Breaking AI & Tech News Analyzed

The Unlikely Cricketer Nigel Martyn, English football's first £1m goalkeeper, has made a surprising transition to cricket. With a career spanning three decades, Martyn played for top clubs like Leeds, Everton, and Crystal Palace, and represented England in two World Cups. Martyn's Love for Cricket Despite his illustrious football career, Martyn's heart belongs to cricket. Growing up in St Austell, Martyn was a promising young cricketer. However, he had to give up the sport when he turned professional with Bristol Rovers in 1987. Rediscovering Cricket After retiring from football due to an ankle injury in 2006, Martyn rediscovered his love for cricket. He started playing for Leeds Modernians in the Airedale & Wharfedale senior cricket league. Martyn's competitive spirit and natural athleticism made him a quick learner, and he soon found himself enjoying the game. A Memorable Moment Martyn recalls a thrilling moment when he hit a six in a crucial game, securing a win for his team. 'It was right down to the wire, I think we had one wicket left and it was almost pitch black,' Martyn says. 'The ball before I had not seen at all. I decided to just swing at the next one and somehow I really middled it!' From Football to Cricket Martyn's football career was marked by significant achievements, including an FA Cup final appearance and 846 club appearances. However, his cricket journey has brought him new joys. 'I've never been much of a runner, but I always loved diving around and catching balls,' Martyn says. 'I'm still really competitive though, so when I set my mind to something I really go for it.' A New Chapter Now 59, Martyn continues to play cricket, inspiring younger players at Knaresborough Cricket Club with his fitness and dedication. His wife, a huge cricket fan, supports his endeavors, although she finds his enthusiasm 'slightly bonkers.'

The Discovery Jem Calder's writing career had a fairytale start. Sally Rooney emailed him, impressed with a short story he'd submitted to the literary magazine she was editing soon after Conversations with Friends came out. It was the first story he'd ever completed. Calder was already 'a huge fan' of Rooney's, so the whole thing was surreal, he tells me. 'I can't really imagine what could top that, to be honest.' The Writing Career That story ultimately ended up in Reward System, Calder's 2022 collection of six interconnected tales following a cast of sad young things living in an unnamed city. It was hailed as a book of the year; a review in this paper placed Calder among 'the most talented young writers of fiction at work today'. Now, his debut novel, I Want You to Be Happy, picks up some of the themes of the first book: the trials of modern love, millennial ennui, consumer culture, technology, political and ecological doom. The Novel's Themes The novel explores the challenges of modern relationships, with characters struggling with commitment, addiction, and the search for meaning in a dismal macroeconomic climate. Calder's characters are addicted to instant gratification – buying stuff, social media, vaping, porn – anything to ward off the world's horrors. The Author's Perspective Calder grew up in Cambridge, studied English at Leeds, and has since worked a variety of jobs alongside writing, including those of his protagonists – Joey is a barista, and Chuck is a copywriter. He says he 'truly can't relate' to authors who complain of writer's block – having to work a day job 'gives me such motivation to get back to it and force myself to deal with something difficult in my writing'. The Future Calder could be grouped with a cohort of young novelists to whom the 'voice of a generation' label can easily be applied, alongside the likes of Rooney, Oisín McKenna, Madeleine Gray – writers concerned with how a dismal macroeconomic climate impacts young lives. How does Calder feel about that badge? It 'isn't something I consciously pursue at all', he says. 'It's unavoidable not to critique capitalism in some way if you're trying to address the absurdities of how we live now, but I also don't care about putting my political views in my fiction. The goal is always to just write realistically about how life feels.'

