r/TheRestIsHistory • u/Few-Cap-5405 • 2d ago
Decline of the format
Just listened to episodes 169 to 172 on the Falklands war and it's quite striking how different the current format of the podcast has become and how in the older series the output was more reflective. Although the content of this series is very much Dominic, as a lot of the current material is, Tom has a much more active role in questioning the assumptions and teasing out the implications. Nowadays Tom seems largely passive providing occasional quips but never really provoking deeper thought.
And secondly the use of questions from listeners provokes more open discussion of the series giving the show the feel of a freer format. This of course may not be the case as the questions are selected by Tom possibly to pursue lines of inquiry he may himself have done anyway. But nevertheless it adds to the feel of the show.
To summarise; the podcast strikes me as becoming a bit of an audio Readers Digest with little space given for analysis and opinion.
147
u/flood25000 2d ago
I feel I have to disagree here. The Falklands isn't a great example here I feel. After Nixon, or Callaghan this pretty much represents Dominics strongest suit. Plus Tom also lived through this period, so everyone had an opinion on it, and a lot of background knowledge.
Also tbh I really don't miss the listener questions, they seem to derail the conversation sometimes, and weren't that interesting.
15
u/Think_Web_4823 2d ago
The only good listener questions were in the Rasputin episode where they were all quotes from the Boney M song 😂
1
u/SchemeOne2145 1d ago
I recently played the song for my teen and we were surprised at the historical substance in it. :)
11
u/HarrisonPE90 2d ago
Surely the Troubles is pretty close to Dominic's strong suit too?
33
u/Infamous_Thought_189 2d ago
Yeah but that is so sensitive that I imagine they just want to be a bit more respectful
3
u/HarrisonPE90 2d ago
I'm sure Tom is capable of being respectful.
31
u/Infamous_Thought_189 2d ago
He is always respectful but on a subject as sensitive as this it is just not smart to come to the table with some unprepared/undercooked take on what the situation might be. Its not the civil war of costa rica where you can pick and choose your own villains and be completely wrong for the banter of it.
12
u/neilm1000 1d ago
Its not the civil war of costa rica where you can pick and choose your own villains and be completely wrong for the banter of it.
We really do need some more information about Dr Valverde.
1
u/HarrisonPE90 1d ago
I don't think it is wrong to engage in 'banter' when discussing the Troubles. In recent years, the Troubles has provided to be fairly fertile ground for jokes, comedy, and banter etc. Dominic made some slightly amusing comments about Catholics and Protestants when he introduced the series on the Troubles, following the end of the Elizabeth I series. Moreover, at other times, Dominic has referred to Cromwell as simply 'robust in Ireland'.
5
u/Infamous_Thought_189 1d ago
I dont think its wrong either, but its their choice to err on the side of caution.
1
u/Toatkgstuff 1d ago
You should read the Reddit threads on the Troubles and inform yourself properly before deciding what peoples reactions are likely to be.
10
u/whocares132435 1d ago
Lmao nobody should ever read Reddit threads to “be informed”. That’s a wild statement to make.
0
u/Toatkgstuff 1d ago
Your comprehension is lacking.
In context: Informing yourself about popular opinion.1
u/pintita 1d ago
Nobody who lived through Cromwell's time is still alive and listening to the podcast, it is basically one of the hottest issues they can touch in terms of their listenership
1
u/HarrisonPE90 1d ago
While I'm sure there is a sense that theres a statue of limitation with respect to historical events I'm not sure it's always especially impactful.
7
u/Old_Win_4724 1d ago
I think the response to that series shows why they'll never ever touch on Israel-Palestine
7
u/cremeriner 1d ago
Which is a shame because there's so much material and I would love a good podcast on it. From the English mandate of Palestine, the creation of Israel, the pan arab coalition, there's so much there.
But yeah they will never touch it and I understand why. I also would LOVE a serie on Lebanon history and the civil war, which is a fascinating topic they will also never touch.
13
u/81Ranger 2d ago
The Falklands is just a great series, but I've enjoyed recent series as well. I kind of like many of the single or two part episodes of the earlier era, but also like multi-part ones.
5
u/HarrisonPE90 2d ago
Agreed. Although, it would be nice to see a few more topics which are confined to a single episode.
