PARIS 1
OTC50#50
PARIS YELLOW VEST PROTESTS (2018-2019)
PARIS NATURAL HISTORICAL SETTING FOR CHANGE
B
ravo. Incredible. Vive la France.
Paris in the very late summer presents as a wonderful place with a warm sky filled with a bright sun that lights centuries of history in a late evening golden glow.
Cars yes, stall along the ancient streets, and the resulting smog frequently shrouds the national monuments, but the city maintains a grand concourse for people that circumvents the urban madness.
The grand concourse that begins at the Louvre Museum and ends at the Arc de Triomphe was built in the time of kings and queens, leaving the foundations for the city to still sustain a vibrant metropolitan atmosphere along the Seine River.
People meander to and froe on a street level near museums and monuments, and also on a lower level inside the river canal along the shoreline where there is a multi-use trail and small green spaces for family, friends and lovers to picnic with open bottles of wine in celebration of another day within the splendid liberal society.
Paris maintains popularity partly because of the centuries of history dating back to King Charlemagne. Charlemagne was one of the great kings uniting western Europe during the eighth century for the first time since the Roman Empire.
Despite Paris being built out and redeveloped several times since the time of Charlemagne, the great king’s presence seems everywhere within the history of Paris, with the lavish investments in the people that has left a luxury of space and time in a very busy city.
History yes, but also the presence of the art developed in Paris that has provided a foundation for popular culture still today. The collective consciousness cannot have popular culture without the impressionists and post-impressionist painters having used Paris as a place of innovation over one hundred years ago.
The city government has respect for the people of Paris. The metro and supporting transportation systems, such as the regional trains and the trams have been installed in a manner that considers the importance of time to residents and visitors alike.
Parisians seem happy – perhaps having resigned themselves a long time ago that Paris is an international city with open doors to the world ever since the medieval wall protecting Paris from mass urban migration was opened to allow unrestricted access.
Parisians also seem proud of living and working in Paris, while maintaining dignity because time is not so cheated away from them by an inefficient transportation system. Time is everywhere in the art and historic buildings converted into galleries for the many masterpieces created in Paris and as a result of some connection to Paris. Freedom is everywhere else in the grand public spaces.
Paris has been experiencing a bit of turmoil with strikes and protests spiraling out of control.
Ultimately, the riots are a result of a great betrayal of the working class by the middle class and by the monied class.
The French Revolution occurred because of a similar betrayal on a much more entrenched level. The intellectuals within the middle class finally organized against a monarchy that squandered the nation’s wealth on pastry, opulent palaces and war, while the workers barely found a potato for nourishment.
The ultra rich have always been arrogant buggers, particularly those benefitting from old money inherited from a grandfather and so on down the line of wealthy ancestors, like the European monarchs before democracy, doting about here and there as if they were the god chosen ones.
One can almost envision that the city had been created by them for them and not the peasantry washing laundry and tending to the stables.
The philanthropic efforts of the ultra rich attract criticism in modern times because the amount of return to the community has often been too little too slowly and, in many cases, quite too late. This state of wealth has not changed much since the king resided at the Palace of Versailles.
The Treaty of Versailles signed by the warring parties in the Great First World War, that was fought mainly on French soil, collapsed the world order because this same human frailty was embedded in the armistice signed in the Greta Hall of Mirrors one hundred years ago on November 11, 1919.
The victors demanded so much compensation, and treated the defeated so poorly, that only time stood between peace and a second world war when the losers eventually regained individual and community dignity through vengeance.
Paris has also contributed to intellectual thought in those years, just as popular art found innovation from the painters and sculptures meeting and working along the Seine, the great thinkers of our times have quite often come from Paris.
The philosophical approach to life of many people, whether they know why or when, roots in existentialism, which was popularized during the Second World War by the writings of Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus. The popular philosophers wrote for rival newspapers in Paris. Sartre and Camus would win the Nobel Prize of literature, arguably Camus first, particularly for his book the Rebel, and then Sartre seemingly much later, really so much later as to be a bit too late.
Sartre declined the Nobel Prize, taking a slightly tenable position about not wanting to be institutionalized.
Sartre’s argument was one argument few people other than the French would appreciate. Sartre insisted on being a free thinker, stating that accepting the literary prize would mean he would everafter be writing for the Nobel Prize Committee.
