Loading summary
Transcript70 lines
- [00:00]
Dr. Christina Lambert
Foreign.
- [00:07]
Scott Bertram
The historic campus of Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Michigan, where the good, the true and the beautiful are taught, nurtured and honored. This is the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour bringing the activity and education of the college to listeners across the country.
- [00:25]
Molly Hemingway
It would be lovely if the country had two anti tax parties in the country. What we have are two parties that love to spend money like drunken sailors.
- [00:35]
Scott Bertram
This is your host, Scott Bertram. Welcome to the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour. That was Molly Hemingway, senior journalism fellow here at Hillsdale College, also author of the upcoming book Alito. We'll go in depth on news of the day with Molly in just a few minutes. Also later on in today's program, Dr. Christina Lambert from Hillsdale's English department returns. Dr. To finish her series on T.S. eliot. First, we're joined by Molly Hemingway. She is senior journalism fellow here at Hillsdale College, editor in chief at the Federalist, a FOX News contributor, and also the author of the upcoming book the justice who Reshaped the Supreme Court and Restored the Constitution. Molly, thanks so much for joining us.
- [01:18]
Molly Hemingway
Wonderful to be here with you, Scott.
- [01:19]
Scott Bertram
Happy to talk. Find Molly on XZ Hemingway, I'll say at the beginning you're coming back in a few weeks, six weeks or so. We'll, we'll talk far more in depth about Alito. We'll also preview the book a bit at the end of our conversation. But I've read a third of it already while waiting at an airport in New York. And there is no better way to spend six hours at an airport in New York than reading Molly Hemingway's book.
- [01:42]
Molly Hemingway
What an endorsement.
- [01:42]
Scott Bertram
That's my blurb for you. I wanted to start our conversation talking about the war, the war in Iran. And I saw you last weekend on FOX News Sunday. As we look at these, you know, approval disapproval numbers about the war, they're very much in line with the numbers about Trump in general. Do you like the president? Do you not like the president? How do you think that changes shifts over time? How much leash do both Trump supporters and perhaps American and Americans in general have with what we are going to watch unfold in Iran?
- [02:14]
Molly Hemingway
In Washington, D.C. you saw a lot of people pushing polls showing that the vast majority of Republicans support the war. And when you look at the numbers, it does look like a proxy for Trump support or Trump opposition. But it is true that Republicans tend to support President Trump and they trust him to handle foreign policy. That's one of the things that he had great success with during his first administration and has also had great success now I think it's also true that you can vastly overread or overstate what those support numbers mean. And that's because many Trump supporters like Trump's foreign policy, because he wasn't getting involved in big, expansive wars. And so there's the danger of a softening should the war go on more than a few weeks. But also because Trump supporters are very interested in saving their own country. They are worried that America is in serious decline, that the left has done a great deal of damage to the country and its institutions. And so insofar as a big war takes away from that domestic policy agenda, which much success, in their view, has been accomplished already. But there's much more to be done that could cause some problems in midterm elections in terms of lack of enthusiasm, even from Republican voters.
- [03:35]
Scott Bertram
Was there a misunderstanding or slightly different definitions about what America first is, or was this idea that perhaps some interpreted that as a very specific call for isolationism, and others, perhaps President Trump himself would say it's just a matter of putting America's interests first, whether it be home or abroad in some of these instances, because now we have Venezuela, Iran, Israel. President Trump's been a foreign policy president most of the second term so far.
- [04:06]
Molly Hemingway
Well, a lot of the dramatic stuff has been taking place in internationally at least, although I'm sure he would like people to remember what has been accomplished in terms of shutting down the border, the beginning of deportations, which are, I will note, majority supported things to do, even, even some Democrats and a lot of independents support those things. But, yeah, America first is a good political slogan for Trump because it can mean so many different things to different people. If you're mostly interested in Maha, the, you know, make America healthy again, that fits in under Make America great again. If you are interested in reshoring American jobs or building up the economy so that you have better control of your own supply chain, that fits very well. It also works for national interest, foreign policy, just that when you do something, instead of doing something for the sake of building up a democracy in Iraq or building up women's schools in Afghanistan, you're doing it really mostly focused on whether it's in your interest or not. But the problem with that phrase, therefore means that you can have a lot of competing visions with within the MAGA movement. And I think you will see that as the movement develops.
- [05:19]
Scott Bertram
Molly Hemingway with us, Editor in chief of the Federalist, senior journalism fellow here at Hillsdale College. Domestically, the issue of affordability, this word that Democrats have latched onto over the past Months will be a key topic throughout 2026 as the midterms approach the economy as well. President Trump promised at the end of 2025 that 2026 was going to be the year that Americans felt the effects of the big beautiful bill, which is now law, passed in 2025. Whether it comes, whether it was tax returns and tax refunds or small business tax certainty, where will Americans feel the big beautiful bill throughout 2026? Will it be enough to counter the Democrats arguments about the issue of affordability?
