Comments on The Industrial Revolution

In the first of two programmes, Melvyn Bragg and his guests discuss the Industrial Revolution.

Programme information and audio

Comments

  • 30. At 10:03am on 23 Dec 2010, Dr Michael Eldred wrote:

    A lively controversial program! With three historians talking on the topic of the British Industrial Revolution, it is inevitable that the all-purpose washing line of time is used to hang out one or several narratives. One is interested in causes that have to be hung properly on the temporal line -- hence the controversy. Another perspective: without Aristotle who thought a fundamental thought about movement to which he gave the neologism _energeia_ (energy), there would not have been any IR, nor any modern science at all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 10:04am on 23 Dec 2010, lucylocket wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 32. At 10:05am on 23 Dec 2010, SkoobBooks wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 33. At 10:05am on 23 Dec 2010, pse001 wrote:

    No one is denying the contribution of other countries or people or the importance of economic conditions; but were Socratese, Plato and Aristotle just the result of Athen's an imperialistic, expansionist and slave owning society. My point about Newton was that it caused people to think of everything as being mechanistic, and consequently, everything could be done by machine. This idea, if not the book, inspired a generation of inventors, who were pretty great in my opinion too (and deserve some credit), at just the right time. PS I really enjoyed the program, partly because it was a bit out of the ordinary.

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 10:07am on 23 Dec 2010, Dr Michael Eldred wrote:

    A lively controversial program! With three historians talking on the topic of the British Industrial Revolution, it is inevitable that the all-purpose washing line of time is used to hang out one or several narratives. One is interested in causes that have to be hung properly on the temporal line -- hence the controversy. Another perspective: without Aristotle who thought a fundamental thought about movement to which he gave the neologism _energeia_ (energy), there would not have been any IR, nor any modern science at all.

    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 10:07am on 23 Dec 2010, Clive M-L wrote:

    I enjoyed this edition very much, as Mr. Bragg said/says "robust", it's nice to hear bright people argue and it was practically Chekhovian this morning.

    Complain about this comment

  • 36. At 10:15am on 23 Dec 2010, lucylocket wrote:

    I enjoyed the program, but would have prefered the lady guest to allow others to have a fair share of the time allotted.

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 10:16am on 23 Dec 2010, Mouth of the Umber wrote:

    The word 'genius' was mentioned, only a couple of times, but it was mentioned. In fact to paraphrase one small part a comment was made to suggest that the 'geniuses' of the Industrial Revolution didn't read books like Newton's Principia Mathematica.
    There were a lot of ingredients that needed to go into the IR, without one it would fail. Virtually all other aspects of the IR were examined in detail with the exception of these engineering geniuses who didn't read. So isn't this the clue? 'Hands On' engineers who who weren't restricted by previous thought. 'Hands On engineers/inventors who have creativity, day-dreamers, who possibly have a vision of what the engineering future might hold, possibly engineers/inventors who can't read.
    Possibly engineers/inventors with dyslexia ! ! !
    I assume that nobody in the studio had dyslexia and I assume that virtually everybody in the studio has the same concept of dyslexia, word blindness. But there are many more facets to dyslexia, creativity is possibly one.
    Maybe this topic could be revisited, but with engineers who have dyslexia. And discuss how they would proceed in such circumstances.

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 10:18am on 23 Dec 2010, SkoobBooks wrote:

    Excellent discussion. Necessities of markets, nationalism, growth, imperialism, and realisation of scientific opportunities (both novel and borrowed) were the mothers of these inventions. I'm sure this debate will provoke lots of reading, including by the presenter... Job done...

    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 10:18am on 23 Dec 2010, NickTarrant wrote:

    Well! We know quite a bit about the context and conditions precedent for the Industrial Revolution to happen in the UK - but I don't feel much the wiser about the specific drivers (or indeed historical causes, as we used to call them). Since just about all the circumstances also obtained elsewhere, it seems to me that individuals, whether inventors or entrepreneurs - often Quakers - must have made the difference.
    Re Pat Hudson, I'm all for "robust" debate. But it used to be bad science, as well as bad manners, to let one's agenda show too blatantly.
    One question about the subject matter: I heard no reference to the enclosures of the mid/later 18th century. These must surely have had an impact, probably in more than one respect.

    Complain about this comment

  • 40. At 10:21am on 23 Dec 2010, glynisp wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 41. At 10:25am on 23 Dec 2010, susan hackney wrote:

    I was very interested in the views being put forward by Pat Hudson and was irritated by the way she was over ruled on so many new and challenging viewpoints. What a pity - because it was really opening my mind to new perspectives, particularly one coming from a more global view. Also a pity that Pat Hudson is being seen as the disrupter of debate - rather than the innovater of new lines of discussion.

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 10:29am on 23 Dec 2010, sallytottle wrote:

    Just to say that I will not be tuning in to episode 2 of your piece about the Industrial Revolution unless it is presented by someone who is open minded enough to listen to his guests and take on board their views and has some humility and good manners. We expect an adversarial style of debate when the presenters of the Today Programme are grilling a slippery politician, but not for a discussion programme involving academic experts. It made for an uncomfortable listen.

    Complain about this comment

  • 43. At 10:33am on 23 Dec 2010, Robert wrote:

    Melyn's constant interruptions and rudeness to the lady who was trying to explain her perspective was most unwelcome. Either the BBC dictate the history books or they listen attentively and learn from people who come in from the outside.

    I very much appreciated to hear the lady's input; a different perspective to the nationalistic one held by some.

    Complain about this comment

  • 44. At 10:34am on 23 Dec 2010, Malcolm Peltu wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 45. At 10:35am on 23 Dec 2010, paul wrote:

    Love her or Loathe her, Prof Pat has had an Effect.
    Brilliant!
    Yes, not the usual warming,intelleectual, thought-provoking and balanced programme, but certainly worthy of comment.

    Can you get her back on Melvyn, but on a different subject?
    Something where there's more of a historical level playing field, where the facts as we know them, as to the Origins of the Thing, are less documented and therefore wide open to interpretation.

    Perhaps on the History of the Invention of the Wheel?
    I'd love to hear her views and opinions on that and see her try to accuse you of racism again.

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

Podcasts

  1. Download every edition Download the podcast As well as the regular weekly podcast, you can now download past editions of the series via the new genre archives.

Newsletter

Melvyn Bragg

Melvyn Bragg's personal insight into the latest programme.

Read the newsletter

Melvyn Bragg

Read a profile of In Our Time's presenter

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.