Richard Powers: 2019 National Book Festival

Video Statistics and Information

Video
Captions Word Cloud
Reddit Comments
Captions
>> Peter Vankevich: We're really fortunate to have Richard Powers here, and Ron Charles from "The Washington Post," who tells me that all he does is review books at "The Washington Post." So I'm leaving it at that, Ron, and you can [laughter] -- I want to welcome you both here to our fiction stage. >> Ron Charles: Thank you. Thank you very much. [ Applause ] First, a word of thanks to our co-chairman of the festival, David Rubenstein, and the other generous sponsors who've made this day possible. If you'd like to add your financial support, please note the information in your program. And I want to note that we'll have time for questions after this conversation. So if you would please come to the microphone and wave your hand about -- it's very difficult for us to see you, but we will call on you. So be thinking of questions as we're talking. My guest today is Richard Powers, a man I've admired for years. He's the author of a dozen celebrated novels, including "The Echo Maker," which won a National Book Award, and his most recent novel, "The Overstory," which justifiably won the Pulitzer Prize in April. [ Applause ] Thank you. Thank you so much for being here. Genetics, pharmaceuticals, artificial intelligence, music, photography, botany -- I feel like I've learned more about these subjects from your novels than I ever did in school. How is it you know so much [laughter]? >> Richard Powers: I don't, really. I mean, my problem growing up was I couldn't make a choice. You know, I just -- I just found everything interesting, and from year to year, the interests would change. One year, I was certain I was going to be an oceanographer, and the next year, an entomologist. And, you know, I was just that kind of kid, and when it came going to college, I just -- I became claustrophobic. You know, I had to declare a major, and I had to say what I was going to study, you know, for the rest of my life. And whatever door it was that I was going to open and walk down was going to be 100 doors closing, and I did make a choice. I chose for physics, thinking that somehow this was, like, a fundamental discipline, and it might be a way of continuing to get the big picture, and to -- you know, to get an aerial view of the way that things worked. And I pretty quickly realized that, as with almost every other discipline, you know, the farther along you went, the more specialized you have to get. And I just felt I was in danger of learning more and more about less and less, until I knew everything there was about nothing [laughter]. But it was toward the end of my undergraduate career, and there was some careering involved at that level -- but I stumbled onto the idea of taking writing seriously as a profession. I had written before then, but not -- not in a concentrated or a dedicated way. And all of a sudden, this little bell went off. It's like, wow, I can wake up in the morning, and for day after day, for the period of however long it takes, get a vicarious sense of what the world looks like to someone who knows that discipline that is the subject of that book. >> Ron Charles: But how do you become that expert in those subjects? >> Richard Powers: Deep reading, and that's the joy, when -- I mean, you are an expert. I'm not an expert. I'm a novelist, but in that period of time that it takes to write a book, I can build a sense of the essential bibliography. I can immerse myself in it. I can interview people. I can live as closely to that culture as possible, and get a little sense of the road not taken, who I might have been had I pursued that as a way of life, what the -- you know, what's -- what are the hopes, and fears, and dreams of people who organize their sense of themselves and their sense of world around that specialization? And at the end of five years, when I'm starting to feel claustrophobic again, I can reinvent myself, and start again in some other place. >> Ron Charles: How do you know that you are an expert enough to write the book? How do you know, in a sense, you're right? Do you have experts read your novels over? >> Richard Powers: Sure. >> Ron Charles: You do? >> Richard Powers: That's a crucial part, and over the years, I've been saved from some pretty bonehead errors by people who are really in the field. So there's -- it is a dicey thing, in some ways, to make -- to take that material and say, "It's not just window dressing for the story. That is the story." >> Ron Charles: Right. >> Richard Powers: You know, and the things that are being contested are the things that are being contested in those fields. It's taking a chance, and, you know, I've not gotten away Scot-free. But, you know, the -- to spend that amount of time doing legwork means you are in contact with a network of experts who can say, "Actually, you know, you're close here, but this series -- this part needs some serious work." >> Ron Charles: So you make some strong demands on yourself as an author, as a researcher, and you make, I think, strong demands on readers. And I think you make strong demands on the novel form, too. I mean, if