- [06:06]
Molly Hemingway
Well, it's not just a Democrat issue. It really is a concern for a lot of Americans and Trump. The Trump administration did pursue policies that meant that inflation wasn't skyrocketing as it had been under President Biden. But that's not the same thing as prices going down.
- [06:23]
Scott Bertram
Right?
- [06:23]
Molly Hemingway
Just because you're not having them go up as much as they were, you know, the previous four years, does not mean it's that much easier to buy groceries. Now. It is true that wage growth has increased relative to inflation a little bit, and that's, that's a solid thing for Americans. But you also have gas prices that are in turmoil now. If you those things come down, you know, already we saw some spikes in oil prices, and then they kind of calmed down a little bit again. This is where how long the war goes on, it's going to matter a great deal. Any unrest to the region can take time for those things to sort out. And so the Trump administration has done a good job of reinvigorating the economy insofar as it can or has done in part through deregulation, which is one of the things that the Trump administration, both the first one and this one, have done a remarkably good job on. In order to pass a new regulation, you have to get rid of several old regulations. Even just deciding things quickly has been very good for American businesses. Like, maybe you lose a regulatory decision, but it happens now in a matter of months instead of 10 years, and that can help help the economy grow as well. But prices will continue to be a concern, and the Trump administration would be wise to focus on that ahead of the midterms.
- [07:39]
Scott Bertram
I think there is conventional wisdom in the media, at least, that the tariffs are a net negative for President Trump. Is there enough time, is there enough data that the president and Republicans turn tariffs into a net positive for the party and those candidates?
- [07:56]
Molly Hemingway
I just think it's interesting that when President Trump first imposed the tariffs, and this is totally apart from whether you think they're a good idea, bad idea, constitutional not constitutional. The claims made by economists in the media were that it would be catastrophic for the American economy, economy and the stock market and the stock market and prices would skyrocket. And that just, that just did not happen. And I wish there were more study of tariffs in part because it's not like the kind of thing where if you add a 20% tariff, it, it increases the price 20%. And the reasons why are interesting and worthy of study by economists. I don't know if it can ever be a super popular decision, but I will say that reshoring American jobs and having more of an industrial base in this country and is popular and tariffs are the primary way you can accomplish that. And also if you want to have, you know, I don't think people realize how much other countries place tariffs on American businesses. And again, retaliatory or reciprocal tariffs for that issue is one of the best ways you can get other countries to stop punishing American businesses. And that could be communicated much better even again, even if you oppose tariffs as a policy.
- [09:06]
Scott Bertram
Over the past seven, ten days, Molly, we've had two prominent Democrats propose new tax policies. Chris Van Hollen has a proposal that essentially says no household making $92,000 or less will pay federal income tax. Cory Booker has a policy that essentially says if you earn less than $75,000 as a household, you pay no federal income tax. What do you make of this? Do we now have two anti tax parties in Washington?
- [09:34]
Molly Hemingway
It would be lovely if the country had two anti tax parties in the country. What we have are two parties that love to spend money like drunken sailors. So their tax policies aren't really meaningful. But it's also interesting here. You know, I don't know if people realize that people at lower incomes do not pay taxes. Already edging that up a little bit to the 70th percentile or 90th percentile or sorry, 70,000 or $90,000 doesn't really change that that much. The vast, vast majority of taxes are paid by upper income earners. And that also means that if you want to again get some money into the economy, tinkering at the lower ends doesn't really matter. Also seems to reimpose a policy that was very bad for the country where we had these, this gradation of taxation so that if you made a lot of money, you would have, you know, just a tremendous percentage of your income taxed. And the more we could even that out, the better it would be, the more democratic and having people understand the burden of taxes so that they would have that play into their voting would be good as well.
- [10:41]
Scott Bertram
Molly Hemingway, hold on. I want to follow up on that point in just a moment. One more question. First, reminding our listeners about the new episode of the Larry Arn Show. If you haven't watched or listened yet, now is the time to do so. The great Charles Kessler is the guest. He's editor of the Claremont Review of Books and professor of government at Claremont McKenna College. Dr. Arne and Charles Kessler discuss what we can learn from Cicero, the life and work of William F. Buckley and what the Trump presidency means for the future of the United States. It's an in depth discussion in which those two men try to answer the question, can we save the Republic? Find the new episode of the Larry arn show on YouTube. Watch the video or listen to the audio wherever you get your podcasts. The Larry arn show with Dr. Larry Arne and Charles Kessler. Out now we continue with Molly Hemingway, senior journalism fellow here at Hillsdale College, also editor in chief at the Federalist. Molly, this idea, these ideas from Senate Democrats about eliminating federal tax on certain American families, in a way, should we root for them to succeed in their tax cutting ways? If there is less money coming to Washington, is it at all possible that we can starve the beast of D.C. government again?
