In Our Time

[bgmnts]

I like In Our Time and keep up with it through the BBC Sound podcast app.

Last episode was on the Battle of Crécy and it was quite interesting! Edward III declaring himself king of France seems a perfect wind up move.

Might be the only sad cunt that listens to it but it's rammed full of cool 45 minuteses of experts talking about interesting shite, nowt to not like, except Melvyn Bragg's weird breathing.

[elliszeroed]

I love it. Especially on the occasional where Bragg loses his patience.

I remember one early episode though, where they were discussing the mind where one of the guests was a right prick and it derailed the episode.

A great show, exploration of various topics, probably the most widely informative show/ podcast I listen to.

[gilbertharding]

*clears throat*

"...and a reminder that if you missed Melvyn Bragg this morning, there's another chance to hear him brag at half past nine this evening."

Always liked that joke, but I'm sad to say I haven't listened to In Our Time for ages. There was one about the charge of the Light Brigade, I remember deliberately seeking out though.

[Petey Pate]

I love it. Especially on the occasional where Bragg loses his patience.

This usually happens when Bragg's blind spot for his British patriotism is exposed. In the episode on the Industrial Revolution, Bragg gets upset at how one of the guests focuses on the underlying environmental and global economic factors behind industrialisation. She then insinuates that regarding the main cause as 'British ingenuity' developing new technologies is nationalistic and racist and Bragg really loses it.

It makes for some great radio.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b00wqdc7

[bgmnts]

Haha he didn't like that did he?

He does plow on with the argument regardless. Bad look!

Overall good egg for me though, Clive.

[Ignatius_S]

Haha he didn't like that did he?

He does plow on with the argument regardless. Bad look!

Overall good egg for me though, Clive.

Although to be fair, the same can be said of Hudson. Although geography is an important consideration and one that grew in popularity, there have been good counters against it in terms of overstating its significance, which some historians have and there's an element of swapping one simplistic explanation for another. Also, the dismissal of inventions as gadgets isn't the strongest; there have been excellent engineering explanations why some inventions were a huge deal and that going by horsepower number alone is pretty much meaningless.

IIRC, this episode was the first one to be broadcast live and really wished it hadn't. Bragg and Hudson didn't listen to each other properly and it's a real shame.

[Ignatius_S]

The early ones are quite interesting to listen to - only 30 minutes and the show really benefits from a little longer.

Some interesting guests, such as Alan Clark and Gore Vidal, who got on like a house on fire and I found very entertaining.

[bgmnts]

Although to be fair, the same can be said of Hudson. Although geography is an important consideration and one that grew in popularity, there have been good counters against it in terms of overstating its significance, which some historians have and there's an element of swapping one simplistic explanation for another. Also, the dismissal of inventions as gadgets isn't the strongest; there have been excellent engineering explanations why some inventions were a huge deal and that going by horsepower number alone is pretty much meaningless.

IIRC, this episode was the first one to be broadcast live and really wished it hadn't. Bragg and Hudson didn't listen to each other properly and it's a real shame.

Agree, and most social science topics tend to benefit more from a balanced approach obviously. Although the more entertaining episodes revolve around a guest taking a hard stance, like when they had Mary Beard on to talk about Seneca and stoicism!

[superthunderstingcar]

I remember one early episode though, where they were discussing the mind where one of the guests was a right prick and it derailed the episode.

Fuck it, post.

[idunnosomename]

This usually happens when Bragg's blind spot for his British patriotism is exposed. In the episode on the Industrial Revolution, Bragg gets upset at how one of the guests focuses on the underlying environmental and global economic factors behind industrialisation. She then insinuates that regarding the main cause as 'British ingenuity' developing new technologies is nationalistic and racist and Bragg really loses it.

It makes for some great radio.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b00wqdc7

that episode genuinely is the exception. He got a lot of flak for that for talking over her too. Genuinely did make an effort to improve afterwards I think.

He's getting on a bit now though

[Ignatius_S]

Agree, and most social science topics tend to benefit more from a balanced approach obviously. Although the more entertaining episodes revolve around a guest taking a hard stance, like when they had Mary Beard on to talk about Seneca and stoicism!

Absolutely - and was just listening to that one again recently!

[Petey Pate]

Although to be fair, the same can be said of Hudson. Although geography is an important consideration and one that grew in popularity, there have been good counters against it in terms of overstating its significance, which some historians have and there's an element of swapping one simplistic explanation for another. Also, the dismissal of inventions as gadgets isn't the strongest; there have been excellent engineering explanations why some inventions were a huge deal and that going by horsepower number alone is pretty much meaningless.

IIRC, this episode was the first one to be broadcast live and really wished it hadn't. Bragg and Hudson didn't listen to each other properly and it's a real shame.

