Arts Entertainment Books Videos

Marjorie Rosen is most recently the author of Boom Town: How Wal-Mart Transformed an All-American Town Into an International Community. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Kicked out of bed. Author: Marjorie Rosen Subjects Discussed: The white and non-Hispanic white majority in Bentonville, Arkansas, numerous houses of worship, multiculturalism, the largest population of Marshall Island immigrants in the United States, work for unskilled laborers, exploitation at Tyson and Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart s $319 billion annual profit and its failure to offer proper healthcare, sentiments from former Bentonville mayor Terry Black Coberly, whether or not Wal-Mart is good for Bentonville, The Whistler Group, Wal-Mart, Christian-based merchandise, and staying in denial about being a Christian company, mandatory Saturday morning meetings, diversity groups, the conflict between Saturday morning meetings and shabbat, St. Paul Wal-Mart worker Abdi Abdi fired for praying on work breaks, the difficulties of integrating with a white community, trying to get Wal-Mart middle managers to disclose salaries, relative salaries and Bentonville s relative economy, Bentonville housing, the abuses of the Bentonville and the Rogers Police Departments, the culture of fear spawned by Section 287(g), Rogers Mayor Steve Womack s racist sentiments, Sheriff Joe Arpaio and white privilege, and the reasonable unification of culture. EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Correspondent: Ajaydev Naliur said to you that the most difficult part of integrating into the larger white community was not being able to socialize with them like we do with the Indian families. The people at work never say, A.J., come to my house for dinner, come to my home. Now if Naliur has only a professional relationship with the Americans and he fears bringing Indian food even to the Walmart food day potlucks, then surely there s a multiculturalism problem here. And I m curious about why there s this lack of integration. Rosen: No, it s interesting that you choose A.J. I think it was his problem. Correspondent: Yeah? Rosen: Yeah. Because he was so timid about everything. About sharing Indian food. You know, there are Mexican restaurants. There are Chinese restaurants. There are all sorts of restaurants in the area now. Not an Indian restaurant yet. But he was so timid about it. And yet there were other Indian families. Like the Kulkarnis, who were not at all. Who said to me, Many American friends, we invite them to dinner. And I kept wishing they d invite me for dinner. You know, because I love Indian food. Correspondent: Yeah. Rosen: But when push came to shove, A.J. said that he was hesitant to embrace American values. Mostly because of his daughters. He has two teenage daughters. And he was very, very afraid that they would become too Americanized. And then he would lose control of them, in terms of boyfriends and in terms of setting up arranged marriages. And it s definitely in the picture for him. And he wants to keep his girls under his wing. Correspondent: But A.J. likewise wants to hold onto his job. And maybe the timidity comes from the fact that if he brings in the Indian food, by his standpoint, he could risk raising ire and possibly having people make fun of him. Or, I suppose, putting a red flag on the cultural divide. So is it really fair point to A.J. and say, Hey, it s your problem. Because he is, in fact, the guy who is bringing sodas and pretzels and potato chips and the like. Basically conforming to American society. Rosen: He said it was his problem. Correspondent: He said it was his problem? Rosen: He said it was his problem when I spoke to him about it. I said, Gosh, people love to share. Especially in terms of food. People are very open to that kind of thing. He said it was his problem and his timidity. It s funny. His wife, it s been harder for her because it s taken her a longer time to learn English. Now that she s learning English, she works at a day care center. She s having a great time going to weddings of friends without him. Because she s much more willing to socialize with Americans somehow. Now that she s learned English, it s easier for her. Correspondent: Well, if she s the social butterfly, has she brought Americans to her place? Or anything like that? Rosen: Not yet. She s still fairly submissive. A fairly submissive wife. On and off for the first two years that I spoke with them, I would visit them when I d come into town. And I d ask what he thought about something. And then I d ask what she thought. And she d say, with no irony, I think what he thinks. Correspondent: Interesting. Rosen: But now that she s learning English, and she s more comfortable in her own community and basically in her own skin, I really have detected a change in her. It s really lovely to see that. Correspondent: By comfortable in her own skin, do you mean as she s learned English? What do you mean by that? Rosen: As she s learned English. She s been able to take a job and hold a job by herself. And I think that s given her a little bit of freedom. Not, I would say, a lot. But a little bit of freedom. Correspondent: Freedom to further integrate with American culture? Rosen: Yes. Correspondent: Or because it seems to me that we re getting a one way signal here. I mean, shouldn t multiculturalism work where everybody integrates together? And everybody goes, Hey, Indian food. Hey, American food, and that kind of thing? Rosen: Well, I think it s nice that she has American friends from the day care center where she works who invite her to their wedding. Which entails a whole day of traveling and celebrating. I mean, to me, that s a gesture in a community that maybe ten years ago would not have made that gesture. And she would have been too timid to go without him.

A silly skit just for Forever 15 fans.

