Charlie Huston - Sleepless and Shotgun Rule

I got turned on to Charlie Huston by Patrick Anderson, who reviews thrillers for The Washington Post. While doing an interview on his new book about thrillers, Anderson and I realized we seemed to be in synch regarding those authors who are great (including Michael Connelly, George Pelecanos) and those who, at least in recent years, suck (such as Patricia Cornwell, David Baldacci, Tom Clancy).
About a month ago Anderson asked if I'd read Charlie Huston's books. I contacted Huston's publicist who kindly sent me both Huston's Henry Thompson trilogy and his new novel, The Shotgun Rule. Anderson's review of Huston's new book came out about two weeks ago and it picked up on some good points about the book, Huston's first stand-alone thriller. More on Anderson's review in a minute.
The Shotgun Rule is set back in the summer of 1983 in a California suburb and, having grown up in that state during that time period (I'd be 15 then if you want to do the math), I can tell you it's pretty authentic. The book is about four teenagers who are always getting into trouble. The trouble reaches a new level, though, when they come across a crank lab and steal a sample with plans to sell it. Then mayhem ensues but it's far from fun – it's intense and dark. If you are looking for light or happy material look elsewhere. But if you want something dark and pure check out this book.
If an endorsement by Patrick Anderson or me is not good enough, Stephen King also has a blurb on the cover: "Anyone not acquainted with Charles Huston's blistering, unputdownable novels will want to tie their sneakers nice and tight before starting The Shotgun Rules, or they are apt to be blasted clean out of them."
Scott Butki: How would you describe what this book is about to someone unfamiliar with your work?
Charlie Huston: The short answer is that it's a book about four juvenile delinquents who break into the wrong house and steal the wrong thing and @!$%# gets all @!$%#ed up. Implicit (and explicit for that matter)in that answer are the ideas that the book is both violent and vulgar. The violence in all my books tends to be graphic. I try not to write it for entertainment value. I know that's how it's often read, but that's not the point. And more than my past books, the violence here isn't padded by a large number of genre conventions. It's not a caper. It's not old school noir. It has some of the tone of hardboiled crime, but put in a mundane setting. There's humor, black and otherwise, but it's incidental. The vulgarity is part of my nature, but particularly relevant here as the protagonists are four teenage boys. There's simply no way to wrote that dialogue without using "@!$%#" just about every other word.
How does this book compare to your other books?
It breaks from the first person present tense narrative I used in the previous five books. The POV moves from character to character, giving me a chance to tell a story with an altered voice. My bag of tricks is still on display, but I got to dig a little deeper into it and come up with some new stuff. While the body count is down in this book, I think it's a bit darker. The fact that the world between the covers is closer to our own than in previous books makes the deaths that do take place harder to balance. Or that's what I hope for.
What did you hope to accomplish with this book? Did you succeed?
I wanted to tell a good story. Beyond that, I wanted to deal with violence in a manner less varnished than in my other books. I like the story, and some other people do as well, so I think I did my job there. The violence issue I'm still unsettled on. It's not quite as bare as I initially set out to make it.
What question do you wish you would be asked more in interviews?
More questions about sports.
What questions are you tired of answering?
I can't say I'm tired of answering questions about how I became a writer, but I feel boring when I try to answer it at this point.
Which of the book's characters is most like you now?
Either none or all of them. I was on a panel with Max Allen Collins where we were being asked about how much of ourselves is in our characters. Max answered, as I recall, "It's all just us with guns." All a fiction writer can do is write about what they know, whether that's from first, second, or third hand experience, and then embellish with imagination. There are bits of me in all my characters, and bits of them in me.
What did you think of Patrick Anderson's review of your book?
A review like that is a lovely thing. It's both a commercial boon and an ego boost. And it's particularly gratifying to have your work taken seriously and addressed and that manner. I always like to see where the readers' eyes are drawn when they read my stuff. Mr. Anderson's eye seems to have been drawn to the aspects of desperation in the lives of some of the characters. But to me, there's nothing special about that desperation. I'm a pretty upbeat guy, but I see a lot of that kind of thing everywhere. To me it's more incidental to both life and the book, and not central. But I'm ultimately just trying to write stories that I want to tell, in the hope that people will want to read them. And I love when readers see what I do not see in my own stories. It happens all the time.

Anderson noted in his review something I noticed too - regarding your book dedication. Why did you write it like that? Specifically, the book's dedication page says:
The book is dedicated to:
Jeff Kaskey.
Role Model.
Though he'll be horrified to hear it.
And
To the kids who don't know any better.
The ones with the attitude problems.
What the hell are they thinking?
Man, believe me, they aren't.
That's the point.
We never do.
The use of the word "we" that Mr. Anderson mentions was conscious. I was often told I had an attitude problem and asked, "What were you thinking" when I was a teenager. But most of my trouble-making and getting-into, outside of drug use, was only mildly criminal. I got away with @!$%# I was lucky to get away with, and had friends who were far less lucky. Having a front row seat for some sad and seriously stupid crap had a lot to do with making me both the person and the writer I am. I wanted to acknowledge the kind of kids I was writing about. With luck, they grow up to be the kind of adults I enjoy spending time with.