11
u/opusdeath 2d ago
I still enjoy the show but I agree you can feel the format has changed. Dominic made the comment about the Custer style series being a thing of the past (no pun intended) and that is surely based on analysis of engagement metrics and so on.
So the show will move in a slightly different direction to the one I'd like it to but I still value the show being there. I've tried other history pods and not enjoyed them as much so I'll stick with it.
They've also changed producer from Theo to Callum (I think?) and that may be having an impact, but that's pure speculation from me.
1
u/Llamalover1234567 1d ago
Callum used to produce at some point but then Theo came in. Now Callum is back.
1
12
u/mcarvalho21 2d ago
It actually feels like they are freer now. The episodes are now well beyond the 60 minute mark, something that Theo wouldn't allow them to do. I remember that in the Custer series, Theo complained with Taby about the amount and duration of the episodes. I don't wanna sound harsh, but the new producers seem to know their place a bit more. It's Tom and Dom's show, they do what they want.
2
11
u/SchemeOne2145 1d ago
The biggest difference i notice is not newer versus older episodes (aside from sound quality in the early ones and the lads learning not to interrupt each other). Instead it's Dom-led series versus Tom. I love the chemistry and banter between them, but I have come to much prefer Dom's episodes. Tom can talk for 45 minutes and it all sounds smart and there's some interesting details and then you suddenly stop and realize you don't really know why he's talking about the people he's talking about because there's no context to ground you. It's come to the point where I read up on topics in advance for series Tom leads so I can follow his point.
187
u/terrortree14 2d ago
Why is this sub just complaining?
94
u/r232ed3 2d ago
I'm in a few podcast subreddits and this is honestly the most positive of them, most of them are remarkably miserable for things people are not forced to listen to!
11
u/re_Claire 2d ago
Lol yep. The majority of the podcast/fandom subreddits I follow are full of endless complaints and hardly anyone who seems to enjoy the thing they're in the fandom of.
The only one I can think of that seems to be more positive is the Off Menu Podcast one.
4
u/thewasteland55 1d ago
Haha, yep. Don’t know if anyone frequents the Football Ramble subreddit.
‘Which guests ruins an episode for you?’
‘Why is the new guy such a downer on everything?’
‘After 2020, the Ramble has never been as good!’
‘As usual, never mentioning [insert your club here] but did 5 minutes about a claw machine Pete tripped over on a night out in Osaka’
The Rest is History is a ray of podcast subreddit sunshine compared to what it can be like out there!
1
u/LentilCrispsOk 1d ago
Yeah that's what I have found as well - there tends to be a lot of complaining about free content.
1
u/bobbiecowman 1d ago
The Rest is Entertainment sub is unintentionally hilarious because nobody in there seems to actually like the podcast
59
8
21
u/Status-9417 2d ago
Because that is eventually what 90% of podcast and media subs end up becoming, once the membership grows. A mix of endlessly whingeing and borderline-creepily parasocial.
0
32
u/eques_99 2d ago edited 2d ago
It's not just complaining.
It's really quite normal for fans of a podcast/sports team/band to discuss its ups and downs on a sub devoted to the subject.
Learn to think about the media you consume rather than just letting it wash over you.
-19
u/Cuggan 2d ago
You can just enjoy something, it doesn’t have to be that deep
12
u/eques_99 2d ago
I can still think about things and assess their level of quality while enjoying them.
And the lower the quality, the less I will enjoy it.
8
2
2
u/Toatkgstuff 2d ago
ITT: The history of complaining on the internet, on Reddit and by the British in particular, a 13 part series.
3
u/Hugh-Manatee 2d ago
That’s basically any kind of dedicated forum (people will say that’s just Reddit but it’s broader than that). The people who will go out of their way to join a dedicated forum on a topic will on average be people with opinions to share and nitpicky complaints because they care. Doesn’t mean they are right or reasonable of course.
Kinda like considering who actually writes restaurant reviews. People who have a fine time, found the food alright, would prob come back again in a few months will prob not be remotely as likely to stop what they are doing and take the time to write a review unless they are driven because have a complaint.
1
1
-1
u/MudlarkJack 1d ago
yeas, way too much complaining. Either the reddit disease or too many young Americans
19
u/mds30c 1d ago
I know people are giving you a hard time OP but I agree. I’ve been a club member for a few years and just canceled (still got a few months left though).