you wanted to write about -- >> Richard Powers: I sound like a very demanding guy [laughter]. For me, you know, I think it's -- there's more joy than rigor, if that makes any sense. >> Ron Charles: -- oh, sure. That comes across. But if you wanted to write about neurology, or some other interesting scientific subject, you could write a non-fiction book. What is it that draws you to stories, is what I'm saying. Why encase that scientific subject in a fictional frame? >> Richard Powers: Yeah, fair enough, and I have, over the 35 years that I've been writing, from time to time, thought, you know, if it's that material that interests me, maybe I should become a non-fiction writer. >> Ron Charles: I'm glad you didn't, but why? >> Richard Powers: [Laughter] Well, because it's not just the material that interests me. It's the relationship between the material and its practitioners, the material and its receivers, the way that that stuff changes our life at the level of human experience. So there is no other place that relates empirical, factual material to social questions, and political questions, and to psychological questions, the personal questions. The only place -- if you're interested in relations between the makers, the receivers, the thing being made -- the novel's the place to do it. In fact, I have, over the course of years, made lots of friends who have gone the other direction, who have dedicated themselves to discursive writing, to non-fiction. And they -- in their own fields, they will sometimes say, you know, "Because of the restrictions, we have to write in a dispassionate way. We have to write in an impersonal way. We love it when a novelist takes our field." >> Ron Charles: I'm sure. >> Richard Powers: Right? "Because this is what we would love to do. We would love to show that material, that factual material not as a series of -- as a series of equations, or measurements, or discoveries. We would love to show it as the source of possibility, of deep hope, of fear. We would love to show it in all its human complexity and messiness." And the novel is the place to do that. And sometimes, I'll -- you know, like, I have a sociologist friend who's -- has an international reputation, and he says, "We sociologists really don't know -- you know, we reduce the variables until it's manageable in an academic way." To understand the true sociology of these disciplines, let's look at the artists. Let's see what they do with it. >> Ron Charles: Interesting. >> Richard Powers: Because that's where it becomes a substance of concern. >> Ron Charles: And how do you pick -- I mean, it's easy to refer to your novels by their scientific subjects, if you're trying to remember -- oh, that's the novel about -- that's the novel about -- how do you choose those subjects? Did they choose you? And of course, I want to ask you, how did you choose trees for "The Overstory"? But in general, how do you choose those subjects? How do you say, "This is the time for a novel about artificial intelligence," say? >> Richard Powers: It's been different for each book. I mean, my first book was published in 1985, and I was a kid, you know. I was in my mid-20s, and this book came out last year. And I've got one foot in the grave now. You know, so it's been a long -- you know, and the way that each topic presents itself is -- has been some unique mix of serendipity and will on my part. >> Ron Charles: Yes. >> Richard Powers: But I'll tell you one thing that I do think has happened again and again. While immersed in one subject, I become very conscious of all the places -- all the questions, all the psychological and social concerns, and all the material, and scientific discoveries that I can't get to from there. >> Ron Charles: Funny. >> Richard Powers: And that -- it's almost as if the germ plasm for the next book is always in the previous book. >> Ron Charles: Interesting. >> Richard Powers: Yeah. >> Ron Charles: And how did you choose trees for this book? Because I've been telling people, "This is the most exciting novel about trees you will ever read.." [Laughter] But I totally mean it. >> Richard Powers: [Laughter] You just reminded me -- where did the book begin? So I had a conversation a couple days ago with a dear friend who was telling me a kind of shocking story about being the recipient of a certain kind of racist practice inside the publishing industry. >> Ron Charles: Geez. >> Richard Powers: And, you know, I said, "Really? Wow." And she said, "Yeah." And I said, "Wow, I -- you know, tell me all about this. You know, tell me from the beginning." And she said, "Well, in 1619" [laughter] -- so when you say, "Where did this book begin," I want to say, "Well, 400 million years ago [laughter]." Where it began for me was in northern California, when I was teaching at Stanford. I had spent many years at the University of Illinois in Urbana, Illinois, and had retired from there, and had gone out west, and really was starting a new life. I had reached the age of 55 more or less tree-blind. I mean, I -- >> Ron Charles: You'd seen trees. >> Richard Powers: -- I loved them. I thought they were beautiful, but, you know, I couldn't tell an elm from an ash, you