Richard Greene – författare

Mary Leapor (1722-1746), a Northamptonshire kitchen maid, produced a substantial body of exceptional poetry which was only published after her early death at the age of twenty-four. This is a timely examination of the work of a poet who has remained almost forgotten for 200 years.Leapor is one of many gifted poets, mainly women and labourers, whose work stands outside the traditional canon of eighteenth-century verse. Richard Greene draws on extensive primary research to present substantial new information about Leapor's life. He discusses her protests against the injustices suffered by women and the poor, her attempts to gain an education, and the influence that illness and the expectation of an early death had upon her writing.Throughout, Leapor is seen in relation to both the mainstream poets of her time and to those whom literary history has considned to obscurity. Mary Leapor: A Study in Eighteenth-Century Women's Poetry thus provides insight not only into the work of a single neglected woman poet, but offers a sometimes surprising perspective on the literary history of the "Ages of Pope and Johnson".

Mary Leapor (1722-1746) was the kitchen-maid daughter of a Northamptonshire gardener. In the past 15 years, her works have been recovered from deep obscurity and she has been widely recognized as possibly the most important woman poet of the eighteenth century. This new edition, the first in 250 years, provides an accurate text of all her known works, including prose and drama. The volume has a substantial introduction summarizing all that is known of her life and providing an over-view of current scholarship. It also provides textual notes and detailed commentary on individual works. This long-anticipated edition is expected to become a landmark in eighteenth-century studies.

One of the undisputed masters of English prose in the twentieth century, Graham Greene (1904-91) wrote tens of thousands of personal letters. This substantial volume presents a new and engrossing account of his life constructed out of his own words. Meticulously chosen and engagingly annotated, this selection of Greene's letters - including many to his family and close friends that were unavailable even to his official biographer - gives an entirely new perspective on a life that combined literary achievement, political action, espionage, travel, and romantic entanglement. The letters describe his travels in Mexico, Africa, Malaya, Vietnam, Haiti, Cuba and other trouble spots, where he observed the struggles of victims and victors with a compassionate and truthful eye. The book includes a vast number of unpublished letters to Evelyn Waugh, Auberon Waugh, Anthony Powell, Edith Sitwell, R. K. Narayan, Muriel Spark and other leading writers of the time. Some letters reveal the agonies of his romantic life, especially his relations with his wife, Vivien Greene, and with his mistress Catherine Walston. The sheer range of experience contained in Greene's correspondence defies comparison.

Probably the greatest British novelist of his generation, Graham Greene's own story was as strange and compelling as those he told of Pinkie the Mobster, Harry Lime, or the Whisky Priest. A restless traveller, he was a witness to many of the key events of modern history - including the origins of the Vietnam War, the Mau Mau Rebellion, the betrayal of the double-agent Kim Philby, the rise of Fidel Castro, and the guerrilla wars of Central America.Traumatized as a boy and thought a Judas among his schoolmates, Greene tried Russian Roulette and attempted suicide. He suffered from bipolar illness, which caused havoc in his private life as his marriage failed, and one great love after another suffered shipwreck, until in his later years he found constancy in a decidedly unconventional relationship.Often called a Catholic novelist, his works came to explore the no man's land between belief and unbelief. A journalist, an MI6 officer, and an unfailing advocate for human rights, he sought out the inner narratives of war and politics in dozens of troubled places, and yet he distrusted nations and armies, believing that true loyalty was a matter between individuals.A work of wit, insight, and compassion, this new biography of Graham Greene, the first undertaken in a generation, responds to the many thousands of pages of lost letters that have recently come to light and to new memoirs by those who knew him best. It deals sensitively with questions of private life, sex, and mental illness; it gives a thorough accounting for the politics of the places he wrote about; it investigates his involvement with MI6 and the Cambridge five; above all, it follows the growth of a writer whose works changed the lives of millions.

This book is the first comprehensive guide to Holst's popular orchestral suite The Planets. It considers the music in detail and places the work in its historical context, describing the circumstances of its composition and its meteoric rise to popular acclaim. Starting with Holst's particular interest in astrology, Professor Greene explores the plotting of the work's central melodic and harmonic gestures to reveal a profound statement of human character and Holst's own psychological journey toward the mystic state. Using parallels in the verbal arts Greene weaves a fascinating tale of musical communication. An understanding of The Planets is crucial to a full appreciation of Holst's profound late works, and Greene's systematic appraisal provides the first revealing light in this direction.

