Enjoyed it! I take comfort in the dysfunction, deeply flawed emperors and kings, empires constantly rising and falling, brothers betraying brothers, betraying mothers, fathers, sons, sisters, debt, slavery, wars, etc. throughout history.
The comedy in the story itself sounds a bit like Shakespeare in places... Bathroom humor is obviously timeless!
Great title for the show, funny book, and very cool concept.
I see posts by totally misandrist feminists on Substack every week or so, that sound like the women in this book. The ancient Greek women did sound happier, though. Modern feminists always sound miserable.
You show your typical ignorance. Those ‘ancient Greek women’ were characters produced by a playwright noted for hating women. Athenian women had no rights whatsoever and were forbidden to leave their houses. Read, if you’re capable of sustaining the attention required for something this long, the Aristophanes parts of Plato’s “Symposium.” Aristophanes thought straight men were all inferior to the kind of gay men who run the Manosphere today. He wasn’t gay because he loved men; he had sex with men because he hated women.
Modern feminists sound miserable for the same reason Civil Rights activists sounded miserable — we hate the injustice in this world and want it GONE. You, however, are a pathetic ignoramus who thinks she’s SPECIAL and will still be accorded rights if you just suck up harder to the men. You’re just as much trash as the rest of us and will be treated like garbage because the men you want to impress like these two think ALL women are garbage. You can’t make yourself pathetic enough to save yourself from them. Learn that most men hate you and prepare accordingly.
Karen: When I first read your post, I honestly thought it was a brilliant parody. Then I noticed your name. I’m not saying it’s unhinged, but it definitely reads like something that could be a parody.
A very promising start! Thank you Matt and Brad for your literary insights, meditations on storytelling whilst also highlighting the continuous historical prescience the play offers - looking forward to Thursday's show!
Great show! I found it a bit more nuanced than Men v. Women -- I'm wondering what both of you think about it skewering weak men in particular. That many of the troubles of Athens were caused by weak men in government wearing the costumes of men, but without steadfast strength and honor. These are not the men of Marathon.
Weak men lead to hard times.
One line stood out to me. The First Citizen is mocked for being nuts by The Second Citizen for doing his duty by the law, responding:
"Because I obey the law? Is that not the first duty of an honest man?"
And I think this may be the moral center of the play.
Blepyrus is a weak man, and is effectively interchangeable with his wife. Both of them are costumed as men. They are interchangeable. His wife crafts a new order where she gets first dibs on screwing the young men, even though she already had the opportunity of youth. Same kind of self-dealing corruption, which in both cases was wrapped in sophistry and the clothes of virtue, rather than the real thing.
But as they are new to it, the women make a better show than the men. Better men than men, as we see Blepyrus floundering around in his wife's gown.
But in the intra-female sexual conflict, the seeds are clearly sown for just more of the same social decay, simply organized differently.
Reading my poor phrasing back, I'm not sure if I made the interaction clear between the two. First Citizen is the one trying to comply with the rule of law, and Second Citizen thinks he's a sucker for doing so.
The Second Citizen represented the reality of thriving in an Athens where higher ideals don't rule the day. Corruption of public duty breeds corruption all the way down the chain.
I think this is why the perceived reversal on Epstein hit MAGA so hard, splintering them. Their anger is aimed a system that Trump himself announced was stacked against them for self-enrichment at the public expense. The more independent-minded are naturally skeptical of power, and the turn against transparency wounded them greatly.
They are the First Citizen, once they've reached the point where they've realized that the only thing left it to take the whole damned system down.
I got confused. I should have read your post more closely.
When I was younger, I was more likely to follow most of the rules, but now I’ve learned that there isn’t much point. I agree with your interpretation, and I’ve just about given up on Trump. He’s done a few things I like, but he has focused on enriching his family, his cronies, and himself, while the rest of us struggle to put gas in the tank & food on the table. It’s weird how something written so long ago can still ring true.
Even in the first term, he focused on enriching his family. As have most president's before him, albeit not as flamboyantly and at as much expense of gullible supporters (The Trump and Melania crypto coins, etc).
He's always sought to color up to the very edge of the outlines, so that wasn't too surprising to me. I respect him doing it out in the open, rather than in the shadows.
