There was a bit on the show where Cameron brought up the idea that Lord English could represent a Lacanian conception of language only to dismiss the idea (either out of disbelief or disinterest), and Michael, despite elsewhere flexing his psychoanalytic chops, offered no protest whatsoever. I doubt many people would find themselves irked by such a niche bit, but as luck would have it I'd written an essay on the exact topic being dismissed, so. I found myself irked.

That said, however much I might take issue with particulars of their readings, it's not like anyone else is offering such a sweeping overview of reader-responses to the story-as-event, to the story as an unrepeatable performance. It's invaluable historical work, even if I feel the corner of my mouth twitching 4-5 times an episode