This book is the first comprehensive guide to Holst's popular orchestral suite The Planets. It considers the music in detail and places the work in its historical context, describing the circumstances of its composition and its meteoric rise to popular acclaim. Starting with Holst's particular interest in astrology, Professor Greene explores the plotting of the work's central melodic and harmonic gestures to reveal a profound statement of human character and Holst's own psychological journey toward the mystic state. Using parallels in the verbal arts Greene weaves a fascinating tale of musical communication. An understanding of The Planets is crucial to a full appreciation of Holst's profound late works, and Greene's systematic appraisal provides the first revealing light in this direction.

The Broken Guitar by Richard Greene is a collection of poems about war:MemorialReading the nameof a young man who died in warsaddens us.Yet more the names of thousandsengraved in granite, or marble,their parents’ hopes and dreams interred in stone. All that remains are a few keepsakes,and memories of newborns, toddlers, vulnerable boys,youths becoming men,those now sad memories,and names carved in cold stone.Who wanted those wars?Their leaders of course,but all too often those same young men,and all too oftenthose who mourn for them.

A collection of poems on aging, such as:I See Myself Becoming OldMy closet is full of suits I don''t wear anymore.Nothing I need to wear them for.There are days when I stay in my pajamas till noon.I picture my heirs looking at my wardrobe one dayasking "Can you think of anyone who can use theseor should we give them to Goodwill?"Or, "Would you like this tie as a remembrance of Dad?"As I read the obits of the recently deceased,which I took to doing a few years ago,I compare their ages to mine.Then there''s the arthritis in my hands and feet.My left foot aches when I walkand I suffered a rupture in a time-worn tendon not long ago.I have more trouble lifting things and getting around.Don''t jump over puddles anymorefor fear of the damage I might do coming down.(No more kicking up heels for me.)What will it be next,the incipient cataracts?My hearing isn''t what it used to be.I don''t think I need a hearing aid yet,though my daughter disagrees.Or will it be something unforeseenlike that ill-fated tendon?I see myself becoming old,yet it''s as if I were watching it happen to somebody else.

A collection of poems describing the exterior world, such as:Orinocos of the ImaginationI’ve never been to the Orinocoand have seen few photos of it,but I feel I know its sinuous lengths,winding between thick jungle walls,flashing silver in the sun,delicate waterfallsthreading from cloud-shrouded cliffs,dense foliage adorned with birds of kindergarten colorsand jaguars that merge into shadow,the insistent music of bird cry and monkey chatter,dugouts and caimans scoring its sleek waters, those who people its valleygliding nearly nakedthrough twilight forests,dappled by the distant sun.I know these lush landscapesfrom my dreams.

Richard Greene has been writing poetry intensively since he retired from a 38-year career in international development in the mid-1990s. A lawyer by training, he fell into his development career by accident when, after law school, though planning not to practice law but interested in international affairs, he accepted an unsolicited job offer from the U.S. Agency for International Development. After a few years in Washington (or Foggy Bottom, as the location of the U.S. foreign policy establishment is known), he was assigned as legal advisor to the USAID mission in Laos and there discovered that the development business suited his interests and inclinations very well. Greene wrote poetry beginning in the 8th grade and continued through college where he studied with a Professor, Henry Rago, who later became editor of Poetry magazine, the leading U.S. poetry journal. However, he wrote few poems after law school as he became absorbed in international development, but turned back to poetry as he neared retirement.

Now revised and updated with new aphorisms!Reader beware: This book contains material that disparages cherished beliefs, opinions and institutions including political and religious ones. While some readers may find that material refreshingly irreverent, others may find it offensive. The aphorism quoted on the cover, Patriotism, piety and chastity are all much overrated virtues, offers a relatively mild example. Some of the aphorisms offer potentially even more offensive material, so proceed with caution.Here are a few examples of Mr. Greene’s aphorisms:Sex wouldn''t be nearly so interesting if it weren’t so widely forbidden.The truly strong are those who aren’t driven by the need to prove their strength.Lawyers, actors and politicians must fool others. In the process they often fool themselves.We tend to forget that not all mothers are saints, nor all soldiers heroes.The most important measure of civilization is compassion, not technology, culture, sophisticated institutions, power or the gross national product.