The detour in Iran, which is causing deep pain, was a little surprising... but the seeds were there. And I think it is easy to disagree about what threat to the United States a nuclear Iran would pose, and whether there were better ways to attain it. A lot of judgement calls here.
But the opportunity cost for that action is massive. I'm deeply feeling the pain too. And, if it were, me I would have focused on getting something like the JCPOA and take the risks that Iran goes nuclear, willing to bank on the backstop of our own nuclear deterrent. Iran has mostly been a rational actor.
I was young in 1979 and the taking of our embassy and the Nighline nightly updates on the matter were formative experiences. I think likely for Trump as well. Of course, our meddling in Iran that fueled the anger at us in the hearts of the Iranian revolutionaries never got the media exposure that was merited.
But as we sit today, America has been hollowed out to the point of crisis. In that context, the Iran war is completely irresponsible. This may have been the last opportunity to put Humpty Dumpty back together. There are so many cracks, so many broken pieces. They are everywhere.
Sadly, it is entirely rational to pivot from the idealism of First Citizen to the cynical pragmatism of the Second.
I’d like to see Taibbi and Shellenberger team up and investigate the Wall corruption. We live on the Texas border and see first hand the Feds steamrolling over us with the no-bid Wall, an environmental disaster in the making.
I’ll just chime in here that it’s also amazing that the rule of law has been completely disregarded in terms of congressional approval for the use of military force.
We are hollowed out economically and militarily, but in a way also spiritually and legally. We don’t even go through the pretense of making up an AUMF because Congress is so comatose and supine to Trump and the executive.
I remember weeks ago having discussions with others about this topic and how after 60 days they’d have to at least come to Congress. Nope. We just have a pretend “ceasefire” that supposedly “reset” the clock. That’s not how it works.
But does anybody care anymore?
We are fully lost in the woods. Total interregnum moment.
Agree completely. And as we foolishly vote lawyer after lawyer into Congress, we are ruled by their archetype, which seems downright eager to sacrifice the spirit of laws for their technicalities.
I came to Matt Taibbi for news, been here since the start of the Substack. I came to enjoy the story/book segments of ATW, but it was essential they were tired into the news (for me). I have plenty of creators who I go to for books/movies/TV shows/popular culture/Etc. Matt is not even close to that list. Those people are not even close to doing news coverage in my list. What made ATW wonderful was the news, followed by the book tie-in to said news. Those "Internet obsessions" or whatever you described ATW as devolving into in your mind is just what I watched it for. ATW was my favorite podcast of all time and I admit it was because of Walter. For written journalism, I will take Matt. We just aren't seeing much of it any longer. From looking at the viewing and comment numbers, seems like a big fall off. Just my opinion.
I dunno I haven’t got past the intro but already I liked how Walter sounds better - and literature without Walter 😰 if it was going to turn into pure lit why not with Walter??? He was so good and accredited with that!!
Get Lit's first episode seems like a bit of a "shakedown cruise." LOVE the concept and the substance of the discussion. A few of suggestions/wishes:
(1) Brad might want to slow down a bit and be a little more demonstrative...as a mentor counseled me eons ago,"You can rarely speak to slowly or loudly." There were places where Brad is saying very interesting and important things but delivered them in a fast clipped monotone. No need for the Walter Kirn hair-on-fire style, as entertaining as that can be, but awareness of the audience is always a good thing in podcasts;
(2) Is there any way to have these discussions in the same studio/ space? A more professional look would be nice and it might encourage more of conversational feel;
(3) This was peppered with brief allusions to our current situation...more deliberately developing those would be a great service. Hoping this gets refined and really takes off
Enjoyed it! I take comfort in the dysfunction, deeply flawed emperors and kings, empires constantly rising and falling, brothers betraying brothers, betraying mothers, fathers, sons, sisters, debt, slavery, wars, etc. throughout history.
The comedy in the story itself sounds a bit like Shakespeare in places... Bathroom humor is obviously timeless!
Same shit, different millennium.
:-)
Enjoyed the book, as well as the show!
Great title for the show, funny book, and very cool concept.
I see posts by totally misandrist feminists on Substack every week or so, that sound like the women in this book. The ancient Greek women did sound happier, though. Modern feminists always sound miserable.