- [12:10]
Molly Hemingway
I wish that were the case. I think that what we're doing is just creating situation where we have a greater percentage of the country completely dependent on federal and state government and paid for by an increasingly small percentage. When you combine that with all the other issues that seem to be in place, like rule of law is for people who are middle class but not for lower class or in some cases super upper class people. It breaks the bonds of civilization. And we're already having such a tenuous situation with institutional collapse that it concerns me, but it doesn't, you know, again, doesn't matter that much at these levels.
- [12:45]
Scott Bertram
Molly Hemingway with us, senior journalism fellow at Hillsdale College, Fox News contributor, editor and chief Federalist. Her new book coming out end of April is Alito. We'll talk a bit about that in a few minutes. Let's talk about something really popular, the SAVE act, which voter ID is extremely popular. 80% of Americans and 81% of blacks and 78% of Hispanics and a majority of Democrats are voter ID supporters. And yet the SAVE act languishes in Washington. President Trump this week called it his number one priority. Why can't Republicans get something so popular across the finish line when they control both branches of Congress and The White House.
- [13:28]
Molly Hemingway
So this is an issue of great frustration for Republican voters because of what you just said. This is, this is wildly popular legislation. They have given Republicans the presidency, the House, the Senate. Now the President supports it, the House has already passed it, and they did use some creative legislative work to get it over to the Senate. And now the Senate is saying there's just nothing they can do. Now, part of that is because the Senate does have a lot of rights for minority parties, and the Democrats as a minority party, will make it difficult to pass it. What's frustrating for a lot of Republicans is there are things you could do include forcing a filibuster instead of just saying the filibuster exists theoretically, so we're not going to push this. And having people actually debate it on the floor is something that I think a lot of Republican voters think is worth it. And to see it, to see it fail that way would be different than seeing it fail by not even coming to the floor. But it's just frustrating again, for these voters. We know there are problems with our election administration and there are issues involving the federal government. I think a lot of people say, oh, well, shouldn't voting just be happening at the state level? And that is true by and large, constitutionally. But it's also true that we have all sorts of guidelines that do relate to federal elections. And we also have military ballots. And increasingly we have a great deal of military and overseas ballots coming in with people like, let's say someone was born here and then moved overseas. They can still vote here because of our situation with birthright citizenship. And Democrat groups are starting to make that a much bigger part of voting totals. And we have a massive increase in mail in ballots. And it's much easier to game the system with mail in ballots. Just by definition, it's different. If you go in, your neighbor is running the poll, they know you, they're checking off a box versus we don't really know what's happening with mail in ballots all the time. And so making some of those ID requirements fit for the age of mail in ballots makes sense for a lot of people. And without it, you also are going to continue to have this massive distrust in elections, which again, is not good for a healthy republic.
- [15:37]
Scott Bertram
The issue of artificial intelligence continues to creep deeper into our lives on seemingly a weekly basis. There was an NBC News poll this past weekend that said AI was underwater by 20 points. More people had a unfavorable view of artificial intelligence right now by 20 points. I'm curious about this Issue related issue about data centers and whether or not the debate over data centers has sort of penetrated the DC bubble yet. Because here in Michigan, follow the news in Illinois as well, Midwestern states, rural areas, there's a lot of debate, heated debate and discussion about where these data centers are going to be built, how they're using resources, how much water they're using, how much power they're using. Are they paying for their own power, are they creating their own power? Initially, there were states that were offering tax incentives for data centers to locate in those areas. There are bills here in Michigan that say, no, we're going to take all those tax incentives back, put a moratorium on new data centers. Bernie wants a moratorium on new data centers. I think this is going to be a huge issue in gubernatorial races and eventually in Washington. I'm wondering how much this has broached the DC bubble quite yet.
- [16:49]
Molly Hemingway
So it is a big issue. I think the federal government would like this to be a state issue so that they could win some battles at the state level. The general issue is that the lobbies behind these data centers are incredibly strong and they do a lot of financing of campaigns. And it is also true that there is a big push to win the AI race versus other countries. And you can't do that without these data centers. And so people want them to exist. But as you note, there are major problems when that happens for local people. Robert Duvall, who just died, I remember he was testifying against the building of a massive data center in Northern Virginia on environmental concerns. And it's something that bridges different political parties and divides. And so it will. I mean, it's a fraught issue, but I think the feds want to have the states deal with it.