The Lead: A Tale of Repression and Hidden DesiresThere's a common greeting in the Outer Hebrides: the lineage-establishing "Who do you belong to?" By the time this question is posed to 22-year-old gay Harris islander John-Calum Macleod, or Cal, in Douglas Stuart's new novel, there is a sense that Cal is his father John's beyond the ordinary claims of blood – the latter's sway containing undercurrents of domineering ownership.The Novel's Core Themes: Repression and Self-Denial in a Conservative CommunityThe book opens with the two conducting a strange ritual over the phone, performed regularly ever since Cal moved to Edinburgh to study textiles: John, a precentor, reads to Cal in Gaelic from the New Testament and has him sing back "with the full power of his belief". The verse John recites – which prefigures the novel's themes of repression and self-denial – urges the faithful to guide the errant and to stay vigilant against temptation. After receiving Cal's assent, John orders him to return home, ostensibly because Cal's maternal grandmother, Ella, is sick. Though John lives with Ella in her croft house, she is his ex-wife's mother and thus not his responsibility.Set within a tight-knit Free Presbyterian community of farmers, weavers and fishers in what appears to be the 1990s, John of John tells the story of Cal's uneasy homecoming. It's a reprise of the parable of the prodigal son and an ardent exploration of the half-lives of queer men condemned to love, pine and suffer in silence. Intimate yet epic in scale, it contains equal parts pastoral drama, tale of familial fracture, love story and inquiry into various forms of loneliness: the loneliness that can reside between fathers and sons, between lovers, between man and God, and between a small place and the big world.Character Analysis: Complex Relationships and Hidden TruthsJohn disapproves of Cal's appearance, his sartorial choices and his long, "flame-coloured" hair, disturbed "by the confused signal they were sending, the strange tension between the masculine and the feminine". Cal's disinclination to be "saved" creates a rift between them that later erupts in violence. Meanwhile, childhood friend and hookup partner Doll gives Cal the brush-off, cross that he's been away for so long. Wearied by his ultraconservative environment, where connection feels out of reach, Cal takes a fancy to his dad's sole friend, confirmed bachelor Innes MacInnes. Cal is struck by Innes's "gentleness, his benevolence – which Cal had never appreciated before, which, if he were honest, he would have said he found boring, unsexy in younger men".This, however, can never be the merry May-December romance Cal wishes it to be. Innes and John are lovers, we learn fairly early on, and it is this pair's tortured relationship since their teenage years – kept secret from everyone, including Cal – that forms the novel's centre of gravity. Masters of discretion, John and Innes are, to townsfolk, neighbouring sheep farmers. The first time we see them alone together, at Innes's, they go through the motions of a long-established routine, allowing themselves to draw close only after John has made sure each room is empty and they are really alone. Later, as John prepares to leave, Innes loudly seeks his assistance over an unspecified "two-man job", "all in case someone should find out and ask what exactly John Macleod was doing upstairs in the MacInnes house at such an ungodly hour".Literary Context: Stuart's Evolution as a StorytellerThe novel tries their bond in ways small and big. Aside from the difficulty of Cal, there is the matter of John's other liaison with a married man, and the tenancy of Ella's house soon to be transferred to Cal's mother. Innes floats the idea of John moving in with him but intuits "how, even under the threat of homelessness, a life together with him seemed no consolation at all". John is a man tormented by the idea of his own depravity: "He loved God. He loved Innes. He loved God and God hated how he loved Innes." At one point he entertains the possibility of Innes, Cal and himself being a family, but even in fantasy, the thought of Cal being gay, like him, remains unimaginable: "They would live like this every day, be useful, peaceful, happy on their land, looking forward to the day Cal married a local girl and filled their croft with grandchildren."The novel is outstandingly canny and wrenching on self-contempt, on the toilsome art of deceit, and on the contradictions we all contain, as well as the friction that can exist between the personal and the collective. As secular values gain ground, there is the suggestion that John and Innes living together could deal a death blow to their local congregation, leaving us wondering whether John and Cal will – or can – come out to one another. Amid all this, Stuart finds the space to touch on crofter subservience to absentee landowners, the scorn and prejudice of mainlanders, and the place of the Western Isles within the English imagination.Critical Reception: A Complex but Ultimately Rewarding ReadJohn of John is certainly enthralling, but the ambient Weltschmerz and the characters' frequent self-pity can be draining. Stuart's first two novels, the Booker-winning Shuggie Bain and its follow-up, Young Mungo, were feats of heartfelt, operatic storytelling, composed as though in defiant response to our age of irony and subtlety. Despite their occasionally miserabilist tenor, the emotions felt guileless and real, whether Shuggie's love for his doomed, alcoholic mother, Agnes; Jodie's for her brother Mungo; Mungo's for his birdkeeping neighbour James or his own doomed, alcoholic mother, Maureen. The impoverished Glaswegian milieus where they were set – marked by Thatcherite ruination, homophobia, sexual predation and sectarian strife – made for sobering reading; but these were novels so lavishly and graciously imagined, so very moving, that you gladly faced up to their gloom.Here Stuart leans heavily on melodrama and sensationalism as a shortcut to tragedy. Towards the end, the novel is eventful to a fault and surfeited with pathos: we have a pregnancy; an attempted shotgun wedding ("What in the world of Thomas Hardy?" says Cal); a death and a momentous departure from the island. While this book will not appeal to those with a low tolerance for excess, diehard romantics will find much to love; I see Cal, John and Innes – knottily entangled and imperfectly endearing – being cherished with readerly devotion. And that is no small feat.