Nicholas Meyer is perhaps best known for his work on Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. He is most recently the author of The View from the Bridge. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Ah, listener my old friend, do you know the Klingon proverb that tells us revenge is a dish best served cold? Author: Nicholas Meyer Subjects Discussed: Lotus positions, talking back to prescience, writing books when the Writers Guild goes on strike, Samuel Johnson, the origins of The Seven Per-Cent Solution, words as a place of retreat, William S. Baring-Gould, generating scholarly commentary, Meyer s dislike of Sherlock Holmes movies, Watson being portrayed as a buffoon, using the old Warner shield for Time After Time, the unusual opening shot of Time After Time and developing a directorial voice, Stanley Kubrick on the set of Spartacus, on-the-job training about cinematography, directing Ricardo Montalban, making specific choices, directors who don t know what they want, the importance of understanding actors, finding distinct style with a preexisting Star Trek cast, William Shatner s concerns on Star Trek II, the Coca-Cola product placement in Volunteers, responding to Ken Levine s remarks on the scene that ruined Volunteers, Meyer s problematic metrics with cinematic comedy, Black Orchid, whittling down the original draft of The View from the Bridge, being a script doctor on Fatal Attraction and determining Meyer s precise involvement with the bathtub ending, calculating a film for an audience and the problems with doing so, how to write a good screenplay with Philip Roth s source material, the differences between source material and other versions of the story, The Wizard of Oz, arguments about Dickens film adaptations, thoughts on Josh Olson s I Will Not Read Your Fucking Script, The Avengers, and why Meyer s frequent flyer miles are in the University of Iowa archive. EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Correspondent: You re sitting in a rather strange lotus position. Meyer: No. Correspondent: Do you sit like this often? Meyer: I m not lotus actually. Correspondent: Oh. Not lotus. Meyer: You can t see, but, underneath this table, my legs are stretched out in a very conventional position. Correspondent: I m sorry I wasn t noticing your muscular legs. Meyer: The anti-lotus. Correspondent: How are you doing? Meyer: I m doing fine so far. Correspondent: Okay. I had a question pertaining to recent events and also pertaining to your work and your tendency to have scripts mirror certain international events. I think, going back to Star Trek VI and Company Business, how real events tended to unfold in relation to those particular scripts. But simultaneously I might argue that you were prescient with one particular character in the Star Trek films. Most recently, as you ve probably been reading the headlines or seeing various clips, a certain Congressman from South Carolina basically said something to the President. And I couldn t help but think when that happened, Chekhov saying to Khan, You lie! Which I thought was quite prescient of you possibly. But simultaneously, in relation to Chekhov and Presidents, I should point out that Chekhov was able to correctly pronounce nuclear, whereas the previous President was not. So what do you attribute this linguistic prescience on your part? Meyer: Well, talking back to prescience is like one of the weirder things that you can do. And I think the fact that Chekhov addressed Khan so disrespectfully in the well of the Botany Bay obviously qualifies him for a Federation reprimand. Correspondent: Yeah. Meyer: Does this address your question? Correspondent: It sort of does. But it s interesting that Chekhov could pronounce nuclear where George Bush could not. 43. Meyer: The list of things that George Bush was unable to pronounce. In order to pronounce some of these things, I think you have to conceive of what they are first. Correspondent: And Chekhov was able to conceive of what they were. I mean, it s funny that Chekhov was the guy here. This could also have a lot to do with my own particular connections to your work and the larger canvas. But you did bring this up in your book and so I was tempted to infer many things in your scripts that possibly were intended or prescient or seer-like. Meyer: Well, I think Chekhov s remark clearly, as far as Congressman Wilson is concerned, is an accident. It was about thirty years before. And there are people who go around saying You lie! at the drop of a hat. Chekhov, I think, is more right than not when he accuses Khan. Correspondent: Yeah. I also wanted to ask just to go to a general question that isn t so convoluted or so crazy. This particular book. Was this written during the writers strike at all? Meyer: Yes. Correspondent: It was. Meyer: I write my books when the Writers Guild goes on strike. You re not allowed to write screenplays. And I usually write it because I have to make money. And Dr. Johnson said a man is a blockhead who writes for any reason except money. Correspondent: Yes. Well, that s paraphrasing it a bit. But it s close enough. Meyer: Well, I got blockhead and Correspondent: You got blockhead and money definitely. Nobody but a fool wrote for money Meyer: For anything except for money, yes. Correspondent: I think I m mangling it now. Yeah, I m familiar with that quote. You were a movie reviewer at the University of Iowa. You then wrote press kits for Paramount. And then you wrote The Love Story Story. And then you headed out west to become a screenwriter and what was, of course, this novel that came about. Quite a circuitous route in terms of approaching the inevitable. And so I m curious why you postponed it for so long over the years. Was there a definitive answer? You say that you re not an analytical person. But I m sure you ve had many years to think about this roundabout way of going to your present profession. Meyer: Well, I always wanted to make movies from the time I was very young. I never thought much about the writing part of it. Which is interesting, because I ve been writing since I was five years old. Writing was just something I always did. Words were the place to which I retreated. Sort of instinctively and intuitively all my life. I tried writing novels as a young man and I didn t like my novels very much. And by the way, neither did anyone else. So I went to California eventually to seek my fortune and try and get into the movie business. And I was lucky. I started to make some progress. And then just as I was starting to have stuff produced, the Writers Guild did go on strike. This was back in 1972 or 73, I think. And I was sharing digs with a young woman who said, Well now, since you re not allowed to write screenplays, you can write that book you are always talking about. And that book was my fanciful notion of a Sherlock Holmes adventure, in which Holmes met and joined forces intellectually as well as narratively with Sigmund Freud. And there really wasn t any good reason at that point not to try doing it. I don t think I was expecting it to add up to much. But it was as much a way of passing the time when I wasn t on the strike line as anything else. And so, yes, it became a big success. It was the number one best-selling novel for a while in the United States. And then when it was optioned for the movies, I said, Yes, I will sell you the option on condition that I write the script. And the script with all its faults was lucky enough to be nominated for an Oscar. And so that sort of led me to the next level. And the next screenplay I wrote, I said, Yes, I will sell you the script, but I must direct the movie. And so I leapfrogged my way into my profession.

Brian Evenson is most recently the author of Fugue State and Last Days. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Latching onto toccata. Author: Brian Evenson Subjects Discussed: Knowing when a story concept has legs, ideas that never come to anything, the origins of A Pursuit, The Open Curtain, maintaining surprise, text sources vs. personal experience, writing fiction moments that hit two simultaneous emotions, grisly moments and descriptive detail, the reader s imagination, revision and rhythm, not showing work to people, the surprise of audience responses, Bjorn Verenson, certain similarities with characters in Ninety Over Ninety and publishing people, Morgan Entreiken, determining the precise moment in which a story ends, open endings and critical theory, story concepts as building blocks for novels, similarities between An Accounting and Last Days, conversations between stories, bureaucratic language, investigating religious communities, solitary figures being pursued by men vs. the recurrent theme of community, expanding on conclusions from Ryan Call s Collagist essay, literalisms and tributes to pulp, challenging the assumptions of human, translating, Antoine Volodine, how a line from The Savage Detectives inspired a short story, dwelling upon consciousness, intertextual aspects, absurdity and violence, characters who plunge into dark chambers to experience horror, being the dungeonmaster at 12, knowing the environment, Evenson s concern for numbers and scales, Flann O Brien s The Third Policeman, postmodernism and theft, and the satisfaction of genre literature. EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Correspondent: Do you need to have a source text more than, I suppose, a personal experience? I mean, I could inquire as to whether you had sex with a mime. I don t know whether you have or not. Evenson: No, no, I didn t. I did meet someone, after I read that story aloud, who had had sex with a mime. It made me think that maybe I could have gone even farther in that story than I did. But not a lot of it is from personal experience. I mean, I think the things that are from personal experience are not the things that you would expect. So in Younger and in Girls in Tents, you know, when I was a kid, I used to make tents out of blankets. Which I think a lot of kids did. Correspondent: I did myself. Evenson: Yeah. But my daughters never did. So there is a kind of personal thing there. There s a moment in one of my stories I think actually that it s in The Wavering Knife, in that collection in which someone is taking bread and squishing it until it makes a ball of bread. And that s something that s incredibly vivid to me from my childhood. But the main thrusts of the plot and those sorts of things are not personal experience so much. But they do respond to a lot of other things. Correspondent: But then you re also dealing with a lot of mutilation and violence. Evenson: Correspondent: Like, in particular, Last Days. I mean clearly, I see that you are a zero according to that particular scale. Evenson: Right, right, right. Correspondent: Unless there s something you re not showing me. Evenson: No, no, no. Correspondent: How do you get into that particular mind set to make a narrative along those lines real when you have not personally experienced it? Evenson: (laughs) Correspondent: There s the old famous story. Well, Stephen Crane never experienced or witnessed any kind of war. So how does reality come about for you? When do you know it s real when you haven t experienced it? Or are we underestimating verisimilitude and not always capitulating to that wonderful imagination? Evenson: Well, I really do think a lot about how things would feel. Even if I haven t experienced them. I really see myself as partly a I don t know quite how to describe it, but I want to create a world that the reader experiences as if they re living through it more than something that they can see as a representation on the page. And to do that, I spend a lot of time thinking how things would feel, how things would occur. What would happen to a limb if you did something to it in Last Days. And I read a fair amount and try and figure things out that way. But mostly it s just trying. What you say. The primacy of the imagination. Trying to imagine yourself into a space where you really are experiencing something on the page in a very visceral way. One of things that people say about my stories, both for better and for worse, is that there are stories that you don t forget and there are stories that you feel like you re suffering through them in some ways. While the character suffers. And as a writer, I think that s very much what I do. I try to put myself very much in the position of the characters in the story. So in Last Days, there s all these moments in the hospital bed. And trying to figure out how you see around the curtain if you have one kind of mirror and another kind of mirror. If you can t move this bar to your body, then what do you do? And I took a lot of time thinking very seriously about that and trying to figure out what would I do. (Image: Beowulf Sheehan)