Last weekend I finished The Shotgun Rule which is as gritty and dark a novel as I've read in several years. It explores violence and life in a fictional Northern California town. Is it good? Let's put it this way, Stephen King was right when he called it "Stand By Me on Dexedrine."
I emailed author Charles Huston questions for this half of the interview and he sent his responses quickly.
What's it like to have Stephen King describe your novel as "Stand By Me on Dexedrine"?
Beyond flattering.
It seemed like the town itself became a character in the novel, sort of like George Pelecanos does with his books about Washington D.C. Was that intentional?
I try and give the locations in all my books a certain amount of texture. That can be a relatively easy task when you're writing about New York City or L.A.
In the case of the unnamed town in The Shotgun Rule, the actual geography, physical locations, and the social structure, are all based on a town I lived in. Some things get altered by faulty memory, or simply because I need to take a house on one side of town and relocate it, but I try to play as close to reality as I remember it.
As much as it is about anything, Shotgun is about the town itself. I can't say I was trying to make it a character, but I was trying to describe what I consider a pretty typical place that some people grow up in.
I really liked the character of Geezer especially how he was always searching for just the right word. Can you tell me how you came up with that character and that particular character trait?
I started with the name. It's actually an homage, if you can call it that, to Black Sabbath's bassist Geezer Butler. I always thought that was a tremendous name. It seemed a great fit for a scumbag (which Mr. Butler is not). I built a physical description around the name, but beyond that, it's hard to describe how a character generates. I didn't go looking for his verbal tick, but when it popped up it fit and I ran with it.
Andy seemed like he had aspergers or autism since he was so smart and so focused. Did he?
I hadn't thought of him in those terms. I pictured him more as just a kid whose intelligence sets him apart. He sees the world through a different filter, and that makes it hard for him to interact the way other people do.
My experience with some hyper-intelligent friends I've had is that they don't really understand why so many things they find utterly banal can be so important to so many people. Their intelligence puts them in an outsider's role at a young age, which means they get treated differently.
That just provokes greater alienation. I don't set out to ask any big questions when I write my books, but in retrospect the question Andy asks me is: Where does his violence come from? Is it that alienation? Heredity? Or is it innate? Honestly, I don't know.
Now in addition to your novels you also write a comic book? Can you talk about that? How does writing for comics differ from writing novels?
Comics are a visual medium, so the trick for a novelist is to learn how to let the pictures carry most of the story. I lay out what I want the pictures to look like, but an artist still has to interpret that. So you need to be flexible that way. For someone like me who uses a great deal of dialogue, you need to try and reign in that tendency. Dialogue in a comic book takes up physical space on the page. The more dialogue, the less room you have for pictures. It's a real technical challenge, not just the exercise in imagination and craziness that it maybe looks like from the outside. A lot of fun, but definitely work.
Some novelists are opposed to having their stories optioned for movies. What's your take on this?
My take is that a movie version, in the off chance that an option actually ever gets exercised and a movie manifests, doesn't change the fact of the novel. To me, a movie option is a great way to make a little extra money on work I've already done and been paid for. At that point, I don't much care what happens. In an ideal world you'd like any movies made from your work to be good movies. The reason for that is that you want your name and your work associated with things that are not crappy. But a movie is not the final step in the life cycle of a novel. A novel is a novel. Good movie, bad movie — that doesn't change the work I've already done.
What are you working on next?
The next book to publish will be the third in my Joe Pitt series: Half The Blood of Brooklyn (Dec. 26, 2007). A terribly bloody vampire book written in hardboiled noir style. Just perfect for the holidays.
I've got a crime book set in Los Angeles that's all wrapped up. It'll be the first in a proposed open-ended series about a former elementary school teacher who gets involved in trauma scene cleaning. Despite his profession, the book is actually quite a bit lighter and less violent than my other books. That should be out in early 2009.
And I'm completing the fourth Joe Pitt book so it will be ready for Fall 2008.
I'm going to take a brief pause from novels and do some comic book work before starting another stand-alone in about a month.
Thanks again to Mr. Huston for the interview.

-------------------------------------------------------------------harlie Huston is one of the most intriguing and creative fiction writers around right now. He is so good that I broke a promise for him: When I left journalism as a career I vowed I would never again do a telephone interview because those are much more work for a writer than an email interview. Usually when I tell a publicist I will only do an email interview they come around but Huston (or his publicist) would not.
While I had interviewed Charlie before for the Shotgun Rule I was so fascinated by his two latest novels I decided to make an exception just for him.
I spoke to him by phone about two weeks ago. The following is the result of that conversation.
I asked him to explain how he came up with the concept and story lines for his two most recent books.
He said the idea for Sleepless, a work of speculative fiction, came partly from reading The Family That Couldn't Sleep. He took this real life problem and exaggerated and played with it and the result is this bizarre but fascinating work. While the medical ailment that caused that family was true he made up a worse form of sleeplessness for the book.
Publisher's Weekly describes the book this way :"In Huston's impressive, challenging thriller set in a postapocalyptic Los Angeles, a devastating illness renders the afflicted unable to sleep. In about a year, those with SLP (as the sleepless illness is known) deteriorate and die. Amid the city's rampant violence and lawlessness, LAPD cop Parker Park Haas tries to persuade himself that a future exists for his newborn daughter. As the outside world becomes increasingly dangerous, Park pursues an undercover investigation that takes him deep into the milieu of an online game called Chasm Tide, into which many people have retreated. As in the author's Joe Pitt vampire series (My Dead Body, etc.), this book has at its heart a love story: Park's wife is dying from SLP, and Park begins to fear he may be getting it, too."
As with the protagonist Huston is a proud papa. I asked which came first: Making the protagonist a father or becoming a "real life" father. Also, the book is dedicating to "my darling Clementine." He confirmed that Clementine is his daughter's name. He had decided the book's main character, Park, would be a father before he himself found out he would become a father.
Why did he want the protagonist to be a father?
"I wanted him to everything to lose. I wanted him to be invested wtih a child, and the world continuing, someone for whom the end of civilization" - something possible in the book - just could not occur, Huston said.
He prefers to call the book speculative fiction rather than science fiction. Either way he admitted it was sometimes weird to be driving around Los Angeles, where he lives, and see sites that are in the book but in radically different.
Whether you call it science fiction or speculative fiction is a vast - but intriguing - departure from his prior books. He decided for his prior book to try for something more comic. He was thinking it'd be a funny cop drama along the lines of the great Rockford Files television series. And he succeeded - it IT damn funny - but boy is it dark at times.
Huston said he was thinking the protagonist would be a funny private eye but then he learned about the people who clean up crime scenes and the result was this amazing novel.
Stephen King praised this book in a review you can read here.
Mystic Arts is described this way by Publisher's Weekly: Noir master Huston (The Shotgun Rule) should win himself a whole new audience with this bizarre and utterly grotesque stand-alone, told mostly through dialogue that highlights the author's uncanny ear for the spoken word. Former Los Angeles grade school teacher Web Goodhue, now a full-time slacker suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, falls into a job on a crime scene cleanup crew, scrubbing up the remains of the recently deceased. After the crew has finished cleaning up a messy suicide scene in Malibu, Web gets a phone call from the dead man's daughter, Soledad. She and her thug half-brother have another big mess on their hands that needs cleaning, on the QT. Unable to resist the beautiful Soledad, Web soon finds himself in way over his head. Huston, one of his generation's finest and hippest talents, shows in grisly detail what cleaning up after the dead entails. This one should appeal to Chuck Palahniuk fans as well as hard-boiled crime readers
The book is being adapted into a HBO series with Alan Ball of Six Feet Under executive producing. What's that like? Is it hard to imagine your books as tv shows and movies?
He said it is great "writing under his tutelage." He is able to use Ball's contacts and helps as he is "godfathering the project" and providing lots of helpful feedback. There is no timetable or timeline for the project.
We talked about some of Huston's other projects which include writing the graphic novels Moon Knight. He enjoys the different writing style and regimen for graphic novels compared with that of "regular" novels.
We talked about what it is like to see books you have written turned in to television series or movies. His book, Already Dead, was optioned but not turned into a movie. I mentioned that another L.A.-based crime writer I like, Robert Crais, told me he takes steps to ensure his books are not made into movies.