The French embraced nuclear power. Nearly the entire country runs on the electricity generated by nuclear fuel that lights the lightbulbs and heats the offices and homes standing strong on that same free thinking individual philosophy. Electricity also powers an extensive rail transportation system laid out in such a manner as to provide seamless travel within the metropolitan area.
Paris has less pollution from vehicle emissions as a result, but quite obviously the amount of people using the trains would not have been able to travel with any great clarity without the metro. Parisians would likely have revolted in such circumstances, a very long time ago.
Parisians like their pastries as well. In a way, the sweet cakes and other assortments of pastries accent a distinctly French pragmatism by circumventing the sugar binges that persuade consumers to purchase food and drink in which the level of sugar is sometimes beyond natural consumption levels and otherwise unknown, such as in soft drinks.
Similarly to French wine, an alcoholic drink is not an alcoholic drink, but instead no different than having a glass of milk.
The French version of pragmatism has not really saved the individual and community from conflict, though.
The richness of the upper classes is not the issue, but the greed, and the exclusion of the other classes, and the waste, while other people obviously do with much less, and often barely survive with insufficient means.
The economy does not need to shift to socialism or even a mixed economy, although those economic philosophies are not necessarily absent, but the movie star attitude and rock star lifestyles should be left for the movie stars and the rock stars. When you analyze in percentages against the entire global population, very few true movie stars and very few real rock stars exist and make a living at entertaining everyone else.
Popular culture in essence has become a social vehicle made for the stars and for people to at least hope to join the stars.
Still only a few entertainment people manage to sustain a presence because of their instant wide appeal that often cannot be quantified. Movie stars are ultimately paid for that product and if they were not paid so much, the movie mogul and production studios would take the money anyway.
Film production has always been a financially risky endeavor.
The Paris riots, as seen from afar, discounting the hooliganism from various violent marginalized factions, were about the living wage. Protesters were from a class of French society, resigned to being wage earners, who merely want to be able to live on the wage they work so hard to accrue.
That predicament of financial disparity is a substantial dilemma for society to resolve in a time and space within history of obvious luxury.
Eventually people come to an impasse, where no way forward seems apparent and no turning back is possible without great disappointment. This unacceptable position compels people into action.
People will for the longest time muster their way to work through the long commuting hours, tolerate substantially lower wages so as to maintain employment, do with less while other people obviously have substantially more beyond merely sustaining themselves, but eventually everything comes to a grinding, often violent halt.
Sartre advocated for total involvement. Only the person who chooses total involvement becomes a hero.
People must choose, and thereby act by so choosing.
Paris is the star. And Parisians working in the world capital seem proud to have that significant presence on the world stage, quite happily resigned to that star status.
Street protests have a new profound impact on the world stage with social media reports forcing corporate news organization to pay attention to a cause where once a publisher might have been pressured to pull the copy from the morning edition.
People are protesting in greater numbers more frequently, perhaps because word of the disenchantment with the status quo is gaining wider publication on social media.
The impact is not all pop. The world should once again pay attention to Paris.
Parisians have hit upon a cause that resonates throughout an increasingly smaller world order with technology contracting space and extending time.
The deepening class divide has created a working poor servicing luxury, essentially luxury and poverty simultaneously present like utopia and dystopia inside the same fantastical dream for humanity to sort out one more time.
The Parisian dissatisfaction for the present state of humanity has moved beyond impatience for the slow pace of change, and may yet take hold around the world, although perhaps in other intellectual forms and under other political banners for slightly different reasons.
TITAN #1
TECHNOLOGICAL AGE LITTERED WITH IMPERIAL TITANS DRIVEN FOR MORE
OTC50 #77 January 6, 2022
T
he world marketplace has become ruled by more than just eCommerce barons. The global economy is run by oligarchs, capitalists, innovators and outright no holds bar imperialists, and sometimes heads of state.
These over achievers seldom set aside economics and wealth accumulation to run for political office, but once in a while, an unabashed capitalist successfully wins the leadership of the democratic world order.
United States President Joe Biden is a career politician, but his knowledge of the ins and outs of Washington have not carried him all that far during the first year of his four-year Presidency. Biden had finished second place to several democratic and republican Presidencies for most of his life until finding a way to win the ultimate political victory at the last possible moment in his political career.