You show your typical ignorance. Those ‘ancient Greek women’ were characters produced by a playwright noted for hating women. Athenian women had no rights whatsoever and were forbidden to leave their houses. Read, if you’re capable of sustaining the attention required for something this long, the Aristophanes parts of Plato’s “Symposium.” Aristophanes thought straight men were all inferior to the kind of gay men who run the Manosphere today. He wasn’t gay because he loved men; he had sex with men because he hated women.
Modern feminists sound miserable for the same reason Civil Rights activists sounded miserable — we hate the injustice in this world and want it GONE. You, however, are a pathetic ignoramus who thinks she’s SPECIAL and will still be accorded rights if you just suck up harder to the men. You’re just as much trash as the rest of us and will be treated like garbage because the men you want to impress like these two think ALL women are garbage. You can’t make yourself pathetic enough to save yourself from them. Learn that most men hate you and prepare accordingly.
Karen: When I first read your post, I honestly thought it was a brilliant parody. Then I noticed your name. I’m not saying it’s unhinged, but it definitely reads like something that could be a parody.
I have thought the same thing. I seriously think she is Andy Kaufman.
Bwahahahahahahaaha!
Have a lovely day, Karen.
This was great! Thanks Matt and Brad! I love that the lit talks are back.
Very good start, Matt. I like your cohost so far, and hopefully I will continue to like him.
A suggestion for Brad is to get closer to the camera, and talk slower to match Matt's pace. That would be more organic and easier for the listeners.
Probably not going to happen. Many people have the habit of talking fast, a filibuster of conversation. But I enjoyed Brad’s comments, all the same.
A very promising start! Thank you Matt and Brad for your literary insights, meditations on storytelling whilst also highlighting the continuous historical prescience the play offers - looking forward to Thursday's show!
Stoked to know the books are back!
But which Dostoevsky book? Demons? Demons seems to best fit the times, but they’re all good.
What a relief. I am already a fan of this new format. Thank you, Matt. Brad seems to be the perfect cohost for this show. Can't wait to dive in.
So presumably the participants in these discussions would be the “litwits.”
Nice, with Matt's approval using that as a denonym for show listeners has my full support.
(I realize that is a somewhat figurative use of denonym still the one I prefer as you are residents of the other end of the stream.)
Hahahahaha!
Nice!
Great show! I found it a bit more nuanced than Men v. Women -- I'm wondering what both of you think about it skewering weak men in particular. That many of the troubles of Athens were caused by weak men in government wearing the costumes of men, but without steadfast strength and honor. These are not the men of Marathon.
Weak men lead to hard times.
One line stood out to me. The First Citizen is mocked for being nuts by The Second Citizen for doing his duty by the law, responding:
"Because I obey the law? Is that not the first duty of an honest man?"
And I think this may be the moral center of the play.
Blepyrus is a weak man, and is effectively interchangeable with his wife. Both of them are costumed as men. They are interchangeable. His wife crafts a new order where she gets first dibs on screwing the young men, even though she already had the opportunity of youth. Same kind of self-dealing corruption, which in both cases was wrapped in sophistry and the clothes of virtue, rather than the real thing.
But as they are new to it, the women make a better show than the men. Better men than men, as we see Blepyrus floundering around in his wife's gown.
But in the intra-female sexual conflict, the seeds are clearly sown for just more of the same social decay, simply organized differently.
My sympathies were also with the Second Citizen.
Reading my poor phrasing back, I'm not sure if I made the interaction clear between the two. First Citizen is the one trying to comply with the rule of law, and Second Citizen thinks he's a sucker for doing so.
The Second Citizen represented the reality of thriving in an Athens where higher ideals don't rule the day. Corruption of public duty breeds corruption all the way down the chain.
I think this is why the perceived reversal on Epstein hit MAGA so hard, splintering them. Their anger is aimed a system that Trump himself announced was stacked against them for self-enrichment at the public expense. The more independent-minded are naturally skeptical of power, and the turn against transparency wounded them greatly.
They are the First Citizen, once they've reached the point where they've realized that the only thing left it to take the whole damned system down.
I got confused. I should have read your post more closely.
When I was younger, I was more likely to follow most of the rules, but now I’ve learned that there isn’t much point. I agree with your interpretation, and I’ve just about given up on Trump. He’s done a few things I like, but he has focused on enriching his family, his cronies, and himself, while the rest of us struggle to put gas in the tank & food on the table. It’s weird how something written so long ago can still ring true.