know, and there were a lot of maples out there. You know, and everything was kind of maple, you know [laughter]. And it was going out west. And Stanford -- you know, Stanford's an extraordinary campus. I mean, they just have -- it's almost like an arboretum, being on campus, so you can't not notice these bizarre, unique, distinctive creatures that you -- you know, that I had never come face-to-face with. So you're always a bit more alert to something that you haven't normalized, but it was really going up into the Santa Cruz Mountains above Silicon Valley, and walking in those redwoods. >> Ron Charles: I just saw those this summer. >> Richard Powers: It's incredible. >> Ron Charles: It's amazing. >> Richard Powers: Where were you? >> Ron Charles: Mirror Woods. >> Richard Powers: Oh, yeah, Mirror -- sure. >> Ron Charles: Unbelievable. >> Richard Powers: Yeah. I mean, it -- I'm not proud to say that the creature that woke me up was a redwood, because it doesn't take a particularly sensitive soul [laughter]. You know, when the thing is 30 feet across and 300 feet high, you're going to notice it. And, you know [laughter] -- and as old as Jesus, you know, and it -- you start thinking about time, and life on an entirely different scale. And that's why so much of the book has to do with these last remnant stands. I mean, to look at a tree like that, and to think of the role that it played in American history, and to see its grandeur, and just to be totally humbled by something on that scale, on both the physical and the temporal scale, and then to learn that 98% of the redwood forests were cut. And that even when there was only -- you know, you see the figures varying. Like 2 to 5% of original, you know, primary redwood forests remaining -- that they were still being cut into the 21st century. They're being cut now, right, old ones. But to think that so little remained, and yet, it wasn't enough. I mean, you don't have to look far for a drama, you know. That's a story, and it's a story that opens up onto, you know, anything you wanted to open it up onto. >> Ron Charles: It's an incredibly complex system of people in this novel, all different kinds of people over several hundred years, many different occupations. Which came first? Did the trees come first, and then you invented the people into that forest? >> Richard Powers: I absolutely had a road to Damascus moment there. You know, I -- the scales fell off my eyes. I said, "I'm sharing the planet with something that I've absolutely taken for granted. I need to meet the neighbors." So it was the obsession with trees first, and the people, the cast of characters came on board fast and slow. But in the wake of my realizing that I needed -- I needed to tell a story that would convey those two things -- how I could be so utterly oblivious to something so essential to us, and that -- one, and then two, what it feels like to turn that corner, and to see that you've missed the story. And there's another way of thinking about us, what we're doing here. There's another way of thinking about non-humans, and what our relationship to them should be. And so, the humans that came long in the wake, as it were, you know, all had a little bit of that conversion moment. >> Ron Charles: Yes. Sometimes dramatic, sometimes subtle. >> Richard Powers: Right. It's a story about what the world would look like if you could wake from this dream that we've interpolated so deeply we don't even realize there's an alternative. What would the world look like if you didn't believe that meaning was an individual, private, synthetic thing that you were responsible for, and that disappeared when you disappeared? What if meaning were out there, you know, and what if -- what if meaning consisted of extending the same kind of sanctity to the four billion years of life that isn't us, that we extend to ourselves? And the characters are hybrids, as always, with novelists, composites of people that I know, people who I read about, people who were created out of more or less whole cloth, but they -- the drama of the book -- I mean, there's a MacGuffin, right? I mean, there's a manifest drama, which is, are we going to lose the last 2% of this, or not? And what is it like when a person decides -- you know, an apolitical person decides, hey, I'm going to put my life on the line, because suddenly, this is as important to me as anything. So that's a manifest drama, but the latent drama is the drama of self-transformation. What happens when you realize you've been completely co-opted into a culture that says, "Hey, you're on your own. You know, make it for yourself, and do it through commodities. That's the only currency we have for you." >> Ron Charles: And what is it like to realize you're a secondary character, and not the protagonist of this planet? >> Richard Powers: Yeah, that's right. That the earth's story is not about us. >> Ron Charles: Right, it's about these ancient -- >> Richard Powers: Yeah, huge -- it's about a very, very long journey that has happened to branch and ramify far beyond our comprehension. >> Ron Charles: -- were there characters you cut? >> Richard Powers: Sure, yeah. In the -- I don't mourn them, because