Mason

All right. So buckle up, everyone, because we're about to take a deep dive into some seriously heavy history.

About absolute power.

Like it makes you wonder if there's any other way to achieve those goals.

Without resorting to these brutal tactics.

A philosophical one with really high stakes.

Grapple with the complexities of history.

I'm starting to see why this chapter really had an impact on you.

It was the only way.

And the dangers of utopian thinking.

The red flag.

So are you saying we should be wary of all revolutions?

That any attempt to overthrow the existing order is bound to end in tyranny?

Okay.

In sacrificing individual liberty in the pursuit of some abstract collective good.

So Lenin's not pulling this out of thin air.

It's like he's saying the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

That's a warning we should all heed.

This deep dive, man, it's been a roller coaster.

I started out excited to learn more about the Russian Revolution.

He's building on ideas that were already there.

And now I'm kind of terrified.

But also strangely inspired.

So as we wrap things up here, I think we've covered a lot. What's the one thing you hope our listener takes away from all of this?

What's the most important lesson we can learn from this journey into the Bolshevik state?

It's easy to do.

But we can't just assume that those in power, even those who claim to be acting on behalf of the people, have our best interests at heart. Right. We have to stay vigilant.

And always be willing to stand up for what we believe in.

Because as Maximoff shows us, the price of silence... Can be much higher than we ever imagined. Wow. That's powerful. And on that note, I think it's time to wrap up this deep dive.

Which brings us to that phrase that always sends chills down my spine.

full of twists and turns and unsettling revelations.

I agree.

In the future.

Keep questioning.

Even if their dreams sometimes turned into nightmares.

And to learn from the past.

Thanks for joining us on this deep dive.

The dictatorship of the proletariat.

This chapter, man, it it really delves into those early days of the Bolshevik state in Russia.

And Maximoff just hits us with this direct quote from Lenin describing it as a power unbound by laws.

Not at all.

So it was like a blank check.

Everyone remembers the czarist autocracy.

So to hear Lenin.

Echoing those same tones.

Yeah, jarring is a good word.

And Max Moff, he really drives home this point that Lenin didn't just target, you know, those usual suspects.

The capitalists, the Lando.

Anyone who disagreed with him.

It's crazy.

I was just going to ask you about that.

So enemies we get.

But adversaries is broader.

Like anyone who dared to question.

It's like this family feud.

And Maximoff gives us these truly terrifying examples. Doesn't hold back. He talked about April 1918.

You know, what's fascinating is how Maximoff pulls back the curtain. On Lenin's actions.

They trashed headquarters, shut down newspapers.

And it didn't stop there, right?

Those are rival socialist parties.

And if you were against them, well, things could get really bad, really fast.

So this wasn't just, you know, theoretical debates.

They were silencing dissent with violence.

Oh, yeah. He's saying Lenin saw the guillotine as a blueprint.

It's like that saying, you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, but on a way bigger and more terrifying scale.

Hold on. He advocated for what he called terror by starvation.

To crush any form of resistance.

That's messed up.

So for Lenin, the guillotine was just one tool.

Instead of cutting off people's heads.

And everyone's got to eat. Right.

And you might be surprised by what he reveals.

So if you were hungry.

You were an enemy of the state.

That's insane. How could anyone think that was a good idea?

So the gray monopoly, bread cards, forced labor.

You're kidding. He's basically saying that starving people into submission is more effective than the guillotine. That's the logic. This is blowing my mind.

So, you know, right off the bat, Maximoff kind of throws us into this.

People were desperate.

OK.

So it was a way to create a system where people were so dependent on the state.

That's a level of control that's hard to wrap your head around.

Hold on. I need a minute to process all this.

We've gone from praising the Paris Commune to terror by starvation in what feels like 10 minutes.

It's like looking into the abyss of history and seeing how this idealistic vision for a better society can twist into something monstrous.

Yeah. He highlights this contradiction with Lenin.

Oh, no, there's more.

I don't know if I'm ready for this.

Yeah, pretty messed up stuff.

Passive resistance. So like not being revolutionary enough.

So not actively rebelling, but like.

Not being productive enough.

Yeah.

That's what sent Lenin into a frenzy.

It really is. Like you could get in trouble just for not being sufficiently enthusiastic about the revolution.

So this wasn't just some abstract concept. Bro, not at all. Maximoff gives some concrete examples of how this terror by starvation actually played out.

He was living through this stuff.

But then you see what he's actually aiming for. Yeah. Something far more centralized.

He talked about how Lenin specifically targeted the peasantry.

But those prices were often way below market value.

So the peasants were getting squeezed from both sides.

Forced to sell their grain at a loss. And if they resisted, they were labeled as enemies of the people.

And Lenin didn't hold back.

Called those resisting peasants enemies of the people, friends of the capitalists.

Painting a target on their backs.

But weren't the peasants supposed to be like the backbone of the revolution?

The proletariat that Lenin claimed to be fighting for?

Yeah.

The state claiming to be acting in the name of the proletariat.

Even the workers they claim to represent.

My head is spinning.

To go after your own base of support.

It really does.

The Combides, right?

To enforce these policies.

Wait, so he was pitting the poor peasants against the more successful ones.

Talk about a recipe for disaster.

Which only provoked more peasant revolts.

Direct quotes.

But the damage was already done.

It's starting to feel like a horror movie where the monster is not some external threat, but the revolution itself.

It's like this inherent tendency toward authoritarianism.

Daked into the very DNA of the Marxist state as Lenin envisioned it.

But hold on a sec. Didn't the Bolsheviks actually abolish the death penalty initially?

So how do we square that with this whole idea of them being obsessed with violence and terror?

He doesn't shy away from these seemingly contradictory details.

Okay, I'm intrigued. So how does he explain that whole death penalty thing?

He was a master strategist.

Especially after the czar had been overthrown.

Not more bloodshed.

And he drops this bomb on us. The workers should strive not only for a single and undivided German republic, but the most vigorous centralization of power in the hands of the state.

So it was a calculated move to gain power by appealing to these democratic ideals.

Wow. Talk about playing the long game.

It's like they were intentionally acclimating the population to increasing levels of brutality.

