. PhD. We spoke about the nature of suffering, buddhism, happiness, Dostoyevsky, Tolstoy, Nietzsche, and his work across the globe treating patients with PTSD. I promise you that if you listen to this conversation with an open mind and with good intentions, you will walk away a better person. I hope you enjoy today's episode of the Max Depth Podcast.

“Gratitude is contagious. It's something that becomes more powerful as you express it. It reminds me of how fortunate I've been — and through that privilege I feel I owe to do what I can for others.”John Pepper, P&G's former Chairman and CEO, needs no introduction. John has played many roles in business, community, service, and the lives of countless people. He returns to our podcast to discuss his new book, "100 Books That Shaped My Life: Reflections on a Lifetime of Reading, " which might just be the perfect gift this holiday season, for yourself or for anyone in your life who loves a good read."100 Books That Shaped My Life" is no mere book list — it is a life story told through the books that walked alongside John: as a husband, father, leader, citizen, and as someone thinking deeply about what matters most in the time we're given. These are the books that shaped John's understanding of history, democracy, gratitude, and hope — especially in the most recent chapters of his life.Moving from Values, to Biographies, Philosophy, U.S. and Global History, Memoirs, Novels, and Personal Essays, 100 Books That Shaped My Life mirrors something true about John himself: a leader shaped not by one discipline, but by a lifelong curiosity across every discipline. In our conversation, John reflects on how a lifetime of reading helped him better live a lifetime — deepening his understanding of friendship, love, loss, courage, service, and the quiet beauty of everyday life.John's literary influences range from novelists like John Steinbeck, Oliver Sacks, Wallace Stegner, Marilynne Robinson, George Orwell, and Tolstoy, to memoirists such as Frederick Douglass, Katharine Graham, James Reston, and Michelle Obama, to historians and biographers including David Blight, Jon Meacham, Doris Kearns Goodwin, Jill Lepore, and so many others. Woven through all of it is a deeply human narrative — his love for his late wife, Francie; his reflections on aging, family, and purpose; the leaders who shaped him; the lessons hard-won; and the quiet moments that stayed with him.As Bob Iger put it, “Whether you're an executive or simply someone who loves reading and learning, you will find great value and wisdom in this book.” And we couldn't agree more. For anyone who enjoys learning from lived experience, this conversation — and this book — make a wonderful companion. It might even inspire you to reflect on everything you've read and learned along the way. Be sure to check out John Pepper's "100 Books That Shaped My Life" wherever you get your favorite books.bookshop.org/p/books/100-books-that-shaped-my-life-reflections-on-a-lifetime-of-reading/23a8c953e3dfd1e5amazon.com/gp/product/B0FXQPHQPK

In his 20th year in the music business, the rapper Shad has shown no signs of slowing down. The Juno-winning musician has also had an illustrious career as a broadcaster, hosting hit shows like the documentary series Hip-Hop Evolution on Netflix. His latest album is called Start Anew, and he joins the show to go back and talk about how he first discovered the power of words and shares some of the books that have shaped his life.Books discussed on this week's show include:Black Noise by Tricia RoseJuly, July by Tim O'BrienA Confession and Other Religious Writings by Leo TolstoyCrime and Punishment by Fyodor Dostoevsky

Kitty Reads Lit for Peace: Leo Tolstoy – Letter to a Hindu plus The Next Peacelands This episode includes a short reading from “Tolstoy's Letter to a Hindu,” a late-life reflection on nonviolence, conscience, and the moral strength of ordinary people. Kitty offers only a brief portion, giving listeners a steady moment inside Tolstoy's clear-hearted thinking. Kitty O'Compost warms up for The Peace Experiments, the upcoming Peace Is Here series exploring peace, AI, and the commons. For this special holiday edition of The Next Peacelands, Avis Kalfsbeek changes her focus from the factual grounding of warzones and arms suppliers to highlight the spiritual organizations and networks actively building peace around the world. Get the books: www.AvisKalfsbeek.com Contact Avis to say hello or let her know how to say “Peace is Here” in your language: Contact Me Here Music: "The Red Kite" by Javier "Peke" Rodriguez Bandcamp: https://javierpekerodriguez.bandcamp.com Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/3QuyqfXEKzrpUl6b12I3KW?si=uszJs37sTFyPbXK4AeQvow Peace is Here podcast series Coming Soon!: The Peace Experiments Leo Tolstoy Letter to a Hindu on Gutenberg: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/7176/7176-h/7176-h.htm

Some storytellers are for every season. O'Henry is one such. We grew up on his stories in English but also some of us will recall the wonderful televised adaptations of world's best stories in the series, ‘Katha Sagar'. Made in 1986, the series featured a collection of stories by writers like Katherine Mansfield, Guy de Maupassant, Leo Tolstoy, O' Henry, and Anton Chekhov. Each episode was directed by one of eight well known Indian directors, including Shyam Benegal, Kundan Shah, Ved Rahi and Satyen Bose. Most of the stories in the series were one episode long. Today's story is as much a remembrance of O'Henry as it is a hat tip to tasteful and meaningful entertainment that television used to be.Listen to Hindi kahaniyan and Urdu Kahaniyan by famous as well as lesser known writers. You will find here stories from everyone from Premchand to Ismat Chughtai ; Suryabala to Mohan Rakesh, Kaleshwar and Mannu Bhandari.

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

Indentured peasants, motivated by nothing more than a love of the land and a cripilingly inescapable system of debt and ownership. Poor? Definitely.Stupid? Perhaps.Violent? Only when drunk or angry.But forget what you might have heard about them down at your local gentlemans club, because this week we're joining the unwashed masses to discover first hand what they really think, believe and feel. Who leads them? What do they want? Will they ever be free?〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️Support the show, say Hello, and find the thoroughly diplomat extras at:patreon.com/wapin7Including... (Free!) bonus content, Tolstoy's Hall of Fame, and special episodes.〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️