Laurie Sandell is the author of The Impostor s Daughter. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Wondering if the coalminer was an impostor. Author: Laurie Sandell Subjects Discussed: Chicken recipes, the quest for truth within memoir, how narrative shapes and stretches truth, subjective vs. objective accounts, the essay written anonymously for Esquire, memory vs. concrete evidence, emails from Ashley Judd, how hard evidence enhances a visual diagram, lawyers sifting through evidence, the use of clothing against background, working with a colorist, becoming one s parents, the use of motion lines, adopting comic book semiotics, drawing from an intuitive part of the brain, Art Spiegelman s Maus, feeling liberated in comic form vs. restrictions in textual form, maintaining privacy vs. spilling all details to the public, diagramming environment, knowing the lay of the land, static panels, consulting graphic novels, Scott McCloud, arrows pointing to figures, strange stays in five-star hotels, sketching out the book before drawing, taking the story arc from the text version of The Impostor s Daughter, structure and spontaneity, maintaining momentum vs. contending with painful memories, emotional change and artistic change, whether or not writing is the proper way to exorcise demons, the story of Sandell s father as a former sense of identity, the ethical dilemmas of narrative seduction, and fearlessness. EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Correspondent: I should point out I m not trying to insist that stretching [the truth] is necessarily a bad thing. I m merely pointing out that memory, as we all know, is a fallacious instrument. Sandell: Yes, it is. Correspondent: It s been said that memory is the greatest liar of them all. It s been said by, I believe Lincoln that you have to have a great memory to be a great liar. Sandell: Right. Correspondent: So given this conundrum, I m wondering to what degree you relied on your own memory and to what degree you relied on reference shots. You have, for example, illustrations that crop up within the course of the book. This leads me to wonder about other specific details. But maybe we can start on memory vs. concrete evidence. Sandell: Well, you know, it was a mix of memory and concrete evidence. On the one hand, I had a lot of concrete evidence because I had interviewed my father over a period of two years and I tape recorded our conversations with his knowledge. This was leading up to the Esquire piece when I had a 300-page transcript. So most of the things that my father said in the book came directly from those transcripts. So he s telling stories from his past. Those came directly from my father s mouth. Correspondent: Yeah. Sandell: As far as I m trying to think. I don t know. What else? Correspondent: Well, I could actually cite specific examples. Sandell: Okay, sure. Correspondent: For example, the difference between the narration and what is actually spoken in the text bubbles. Sandell: Right. Correspondent: Here s one example. When you re working at the office, you have a text box point to the screen: Have you considered inpatient treatment. We don t actually see the email on the screen. Sandell: Okay. Correspondent: We actually see your particular perspective. Sandell: Right. Correspondent: And so I want to ask you about why that particular emphasis I mean, that s inherently subjective. We re counting on your subjective viewpoint as to what is on the screen. As opposed to later on, when we actually see what s on your screen, when you re on your laptop in your motel room. Sandell: I need to be honest. The reason you didn t see that screen was probably because it didn t fit in that box. Correspondent: Okay. Sandell: And so I had to deal with little callouts so you could actually see what was on the screen. But the interesting thing about the process of putting together all this evidence a lot of it really was evidence is that there were so many emails. For example, that email was an email, I believe, from Ashley Judd. Correspondent: Yeah. Sandell: And I have those emails from Ashley Judd. I have the emails from my father. You know, I worked with a private investigator for two years. So I have all of his information and the lawsuits he compiled and all the various evidence and things written by my father. You know, I think did you ever read Autobiography of a Face by Lucy Grealy? Correspondent: No, I never read that. Sandell: It s a beautiful memoir. Ann Patchett later went on to write Truth Beauty: A Friendship. Correspondent: That s right. Sandell: And one of the things that Ann Patchett said in her afterword after Lucy died, Ann Patchett wrote an afterword to the book and she described how, at a reading, someone said to Lucy Grealy, How did you remember all those details about your past? And she said, I didn t remember it. I wrote it. And people were a little bit up in arms about that. But she was pointing out the fact that this was a piece of art, it s a piece of subjective memory, and the most important thing is to show the emotional truth of the situation. And I would say that in my case, because I have so much evidence, and evidence that Little Brown asked to say and anytime I ve done television, they ve actually asked to see the evidence, I feel pretty comfortable that there s not going to be any big explosive James Frey situation. Correspondent: Well, to what degree were they asking for the evidence? Because we re talking about transcripts. We re talking about investigative reporting. This is all text right now. And here you are. You have a visual document here. Sandell: Yes. Correspondent: You have to construct something from the text here. So it s a wonder that evidence even means anything if it s a visual result. Sandell: I think it does. I mean, the visual result is obviously my memory. It s the way I remember the situation. (Image: Brantastic)

Michael Muhammad Knight is most recently the author of Impossible Man and Osama Van Halen. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Expressing forceful words about his distinct identity. Author: Michael Muhammad Knight Subjects Discussed: Knight s powers of prescience, Muslim punk, fictional suicide as a form of personal critique, the fictional character Mike Knight vs. the real Mike Knight, the Amazing Ayyub, character creation as the author arguing with himself, spiritual poles and quasi-Mikes talking with Mike creations, romanticizing the failure to be an adult, the mythology of consolation, leading a life in peripatetic homelessness, being a provocateur, compromise vs. getting into certain quarters, reading Will Ariel Durant s big red books at an early age, God as the Force (Star Wars) vs. God as the Dao, the Asma Gull Hasan defamation suit, Edward Norton s soliloquy in The People vs. Larry Flynt, the coercive nature of apologies, getting kicked out of ISNA press conferences, journalism and formality, being disheartened by the Sunnis, whether or not umma is impossible, respecting religious difference, noting laundry lists of possession, constant reference to Spike Lee s Malcolm X over The Autobiography, women-led prayer and Islam, disowning whiteness, Pakistan as a white supremacist country, elaborating on Knight s remarks to David Hunter concerning cyphers, filtering information from the outside world, the apostasy essay, following up on Mark Athitakis s remarks on allegorical house layout, and the last time Knight was in touch with his father. EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Correspondent: I want to start off with something that you have a particular talent for in your fiction and that is the anticipation of events. The Taqwacores, of course, most famously initiated the Taqwacore punk movement. But as I learned in the afterword of Osama Van Halen, you write about Muzammil Hassan, arrested for beheading his wife on British TV. And you are unnerved by the fact that you were not only not able to foresee it, yet it happened. What do you attribute this prescience to? I m curious. Knight: I don t know. It spooks me out a little bit. You know, I wrote this fictional decapitation of myself in the parking lot of a TV station in Buffalo. Having a Muslim TV station in Buffalo and then, in real life, there was a Muslim TV station in Buffalo. And an actual decapitation happened there. Just as this book was about to come out. And that started to spook me out a little bit. Correspondent: Yeah. Knight: I m starting to get afraid right now. Correspondent: Well, this is interesting. Because as I read your two memoirs both Blue-Eyed Devil and Impossible Man I saw, for example, that the Victoria s Secret catalog actually came from a personal example. Knight: Oh yeah. Yeah. Correspondent: As did the Penguin misspelling of the Qur an. And I m curious as to whether this almost convenient lifting of events from your own life is what leads to this prescience. Have you ever thought about this? Knight: I don t know. But it s all starting to blend together. Because I was on the set of the Taqwacores movie, when they were shooting that in the fall. And one day, I showed up on the set and I saw Dominic Rains, who was playing Jehangir, in a drum circle with Marwan from the real life band Al-Thawra in the parking lot of this house. The driveway. And you had the real life Taqwacore punks and the film Taqwacore punks. The fiction and the reality, all the borders are gone. Correspondent: But drawing from events so explicitly, what do you do to invent? To draw the distinction between something that is personally experienced versus what you concoct? Such as the idea of a Muslim punk scene. Knight: I don t know, man. Because in Osama Van Halen, I have a fictional character. So sometimes I m writing from the omniscient narrator. Sometimes I m writing myself. Like the real-life author. First person narrative. Sometimes I m talking about this fictional Mike Knight. And it s almost like there s no distinctions anymore. I mean, I just wrote myself getting my head chopped off. And now I m afraid that s going to happen. Correspondent: I m wondering if this is more of a metaphorical losing your head. Because after you wrote The Taqwacores, I know that you were considering leaving Islam altogether. And you were urged back into it when you realized there was some fluidity. And so I m curious as to whether this was finally cutting the cord to a particular type of Mike Knight or . Knight: Well, there were some serious things I was trying to talk about in that story. You know, Imam Ali said to hate in yourself what you re going to hate in other people. So the way that I made my points was to just look at myself in the worst way and to see myself as the object of critique. Everything that I was lashing out against I could search into myself and find some trace of that. That s why at the end, I deserved to have my head chopped off. (Image: Publishers Group Canada)