It really is. But was there any pushback from within the Bolshevik ranks?

So not everyone was on board with this descent into authoritarianism.

What did he say?

So much for comradely debate.

Even from his own comrades.

He uses that slaveholder democracy analogy to drive this point home, right?

It's such a powerful image. What exactly did he mean by that?

We're cracking open chapter two of Guillotine at Work by Gregory Maximoff.

While brutally exploiting an entire class of people.

While simultaneously crushing any form of dissent or opposition from the masses.

The proletariat was more enslaved than liberated.

So even the workers, the people this whole revolution was supposedly for.

It's like the revolution devoured its own children.

But wait, if this dictatorship of the proletariat was such a sham.

Right. Why not just come out and say, look, we're in charge now. Do things our way or else.

Fair enough.

So it allowed them to maintain this veneer of legitimacy.

That doesn't sound very power to the people.

Even as they were actively suppressing any expression of working class dissent.

And devastatingly effective.

They were able to consolidate their power and crush their opponents.

It's like they were masters of propaganda.

So Marx is actually advocating for a super strong centralized state.

This is getting seriously dark. But I can't help but be fascinated by how Maximoff weaves this complex narrative together.

It's making me rethink everything I thought I knew about the Russian Revolution.

And Maximoff doesn't stop there. He goes even further.

Or the specific circumstances of the Russian Revolution.

So is he saying that Marx and Engels were proto-tyrants?

That their ideas inevitably lead to dictatorship.

Okay, fair enough.

About the inherent dangers of utopian thinking.

Even when wielded in the name of the people.

This is getting really heavy. I need a moment to process all of this.

From the guillotine to terror by starvation to slaveholder democracy to the very nature of Marxist thought.

But we're not done yet.

Maximoff's analysis is just so rich and thought-provoking.

So are you ready to delve into the final part of our deep dive?

We'll explore the long term consequences of Lenin's vision.

All right. So we're back and I'm still processing all that stuff about terror by starvation.

Maximoff really lays it out. You know, those connections between ideology and action.

Actually played out in the real world.

Oh, I bet.

But I feel like we've only just scratched the surface.

Because Maximoff takes us beyond just those immediate consequences.

That this wasn't just some like phase or, you know, necessary evil on the road to utopia.

It was baked into the case.

So he's saying this wasn't just a case of good intentions gone wrong.

That's a bold claim.

Of Lenin's approach.

Always needing to find and eliminate adversaries.

So like that terror by starvation mentality just seeped into everything.

Of how this system.

It's the slightest thing.

Yeah, keeping it local.

So you couldn't trust anyone.

That's terrifying.

This system, the dictatorship of the proletariat.

But its own children too.

I'm still grappling with this idea that Maximoff sees this authoritarianism as inherent to the Marxist state itself.

So is he saying that any attempt to build a socialist society is doomed to fail?

All right, let's dive in. Today we're taking a deep dive into Walt Whitman's Song of Myself.

It's a beautiful thought, isn't it? The idea that the extraordinary exists all around us if we just open our eyes to see it.

So he's not just taking us on these journeys through time and space. He's also taking us on a journey inward, encouraging us to explore the landscapes of our own minds and hearts.

It's like he's saying the journey outward is also a journey inward. And he's not just telling us about it. He wants us to have these experiences ourselves.

All right. Well, before we get too lost in all that cosmic vastness, I want to bring us back down to Earth for a minute and talk about one of the most profound themes that runs through Song of Myself Death.

And he does it in this way that's both, I don't know, unsettling, but also somehow comforting.

So he's not just talking about feeling connected in a spiritual sense. He's actually claiming to be made of the same stuff as the earth, as everyone else, like literally.

Right. Exactly. Remember that line. And as to you, death, and you bitter hug of mortality, it is idle to try to alarm me. He's not afraid of it. It's almost like he welcomes it. He sees death as this transformation, this merging back into the source of everything.

right and i know i know poetry can sometimes feel like ugh homework totally but trust me on this one song of myself is not your typical poem it's not all flowery sonnets and rhyming couplets this is free verse folks and it's epic we're talking about a journey that explores everything from self-identity to america to the entire universe also like big ideas Huge.

No, he's not. He's acknowledging it, even embracing it. He sees it as a way of creating new life. You know, it's a pretty powerful expression of his belief in the interconnectedness of everything.

It's definitely a lot to take in. You know, we've covered so much in this deep dive, but I feel like we've only just scratched the surface of Song of Myself.

It's the kind of poem that keeps on giving. And that's what makes it so special. It's not just some static thing. It's this living, breathing text that changes with each reader.

Okay. Before we wrap up, I want to touch on one more important part of Whitman's philosophy, the importance of individual experience and interpretation. He's not trying to tell us exactly what to think. He wants us to find our own truth in his words.

So it's not just about passively reading. It's about grappling with ideas, questioning things, and coming to your own understanding.

Making the poem your own, too. Finding your own personal connection to it.

OK, I have to ask, you know, Whitman is clearly a genius, a visionary poet who really changed the course of American literature. But like, why should the average person, someone who maybe doesn't read a lot of poetry, care about Song of Myself? What can it offer them?

It's a poem that can help us understand our own lives, to find meaning and purpose. And it can be a source of, I don't know, comfort, inspiration, and also a challenge, all at the same time.

Okay, we're back for the last part of our deep dive into Song of Myself. It's been, well, it's been quite a journey. We've covered the body, democracy, even death. We've traveled through time and space, and it's all in this one poem.

Wow. Imagine what people back then thought when they read that.

It really does get under your skin. You know, it makes you think, makes you feel things, makes you question everything you thought you knew about poetry and yourself and the world.

So before we finish up this deep dive, I want to leave our listeners with something to think about, some questions to ponder.

Okay, so listener, here's a question. How can you take Whitman's ideas and apply them to your own life? What does it mean to celebrate yourself, not in like narcissistic way, but in a way that embraces everything you are, even the flaws?

It makes you think about all the division in the world. But Whitman is saying that underneath it all, we're all connected. Part of this big, messy, beautiful thing called life.