Spoilers get folks upset—really upset. One thing that follows from this is that if you pick up a book that’s all about spoilers, it may seriously disturb you. So anyone reading this book—or even dipping into it—does so at their peril.Spoilers have a long history, going back to the time when some Greek theater-goer shouted “That’s Oedipus’s mom!” But spoilers didn’t use to be so intensely despised as they are today. The new, fierce hatred of spoilers is associated with the Golden Age of television and the ubiquity of DVR/Netflix/Hulu, and the like. Today, most people have their own personal “horror story” about the time when they were subject to the most unfair, unjust, outrageous, and unforgivable spoiler.A first definition of spoiler might be revealing any information about a work of fiction (in any form, such as a book, TV show, or movie) to someone who hasn’t encountered it. But this isn’t quite good enough. It wouldn’t be a spoiler to say “The next Star Trek movie will include a Vulcan.” Nor would it be a spoiler to say, “The story of Shawshank Redemption comes from a short story by Stephen King.” There has to be something at least a bit unexpected or unpredictable about the information, and it has to be important to the content of the work. And you could perpetrate a spoiler by divulging information about something other than a work of fiction, for example details of a sports game, to someone who has tivoed the game but not yet watched it.Timing and other matters of context may make the difference between a spoiler and a non-spoiler. It could be a spoiler to say “There’s a Vulcan in the next Star Trek movie” if spoken to someone raised in North Korea and knowing absolutely nothing about Star Trek. It can also be a spoiler to say something about a movie or TV show when it’s new, and not a spoiler when it has been around for some years.This raises the distinction between “personal spoilers” and “impersonal spoilers.” Personal spoilers are spoilers for some particular individual, because of their circumstances. You should never give personal spoilers (such as when someone says that they have never seen a particular movie, even though the plot is common knowledge. You can’t tell them the plot).Sometimes facts other than facts about a story can be spoilers, because they allow people to deduce something about the story. To reveal that a certain actor is not taking part in shooting the next episode may allow someone to jump to conclusions about the story.Spoilers need not be specific; they can be very vague. If you told someone there was a big surprise ending to The Sixth Sense or Fight Club, that might spoil these movies for people who haven’t seen them.You can spoil by mentioning things that are common knowledge, if someone has missed out on that knowledge (“Luke and Darth Vader are related”), but you usually can’t be blamed for this. People have some obligation to keep up. This means that in general you can’t be blamed for spoilers about stories that are old. “Both Romeo and Juliet are dead at the end” could be a spoiler for someone, but you can’t be blamed for it. This is a rule that’s often observed: many publications have regulations forbidding the release of some types of spoilers for a precisely fixed time after a movie release.However, some spoilers never expire, either because the plot twist is so vital or the work is so significant. So, if you’re talking to young kids, you probably should never say “Darth Vader is Luke’s father,” “Norman Bates is Mother,” “Dorothy’s trip to Oz was all a dream,” “All the passengers on the Orient Express collaborated in the murder,” “in The Murder of Roger Akroyd, the narrator did it,” “Soylent Green is people,” “To Serve Man is a cookbook,” and finally, what many consider to be the greatest and worst spoiler of them all, “The Planet of the Apes is really Earth.”Some famous “spoilers” are not true spoilers. It’s not going to spoil Citizen Kane for anyone to say “Rosebud is his sled.” This piece of information is not truly significant. It’s more of a McGuffin than a plot twist.A paradox about spoiling is that people often enjoy a work of fiction such as a Sherlock Holmes story over and over again. They remember the outline of the story, and who did the murder, but this doesn’t stop them re-reading. This demonstrates that the spoilage generated by spoilers is less than we might imagine.It’s bad to spoil, but how bad? People do seem to exaggerate the dreadfulness of spoiling, compared with other examples of inconsiderateness or rudeness.Are there occasions when it’s morally required to spoil? Yes, you might want to dissuade someone from watching or reading something you believed might harm them somehow. Also, you might issue a spoiler in order to save the world from a terrorist attack (Yes, this is a philosophy book, so it has to include at least one totally absurd example). A more doubtful case is deliberate spoiling as a protest, as occurred with Basic Instinct.The book ends with three spoiler lists: the Most Outrageous Spoiler “Horror Stories”; the Greatest Spoilers of All Time; and the Greatest Spoilers in Philosophy.