Crais told me:

Scott: Is it true you have taken steps to prevent Elvis Cole or Joe Pike from being portrayed in movies? How? Why?
No fancy steps here—studios, producers, actors, whoever, they make offers to buy Elvis and Joe, I say, no thanks. It would take me six pages to write out why, so here's the short version: I want to save the characters for me and my readers.

Huston has a different attitude.
"I wrote the book and nothing anyone does after that will change it," he said. He would prefer, of course, that the book is not made by someone incompetent.
Since he has what he described as "modest readership" he is "lessy fussy" about the possibility of turning one of his books into a movie. He figures he has less at stake, he said.
I usually close my interviews by asking authors what they are working on next. In Huston's case, since he has his hands full, including writing the pilot for a television series about which he was not allowed to provide details, I decided on a different approach. When I interviewed him for the Shotgun Rule I asked him a question I think writers like to be asked, namely, "What question do you wish you would get asked more often." He said he wished he was asking more sports questions. Since he has moved from New York To L.A. (where I grew up, incidentally, well, in Riverside) I asked if he roots for New York or L.A. teams.
He said he cheers for the same teams he always did, the San Francisco Giants, the Golden State Warriors and the Miami Dolphins.
"I hate Los Angeles teams," he said. This from a guy who lives close to Dodger Stadium might seem odd but then the L.A. he describes in Sleepless is so disturbing that maybe the Dodgers should be glad he's not a fan.

Interview With Walter Isaacson, Author of Einstein: His Life And Universe

will follow this interview in a few weeks (post-Harry Potter) with a review of
this excellent tome. I am still collecting my thoughts about it, which speaks volumes about the weight of the topics covered as well as how they affected me.
I had the great pleasure recently to interview Walter Isaacson, a former editor of
Time, about his biography of Einstein. Isaacson previously wrote biographies of Ben Franklin and Henry Kissinger.
Isaacson even said, "I love BlogCritics, and "I'm happy to help."
The downside was I was only allowed to ask five questions.
Scott: Like Benjamin Franklin, there is an enormous body of work about Albert Einstein already, what inspired you to write this book? Did you have a particular curiosity about what made him such a fascinating and iconic figure to so many people?
Walter: I became interested in Einstein when I was editor of Time, and we were choosing the Person of the Century.  Some of my colleagues argued for other candidates, such as Franklin Roosevelt or Churchill or Gandhi. But to me, it seemed that the 20th century will be remembered for its breakthroughs in science and technology: splitting the atom, going into space, inventing the microchip, etc. Einstein was primarily responsible for the two great scientific pillars of our time: relativity and quantum theory.
His fingerprints are on much of the technology: lasers and photoelectric cells, atomic power and weaponry, space travel and even microchips. And he was an exemplar of a century in which refugees fled oppression to seek more freedom. His life is a testament to the connection between freedom and creativity. As I was researching him, I realized that the final and most personal batch of his private papers was scheduled to be released in 2006.
I worked with the folks at the Einstein Papers Project at Caltech. That allowed me the opportunity to write a narrative biography that seeks to weave together his scientific thinking, political ideas, personality, and private life. I attempted to show how they were all related. I was attracted to Einstein because of his creativity, which was based on a rebellious willingness to question authority and defy convention. You see that in all aspects of his life.
Scott: Do you feel that the events of WWII, especially the dropping of atomic bombs, overshadowed the scientific achievements of Einstein and his peers?
Walter: No, I think the dropping of the bomb dramatically brought into focus that e=mc2 was more than an abstraction. The Time issue after the dropping of the bomb has a painting of Einstein on the cover with that equation emblazoned on the mushroom cloud behind him. Because Einstein had signed the letter urging Franklin Roosevelt to launch a bomb project, Einstein felt responsible and worried. He dedicated the last decade of his life largely to pushing for arms control and world peace. The connection between science and politics fascinates me, and it's a theme of the book.
Scott: How do you suggest readers like me reconcile Einstein's morally questionable actions in his private life with some of his positive scientific feats?  Do you think Einstein's private problems actually contributed to his successes indirectly? They say, for example, that most/many great writers have had unhappy lives -- the theory being that they compensate for this by creating their own worlds. Psychologically, how would this play out for Einstein’s creation of another "universe" --literally and figuratively?
Walter: One of the things we discover, whether about Benjamin Franklin or Albert Einstein, is that they are not made of marble. They are flesh and blood. They have their flaws. Does this diminish them? Well, it makes them more human. We know people like that in our own lives, we can relate to it, and we have to factor it in -- however we see fit – in assessing them.
I do not think unhappiness at his personal life contributed to Einstein's greatness. But here's a connection I see: in his politics, personal life, and science, he was always resisting constraints, averse to any bonds, defiant of convention, nonconformist, and disrespectful of authority. That's one of the themes of my book. For better or worse, you see that attitude in him when it comes to the bonds and commitments of family life.
Scott: What is the biggest misconception about Einstein, other than the myth that he failed math?
Walter: That he was an aloof loner, an image he liked to foster. The latest personal papers, along with the trove of letters in the archives, show that Einstein was passionate, made close friendships and had deeply emotional relationships, throughout his life -- from his days as a student to his genial later years in Princeton. He could defy the prevailing currents, but he loved spending time with other people, be
they scientific colleagues or personal friends or acquaintances or kids.
Scott: How do you reconcile Einstein’s religious stands with his scientific discoveries? (the famous "God does not play dice with the universe" quote being the obvious example)
Walter: Einstein saw no conflict between science and religion, and wrote many essays and gave many speeches saying so. My chapter called “Einstein's God" was to me one of the most interesting sections to write. His concept of God was a reflection of the harmonies and certainties of nature's laws. That's what made him a "realist": someone convinced that an ultimate reality exists independent of our observations or abilities to observe it. And that was at the root of his discomfort with quantum mechanics.  
He often said that when judging a theory he would ask himself if that's the way God would have made the universe. And when he didn't believe an experimental result, he once said: "Subtle is the Lord, but malicious he is not." (Near the end of his life, he was standing at Princeton next to a fireplace mantle where that quote of his had been carved, and he was discussing how quantum mechanics was proving more solid than he thought, and he pointed to the quote and quipped, "Well, maybe He is a bit malicious.")
When he spoke about God not playing dice, Einstein was express faith that there were harmonious laws of nature that explained everything, and God did not let things happen merely by chance. That's not how He would have made the universe.
Thanks. Walter.

