And I thought you were Roberta..another issue entirely however tho I welcome having some sense of who I am talking to. I will think of you as Roberta Mach 2.

To feel stunned that you did not know about the podcast suggests to me - and I actually mean this nicely - that you have invested a lot into Stephen and your interest of him. So much so that you, probably subconsciously, felt he should have ensured you knew about the podcast - as one would say with a close friend. I suspect your reaction to this statement will be quick negation - you are wrong Susan P, of course I don’t expect him to personally tell me!

But, at an emotional level, is that really the case? I think it easy for us, no matter who we are, to form strong invisible connections with people we would genuinely love to know at a personal level. I have those tugs from time to time so I’m not speaking from a rarified realm.

I didn’t even know he had an apartment. He could live in Cadfael’s TV series hut for all I know. Accruing knowledge about a celeb or someone you admire is actually part of the need to have personal connection. Again, I do this from time to time and have to use the left hand to smack the right and say..no..get real! I also remind myself that any person has faults and flaws. I take the view (when I am in headspace and not emotion) that thinking deep down that someone is a desirable object - and close to perfect - is a burden on both of you. I certainly know that I have created discomfort in people when I have not treated them as an earthly human being. When I DO achieve the latter I feel them relax.

By the way, I am not that young and that was the first podcast I have ever downloaded and listened to. I have listened to some of my son’s but he had done the downloading work.

Stephen does have an incredible command of English. From time to time I have to reach for a dictionary. But the podcast was not perfect. There were times when i could not hear him. Now, ethnographically speaking, I liked that; it was true and credible. “Believability” is a criterion I look for. I quite like imperfections. But, from another angle entirely, it was a slight nuisance because I could have missed single words or phrases that were key to interpreting his meaning more closely to his intentions.

But, in reading many responses to the podcast, I was one of the few who heard the underlying enviro and other concerns. The vast majority of people heard only about his arm. If people are in the latter group, the missed words et al would perhaps not have been terribly noticed by them.

None of this affects or influences my view of Stephen because this was but one offering of many he has given. I enjoyed it, I like the lack of script. I liked learning more about what he says is important to him. But I would not deify him.

If I have offended you, I regret that, but blogging always, of course, opens channels to discourse and disagreement.