when [laughter] -- I mean, nine characters is a lot of characters to keep track of. >> Ron Charles: And to develop their back stories. >> Richard Powers: Yeah, and to actually have as real protagonists. When there was something really, really wonderful in a character that had to go, because I had nine others, I could find a way [laughter] of bringing it back into their life. >> Ron Charles: She would get his dog. >> Richard Powers: That's right, yeah [laughter]. >> Ron Charles: Was there some -- can you tell us about one of the characters that we all know from the book that was particularly surprising to you, or was exciting to develop? >> Richard Powers: They all had a real pleasure, and, you know, the -- it -- there's a little bit of multiple personality disorder, I think, in a lot of fiction writers. I certainly have it. I mean, I talked earlier about this pleasure of vicariously being able to pretend to be in a certain career for five years, and then change careers, and it's the same with personalities. I mean, you write a book for the sheer delight of trying to empathize with somebody who's so distinctly not-you, and that was especially fun in this book. The character who I really got a kick out of was Douglas Pavlicek. He's kind of a bumbling, working-class guy. You know, he's a vet, big, big-hearted guy, but he's a little clueless. >> Ron Charles: Yes. >> Richard Powers: And that was just so fun for me, to wake up every morning and be that person, you know, and just try to make him as vulnerable as possible. >> Ron Charles: Can we talk about the -- your working structure for this? I mean, was it like Carrie Matheson's [assumed spelling] office? Was it -- you've got these nine characters, and all their stories. And when you start the book, as you'll experience, or you remember, you think it might be a collection of short stories. It's not obvious -- wasn't obvious to me how these people would relate to one another, but then, slowly, as several reviewers noted, they all kind of start to branch together. How do you keep track of it? Is your office just covered in Post-It notes? >> Richard Powers: You know, it's a -- it's funny that you would mention that structure, because that didn't come to me early on. That was really a way downstream -- >> Ron Charles: You're kidding. >> Richard Powers: -- no. See, when you have nine characters, it's like now you have to build a very complicated story in a way that the reader is, you know, going to be able to get through exposition, get into the rising action, get to the climax while keeping track of all these various people. And I'm thinking, how do you do that? Because I've never tried anything anywhere near as close to that big a canvas. And I thought, well, let me -- you know, I tried to think of it very different ways. I'll do it -- geographical province didn't make any sense at all. Chronologically -- you know, people have a sense of time, and as these characters come in, they'll keep track of the -- >> Ron Charles: Tree book does -- brilliantly -- >> Richard Powers: Yeah -- so let me just set that up as the backbone, and then I'll get my -- you know, my ribs on there as they come in. I went back to read that, you know, after I completed that draft. I couldn't keep track of the characters [laughter]. I mean, it's -- you know, there's just too much time, too many different people doing too many different things. So I thought, here's what I'll do. I'll gather them together unto themselves, and I'll write each one with its own -- all the back stories, so that a reader can actually live long enough with each character to say, "Ah, I'm in that world as its own micro-drama." >> Ron Charles: -- yes. >> Richard Powers: And then, that felt really good. The problem with that structure, of course -- it's a really odd one for a novel, you know. You're supposed to get your exposition underway as quickly as possible. >> Ron Charles: Yes, and yours goes on -- what, 120 pages? >> Richard Powers: Yeah, and I -- there were plenty of readers who said, "Hey, I bought a novel. This is nine different short stories. You know, what's with this?" You know, on the other hand, once I had all those different stories, and I knew they were going to converge, because I already had written the draft where the chronology brings -- you know, brings them together. So I thought, now I've got these back stories, and they're all going to grow into this central trunk. But they're my roots, and if I just call that section "Roots," you know, and I say -- it's a little bit like saying, "Patience. This is more Mahler than Chopin, you know. It's going to take a while, you know." It's a redwood, right? So if you can get through those roots, and into that trunk, then all of a sudden, it becomes a different kind of book. >> Ron Charles: That puts the demand on you to write nine compelling short stories. >> Richard Powers: Which -- you know, I'm not a short story writer. I've written them over the years as occasional pieces. >> Ron Charles: Those pieces are all great. >> Richard Powers: Well, bless you. He does get a kickback. You know that [laughter]. No, and it was nice, to try to learn how to do that in my late 50s, you know, and