This paramount chapter involves Tolstoy using Andrei to grasp the transcendence of the Almighty God which the author revered. More particularly, when Andrei takes in the vastness of the sky, Tolstoy conveys the vulgarity of this earth compared with His infinite nature. Further, Tolstoy lays bare the senselessness of war for most of the men shooting and hacking each other. There will be a depiction of opposing soldiers in a tug-of-war over the most insignificant object – a broomstick, highlighting the meaninglessness many sacrifice themselves for.  The chapter begins with the battle intensifying while Kutuzov was riding near the rear of a column down a hill.  He stops at a deserted house on a majestic hell, symbolic of war interrupting civility.  Fog was clearing as some of the French became more visible, at first over a mile away. However, additional forces were quickly found to be ascending toward them. Upon noticing, the expressions on most of the Russian officers changed to Holy terror. Andrei embraces the moment, thinking “Here it is! The decisive moment! My turn has come!” Soon a cloud of smoke from a blast of artillery spread all round. A voice of naïve terror shouted, “Brothers! All is lost!” There was an instantaneous break of morale and the men ran in different directions.Andrei took in bewildering sights as Kutuzov was encouraged to leave and avoid being taken prisoner. With stoicism, Kutuzov wiped away blood flowing from his cheek and noted the true damage was to his army by reason of their humiliating performance.  He vainly called for the soldiers to maintain discipline.  Kutuzov rode toward the sound of artillery – where one of the batteries was under attack.  The French noticed Kutuzov and fired at him. There were many casualties, including an officer carrying the Battle Flag.  Kutuzov called out to Andrei with a trembling voice. Andrei, feeling shame and rage leapt from his horse and picked up the fallen Standard. He called to his men, in a piercing scream: “Forward, lads!” He was not physically powerful and was challenged in carrying the flag. Yet he proceeded with full confidence his army would follow him, which they did and soon overtook him.A burly sergeant assisted with the swaying flag, but was killed.  Undaunted, Andrei stumbled along. He embraced being the primary target and essentially dared the enemy to hit him. He reached within 20 paces of French soldiers seizing horses and canons as prizes. Through the whistle of bullets and men dropping, he focused on reaching the seized Battery. However, he became distracted by the most unusual but symbolic confrontation -- a red-haired gunner from his army in a tall cylindrical hat comically askew pulling one end of a cleaning mop while a French soldier tugged at the other. He took in their contorted faces filled with venom. Andrei realized the absurdity and that the gunner should have retreated, as there were other Frenchmen nearby.  His comrade won the broom but Tolstoy notes the man's fate was about to be decided when Andrei lost the moment though taking a heavy blow. He felt as if hit on the head with the full swing of a bludgeon. The pain was disorienting but he felt worse about not seeing how the fracas over the broom ended.  The Comment is that all such efforts, for the men doing the hacking and dying, are as useless as fighting over a broom.Andrei's perception slows down and as he falls on his back. “What's this? Am I falling? My legs are giving way…” He opens his eyes, hoping to see the struggle for the mop. However, he absorbed what couldn't be more opposite -- something vast and Godly,  Above him there was only the sky—the lofty sky, not clear yet immeasurably lofty, with gray clouds gliding. “How quiet, peaceful, and solemn; not as it was as I ran.  No, not as we ran, shouting and fighting, not at all as the gunner and the Frenchman with terrified faces struggling for the mop. How differently do those clouds glide across that lofty infinite sky! How was it I did not see that sky before? And how happy I am to have found it at last!"This is where Tolstoy briefly quotes and paraphrases Ecclesiastes:"Yes! All is vanity, all falsehood except that infinite sky. There is nothing, nothing but that. But even it does not exist, there is nothing but quiet and peace."And Andrei thanks God for this realization!

Banned in most prisons! That feels like a point in the book's favor, but I'm not entirely sure I can articulate why. The Daily Laws: 366 Meditations on Power, Seduction, Mastery, Strategy, and Human Nature By: Robert Greene Published: 2021 464 Pages Briefly, what is this book about? A "page a day" book collecting bits of wisdom from Robert Greene's other books (Laws of Power, Art of Seduction, Strategies of War, etc.) What's the author's angle? As a general matter Greene is something of a Machiavellian figure, he's going to tell it like it is, and give you the tools you really need to succeed in life. Or at least that's his claim. I generally find his approach to be refreshing, but there are also moments when I would say he takes things too far and dispenses advice that's counterproductive.  Who should read this book? If you're one of the small number of people who likes to have a page of the day book as a way of marking the time from January 1 to December 31, this is an average entry in this very niche genre. But as the genre is not particularly large, any example might be welcome. If you've never done a page a day book I would probably start with Tolstoy's A Calendar of Wisdom. I thought it was quite good. Also, there's an argument to be made for it being the first such book chronologically. (It's the earliest example of a devotional book that wasn't rigidly sectarian.) Finally, it was banned by the Soviets, which immediately gives it ten extra points in my book.  Specific thoughts: Some good advice, some okay advice and a few pieces of actively bad advice

Jorge Luis Borges called her the “Tolstoy of Mexico” and César Aira the “greatest novelist of the 20th century,” so why is it likely that you haven't read or even heard of Elena Garro before now? And given that Garro was, like her fantastical stories,  not beholden to the truth when accounting her own life, […] The post Jazmina Barrera : The Queen of Swords appeared first on Tin House.

Charlotte delves into Ecclesiastes through the work of liberation theologist Elsa Támez (When the Horizons Close) before Jo shares some of Pierre Guyotat's horny, rapturous literary memoir, Idiocy. Icon of many RW conversations past, the thoughtful Jackie Ess then joins to discuss Tolstoy's crank-inflected final novel, Resurrection.Jackie Ess is the author of a novel called Darryl, and more recently of a long short-story length chapbook called Eugene. Please consider supporting our work on Patreon, where you can access additional materials and send us your guest and book coverage requests! Questions and comments can be directed to readingwriterspod at gmail dot com. Outro music by Marty Sulkow and Joe Valle.Charlotte Shane's most recent book is An Honest Woman. Her essay newsletter, Meant For You, can be subscribed to or read online for free, and her social media handle is @charoshane.  Jo Livingstone is a writer who teaches at Pratt Institute. To support the show, navigate to https://www.patreon.com/ReadingWritersOur Sponsors:* Check out Avocado Green Mattress: https://avocadogreenmattress.comAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

Kont Nikolai Tolstoy

The title says it all really: the Indieventure podcast is celebrating a couple of milestones, and you're all invited! Hope you like parties where three people indulge in absolute bullshit banter at length because that's what we've got for you today as we mark both our 50th episode and our podcast's only ever-so-slightly belated second birthday. You really do deserve to hear some of this without being spoiled by any pesky context beforehand, so suffice to say that Rebecca has put together a quiz with a heavy visual component (check out our blog for the companion piece to that!) and Liam has written A Thing. Don't ask. Just listen. Trust me, it's better that way. After completely wearing ourselves out with that nonsense, we mellow out a bit with a slightly more sensible second half in which we discuss a few games we've been playing recently – including The Séance of Blake Manor, Hades II, PEAK, and Demonschool – before making a very optimistic wishlist of all the amazing 2025 indies we'd love to play before recording our GOTY episode but, like, we're starting to get a bit nervous about the timeframe on that, not gonna lie. Finally onto hyperfixations, this week with some completely improvised bonus bullshit about which Pokémon starter type each of us would be! Liam (grass type) has been finishing his 2025 Goodreads challenge by reading some of the most acclaimed short novels he could find, including The Death of Ivan Ilyich by Leo Tolstoy, Foster by Claire Keegan, and Slaughterhouse Five by Kurt Vonnegut. Rachel (fire type) is once again bingeing The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives, which has become surprisingly meta in its new season. And Rebecca (water type) somehow hadn't heard of The Amazing Digital Circus until very recently, but now she's been completely drawn in by the hype. Our music was written and performed by Ollie Newbury! Find him on Instagram at @newbsmusic. Meanwhile, you can find us at indieventurepodcast.co.uk or wherever you listen to podcasts. Don't forget that you can now join our dedicated Discord too, and be sure to check out our new Steam Curator page if you simply still can't get enough of us!