A Newsvine Interview With Stephen Hunter About His New Book, "I, Sniper," And His Career As A Novelist and Film Critic

I come late to Stephen Hunter, who has been publishing novels for almost 30 years now. I have heard his name over the years mentioned as both a good writer of thrillers but more often I came across his name as a pulitzer-prize film critic, working for the Washington Post and, before that, the Baltimore Sun. I consider myself a student of film as I talked about in my interviews with his former colleagues David Denby and Roger Ebert.
But I am a sucker for a good thriller. In this interview with Patrick Anderson, the thriller book reviewer for the Washington Post, we compare notes on some of our favorite thriller writers, so if you want to get turned on to some great writers check out Anderson's book.
I'm two-thirds of the way through Hunter's book and am ready (unless he totally does a Stephen King - aka a bad, weak ending) to add him to my list of good thriller writers.
I'll let you know how I felt about the ending when I publish part two.
Now let's get to the interview.
Why did you leave a career as a newspaper journalist, particularly film criticism? I am asking as not just a reader but also a former journalist
I think it was when I was driving madly across Maryland one Saturday morning to reach a screening of "Alvin and the Chipmunks" that I said to myself, "Steve, you're 61. Is this really how you want to spend your life?" From that insight, I realized, I didn't HAVE to be the movie critic any more. It so happened that the Washington Post chipped in with a very good buyout offer at exactly that moment and that if I took it, not only would there be no more chipmunk movies in my life but also no more New York avenue fatigue.
Moreover, the Post was reinventing itself as a smaller, tighter, younger outfit, and the Post I had loved no longer existed. So all those factors created a perfect storm of opportunity, I seized it, haven't looked back and am quite happy. Now and then I'll write a film piece for COMMENTARY, but I'm definitely done with the chipmunk lifestyle.
I noticed in reading past interviews that you said you were the child of a murder victim. How did that affect you as a writer? If I read right your comments from past interviews you have suggested that it is that violence which is why your books are not only violent but you can't imagine writing a book without violence - is that accurate?
What I learned from my father's death was that a violent death leaves ripples in society that go on and on, even through subsequent generations. Somehow the movies never get that and books seldom do either. So I tried to get that reality into the books--"Black Light," particularly--though now and then I yield to temptation and do some big scene where lots of anonymous folks get whacked. They're not anonymous to their spouses and children, believe me.
I wish I could make the melodramatic claim that my father's death profoundly affected my life and work--something akin to Hemingway's Big Wound in WWI--but it's probably not true. I was always attracted to melodrama and particularly gun drama. By always I mean since about age 2. So it always plays out in my books, though of late I've learned to keep the body count down somewhat and try not to wipe out battalions of extras. And no, I can't imagine writing a book without violence, particularly gun violence. I mean, that's my Yaknawpatawpha; I'd be cut off from the material that most profoundly stimulates my imagination.
Did you find movies with violence more interesting than those without?
Not necessarily. There is a certain reptile-brain part of me that grooves on the melodramatic trope of the "cool" gunfight or the "righteous death" of the villain, and in weaker moments I'll partake of that pleasure. But really it's the execution and the ideas more than the gunfights that consign a movie to thumbs up and thumbs down in my mind. Just saw, for example, "Avatar," which is full of violence, and found it extremely dull, to say nothing of obvious and insulting to its audience.
The next day I saw "Red Cliff," the John Woo movie about an ancient Chinese battle. Loved it; Woo had thought hard and rigorously about new ways of portraying an old movie tradition of big battles and he continuously came up with vivid images, newly framed constructions, clever takes on old problems, and he kept the whole thing witty and alive. I found Cameron's violence annoyingly generic; I mean even with giant red birds knocking down gunships, the imagery lacked wit and never overcame the threshold of disbelief.
So it's not so much violence per se as it is the director's ability to conceive of the cinematically banal in new ways and give it freshness. That's something Coppola did in "The Godfather," probably the 8,455th gangster movie ever made. I try to do that to in the books: find new ways to construct the problem and new ways to solve it and give it a visual distinction it might not have otherwise had.
Do you think there is a correlation between violence in books and in life? What about between violence in movies and real life?
Yes. l live in fear that some maniac will take a Rem 700 into a steeple and kill 25 people and they'll find "Point of Impact" in his knapsack. On the other hand, I think what's missing from this issue is the other side of that argument: all the times some disturbed, angry fellow has been close to acting out, but he's instead been soothed and released by the magic of narrative and instead of doing the bad thing has done the good thing,i.e, gone to bed early. I've always thought stories, in whatever form, had their highest social use as a kind of pre-chemistry Prozac or anti-depressant. A story takes you outside your head, gets you into others, teaches you empathy, shows you things, calms you down, civilizes you. You never hear about THAT, but since all societies have invented a narrative tradition over the past 4,000 years, clearly it's effective. It's that tradition into which I would insert myself, and I believe that my violent stories, over the long run, do far more good than ill.