just understand -- it's harder. >> Ron Charles: I'm sure. >> Richard Powers: It's -- >> Ron Charles: If you haven't been doing it your whole life, yeah. >> Richard Powers: -- there's the challenge of concision, right? In a novel -- and I'm a prolix -- I'm a little bit on the verbose side. And, you know, I love the luxury of taking 100 pages to get your main character in the door. Well, in a short story, you don't have that luxury. Every single word counts, and as a result, the amount of revision involved to get everything perfectly paced -- it's a lot harder, a lot -- you know, lot more demanding. >> Ron Charles: I'll bet. Let's talk about Patty. Well, you can tell us about Patty. >> Richard Powers: Patricia Westerford. >> Ron Charles: Patty Westerford. Was her issue based on anyone in particular? >> Richard Powers: She is, and she's based on real-world figures -- I mean, professional figures, as well as personal figures. >> Ron Charles: Oh, okay. >> Richard Powers: Yeah. She's kind of the heart and soul of the book. >> Ron Charles: Yes. >> Richard Powers: As a -- she's born with a hearing impairment, which, as almost very frequently happens, means that she also has a speech impediment. And it isolates her, and it sets her apart from her peers at school. And she's taken under the wing by her father, who is an agricultural extension agent, and he teaches her about plants. And all of a sudden, she comes home. Here's a world that you don't have to hear. Here's a world where you can dial your attention down, and be present to them in the most visceral way. And it predisposes her to thinking about the communication between plants. >> Ron Charles: Yes. Trees are social. >> Richard Powers: Right. >> Ron Charles: Is this true, by the way? >> Richard Powers: You know, what's beautiful about her story -- what I find most moving about the Patricia Westerford story is, insofar as she is based on historical figures, the answer to the question inside that discipline at the time that she was a girl, and at the time that she was going to college, would be no. >> Ron Charles: People thought it was crazy. >> Richard Powers: Plants -- right, it's an eccentric -- it's absurd to think that there's any kind of complexity going on there at all. What you see is what's happening. >> Ron Charles: Right? >> Richard Powers: And it's only been in the last few decades that this whole astonishing social, reciprocal, connected life of plants has become verified, and repeatedly demonstrated not just -- I mean, she's one of the first -- you know, I base her on these early pioneers who were willing to risk their professions to say, "Look, there's more happening here than we realize." And she's one of the first generation who's saying, "They're actually sending out chemicals over the air." >> Ron Charles: Communicating in a -- >> Richard Powers: Yeah, "so that if one tree gets attacked by insects" -- we knew that the trees make their own insecticides. So we knew that, you know, as soon as one tree was compromised, it would start to fight back. What we didn't know is, simultaneously sending out an over-the-air pheromone that other trees nearby are receiving, and they start to preemptively produce their own insecticides, so that they're in place for the attack before the attack hits them. Trees are sharing -- it's not a -- well, it's a little bit of a stretch, but they're sharing something that looks a lot like a common immune system. >> Ron Charles: -- right. >> Richard Powers: That's just the start. I mean, so she publishes that data. She gets ridiculed by the old white men gatekeepers of the field, you know, who think this is preposterous -- as, you know, the research was rejected initially, historically. So she's humiliated, and drops out of the field, and has to start life again on her own. But she's also there for the vanguard of the almost-more-stunning discoveries having to do with subterranean communication, that trees are connected underground by fungal filaments, by miles and miles of fungal filaments that are in symbiotic relationship with trees multiply on this network. Suzanne Simard, who's actually -- whose research was instrumental in my telling the story of Patricia Westerford -- she calls it the wood-wide web [laughter]. The trees are supplying the fungus -- since fungi don't photosynthesize, they don't -- they can't make their own sugars, right? They get those sugars and other hydrocarbons from the trees. In return, they're doing things underground to extract secondary metabolites that they send up to the tree. So that, in itself, is incredibly cool, right, the fact that an individual tree and a fungus are in a symbiotic relationship, you know, producing the essentials that the other can't produce. >> Ron Charles: Right. >> Richard Powers: Now, put a Douglas fir at one end of that fungus, and a birch at the other end, and have two trees of different species that are helping to nurture each other, and feed each other, and transfer -- and that's mind-blowing. >> Ron Charles: And this is not just some fictional metaphor. >> Richard Powers: Something that Powers make up -- no. No, this is fact. >> Ron Charles: So this isn't, in a sense, a novel about