Charlotte delves into Ecclesiastes through the work of liberation theologist Elsa Támez (When the Horizons Close) before Jo shares some of Pierre Guyotat's horny, rapturous literary memoir, Idiocy. Icon of many RW conversations past, the thoughtful Jackie Ess then joins to discuss Tolstoy's crank-inflected final novel, Resurrection.Jackie Ess is the author of a novel called Darryl, and more recently of a long short-story length chapbook called Eugene. Please consider supporting our work on Patreon, where you can access additional materials and send us your guest and book coverage requests! Questions and comments can be directed to readingwriterspod at gmail dot com. Outro music by Marty Sulkow and Joe Valle.Charlotte Shane's most recent book is An Honest Woman. Her essay newsletter, Meant For You, can be subscribed to or read online for free, and her social media handle is @charoshane. Jo Livingstone is a writer who teaches at Pratt Institute. To support the show, navigate to https://www.patreon.com/ReadingWriters Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Send us a textWhat if the regrets you carry aren't random—they're rooted in something deeper?In this episode, I unpack a passage from Tolstoy that struck a nerve. He named five “sins,” but I see them as something more real, more lived: regrets.These five regrets—gluttony, sloth, lust, anger & animosity, and pride—aren't just ancient ideas. They show up in our everyday lives through excess, laziness, obsession, bitterness, and ego.I walk you through each one:How it creeps inHow it disguises itselfAnd how it steals your momentumBut more importantly, I share how to spot it, study it, and outgrow it.This episode isn't about shame. It's about self-awareness. It's about learning how to grow through what you've gone through—so regret doesn't have the final word.

Dit zijn onze shownotes:Abonneer je gratis op onze podcast via jouw favoriete podcast-app (zoals Google Podcasts, Spotify of Apple Podcasts), dan valt de eerstvolgende aflevering van het derde seizoen automatisch in je podcastbibliotheek.Wil je ons helpen? Geef ons dan likes en recensies in jouw favoriete podcastapp en deel ons met iedereen die wel wat Ballet Kroket kan gebruiken in het leven!Welkom bij aflevering 13 van het derde seizoen van Ballet Kroket! We hebben het over alle dingen waarmee je het leven kunt vieren, versieren en verdiepen, kortom over alles op de lijn van ballet tot kroket.Je kunt onze opnames bijwonen, iedere maandagavond van 19:30 - 21 uur in Studio Kookhaven in Amsterdam Oost. Wil je erbij zijn? Aanmelden kan via de mail: alles@balletkroket.nlOngeveer 1 keer per maand maken we een heel evenement van de opname, dan is de Bar Van Dick geopend en kun je Aan Tafel Bij Lone een heerlijke vegetarische maaltijdsalade eten (E 17,50). Het eerstvolgende evenement is op maandag 15 december. Aanmelden voor opname en/of eten kan via alles@balletkroket.nlof stuur ons een DM op Instagram @balletkroket.Host Francien Knorringa las de dichtbundel Een titel hoeft niet van Wislawa Szymborska. https://libris.nl/singeluitgeverijen/a/wislawa-szymborska/een-titel-hoeft-niet/501593711#paperback-9789044549447Host Jannekee Kuijper zag de serie A man on the inside op Netflix. https://www.netflix.com/title/81677257Gids Helena Hilgerdenaar zag de musical Stoornis of my life Alex Klaasen. https://stoornisofmylife.nlGids Bart Prinsen had het over het thema van de koets in de literatuur. Hij citeert hierin uit verschillende titelsDe postkoets van Mieke en Selma, de originele Selvera's (1970) https://open.spotify.com/track/5agBRHKJzyPNF2PpelJddo?si=1d5f71a6cae944ffOorlog en Vrede van Leo Tolstoj (1869)De kales van Nicolaj Gogol, uit: De Petersburgse vertellingen (1835)Majoor Frans van A.L.G. Bosboom-Toussaint (1875)Le rouge et le noir van Stendhal, (1830)Assepoester uit Sprookjes van Moeder de GansCamera Obscura van Hildebrand (Nicolaas Beets) 1839Boule de suif van Guy de Maupassant (1880)Madame Bovary van Gustave Flaubert (1856)Lucky Luke nr. 32 De Postkoets van Morris & Goscinny (1967)Onze Adverteerders:Onze technicus Reinder Van der Put doet de nabewerking van onze opname. Daardoor klinkt deze als een klok. Een even betaalbare als onmisbare dienst voor podcastmakers. http://putintomedia.nlSeafarm, voor de lekkerste oesters. https://www.seafarm.nl/producten/oestersDe Kookhaven - te gekke locatie aan de rafelrand van Amsterdam, geschikt voor al uw culinaire uitspattingen, van private dining tot kookworkshop, van vergadering tot culinair feestje. Iedereen viert weleens een feestje dat thuis of op het werk niet past. Bespreek de mogelijkheden met uitbater Dick Ferwerda. www.kookhaven.nl. Zoek Kookhaven ook op Instagram, daar vind je alle informatie over de komende oester- en scheermes pop up.Don Ostra - oestermannen Arend Bouwmeester (de jonge), nieuwe ster Marijn en Dick Ferwerda serveren oesters en gin op geheel eigen wijze. Voor luisteraars van Ballet Kroket geldt een 99% glimlachgarantie. Neem contact op met Dick Ferwerda als je oesters wil bestellen voor pasen, dan kun je ze vlak voor pasen ophalen tijdens een oester pop up in de Kookhaven. www.donostra.nl Don Ostra is ook te vinden op Instagram. Daar is de informatie over de komende oester- en scheermes pop up te vinden.Lone Poulsen, de kok die uit het noorden kwam en private dinings en workshops verzorgt in het teken van de nordic cuisine. Je kan ook vers Deens roggebrood bij haar bestellen. En ze maakt likeur van de bladeren van je vijgenboom als je dat wil. Op evenement-dagen van Ballet Kroket kun je Aan Tafel bij Lone (E17,50). Neem contact op via: www.shecamefromnorth.comJachthaven Bouwmeester, de full service jachthaven in Amsterdam waar je van reparatie, stalling tot volledige botenbouw overal voor terecht kan. https://jachthavenbouwmeester.nlAdverteren in Ballet Kroket? Mail alles@balletkroket.nlBallet Kroket wordt op maandagavond opgenomen in Studio Kookhaven in Amsterdam. Wil je een opname bijwonen? Dat kan iedere maandagavond. Op bepaalde dagen maken we er een heel evenement van. Bijvoorbeeld op maandag 15 december 2025. Mail alles@balletkroket.nl of stuur ons een DM op Instagram @balletkroket.Kijk op onze insta: https://www.instagram.com/balletkroket/ en stuur ons een DM.Abonneer je via je favoriete podcast-app op onze podcast dan vallen de nieuwe afleveringen vanzelf in je bibliotheek.Reageren? We horen graag van je!www.balletkroket.nlalles@balletkroket.nl

Leo Tolstoy (1828 - 1910)Two love stories are set against the backdrop of high society in Tsarist Russia. Anna awakes from a loveless marriage to find herself drawn irresistibly to the dashing cavalry officer, Count Vronsky. Levin struggles with self-esteem, and even flees to the country, before gaining courage to return and offer himself to the beautiful and pure Kitty. Through troubled courtships, reconciliations, marriage and the birth of each one's first child, Anna and Levin experience joy and despair as they each struggle to find their place in the world and meaning for their lives. (Introduction by MaryAnn)Genre(s): General Fiction, Historical FictionLanguage: EnglishKeyword(s): romance (1066), tragedy (161), Russian Literature (47), adultery (28), Tolstoy (26), tolstoi (2)

Support Us: Donation Page – LibriVox Free AudiobooksLeo Tolstoy (1828 - 1910)Two love stories are set against the backdrop of high society in Tsarist Russia. Anna awakes from a loveless marriage to find herself drawn irresistibly to the dashing cavalry officer, Count Vronsky. Levin struggles with self-esteem, and even flees to the country, before gaining courage to return and offer himself to the beautiful and pure Kitty. Through troubled courtships, reconciliations, marriage and the birth of each one's first child, Anna and Levin experience joy and despair as they each struggle to find their place in the world and meaning for their lives. (Introduction by MaryAnn)Genre(s): General Fiction, Historical FictionLanguage: EnglishKeyword(s): romance (1066), tragedy (161), Russian Literature (47), adultery (28), Tolstoy (26), tolstoi (2)Support Us: ⁠Donation Page – LibriVox Free Audiobooks⁠