- [17:45]
Scott Bertram
I think there's going to be, as you mentioned, very interesting teammates and opponents on this issue. I know a lawmaker in Illinois that I had a long discussion with, one of the first data centers in Illinois was in his state legislative district. And he said, he said this has been really good. We've lowered property tax rates because of the amount of money it's brought in. We've had no issues environmentally. We've had no issues here. You know, that's one example. But there's going to be other Republicans who have other experiences. The way this lines up is going to be really interesting, I think, moving forward.
- [18:17]
Dr. Christina Lambert
Right.
- [18:17]
Molly Hemingway
And there are also all the other issues of AI regulation that will be that. That are related to this as well, that will probably cut across different parties.
- [18:25]
Scott Bertram
Molly Hemingway with us for a Few more minutes. You can find her on xz. Hemingway, the book Alito comes out at the end of April. We'll talk more about that in a minute. Democrats have a Senate candidate in Texas, James Tallarico, who is getting the usual treatment from the mainstream media. Saw him on CBS Mornings this past week. Everyone loves him because he's a Christian, Molly, and he can appeal to those Christians in Texas. That's the storyline, at least. I wonder if this is yet another example of the media's massive blind spot about religion in which they see something and think it's Christian and actual Christians see it and say, what are you talking about? Of course, New York Times op ed members excluded from this conversation and say that this is nothing like the Christianity that we know and we practice on a weekly basis.
- [19:14]
Molly Hemingway
It's not just their misunderstanding of Christians, it's also men. I think you saw it with Tim Walls and Pete Buttigieg and the media would say, oh, the Democrats have found someone that will appeal to white men. And so James Talarico is their latest version of this. I was on Fox News Sunday this week and one of the other people on the panel said that Democrats were really excited because this guy was a moderate. And people always say that about Texas, that it's going to go blue and it never does. I mean, I'm not saying that it won't in the future, but this guy doesn't just say that abortion is good. He says God wants you to have an abortion. He doesn't just say that he supports transing children. He says God wants children to be trans. He says, says there are six genders and that God is non binary. The type of people who call themselves Christian who support this are such a shrinking, tiny portion of the population that you would have to be a member of the media to not know that, you know, I mean, there's just and to do. It would be difficult for this person to be elected in a normal state or even a, even a very liberal state. The idea that you're going to elect him in Texas to me is laughable, but it's dangerous and it is a huge blind spot on religion.
- [20:29]
Scott Bertram
And frustrating moderate Democrat these days now simply means someone on the far left who is not explicitly a socialist.
- [20:40]
Molly Hemingway
Not even that. I mean, yes, it means someone who is willing to say things publicly different than how they will enact legislation or sign legislation. Because I'm in Virginia, we have a, quote, unquote, moderate governor who has within a matter of just a couple months, right, radically transformed gun laws, voting Laws as opposing ICE is increasing taxes, is redistricting so that there will be no Republican representation in a state that had a Republican governor a few months ago. I mean, she's very, very, very radical. But she presents and she'll tell the media, say I'm moderate. And they say you're moderate.
- [21:13]
Scott Bertram
James Talarico had an interview with Stephen Colbert on the Late show, which didn't air on cbs. And we now know story that came out this past week that everyone knew this way in advance that it was not going to be aired on cbs. They went through with it with the hope that there'd be outrage and the mainstream media would help drive donations and support. And wouldn't you know it, that's exactly what happened. It played right into their hand. But the reason why it didn't air was, was fcc, the FCC and Brendan Carr saying, we're going to slightly change the way that we are enforcing the equal time provision. And this is now applying differently, Brendan Carr says, to late night shows, to the View, daytime talk shows like that. My question, we have a talk radio sector that largely conservatives have done very well in over the past 30 years. The Equal time provision, as laid out by Brendan Carr by the FCC would apply equally to talk radio as it would to these late night talk shows or daytime talk shows. Are you concerned with how the FCC is going to enforce equal time moving forward and what it might mean not for, not just for, say, national shows in which Republicans and conservatives can find a voice, but also many local radio stations and talk shows across the country?
- [22:30]
Molly Hemingway
I'm not a huge fan of the FCC as an agency, but I am definitely a fan of the fcc. Enforcing the law as written, enforcing regulations as written. If you're going to have these rules, you should definitely enforce them and enforce them fairly. It is shocking, I think, to a lot of people that these things that are broadcast over public airwaves on television are considered news shows when they are so biased like the View or these late night shows that just run Democrat propaganda day in and day out and are in complete violation of the rules. With talk radio, I think you shouldn't oppose it or support it based on whether it hurts your political party or not. But I think it's also true that radio would be happy to have more equal time for different candidates. And I think it's interesting. The issue here with the James Talarico interview was that they were conspiring to harm Jasmine Crockett. Now, Jasmine Crockett has been very mean to me personally. I'm not A big fan of her, hers, but she, she should not have been subjected to this conspiracy by Stephen Colbert and James Talarico to make it so that she didn't have a fair shot at the election. And again, if you want to get rid of the fcc, if you want to return public, public airwaves back to the people, I mean, I don't think people realize when you get part of the spectrum, it is a massive gift of money. And you have certain entities that have been building up huge media monopolies over decades because they got these public airwaves. And it doesn't apply to cable, it doesn't apply to satellite.