Followup question: If the portrayal of violence was more realistically portrayed in TV and movies do you think there would be less violence on TV and movies and would change peoples attitude toward violence and eventually lead to a less violent world?
Not really. I mean each year, the film industry ratchets up the threshold of what can be shown. Splatter, gore, beheadings, savage depictions of arterial spray, limb removal and whatever are quite commonplace by now. Has that made the world more violent? Hmm, murder rates seem to be going down, not up for now. It's hard to establish a connection between what is shown and what is done, other than in "think pieces" that argue by anecdote, not data. As an interesting side note, did you know that in the late 19th Century when multi-color lithographs became available, many believed it would drastically cut crime, because works of inspirational art could be widely reproduced in all their glory and that would soothe the savage breast of the common man. How'd that work out, I wonder?
The larger point is that by far, most people are aware of the difference between the imagined and the real and can live with the difference. They see a movie in which a vengeful hero guns down his antagonists, crying revenge all the while; they're unfairly dissed by their boss at work the next day and they usually don't haul out the .357 and begin blasting. They understand that the celebration of revenge in the story is cathartic but metaphorical just as they understand hosing down the supervisor would be a very bad idea. Now and then, VERY now and then, some freako doesn't get the memo, but it happens so rarely it's probably not reachable by policy.
Was it frustrating as a reporter and staff writer to hear people make ignorant comments about guns? Did you set them straight or is this a delayed way of doing so?
Less so by far on the paper than in movies, TV and other books. One of my early ambitions was to get the gun stuff right in a way it was almost never gotten right. I thought I could build a readership of people who knew and cared about such stuff. In the first book, "The Master Sniper," I went out of my way to identify the M1A1 Thompson with the bolt handle on the side and not the top and no Cutts Compensator, and of course the copyreader scratched all that out and replaced it with something like "automatic gun." Duh! So I re-corrected that in proofs as well as inserting the decimal in the .45 caliber construction she had so helpfully edited and took out the decimal she had inserted before the 9 in 9 millimeter, and in the end got something that a lot of people appreciated for its technical accuracy. That has remained a value and even though I have made mistakes I've taken shoemaker's pride in getting the small stuff right. People say, why don't you cut out the gun crap, I don't care about that. But the gun crap isn't incidental, it's elemental. The gun crap is where the books start in my mind and it's where my imagination is most deeply provoked and I need that electricity to find the stamina to write the 400,000 words.
Have you ruled out ever resuming doing any film criticism?
As a "job" pretty much. I'm tired of the CGI; I really don't care for this genre of "really big machines invade earth" that seems to be commonplace now days. Give me tommyguns and Garand rifles and I'm happy.
How do you feel about getting early raves for this new book?
Very pleased. It's the first time I've gone 4-for-4 from the pre-pub reviewing services and I guess once Kirkus gave me a rave, they figured there was nothing left so they went out of business. Seriously, the signs are better for this one than they've ever been, so I hope it's my turn at last. If not, I still wrote the book I wanted and not one about a spunky gal detective and her avuncular black mentor going after assassins from the tobacco industry, so I'll take some comfort in that until the bourbon kicks in!
I have read you hate the blurbing part of the book business. Can you tell me about that?
I'm not an asker, a networker, a professional association joiner and politician, a favor doer. I don't join claques or coups or committees. I don't sign petitions. I can't work a room or seduce someone who's never heard of me into liking me. All those skills are beyond my rather crude, thorny personality. If I try, I screw it up, say the wrong thing, laugh inappropriately, let boredom show in my eyes or get caught up in a lie about how much I love someone's book that of course I've never read. I'm hopeless in this regard. (I just write, shoot and drink.) So I've kind of withdrawn from the blurb business and the books go out into the world unblurbed. I don't know if that hurts or not; probably doesn't really matter. Understand, I don't disparage those who blurb and counterblurb, it's just not a thing I'm comfortable with. I'm not suggesting blurbers and blurbees be executed or anything; I think waterboarding or toenail removal would be sufficient.
Will the characters from Dirty White Boys be making an appearance in any of your next books?
Doubtful. That book came out of a very dysfunctional period in my life (details to be omitted) and expressed a certain existential bleakness I no longer feel. To write something like it, I'd have to get back to that dark place again, and I don't particularly feel like going there, thank you very much.
What are you working on next?
I've got another grand sniper novel in mind, with some important family revelations for the Swagger clan as part of the DNA of the thing. It'll be fun to write and I think my fans will like it. It'll look at, as technical background, another sophisticated technology for sniping which I think will be quite interesting and which hasn't been handled in a book before. I've written the first sentence and the last word. I only have 400,000 words to go.