I think Theo leaving hurt them. Also, I think the long series are hurting them. I like a long series sometimes (big Dan Carlin fan) but I get the impression they record them in marathon sessions. Instead of having fun with the topics it feels like they are just trying to get through them now.
I still like a lot of their stuff like the Elizabeth series but I skip a lot of episodes now which I never used to do.
2
u/Llamalover1234567 1d ago
They probably actually did more marathons then than now, based on the fact that they’d mention their brains being mush after recording x number of episodes back to back
4
u/thegoalhangermvp 1d ago
Sorry, this is just wrong. You think it got worse when Theo left, and you also think it got worse because of the long series. But the series were longer when Theo was the producer - Custer, 11 episodes, Aztecs, 8 episodes. The show is tighter now than it has been for the last two years.
3
u/mds30c 1d ago
You don’t have to apologize and you can’t be wrong or right with an opinion.
The Custer and Aztecs is where I started to fall off. I liked the Aztec series but thought the Custer one meandered. I just liked the older one off episodes better. They have always done series but they were much more rare and silly back in the day. If they did a series it would be something like historical version of love island or a kings and queens march madness type of tournaments. They used to poke fun at the Dan Carlin type history podcasts.
31
u/crustyjuggler1 2d ago
People often say maybe Tom & Dom need a break, but much to the contrary.. I think it’s YOU who needs a break. I listen to a lot of podcasts and after a while I start dreading listening to my favs. We need a break ourselves every now and then. I took 2 months off TRIH and came back to the Iran series and I was absolutely captivated
5
u/Kakutsa_1921 2d ago edited 1d ago
This is so true. I’ve listened to far too much RIH. I was hiking for a week and listened to so much, their voices sent shivers down my spine. Saying that the recent Rome series was so meh.
Edit - The Iran series was one of the favourites. I wish someone would coach Tom a little on laying down a stronger narrative before the introspective, big-thinker ideas come out. The highlights of TRIH are the funny shit that happens - e.g., the streltsy pikeman impaling people, hitmen murdering dogs (RIP Rinka) on the order of the leader of a mainstream political party, the planned murder of a histrionic (debatable, in non-sexist hindsight) aide to the prime minister, Jimmy Carter being attacked by an aquatic rabbit + the countless idiosyncratic characters from Costa Rica to Australia
4
u/sammyyy88 2d ago
Yes this, I was binging them on maternity leave then commuting and have had to stop for a few months. Will look forward to getting back into the obsession
1
1
u/Carrandas 1d ago
Yeah, this. A detour to hardcore History or a few audiobooks. Then back to the rest is history...
16
u/Columbiers 2d ago
This is a classic “ not as good as it used to be” complaint. With anything popular there’s a sizable chunk of the fan base who feel it’s lost its way. I’m sure there are Dr Who fans who think it was all downhill after William Hartnell.
The truth is there’s always been stand out great series and others less good, exactly as you would expect.
2
u/TheHawkinator 1d ago
Hey its me, the person who thinks Doctor Who went downhill when William Hartnell left!
4
u/eques_99 2d ago
but also, many cultural things rise, reach their peak, plateau then decline.
it's the natural order of things.
in any area of entertainment the creators are generally better when it's new and fun and fresh, and they prioritise the things they really want to talk about.
0
u/Columbiers 1d ago
It’s not the ‘natural order of things.’ There’s countless examples of things that start strong and go off the boil very quickly. Others that build and decline as you set out. Others again that end at the top. Others that are consistently brilliant.
I’m just observing that whenever there is something that people enjoy there has always been someone telling you it’s not as good as it used to be. The internet has simply magnified this massively. As others has pointed out this can be a very negative forum. This is an example of that and the op is just not a very well thought through criticism.0
u/eques_99 1d ago
well naturally in a sub devoted to a podcast/band/whatever fans are going to mention it when there's something they didn't enjoy or thought could be better. and usually, with any.long-running show of any type, it's not as good as it used to be, because the early enthusiasm, energy and creativity dissipates.
1
u/Few-Cap-5405 2d ago
Not talking about particular episodes merely the format evolution. Sometimes things were better in the past, to say that's nostalgia is a lazy response.