- [24:11]
Scott Bertram
Nothing.
- [24:11]
Molly Hemingway
Streaming?
- [24:12]
Scott Bertram
No. Podcast.
- [24:12]
Molly Hemingway
Yeah. So, I mean, there's plenty of area for people to be as biased as they wanna be. The public airwaves that Stephen Colbert gets to make millions of dollars a year off of. Maybe not for him.
- [24:25]
Scott Bertram
And to be clear too. So I have taught equal time and the Fairness Doctrine, which is no longer in effect, but it's still important to know and understand especially how it differs from equal time. But I've taught this for a decade to all of our journalism students here at Hillsdale. And up until now, as you said, it's been basically a dead letter with enforcement. There haven't been a lot of prominent cases. Now all of a sudden everyone's interested in equal time, which is fantastic. But equal time only applies to legally qualified candidates in the midst of a campaign season. So it's not this blanket 24, 7, 365. It's not going to affect even the late night shows or the View or talk radio for a majority of election cycles, majority of the time. But it will be in those certain circumstances.
- [25:06]
Molly Hemingway
And I just want to add, Scott, I don't think people, you know, we give the media so much power based on their, like, they get to moderate debates, they get to be considered people who have the right to moderate debates. Even broader than the legal issues in play. I think that the media have done a great disservice by becoming such Democrat partisans and propaganda outlets that they shouldn't have any role in interviewing candidates, moderating debates, you know, setting the terms of what the debate are. It's just bad.
- [25:36]
Scott Bertram
Yeah, Molly Hemingway is with us. Her brand new book is out at the end of April. It's called Alito, the Justice who Reshaped the Supreme Court and Restored the Constitution. We're going to have an in depth conversation in a few weeks about Alito, but I do want you to preview it for our listeners today. Why were you so intrigued by Sam Alito on the Supreme Court.
- [26:02]
Molly Hemingway
So I co authored a book with Carrie Severino on Justice Kavanaugh a few years ago and got to interview many of the justices and also talk to them about each other. And I realized at that point I'd always known who Samuel Alito was. I always enjoyed his writing. But at that time I realized, oh, this guy is the giant on the court. He's also unlike every single one of his colleagues, completely, completely introverted and quiet. So people don't know, you know, he's not going to be out there trying to become a celebrity or anything like that. And he has quietly shaped the jurisprudence, he and Clarence Thomas. And I think people now, particularly on the right, understand what a great role he has played, including that he authored the Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade, which had been a goal of the conservative legal movement for 50 years. But on so many other issues, he has moved things along, including in support of religious liberty, in support of parents rights to educate their children as they see fit. And he also has a different approach to originalism than a lot of other people do. He believes in a practical originalism that relates to the real world. I think a lot of the conservative legal students are getting a little sour on pure originalism. And so being able to introduce his unique jurisprudence, which is going to have much more sway in the years to come, is exciting. But he's just an interesting guy, interesting background, and his story also mirrors that of America, I think, in some ways. So I am just thrilled that it's coming out, and I'm thrilled that it's coming out now as people are beginning getting to realize, oh, this, this is the guy. This is the one that we haven't been paying attention to.
- [27:32]
Scott Bertram
And as I said, I've read about a third so far. And early in the book, it's interesting to see how deeply respected he is by virtually everyone across the board. As he built his legal career, as he worked as a prosecutor inside the government and elsewhere, put away mob members before becoming a justice, and how he navigated that career as well, and how nice he is to everyone around him.
- [27:58]
Molly Hemingway
Right. Most people who make it to become a federal judge or a Supreme Court justice, there's a lot of politicking involved. This is a guy who got there purely by merit, purely by his intelligence and hard work. And yes, a very nice guy. He will give you the shirt off his back. And his clerks, I mean, I've interviewed tons of clerks over the years, and they're all you know, they're all top of the class, brilliant people, but the way his clerks talk about them would make you weep.
- [28:25]
Scott Bertram
And you have stories in the book where he moults multiple times, has hired other justices secretaries to allow them to basically reach retirement age. Right. If a justice retires, he'll take in these secretaries that don't have a home anymore.
- [28:38]
Molly Hemingway
Yeah, he kind of has it's not what you'd think of him, but he kind of has a bleeding heart. So if someone needs a few more years before retirement, he'll bring them on, even if it's not a great match. And he's also very helpful to his clerks, you know, if they need time off to have a baby or anything like that. Very helpful as well.