Lawrence Block is most recently the author of Step by Step. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Ruminating upon a life of exquisite indolence. Author: Lawrence Block Subjects Discussed: Step by Step as an anti-memoir, exploring childhood experience in print, randomness and finding connections, writing with a greater degree of freedom, Random Walk, concerns about a limited audience, earlier attempts at memoir, attempts by Block to write memoirs in the mid-1990s, the virtues of getting older, being less guarded with age, following up on Block s remarks from Galut, avarice as the guiding principle, Evan Hunter, Charles Ardai and Hard Case Crime, growing less reticent about limited editions, the $479 Kindle, not carrying about work being preserved, genre fiction as a window to a specific world, Raymond Chandler, Agatha Christie never going out of print, Block and Judaism, being a creature of intense and transitory enthusiasms, not having a goal, the lack of commonality between writing and race walking, becoming increasingly drawn to pursuits that don t involve leaving the house, writing screenplays, short stories vs. novels, and Alexander McCall Smith s Wall Street Journal article and reader ownership of the characters. EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Correspondent: You mentioned that you had attempted memoir before. Block: Right. Correspondent: And that memoir, which I presume is still unfinished, that had more to do with the working life of a writer, I suppose? Block: That memoir was about the early years. About the years writing pseudonymous books and getting started in the business. And I wrote about 50,000 words of it. And it still exists. And I went back to it. It was part of a multiple contract. It was submitted as part of that. And eventually the day came when I bought it back. It was a tiny portion of the advance. And I don t think anybody at Morrow was that excited about it. My agent had just bundled things together. And because I didn t seem inclined to resume it, oddly enough, now I find myself thinking maybe I ought to. That maybe that s what I might want to do next. Correspondent: Really? Block: Yeah. Correspondent: What brought this on? Was it just from ? Block: The experience of Step by Step. It s early days. I have no idea how it will sell. But people seem to like it and it seems to be getting a fair amount of attention. So we ll see. Correspondent: Well, I think just speaking as one person familiar with your work, the reason I was piqued when you talked about this unfinished memoir was because there s almost like a surprising lack of amount of stuff written about that time period where you were writing pseudonymously. There was a book written by the guy who later went on to do Don t Know Much About History, who wrote a book published about twenty-five years ago about the paperbacking of America [Kenneth C. Davis's Two-Bit Culture] and went on about mass market paperbacks as a whole. But nothing much about the dawn of Gold Medal and Dell and all the other paperback houses. And the pseudonymous aspect. So I wonder could this interest also have to do with the fact that, with all due respect, you re also one of the few people left who remember. Block: Yeah. That might have something to do with it. Also, when I wrote I think it was about 95, 94 or 5, that I wrote the memoir. And I hadn t been planning to, as I may have mentioned in there. I was stuck on something else. I had time booked at Ragdale. And I had to write something. And at the time that was what, fourteen years ago? I was fifty-five, fifty-six years old. It felt early days to be writing a memoir to me. Correspondent: Right. Block: And before the memoir genre became something. Correspondent: Now you have memoirs by twentysomethings. Block: I know. I know it. I remember the birth canal. (laughs)

Listen to LibriVox Community Podcast #107 hosted by Cori. Download audio file (librivox_community_podcast_107.mp3) Duration: 16:32 Intro by Cori and a Poem by Neeru. Guest appearances by Various Giggling stars of the Blooper Thread. TriciaG talks about Proof-Listening an essential part of the LibriVox Audiobook Production Process. To Subscribe to the Librivox Community Podcast, go to: http://feeds.feedburner.com/LibrivoxCommunityPodcast Or hit this itunes link to get you to the subscribe page: http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=203970211 Recent past and present Librivox Community Podcast files can be found at our spot on: Archive.org Archived shows for previous years can be found at: 2006, 2007 and 2008. Archived shownotes for the Librivox Community Podcast can be found at: http://librivox.org/category/librivox-community-podcast/ And the rss feed for those shownotes is: http://librivox.org/category/librivox-community-podcast/feed Community Podcasts have been downloaded 14,455 times so far this year!