how ridiculous ideas eventually become accepted -- >> Richard Powers: It is. >> Ron Charles: -- through a painful process for the people that raise them. >> Richard Powers: It is also a novel about how an established scientific and cultural set of beliefs -- in fact, cultural beliefs that spin off of erroneous scientific beliefs -- >> Ron Charles: Right. >> Richard Powers: -- can be profoundly challenged and upended. So this whole notion that we have, that when you look at a forest, you're looking at absolute competition, you know, everybody just trying to throw shade on everybody else -- >> Ron Charles: Yes. >> Richard Powers: -- right? >> Ron Charles: Yes. >> Richard Powers: And, you know, that it's just nature's red, and tooth, and claw -- this is actually green, right? And for every act of competition, there are many acts of cooperation. That's a profound, philosophical shift, and it's one that has a bearing on what we were talking about earlier, which is -- this is a book about how personal meaning is a bill of goods you've been sold. Right? >> Ron Charles: Yes. >> Richard Powers: There's a line in -- that -- in the Patricia Westerford section, "There are no individual trees in a forest. Everything in the forest is the forest." >> Ron Charles: It's connected. >> Richard Powers: Starting to sound a little bit like Medicare for all, but [laughter] it's out there. >> Ron Charles: Well, it's not -- it is one of the great -- one of the greatest environmental novels ever written, but it's not just about the destruction of the environment. It's about how we are conditioned to ignore that destruction. >> Richard Powers: That's right. >> Ron Charles: And one of your characters even -- a psychiatrist, psychologist -- sort of starts to investigate it. How is it that we are possible -- that we are able to ignore our own imperiled state? >> Richard Powers: Yeah. Yeah. And in fact, more than ignore. >> Ron Charles: [Laughter] Deny. >> Richard Powers: Right, and see the conquest and control of nature as somehow in our interest -- >> Ron Charles: Yes. >> Richard Powers: -- which it can never be, right, because of the dense, dense, reciprocal interdependence of living things, right? So in -- to think somehow -- you know, here's a nice way into that question. The word for ecology, the word ecology, and the word economics share the same Greek root, and it's a word that means housekeeping, right? Now, you -- we have spent our lives hearing people say, "Such-and-such a move to protect the environment is not economic." >> Ron Charles: Yes. >> Richard Powers: If we're living in a world that says economy and ecology are two different things, we're not going to be here for very long. >> Ron Charles: No. The person that climbs a tree and lives up there for three years to save it is clearly crazy. >> P; Yeah [laughter]. >> Ron Charles: But the person who ignores the destruction of the forest is somehow just a businessman. >> Richard Powers: That's right. >> Ron Charles: That's what your novel turns on its head. >> Richard Powers: Until the bill comes in. >> Ron Charles: Yes. >> Richard Powers: And the bill is coming in now, and, you know, one of the astonishing things -- oh, 10 minutes, so we're going to go to audience in a bit. But one of the astonishing things about writing the book for me is to -- is how sensitive I became to news every day. >> Ron Charles: And the way it shapes our understanding of what's happening. >> Richard Powers: Every day, and what we're missing every day. And even when we try -- you know, now we have -- we have -- the Amazon is on fire. >> Ron Charles: Yeah. >> Richard Powers: And it's not on fire by accident. It's not on fire by weather conditions. It's Bolsonaro putting out the word that this is economically desirable, to burn this down. >> Ron Charles: Right. >> Richard Powers: Right? So -- and it's also -- and it's also those of us who say, you know, I need meat with every meal, right, because 80% of deforestation as pasture is agricultural practice. >> Ron Charles: I want to ask you about your own moral reasoning. If the planet is imperiled, what kind of action is immoral to save it? >> Richard Powers: I'll tell you something, Ron. That's what novelists have to write about. It's a complex -- as rich, and complex, and rewarding a set of dramatic questions, and as hard to answer as anything that we've devoted literary fiction to. Why aren't we -- why don't -- we're doing that book after book after book. You know, that -- we need to bring that back into the stories that we're telling about ourselves, because we've been on this misguided thing, that somehow we are autonomous. And we can tell a story about us that has -- you know, that -- where these moral questions aren't a part of the texture. >> Ron Charles: I could talk to you all day, but [laughter] there must be questions. You will have to raise your hands and wave them for us to see you. Yes, sir? >> Yes, hi. I really enjoyed your book. I assume that you talked with experts. You referred to a couple of them. What was the best and worst advice you got from the scientists in how to shape your book? >> Richard Powers: The best advice is embroidered into every page of