Biden was born in Scranton, Pennsylvania on November 20, 1942. Wikipedia seems uninterested in Biden having been born on that day, though. Instead, British Forces having captured Benghazi on that day during World War II seems more noteworthy, as was the Russians having the German Army surrounded at Stalingrad. Casablanca, starring Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman, premiered four days later, but still no one noticed that the Mayor of Scranton added one newborn citizen to the city population highway sign.
Scranton had a population of 9,223 just prior to the American Civil War in 1860. Pennsylvania’s coal and textile industries attracted families to the North from the cotton plantations in the South. And as a result, the population of Scranton had swelled to 140,404 by 1940. But the population of Scranton has been in a precipitous decline since Biden was born, falling in numbers each decade until only 76,328 people were living in Scranton as of 2020.
Just as Former United States President Donald Trump found out, the President is not the only American swaying the power balance. For starters, the American people had the good sense to set term limits for the president at two: leaving just one for now and maybe, just maybe, one for later. But the public marketplace allows the overachieving American capitalist to stay around a lot longer than that.
Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard and began developing personal computers when Jimmy Carter was President.
I wouldn’t mess with Bill Gates, even now that he has retired, because Gates talks with the swagger that suggests his word is golden, otherwise his rich father will come down and have a talk with your not so rich parents.
Gates and Microsoft earned their stature by innovating something valuable for the new world order.
Gates and cofounder, Paul Allen, had been determined to unify the world under one banner during the golden age of computing.
The technology age was developed in fits and starts and bits and pieces, and by people working out of the garage (the required workspace for a Silicon Valley start-up) but eventually most small start-ups were gobbled up by the surviving magistrates of eCommerce, so much so that the European Union had to take measures against the monopoly.
Microsoft had brought the world so far, but Gates and Allen had global domination in mind. The European Union forced Microsoft to accept competing software for Microsoft operating systems, including competing Internet browsers.
If you had all the economic influencers in one room, you could divide them up into categories, like rich kids innovating being in one group, and entrepreneurs successfully completing a rags to riches story being in a second group, and investors becoming rich by applying the eCommerce innovations invented by others to a business model, and then just being so determined to succeed within a third group.
Jeff Bezos of Amazon kind of liked the whole idea of on-line shopping and simply decided to keep getting bigger until book sales exceeded those of the reigning retail book seller. Amazon then expanded into an on-line marketplace for everything as the technology age found more ways to replace the conventional marketplace formed out of the industrial age.
That need to control the market by constantly increasing the scope and breadth of the business differentiates the richest people in the world from business owners’ content to provide for the existing demand in a distinct neighborhood.
Richard Branson of Virgin was not content with a record store, and he eventually moved to producing recording artists with his own record label. But Branson wanted even more.
The world had already created celebrity out of Thomas Edison, Henry Ford and Albert Einstein, before Branson became the first ‘rock star imperialists’. Branson was doing business like he was on stage performing in public to bigger and bigger crowds, as he went from music to commercial airlines to telecommunications and then eventually to space.
Ford invested in the new world imperialism after rationalizing that a truck would be cheaper for consumers without all the added shipping costs. So Ford constructed vehicle assembly plants within separate international markets. France got a Ford manufacturing plant for assembly of vehicles sold to the French, as did Canada for assembling cars for Canadians.
Ford’s individual imperialism not only created great wealth, but he amassed great influence with his economic power. Ford didn’t need to conquer Brazil to undertake a rubber plantation. Ford merely needed to use his great wealth to purchase land on which to develop one.
Ford expanded within the automotive industry, eventually creating a vertical market that had Ford automobiles assembled with Ford parts, right down to the rubber for the rubber tires. But Ford stayed with what he knew, so much so that he resisted the need to design and build a new model to replace the aging Model-T.
When Charles Lindbergh flew the Spirit of St. Louis across the Atlantic on May 21, 1927, the world became a much smaller place for everyone, including for the captains of industry. Wikipedia points out though that Lindbergh was not the first to fly across the Atlantic, just the first to get the job done solo.
In this sense globalization is not a new concept, but an economic one that began with exploration and adventure, such as when the Venetian merchant Marco Polo travelled the Silk Road to China in search of a new mercantile exchange from 1271 to 1295.