Whoa, that's a deep question. It really makes you look at the world differently, you know. And it's not just about the physical world either, right? He sees that same spark of life, that same wonder in every living being, like he says about the mouse.

These are big questions, aren't they? They're not the kind of questions that have simple answers.

It's like he gives us this map, but there are all these blank spaces we have to fill in ourselves. Maybe that's the whole point. The journey is more important than the destination.

It's about being present in the moment, isn't it? Paying attention to what's around us, to the beauty, the pain, the joy, the sadness, all of it.

So listener, as you go about your day, try to keep a little bit of Whitman's spirit with you. Look for the extraordinary in the ordinary things. Embrace the messiness and complexity of life. Celebrate your own unique song and really listen for the symphony of voices all around you.

It's a poem that inspires us, challenges us, comforts us, and helps us find our place in it all.

Yeah. Thank you so much for joining us as we explore this incredible poem by Walt Whitman. We hope you've enjoyed the journey. Until next time, keep exploring, keep asking questions, and keep singing your own song.

That's the one.

Instead of just, you know, squashing them. I'm starting to get this picture of Whitman as this like super observer.

But also someone who's not afraid to dive into the less pleasant parts of life. He tackles the body, sexuality, even death topics most people would avoid, especially back then.

So it's not just about feeling connected to everything. It's about accepting everything, even the stuff that makes us squirm.

No hiding allowed. It makes me think of that section 28, I think, where he gives this incredibly raw, almost violent depiction of a sexual encounter. It must really push boundaries back then.

He doesn't let us off easy, does he? It's like he's holding up a mirror and saying, deal with it. But, you know, there's also this sense of freedom in his honesty. This boldness actually ties into another big part of Song of Myself, Whitman's democratic spirit.

Exactly. And he sees poetry as a way to give everyone a voice, regardless of background.

Not at all. He's intentionally highlighting everyday people, especially those on the margins of society.

It's not just that he's writing about them, though. He's clearly empathizing with them. Like that line, the heavy-lipped slave is invited. There shall be no difference between them and the rest. Just jumps out at you, doesn't it?

It really makes you think about America today. Are we living up to that ideal of no difference between people?

It really does. It's like this poem is still speaking to us across time. And Whitman doesn't just move through social classes. He takes us on these incredible journeys through time and space, too. His imagery is so vivid, it's like he's teleporting us into these scenes.

Oh, it totally is. Like that line where he's talking about sailing across the ocean. My ties and ballasts leave me. My elbows rest in sea gaps. I skirt Sierras. My palms cover continents.

It's so grand and sweeping. You can almost feel the wind in your hair.

And what makes this deep dive even more interesting is the time period it was written in. It's the late 19th century. And America's going through some massive changes. Think industrialization booming. The Civil War just ended.

Right. Super strict.

Ah, that's why it feels so different. So much more. Unbound.

Speaking of Unbound, it's interesting how he also doesn't shy away from these like harsher realities of life.

He takes us into battlefields, confronts us with violence, suffering. You know, it's not all sunshine and roses.

He's not trying to shield us from the darkness. It makes me wonder, was that shocking for people back then, this kind of unflinching honesty in poetry?

He was a radical, wasn't he?

It really is. He had this incredible talent for finding beauty in everyday things, even in the midst of suffering. And he could make you see the world in a whole new way. You know, appreciate things you might have just overlooked before.

And he did it in a way that feels both personal and universal at the same time. It's like he's speaking directly to you, sharing these really intimate experiences. But he's also tapping into these larger truths about what it means to be human.

Absolutely. It's definitely a lot to unpack, but honestly, I'm feeling pretty inspired right now. It's like Whitman is giving us permission to just be ourselves, to embrace it all, and to find our own song in the midst of this crazy, beautiful world.

Exactly. And Whitman, with his revolutionary free verse style, he's like a mirror reflecting all that change and disruption. He's totally breaking all these old poetic norms, just like the nation itself is redefining its identity.

So much more. I can't wait to dive back in. We'll be right back to continue our exploration of Walt Whitman's masterpiece. All right, we're back and ready to keep going with our deep dive into Song of Myself. Before the break, we were talking about how Whitman celebrates, you know, every aspect of life, even the stuff that makes people kind of uncomfortable.

It's like he's shouting, this body is mine and it's beautiful. And he's not just talking about the parts that society thinks are attractive, right? He celebrates every inch of it.

And it's interesting how he uses such straightforward language to is not flowery or abstract or anything. He's very direct and specific about the body.

Wow, that's pretty bold, especially for that time period. He's placing the physical self above religious doctrine. It's like he's saying the body itself is a temple.

Specifically, we're looking at the 1892 version.

It makes you wonder what people's reactions were back then. This had to be pretty revolutionary stuff.

Totally. Like he's saying, forget the old rules. We're doing things differently now. And he really kicks things off with these bold lines. I celebrate myself and sing myself. Now, before you think he's just being like egotistical, remember, he's actually inviting us, the readers, and now you, the listener, to come along on this journey of self-discovery with him.

Yeah. And it wasn't just about shocking people. He had a deeper point, right? Like in section 21, where he talks about both the pleasures of heaven and the pains of hell existing inside him. It's like he's saying that to truly know yourself, you have to acknowledge all of it, the good and the bad.

So he's not saying go wild and do whatever you want. It's more about self-acceptance on this deeper level.

all the complexities and contradictions. He doesn't make it easy. And he does it all in this incredibly powerful language that just draws you in. There's one section that really captures this bold approach to the body. Section 28.

It's incredibly sensual, almost violent in the imagery. He describes this encounter with like such force, such raw passion that it's almost unsettling.

It's definitely a complicated passage.

It definitely challenges our modern sensibilities. It makes us confront the raw power of physical desire, which was pretty much never talked about openly in Whitman's time.

And letting us figure it out for ourselves. It's interesting, though, because even with all this talk about the body, Song of Myself doesn't feel like a sexy poem, you know, in the typical sense. It's more about this deep spiritual connection with yourself and with the universe.

So the body becomes this bridge between personal experience and universal truth. He takes these big philosophical ideas and grounds them in the physical reality of our existence.

And that's a powerful message, especially in our world today, where we're often so disconnected from our bodies. We spend so much time in our heads staring at screens that we forget to actually like inhabit our physical selves.