- [28:54]
Scott Bertram
All right. We'll talk much more about the book, which is available for pre order now. Alito, the justice who reshaped the Supreme Court and restored the Constitution. Find it at Amazon.com and elsewhere. Molly Hemingway, find her editor in chief at the Federalist, FOX News contributor and senior journalism fellow here at Hillsdale College. She's on X. Hemingway. Molly, thanks so much for joining us here on the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.
- [29:19]
Molly Hemingway
Thank you, Scott.
- [29:20]
Scott Bertram
Up next, Dr. Christina Lambert from Hillsdale City English Department is back to finish her series on T.S. eliot. I'm Scott Bertram. This is the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.
- [29:45]
Bill Gray
Hi there. It's Bill Gray from Hillsdale College. Before you skip ahead, can I ask you a question or two? If you could teach 50 million Americans one thing, what would it be? Would you teach our great American story that this nation is unique, founded on self government and individual liberty? Maybe you would teach the truth about free enterprise, how hard work and opportunity allow anyone to rise. Or would you teach the gospel and the Christian faith that helps us live good and meaningful lives? At Hillsdale College, we're doing exactly that, teaching the best that's been thought and said. Through our free online courses, K12 programs in Primus, podcasts and more, we reach and teach millions every year with the principles of liberty that make America free. And with your help, we can reach even more. Your tax deductible gift today will help us teach millions more people to pursue truth and defend liberty. Just text the word give to 7 1844. You'll get a secure link to make your donation in seconds. That's give to 718 44. Thank you for standing with us. Now back to the show.
- [30:59]
Scott Bertram
You know the Robertson family from the hit TV show Duck Dynasty. Now Hillsdale College offers you the unique opportunity to learn alongside the Robertsons as they dive deep into Hillsdale's online course, the Genesis Story. Every Friday on the Unashamed Podcast, the Robertsons will share their insights and perspectives. Learning from Hillsdale professor of English Justin Jackson. Take a trip down south to Louisiana for this one of a kind learning experience we call Unashamed Academy. Visit unashamedforhillsdale.com and enroll today. That's Unashamed. F O R hillsdale.com to experience the Genesis Story alongside the Robertsons. Welcome back to the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour. I'm Scott Bertram. Be sure to follow us on activity at Hillsdale Radio and the Hillsdale College Podcast Network is there as well. At HCpodcasts, we're joined by Dr. Christina Lambert. She is Assistant professor of English at Hillsdale College. Dr. Lambert, thanks for joining us.
- [32:19]
Dr. Christina Lambert
Thanks for having me.
- [32:19]
Scott Bertram
We continue our conversation as we dig into the work of T.S. eliot. Last time a little bio and background. You can go back to our previous episodes to find that this time we focus specifically on the Wasteland. As we enter, what should we know about the poem? Basic plot elements? What should we know as we begin our discussion?
- [32:41]
Dr. Christina Lambert
So the Wasteland was published in 1922. It has five sections. It's actually only a 434 line poem, and it's not that long for a poem that's had such a lasting effect on 20th and 21st century verse. Content for poetry, of course, is inseparable from form. Modernist form is fragmented. So the best thing you can think of when you start the Wasteland is don't expect a normal plot in this poem. The poem is sometimes called a lyric and sometimes an epic. Using Eliot's own words, the poem employs the mythical method as an ordering structure. One of these myths that the poem engages with is the Grail myth in the legend of the Fisher King. This is going to contain elements of your standard heroic quest, restoration of the land, and cyclical fertility rites. The whole poem longs for water, for rain, and the restoration of the cycles that renew the land. The problem is, in the Wasteland there's little hope for new life. If you open up to the very first page of the poem, you learn this. The poem begins, april is the cruelest month, breeding lilacs out of the dead land, mixing memory and desire, stirring dull roots with spring rain, Winter kept us warm, covering earth and forgetful snow, feeding a little life with dried tubers. So what's cruel? To begin with, the coming of spring, which is also, of course, April, the beginning of Chaucer's famous stories of Pilgrimage, the Canterbury Tales. But this whole cycle of spring, of pilgrimage, of the coming of new life, is described as cruel. What's better than that? In these opening lines? Winter, winter, that season where the seeds are deep under the ground, still alive, but barely. And that's what's preferred here, right? So that's where we begin. And Helen Gardner, the scholar, famously says it's a poem about death in life, about people who are still alive but barely so. And you can hardly tell right after this, which is a helpful second lens for thinking through the poem, we get the stanza that reads, what are the roots that clutch? What branches grow out of this stony rubbish? Son of man? You cannot say or guess, for you only know a heap of broken images where the sun beats. So looking at this idea of the broken images is really helpful for reading the wasteland. You still have something, right? You have some images, but they're broken. They're in a heap, like a trash pile. And so the work of the poem, your work as a reader, is to watch the poet piece them back together and understand how and why this happens. And the poem is going to take you through intimate spaces of the home, British pubs, the Thames, a vast, barren outdoor space with the threat of thunder. And you're going to figure out how these images create one picture that is the wasteland. Finally, something to think about is that the original title of the poem was he do the Police in Different Voices? Which is amazing. It's a line from a Dickens novel, Our Mutual Friend. But it captures the poly vocality of the poem. You're going to be hit by so many voices. So another way of reading the poem is following these voices. Where do they begin, where do they end, and how do they connect?