樂觀 lèguān – optimistic; having a positive outlook悲觀 bēiguān – pessimistic; having a negative outlook一致 yízhì – consistent; in agreement; uniform情境 qíngjìng – situation; context; scenario內側前額葉皮質 nèicè qián'é yè pízhì – medial prefrontal cortex 腦波 nǎobō – brainwave; electrical activity in the brain聚焦 jùjiāo – to focus; to concentrate (on something)分散 fēnsàn – to scatter; to disperse; to spread out樂觀收斂 lèguān shōuliǎn – optimism convergence (a research term describing how optimistic people's brain activity converges when imagining the future)托爾斯泰 Tuō'ěrsītài – Leo Tolstoy (a Russian writer and philosopher)想開一點 xiǎng kāi yìdiǎn – to think more positively; to not take things too seriously; to let go of worriesFollow me on Instagram: fangfang.chineselearning !

Tolstoy affirms that only the will of the Deity, who is not dependent on time, can make sense of any monumental event or series of events. Tolstoy acknowledges his belief in an omnipotent God, who determines the Way. This majestic being is something we can never come close to understanding. Even the most renowned, like Napoleon, cannot veer humanity in the direction they intend. This is because man acts in his limited time and sphere. Thus, historians who attribute grand events to so-called “Great Men,” are engaged in a vain pursuit. This outlook is not surprising given Tolstoy's affinity of Scripture, particularly the Wisdom literature of Job and Ecclesiastes. In analyzing the futility of attributing an effect to a purported cause, Tolstoy proffers that no command can be executed without an endless chain of proceeding orders. There is no such thing as a command that appears spontaneously.  At best, we can say every command and event refers to a sliver in time that can only have influence over the fraction that comes after.     Tolstoy suggests there is a general consensus that paramount decisions are made akin to the setting in motion of a clock -- such that a single command is often thought to govern a whole series of occurrences. For example, “Napoleon wished to invade Russia and did so in 1812.” However, Napoleon could never have commanded such a movement in one fell swoop.  Instead, there were countless preceding missives and orders to his generals as well as the leaders of Vienna, Berlin and St. Petersburg.  It is more accurate to say that events took on a direction that humanity, for some impossible to define reason, were ready to move in. The true reasons behind such movements are something only The Deity can comprehend.  Tolstoy reflects that Napoleon was more of a natural adversary of England. Therefore, there was a greater chance of him coming up with a plan to invade England as opposed to crossing the Vistula River.  Tolstoy posits that for any order to be executed -- in a philosophical sense – it is necessary that said order be possible.  This is not only in the case in military endeavors, but in everyday transactions, for there are always a myriad of contingencies that could arise to prevent a command's execution.  With respect to invading Russia, there would have been many directives that if analyzed soberly and in hindsight, would never have been possible. We have this false conception that an event is caused by a command because what occurred is looked at as a plan coming together. Yet for every directive executed there are an immense number unexecuted and forgotten.  Thus, Tolstoy goes back to his theme -- that it is virtually impossible to attribute causes to grand historical events.   Tolstoy then turns to wrestling regarding the nature of power in looking at how commands and directives play out between related events, that is between very close in time events. Tolstoy finds it important to understand the roles of those giving and taking orders.  In most endeavors, there are small numbers giving orders and large numbers subject to them. In military life, army leadership resembles a cone where the thickest part, the base, consists of the rank and file. Here exists the domain of the soldiers, who are told where to march and who to kill. On the next level are the noncommissioned officers, who give commands to soldiers below and get into action less frequently.  An officer like Andrei customarily participates even less in the battles, but commands more. At the top, there is the commander like Kutuzov or Napoleon, who rarely takes direct part in the action.  Tolstoy feels there is similar relation of people (between the few who give orders and the majority who take them) in most common activities—including in agriculture and trade. It is this relationship which constitutes the essence of power. For example, while Napoleon may be given credit or blame for the way a particular battle turned out, All the people in the cone have a voice!  When the overwhelming majority figuratively decide to swim in the same direction, that is where the greatest power lies. Thus, Napoleon guided people toward where they were already headed.  Yet behind it all is a Deity, whose guiding influence we will never fully grasp.

The Death of Ivan Ilyich by Leo Tolstoy (1886)

Support Us: Donation Page – LibriVox Free AudiobooksTwo love stories are set against the backdrop of high society in Tsarist Russia. Anna awakes from a loveless marriage to find herself drawn irresistibly to the dashing cavalry officer, Count Vronsky. Levin struggles with self-esteem, and even flees to the country, before gaining courage to return and offer himself to the beautiful and pure Kitty. Through troubled courtships, reconciliations, marriage and the birth of each one's first child, Anna and Levin experience joy and despair as they each struggle to find their place in the world and meaning for their lives. (Introduction by MaryAnn)Genre(s): General Fiction, Historical FictionLanguage: EnglishKeyword(s): romance (1066), tragedy (161), Russian Literature (47), adultery (28), Tolstoy (26), tolstoi (2)Support Us: ⁠Donation Page – LibriVox Free Audiobooks⁠

Let us know what you enjoy about the show!We're all moving so fast — planning ahead, rushing toward the next thing, trying to get it all right. But what if the clarity we're searching for only arrives when we slow down long enough to notice what's right in front of us?In this episode, Lisa narrates Leo Tolstoy's beloved parable “The Three Questions” — a timeless story that reveals the power of presence, the wisdom of tending to this moment, and the truth that the “right time” is rarely somewhere in the future…it's now.After the story, Lisa offers a reflective breakdown exploring: ✨ Why slowing down is a strategy, not a setback ✨ How presence sharpens clarity ✨ Why the right people are often the ones who are already here ✨ What it means to tend to the moment you're actually in ✨ How energetic choice influences every decision we makeThis is a grounding, spacious listen — perfect for a walk, a cup of tea, or any moment you need to reconnect with yourself.If you are enjoying the show please subscribe, share and review! Word of mouth is incredibly impactful and your support is much appreciated! Support the show

A man climbs a ladder to hang drapes and slips into a lifetime's truth: he's been decorating emptiness. We sat with Tolstoy's The Death of Ivan Ilyich and asked hard questions about status, ritual, and the kind of love that only shows up when it costs.Quick story snapshot (Tolstoy): Ivan Ilyich, a successful judge with a “proper” life, suffers a fatal illness after a trivial accident. As pain strips away his self-deception, society's politeness rings hollow—only the servant Gerasim meets him with honest compassion. In his final hours Ivan sees that a life ordered around comfort and appearances cannot save; repentance and self-giving love can.What we explore (through an Orthodox lens):Marriage as sanctification, not transaction—a place where pride dies and love learns to serve.Rituals with a why—why liturgy and household habits either form us or numb us.Seeing with others' eyes—how wives, husbands, converts, and cradle faithful re-read the same text and grow empathy.The bruise as a parable of sin—ignored at first, spreading quietly, distorting how we see those closest to us.Gerasim's ordinary holiness—humility, patience, and joy as the persuasive answer to “main-character energy.”Recovering a shared moral language—how myth and realism help us talk about death, judgment, and mercy in an age of “my truth.”Takeaway: Don't wait for a deathbed to choose communion over isolation. Read bravely, examine your ladders, and practice the love that moves first—especially when it costs.Questions about Orthodoxy? Please check out our friends at Ghost of Byzantium Discord server: https://discord.gg/JDJDQw6tdhPlease prayerfully consider supporting Cloud of Witnesses Radio: https://www.patreon.com/c/CloudofWitnessesFind Cloud of Witnesses Radio on Instagram, X.com, Facebook, and TikTokPlease leave a comment with your thoughts!