He's giving us permission to be fully present in our bodies, to experience the world with all our senses. That's a pretty liberating feeling.

You know, we were talking earlier about Whitman being this poet of the people. And I think his whole approach to the body is a great example of that democratic spirit, too. He's taking something that was taboo, something people were ashamed to talk about, and bringing it out in the open.

It's a message that feels, I don't know, even more relevant today with our world becoming increasingly fragmented and digital. He's reminding us to reconnect with our bodies, celebrate our differences, and find the beauty in our shared humanity.

He really makes you want to get out there and experience the world, savor every moment, every sensation.

I like that. Messy glory. And that exploration takes us straight to one of Whitman's core ideas, this radical notion of interconnectedness. He sees himself reflected in literally everything. Nature, people, even the tiniest little creatures.

Speaking of being in the world, it makes me think about Whitman's incredible ability to transport us through time and space. His language is so vivid, it's like he's creating these virtual reality experiences in our minds.

It's like watching a movie with quick cuts and different perspectives. It's exhilarating. And he doesn't shy away from the darker side of life either. He takes us right into the middle of battles, confronts us with the horrors of war, the suffering of the wounded.

It's that honesty, that willingness to look at it all that makes him so compelling, so real.

It really is. It makes you think about how often we try to avoid the tough stuff, the uncomfortable parts of life. But Whitman's urging us to face it, to accept it all as part of the cycle.

welcome back everyone we're diving into the world of sujata pot today oh a fascinating choice i thought so yeah a poet whose work is as interesting as as her life story seems to be um we've we've got her biography right we've got some critical analysis of her work and even like a list of all of her collections and all the awards that she's won okay it's it's really a lot wow

Definitely check out Sujata Pat.

Her poems are a real testament to the beauty and complexity of being human.

And they give us a look into a world... Mm-hmm. That's both familiar and strange.

Thanks for listening, everyone.

I noticed, though, it's not just the content.

It's the language that she uses.

Like the language itself feels very deliberate, very layered.

Have critics picked up on that?

OK.

OK.

I mean, that reminds me of her poem Search for My Tongue.

Where she explores that struggle of balancing her mother tongue with English.

She does. And it's fascinating to me how she uses language to explore these really complex feelings. And speaking of exploration, her interest in the German artist Paula Modersen-Becker, I was really interested to see that, how deeply that influenced her work.

Totally.

Totally.

I wonder what sparked that connection. Yeah. Like what drew her to Maderson Becker's work.

Oh, okay.

Right. Speaking of recognition though, her work has gotten quite a bit.

She's won the Commonwealth Poetry Prize, the Chalmondeley Award, and many others. So I'm curious, what do these awards signify within the larger literary world?

So she's led a pretty remarkable life, it seems like. What stands out to you as particularly influential on her work?

So it's not just about her personal success then. It's about paving the way for other poets from marginalized communities to have their voices heard and celebrated on a global stage.

That's amazing.

Oh, how so?

Through language, yeah.

Yeah, it's like she's saying poetry is this universal language.

That can connect us across these borders and differences.

So we've established that her upbringing, her experiences, her fascination with language, it's all really shaped her unique voice. But what about the work itself? What impact has it had on readers, on critics?

So it sounds like she's using poetry to challenge these assumptions, to spark dialogue, to make people think differently about the world.

Yeah, I love that idea. Now, before we get lost in these bigger themes, I want to look a little closer at some of her collections, some of these titles like Monkey Shadows, Pure Lizard. What do you think? What comes to mind?

It's like she's inviting us to look at those darker parts of ourselves.

You know, to confront those things that maybe we don't want to see.

And then there's pure lizard.

Which just seems to pulsate with this energy and transformation.

I'm kind of sensing a pattern here. This willingness to confront these difficult emotions.

This fascination with the cyclical nature of life and death. Right. And this connection to the natural world. Yeah. It's almost as if she's drawing parallels between our human experiences and the rhythms of the natural world.

Yeah.

Okay, so we've got monkey shadows with its darkness and pure lizard with its transformation and resilience. What other titles kind of jump out at you?

Agatora.

Okay.

Oh, wow.

Right.

Do you think this collection maybe explores like female identity or the effects of trauma?

Yeah, it's remarkable how these titles just spark so many questions.

And interpretations. It's like she's giving us just enough to make us curious. And then she's inviting us to fill in the blanks with our own imaginations.

Right.

Like she's saying.

Here's a starting point. Now go explore.

Discover. Make your own connections.

Yeah.

Yeah.

So I'm curious about how critics have responded to her exploration of these themes. What have they said about her ability to delve into these darker aspects of human experience?

I'm really curious about those storytelling traditions.

So she's not shying away from pain and suffering.

She's embracing it as part of the human experience.

You know, acknowledging it, but not letting it define us.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah.

She's creating this space where we can be vulnerable and acknowledge that darkness, but still find hope and connection.

Because, you know, how do you think that that might have shaped her approach to poetry?

Speaking of making connections, her work often blurs the lines between personal experience and these broader cultural themes. So how does she do that?

It's like she's using her story to illuminate the stories of others, you know, to connect her own struggles to the struggles of others.

Who've been marginalized in silence.

It's a really powerful reminder. That our stories aren't just our own. You know, they're connected to these larger narratives of history and society.

Right.

Right.

And by sharing our stories, we create this space for empathy, understanding, and recognizing that shared humanity that connects us all.

Yeah.

We've talked a lot about the themes and techniques that make her work unique. But what about the actual language she uses?

Like what words come to mind when you think about her style?

Well, really?

I love that.

Painting pictures with words. I love that.

And she does it with such precision.

You know, there's no wasted words.

Every word is carefully chosen.

Every image is meticulously crafted.

Oh, wow.

Yeah.

Yeah. It's amazing how much she can say.

Oh, wow.

In so few words.

And that trust in the reader. Yeah. That invitation to engage.

Now before we wrap up this deep dive.

I want to touch on something we mentioned earlier.

Her talent as a translator. I mean it's one thing to be a great poet yourself.

But to translate the work of others.