The Rise of a Provocative Comedy StarOnce in a while, you get to see a legend at the absolute top of their game," booms a voice at the beginning of Robby Hoffman's Netflix special, Wake Up, welcoming her to the stage. High praise indeed – especially since the voice is that of the leading US comedian John Mulaney, who directed the special, and who clearly thinks this 36-year-old New Yorker is one of the hottest talents around.Over the last year, Hoffman's star has risen at a stunning pace. She is currently on TV in Rooster, a college campus comedy starring Steve Carell, as well as the fifth season of the critically acclaimed sitcom Hacks. This is only her second season as talent agency assistant Randi, but last year the role earned her an Emmy nomination.From Religious Upbringing to Hollywood Success"Last week, I was a Hassidic Lubavitch Jew living in Crown Heights, New York," was Hoffman's first line as Randi. "Now I'm in LA, I'm gay and probably an atheist." Hoffman's own life has taken a similar about-turn after being thrust into the spotlight. Randi, a role that was created for her by writers Lucia Aniello, Paul W Downs and Jen Statsky and draws on Hoffman's own background, has been "a life-changing part," she says on a video call from the home in Los Angeles that she shares with her wife, the reality TV star Gabby Windey.Home life in Montreal was chaotic, living in a house that was "so packed with so many people," Hoffman says. She would frequently get into physical fights with her brothers and "cried every single day … sometimes I was kicking and screaming on the floor." She got out as soon as she could, at 17, when she began renting a place of her own, taking on a part-time job to support herself through her Cégep, a type of pre-university college unique to Quebec.Awards, Recognition, and Controversial Comedy StyleAlthough Hoffman insists she isn't trying to offend ("I do think that a lot of my jokes are misinterpreted"), she also doesn't think being offended is the worst thing: "Being poor is." She's speaking from experience: she grew up in a family that relied on welfare payments, the seventh of 10 children.Wake Up includes gags about "disgusting" women ("always the hottest ones are sickest") and abortion ("we raise the age of abortion till 10, we got a lot of well-fucking-behaved kids on our hands"). Not to mention the jokes about paedophilia. But although her punchlines make some audience members bristle, "I just don't get to choose my thoughts," the comedian says. "I'm just sharing it with you. I wish I didn't know some of these things. I truly wish paedophilia was not something that I was introduced to or heard about. I think it's more democratic that I joke about everything, you know?"The Changing Landscape of ComedyThe comedian's proclivity for referring to women, including herself and her mother, as "bitches" is an aspect of her onstage coarseness that carries over into our call, in which she is otherwise much more mellow and thoughtful. Sure, she doesn't follow the typical Hollywood script of simpering self-deprecation, instead unapologetically backing herself and frequently talking about how great it is to be rich. But you get the impression that this is self-conscious gaucheness, a send-up of convention rather than outright rudeness."I come in hot," Hoffman admits – especially on stage. But she is not pretending to be something she's not – unlike, she says, supposedly "kind and nice" figures such as Will Smith, who was banned from the Oscars after slapping the comedian Chris Rock, or Ellen DeGeneres, whose talk show was cancelled after allegations that junior staff had been bullied.Future Prospects and Industry ImpactHoffman is endearingly grateful for her success. "Am I not living one of the greatest lives you've heard about?" she said during her recent appearance on Late Night With Seth Meyers. "I really do feel that," she says. When she started out in comedy, it felt like "such a risk" to pursue a career with no promise of financial stability: "It's becoming harder and harder to go from no money to money, so when we get one of our guys in, it always feels miraculous."She wishes it wasn't so miraculous – Hoffman is a Bernie Sanders supporter and believes "everybody's entitled to dignity." She resents being an example of someone who "did it" – got herself out of poverty via talent and determination. "You shouldn't have to be this special, you shouldn't have to be this talented," she says. Throughout her adolescence, she was "so sick of being poor," so focused on working hard at the Jewish private school for which her grandfather had helped her win a scholarship, then pursuing a degree in accounting.