Even in the first term, he focused on enriching his family. As have most president's before him, albeit not as flamboyantly and at as much expense of gullible supporters (The Trump and Melania crypto coins, etc).
He's always sought to color up to the very edge of the outlines, so that wasn't too surprising to me. I respect him doing it out in the open, rather than in the shadows.
The detour in Iran, which is causing deep pain, was a little surprising... but the seeds were there. And I think it is easy to disagree about what threat to the United States a nuclear Iran would pose, and whether there were better ways to attain it. A lot of judgement calls here.
But the opportunity cost for that action is massive. I'm deeply feeling the pain too. And, if it were, me I would have focused on getting something like the JCPOA and take the risks that Iran goes nuclear, willing to bank on the backstop of our own nuclear deterrent. Iran has mostly been a rational actor.
I was young in 1979 and the taking of our embassy and the Nighline nightly updates on the matter were formative experiences. I think likely for Trump as well. Of course, our meddling in Iran that fueled the anger at us in the hearts of the Iranian revolutionaries never got the media exposure that was merited.
But as we sit today, America has been hollowed out to the point of crisis. In that context, the Iran war is completely irresponsible. This may have been the last opportunity to put Humpty Dumpty back together. There are so many cracks, so many broken pieces. They are everywhere.
Sadly, it is entirely rational to pivot from the idealism of First Citizen to the cynical pragmatism of the Second.
I’d like to see Taibbi and Shellenberger team up and investigate the Wall corruption. We live on the Texas border and see first hand the Feds steamrolling over us with the no-bid Wall, an environmental disaster in the making.
Are they still building it? Are there better pathways to getting it built that you see that aren't being taken?
I’ll just chime in here that it’s also amazing that the rule of law has been completely disregarded in terms of congressional approval for the use of military force.
We are hollowed out economically and militarily, but in a way also spiritually and legally. We don’t even go through the pretense of making up an AUMF because Congress is so comatose and supine to Trump and the executive.
I remember weeks ago having discussions with others about this topic and how after 60 days they’d have to at least come to Congress. Nope. We just have a pretend “ceasefire” that supposedly “reset” the clock. That’s not how it works.
But does anybody care anymore?
We are fully lost in the woods. Total interregnum moment.
Agree completely. And as we foolishly vote lawyer after lawyer into Congress, we are ruled by their archetype, which seems downright eager to sacrifice the spirit of laws for their technicalities.
Well, at least he acts as corrupt as he is, unlike a lot of equally corrupt politicians. Faint praise…
I came to Matt Taibbi for news, been here since the start of the Substack. I came to enjoy the story/book segments of ATW, but it was essential they were tired into the news (for me). I have plenty of creators who I go to for books/movies/TV shows/popular culture/Etc. Matt is not even close to that list. Those people are not even close to doing news coverage in my list. What made ATW wonderful was the news, followed by the book tie-in to said news. Those "Internet obsessions" or whatever you described ATW as devolving into in your mind is just what I watched it for. ATW was my favorite podcast of all time and I admit it was because of Walter. For written journalism, I will take Matt. We just aren't seeing much of it any longer. From looking at the viewing and comment numbers, seems like a big fall off. Just my opinion.
Good job guys! Looking forward to the next.
Five bucks says the Dostoevsky will be Demons.
I didn't watch, because I no longer care about Racket because Racket doesn't care for me.
I dunno I haven’t got past the intro but already I liked how Walter sounds better - and literature without Walter 😰 if it was going to turn into pure lit why not with Walter??? He was so good and accredited with that!!
Get Lit's first episode seems like a bit of a "shakedown cruise." LOVE the concept and the substance of the discussion. A few of suggestions/wishes:
(1) Brad might want to slow down a bit and be a little more demonstrative...as a mentor counseled me eons ago,"You can rarely speak to slowly or loudly." There were places where Brad is saying very interesting and important things but delivered them in a fast clipped monotone. No need for the Walter Kirn hair-on-fire style, as entertaining as that can be, but awareness of the audience is always a good thing in podcasts;
(2) Is there any way to have these discussions in the same studio/ space? A more professional look would be nice and it might encourage more of conversational feel;
(3) This was peppered with brief allusions to our current situation...more deliberately developing those would be a great service. Hoping this gets refined and really takes off