the book. You know, it was -- there's so much there that I owe to the people in the field, and to make -- to make their fieldwork actually not just color, right, not just background, but to say that's the drama. That's the story. That's what they gave me. The worst advice -- [laughter] I don't know. The worst advice was, you know, now that you've -- now that you've taken the six years to do this, you know, how would you -- you know, how would you like to do it again on my particular research [laughter]? I would be delighted, but life is short [laughter]. >> Ron Charles: Yes, I see people waving their hands. >> So, two questions. Do you envision yourself being claustrophobic by trees and moving on at this five-year mark, or do you see yourself continuing to be perhaps an environmental activist? And then, the second question is, any advice for those of us who are thinking about going up and chaining ourselves to a tree at -- National Park? >> Richard Powers: Yeah. I -- I would love to make the case that environmental activism is a big tent, and that I think of myself as one now, that it's not -- it's not a separable thing, to write a work of art with those concerns, or to chain yourself to a tree. And that's why, you know, when people read the book, and they're moved by it, and they say, "You've made me want to join this transformation. How do I do that?" And they say, "You know, you've changed the way that I look at things. I walk down my street differently. I'm passing -- you know, these trees that I've passed for 15 years, I'm suddenly looking at in a different way." And I'm saying, well, then, you're already -- you're already on. You're already in. And now, you're -- the change in your attitude is going to be infectious. So I -- you know, I think there are lots of -- there are lots of ways to act, and there are lots of ways to change. As to your first question of do -- am I claustrophobic now? You know, you look at that -- you look at the 12 books that Ron talked about, and it's like very rarely did I ever get to the end of the book when I wasn't ready to start a new project, or a new field, and to go into something very, very different. This is the first time ever where I just want to stay. This book changed my life. It moved me to the place where I now live. It moved me cross-country to the Smoky Mountains, and I've been living there now for four years because of the research that I did for the book. And my day is profoundly different. I live differently now because I live in a place where I -- you know, I can be present, and learn something every day, and be a student every day. It's a challenge to figure out how to broaden that first attempt, to say there is a story bigger than us and it involves the non-humans. Now, to say yes, but the books can look as varied as, you know, the difference between Jane Austen and Leo Tolstoy, you know. It's not repeating the same book. It's finding another book that can do that same kind of work. That's what I'm working on now. >> There's a question here, please. >> How did you research the commitment and the violence of the protesters? And we talked about the fact that they spent a year up in a tree, and then the horrible events that happened after. But how did you research that? >> Richard Powers: There's a very beautiful bibliography for the real-world practitioners who have been committing their lives not just in the last three decades, but for long periods. And they've taken different paths, and they've left different records and different legacies. But they have told their own stories in a variety of ways. I mean, you mentioned the -- you know, living up in the top of the redwood, and the most famous -- you know, a lot of you will know the book by Julia Butterfly Hill, "Luna," about her experiences living at the top of a redwood for a protract -- a much longer period of time than she signed on for. But I also talked, you know, face-to-face, which is a different thing. Because passion can come across on the page, but they're more interested in telling you the rich complexities of the actions, what happened when, and the tactics that they used, and the ones that worked, and the ones that failed. But face-to-face, you actually feel it. You feel the embodiment of urgency that I tried to put into the individual characters in my story. That was an indispensable part of getting the story. >> I guess the police reaction was also -- the police reaction was also a part of my question, the violence that -- >> Richard Powers: Yeah. You know, there were people who questioned a pretty graphic and grizzly scene in the book, where the protesters had -- you know, they had what they called the Bear's Claw -- Bear's Claws, was it? The iron pipes that had the carabineers inside the pipe, and they would affix their arms inside the pipes so that they could not be cut apart, right? And they -- and they staged a protest where they made a ring of people using this technique, and in that scene, the police come by and put the capsicum in the eyes of the protesters. And there were readers who said, "You went overboard there. That's too much. You know, it was too violent. It was not going to happen in America." I