The Incident Victor Wembanyama was ejected for the first time in his NBA career after an elbow to the jaw of Naz Reid as the Minnesota Timberwolves beat the San Antonio Spurs to level their playoff series. Details of the Play Wembanyama was whistled for an offensive foul as soon as he struck Reid, who had swarmed the Spurs star outside the paint along with teammate Jaden McDaniels after the 7ft 4in Wembanyama rebounded a missed three-pointer by the Spurs. The incident occurred during a crucial moment in the game, with the fans at Minnesota's Target Center chanting, 'Kick him out! Kick him out!' After a video review of the play, the foul was upgraded to a Flagrant 2 for excessive contact above the neck. The Impact of the Ejection The penalty triggered an automatic ejection, immediately swinging the balance of the game, which the Timberwolves won 114-109. The best-of-seven series is now level at 2-2. When the penalty was announced, Wembanyama appeared to ask teammate Harrison Barnes: 'What does that mean?' Reid sank both free throws to give the Timberwolves a 38-34 lead after Wembanyama's ejection. Wembanyama's Performance Despite the ejection, Wembanyama had an impressive game prior to the incident, with 39 points on 13-for-18 shooting from the floor in Game 3. The Series Outlook With Reid, Julius Randle, and McDaniels in their frontcourt, the Timberwolves have had plenty of muscle and tenacity to send at Wembanyama, setting up a competitive series.

The Lead Investors in JP Morgan have been urged to vote in favour of splitting the role of chief executive and chair at America’s largest bank, amid concerns over the power wielded by its billionaire boss Jamie Dimon. The Proxy Advisers' Stance ISS and Glass Lewis, which issue advice to some of the world’s biggest fund managers on how to vote at annual investor meetings, have thrown their weight behind a shareholder resolution that would ensure two separate people hold the office of chair and chief executive “as soon as possible”. Investors are due to vote on the resolution at the bank’s annual general meeting on 19 May. The Data Analysis Dimon, who is worth an estimated $2.6bn (£1.9bn), has held the dual role for two decades. Holding the two most senior roles in a company is widely frowned upon in corporate governance circles, particularly in Europe, but not banned. The Impact Analysis “The size and complexity of JP Morgan suggests that it is difficult for any one person to run both the company and the board,” ISS said in its shareholder report. “The board is responsible for overseeing management and instilling accountability, and conflicts of interest may arise when one person holds both the chairman and CEO positions, thereby leading both the management team and the board which oversees it.” The Prediction The guidance has put the proxy advisers on a collision course with Dimon, who has held the chief executive and chair roles at JP Morgan since 2005 and 2006, respectively. The battle has also made its way to the White House. Trump in December signed an executive order aimed at reining in Glass Lewis and ISS, which he claimed were using their power “to advance and prioritise radical politically motivated agendas”.

The Forgotten OriginsThe last time the US hosted the men's World Cup in 1994, many Americans viewed soccer as a game they watched their kids play on Saturday mornings, not the world's most beloved sport. Thirty-two years later, the sport has exploded in popularity and the USA have become a regular fixture at World Cups. But many people don't realize the US's World Cup history extends all the way back to the first tournament staged – when the US men had their best-ever finish, reaching the semi-finals.The tale of those connected with the US team is often bleak, but it's also more deeply rooted and richer than is often appreciated. As US soccer fans turn their attention to the future of the sport, we revisit four often overlooked moments – and one widely celebrated kick – of the USA's early World Cup history.Tragedy and TriumphSix of the 16-man squad who went to Uruguay for the first World Cup were British, but all played their club football in the US, an indication of the strength of domestic league at the time. A 3-0 win over Belgium in their opening game – which shared with France v Mexico the honor of being the first-ever game at a World Cup – was followed by a 3-0 win over Paraguay in which Bert Patenaude scored the first World Cup hat-trick – although it was only in November 2006, 32 years after his death, that the disputed second of his three goals was finally confirmed as having been scored by the Fall River striker.Substitutions were not introduced to the World Cup until 1970, meaning injuries could have a huge influence on the outcome of a game, reducing a side to 10 men or fewer. And injuries severely afflicted the USA in their semi-final against Argentina. The goalkeeper Jimmy Douglas struggled on with a twisted knee and the midfielder Ralph Tracy missed the whole of the second half after fracturing his right leg. Andy Auld, meanwhile, was temporarily blinded after the physio Jack Coll dropped a bottle of chloroform as he tended to the forward's split lip. After battling gamely, the USA conceded three late goals and lost 6-1.The Mystery of Donelli and SchroederThe USA entered the 1934 tournament late and were very fortunate that Fifa agreed to let them play a qualifier against Mexico in Italy shortly before the first