My Interview with Tony Horwitz, Author of Confederates In the Attic and A New Book, A Voyage Long and Strange: Rediscovering the New World By Scott (Scoop) Butki

(2008)
Tony Horwitz is one of the best writers who are forging the trail for a new genre, one that is in desperate need of a name. More on that in a minute.
In books like Confederates in the Attic and Blue Latitudes (my two favorites), as well as Bhagdad Without A Map, Horwitz has merged travel writing, history writing and memoir writing.
Why, for example, write about the trip Captain Cook took when you can ride it yourself and mix your experiences with a colorful summary of Cook's trip, as Horwitz did with Blue Latitudes?
Put another way Horwitz retraces the steps of others, taking readers along for the ride. These reports are unflinching at times – Howard Zinn would be satifisfied – while also quite comic and entertaining.
I was excited at the chance to interview Mr. Horwitz about his new book.
The second half of this interview will follow in about two weeks, after I finish the book, and will focus more on the book itself.
Scott:How would you describe your style of writing? In encouraging others to read your books, especially my favorite, Confederates In the Attic, I call it a cross between memoir writing and history. Do you agree it has elements of both?
Tony: To be honest, I don't know what to call my books. They're a blend of history, journalism and adventure travel, with my own story woven in. There's a bit of memoir in Confederates but not much of it in my other books. If you come up with a catchy shorthand name for this style, please let me know!
When you started writing your books what was your goal? Did you intend to inject yourself into your stories or did it just sort of turn out that way? Have you encountered any historians giving you grief over that?
My first two books, One For the Road and Baghdad Without A Map, were basically traveler's tales that grew out of my adventures as a reporter in Australia and the Middle East. I had no goal other than to write books, which gave me the latitude to do things I couldn't in my journalistic work and also a second career of sorts. But I did them while still working at my day job as a journalist.
My last three books, Confederates in the Attic, Blue Latitudes, and A Voyage Long and Strange, were full-time occupations and have gradually moved me away from journalism and towards history. By and large, I find historians welcome nonfiction that exposes a general audience to historical topics, so long as the material is accurate. Also, since they're often limited to libraries and classrooms, they're very interested to find how ordinary people remember and experience history.
What was your goal and plan with this particular book? Have you thought about what historical periods you will be writing about for future books?
I don't really have clear goals when I begin a book, apart from exploring (and getting lost in) a topic I feel passionate about. In the case of A Voyage Long and Strange, I wanted to fill a gaping hole in my knowledge and better understand why it is Americans in general have chosen to forget or neglect an exciting chapter of our history, one that explains a great deal about what this country became and who we are.
What kind of reaction have you received from those you have written about? I'm particularly curious about reaction to Confederates In the Attic since you wrote in there about Civil War reenactors including those at Antietam and Gettysburg, both of which are in my backyard.
You can never please all readers and I've occasionally gotten angry responses from those I've written about. While most reenactors I've spoken to enjoyed Confederates, and felt it accurately portrayed living history, some hardcores felt I was making fun of them (I was, of course, but of myself as well, and felt I was sympathetic while gently ribbing reenactors). I also got heat from extreme Southern nationalists who resent any suggestion that the Confederacy was misguided or that remembrance of it may offend others.
I wrote a llist of things you should never say to a Civil War reenactor. Would you like to suggest any other things you should not say?
Your list hits the high points. To be safe, never call someone a reenactor, say living history. Also just "hardcore" not hardcore reenactor
What is it about history that so interests you as a writers
Like a lot of history buffs, I think it's just a bug I've had since early childhood, the past has always fascinated me, even staring at old pennies as a little boy. As a writer, I'm also drawn to the way the past influences the present, despite Americans' generally forward-looking and amnesiac tendencies. Perhaps, too, I find the present so discouraging at times that I prefer to hide out in the past.
What other writers do you like to read?
For pleasure I mostly read modern fiction, a few of my favorite novelists are Ian McEwan, Russell Banks, and my wife, Geraldine Brooks. For nonfiction, I'm a big fan of Jonathan Raban and Annie Dillard.

Good News: There's A Great Book Retrospective of Herblock's Career (An Interview)