And to capture their essence in another language. Right. That seems like a whole other skill set.

So what are the challenges and rewards of translation?

Especially when it comes to poetry.

Okay.

Right.

It's almost like solving a puzzle.

Finding the right pieces, but also making sure you don't lose the original image.

Like what?

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah.

Do you think her experience as a multilingual poet?

Informs that process.

Yeah.

So it's like she's this bridge.

That's really interesting.

Between two worlds.

You know, helping readers from different cultures connect. Through poetry.

Okay.

Oh, I'll say.

Is this living thing that's always evolving and changing. Through these exchanges. As we wrap up.

Oh, okay.

What do you think her lasting legacy will be?

Yeah, a poet who really embraced those complexities of identity, who celebrated language, and who wasn't afraid to explore the full spectrum of human experience.

Oh, wow.

It's inspiring to think that her work will keep inspiring people.

You know, for generations to come. Right. So for our listener, if you're looking for poetry, that will challenge you. That will move you and make you think about the world in new ways.

Hello, everyone, and welcome to ClassWithMason.com. I'm Mason, your host for today.

And then we move into autumn, which Keats associates with maturity and contentment. It's a quieter phase of life where we're not chasing after beauty or excitement like in spring and summer. Instead, there's this acceptance of things as they are. The mind is at peace, watching things pass by without feeling the need to act on them.

which Keats describes as pale misfeature this is where mortality comes into play. Winter is the season of decline, where life wins down and we face the reality of our own fragility.

No, not at all. He seems to accept it as part of the natural order. The entire poem feels like Keats is guiding us through the stages of life with an understanding that each has its own purpose and beauty, even winter with its connotations of death. It's just another step in the journey.

It's a very mature perspective, especially considering Keats wrote this when he was so young he passed away at just 25.

Absolutely, Emily. The human seasons is a fantastic example of how Keats uses the natural world to reflect the human experience. He does this by comparing the four seasons, spring, summer, autumn, and winter to the stages of life. It's just 14 lines, but it's packed with meaning.

Yes, and by autumn, we get into the theme of maturity and contentment. This is when the mind accepts that things come and go. We're no longer chasing after beauty like in spring. Instead, we're more content with just observing life as it is, understanding that beauty fades.

Now let's do a quick analysis of the poem, starting with how Keats uses symbolism. The seasons clearly symbolize the stages of life. Spring represents youth, summer's for reflection, autumn brings maturity, and winter symbolizes the end of life. It's simple but incredibly effective.

And don't forget the language. Keats' choice of words like lusty spring, honeyed cud, and pale misfeature really enhances the imagery. These phrases invite the reader to see, feel, and almost experience the passage of time as Keats envisions it.

So to wrap up, The Human Seasons by John Keats is a brilliant metaphor for the stages of human life. Through the imagery of nature seasons, Keats captures the beauty, contemplation, maturity, and eventual decline that we all experience. It's a short poem, but it leaves a lasting impression.

We'll see you next time, where we'll continue unraveling the rich world of poetry and prose. Until then, keep reading, keep reflecting, and stay curious.

Exactly. Let's break it down a bit. Spring or lusty spring as Keats calls it is first. Here he's talking about youth. This is when life is full of energy, creativity, and beauty. It's all about imagination and the sense of endless possibilities. Wouldn't you say, Emily, that Keats is almost romanticizing this phase of life?

Yeah, I love that interpretation. Then we move into summer, which represents a different stage, one of contemplation and dreaming. The mind isn't as wild as in youth, but it's more reflective. Almost like the heat of the summer sun slows things down, the imagery here suggests a mind indulging in thoughts sort of soaking in the warmth of its own dreams.

Welcome to theclasswithmason.com. Today we are going to discuss the analysis of so many oaks In the poem, the narrator stands amidst a forest of oaks, which symbolise long-standing cultural traditions and practices. These oaks represent the deeply rooted traditions in society.

This metaphorical blindness signifies those who are unable or unwilling to perceive the world with an open and free perspective. They remain ensnared by the constraints of society and refuse to acknowledge or listen to those who offer alternative viewpoints. The reference to plum trees bearing both red and white fruit symbolizes the duality of mindset.

The red fruit represents a mindset entrenched in traditions, while the white fruit symbolizes the desire for freedom and change. The narrator's ownership of both types of trees suggests an inner conflict, a coexistence of these opposing mindsets. The neutral color brown worn by the narrator symbolizes practicality and adaptability.

Choosing this color allows the narrator to blend into society without drawing attention. In a society that may label those who challenge traditions as evil witches, brown serves as a practical choice to navigate the world without inviting unnecessary scrutiny.

The act of attempting to eliminate or challenge these traditions is metaphorically portrayed as an attempt to cut down these oaks. In this context, someone who challenges or threatens these traditions is labelled as an evil witch. This reflects society's resistance to change and its tendency to demonise those who question or seek to break with established norms.

The poem then shifts its focus to a house with bright and clean windows, which initially appears pure and pristine. However, the brightness of the house is contrasted with the profound sorrow that resides within it. The house is inhabited by a woman who has endured the loss of her five sons in a war.

This observation underscores the idea that appearances can be deceiving and within even the most seemingly idyllic settings, profound suffering and loss may exist. The poem adopts a reflective tone as it explores human limitations and aspirations. The reference to birds with feathers emphasises their freedom and the ability to fly.

In contrast, humans, referred to as mammals, are depicted as bound to the earth and unable to experience the same freedom. This longing for the freedom to soar above earthly constraints is portrayed as a pitiful desire. The poem also delves into humans' sensory experiences. While humans are equipped with eyes to see and ears to hear, the poem acknowledges that some individuals are born blind.

Welcome to theclasswithmason.com. Today we are going to discuss the summary of So Many Oaks by Sujata Bahat. In so many oaks the narrator finds themselves in a forest of ancient oaks that symbolise deep-rooted cultural traditions and societal norms. Challenging or attempting to discard these traditions is akin to being considered an evil witch.

The poem juxtaposes this external symbolism with the portrayal of a bright, clean house inhabited by a mother who has lost five sons in a war, highlighting the stark contrast between outward appearances and inner suffering. The poem also delves into human aspirations for freedom and open-mindedness.