round. The USA won 4-2 in front of 10,000 spectators in Rome, all their goals being scored by Aldo "Buff" Donelli, who would later become a coach in the NFL with the Pittsburgh Steelers and the Cleveland Rams. Mexico blamed their defeat on the fact their journey to Italy had taken 15 days, while the USA had managed to cross the Atlantic in just nine. In the first round, the USA lost 7-1 to the eventual champions Italy; if the journey hardly seemed worth it for just two games, they were at least better off than poor Mexico, who went straight home after their qualifying defeat.The US team manager in Italy was Elmer Schroeder, who had also been part of the backroom staff in 1930. In 1932 he had been elected as the first US-born president of the United States Football Association (the body that is now US Soccer) and although he did not seek re-election in 1934, he led the national squad at the 1936 Olympic Games as well, and remained manager of Philadelphia Germans until 1949. Four years later, his badly beaten body, bound with the cord from the window-blinds, was found on the bed in his apartment. Although nobody was ever convicted of his homicide, it seems probable that he was murdered by a serial killer who preyed on gay men in Philadelphia in the early 1950s.The Disappeared HeroThe USA withdrew from a playoff against the Dutch East Indies for the 1938 World Cup but did qualify for 1950. It was at that tournament in Brazil that they achieved perhaps their most notable result, beating England 1-0 in Belo Horizonte, one of the greatest shocks in World Cup history. The only goal was scored by Joe Gaetjens, diverting in a shot from Walter Bahr. Gaetjens had been born in Haiti and was awaiting US citizenship at the time; early US soccer history was based on a liberal immigration policy.Gaetjens never got his citizenship, returning to Haiti soon after. His family were distant relations by marriage of Louis Déjoie, who lost the 1957 presidential election to the notorious François "Papa Doc" Duvalier. In 1964, when Duvalier declared himself dictator for life, most of Gaetjens's family fled the country.Gaetjens, though, had had little involvement in politics and decided to remain. He was soon arrested by the Tonton Macoute, Duvalier's secret police, and never seen again. It's believed he was murdered at the Fort Dimanche prison, but his body has never been found.The Shot Heard Around the WorldThe modern history of the USA at the World Cup begins with Paul Caligiuri's "shot heard around the world" in Port of Spain in November 1989 – a 30-yard left-foot volley that secured a 1-0 win over Trinidad and Tobago and booked the USA's place at Italia 90. Qualification was seen as an essential part of preparation for hosting the tournament in 1994, for reasons of credibility if nothing else. The USA lost all three games they played in Italy, but, with the exception of 2018, they've been at every World Cup since.

Dubois Claims WBO Heavyweight Crown in Early 11th‑Round StoppageIn a blood‑soaked contest at Manchester’s arena, Daniel Dubois became the new WBO heavyweight champion after referee Howard Foster stopped Fabio Wardley just 28 seconds into the 11th round. The stoppage came after a brutal exchange that left Wardley with a shattered nose and a flood of blood, while Dubois, despite being knocked down twice earlier, showed relentless resolve.The Brutal 11‑Round Battle That Defined the FightThe bout opened with Wardley landing a powerful right that sent Dubois to the canvas within seconds, but Dubois recovered and the two fighters tangled repeatedly, each hitting the canvas at least once. Dubois’ jab and steady right hand began to wear Wardley down from round two onward, while Wardley’s resilience kept him in the fight until the referee intervened. The fight’s atmosphere was electric, with the crowd chanting Wardley’s name before the action turned decidedly in Dubois’ favor.Numbers Behind the Fight: Rounds, Knockdowns and ViewershipDuration: 10 full rounds plus 28 seconds of the 11th round (≈ 31 minutes total).Knockdowns: Dubois was knocked down twice (round 1 and round 3); Wardley was never knocked down.Rounds won (media estimate): Dubois dominated rounds 4‑10, Wardley showed strength in rounds 1‑3.Live audience: ~12,000 spectators in Manchester.Broadcast reach: The fight was streamed live on major UK sports networks, drawing an estimated 1.8 million concurrent viewers.What Dubois’ Victory Means for the Heavyweight LandscapeThe win catapults Dubois into the elite tier of heavyweight boxing, positioning him as a prime candidate for unification bouts with reigning champions such as Oleksandr Usyk (WBA, WBC, IBF) and Tyson Fury (WBC). It also revitalises British heavyweight interest after a period dominated by the Usyk‑Fury rivalry, promising higher ticket sales and sponsorship opportunities for UK promoters.Future Match‑ups and the Road to UnificationAnalysts predict that Dubois will soon face either a mandatory challenger from the WBO rankings or a high‑profile unification opponent. Potential match‑ups include:A showdown with Oleksandr Usyk to settle the undisputed claim.A clash with Tyson Fury for a blockbuster British‑British title bout.A rematch clause with Fabio Wardley, should Wardley invoke his contractual right.Regardless of the opponent, Dubois’ ability to rebound from early adversity and finish the fight emphatically suggests he will be a central figure in the heavyweight division for years to come.