Even earlier, the Vikings, and the Romans before them, travelled beyond their communities for plunder. And the Tribes of Abraham salso tarted to explore the lands around their homes many years after Adam and Eve were tossed from the Garden of Eden, which was located somewhere, or so the story goes, in Iraq.
The Greeks had conquered, plundered, and traded along the Mediterranean before the British merchants established the East India Company after seizing control of large swaths of land in the Indian subcontinent.
The company conquered and set up shop as if governing as a state. The Hudson Bay Company had operated the same way in North America, setting up and running trap lines for the fur trade as the British troops arrived. This concept of company rule eventually seeded to empire as the troops rolled in off the ships to institute law and order in the wildernesses.
But with empire eventually came rebellion, and the Great War and World War II were one of the last few formal attempts to sustain global empires for trading economies as more nations developed into distinct entities associated with land borders. The world shifted to individual national identities after 100 million war dead in just 30 years, as old empires fell asunder into a horrible deconstruction.
Empire gave way to the concept of Superpower and a central system of economics and governance influencing distinct cultural and linguistic entities in places beyond their borders to the point that the world was almost broadly divided into two: between capitalist democracies and communist dictatorships, and nary every variation in between.
But the corporations, and their capitalists leading them relentlessly onward, held on to power. Of course, the transitions were not so simple, with many states being formed only as a result of military conflict. The United States of America expanded territory from the Eastern seaboard to the west coast by fighting the indigenous populations, and then by turning south to fight the Spanish and Mexicans for the southern border.
The British, French, Russians and Spanish had all settled swaths of lands in the new world, but what they had was decidedly insufficient for their needs, eventually resulting in wars within North America for final domination.
America formed from a successful rebellion against British Rule, and the British retreated north of the 49th Parallel, which eventually became Canada within the British Empire. The French held onto Louisiana. And Bourbon Street has been a party zone ever since. The Russians owned Alaska as part of an ancient lost land bridge to Moscow.
America, still not content with what they had, kept fighting, plundering, and when they could not steal anymore, outright purchased Louisiana and Alaska under the unified central authority of the revolution, like a reigning heavyweight MMA fighter, accumulating more and more title to land.
Make no mistake though, the wealthy aristocracy became the architects of the American constitution in America, and the independence from empire was hard fought for over many years, in the same way the rich kids from Seattle and Silicon Valley created the blue print for the technology age.
Benjamin Franklin bestowed not just an intellect, but also an attitude on the new nation that has left a blueprint for the economic titans of the 21st century.
Franklin left a potent recipe of hard work, celebrity and wealth accumulation leading to expansion for an elite class of capitalists to replicate, whether they recognize the influence as such or not.
In many instances, celebrity comes first, then wealth and influence, and then, with a lot of hard work and gritty determination, a business empire.
Celebrity is so influential that true celebrities often use their brand to generate further wealth separate and apart from what made them so famous in the first instance. Celebrity can itself be an end, with the popularity of the image developed on social media as a result of nothing else other than the image, eventually selling other products with that image like supermodels walking the catwalk wearing the season’s designs from the most popular and influential fashion houses.
Celebrity can be a powerful ally to innovation, providing the pivotal component in convincing people of the likely success of further expansion when industry might otherwise hesitate to accept change. Elon Musk of Tesla transitioned from electric cars for individuals to the hyper loop for public transit to the Falcon 9 for space travel, all the while maintaining momentum with a carefully crafted celebrity status.
The market resisted the brash talk of fantastical change tweeted by Musk, but innovation, celebrity and relentless hard work eventually sold the brand on government and the people.
This entrepreneurial attitude with star status forms the basis of a transnational class of executive types that dream of all things big within their sphere of influence, wherever located. Far from the innovators that have died poor, such as Nicola Tesla, this modern imperialist accumulates wealth and influence in an ever widening, global scope.
To boot, the rock star CEOs and the never ending talk of unlimited change, attracts the brightest up starts from around the world to work for the titans and share the wealth. Everything else just accelerates exponentially ever after.
Small shops often get absorbed in a wave of unified innovation in a competition to be bigger and better and more influential than the nearest competitor. Global domination like that achieved by rock stars is often the only successful end for an imperialist.
American imperialists even compete for a bigger and a brighter piece of stardom. Andy Warhol’s 15 minutes of fame was meant for everyone, but the time slot in history has proven insufficient time and time again for the global titans.