Dick Cavett s column, Talk Show, regularly appears at the New York Times. (PROGRAM NOTE: During the course of our conversation, a Professor Robert Costelli from John Jay College who apparently has a background in law enforcement pushed in Mr. Cavett s chair, causing Mr. Cavett to accost him. This unusual social moment, which was resolved with bonhomie, can be experienced at the 38:04 mark.) Condition of Mr. Segundo: Examining his birth certificate for potential Nebraskan roots. Guest: Dick Cavett Subjects Discussed: Books that Cavett may or may not have authored, jobs that Cavett has worked, being a professional magician as a teenager, Cavett s brief career as a caddy, humorless Germans, James Ellroy, starting the Caddies Hall of Fame, Groucho Marx s golf ball-enhanced hat, stalking Jack Paar in the bathroom, the dreadful cliche It s who you know, not what you know, being drawn to living with showbiz people, Paul Douglas, meeting Groucho at George S. Kaufman s funeral, Studs Terkel, being born with the showbiz urge, fame vs. ideas, whether or not showbiz people are real people, Nixon s blue-suit adventures in Montauk, separating the real Cavett from the telegenic Cavett, Johnny Carson s failure to remember his guest lineup that night, learning how to listen over the years, real listening vs. telegenic listening, Jimmy Fallon, on not relying on a catalog of quips, overpreparing for an interview, advice Cavett picked up from Jack Paar, the icky word share, Werner Erhard and est, oversharing, Twitter, on not getting Mike Nichols on the show, interviews vs. conversations, when Cavett had to telephone potential guests to get them on the show, Frank Sinatra, Gay Talese s Frank Sinatra Has a Cold, secretly taping a telephone conversation with Marlon Brando, phrases that Brando used, Cary Grant, having to contend with armies of publicists, the worthlessness of many present talk show appearances, talent coordinators, allegations from 1960s Toronto journalists that Cavett was attractively functional, the bright orange shag rug on the ABC set, being bombarded by constant information and subwindows on television, TV as GUI, why Cavett didn t renew his six-year contract at CNBC, the mispronunciation of nuclear, David Frost, the problems with occupying vacant rooms, Peter Ustinov, claims from executives that people won t sit still for a long-form interview, the relationship between William Peter Blatty s appearance and the success of The Exorcist, the number of panties that Cavett has received over the years, resistance from ABC, the infamous Norman Mailer-Gore Vidal show, the Mailer-Torn brawl, Of a Small and Modest Malignancy, Wicked and Bristling with Dots, the Lillian Hellman/Mary McCarthy feud, making sure that writers could talk on television, Stephen Colbert, and Jon Stewart as the most trusted newsman in America. EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Correspondent: I m curious about this period of you coming to New York. Coming into town. You re on the prowl trying to get work as an actor. Before you eventually become a copy boy for Time Magazine. Cavett: That s right. I finally made it. (laughs) Correspondent: I should point out that your efforts to befriend numerous showbiz figures here in New York would in some cases, by today s standards, be considered stalking. You know, Jack Paar in the bathroom and all that. Cavett: Yeah. Correspondent: I m curious. Were you drawn by the notion of It s who you know rather than what you know or what was the impetus for this? Cavett: I had heard that dreadful cliche, usually used in the same conversation as I don t know much about art but I know what I like and Some of my best friends are Jews. In fact, two friends of mine used all three one evening and hit the jackpot. But anyway to get to your question. Correspondent: Wow. And they re still your friends? Cavett: They re both dead. So I don t see them that often. Correspondent: Using the phrase has killed them, I presume. Cavett: It mighta. If cliches could kill. Correspondent: (laughs) Cavett: But what was the one we were working on? Correspondent: Oh, we were kinda talking about who you know. Cavett: Oh, who you know. Nobody ever says, It s whom you know. Correspondent: No, they don t. Cavett: Even though my father was an English teacher, I never did. And I was just drawn to famous successful showbiz people and wanted to live among them. Correspondent: Really. Cavett: Be one of them. And that took me to accost on my first day in New York Dave Garroway, who was out in front of the Today Show window. And speaking of making it around as an actor, one day, the great Paul Douglas film actor for those of us older than 30 was standing next to me waiting for a light to change waiting on Madison Avenue. And I said, Mr. Douglas, where would you go to look for work today as an actor? And he said, I couldn t answer, and walked on. (laughs) He wasn t impolite. Correspondent: Yeah. Cavett: He told the truth. Correspondent: He probably had to get to an appointment. I m sure it wasn t anything personal. Cavett: I still love him in the movies. Correspondent: But you managed to coax Groucho into buying you lunch. And I m curious if it was a scenario involving charisma or blackmail. I mean, what happened here? What did you attribute your ability to get on with so many people? So many bigwigs here? Or did you stalk them all like Jack Paar? Cavett: Well, I ve never given that much thought. I don t know what it is. Something in me appealed to him apparently enough. I met him at George S. Kaufman s funeral or after it on the street. Groucho was starting to come down Fifth Avenue. Puerto Rican Day Parade booming along beside. And I said, Groucho, I m a big fan of yours. Then he said, Well, if we get any hotter, I can use a big fan. I should have said gets any hotter, which is what he said. Retake. (laughs) And Groucho said, Well if it gets any hotter, I can use a big fan. There. That s right, isn t it? Correspondent: Yeah, sure. Sure. Cavett: Yeah. And the joke still works. Correspondent: Yeah, it does. Cavett: Even though it was years and years ago. Correspondent: Actually, we should have six different attempts at this joke. Cavett: Yeah. Correspondent: Just to show the Cavett mind. Cavett: Well, it shows the Groucho mind in a way. Because I never saw him misspeak a joke or a line. I only saw Hope, who I used to worship and watch and hang around when I was working for Carson/Parr. When we were out in California, I would watch Hope tape his show all the time. Once or twice, he would blow a monologue or a joke, and get a bigger laugh about doing that. As Johnny could. Correspondent: Yeah. Cavett: And really any good comic could. But where was I? Oh, Groucho. So we started walking down the street and chatting. Beautiful day. And I remember thinking, This may be the best day of my life. And I m still not sure it was not. When we got all the way down the Plaza, where he was lunching alone. And on the way down, he insulted every doorman. And then a Puerto Rican man in a bright suit happily enjoying his day saw Groucho and made a great grin. And he said, Com-e-dy! (laughs) Correspondent: Yeah. Cavett: And Groucho said, Tell me. Is it true that you were cutting sugar cane only a month ago? You seem to have succeeded with that suit. Well, anyway, it entertained me and the man. And we got to 59th Street. And he said to me, in the voice from the game show, Well you seem like a nice young man and I d like you to have lunch with me. And I thought, Am I going to awaken in a moment and find this to be only a dream? Correspondent: The question I have is why did showbiz people appeal more than, say, regular people. Like say the doorman, for example. I know that over the course of your show, you had a number of intriguing cultural figures and unusual people that wouldn t be on other late-night shows. But on the other hand, it does make me curious why culture, in some sense, was the great prism for which you could conduct these many lengthy conversations with these people. Why didn t you go the Studs Terkel route? I m curious. Cavett: How do you see the Studs Terkel route? Correspondent: Well, he talked with everybody. Cavett: Talking to? Correspondent: He talks with writers. He talks with ditchmen. Cavett: Talk to janitors. Or, in the politically correct age, custodians. Correspondent: Exactly. Cavett: (laughs) Correspondent: I m old enough that when I went to elementary school, they called them custodians back then. Cavett: They did even then? Oh. Correspondent: Yeah, they did. Back in the 70s.

In this special podcast Nick Hornby talks revealingly about living in England, writing, music and his new novel Juliet, Naked.Get the PodcastDownload the podcast [MP3] Add the Penguin Podcast feed to your RSS Reader and have the show delivered automatically (copy this link to your RSS reader )Subscribe to the podcast directly in iTunes [itunes ]Download penguinpodcast58.mp3About this podcastFor information about any of the authors and books featured in these podcasts, plus features, interviews and news on the best in UK fiction and non-fiction, visit Penguin Books. Annie and Duncan are a mid-thirties couple who have reached a fork in the road, realising their shared interest in the reclusive musician Tucker Crowe (in Duncan's case, an obsession rather than an interest) is not enough to hold them together any more. When Annie hates Tucker's 'new release', a terrible demo of his most famous album, it's the last straw - Duncan cheats on her and she promptly throws him out. Via an internet discussion forum, Annie's harsh opinion reaches Tucker himself, who couldn't agree more. He and Annie start an unlikely correspondence which teaches them both something about moving on from years of wasted time.Nick Hornby's compelling new novel, four years after A Long Way Down, is about the nature of creativity and obsession, and how two lonely people can gradually find each other.Visit Nick's siteAnd buy the bookOr read the first chapterOr download Nick Hornby audiobooks on iTunes