Spoilers get folks upset—really upset. One thing that follows from this is that if you pick up a book that’s all about spoilers, it may seriously disturb you. So anyone reading this book—or even dipping into it—does so at their peril.Spoilers have a long history, going back to the time when some Greek theater-goer shouted “That’s Oedipus’s mom!” But spoilers didn’t use to be so intensely despised as they are today. The new, fierce hatred of spoilers is associated with the Golden Age of television and the ubiquity of DVR/Netflix/Hulu, and the like. Today, most people have their own personal “horror story” about the time when they were subject to the most unfair, unjust, outrageous, and unforgivable spoiler.A first definition of spoiler might be revealing any information about a work of fiction (in any form, such as a book, TV show, or movie) to someone who hasn’t encountered it. But this isn’t quite good enough. It wouldn’t be a spoiler to say “The next Star Trek movie will include a Vulcan.” Nor would it be a spoiler to say, “The story of Shawshank Redemption comes from a short story by Stephen King.” There has to be something at least a bit unexpected or unpredictable about the information, and it has to be important to the content of the work. And you could perpetrate a spoiler by divulging information about something other than a work of fiction, for example details of a sports game, to someone who has tivoed the game but not yet watched it.Timing and other matters of context may make the difference between a spoiler and a non-spoiler. It could be a spoiler to say “There’s a Vulcan in the next Star Trek movie” if spoken to someone raised in North Korea and knowing absolutely nothing about Star Trek. It can also be a spoiler to say something about a movie or TV show when it’s new, and not a spoiler when it has been around for some years.This raises the distinction between “personal spoilers” and “impersonal spoilers.” Personal spoilers are spoilers for some particular individual, because of their circumstances. You should never give personal spoilers (such as when someone says that they have never seen a particular movie, even though the plot is common knowledge. You can’t tell them the plot).Sometimes facts other than facts about a story can be spoilers, because they allow people to deduce something about the story. To reveal that a certain actor is not taking part in shooting the next episode may allow someone to jump to conclusions about the story.Spoilers need not be specific; they can be very vague. If you told someone there was a big surprise ending to The Sixth Sense or Fight Club, that might spoil these movies for people who haven’t seen them.You can spoil by mentioning things that are common knowledge, if someone has missed out on that knowledge (“Luke and Darth Vader are related”), but you usually can’t be blamed for this. People have some obligation to keep up. This means that in general you can’t be blamed for spoilers about stories that are old. “Both Romeo and Juliet are dead at the end” could be a spoiler for someone, but you can’t be blamed for it. This is a rule that’s often observed: many publications have regulations forbidding the release of some types of spoilers for a precisely fixed time after a movie release.However, some spoilers never expire, either because the plot twist is so vital or the work is so significant. So, if you’re talking to young kids, you probably should never say “Darth Vader is Luke’s father,” “Norman Bates is Mother,” “Dorothy’s trip to Oz was all a dream,” “All the passengers on the Orient Express collaborated in the murder,” “in The Murder of Roger Akroyd, the narrator did it,” “Soylent Green is people,” “To Serve Man is a cookbook,” and finally, what many consider to be the greatest and worst spoiler of them all, “The Planet of the Apes is really Earth.”Some famous “spoilers” are not true spoilers. It’s not going to spoil Citizen Kane for anyone to say “Rosebud is his sled.” This piece of information is not truly significant. It’s more of a McGuffin than a plot twist.A paradox about spoiling is that people often enjoy a work of fiction such as a Sherlock Holmes story over and over again. They remember the outline of the story, and who did the murder, but this doesn’t stop them re-reading. This demonstrates that the spoilage generated by spoilers is less than we might imagine.It’s bad to spoil, but how bad? People do seem to exaggerate the dreadfulness of spoiling, compared with other examples of inconsiderateness or rudeness.Are there occasions when it’s morally required to spoil? Yes, you might want to dissuade someone from watching or reading something you believed might harm them somehow. Also, you might issue a spoiler in order to save the world from a terrorist attack (Yes, this is a philosophy book, so it has to include at least one totally absurd example). A more doubtful case is deliberate spoiling as a protest, as occurred with Basic Instinct.The book ends with three spoiler lists: the Most Outrageous Spoiler “Horror Stories”; the Greatest Spoilers of All Time; and the Greatest Spoilers in Philosophy.