(2009)
Herblock was the MAN when it came to editorial cartoons. You can see some of his classic cartoons on the presidents here and here
Herbert Lawrence Block won the Pullitzer Prize three times as well as the Presidential Medal of Freedom, not an easy accomplishment for someone holding elected officials feet to the fire on a regular basis.
He died in 2001.
I tell in the interview below an example or two of following his work at key parts of my life. I'll say more about him in the comments below.
I saw this book mentioned in the news and asked if I could interview someone about it and was elated that Harry Katz, Curator of The Herb Block Foundation Collection, agreed to let me interview him by email.
In addition to this new book there is an exhibition of his work traveling the country, which you can read about further here.
Scott:Great book. I thought I knew a lot about Herblock having read him for years - I remember taking a class in college comparing Iran-contra to Watergate, especially in terms of government and media, and each day
we'd gather around to read what Herblock wrote. And this was in So. Cal where it's harder to get the Washington Post! But I didnt know, for example, that he coined the term McCarthyism.
What is the relationship between the book and the exhibit of his cartoons?
Harry: Library of Congress Curators Sara Duke and Martha Kennedy produced the exhibition, which was informed by and includes selections from the book. The Library of Congress holds the Herblock archives, which includes his manuscripts, original cartoon drawings and sketches.
What were you goals in editing this book? I am wondering if it was hard to try to balance a goal of showing his representative pieces from each era with trying to avoid the book being dated?
The goal was to show Herblock at his best and since his best cartoons are never dated, no matter the era, the book seems fresh and timely. There are certain cartoons, "Fire!", for example, or the Huey Long "Crown Jewels" which will never be dated and must be shown. I can use my discretion on other more surprising discoveries such as the 1937 cartoons addressing underage weddings, legal pedophilia, or his gentle memorial to the London School gas explosion tragedy.
What was the hope with the inclusion of the DVD with the book?
Herblock covered American politics and society like no other cartoonist ever has. Technology now allows us to share the entire extant body of Herblock's published work. Few creators' archives would stand the scrutiny. Herblock's does.
The disk represents seventy years of world history through the mind of one of America's great commentators. It is great to see in the book what choices I made in defining Herblock's career but with the DVD readers can make their own choices as to his best work or identify specific cartoons and events. The DVD sheds light on every aspect of his career, even before he came to the Washington Post in 1946.
We see how his style and methods changed, how issues and motifs came and went in his work. The DVD gives everyone equal access to Herblock's ultimate legacy: his cartoons.
How DID you guys choose which cartoons to include? Did one person decide or was it a committee of people?
I produced a final illustration list compiled from selections made by Herb Bloc Foundation friends and former colleagues including Haynes Johnson, Herblock's longtime assistant Jean Rickard, Jill Stanley, Robin Meszoly and a few others. The selections include many of Herblock's own favorites, for example, classic Nixon cartoons from the Watergate portfolio.
What is your personal favorite and why? Or you can choose 3 to 5 if that would help?
There are too many favorites to count or choose. Here is a selection!
"Fire!," June 17, 1949
After World War II, the Soviet Union expanded its control to most of Eastern Europe, and it appeared that China would soon fall to the Communists. Herblock captured the postwar "Red Scare" hysteria sweeping the nation, as anti-communist crusaders led by the House Un-American Activities Committee threatened civil liberties in their efforts to preserve democracy.
"Nah, You Ain't Got Enough Edjiccashun to Vote" December 10, 1958
Herblock drew the future Obama beginning in the 195os, before he was born! Who knew?
Herblock caught the irony in ignorant Southern racists denying educated blacks their right to vote. He created this cartoon seven years before the Voting Rights Act of 1965 made scenes like this far less plausible. The Tuskegee Institute, one of the South's foremost institutions of higher learning was created by an act of the Alabama state legislature in 1880. Legendary black educator Booker T. Washington served as the school's first instructor and later, during World War II, students from the Institute gained military fame as the courageous Tuskegee Airmen.
"Bubble Dance" June 6, 1974
Two months before Richard Nixon resigned the presidency, Herblock drew this cartoon. In his book, Special Report, devoted to Nixon and Watergate, he wrote:
I've often summed up the essential role of the political cartoonist as being that of the kid in the Hans Christian Andersen story who says, "The emperor has no clothes on." For a long time after the Watergate break-in, it seemed to be a matter of saying, "Good grief, none of that bunch has any clothes on." There were a couple of occasions when I seemed appropriate to show the "emperor" literally in the buff.-Herblock
"Who's In Charge Here?" July 18, 1979
Herblock never admired President Jimmy Carter's leadership qualities but flinched even so on July 15, 1979, when, in a nationally televised address, Carter appeared to throw Americans under the bus holding them accountable for the country's mounting political problems and economic ills:
"What you see too often in Washington and elsewhere around the country is a system of government that seems incapable of action. You see a Congress twisted and pulled in every direction by hundreds of well-financed and powerful special interests. . . . You don't like it, and neither do I. What can we do? . . . One of the visitors to Camp David last week put it this way: 'We've got to stop crying and start sweating, stop talking and start walking, stop cursing and start praying. The strength we need will not come from the White House, but from every house in America.'"
Balance, February 4, 1998
Allegations of an affair between President Bill Clinton and former White House intern Monica Lewinsky became public on January 21, 1998. Although Clinton repeatedly and forcefully denied any improper relationship, later testimony proved his statements untrue and resulted in a House vote of impeachment. While fending off these accusations, Clinton proposed the first balanced budget in nearly 30 years.
Are there any cartoons you left out because you found them to be of questionable political or social taste?
No, Herblock possessed an unerring instinct for the ethical bounds of journalism. He never crossed the line. For example, his colleague Dan Fitzpatrick's portrayal of Sen. Joe McCarthy as a Neanderthal caveman was brutal, but Herblock's sweating, greasy, shabbily realistic depictions of McCarthy transcend caricature and proved more devastating.
Did you attempt to show the breadth of his abilities including some of the less-well-done items?
I illustrated the span of his career, the evolution of his work and style. I did not specifically choose less-well-done items, rather I specifically chose well-done but less-well-known items!
What (if anything) did you include that was about an issue that's pretty much been forgotten, and why?
Actually, I emphasized Herblock's unbelievable journalistic prescience. His ability, even as a young man in his twenties, to foresee political, social and economic trends well before they were identified by his colleagues, or countrymen and women. He is remembered for taking on hard issues with tough cartoons: joblessness, hopelessness, fascism, isolationism, racism, corruption, hypocrisy, Big Oil and Tobacco, gun control, poverty, education, civil rights and civil liberties. He always represented "the forgotten" man, woman, and child in American society, reminding us of our rights and our leaders of their responsibilities. He also recognized that a strong democracy is founded on an informed democracy and that public funding for education is critical to the future of our children and our country.
How does it feel to be put on the record as to what was the best of a real genius's work? Is this intended to be a definitive collection, and how much remains uncollected?
It's a privilege to work with his archives and very inspirational. The book is intended to remind us why we need commentators and cartoonists like Herblock now more than ever. Newspapers are folding and editorial cartoonists are vanishing. We take them for granted yet they represent a potentially powerful and independent voice for positive reform.
In this country, under our Constitution, political cartoonists can say publicly what no other commentators can and we need them in our lives as advocates and investigators. That is what Herblock did best and why we loved him; he was always on our side and always seemed to get it right.
The collection represents the most complete possible gathering to date of his published work. There may be no such thing as a definitive work; the CD includes the vast majority of known Herblock cartoons.
What was Herblock's impact on his genre?
Herblock led several generations of editorial cartoonists and garnered more awards than any other American. He stood up to power virtually alone on numerous occasions and proved himself the most independent, influential and courageous political cartoonist in our history.
How would you describe Herblock's lasting legacy?
Herblock succeeded because his work transcended cartooning, setting a new and incredibly enduring standard for commentary and investigative journalism. No one did it better.
Lastly, one of my other ongoing interviews is for a book about Gary Trudeau and Doonesbury - this one here - and with Trudeau he has received much feedback (which he seems to love) from politicians and public figures. Did Herblock also get much feedback from politicians and what did he think of it?
Herblock always seemed to provoke and quietly appreciate negative feedback from politicians. Although, within the Washington DC cocktail party set he avoided them like the plague, preferring to keep his social and professional circuits separate. Herblock's feeling seems to have been that if somebody's complaining he must have gotten something right.
McCarthy and Nixon complained publicly of their Herblock image. LBJ became such a nuisance requesting originals featuring his caricatures that Herblock refused his calls.

Interview With Tim Green, Author of American Outrage

(from 2007)