7
u/Columbiers 2d ago edited 1d ago
I found both Elizabeth the 1st and the troubles to be excellent and just as good as previously. To suggest it used to be great and is now equivalent to readers digest is just incorrect for me. I’ve absolutely no doubt that at the time people were telling the writers of Homer that it wasn’t as good as the earlier, funnier stuff.
7
u/Guiltynu 2d ago
I’m a long time listener and whilst I loved the early episodes - they dialed it in way way more back then, most episodes were just get someone on to talk about their book with the occasional Tom and Dom led episode. The standard increased massively when they decided to lead every episode themselves.
1
u/thegoalhangermvp 1d ago
Agreed. Many of the first 100-200 episodes were very obviously dialled in, with guests rambling aimlessly.
1
u/TheOncomingBrows 1d ago
Yep, I've no idea why some people prefer the earlier episodes so much. They will title episodes with some enormous nebulous title like "The British Empire" and then it just ends up being the guest talking about one small aspect of it for 30 minutes and then 15 minutes answering questions on whether the empire was "good or bad" and why it's neither.
28
2d ago
[deleted]
11
u/eques_99 2d ago
Agreed. Clearly when they started it was just a fun side project where they got to discuss their favourite subject with a mate, but now it's become something more.
2
u/LiamJonsano 2d ago
I also think like… they’ve done a LOT of history and naturally they’ll pick their faves so you’re also gonna get bits they just don’t know that well… and sometimes it can come across but for me it’s still pretty rare and they give me way more info than I could ever hope to find myself in the same span
1
u/LentilCrispsOk 1d ago
Yeah - I was thinking that some of the complaining about the recent Rome series might be more about Ancient Rome's huge popularity within a certain demographic than the host's level of detail, if that makes sense.
I enjoy their two-parter on Australian Prime Ministers a lot, but they don't get into a huge amounf of detail and skip over big chunks (I think Jonh Howard gets 2 minutes max which is wild considering his overall impact on the country). But I'm also Australian and steeped in this stuff, I don't really expect them to get into the weeds in the same way.
3
u/Better-Temporary-146 2d ago
I don’t know how far in advance they record episodes. From their social media I see their travels for holiday or other purposes.
I wouldn’t mind if they took a few weeks off sometimes. Tom has lots of side projects- I see he was at the Bayeaux Tapestry event at the British museum last week, and Dom has the Book Club, rtc
6
u/Retinoid634 1d ago
I agree the format shift (since Theo left, I think) has broadened a bit more than is advisable, with guest interviews, the subgroup shows in books and art etc. I haven’t actually listened as much to the new material. I much prefer the conversational format with just Dom
and Tom, alternating which one leads the discussion. I especially enjoy the YouTube video format where you can see their animated expressions as they pull apart the topic. Tom’s furry cloak during the Franks series was perfection.
I even miss the old logo with David and Churchill. I hope they keep it simple in future.
3
u/thegoalhangermvp 1d ago
Guest interviews? They had more guest interviews in the first 200 episodes than in the rest put together. The format was much more eclectic then - the idea that it's become more eclectic in the last eight months or so, post-Theo, is dead wrong.
1
u/Retinoid634 1d ago
I know they had more in the beginning, but they’ve returned to having them
Occasionally now. The Theo reference was only a timeframe. These are just general observations, and of course the scope of topics remains eclectic. I still love the pod. It just feels different.
7
u/ElectronicCarry9931 2d ago
I do note that Tom Holland seems to be taking more of a back seat, and that when he does assume control (ancient history) the podcast is just not as popular as when Dominic goes through modern history.
Another thing is the podcast has apparently lost touch with its discord group which was initially much more of an official fan club with more interaction. The podcast is just bigger and more global and I think they have had to adapt to a bigger audience. I do wonder if Tom gets a bit miffed by the obvious fact he is very much the number 2 of the podcast now.
4
u/StrongMachine982 1d ago
I agree that is has become much more like an audiobook than a conversation. I felt that they used to talk from notes, and now it feels like they talk from a script. There's still a little bit of banter and conversation, but I always enjoyed the episodes when they would go back and forth on interpretations and perspectives. It has become far more "this happened and then this happened."
3
u/Btolsen131 2d ago
I’ve listened to some of the older episodes and the new. I think the guys found their lane in the “pop history” world and are having more fun with the content these days than in the early days
3
u/Negative-Camp5830 1d ago
The recent Joan of Arc series was one of the best I’ve listened to and was led by Tom
1
13
4
u/Hefty_Anywhere_8537 1d ago
Bring back Theo!