Everyone wanted a bit of what Elvis had. Elvis was the King of Rock and Roll, while the wizkids of the technology age sought to attain the global influence of emperors.
Larry Ellison of Oracle designed data software for large corporations. But in the end, getting more media attention than Paul Allan of Microsoft was just as important to the rock star capitalist. In an era dominated by popular culture, the billionaires fought to maintain a historical footprint, just as much as the musicians and the movie stars did.
The titans did not just come by their wealth one day, nor is the money old money passed down from previous generations. A certain entrepreneurial aggressiveness created success on the scale of the titans of the technology age.
Walt Disney made his way to California, from the same Chicago as Ernest Hemmingway and Frank Lloyd Wright, to found Disney in 1923, after working as an animator for other Hollywood studios.
Disney turned Mickey Mouse into a celebrity, and that celebrity status transposed onto Disney while he worked relentlessly hard to create the media empire that exists today.
Former Disney CEO Bob Iger found himself in line for the flagship enterprise after Disney bought ABC where he was working. Iger began as a television studio supervisor at ABC. When Disney bought ABC, then Pixar, Marvel and Lucas Films, Iger became more of a celebrity than Mickey Mouse and Han Solo.
In the same way that Iger became part of the Disney empire, Musk became part of Tesla and superimposed himself onto the image of this quirky electrical engineer that might be able to save the planet from the fossil fuel driven internal combustion engine.
Iger and Musk also have in common the pursuit of perfection. That attitude brought Disney into the digital age with a streaming service for original content. That same attitude took Tesla to the forefront of the electric vehicle age, and eventually into space with SpaceX.
The new imperialists discovered that perfection and hard work found success with universally appealing products. Bezos sold India on an eCommerce platform because the technology operated to the simultaneous benefit of merchants in India and consumers in America.
The large ABC broadcasting corporation and the iconic Disney studio and theme park system refused to accept mediocrity. Ultimately the cultural imperialist entertained, but then also accumulated products and expanded into associated acts.
Lucas Films adopted a similar motif, making entertaining films, but spinning off cultural products and merchandise not necessarily for market domination, but nonetheless accumulating influence and wealth along the way.
Iger getting Disney to purchase Lucas films was apropos a business model begun by Disney from the Burbank, California animation studios. Disney created a more complete entertainment experience that would create memories passed down from one generation to the next through merchandising and commodifying the studios own cultural products for an overall, bigger market share.
The Ride of a Lifetime, by Robert Iger, New York, Random House, 2019.
ICONIC MOVIES
ACTOR CHANGED THE WAY THE CAMERA LOOKS AT WOMEN
A
ctors are often only as good as the film production, and when the role of a lifetime comes along, the chance that only comes but once is not to be squandered.
Isabelle Adjani delivered one of the greatest performances in world cinema when she portrayed an aspiring sculpture competing with her mentor, Auguste Rodin.
Camille Claudel (1998) directed by Bruno Nuytten, co-stars Gerard Depardieu as the famous sculptor Rodin. Rodin hires Claudel to work on a government commission and the two predictably, inevitably fall in love.
Claudel develops her own style and seeks critical acclaim by exhibiting her work in the Paris salons.
Nuytten gradually builds tension on screen with the developing lead characters falling victim to all the emotions of love, including jealousy, suspicion and rage.
The narrative twists and turns putting Adjani to the test of performing several emotions of the complicated biopic character, from steeling sculpting clay from a civil works trench in the middle of the night to fits of disappointment when she discovers that Rodin has other mistresses ahead of her in his sphere of influence.
Adjani also shows how Claudel had unconditional love for her famous poet brother, Paul Claudel.
Claudel is a young aspiring genius, but her relationship with Rodin becomes her greatest undoing as artistic rivalries initially sever the relationship and then plunge her into madness when she does not receive similar critical acclaim that she so deserves.
The beautiful young talented Adjani portrays her character as an unconventional female artist in the misogyny riddled Parisian arts community. But then, Claudel becomes a frantic tired failure when she becomes marginalized in a life she attempted to etch out for herself after life with Rodin.
Adjani was nominated for the Best Actor Oscar, losing to Jessica Tandy for Driving Miss Daisy. Camille Claudel was nominated for Best Foreign Film, losing to the Italian nominee, Cinema Paradiso.