Conspiracy theories have become a major element in modern opinion formation. From the theory that the killing of President Kennedy was masterminded by a powerful conspiracy to the theory that 9/11 was an inside job, from the story that Barack Obama wasn’t born in America to the story that Donald Trump was a Russian asset, conspiracy theories have become a major element in opinion formation and an ever-present influence, sometimes open, sometimes hidden, on the daily headline news.In Conspiracy Theories, philosophers of diverse backgrounds and persuasions focus their lenses on the phenomenon of the conspiracy theory, its psychological causes, its typical shape, and its political consequences.Among the questions addressed:● What’s the formula for designing a contagious conspiracy theory?● Where does conspiracy theorizing end and investigative reporting begin?● What can we learn about conspiracy theories from the three movie treatments of the Kennedy assassination (The Parallax View, JFK, and Interview with the Assassin)?● Does political powerlessness generate conspiracy theories?● Is conspiracy theorizing essentially an instinct that lies behind all belief in religion and all striving for a meaningful life?● Can we find conspiracy theories in all political movements for centuries past?● What are the most common types of fallacious reasoning that tend to support conspiracy theories?● Is there a psychological disorder at the root of conspiracy theories?● Why is the number of flat-earthers growing?

Conspiracy theories have become a major element in modern opinion formation. From the theory that the killing of President Kennedy was masterminded by a powerful conspiracy to the theory that 9/11 was an inside job, from the story that Barack Obama wasn’t born in America to the story that Donald Trump was a Russian asset, conspiracy theories have become a major element in opinion formation and an ever-present influence, sometimes open, sometimes hidden, on the daily headline news.In Conspiracy Theories, philosophers of diverse backgrounds and persuasions focus their lenses on the phenomenon of the conspiracy theory, its psychological causes, its typical shape, and its political consequences.Among the questions addressed:● What’s the formula for designing a contagious conspiracy theory?● Where does conspiracy theorizing end and investigative reporting begin?● What can we learn about conspiracy theories from the three movie treatments of the Kennedy assassination (The Parallax View, JFK, and Interview with the Assassin)?● Does political powerlessness generate conspiracy theories?● Is conspiracy theorizing essentially an instinct that lies behind all belief in religion and all striving for a meaningful life?● Can we find conspiracy theories in all political movements for centuries past?● What are the most common types of fallacious reasoning that tend to support conspiracy theories?● Is there a psychological disorder at the root of conspiracy theories?● Why is the number of flat-earthers growing?

The new TV series, His Dark Materials, is based on the series of novels by Philip Pullman, depicting a young girl’s adventures in an imaginary world with similarities and dissimilarities to our own. The story tells of world domination by a religious body, the Magisterium, with malevolent intentions, serving a really existing God who is evil and who can be killed. The story, in all its manifestations, as novels, movies, and television shows, has received fierce criticism from religious organizations, especially because its criticisms of religion are aimed primarily at children.While the story is a thrilling adventure yarn, enjoyed by millions of children and grownups alike, it raises many philosophical issues. In the world of His Dark Materials (or one of its many worlds) humans have an animal companion to which they are emotionally linked and which is like an external ‘soul’. This provokes questions about the human personality and the way we think of humans as having bodies, minds, and maybe also souls. Human psychology can be analyzed by psychoanalysis and other theories, some of which are explored in His Dark Materials and Philosophy.Questions of social and political philosophy are also prompted by the story of His Dark Materials. The malignant Magisterium has similarities with the various churches and other religious organizations which have wielded tremendous power both politically and culturally, throughout human history. The relation of the Magisterium to the mysterious “dust” which pervades the universe helps us to understand the relationship of science, religion, and metaphysics.Ever since Friedrich Nietzsche proclaimed that “God is dead,” the question of what Nietzsche meant and what are the consequences of the death of God has agitated many thinkers, and so the story in which God is actually killed enables a closer look at the death of God.A popular theme in philosophy and in modern fantasy stories, is that of possible worlds, including how possible worlds relate to parallel worlds. His Dark Materials has many alternative worlds (one of which happens to be our own) and is filled with rich materials for discussion of these questions.His Dark Materials is a good example of a good story, and therefore provides materials for the branch of philosophy called aesthetics, especially the aesthetics of storytelling. We can learn what makes a good story from thinking about specific stories such as His Dark Materials.One chapter looks at the existentialist implications of the story, another at the feminist implications, and another at the Marxist interpretation. Other chapters focus on specific aspects of metaphysics and epistemology, as well as controversial topics in ethics and philosophy of religion.