It expresses a desire for the kind of freedom that birds with their feathers possess, contrasting this with the limitations that humans, referred to as mammals, experience due to their inability to fly. The poem points out the metaphorical blindness of individuals who are resistant to change or different perspectives, emphasizing the importance of embracing diverse viewpoints.

The reference to plum trees bearing red and white fruit signifies the duality of mindset. The narrator reveals ownership of both types of trees, signifying an inner conflict between traditional and progressive perspectives. The choice of the practical color brown for the narrator's attire symbolizes a pragmatic approach to navigate societal expectations without attracting undue attention.

In summary, So Many Oaks explores themes of tradition and resistance to change, the contrast between external appearances and internal experiences, the desire for freedom, the importance of open-mindedness, and the inner conflict between traditional and progressive mindsets. It conveys a reflective and ambivalent attitude while urging readers to contemplate the societal norms that shape our lives.

Ever get the feeling like the world, the way we see it, it's like built on ideas, not just like physical stuff, but like concepts. You know, we'll get ready to like dive in deep, folks, because today we're tackling Jacques Derrida and his wild idea of deconstruction.

Yeah.

No, not at all.

Yeah. Think of it like watching a movie. You get so caught up in the story. It seems seamless. Right. But then you learned about editing. How all those shots are pieced together. All the cuts to create that illusion.

I love that. And speaking of how we see things, there's that story about the Spanish explorers at the Grand Canyon, right?

They totally underestimated its size. Their language didn't even have the words to describe how massive it was.

Their worldview.

Yeah.

So is that why translating is so tricky?

It's like when you come across a word in another language and there's just no English equivalent.

It's like a glimpse into a whole different reality.

It's always changing.

So dictionaries can only tell us so much. It's like the messy real world use that matters.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah, like a second class citizen.

That's the traditional view.

The OG.

But Derrida flips it all around.

I got to hear this.

Okay.

That's so true. When I do write things down, it's like click.

So meaning isn't this fixed thing out there. It's created in how we use language and even the act of writing itself. But how does this work with like interpreting a book? Do we all get the same meaning?

So it's not like a mirror just reflecting reality.

Between the reader and the text.

It's not like a puzzle with one solution. It's more like a recipe. Same ingredients, but everyone's dish tastes a little different.

Their own experience.

Yeah.

It's more like a lens that like changes things.

This is blowing my mind. And now we get to this like crazy question Derrida asks. Is this whole logo-centric way of thinking, this search for solid meaning, is it just a Western thing?

Are you saying some cultures don't even think like this at all?

Yeah. Take the K'iche' Maya, for example.

Their whole culture values oral tradition, the way stories change over time.

Right.

I'm hooked already. What sources do we have to like figure this out?

And it makes you wonder, does our alphabet system make us more logocentric?

Whoa. My brain needs a break. We've covered so much. Logocentrism deconstruction. The limits of language. The power of writing.

Derrida really makes you rethink everything.

Where do we go from here?

Okay.

I'm ready. Let's do it.

I think so. My brain's still buzzing from our last talk.

We were talking about how different cultures might have like totally different ways of understanding language and reality.

It makes you wonder if anything really gets lost in translation.

Right.

It's like those optical illusions. You can see two different images depending on how you look.

So when we translate, we're not just switching out words. We're trying to bridge these huge gaps in perspective.

Which brings to mind that famous Dorita quote, and forgive my pronunciation, in the Apado Or text, which I think means there is no outside text.

Sounds so cryptic. What did he mean?

So even when we think we're being objective, we're still working within a framework.

Even when we talk about stuff that seems beyond language, Like emotions or abstract ideas.

It's like language is the operating system of our minds.

And we can't just uninstall it and see the world raw.

Okay, that makes sense. But if there's no outside text, if we're always stuck in language, does that mean everything is relative? That there's no right or wrong?

Oh, yeah.

And how it shapes what we think.

Be open to different perspectives.

So it's not about getting rid of truth. No. It's about understanding how we arrive at truth.

Yeah. Their language, like, limited what they could even see.

This is making me see things in a whole new light. It's like I've been wearing glasses with the wrong prescription my whole life.

Now I'm trying on a new pair and realizing the world can look totally different.

See the lenses we use to view the world.

OK, so we've talked a lot about how language constructs our reality.

But how does this play out in everyday life? How do we actually use deconstruction?

Like good, bad, male, female.

So logocentrism, this sounds kind of scary, but I'm ready.

Yeah. With one side being better or more natural.

So deconstruction is about exposing that.

Give me an example. I want to see how this works in the real world.

The real deal.

Less trustworthy because it's not spoken directly.

We talked about that.

Last longer.

And challenge norms that speech might not.

Each has its own pros and cons.

That's so cool. It shows how these big philosophical ideas actually matter in the real world. This whole conversation has really opened my eyes.

It's like I'm seeing the world in a whole new way.

To be aware of how we see the world.

So it's not just about understanding Derrida's theories.

It's about applying them to our lives and becoming more aware of the information we're taking.

With all the media and everything.

To avoid being passively shaped.

My brain needs a break. We went from questioning the foundations of thought.

To exploring how language shapes reality.

It's like we need a solid foundation to build on.

It is.

Oh, there's more.

Okay, we're back for the last part of our deep dive into Derrida and deconstruction. This whole conversation has like really shifted my perspective on language. It's not just words and grammar anymore. It's about how those words shape how we see the world, even ourselves.

Yeah. Okay. So we latch onto these big concepts like Plato's perfect forms.

Yeah. It shapes our thoughts, perceptions, even our identities.

Yeah.

Be more aware.

That's where difference comes in. Difference. Yeah, it's a tough one to explain. But basically it means that meaning is never fully present. It's always deferred, always in process, like a word in a dictionary. It only makes sense in relation to other words and those words to others and so on.

Always shifting, always evolving.

Exactly. As new evidence comes up and societal values change.

We're not these fixed beings.

Right. We're constantly being shaped by our experiences, relationships, the stories around us.

Or Descartes, I think therefore I am.