Like many foreign actors, Hollywood was not kind to Adjani. And she decidedly stayed performing outstanding characters within French Cinema.
Several French actors have made the transition to Hollywood since then, including Marion Cotillard and Lea Seydoux, but other French stars remain primarily involved in French cinema. Cotillard won the Oscar for Best Actor for her performance in the French biopic film about singer Edith Piaf, in La mome (2007). Cotillard was also cast in the crime drama Public Enemies (2009) as the mistress of prohibition era gangster John Dillinger. Cotillard was then cast as the wealthy philanthropist in the Batman franchise film, The Dark Knight Rises (2012).
Seydoux was cast in roles in the blockbuster Mission Impossible franchise film, Ghost Protocol (2011) and the James Bond franchise films Spectre (2015) and No Time to Die (2021).
Adjani had initially been cast in the French counterculture film, Subway (1985) about life as a thief living in the Paris subway. Adjani’s character has her purse stolen and spends the film tracking down the culprit in the Paris subway service tunnels.
Subway is a Luc Besson film, co-starring Christopher Lambert and Jean Reno. Besson is best known for the film, The Fifth Element (2000) starring Bruce Willis and Milla Jovovich, and for the film, Leon (1994), also starring Jean Reno. Reno’s costar is child actor, Natalie Portman. Portman went on to portray Padme, in the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy.
Adjani is one of France’s most highly regarded actors, winning five Cesars, the French equivalent of the Oscars, and receiving four other Cesar nominations.
French cinema fussed politics and history until about 1968.
Filmmakers then took on shaping female sexuality in popular culture beginning with the sexualization of mainstream media content by introducing soft porn such as Emmanuelle (1974) starring Sylvia Kristel. These films served the male gaze and the objectification of the female body.
The cinematic camera often fragmented the female body and thereby further objectified femininity. A female actress was highly regarded for long sexy legs. And the camera would focus on this aspect of the actor rather than on the artistic performance as a whole.
Adjani portrays female sexuality in her performance of a young femme fatale in L’ ete meurtrier (1983). A young woman wonders into a small French town and seduces a mechanic. Adjani appears several times throughout the film as the personification of a statue of the Goddess of Love.
The female lead is presented as the icon of female beauty, but the audience soon learns how the myth is a false one. Adjani personifies the perfect goddess as well as flawed humanity in the film.
Adjani incrementally sheds this objectification as her career develops in parallel with French cinema. The role in Subway illustrates a perplexing place for women in society. She is married to a rich important man but then falls in love with the poor thief who stole her purse with her husband’s important papers inside.
The female character cannot win, stuck between the two social-economic classes. Adjani’s performance is a prequel to her role as Camille Claudel in that the female struggle for equality becomes symbolized in her desperate search for the thief so as to appease her husband with the return of the papers.
Adjani becomes involved in historical films to move away from roles in which filmmakers exploit her female image by making her beauty and the female body a spectacle.
The historical genre includes films that contrast happiness with despair while Camille Claudel (1988) was also part of a feminist reassessment of female representation in French culture. (Austin p. 168).
Historical filmmakers used realism and often framed the face to show real human suffering. Audiences where therefore made to pay less attention to the woman as a sexual object than a person enduring real human suffering.
The female audience then begins to identify more with Adjani’s portrayal of women of limited means and little ability to overcome substantial barriers to society. Claudel is initially missing from the film, because of her ‘foolish’ pursuit for sculpting clay. And Claudel’s conventional mother is her loudest critic, while her father supports her by sneaking money to her for her studio and modeling fees.
The totality of the character created by Adjani is that the young woman in the civil works trench is a troubled woman seeking to overcome the many barriers to gender equality ever present in society.
Adjani’s performances gradually carry French cinema away from the depiction of women as an object and sex symbol, such as Brigitte Bardot a generation earlier. The camera objectified and fragmented Bardot’s body by focusing on her long legs and generous curves rather than the emotive character silently making difficult life decisions.
The camera still notices Adjani’s beauty but the focus is on her inner emotions, particularly her hopes and dreams and how she suffers when the gender barriers in society prevent her from realizing the hoped for happiness that compels her.
Contemporary French Cinema, 2nd Edition, Guy Austin, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2008.