Listening to it again, Bragg and Hudson are clearly talking at cross purposes and both get too irritated, but Bragg definitely comes off worse. Hudson doesn't get to finish her initial point before Bragg interrupts and argues against something she didn't actually say. Understandably but inadvisably Hudson is peeved and implies that Bragg's position is close to being racist. While it might be a shame there wasn't a more nuanced conversation wasn't had, the episode is a stark demonstration of the debate around historical interpretations, and how heated they can get.

Didn't know it was broadcast live, presumably they may have edited out the more tense parts had it been recorded.

[bgmnts]

Truth be told, Bragg does a lot of sort of half talking over his guests and interrupting them a bit, but I put that down to him being a doddering old man more than anything.

[Nooses Give]

interesting shite, nowt to not like, except Melvyn Bragg's weird breathing.

I'm of two minds regarding the weird breathing: Is it only annoying (and worrying) or is it annoying and adding a certain atmosphere? I can't decide.

I was very amused by the Magna Charta episode where it got sweary for a brief second, one of the experts describing John Lackland as "a bit of a shit, wasn't he?".

I feel uncomfortable when the atmosphere in the studio gets tense, it disturbs the whole "audio equivalent to tea and shortcake cookies" type vibe. I'll probably avoid the episode mentioned above.

Anyone having any episodes to recommend?

[bakabaka]

Anyone having any episodes to recommend?

The one that affected me the most was the one on Hope (https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00017vl)

It starts off explaining why, in the story of Pandora's Box, hope was right to be in the collection of all the world's evils, then goes on to... Nah, I'll leave it to you to hear how Christians fucked everyone over.

[elliszeroed]

The one where he gets pissed off about cavemen making beer. The historian makes a joke about it, and Bragg seems right irritated, until the historian says that they really did make their own mead.

I forget what episode, maybe the one on Neanderthals.

[jamiefairlie]

The guests can go off topic quite often and you hear MB getting tetchy when he tries to move them on and they answer a previous point again. I get quite tense when that happens.

[Nooses Give]

Christians fucked everyone over.
[/quote]

This. Never. Happened.

Or maybe it did, over and over again. Thanks for the tip.

[IsavedLatin]

I feel uncomfortable when the atmosphere in the studio gets tense, it disturbs the whole "audio equivalent to tea and shortcake cookies" type vibe.

The guests can go off topic quite often and you hear MB getting tetchy when he tries to move them on and they answer a previous point again. I get quite tense when that happens.

Yes, I also dislike this: I listen to IOT to assuage my feeling that I really ought to have gone into academe, and in my parallel universe where I'm the silent fourth guest on the panel, people can disagree but they don't get shirty.

I recently listened to an older episode, on the Berlin Conference, and there was a classic tussle there between What Melvyn Wanted to Get on With and an academic who was determined to make a particular point, and it made me feel squelchy. It was a good episode otherwise though, including my favourite category of guest: an older academic who clearly didn't feel he had to posture or prove anything -- which is something that can happen with some guests, particularly though not only the younger ones. This man just oozed deep knowledge of the topic, while also being considerate and generous to his colleagues on the panel; he gave an overview of colonialism on the entire continent of Africa within something like three minutes, and it was just joyous to listen to.

Another thing I quite like about IOT is Melvyn's clear prejudices and preferences, which makes it so unusual a beast on old-timey radio: it's profoundly personal. In the recent show on Megaliths, you can tell his heart's not in it, when literally every quite pointed question ("When did this happen?" "Why did people build these things, was it for religious reasons?") gets a more or less apologetic "we just don't know" -- that lack of certainty clearly frustrates him. He's a completely different person when it's about the nineteenth century: he lights up any chance he gets to insert the Royal Society into conversation, or to shoehorn in his own ideas about Thomas Hardy or whatever. Possibly it's attritional: I've been listening so long to him that I've been conditioned to find these opinions, or ways of expressing them, charming. Then too, I am also a nineteenth-century bore at heart; I also find it hard to bridge the imaginative gap with prehistoric people, or with purely theoretical science (as opposed to history of science episodes, where again MB is on surer ground).

There was an absolutely cracking recent run of episodes that went:
The Challenger Expedition
The Great Stink
Citizen Kane
Persuasion

... but that probably says more about me than about the shows themselves.

I am a big fan of the podcast innovation that came in a few years ago of "now for some bonus time with Melvyn and his guests" -- you can hear some people relaxing, thinking "thank FUCK that's over [i.e. live broadcast]" and they just loosen up, you can get quite a lot more value out of them.

[buttgammon]

My secret academic fantasy has always been to somehow bluff my way onto the programme so I can get into an argument with Melvyn Bragg about something or other.

A while back, a friend of mine was saying how much she disliked this programme because he's often rude and overbearing and keeps interrupting the guests; I agreed with her about Bragg's presence but said that's exactly what I enjoy about it.

[Nooses Give]

The Great Stink was a wonderful episode, it even made me change my CaB signature!