Yeah.

this connects to the idea of play in language too right derrida saw language as a playground where meanings can be explored challenged reimagined think about a comedian taking a phrase and twisting it for laughs or a poet using words in unexpected ways to make you feel something new it's recognizing that language is alive we can shape it and it shapes us

It's not about finding the right answer then. Nope. It's about playing with language to see what new meanings we can create. This has been mind blowing. I'm looking at the world in a whole new way. And I think that's the power of Derrida's work. He makes us question everything we thought we knew.

Exactly. They become the bedrock for like understanding everything else.

The fact that there can be multiple perspectives.

So what's the one thing you want listeners to take away from all this?

That's powerful stuff. I think we could all use a reminder of that. Definitely.

Thanks for joining us on this deep dive into deconstruction. We hope you learned something new and that you'll keep thinking, keep questioning, and keep playing with the power of language. Until next time.

Right. But Derrida's like, hold on a sec. What if that center, that solid ground is actually shaky?

That's logocentrism. And he thinks it might be like a uniquely Western thing.

That's right, Anna. The Old English period gave us one of the most important works in early English literature, the epic poem Beowulf. It's a fascinating tale of heroism and monsters, written in Old English, which is quite different from the English we speak today.

It's worth noting that women writers also made significant contributions during this time. Julian of Norwich, for example, was a medieval mystic who wrote Revelations of Divine Love, considered to be the first book in English known to have been written by a woman.

These women's contributions highlight the fact that even in medieval times, literature wasn't exclusively a male domain. Their works offer valuable perspectives on religion, society, and the human experience during this period.

Absolutely. The Renaissance was a time of great cultural and intellectual awakening. Let's start with some of the major male figures of this period. William Shakespeare, of course, stands out as perhaps the most influential writer of all time. His plays and sonnets continue to captivate audiences today.

Absolutely. But it's important to note that women were also making significant contributions to literature during this period. Mary Sidney, for instance, was a prolific translator and poet. Her translation of the Psalms was widely read and admired.

That's right. The Renaissance was characterized by key themes, like humanism, which emphasized the value and potential of human beings. This was a shift from the more religious focus of the medieval period.

Absolutely, Anna. Let's dive into our literary adventure, shall we?

Absolutely. And it's fascinating to see how this influenced the literary landscape. Can you tell us about some of the key male writers from this period?

That's interesting. What about female writers from this period? Were there any notable contributions from women?

And wasn't Mary Wollstonecraft also active during this time?

It sounds like the Enlightenment was a period of significant literary development. Didn't we also see the rise of the novel as a genre during this time?

That's right, Anna. We'll be covering the Homeric, Greek, Roman, and Patristic periods. Each of these contributed significantly to the literary traditions we see in later English works.

Absolutely. These works introduce themes of heroism and adventure that would resonate throughout literary history. Moving on to the Greek period, we see the emergence of lyric poetry with figures like Sappho.

Today we'll be covering major periods of English literature and highlighting contributions from both men and women writers throughout history.

In the Roman period, we have Virgil, whose epic poem The Aeneid continued the heroic tradition while also exploring themes of duty and destiny.

Throughout the classical age, we see the development of themes that would become fundamental to English literature, heroism, love, and religious contemplation.

Welcome back, everybody, to another Deep Dive. Today we're going to be doing something a little bit different. Instead of looking at research and news articles, we're going to be looking at personal diary entries.

Yeah.

And then she asks him, where have you been? Wow.

Such a simple question, but it carries so much weight. It's like she's acknowledging his absence, his journey through doubt and confusion.

Right. And his response, I'm not going anywhere now. Like a vow. A promise to stay present, to hold on to this moment of connection. And the story ends with this feeling of hope. A sense that maybe just maybe they found their way back to each other.

Yeah.

This whole deep dive has been a whirlwind.

What stood out to you the most?

Right.

Yeah.

I completely agree. And for anyone listening who enjoys stories that challenge your thinking, that blur the lines between reality and fantasy, I think Two Years to Forever is definitely worth checking out.

So specifically the diary entries of Jeremy from the novel at two years to forever.

Oh, yeah.

So to wrap up, if you're looking for a quick read that will stay with you long after you finish, that will make you question everything you thought you knew about love and reality, dive into Jeremy's world in two years to forever. You won't regret it.

I think it means that something significant has already happened. Something's driving this need to document his experiences, his feelings for Emily.

Right.

Well, that's where things get a little bit interesting.

There's this recurring theme of Emily appearing and disappearing.

Yeah, it's like one minute she's there sharing these intimate moments with Jeremy.

And then the next, she's gone almost like a ghost.

In fact, there's this one entry where she was supposed to meet him at the cafeteria and she just never showed up.

The dread that he describes is palpable.

Yeah.

Oh, absolutely.

Right. Is she playing games with them? Does she even exist? I mean, these are the questions that were going through my mind as I was reading these entries.

I bet.

He's grappling with it. You know, he talks about the raw honesty and vulnerability that he feels in her absence. And it's not just through straightforward statements. You know, you can feel it in the poetic language he uses.

This constant longing and waiting. It's almost as if he's pouring his heart out onto the pages.

Well, first of all, they're interwoven with passionate love letters between Jeremy and his love interest, Emily. So you get kind of both sides of their relationship.

Yeah, that's what makes comparing their voices so fascinating. So while Jeremy's language is very grounded, focused on their earthly experiences together, Emily's letters are full of celestial imagery.

It's like she's speaking from a different realm, which adds to this growing sense that she might not be entirely of this world.

For sure.

He does, and it seems to weigh on him. Okay. As I kept reading, I noticed Emily's behavior changes. Right. And they start to drift apart. There's this growing unease in his entries, almost like he knows something's not right, but he can't quite grasp it.

Yes.

Exactly. And then bam, there's this gut wrenching entry where he sees Emily with another man.

This guy named Warner.

In that same idyllic garden setting where they shared their first kiss.

Oh, my gosh. The betrayal he describes is so raw. Yeah. It made me ache for him.

Right.

Yeah.

But here's the thing. Jeremy's diary entries don't even start until well into the story.