My co-host today is Jeff Bader, co-founder of Twisted Reels Productions.  They are a true cinematic powerhouse. Jeff is a life long visual storyteller. His innovation and experience just rocks from original concept thru project completion.  Merging AI with innovation and cutting edge visual effects, they are becoming The company you want to work with on all your creative ideas/projects.  Check them out  https://www.twistedreelsproductions.com/   check Jeff out on instgram https://www.instagram.com/jeff.bader.twisted/  National pay back your parents day. Entertainment from 2005. Moby Dick happen in real life, Nuremberg war trials began, SETI was formed, 1st piece of the International Space Station was launched into space. Todays birthdays - Franklin Cover, Richard Dawson, Joe Walsh, Bo Derek, Sean Young, Mike Diamond, Deirks Bentley, Josh Turner. Leo Tolstoy died.Intro - God did good - Dianna Corcoran   https://www.diannacorcoran.com/ Mom & Daddys money - Adam DoleacGod Digger - Kanya West   Jamie FoxxBetter Life - Keith UrbanBirthdays - In da club - 50 Cent      http://50cent.com/Lifes been good - Joe WalshFight for your right to party - The Beastie BoysWhat was I thinking - Dierks BentleyWhy don't we just dance - Josh TurnerExit - All the beer in Alabama - Shane Owens     Shane on Facebookcountryundergroundradio.comHistory & Factoids about today webpage

In this episode of Lit With Charles, I speak with writer, translator, and Chekhov expert Rosamund Bartlett about her new translation of Chekhov's Early Stories. We talk about how Anton Chekhov - the Russian doctor who transformed short fiction - first found his voice, and why his quiet, compassionate storytelling still feels so modern. Rosamund also shares insights from her other acclaimed works, including About Love and Other Stories (Oxford World's Classics, 2004/8), her celebrated translation of Anna Karenina (Oxford World's Classics, 2014), and The Russian Soul: Selections from A Writer's Diary (Notting Hill Books, 2017). It's a fascinating conversation about literature, translation, and the enduring power of small moments — and I hope you enjoy listening to it!Lit with Charles loves reviews. If you enjoyed this episode, I'd be so grateful if you could leave a review of your own, and follow me on Instagram at @litwithcharles. Let's get more people listening – and reading!Rosamund Bartlett's four books were:The Queen of Spades, by Alexander Pushkin (1834)The Student, by Anton Chekhov (1894)Anna Karenina, by Leo Tolstoy (1878)A Writer's Diary, by Fyodor Dostoevsky (1873–1881)

At 8 a.m. Kutuzov rode towards Pratzen Village. He took command of a regiment he came across and led it into the Village.  The other columns were advancing towards a massive valley, where the battle was picking up.  Andrei, who was among Kutuzov's suite, was in a state of constrained excitement.  He was convinced this day would be his Toulon, the battle that made Napoleon. Andrei's motivation to be hero of this world was at an apex.  He would give his life, his family, even his soul, to be admired.   Andrei was keen to troop positions and analyzing how the battle would develop. He could hear musket fire from the valley but could only visualize a sliver of the action. He sensed where the major fighting would concentrate and imagined leading a regiment while hoisting a Battle Flag, perhaps dropped by someone in the units he was observing. He envisioned charging forward with the Standard, breaking the will of the enemy.  Nevertheless, he accepted his battle plans were never considered and it was full steam ahead with the attack attributed to General Franz Von Weyrother.    Andrei took in a clear sky that was still somewhat dark. In the East, the sun was rising.  Well in front of him were some wooded hills. He figured the French were within those woods. He could see the gleaming of bayonets as soldiers advanced into that obscured area.  He also observed masses of cavalry disappear in the fog.  All around him moved infantry.  Kutuvoz reached the edge of the Village and observed various troops pass. He was irritated by their disorganization. He scolded a commander, noting it would be better to go around the Village in a less visible movement, to not show off their numbers. He noticed Andrei when an Austrian officer was asked about the advance.  Kutuzov ignored the inquiry and his caustic feelings softened upon seeing his adjunct.  He told Andrei to find the third division, tell it to halt and confirm whether sharpshooters and skirmishers were posted.   He believed the enemy was close and the troops needed to bunker down.  Andrei galloped off and overtook various battalions and spoke with a colonel of the third division, who was surprised at Kutuzov's order.  The colonel felt placing rifleman was a waste. He was under the impression there were a multitude of allies between them and the French, who were believed to be six miles away.  Andrei reported this to Kutuzov, who is presented as a stodgy old man going against the grain of command.  Kutuzov soon noticed the pageantry of the approach of the two Emperors, who approved of the aggression.  Tolstoy explores a fictional but quite symbolic meeting between the three.  Kutuzov rode up to the Emperors and became uncharacteristically deferential. The Czar quickly grasped the presentation was not authentic and was offended. Alexander appeared thinner after the brief illness cause by experiencing the reality of War.  Yet he is described as an energetic good-hearted youth possessing the essence of majesty. Emperor Francis is described as stoic as well as having a rosy complexion and long face.  Alexander was surrounded by some famous historic names, including: Adam Czartoryski, Nikolay Novosíltsev and Pavel Strogonov. Tolstoy contrasts their perceived brilliance and energy with Kutuzov's age and demeanor. Alexander's clique is compared to a whiff of fresh air.    The Emperor address a critical question to Kutuzov: “Why aren't you beginning, Michael Ilariónovich?”  Kutuzov responds, “I am waiting, Your Majesty, as not all the columns have formed up.” The Czar did not like the reply and noted: “You know, Michael Ilariónovich, we are not on the Empress' Field where a parade does not begin till all the troops are assembled.” Kutuzov then retorts with a degree of defiance,  “That is why I do not begin, sire, because we are not on parade and not on the Empress' Field.” The Emperors' aides exchanged looks expressing reproach.  A silence permeated for about a minute, where the Czar looked intently into Kutuzov's eyes.  Kutozov eventually deferred, saying he would proceed if commanded.  Soon enough, all the troops again began to move, with a number having the honor of passing the two Emperors.  One column was led by Mikhail Miloradovich and included an Azerbyzioni regiment, who the Emperor called out to and encouraged.