transcribed that scene from a YouTube video. >> Ron Charles: Geez. >> Richard Powers: Yeah. So it's all there. It's just a question of looking at it, you know. >> We have another question here. >> Ron Charles: Yes? >> Hi. One of my favorite writers about trees next to you is David Haskell -- >> Richard Powers: Oh, you know, what a wonderful writer. >> -- particularly his book "Song of Trees." >> Richard Powers: A very important book to me as I did my research. >> That was my question, about its influence on you. >> Richard Powers: Yeah. Unfortunately, the -- you know, the -- that book came out toward the tail end. It was the previous book, "The Forest Unseen," that really was a deep influence. "The Song of Trees" was moving and beautiful, but too late to do much difference to what I was working on. But it's now influencing the book I'm working on at present -- a magnificent writer. >> And another question here. >> Ron Charles: Yes? >> One thing I noticed while reading this incredible book was the theme of parenting, either wanting to be a parent, or sort of falling into parenthood, or choosing not to be a parent. And I'm really curious about your thoughts on that theme. Thanks. >> Richard Powers: Yeah. And as -- I think throughout the course of the book, there's a suggestion that there is -- and this is an unfamiliar theme in literature, that the relationship between parent and child is so fraught, and so intractable, and so unsolvable that we carry the scars of that relationship throughout our whole lives. And that it can cause people to make a decision not to have children of their own, but the book itself, I think, tries to link up that drama, the familial drama, the generational family story to this bigger sense of the family of living things. And that people who make that choice are not necessarily betraying the cause of life. If our only sense of making a -- giving a lasting legacy to the future has to do with this very limited sense of identifying with something that shares half your genome, right, then we're also in trouble, right? If we can't empathize, and if we can't extend empathy, and if we can't nurture, and be nurtured by things that go beyond us, the way that this Douglas fir and birch are connected underground, and feeding and nurturing each other, then we're -- you know, then we're not long for the world either. So that small family question about the influence of mothers and fathers on their children gets subsumed into this other question of the much larger sense of familial kinship that we need to learn again. You know, much of humanity knew big kinship for much of human history. It's only recently that we've collapsed into a very narrow sense of kinship. And I think one thing that literature can do is widen that sense of who's kin. >> Ron Charles: Are you optimistic that we're going to make it? >> Richard Powers: Make what? >> Ron Charles: Survive -- >> Richard Powers: I -- >> Ron Charles: -- in organized society. >> Richard Powers: -- so, no. I'm not -- >> Ron Charles: What you're saying -- >> Richard Powers: -- I am not hopeful -- >> Ron Charles: -- you're not hopeful? >> Richard Powers: -- for society organized this way. You know, and that's a -- that was a big change for me. When people say, "Are you hopeful?" They say, "Am I going to get over the finish line, you know, with all my stuff? You know, or is capitalism going to get over the finish line with all its stuff?" And I just don't -- I don't think the transformation that we need can be made within the forms of meaning and social purpose that we currently live under. The real question is -- I mean, it's just -- I -- you have to give up hope for a while to see the truth of that. This small, incremental thing, you know -- like, well, let's keep -- let's keep our basic economic principles, but try to -- you know, try to limit the damage to three degree -- you know, it's a fool's game. >> Ron Charles: Giving up Ziploc bags will not be enough? >> Richard Powers: No. What has to happen is we have to say, "The thing that I was looking for in living the way that is clearly untenable can be found somewhere else." If we were a society who said the rehabilitation of the earth was as gratifying to us, and as essential to us, and as rewarding to us as the accumulation of property, we might have a chance. [ Applause ] >> Ron Charles: Getting to that change would be an extraordinarily violent revolution. >> Richard Powers: The only way we're ever going to get through that revolution quickly enough to make it non-violent is through our -- I sincerely believe it. If our stories change, we're going to change. If they don't, then it is going to be an absolute catastrophe. >> Ron Charles: This is such a profound and important novel, and it's such a pleasure to talk to you. I'm so glad you were able -- >> Richard Powers: Thank you. [ Applause ]
Info
Channel: Library of Congress
Views: 2,800
Rating: 4.8666668 out of 5
Keywords: Library of Congress
Id: HJJ7GUVsSBY
Channel Id: undefined
Length: 47min 17sec (2837 seconds)
Published: Wed Nov 06 2019
Related Videos
Note
Please note that this website is currently a work in progress! Lots of interesting data and statistics to come.