Philip Alcabes is most recently the author of Dread. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Attempting to understand the certainty of certain dread, and the dread of dreadful certainty. Author: Philip Alcabes Subjects Discussed: [List forthcoming, but here is a fun-filled conversation on plague, perception, scientific ethics, linguistics, balancing public response with science, and attempts to combat sexism, racism, and homophobia in the scientific world!] EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Correspondent: Reading this book, I got the sense that the three Ps pandemic, pestilence, and what s the other one? plague! that we re essentially overstating them. But I want to start off by offering a hypothetical scenario. If I m sitting at a restaurant, and a Norway rat jumps onto the table and starts nibbling at my sandwich, I m going to have some understandable concerns. So I guess the question is, if we are in a culture of needless dread about the three Ps, what is the amount of fear that is acceptable for you? Some general terms. Alcabes: So what is the amount of fear that is acceptable? Correspondent: Yeah. Alcabes: Well, I accept any amount of fear. People feel the fear that they fear. But to answer your question about the rat, would I eat the sandwich? No. Would I think I m going to die because I saw the rat? No. Is that what you re getting at? Correspondent: It s what I m getting at. Alcabes: Would I think that the black death is about to start again? Also, no. And do I think that we re too worried about pandemics, pestilence, and plague? Well, we re how worried we are. What s odd is that we re as worried as we are, given that we know so much. In the 14th century, which is when plague came to Europe and became what we now know as the Black Death, people didn t know much about that illness. They didn t actually know that it was connected to rats. They didn t know that it was spread by fleas jumping from rats to humans. They didn t know that it was caused by a bacterium. They didn t know exactly how to prevent it. They didn t know, as we do now, how we can cure it. It can be cured now by common antibiotics. But given that we know so much now, why do we get so panicky? Why do we still think that we re about to be consumed by some new black death? And that s the more puzzling question. It s really the question that launched my book. Correspondent: When the media initially covered AIDS in 1982, they referred to it as the gay plague. But one might argue that here we are twenty-seven years later and most people are not going to use the insensitive term gay plague to reference AIDS or HIV. And I m wondering if you re possibly being a little hard on people when some new development or some epidemic actually occurs. Because people are going to try and want to pinpoint it. They re going to be frightened. They re going to be scared. How do we transmute that initial impulse of fear that goes into atavistic territory into something that is more reasonable along the lines of what you re suggesting? Since we have the knowledge, how do we deploy it among the general public so that they don t freak out like this? Alcabes: You know, it would be unreasonable for me to say, Don t be afraid. People are afraid. And, in fact, I think that one of the premises of my book is that we carry with us innate, inchoate dreads. And the innate ones are about death, at least from what the psychologists tell us. And there are inchoate ones I think this is what you meant by atavistic territory that have to do with a kind of ineffable dark realm of randomness where anything can happen. And I think some people have called that a fear of social disarray, of the dissolution of society. And I think that s a way to put it. We re afraid of whatever s out there. And it s not unreasonable to think that we re going to stop being so afraid. I do think that it s quite reasonable to do epidemiology on it. I was trained as an epidemiologist. It s a reasonable response to collect data and try and make sense of a disease outbreak. Where I think we let ourselves go wrong, where we let ourselves harm our own society, is when we let our fears shape narrative, if you will, of disease outbreaks, in which somebody s to blame. Somebody has crossed a line, imperiled the rest of us. And I think your example of the early days of AIDS is really well taken. Because that s a great example of some people looking at AIDS as a kind of ratification of suspicions they had about what some people were doing that was bad, right? That people were suspicious that the sexual revolution of the 60s was going too far or who had a specific fear about homosexuality allowed themselves to see AIDS as a validation of those anxieties.

Maggie Estep is most recently the author of Alice Fantastic. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Hoping to see Alice at the next opportunity. Author: Maggie Estep Subjects Discussed: [List forthcoming; lots of nutty topics, including speculation on Uma Thurman's activities in Woodstock] EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Estep: Our love of animals is directly proportionate to our indifference to human beings. It s a little bit of an exaggeration. I grew up around all sorts of horses and cats and dogs. To this day, my mom if I want to get her talking to me for more than two minutes it has to be about the dogs. So it s an off-the-nose dialogue where we re talking about the dogs. But really we re talking about something else. Correspondent: Interesting. And in this, you are talking about something else with the dogs. Because from the very beginning, the big oaf with the puppy and all this reminded me very much of Lennie from Of Mice and Men, among many other literary allusions. First of all, I want to ask if some of these literary allusions that are there The Rocking Horse Winner, for example were these intentional or were these just part of the whole ? Estep: It s never, never deliberate. It s all there swimming around in my little brain and comes out inadvertently sometimes. Correspondent: Little brain. I wanted to ask you about littleness. Because one thing that is very curious is that many of the women in this book are described as tiny. Estep: Oh. Correspondent: You have the tiny goth girl waitress. And Eloise is described as tiny by her mother. And, of course, Kimberly is described as tiny. And then, of course, there s Tina in this. Tiny. Tina. Estep: (laughs) Correspondent: I m getting a little theme here that most of the women in this book are tiny. And I m curious as to why this is. What is it with this modifier here? Estep: I actually had not really thought of that. (laughs) I don t know. But Alice, who is sort of the main one, is not tiny. She s rangy. I don t know. There s something about small women who are very tough that s really a beautiful prototype. And until you pointed it out, I didn t realize that s what was going on in the book. Correspondent: There s an inverse ratio between height and toughness in your mind? Estep: (laughs) Correspondent: Is that your theory? Estep: Maybe. That might be something. Correspondent: Okay. Did you develop this theory over the course of time? Or did it just apply to the particular universe of this novel? Estep: It just came out at this very moment. (laughs)

Lizzie Skurnick is most recently the author of Shelf Discovery. She previously appeared on The Bat Segundo Show #13. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Sacrificing his manhood to fight the patriarchal overlords. Author: Lizzie Skurnick Subjects Discussed: [List forthcoming, but oh quite a strange potpourri! Everything from redheads, television rape, Jean Auel, whether patriarchy or elitism is responsible for YA/genre ghettoization, and whether or not Judy Blume's Wifey involves punishing the heroine.] EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Skurnick: You know, you make up a story for what you re trying to do later, but who knows what you were trying to do? Correspondent: Well, then I m going to go ahead and put my own particular question of interest to you. Skurnick: Go for it. Correspondent: Okay. The concern for redheads in your review of The Moon by Night. Skurnick: Oh. Correspondent: The author who has the redheaded stepchild in A Gift of .A Gift of Magic. Yes. I m sorry. My handwriting s terrible. But I found out last night that there are, in fact, a streak of redheaded people in your family. Skurnick: Yes. Correspondent: And so, as a result, I must put forth the psychological question to you, Ms. Skurnick, over whether this preoccupation with redheads reflects this familial genetic scenario. Skurnick: Okay. It s hilarious. Because if you I don t know if you notice this at the party. Because not all of my friends were at the party. But my Grandma Dora was a redhead, my father is a redhead, my Aunt Francine is a redhead. Growing up, one of my good friends Becky was a redhead. I think I have another good friend who was a redhead. And throughout my life it s hilarious two of my dearest friends Casey and Jane were redheads. I have dated many redheads. And my new nephew Asher is a redhead. So I think that certainly I have a huge streak of redheadedness in my life. And I could not tell you why. And it is actually funny. Because whenever I write about Meg s boyfriend Calvin is redhead and there s quite a few redheads in L Engle, in general. You know, Polyhymnia is a redhead. Calvin s daughter. And when you write about it, there s always a few girls in the comments who will go, Oh, Calvin, I love a ginger! Like if you do it with Prince William and his brother, you ll get that too. So there is that is a theme in my life. But it is also a theme in YA. Correspondent: Yeah. Skurnick: It s a huge theme in YA. And I don t know. I guess it s because I ve never understood this because, like I said, there s zillions of redheads in my life. But redheadness in society does always it s like you are marked as a very different thing. Everybody looks at redheads. You know, when Asher, my nephew, was born, it was the first thing five people told me. And then when people looked at him, they would say, He s a redhead. You know, that s like the first thing. And so I guess it s often a little bit of what the author is talking about. You know, the sense of being deliberately put outside. And then what do you do with that? What do you do with the fact that you are an individual. You know, redheads are forced from a very young age to be individuals in the way that we are not. And I think maybe that s Correspondent: I was a redhead, you know. Skurnick: Really? Correspondent: Yeah, yeah. You re drawing a generalization here. But I ll let you continue. I am very curious to hear your answer. Skurnick: Well, all of the redheads in my life are actually like fire red. You know, it doesn t go away. Like I actually have some red in my hair, although you can t tell right now. Because it s wet. (Image: Tayari Jones)