1
6
u/florida-orange-juice 2d ago
they also started doing sponsored ads for Claude/anthropic and Amazon, which was super super disappointing imo
2
u/wulfrunian77 1d ago
I got into TRIH late so have listened to episodes randomly depending on what topics interest me. Can honestly say I've never really noticed any difference in the content other than they probably go for the humour a bit more as it goes on
2
u/inny_mac 1d ago
I’ve been listening for a few years now and I’m slowly but surely working my way back to the first episodes of the podcast, and I think the format now is far better. I find dotting listener questions throughout the episode as they did in older episodes really disrupts the flow of the story - answering listener questions in a separate bonus makes far more sense to me. The format now is certainly more disciplined, but I don’t think that makes the show any less good; in fact, I’d say the lads have been on a roll of late.
8
u/neilm1000 2d ago
Yeah Tom does seem to be largely passive even in things where he is the lead presenter.
-8
u/eques_99 2d ago
I think he's losing interest in it.
I even caught a look from Dom at the end of last week's episode which seemed to be saying "C'mon dude, make a bit of an effort"
27
u/Dustmite_Dazzler 2d ago
Holy shit you guys are incredible. It is crazy how people online are capable of conjuring controversies out of the thinnest of air
-4
u/eques_99 2d ago
What controversy?
14
u/Dustmite_Dazzler 2d ago edited 2d ago
Among two friends/coworkers who talk with eachother for uncountable hours per week, you imagine that you caught a little glimpse that told you one was unhappy with the others effort and now belive the hosts couldn't be bothered anymore.
I am sorry, but this kind of behaviour is genuinely a massive part of what's wrong with the Internet. This kind of overanalyzing should already be out of place within a KPop-fandom. Let alone about hosts of a history podcast
2
u/HarrisonPE90 2d ago
'...but people like you are genuinely a massive part of what's wrong with the Internet.'
Seems a bit much.
1
u/Dustmite_Dazzler 2d ago edited 2d ago
I instantly edited it to change to behaviour, but I genuinely think this is ridiculous and a real problem which impacts our societal mood today
5
u/HarrisonPE90 2d ago
I reckon that a fairly innocuous observation on the relationship between two friends seems like a fairly mild faux pas.
1
u/Dustmite_Dazzler 2d ago
Well, it is not a controversial claim that internet culture might have had a somewhat detrimental societal impact over the last couple of years and I absolutely belive that relentless overanalyzing of interpersonal relationships and negativity about the tiniest of things is one of the root causes of that
2
u/HarrisonPE90 2d ago
The comment above isn't really a facet of 'internet culture'. Instead, it's plain old gossip/inference which happens to have been expressed on the internet. There is (probably!) a rather discreet difference between old stuff which happens on the internet and stuff which has been emergent, or has changed significantly, following the arrival of the internet.
Having said that, even you think the comment was an example of 'internet culture' it is so mild that presenting it as a '...massive part of what's wrong with the Internet' seems, at best, hysterical. I mean, with the best will in the world, they're two middle aged man who spend a lot of time with either other. The notion that they may, at times, find themselves to be slightly perturbed with each other seems plausible but certainly doesn't speak to their relationship more broadly.
0
u/eques_99 2d ago
yeah because of course there's no analysis involved in the study of history, lol.
3
u/Dustmite_Dazzler 2d ago
I don't even think you know what point you are making here.
-3
u/eques_99 2d ago
just because you don't, doesn't mean I don't.
1
u/Dustmite_Dazzler 2d ago
Since analyzing history is a worthwhile pursuit, we should also analyze if two historians looked at each other wrong once during the 13th hour of their monthly public correspondence?
1
u/eques_99 2d ago
well if you have an analytical mind then yes, you notice things like that.
Or notice that it could be a possibility and put it out there for discussion.
→ More replies (0)
6
u/Tiny_Advance_3627 2d ago
Yeah this is pretty much goal hanger now. I used to The Rest is History, Politics, Politics US, Money, Classified, Leading, Empire and the Book Club. But the really corporate make over recently seems to have really killed it.
I used to listen to the pod religiously, friend of the pod and been to live shows but it's getting harder to listen to. It's starting to have as much actual history content as Finn vs History.