In which our hero makes a pivotal mistake because SEX. The Winds of Time Podcast: https://windsoftimepodcast.podbean.com/ The Colin Malatrat Museum of Curious Oddities and Strange Antiquities: https://www.amazon.com/Malatrat-Curious-Oddities-Strange-Antiquities/dp/B0BJ4MMW1N Darkhorse Road, and Other Stories: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CVFFLVNL Podcast artwork by Ruth Anna Evans (https://twitter.com/ruthannaevans) Please consider supporting the following: Sister Song https://sistersong.nationbuilder.com/donate The Afiya Center https://theafiyacenter.org/donate SPARK: Reproductive Justice NOW http://sparkrj.org/donate/ Center for Reproductive Rights https://reproductiverights.org/take-action-abortion-is-essential/

https://hotliterati.com/

This Day in Legal History: 2000 Presidential ElectionOn November 7, 2000, the United States held a presidential election that would evolve into one of the most significant legal showdowns in American history. The race between Republican George W. Bush and Democrat Al Gore came down to a razor-thin margin in Florida, where just hundreds of votes separated the two candidates. Under state law, the closeness of the vote triggered an automatic machine recount. What followed was a legal and political firestorm involving punch-card ballots, partially detached chads, and controversial ballot designs like the “butterfly ballot,” which some argued led to voter confusion.Litigation quickly erupted in Florida state courts, with both campaigns fighting over recount procedures and ballot validity. Central to the legal debate was whether Florida counties could use different standards in determining voter intent during manual recounts. The legal issues raised tested interpretations of the Equal Protection Clause and the boundaries of state versus federal authority in managing elections. Amid national uncertainty and media frenzy, the dispute reached the U.S. Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore.On December 12, 2000, the Court issued a 5–4 decision halting the Florida recount, citing equal protection concerns due to inconsistent recount standards across counties. The ruling effectively secured Florida's 25 electoral votes for Bush, granting him the presidency despite losing the national popular vote. The decision was criticized by many for its perceived partisanship and for explicitly stating it should not be viewed as precedent. It remains one of the most controversial Supreme Court cases in modern history.The legal battles following the November 7 election exposed deep vulnerabilities in U.S. election infrastructure and prompted calls for reform, including updating voting technology and clarifying recount laws. The case continues to shape discussions around judicial involvement in elections, federalism, and democratic legitimacy.A federal judge is expected to rule on whether President Donald Trump violated the law by deploying National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon to suppress protests. The case, brought by Oregon's attorney general and the City of Portland, challenges the legality of Trump's domestic military deployment under emergency powers, with broader implications for similar plans in other Democrat-led cities like Los Angeles, Chicago, and Washington D.C.U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut, who already issued a temporary order blocking the deployment, will now decide if that block should become permanent. The central legal question is whether the Portland protests legally constituted a rebellion, which is one of the few conditions under which federal troops may be used domestically.The Justice Department argued the deployment was justified, citing violence at a federal immigration facility and describing Portland as “war-ravaged.” Defense attorneys for Oregon and Portland countered that most protests were peaceful and that any violence was limited and contained by local authorities.A Reuters review revealed 32 federal charges tied to the protests, mostly for assaulting federal officers. Only a few resulted in serious charges or potential prison time.This case marks a significant test of civil-military boundaries and the limits of presidential emergency powers, and may ultimately be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.Judge to rule on Trump's Portland troop deployment | ReutersSean Charles Dunn, a former Justice Department employee, was acquitted of misdemeanor assault by a federal jury in Washington, D.C., after a high-profile trial over an incident in which he threw a sandwich at a Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer during a 2025 protest. The case, which gained viral attention, stemmed from an August 10 altercation during President Trump's law enforcement surge in the capital. Video footage showed Dunn yelling at officers and then throwing the sandwich, which reportedly splattered mustard and left onion on the officer's equipment.The jury deliberated for about seven hours over two days before finding Dunn not guilty under a statute that criminalizes assaulting or interfering with federal officers. Prosecutors argued the sandwich throw interfered with official duties, while Dunn's defense contended it caused no injury and was symbolic, intended to divert law enforcement from what Dunn feared was an impending immigration raid at a nearby LGBTQ+ nightclub. The CBP officer testified the sandwich left minor messes but no harm, and later received humorous gifts from coworkers related to the incident, which the defense used to downplay its seriousness.The verdict is another setback for the D.C. U.S. Attorney's Office, which has struggled to secure convictions in protest-related cases stemming from Trump enforcement policies. Dunn, who had been fired from the DOJ shortly after the incident, expressed relief and said he believed his actions defended immigrant rights. The presiding judge denied a defense motion to dismiss the case mid-trial but ultimately left the decision to the jury, which rejected the prosecution's claim that the act met the legal threshold for assault.Sandwich Hurler Acquitted of Assault Charge in Viral DC Case (2)U.S. District Judge John McConnell ordered the Trump administration to fully fund SNAP benefits (food aid) for 42 million low-income Americans by Friday, rejecting the administration's plan to issue reduced payments during the ongoing government shutdown. McConnell sharply criticized the administration for what he described as using food aid as a political weapon, and warned of irreparable harm if full benefits were not provided, including hunger and overwhelmed food pantries.The USDA had initially planned to suspend benefits entirely in November due to a lack of congressional funding. It later proposed covering only 65% of benefits using limited contingency funds—an option McConnell said was inadequate and failed to address administrative challenges, such as outdated state computer systems unable to process reduced payments. Some states estimated it would take days to weeks to reconfigure their systems for partial payouts.McConnell said the administration should instead use a $23.35 billion tariff fund—previously used for child nutrition—to fully fund November benefits. His ruling followed a related case in Boston, where another judge also found that the government was legally obligated to use available emergency funds to keep food aid flowing.The Trump administration appealed the ruling and blamed Senate Democrats for blocking a funding bill that would end the shutdown. Vice President J.D. Vance criticized the court's decision as “absurd,” framing it as interference in a political stalemate.Trump administration must fully fund food aid benefits by Friday, US judge rules | ReutersThis week's closing theme is by Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky.This week marks the anniversary of the death of Tchaikovsky, who passed away on November 6, 1893 according to the Gregorian calendar—November 7 on the Julian calendar still used in Russia at the time. His death, just days after the premiere of his Sixth Symphony (Pathétique), remains a subject of speculation and sorrow in classical music history. In honor of that date, we're closing the week with one of his earlier and more intimate works: the String Quartet No. 1 in D Major, Op. 11.Composed in 1871, the quartet was Tchaikovsky's first major chamber piece and reflects his growing confidence outside the orchestral realm. Though best known for sweeping ballets and symphonies, here Tchaikovsky demonstrates a delicate sense of form and emotional restraint. The second movement, “Andante cantabile,” became especially beloved—Leo Tolstoy reportedly wept when he heard it performed.Unlike his dramatic orchestral works, this quartet offers a quiet depth, full of folk-inspired melodies and lyrical interplay between the instruments. It balances elegance with melancholy, a quality that would come to define much of his later music. Tchaikovsky himself cherished the piece, often arranging and revisiting it throughout his career. The “Andante cantabile” was even played at his own memorial.As we mark November 7, it's fitting to reflect on the more introspective side of a composer whose life and death still stir emotion more than a century later. Tchaikovsky's String Quartet No. 1 doesn't shout—it speaks gently, as if in conversation, and in that quiet voice, it endures.Without further ado, Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky's String Quartet No. 1 in D Major, Op. 11 – enjoy! This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