Richard Russo is most recently the author of That Old Cape Magic. He previously appeared on The Bat Segundo Show #152. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Shoving Cape Cod mackerel down his throat. Author: Richard Russo Subjects Discussed: [List forthcoming, but lots in the latter half of the show about the Newsweek piece and the perceptive problems with close third-person.] EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Correspondent: Bon Jovi s Living on a Prayer. Why Living on a Prayer over You Give Love a Bad Name? Russo: (laughs) Correspondent: Was Living on a Prayer the tune that was more applicable to weddings here? Russo: Ed, Ed, you re trying to make me feel regret now, aren t you? Because that would have been perfect as well. Correspondent: Was it more about living than love? With the emphasis in the book. Russo: It was the result of my wife and I having gone recently to a number of weddings and being absolutely fascinated by the way young people my daugghters age react to the song. Because it is so much before their time. And for a lot of young people 28, 29, 30 it is a kind of anthem And the way they not only know the words, they have a kind of routine worked out on the dance floor. Those in the know have this routine on the dance floor that involves the fist-pumping, which they do in unison. Sometimes forty or fifty of them, young people out on the dance floor, to a song that is just so much before their time. But they ve adopted it. So it was a wonderful way to show a bridge between those generations. And Laura, who does such a kind act in that redeems her father, at least temporarily. It just fit that slot so nicely. It also suggests that when Griffin begins this novel, he s had a tiff with his wife. But it s really just a tiff. I mean, he has a kind of tenure in his job. He loves his life. He loves his wife. He loves his daughter. Everything is right. And yet by the end of the first half of this book, he s living on a prayer. And he knows it. Whereas he didn t in the beginning. Correspondent: But it s interesting. Because your timing is absolutely perfect! Recently, on YouTube, there s this video that s been going around, that 18 million people have seen, of this elaborate dance at a wedding all set to music. Russo: Oh really? I hadn t seen it. Correspondent: Well, I know. I don t think you re much of an online guy. Russo: (laughs) Correspondent: I wanted to talk about the notion of the home in this book. There s a sentiment that is expressed: You aren t a real adult until you have a mortgage you can t afford. Russo: Right. Correspondent: Griffin is pressured into home ownership. And he and his wife often sift through the real estate catalogs, splitting up properties into Cannot Afford It and Wouldn t Have It As a Gift. Russo: Right. Correspondent: And then also, 13-year-old Sunny Kim says, You have a lovely home, later on in the book. Home though is not necessarily where the heart is in this. This is a couple that is united by home as a piece of property, as opposed to a place where one can establish a family. This is a couple that settles on The Great Truro Accord and actually figures that this prearranged stratagem will aid them in deflecting every curveball of life thrown their way. So I wanted to just ask you why the home, of all things or even just property in general would be the central place for this couple s failure to (1) deal with life and (2) come to the real terms that they are their parents and that they share a lot of family qualities. That s a lot of points. I ll stop there. Russo: No, no, that s yes, I m overwhelmed by the question. The other conflict, of course, is that Griffin s parents, of course, are confirmed renters. So their notion of a home is something which recedes before them. Like the Cape itself. I mean, home for them is a place that you can only visit. And so, for Griffin, home is something that he is really reluctant to go to. Joy loves her parents home. She loves the vacation home. The same home that they rent every year. For her, home is a central place, as you said. It is the place where love resides most powerfully. And I think I would also expand that to say that home, like marriage, is not just a private thing. Just as marriage institutionalizes love in some way, home institutionalizes family. So when Sunny Kim the outsider comes in and says, You have a lovely home. He s saying, You have a lovely daughter with whom I m in love. You have a lovely marriage to which I aspire. You have a lovely home that I would like to live in one day and you have a lovely nation that is now my adopted home. So just as your question is big, my answer is kind of big. In the sense that the notion of home, by the time we get to the end of this book especially that final Sunny Kim scene that notion of home has gone from something at the beginning it was two people separating real estate property on a place they can t afford into those two categories Can t Afford It and Wouldn t Have It As a Gift. And by the time we get to the end of the novel, it s almost something that you would expect to be taken over at some point by Department of Homeland Security. (laughs)

It s our Fourth Anniversary! LibriVox started with an optimistic blog post on 10th August, 2005 and then grew and grew and We now have a catalog of 2,557 books in 26 languages. And our catalog is growing every day. You too can volunteer! Or perhaps just pop in to say hi on the forum. And you can join the celebration by Listening to the LibriVox Community Podcast #106 hosted by Esther. Download audio file (librivox_community_podcast_106.mp3) Duration: 49:40 Intro by Esther with thoughts from Lars Rolander and a poetry collage by David Lawrence. A few thoughts from Original Member Kara Shallenberg and Founder Hugh McGuire. A special presentation by Neeru and Eli! More thoughts from Ryan, Julie and Joy! Another of Ruthie’s infamous arrangements… Cori closes us off with one of her famous disclaimers. To Subscribe to the Librivox Community Podcast, go to: http://feeds.feedburner.com/LibrivoxCommunityPodcast Or hit this itunes link to get you to the subscribe page: http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=203970211 Recent past and present Librivox Community Podcast files can be found at our spot on: Archive.org Archived shows for previous years can be found at: 2006, 2007 and 2008. Archived shownotes for the Librivox Community Podcast can be found at: http://librivox.org/category/librivox-community-podcast/ And the rss feed for those shownotes is: http://librivox.org/category/librivox-community-podcast/feed Community Podcasts have been downloaded 11,238 times so far this year!

J. Robert Lennon is most recently the author of Castle and Pieces for the Left Hand. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Contemplating his surprising longevity after 300 shows. Author: J. Robert Lennon Subjects Discussed: Ending sentences with nouns, how location affects character description, objects and places as the territory of a story, how the land in upstate New York inspires narrative, objects that regular readers can relate to, lost childhood, lost parents, more isolated characters in Lennon s later novels, meals in fiction, antipodean metaphors within Castle, working with a narrative juxtaposed against a cultural-historical symmetry, Stanley Milgram, Vietnam and Iraq, whether Loesch s actions are exonerated by historical injustice, the white symbols and black redaction throughout Castle, cutting down on pre-planning novels and trusting the subconscious, whether we ll ever see the full version of Happyland, restarting a writing career multiple times, dealing with marketing forces, accessibility, Stewart O Nan, New York publishing biases against small towns, the unexpected American publication of Pieces for the Left Hand, how naps permitted Lennon to finish Pieces for the Left Hand, relying on anecdotal culture for narrative, long thin environments within Lennon s novels, survivalist novels written in dark, evil writing labs, the gray / grey controversy, and batty character surnames close to specific words. EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Correspondent: You seem to veer between these really lonely tales and these outright satirical tales. After the whole incident where your novel got serialized at Harper s, I m curious if there s some hesitancy on your part to pursue satire. Is that why Castle s so dark? Lennon: No, no, no. Correspondent: Why bounce around tonally? Lennon: I had written Mailman and Happyland in sequence. I was in that antic black comic mode for a while. Which I think is kind of my default mode. I like to think that I go away from it for a few books. I do something very different. And then, whatever I learn there, I bring it into default mode. I mean, right now, I m writing a book that has a large cast of characters with some manic satirical elements. And, in fact, it s a family book. Except it s the opposite of the other family books. It s not that family members are missing. It s that there are too many of them. It s a big ad hoc family that has come together in spite of the unlikelihood of that happening. Correspondent: It s interesting. Because I thought you were going to give me the James Ellroy line for this book. Lennon: Oh? Correspondent: You know how he says, It s fun for the whole family if you re the Manson family. He does this every time he sells a book. Lennon: (laughs) Correspondent: But I mean, that s interesting. I should also point out with Eric, there is nevertheless a strange absurdism to his need for having things in place. And, in fact, and I m sorry to just throw a bunch of things at you at once, I wanted to ask about the two meals he eats, which are essentially bipolar. You have this really greasy cheeseburger. And then he goes and he eats this vegetarian meal. So it s almost as if his choices are reflective of not being able to fit into the middle of these two antipodean ends. And I m curious how much this was a part of devising the character. Having specific locative places like this that he couldn t inhabit. The middle ground. Lennon: Well, I think the problem with him is that he can t inhabit the world. And I wanted to have a scene with him twice, where he had to go and eat something, and he would take that opportunity to sit and think about things for a few minutes. And it occurs to me, Where does this guy eat? He s so abstract. He s so detached from human life or this is how he presents himself anyway that the notion of him eating a cheeseburger is just ridiculous. And it was only later I realized, there s nothing I could have him eat that would seem right. Because he s not the kind of person that goes to a restaurant. He s the kind of person that exists in this sort of dark, violent abstraction as a dark, violent abstraction. I mean, this isn t an explicitly comic book by any stretch, but I found these scenes to be kind of funny to write. I mean, he s at the Vegan place! Correspondent: Well, there s also this notion too of him fixing the renovations on his house under time, which is interesting in light of the fact that you do mention Iraq in this book. And, of course, Iraq has no timetable. So I m curious again about these points of disparity throughout the book. How many of these were designed along these lines? There s also the symmetry, of course, of his very predicament. Here he is. Something terrible has happened to him. And he, in turn, has become someone who has done something terrible as well. So I m curious. At what point during the conception or the writing of this novel were you aware? Or did you design such symmetry? Lennon: The Iraq thing came first. And it was only after my wife was reading an article in Weird NJ the magazine about a guy who finds a castle in the woods while walking through the woods that it occurred to me that this should be the setting for this book that I had in mind. Like she was the one who told me that that was the setting for the book I had in mind. Correspondent: Really? Lennon: Yeah, and when I started thinking about this guy, I was reading a lot of Kazuo Ishiguro. You know, how his narrators are they re liars really. Nothing dishonest, but they re creating a reality for themselves that s appealing to them. They re justifying their actions. They re justifying the things that are happening around them in a very self-serving way. I m just going to write a first-person narrative like that. Not unreliable, per se. But it s the sound of a guy who s done something wrong convincing himself that there isn t any ambiguity about it.