The Genesis of a Masterpiece This week we mark two extraordinary centenaries. Sir David Attenborough's, of course, but only four days after the birth of the bona fide national treasure, Dmitri Shostakovich's First Symphony also first saw the light of day – premiered in Leningrad on 12 May 1926. The 19-year-old's composition was played by the Leningrad Philharmonic, conducted by Nicolai Malko. The Revolutionary Sound The symphony's four-movement structure is just about the only conventional feature it has. The teenage Shostakovich had imbibed all the lessons he could about what orchestral music should sound like and how it should behave, and was bold enough to subvert all those ideas and send them up. There is no forelock-tugging to earlier generations of Russian symphonists and orchestral pioneers; instead, Shostakovich's First resounds with a self-confidence that's both optimistic and deliciously sardonic. A Circus of Sound From the distorted trumpet call that opens the work – a fanfare that thumbs its nose at your expectations of how a symphony should start; not an affirmative flourish, but a snakingly dissonant question mark – Shostakovich sets out on a first movement that's like a circus: a cavalcade of characters who take the stage and exit, more often than not pursued by a cartoon bear, clown or bassoon. The momentum that Shostakovich generates from the way he juxtaposes ideas – cutting from one to the other as if the symphony were a reel of film – continues deliriously in the second movement. Here, a piano part is added to the orchestral texture, and that's where one of the secrets of this music's compositional energy is revealed. As a teenager, Shostakovich played the piano for Soviet silent cinema screenings, and in the symphony's piano solos, he turns his work into a knockabout farce that Buster Keaton would be proud of. A Masterpiece of Unbridled Creativity The movement builds to a climax that is both terrifying – a sudden fanfare that consumes the whole orchestra – and bathetic, in the form of the solo piano's chords, as if the pianist couldn't keep up with the music's pace. There is no hint anywhere in this piece of the bombast and poster-paint ideology of Shostakovich's later symphonies, but there is real feeling here, hinted at in that climax of the scherzo, as the cartoon suddenly shudders into real life. The slow movement that comes next is one of the most unironically passionate that Shostakovich ever wrote, as a solo oboe and solo cello inspire the whole orchestra to a melodic outpouring that feels more Shakespearean drama than circus hijinks. A Legacy of Creative Freedom The final movement somehow brings all of these worlds together, and the symphony ends in a torrent of irresistible energy, a culmination of pure sentiment as well as sheer excitement. This is, surely, the most creatively confident First Symphony by any teenager in musical history (and there is plenty of competition, from Mendelssohn to Knussen, from Rihm to Schubert). It announces a world of possibility in which musical conventions are gleefully turned upside down in a frenzy of modernist creativity that's both funny and profound. It's the sound of a unique symphonic avant garde that might have heralded an era of unfettered creative freedom for Shostakovich and generations of composers. A What-If of History Instead, these are the sounds of what might have been, for Shostakovich and for Russia. In Shostakovich's later symphonies, especially from the mid-1930s onwards, you hear the chilling of that freedom and the daily terror of living in Stalin's Soviet Union. The confidence and joy in his own brilliance that you hear in every page of the First Symphony is a miracle that Shostakovich never quite repeated and which is still strikingly new, a century on.