What makes an audience lean forward before the first trick lands? We dive into stage presence as a lived practice, not a buzzword. From Jay's house in Stockholm, Frodo and Jay unpack how real attention, honest emotion, and contextual awareness turn raw technique into connection you can feel in the room. No acting notes, no hollow smiles—just the hard, generous work of being here with people, right now.We share the messy path many artists take from hobbyist to performer and why conviction matters before the material is perfect. You'll hear how a modular show architecture lets you answer a crowd in real time, when quieting down tames a rowdy room, and how three loops—your inner state, the audience's state, and the social relationship—guide moment-to-moment choices. We talk about reading the room beyond clichés: the corporate ballroom with chairs turned away, the school assembly building to a roar, and the town theater reopening after a flood. Context isn't decoration; it is the content your presence must meet.Words versus abstraction, authenticity versus mimicry, and the test that cuts through everything: would you want to watch this? We dig into teachable charisma, why about half of presence can be trained, and how to find an archetype that fits your truth instead of chasing someone else's shine. Craft supports presence—framing, tempo, applause points—but love powers it. Love of practice gives you something worth showing. Love of the audience gives you a reason to share it well. That's how feeling transmits, Tolstoy-style, from your center to theirs.Support the show...Now you can get t-shirts and hoodies with our wonderful logo. This is the best new way to suport the podcast project. Become a proud parader of your passion for Showmanship and our glorious Craft whilst simultanously helping to gather more followers for the Way.You'll find the store here: https://thewayoftheshowman.printdrop.com.auIf you want to help support this podcast it would be tremendous if you wrote a glowing review on iTunes or Spotify.If you want to contact me about anything, including wanting me to collaborate on one of your projects you can reach me on thewayoftheshowman@gmail.comor find out more on the Way of the Showman website.you can follow the Way of Instagram where it is, not surprisingly thewayoftheshowman.If you find it in you and you have the means to do so, you can suport the podcast financially at:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/captainfrodo

In which our heroes make all the dumbest decisions it's possible to make in the given situation. The Winds of Time Podcast: https://windsoftimepodcast.podbean.com/ The Colin Malatrat Museum of Curious Oddities and Strange Antiquities: https://www.amazon.com/Malatrat-Curious-Oddities-Strange-Antiquities/dp/B0BJ4MMW1N Darkhorse Road, and Other Stories: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0CVFFLVNL Podcast artwork by Ruth Anna Evans (https://twitter.com/ruthannaevans) Please consider supporting the following: Sister Song https://sistersong.nationbuilder.com/donate The Afiya Center https://theafiyacenter.org/donate SPARK: Reproductive Justice NOW http://sparkrj.org/donate/ Center for Reproductive Rights https://reproductiverights.org/take-action-abortion-is-essential/

All good things must come to an end - like the weekend,  sleeping or a bowl of nice chips. Even bad things must come to an end, like the hokey cokey, January, or a bee attack. This week in War and Peace some things are coming to an end. But are these things good things, or bad things? Or to put it another way,  are they a bowl of chips, or an attack by bees, or something in between?Ultimately you must decide.〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️Support the show, say Hello, and find the thoroughly diplomat extras at:patreon.com/wapin7Including... (Free!) bonus content, Tolstoy's Hall of Fame, and special episodes.〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️〰️

Today in History: The memorial of Abram “Bram” Poljak (of blessed memory), a Messianic Jewish pioneer who died in 1963 CE (5724). Poljak was an Orthodox Jew, born in Ukraine. Leo Tolstoy's books helped him believe Yeshua is the Messiah. He was miraculously released from a Nazi prison and moved to Israel to help others like himself.This week's portion is called Lech Lecha (Go Forth) TORAH PORTION: Genesis 12:14–13:4GOSPEL PORTION: Matthew 5:38–48What verse spoke to you most today and why?Did you learn something about God?Daily Bread for Kids is a daily Bible reading podcast where we read through the Torah and the Gospels in one year! Helping young Bible-readers to study God's Word, while also discovering its Jewish context!THE KIDS' JOURNAL is available from ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://arielmedia.shop⁠⁠⁠⁠BUSY MOMS who want to follow the Daily Bread readings on podcast for adults, can go to ⁠⁠https://dailybreadmoms.com⁠⁠The Bible translation we are reading from is the Tree of Life Version (TLV) available from the Tree of Life Bible Society.INSTAGRAM: @dailybreadkids @arielmediabooks @dailybreadmomsTags: #DailyBreadMoms #DailyBreadJournal #BibleJournaling #Messianic #BiblePodcast #BiblicalFeasts #Journal #biblereadingplan #Messiah #JewishRoots #Yeshua #GodIsInControl #OneYearBible #MomLife #MotherCulture #FaithFilledMama #BiblicalWomanhood #Proverbs31woman

Support the podcast on Patreon where you get every episode a week early, plus access to every 280 Mysteries episode! https://patreon.com/372pages Find out how this book compares to the works of Tolstoy, Virginia Woolf and Rush. And while you're at it, follow the exploits of Hot Sexton and her father Senator Sexton Sedgewick. Does triple … Continue reading "372 Pages #195 – Deception Point Ep 3 – Conor Admits to Performing Rocket Man!"

This episode is about songs of the heart. There is one from Russia, performed two different ways. (That song is by a man named Tolstoy, although not the author of those great novels.) There is one from Samoa. This episode contains assorted treasures—not the least of them by J. S. Bach. Bellini, Excerpt from “La sonnambula” Bellini, Excerpt from “La sonnambula” Bach, Fugue in G major, BWV 577 Bach, “Liebster Jesu,” BWV 731 Tolstoy-Lim, “On This Quiet Summer Night” Tolstoy, “On This Quiet Summer Night” Trad., “La'u Lupe”

In this episode of History 102, 'WhatIfAltHist' creator Rudyard Lynch and co-host Austin Padgett examine the Enlightenment's philosophical transformation from medieval religious to modern mechanistic worldviews, analyzing French rationalist, British empirical, and German romantic traditions that fundamentally shaped contemporary Western civilization and thought. -- SPONSOR: ZCASH | SHOPIFY The right technology reshapes politics and culture toward freedom and prosperity. Zcash—the "machinery of freedom"—delivers unstoppable private money through encryption. When your wealth is unseen, it's unseizable. Download Zashi wallet and follow @genzcash to learn more: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://x.com/genzcash⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Shopify powers millions of businesses worldwide, handling 10% of U.S. e-commerce. With hundreds of templates, AI tools for product descriptions, and seamless marketing campaign creation, it's like having a design studio and marketing team in one. Start your $1/month trial today at ⁠⁠https://shopify.com/cognitive⁠⁠ -- FOLLOW ON X: @whatifalthist (Rudyard) @LudwigNverMises (Austin) @TurpentineMedia -- TIMESTAMPS: (00:00) Intro (00:15) The Enlightenment (00:50) Defining the Enlightenment - 18th Century Philosophic Breakthrough (01:06) Why the Enlightenment is Hard to Comprehend Today (01:30) Living Off Systems Created by Smarter Earlier Eras (02:37) Living in a World Created by the Enlightenment (03:19) The Enlightenment as an Open Source Toolkit (04:00) Spenglerian Analysis of the Enlightenment (04:30) Ancient World Parallels - Greece and Rome (05:00) Life-Affirming and Life-Denying Phases of Civilization (05:48) The Axial Age - India, China, and Islam (06:52) Every Civilization Doubts Its Old Religion (07:30) Disintegration Since the Enlightenment (17:35) Sponsors Zcash | Shopify (20:18) 17th Century Context & 30 Years War (56:00) British, German & French Enlightenment Discussion (02:05:20) Tolstoy and the Limits of Rationalism (02:06:27) 19th Century Balance - Technology vs Romantic Subjectivism (02:07:15) Transition from French to German Enlightenment (02:08:00) Eastern Europe and Enlightened Despots (02:08:30) Next Video Preview - 18th Century Regime Europe (02:09:00) The Rational Elite Problem (02:10:29) Intelligence vs Character (02:11:00) The Bell Curve and Overproduction of Mids (02:12:18) Wrap Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Tuesday, 14 October, Michal Kaščák, director of the Pohoda Festival, announced the first headliner for the 30th edition of Slovakia's largest summer multigenre event. For the first time ever, Gorillaz will perform at Pohoda, marking the strongest booking in the festival's history. In 2025, the Slovak band Tolstoys performed at the festival in July and spoke to RSI about their experience at Glastonbury—the largest summer multigenre festival in Europe. This week's culture tips include an invitation to the International Documentary Film Festival One World, as well as screenings of Slovak films in Brazil, among other events.