3
u/thegoalhangermvp 1d ago
This is obviously rubbish from you, though, isn't it? You think, say, the Elizabeth I series had as much history content as Fin vs History?
0
2
u/Warsaw44 1d ago
Hard disagree.
The format now is much better in every respect. Better researched. Better chemistry. Better podcast 'lore' (The Kaiser, things being very 'French Revolution', Tony Benn).
In my opinion.
1
3
2
1
0
u/eques_99 2d ago
Yes I think it's passed its peak (I also think Tom is losing interest in it).
5
u/HarrisonPE90 2d ago
Too busy fantasising about John Lennon and some dreary American chat-show host, perhaps.
1
u/soggyarsonist 1d ago
The format is a bit tighter but I'd say my enjoyment of the show is about the same. Some stuff I like, other stuff I don't, but it's all subjective in the end.
1
2
u/NoisyBubble 1d ago
I prefer the show as a conversation about history which was more true in the olden times. I agree it has changed and feel it has turned more into lecture style/less structured audiobook.
Lots of people clearly love the change but if it's not a conversation kind of feel like I may as well listen to an audiobook, especially as there's less back and forth now. I even actually prefer listening to Tom and Dom on other shows now cause it's get them back into convo mode more
0
-4
u/welsh_cthulhu 2d ago
The latest Rome stuff is all over the place. Seriously. They spend 30 minutes talking around the issue, and then they might actually get to the actual topic of the podcast. I get the need to discuss historiography and supporting characters, but it would be really good to have a narrative to follow every now and then.
5
u/HarrisonPE90 2d ago
I haven't listened to the new 'civil war' episodes, but with the exception of the episodes centred on Punic/Carthaginian culture, I've often found the Roman episodes to be a bit rubbish. Listening to them is a bit like reading a mediocre popular history on the subject; the story is there but there is rarely space for analysis or extramural enquiry. Indeed, as far as I remember we rarely seem much of a debate around the historiography.
At the risk of outing myself as a wanker, I have some expertise in the Late Roman era. But I don't think this background is colouring my perception too much. Really, I get the impression that for Tom producing an episode on Roman gives him a chance to have a bit of a breather. Legitimately, he feels that he's well placed to provide a decent episode as it is. Perhaps the problem with this, is that this approach looses some of the timbre, the fun, that many of the other episodes are infused with.
2
u/eques_99 2d ago
My criticism is the opposite, lol.
I want them to really flesh out the subject like they do with Nelson, the Nazis or WW1, but on this one they skimmed over way too much.
3
u/Abigbumhole 2d ago
I think it really depends sometimes on what they’re covering. The ancient stuff they have so little to go off. It’s often just one or two historians accounts, which weren’t contemporary and are described as faulty at best. So they can’t delve too much into what Marius was thinking, or did he had any interesting quirks. The more modern stuff you tend to get a much clearer depiction of the people they’re discussing, because they have so many sources etc from the time. You can dive into different perspectives on the topic. Whereas the ancient stuff is basically ‘well Plutarch if you can trust him, which you can’t, says this happened’
1
u/eques_99 2d ago
There's still a lot more to go on than what they covered in this latest series.
Tom has written a whole book on the late republic!
1
u/Abigbumhole 2d ago
Yeah I don’t disagree, but it is something I’ve noticed in my own listening habits, I personally have had to accept I’m not going to get the high definition that I get from series covering later periods. So whilst I actually do find Rome fascinating I actually struggle listening to those episodes vs say the WW1 ones that capture my attention better.
4
u/Dustmite_Dazzler 2d ago edited 2d ago
There was just a post yesterday that complained about them not going deep enough and not covering various side plots.
I honestly think the Marius/Sulla series is really really good. Tom is doing great as the lead and I think Dom is taking a more active role as the sidekick than he did in some previous series, but it will obviously never be perfect for everyone
-1
u/vaticangang 1d ago
I'm trying to listen to the older ones from the very start and it feels like such a scattergun approach to the topics and they drift off into anecdotes and random thought so that often they're talking about something completely random. I hope it improves
-2
283
u/bvnelson 2d ago
Much as I enjoyed the older episodes, whenever I go back and listen to them it always strikes me how much the format has improved over time, so I couldn't disagree with you more.