Am I the only one whose IOT fantasy revolves around being Melvin? He has this weird thing where he exhales with like a vibrato of some kind when he finds something amusing; I like to practice doing it at home.

How do we feel about the guests having at each other? I for one am still scarred by the Rosa Luxembourg episode where one of the guests thought Rosa was partly to blame for several unnecessary deaths, something the rest of the panel really took issue with.

[bgmnts]

Yeah that was a fun episode.

And yeah I thought that was a strange takeaway myself, and the guests were right to take umbridge.

Can't think off the top of my head where it got really heated between guests but, as mentioned, Mary Beard seemed to enjoy cheeky digs at the other guests for their opinions on Seneca's stoicism.

There's also an after-episode bit on the Garibaldi episode where all three disagree on his legacy and lack of inclusion of the peasantry in his unified Italy.

There is one poor guest who always fills me with tension and I can't remember the name but she has the tiniest voice that feels like it's running out of steam in the middle of every sentence and she sounds petrified. Always feel she's going to splutter and go into meltdown.

[Keebleman]

There's been a Citizen Kane episode?  I've always assumed that, for some reason (perhaps because it is covered elsewhere to saturation level and beyond) IOT doesn't do cinema.

Best episode I remember is one on Authenticity.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00035z4

The reading list was missing until I emailed to query where it was.

[Nooses Give]

Best episode I remember is one on Authenticity.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m00035z4

The reading list was missing until I emailed to query where it was.

I loved that line about, approximate quote, "the guy on the unicycle isn't necessarily the most authentic person in the room" which Bragg commented with something like "well, that certainly came out of left field!".

I would love to hear a CaB edition of the show. I wonder what it would be about? Phimosis? "With us to discuss X is Nooses Give, sevenfold university dropout and reader of dirty magazines..."

[Thomas]

Been exploring the back catalogue lately, and I do enjoy Braggy's heightened way of ushering the conversation along, like a sort of harried English schoolmaster from Blytonland.

How do we feel about the guests having at each other?

My adrenaline shot up recently when two guests disagreed about cave paintings or something.

In the recent show on Megaliths, you can tell his heart's not in it, when literally every quite pointed question ("When did this happen?" "Why did people build these things, was it for religious reasons?") gets a more or less apologetic "we just don't know" -- that lack of certainty clearly frustrates him.

I love yer megaliths and whatnot - it's always funny to hear Melvyn harrumphing over massive spans of time and 'we don't quite know's.

I am a big fan of the podcast innovation that came in a few years ago of "now for some bonus time with Melvyn and his guests" -- you can hear some people relaxing, thinking "thank FUCK that's over [i.e. live broadcast]" and they just loosen up, you can get quite a lot more value out of them.

I replayed one of these sections recently for my partner. You hear a producer come in at the end and offer everybody tea. Lovely!

[bgmnts]

Quite an interesting episode of IOT two weeks ago that I caught upon on, about Panpsychism - the idea that some form of consciousness permeates the universe, and is not just restricted to animals.

There were two advocates of the theory and one who clearly thought it was a load of old bollocks. Not quite as animated as an episode involving Mary Beard or anything but some clear disagreement and debate always makes it more interesting.

Bragg needing clarification of what a guest meant by a new idea being 'Copernican' shocked me, considering he's been doing the show for a millennia and even a thick cunt like me understood what he meant.

Also generally thought it was quite an apposite episode considering all the current fuss over AI, and the debates on here about the complexities of brains and whether our sentience can be replicated or not etc etc.

[Rankersbo]

I love it. Especially on the occasional where Bragg loses his patience.

Quite an interesting episode of IOT two weeks ago that I caught upon on, about Panpsychism - the idea that some form of consciousness permeates the universe, and is not just restricted to animals.

There were two advocates of the theory and one who clearly thought it was a load of old bollocks. Not quite as animated as an episode involving Mary Beard or anything but some clear disagreement and debate always makes it more interesting.

Bragg needing clarification of what a guest meant by a new idea being 'Copernican' shocked me, considering he's been doing the show for a millennia and even a thick cunt like me understood what he meant.

Also generally thought it was quite an apposite episode considering all the current fuss over AI, and the debates on here about the complexities of brains and whether our sentience can be replicated or not etc etc.

I heard that one. I was really giggling at his grumpyness and that he was clearly holding back from saying, "Yes, but this is bollocks."

[EOLAN]

Bragg needing clarification of what a guest meant by a new idea being 'Copernican' shocked me, considering he's been doing the show for a millennia and even a thick cunt like me understood what he meant.

I think Bragg asking for clarification is usually more a case of him doing it on behalf of the 'lay' audience rather than himself personally.

[bgmnts]

I think Bragg asking for clarification is usually more a case of him doing it on behalf of the 'lay' audience rather than himself personally.

That is something I considered and it could be the case.