- [36:24]
Scott Bertram
What are the main themes we find inside the wasteland? How does Eliot develop them throughout the poem?
- [36:31]
Dr. Christina Lambert
So the first, of course, like we said, is Death in Life. Helen Gardner describes another way of thinking through the poem by saying, it's about the problem of history and the time process. Right? History and time, where it's mingled with the desire for cosmic and personal salvation. No poem has ever shown a greater sense of the pressure of the past upon the present. What Garner's describing here, of course, is what's the role of the individual over time and in light of the fact that these myths or these ordering structures of the world now are in a heap of broken images. So when we describe the poem as a kind of epic, like all epics, it's cosmic in scale and it's also particular. It's going to speak to technology, the relationship between men and women, fertility, the environment, and all these different religious and sustaining myths. The poem is very, very concerned in light of all these things, what's the possibility for human connection and communication. And I think it's really important to understand the poem as a kind of lament, full stop. Right. It's going to lament kind of what's been lost here. And then also there's spaces within the poem where it questions what could break this cycle.
- [37:49]
Scott Bertram
Talking with Dr. Christina Lambert, Assistant professor of English at Hillsdale College, about the Wasteland by T.S. eliot. Does the wasteland reflect in some way disillusionment that occurs in post World War I society?
- [38:05]
Dr. Christina Lambert
Absolutely. And it's going to specifically reference images from the war of trench language, dead soldiers, the haunting line from Dante Elliot reuses in our context. I did not know death had undone so many. It's thinking about what are the possibilities for human life after this devastating war. But of course it's going to extend this problem to questions of technology, industrialization and the impacts on culture and the landscape. War develops these new technologies and is the way that we're living in light of them making us less human? The poem asks, do we have any sustaining or ordering myths left? But just as a note to this, Eliot famously said that the poem could have been written without the war as well. So it's speaking to these grand kind of social questions that are happening during his period, but also Eliot struggling with failing health, physically, mental health and a failing marriage. And all of that is bound up in the Lament of the Wasteland.
- [39:08]
Scott Bertram
How does this poem try to explore the themes of isolation and alienation? We talked last chat about his bleak and alienating look at urban landscape. Now we have isolation, alienation. How does the wasteland make that happen?
- [39:22]
Dr. Christina Lambert
Great. So the easiest way to think about this is through the particulars of the poem. Part two of the poem is called A Game of Chess. So I'm going to describe a couple images that this section brings up and then how we might think of them alongside of each other. The section of the poem begins in a woman's dressing room where we find smells of synthetic perfumes and we see a rendering of the myth of Procne and Philomela from Ovid's Metamorphoses. It's rendered on a wall in her dressing room. This myth, though, if you know the myth says that Philomela was raped by her brother in law, Tereus, who cuts out her tongue after the deed, so she can't talk about it, she weaves a tapestry to tell her sister Procne, and they feed Tereus his own son in revenge. It's a pretty dark story. When Tarius comes after them, the gods trans women into nightingales to help them escape. And it's this song of the nightingale that haunts the poem. So we begin with this grave injustice, the inability to communicate what has gone wrong, which is so important in the poem. And then through the tapestry of Philomela, we understand this idea of art as a recourse to justice. So with this myth in mind, we then enter this excruciating conversation between presumably a married couple, one perhaps back from the war with ptsd, and they cannot communicate. And then we go to an image of a London pub or public house where one woman is gossiping about another woman, tearing her down, this woman named Lil, and suggesting that she's had an affair with Lil's husband. So what do we do with all these images together? There's. It suggests something about how the violence of the modern world is making human relationships and communication impossible. It asks, how might the victim speak? Lil, the woman that's spoken of in the pub, never gets a voice. But of course, the poem becomes her voice. Another way we might think of this is the title of the section's called A Game of Chess. So are relationships now strategy games to get what you want? And this chirping voice of the nightingale of Philomela rings throughout the poem to remind us of how we have caused our own alienation through these acts of violence. There's so much more in this section, but you're beginning to get an idea of the rich tapestry Eliot is weaving, like Philomela herself talking with Dr. Christina
- [41:58]
Scott Bertram
Lambert about the Wasteland by T.S. eliot. It's Eliot. So we have some references and allusions. How does he incorporate these references to classic literature? Divine Comedy, the Odyssey? Why does he borrow from texts like the Bible, like Shakespeare, Eastern religious traditions? How does it all end up together?