A man on a shaky ladder, a fall that leaves a bruise, and a life that suddenly tastes bitter—Tolstoy's The Death of Ivan Ilyich gives us one of literature's clearest X-rays of modern emptiness. We gather with friends to unpack why a story written in 1886 speaks uncomfortably well to status-chasing, curated lives, and the quiet neglect of the people closest to us. Along the way, we ask hard questions about sacrifice, spiritual participation, and what it really takes to make a home feel like a living, breathing church.We start with the image of the bruise—how a small accident blooms into moral clarity—and follow it into marriage. Through Ivan's unreliable eyes, his wife seems petty and cold; with a wider lens, she appears faithful, present, even courageous as she brings a priest and urges communion. That tension opens a deeper conversation: family as a school of self-giving; the cost of motherhood and the subtler demands on fathers; and why tender, Christlike leadership from husbands often unlocks a responsive, resilient love. A simple parenting moment—a father shifting from command to kindness—becomes a model for authority as stewardship rather than control.From there, we hold Tolstoy's quiet hint of redemption alongside the need to act before the end. Participation matters: in sacraments, community, honest conversation, and art that reads us back. We contrast vanity's ladder with the ladder of ascent, examine main-character syndrome, and challenge the habits that keep us numb to the good right in front of us. The practical takeaways are simple and demanding: move your ladder, choose the table over the timeline, and practice seeing what is lovely in others so cynicism doesn't win.If this conversation stirred something in you, subscribe for more thoughtful, faith-filled literary dives, share with a friend who loves classics, and leave a review with your biggest takeaway or pushback—we'd love to hear where you agree, disagree, or want to go deeper next.Questions about Orthodoxy? Please check out our friends at Ghost of Byzantium Discord server: https://discord.gg/JDJDQw6tdhPlease prayerfully consider supporting Cloud of Witnesses Radio: https://www.patreon.com/c/CloudofWitnessesFind Cloud of Witnesses Radio on Instagram, X.com, Facebook, and TikTokPlease leave a comment with your thoughts!

In this episode, Jacke talks to author David Denby about his new book, Eminent Jews: Bernstein, Brooks, Friedan, Mailer, a group biography (loosely inspired by Lytton Strachey's Eminent Victorians) that describes how four larger-than-life figures upended the restrained culture of their forebears and changed American life. PLUS in honor of War and Peace, which lands at #13 on the list of the Greatest Books of All Time, Jacke takes a look at an early essay by Virginia Woolf that explains what made Tolstoy's works so great. 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

The parable of the persistent widow. Again. Scholar, poet, and preacher Cameron Bellm has heard it a hundred times—so she turned to Russian literature for help. Drawing on Viktor Shklovsky's ostranenie, the art of making the familiar strange, she reveals how to jolt ancient parables back to life. “It is the goal of art to make the stone stony again,” she says. She also urges preachers to learn from Russian Masters Tolstoy—”a master of the narration of human consciousness”—and Dostoevsky, who “takes us into the deepest, darkest, grittiest underbelly of humanity and lights a single match.” In her homily  for the 29th Sunday in Ordinary Time, Year C, she layers voices across generations—her Presbyterian grandfather's 1964 sermons, Oscar Romero, Etty Hillesum—creating “a double-exposed photograph.” Her provocation: “We identify as the persistent widow, but like it or not, we are also the judge.” ___ Support Preach—subscribe at ⁠americamagazine.org Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Kingdom of God Is Within You is Leo Tolstoy's groundbreaking work on faith, morality, and the futility of violence. Written in 1894, this powerful book was banned in his native Russia, yet it became one of the most influential manifestos of nonviolent resistance in the modern world. Tolstoy argues that true Christianity is not...

This episode focuses on the monumental contribution of 19th-century Russia to world literature. We delve into the minds of masters like Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, and Chekhov, who perfected the psychological novel and used it to explore the depths of human consciousness, morality, suffering, and redemption with unparalleled intensity. To unlock full access to all our episodes, consider becoming a premium subscriber on Apple Podcasts or Patreon. And don't forget to visit englishpluspodcast.com for even more content, including articles, in-depth studies, and our brand-new audio series and courses now available in our Patreon Shop!

What happens when an experienced economist and an English literature expert have a proper conversation? Quite a lot as it turns out. Morton Schapiro and Saul Morson have written an outstanding book on what economists can learn from the humanities. They argue that Adam Smith's heirs include Jane Austen, Anton Chekhov and Leo Tolstoy – and that economists need a richer appreciation of behaviour, ethics, culture, and narrative – all of which the great writers teach better than anyone. Russell Napier joins the duo in conversation.www.libraryofmistakes.com

Pierre Bezukhov's captivity in War and Peace leads him to a discovery straight out of yogic wisdom: happiness is within, suffering can transform into blessing, and the company of a saintly soul changes everything. Raghunath and Kaustubha unpack Tolstoy's descriptions of Pierre's awakening through Platon Karataev and connect them with the bhakti truths of the Bhagavad-Gītā and the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. From Pierre's realization that “Life is everything. Life is God” to baby Krishna's playful liberation of two fallen demigods, the timeless message shines through—what looks like misery may be the doorway to divine joy. Srimad Bhagavatam 10.10.20-31 ********************************************************************* LOVE THE PODCAST? WE ARE COMMUNITY SUPPORTED AND WOULD LOVE FOR YOU TO JOIN! Go to https://www.wisdomofthesages.com WATCH ON YOUTUBE: https://youtube.com/@WisdomoftheSages LISTEN ON ITUNES: https://podcasts/apple.com/us/podcast/wisdom-of-the-sages/id1493055485 CONNECT ON FACEBOOK: https://facebook.com/wisdomofthesages108 ********************************************************************* Join the Gita Collective Whatsapp group! https://chat.whatsapp.com/IoClfPirgHXBad5SxjH2i6?mode=ems_copy_t ********************************************************************* To donate or get a set of Srimad Bhagavatam during this Bhadra Purnima, contact Malini here: +1 (669) 289-5563

Today's story is based on The Three Questions by Leo Tolstoy, adapted and written for you by Daniel Hinds. The king seeks answers to these three questions: When is the best time to do each thing? Who are the most important people? What is the most important thing to do? Check out Stories RPG our new show where we play games like Starsworn with all your Max Goodname friends, and Gigacity Guardians featuring the brilliant firefly! https://link.chtbl.com/gigacity Draw us a picture of what you think any of the characters in this story look like, and then tag us in it on instagram @storiespodcast! We'd love to see your artwork and share it on our feed!! If you would like to support Stories Podcast, you can subscribe and give us a five star review on iTunes, check out our merch at storiespodcast.com/shop, follow us on Instagram @storiespodcast, or just tell your friends about us! Check out our new YouTube channel at youtube.com/storiespodcast. If you've ever wanted to read along with our stories, now you can! These read-along versions of our stories are great for early readers trying to improve their skills or even adults learning English for the first time. Check it out.