Oh, completely. It's like the garden becomes a symbol of his shattered dreams, his lost innocence. And, you know, as the story progresses, Jeremy's confusion just keeps growing. His experiences become increasingly unreal, blurring the lines between fantasy and reality.

Right.

It's a question that kept nagging at me throughout the entire novel.

Is Emily even real?

Or is she a figment of his imagination, a manifestation of his desires?

I know, right?

Right. It's a captivating start full of mystery and raw emotion. And it definitely left me wanting to uncover more about Jeremy and Emily and the true nature of their connection.

I couldn't agree more. So for all you listeners out there who are intrigued by a good mystery, a love story with a twist, and a protagonist who might be teetering on the edge of sanity, stick around. We're just getting started.

Yeah. And I don't know about you, but for me, that made me really want to dig in even more. Like, what's going on here? Why is he holding back?

That's so true. It's like they exist in their own little bubble, oblivious to the outside world. And their conversations are anything but ordinary. I mean, they delve into these really deep philosophical topics, talking about the meaning of life and the importance of being present. It's like they're on a completely different wavelength from everyone else.

Yes.

I felt that too. And then there's this really idyllic picnic scene in the park. Okay. And everything about it just screams romance. The setting, the weather, their conversation.

But there's this subtle undercurrent of unease. Like a sense that something is often. Emily keeps talking about wanting to just be, not worrying about the future or what's supposed to happen next.

Yeah.

I definitely got that vibe. It's like she knows she's not meant to be part of this everyday world, you know, with its routines and responsibilities. And then there's this seemingly insignificant moment where she reaches for Jeremy's hand.

And he describes it as sending shivers down his spine, like confirmation of her reality, but also a fleeting moment of connection before she potentially vanishes again.

Okay. So picture this. He's describing this hidden garden that he found with Emily.

Exactly. And then bam, she doesn't show up for their next meeting at the cafeteria.

The way Jeremy describes his growing anxiety, the fear of betrayal.

It's heartbreaking. You can almost feel the weight of his dependence on her.

A dependence that goes beyond the typical anxieties of young love.

Yeah.

Yes.

Yes. And as his entries continue, you see him struggling with these fleeting moments where Emily seems distant, withdrawn. Her gaze drifts. Her responses are vague. Her touch lacks warmth. It's like she's slowly fading away, becoming less and less tethered to this world.

But it's not just any garden. It's described as this almost magical, secret world. And it feels incredibly personal and intimate. And it's where they share their first kiss.

It's masterfully done. And as their connection unravels, Jeremy's entries become more introspective.

He talks about feeling trapped, weighed down by Emily's absence.

There's this really poignant moment where he compares himself to the River Thames.

Envying its freedom to flow towards its destination while he's stuck waiting for her.

Yeah.

And Emily in her letters compares her love for Jeremy to a ship sailing towards an unseen horizon.

Right.

And just when you think you're starting to understand their dynamic, the author throws in another curveball.

Jeremy describes encountering Emily during a snowstorm in the park.

And the scene is breathtakingly beautiful. Almost magical, but there's this underlying tension.

A sense that this encounter might not be what it seems.

Definitely.

Yeah.

Right.

It's like the snow score has created this isolated world for them.

Highlighting the fragility of their connection.

The possibility that it might not survive outside of this unique dreamlike setting.

Oh, my God.

Right now.

Oh, I remember that part. Talk about a gut punch. Yeah. It's like the author saying, OK, are you paying attention? Nothing is what it seems.

It marks a shift in the story, a descent into even deeper uncertainty.

Right. It's like she's becoming more and more elusive. Yeah. Jeremy is desperately trying to hold on to whatever connection he has left.

It's both fascinating and terrifying to witness.

Yeah.

Right.

Oh, that scene was brutal. The author does not shy away from depicting the raw pain of betrayal.

That's what I was thinking, like, this garden feels like a metaphor for the world that Jeremy is creating with Emily. This world that's separate from reality, full of intense emotions and this kind of sense of wonder. And the way that he writes about their first kiss, honestly, you can practically feel the electricity.

The shattering of Jeremy's illusions. It's like the garden. Once a symbol of their love has become a monument to his heartbreak.

Yes.

Yes. And then he describes being completely ignored by Emily at a party.

As if he's invisible. It's like the ultimate rejection. Yeah. A painful confirmation that he's losing his grip on their connection on reality itself.

Oh, boy.

And then things get even more surreal. Jerry describes regressing back to childhood, reliving his eighth birthday in the cafeteria. Emily's there, but she doesn't acknowledge him. It's like he's retreating into the past, seeking comfort in a time when things felt simpler before the complexities of their relationship took hold.

Interesting.

Wow.

It's a haunting image, isn't it? This sense of Jeremy being lost in time, unable to find solid ground in either the past or the present.

It's like his memories are as unreliable as his perceptions. Blurring the lines between what's real and what's imagined and the rawness of his emotions in these entries, the heartbreak, the confusion, it's palpable.

For sure.

Talk about a cliffhanger.

I was on the edge of my seat wondering what had happened, what it meant for Jeremy and Emily's story.

I know.

Right.

Right. It's a brilliant way to leave us hanging, questioning everything we thought we knew.

OK, so we left off with Jeremy waking up in this hospital, disoriented and questioning his own sanity. He finds his diary. But the memories, the stories he poured onto those pages, you know, they feel like this distant dream. He starts to wonder if Emily was ever

And then just when I thought he'd hit rock bottom, the author pulls us back to the garden.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Right.

It's different. The garden feels more real, more vivid than ever before.

And Emily is there running towards him.

I thought so too. It's like all the doubt and confusion of the previous entries just melts away in this moment.

He describes her warmth, her scent, the feeling of her arms around him.

Oh yeah, I forgot it.

Rich and I are fighting. I need to roll your and your dice. Huh, huh.

Oh my god. I know what's gonna happen.

Hey! I knew it.

What's your weapon of choice?

Mason's name is Poo-pee-poo. Based on what I got, that's probably impossible.

Yeah, if you could. Okay. Good luck. Yeah, if it's not loose.

Um, Daddy, I mean, Your Highness, what do you need us to do?

Wait, which one? White one? Yeah, you each have two white ones.

We got a chance to make our own characters. So they're so good.