- [42:19]
Dr. Christina Lambert
Yeah, so his background obviously is diverse. He's so well read in the great books, in the Eastern and Western traditions, and part of his mythical method is trying on these different myths to see if they can give a kind of ordering structure to a world he cannot make sense of. So the Philomela example from before gives you a sense for how he does this. But. But each section of the poem has these illusions, as if he's trying out another voice that might speak and offer a sense or ordering structure. The best way, in my mind and how I teach my students to Encounter these within the poem is to, you know, find and identify that myth or illusion. Ask then, how does Eliot change or transform that myth or illusion? And then you're ready to ask, why? Why does he do this? What's the effect on the particular section of the poem? And it's really masterful how Eliot uses these to create the voice of the poem. Again, through this idea of many voices of a tradition. He's asking, can this help us out of a wasteland?
- [43:25]
Scott Bertram
How does the poem's ending provide or fail to provide closure for what we've read?
- [43:31]
Dr. Christina Lambert
Great. So the conclusion of the poem is key, and there are quite a few interpretive possibilities here. But after a truly remarkable section, what the Thunder said, we see this image from the Grail myth, right? The fisher King, and he's fishing alone on his lands. The final stanza of the poem begins, I sat upon the shore, fishing with the arid plain behind me. Shall I at least set my lands in order? Now, if you're familiar with Old Testament scriptural illusions, this is what the prophet Isaiah will say to kings and households before he prophesies their doomsday. Set your lands in order so things might not conclude so well for this fisher king. Immediately after that, all the lines of the stanza speaking of fragments and allusions, are different fragments and allusions from all of literature. We get Eliot's favorite line from the Purgatorio about Arno Daniel jumping into the refining fire. Philomela is back with a nod to Ovid's myth. We received the London Bridge nursery rhyme. London Bridge is falling down, falling, falling down. We get Sanskrit words for control, give, sympathize, and then it ends with, shanti, shanti, shanti. T.S. eliot's note here says shanti is repeated here a formal ending to an Upanishad, which is a Hindu sacred text, and he translates it as the peace which passeth understanding. So what do we do with this as readers? Option 1. Is this piece real? Right. Well, the peace is just another fragment in a pile of fragments. We end with the words of peace. But the poem has made us question the possibility for peace or any of these myths to reorder the events we've seen. The poem is a lament, so how can we resolve it with just a word of peace here. How much power does a singular fragment have? But then when you circle back around to the stanza, you still do have this heap of broken images which was beginning in the first section of the poem. And the one original line in this stanza is this really significant line for the poem, Eliot says, these fragments I have shored against my ruins. So these fragments, these myths, they stand like stones or a wall, kind of holding back the water or holding back a kind of total despair. And at least these fragments can do that. So we're given no assurance of peace. But with the very existence of the fragments, all existed in a heap, that is the stanza, at least you have a possibility for peace. I don't think the Wasteland gives us any sure footing, but it does suggest your quest to kind of piece together these fragments would be worth it.
- [46:25]
Scott Bertram
The Wasteland often is considered one of the defining works of modernist poetry. What makes itself so important, influential, memorable?
- [46:36]
Dr. Christina Lambert
So it's just a beautiful, haunting work that everyone should read. I think that it's had such a lasting impact because it exemplifies, especially in terms of modernism, the topics of modernism. How do we live or write in a world like this? The aesthetics of modernism, the formalist techniques that exemplify this fragmentary world. It's also in terms of time period, it's the peak of high modernism in 1922. But what's maybe really remarkable is that all of these pieces are contained within. A scholar calls it the longest short poem of all time. And so it is a piece, unlike James Joyce's Ulysses, that you could read again and again and again. And it's not easier, however, you can read through it in 20 minutes and read through it again and again and it has so much power for again, just 434 lines.
- [47:32]
Scott Bertram
Dr. Christina Lambert, assistant professor of English here at Hillsdale College, as we talk about The Wasteland and T.S. eliot. Dr. Lambert, thanks so much for joining us.
- [47:42]
Dr. Christina Lambert
Thanks.
- [47:43]
Scott Bertram
That will wrap up this edition of the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour. Thanks to Molly Hemingway. Her book is out at the end of April. Alito and Christina Lambert from Hillsdale's English Department. Remember, you can hear new episodes every week on this station. You also can find extended versions of some of our interviews or listen anytime to the podcast. Find it at podcast hillsdale. Edu or wherever you get your audio. Until next week, I'm Scott Bertram, and this has been the Radio Free Hillsdale Hour.
- [48:22]
Dr. Christina Lambert
Sam.