Covering everything from Aristotle to ziti, this title explores such topics as: is Tony Soprano a good man?; is Carmella a feminist?; morally speaking who is the worst person on "The Sopranos"; is watching "The Sopranos" harmful to your mental or moral health? and should Tony have read Machiavelli instead of Sun Tzu? The chapters cover topics from each of the traditional branches of western philosophy: metaphysics (the problem of evil, philosophical psychology), epistemology (self-knowledge), value theory (ethics, aesthetics, political philosophy), as well as eastern philosophy (Sun Tzu), history of philosophy (Plato, Nietsche, Machiavelli), and contemporary postmodern themes (feminism and identity issues). "The Sopranos" is rich in philosophical content and complex human interactions and accurately summarizes the human condition, so it is natural for philosophical treatment. No prior philosophical qualifications or mob connections are required to follow all the arguments, which are presented with the same vibrancy, humour and verve that has made "The Sopranos" itself a hit.

The films of Quentin Tarantino are ripe for philosophical speculation, raising compelling questions about justice and ethics, violence and aggression, the nature of causality, and the flow of time. In this witty collection of articles, no subject is too taboo for the writers to tackle. From an aesthetic meditation on the use of spraying blood in Kill Bill to the conundrum of translation and reference in Vincent and Jules' discussion about French Big Macs in Pulp Fiction, Tarantino and Philosophy shies away from nothing. Is The Bride a heroic figure, even though she's motivated solely by revenge? How is Tarantino able to create a coherent story when he jumps between past, future, and present? The philosophers in this book take on those questions and more in essays as provocative as the films themselves.

The popularity of the His Dark Materials trilogy has generated a major motion picture, a stage play, video games, and a new prequel. The series has also been highly controversial with its use of exciting adventure stories for children to comment on organized religion. These books have piqued the interest of the contributors to this fascinating volume, who use it to probe the philosophical issues that inform them. Could a golden compass, or alethiometer, really work? Can a person's soul or daemon have a mind of its own? What are the ramifications of pursuing the diabolical "intercision" process, or of trying to bring about the death of God, a plot that Lyra and her mysterious Father struggle over? These are some of the questions explored by these essays that try to get to the heart of Lyra's bewildering, inspiring, and multifaceted world.

Since 1968's Night of the Living Dead, zombie culture has steadily limped and clawed its way into the center of popular culture. Today, zombies and vampires have taken over TV shows, comic books, cartoons, video games, and movies. Zombies, Vampires, and Philosophy drags the theories of famous philosophers like Socrates and Descartes into the territory of the undead, exploring questions like: Why do vampires and vegetarians share a similar worldview? Why is understanding zombies the key to health care reform? And what does "healthy in mind and body" mean for vampires and zombies? Answers to these questions and more await readers brave enough to make this fun, philosophical foray into the undead.

The films of Quentin Tarantino are ripe for philosophical speculation, raising compelling questions about justice and ethics, violence and aggression, the nature of causality, and the flow of time. In this witty collection of articles, no subject is too taboo for the writers to tackle. From an aesthetic meditation on the use of spraying blood in Kill Bill to the conundrum of translation and reference in Vincent and Jules'' discussion about French Big Macs in Pulp Fiction, Tarantino and Philosophy shies away from nothing. Is The Bride a heroic figure, even though she’s motivated solely by revenge? How is Tarantino able to create a coherent story when he jumps between past, future, and present? The philosophers in this book take on those questions and more in essays as provocative as the films themselves.