China Mieville is most recently the author of The City The City. He previously appeared on The Bat Segundo Show #105. Condition of Mr. Segundo: Searching for the Mieville and the Mieville. Author: China Mieville Subjects Discussed: When The City The City was written, speculating on the novel s setting, ratty technology and shambolic modern cities, passenger policy, comparisons between The City The City and Reports of Certain Events in London, subconscious intent and conceptual framework, police procedural dialogue vs. melodramatic dialogue, whether an author s voice is reigned in because of genre, the myths of genre constraints, steps taken in advance to alter voice, the dangers of reading while writing, maintaining two sets of momentum while writing two different books, the enabling qualities of thematics, multiculturalism in Canada, satire and political engagement within fiction, resisting critical labels within a cultural framework, Jacques Lacan, metaphors in fiction, Mieville s frustrations with perceived author endorsements, readers who cling to rigid interpretation, disappointing mystery novels, designing endings as moral dilemmas, circumstances in which you can exonerate the author, Mary Doria Russell s The Sparrow, uneasy books, the dangers of unease as an abstract concept, not distinguishing between aesthetic and emotive qualities within text, resisting post-structuralism, seeing text as part of social totality, and keeping people turning pages. VIDEO EXCERPT: EXCERPT FROM SHOW: Mieville: Fundamentally, what this is about is taking the logic of everyday borders the logic of political boundaries and extrapolating them just a little tiny bit. But the logic is the same. It s an exaggeration, but it s not a radical break. So in terms of the rules of physics and all that sort of stuff, it is at least 96% sure that they are the same as in this world here. This is not a magical realm in that sense. That s not how this works. And that s quite a big difference. Because that short story ["Reports of Certain Events in London"] was very much about the kind of implicit dream logic of the psychogeography of London, and literalizing that metaphor and the city as an uneasy beast. This is slightly different. In some ways, this is much more to do with a genuine juridical legal reality of the world. As I said, it s extrapolated. But to that extent, it s very realistic. The logic of the strangeness is actually a logic that exists in the real world. It s a little bit exaggerated, but that s all. So to me, they feel quite different. But that s not to invalidate your point. Because like I say, it has much to do with reception and subconscious stuff. But at a conscious level, they felt different to me. Correspondent: Yeah. But you re also dealing with a conceptual framework here with the two cities. And this leads me to wonder since, of course, the last time we talked, you talked repeatedly about your notion of monsters and the way your imagination works if this is very much extending into creating this giant world. Here you have a situation in which on a dialogue standpoint just on that alone you are now dealing with procedural dialogue, as opposed to what we have seen in your previous books, in which you have dialogue that is very intense and dramatic. Because, of course, there are giant monsters that are terrorizing the landscape and ripping things up. And, of course, people are going to want to get other people s attention in this. But I m curious if going to this procedural dialogue was a bit of a challenge because you had to possibly restrain the natural inventiveness that definitely crops up in the dialogue as well as the narrative or if the conceptual framework was just enough to even things out. Or if there any difficulties in the procedural dialogue whatsoever. Mieville: Well, it didn t feel difficult. Now that s not to say it s done well. I mean, I m not the right person to judge. It s up to readers. They might be saying, Well, of course, it didn t feel difficult. Because you totally fucked it up. You know, I don t know. I mean, for me can I swear? Sorry. Correspondent: Oh yeah. You can say whatever the hell you want here. Mieville: Alright. Okay. But, no, in the writing, it didn t feel difficult. Because for me, it s always a question of trying to get into the voice at the start. So it wasn t a question. Like I don t think I have a default voice as people possibly think. Because the Bas-Lag books have a baroque meandering voice. So that s obviously what I m known for. And I understand that. But I think it s more that each of the voices was got into as part of the project. So, for this, because this was always a book that was conceived of as a noir as a noir set in what is, brackets, very, very nearly, close brackets, the real world, it felt completely different from the word go. And so people ask the same question of Un Lun Dun. Did it feel difficult to get into a slightly more playful child-friendly voice? No. Because that s the mode you re in when you re starting the writing. I was reading a lot of noir. I was reading a lot of crime. I was thinking in terms of telling a story to my mum, who read a lot of books like that. So that was the voice that that demanded. So, no, it wasn t a question of reigning yourself in. It was a question of indulging the voice that you had got into for this job. If that makes sense. Correspondent: But still, you are dealing with limitations here in a way that you re not in any of your other books. Because you don t have those giant monsters. Literal monsters. Metaphorically speaking, we can go into that too. But you have to reign yourself in. Because even though, as you argued in your Scalzi piece, you don t believe mystery novels to represent any kind of realism, there is nevertheless a verisimilitudinous plane that you have to meet with this. It s a little bit different. Mieville: They pretend to be realist. Correspondent: Yeah, exactly. Exactly. Mieville: Yeah, that s true. There is a limitation. But there s a limitation in all forms. Genres are both constraining and enabling. Now one of the things I wanted to do when I was writing this book it was very important to me that this was a book that was faithful to crime. That somebody who was interested in crime, who read a crime novel, would not feel that this is some outsider who doesn t get the rules, who doesn t play fair. I wanted to be completely respectful and have total fidelity to that paradigm. So you re quite right. I can t magic them out of a difficult situation. You don t have the recourse to that sort of thing. But at the same time, you have other things that are potentialities. Like I know a lot of readers with the best will in the world, without any snobbery, who simply cannot proceed with a book once they ve had too much of a strong eruption of the fantastic. (Photo: Mattia V)