One of the joys of this reading-reviewing-and-interviewing hobby of mine is that in addition to interviewing some of my favorite writers, such as Robert Parker earlier in the week, I am also introduced to new writers, including the person whose interview I am writing up today, Tim Green.
I had never heard of Tim Green before I was asked if I would like to listen to his book-on-audio to review. I said I would do it so long as I can interview him. I find I get more out of this experience if I can interview the author instead of just review the book. Hopefully you readers are also enjoying these interviews too. If so please let me know in some way.
Green has written 11 other novels as well as two non-fiction books. After playing eight years for the NFL and becoming a lawyer he then worked as a featured commentator on A Current Affair, Good Morning America, NPR and FOX Sports.
The book is read aloud by Scott Brick, who does an excellent job. Green's next book, described below, also sounds good.
Scott Butki: What was your intention with this story? Did you accomplish that?
Tim Green: My intent was to combine some of the themes I explored in a memoir I wrote titled A Man and his Mother, which was about the search for my own biological mother, along with my experiences working in tabloid TV, with an extremely ruthless and dangerous antagonist who could add a full measure of excitement to the story. I think the result is even better than I hoped for. I feel like the book moves fast and furiously and pulls all those elements together seamlessly. But, after all, I'm a little prejudiced.
Scott: How would you summarize this book for those unfamiliar with it?
Tim: The story is about Jake Carlson, an investigative journalist for the TV news magazine, American Outrage. Jake's career is flagging when his adopted 13 year old son, Sam, asks Jake to use his skills to dig up the identity of Sam's biological mom. Jake combines a career-saving story with the search for his son, only to uncover a story that includes him and his son as the main characters. Sam's adoption evolved out of an Albanian crime syndicate with an international human trafficking operation. When he unearths the Albanians, they are bent on killing Jake and his son to cover a crime that includes the corrupt US Congressman who is also the patriarch of an old wealthy New York family. With the cameras focused on him and his son, Jake has to run for his life and he soon learns that some secrets are best left undiscovered.
Scott: Did you ever work for a program as, well, sleazy as American Outrage?
Tim: I hosted A Current Affair, which I like to think wasn't as sleazy as American Outrage, but some of the ridiculous nature of what the show considered to be news is evident in the book. I, like Jake Carlson, found myself biting my tongue and rolling my eyes quite often.
Scott: This is the first book of yours I've read. (Well, listened to on audio.)
Are there any recurring characters? How does this novel match up against
your others?
Tim: Jake Carlson may come back one day. Right now I'm working on a story that brings back Casey Jordan, a fiery female lawyer who appeared in my first national best-selling novel, The Letter of the Law.
Scott: How did you go from being a NFL player to an NPR commentator to a
novelist? Which of those three occupations has been most enjoyable? Which
has been the most satisfying?
Tim: I've always been passionate about books and football. Growing up I worked hard to developed the skills to be good at both, despite the incongruity of the two. NPR wanted a writer's insight into the wildly popular NFL and that in turn led to my credibility as a writer which helped me get my first novel published. Each of those experiences has been extremely satisfying in different ways. I'd hate to rank them. Football is more electric, a pure adrenaline rush. The payoff in writing is more lasting.
Scott: What question are you most tired of answering? And if the above question is it then I apologize for that.
Tim: The above question. Only kidding. I think it's how can a football player be a writer. The answer is simple: Both require passion and relentless devotion.
Scott: What question do you wish interviewers would ask but they don't. Here's
your chance to ask and answer it.
Tim: What's the best thing that ever happened to you in your life? Answer: Meeting my wife, Illyssa. She completes me and together we have five spectacular kids.
Scott: Did you have an interest in adoptions before you wrote this book? Did
you do research on the topic while working on this book?
Tim: As I said, I was adopted myself. The only research I had to do was the legal elements of international adoption. As you can see in the book, there are many holes in that process that leave it open to corruption and potential criminal activity.
Scott: What are you working on next?
Tim: Casey Jordan, who I already told you about, takes on a US Senator who's killed an undocumented Mexican worker in what he says is a hunting accident. Casey, who represents the wife in an unusual deportation case, thinks the husband was murdered and sets out to prove it against all odds. After I finish that, I'll move on to the next novel for kids which will be the third in a series that will be released this July. It's called Football Genius and it's aimed at boys aged 10-14.


Thanks to Tim Green for his help. I look forward to his next book. Readers, check out American Outrage and you won't - forgive me for this - be outraged that you did.

An Interview With Rupert Isaacson, Author of The Horseboy: A Father's Quest to Heal His Son

(part 3 of a four part series)

This is the third part of a four part series all about a documentary and memoir, both called The Horseboy.
Both chronicle, though in very different ways, Isaacson's family adventure story as he, his wife, Kristin, and son, Rowan, go to Mongolia in order to meet some shaman. Rupert wants the shaman to try their healing work on Rowan since Rowan has autism.
Rupert and the director of the documentary, who I interviewed here for part one, both went out of their way to avoid - with marketing, with their work - to suggest they were seeking or found a "cure" for Rowan's autism. Instead, the question was whether the shamans can do something to make it easier for Rowan to do every day activities like playing with others or using the bathroom.
Part two was my interview with Rowan's mother, who sometimes refers to herself as "the sane one." She took a lot of convincing - more than a year in fact - to be talked into going on the trip.
Part four - which is at least a few weeks away - will be a review of the book. I have made a point of not starting the book until after I finish writing up the interviews so as to avoid confusion between what was said in the movie, from what they told me in person, versus told me by email.
I did a 3 hour interview with Rupert and Kristin but then lost all my notes when my apartment was burglarized. They agreed to let me re-interview them so I can get back some actual quotes on some statements I wanted to preserve in "print."
And so..
the interview....
Scott: You made a great comment which I would hate losing that boiled the trip down to the most basic elements, namely the symptoms Rowan had when he left that were gone when he returned. Can you either name them again or try to recall what you were saying
Rupert: Sure. Rowan went to Mongolia with three terrible dysfunctions - still incontinent, subject to neurological fits that resulted in constant tantrums, and cut off from his peers, unable to make friends. He came back with none of those dysfunctions, though he is still autistic. He is now so functional within the autism spectrum that it comes across more as a charming quirk than as a disorder.
You made some comments about being a journalist as a prior job or profession and how that effected you as you told your story both in the documentary (he was also the executive producer) and in writing the memoir regarding not interfering with the story. Can you talk a little bit about that?
Well, I have spent years and years reporting on human rights issues and so on in Africa. So I am not interested in spin, just what happens. You have to be a servant of the story. You report the experience and what you feel about it - that is all. That is how I was trained. So a memoir is another piece of journalism - you simply describe what happened.
Tell me about the irritatometer
No text goes out to my editor until Kristin, reading the drafts on the couch, ceases to sigh with irritation. Once those sighs stop, I know the text is ready to show.
How many books have you now written, Rupert?
I have written a bunch of guide books to Africa and India in my time. Not sure if those count. But I wrote a book called The Healing Land about my time with the San, or Bushmen and how they harnessed their shamanic process to help win their land back - you can type The Healing Land into Amazon and it'll come up. Also I wrote a book about man's relationship with hunting called The Wild Host - History and Meaning of the Hunt. Again, a quick Amazon search would bring it up.
What do you think it is about nature and/or animals that helps autistic people relax and progress?
Most kids with PDD/NOS (the new form of autism) seem to have an over-active nervous system. Being in nature calms this down. Man-made environments (especially strip lights, loud echo-y spaces etc - like supermarkets and school gyms/hallways) often trigger neurological meltdown.
So being in nature for prolonged periods calms the neurology down and enables the child to learn without trauma. The animals seem to help with both sensory integration and communication. No one quite knows why but the results are very clear.
Was most of the $1 million book advance used to start the New Trails Center? What is the center's purpose and how has it been going since it was opened?
Yes, it was - starting the center was frighteningly expensive. We also started a trust for Rowan in later life. The purpose of the center is to offer time with animals, nature and horses to both special needs kids and their neuro-typical siblings. We don't charge for our services - its all by donation - because many families can't afford regular hippotherapy/therapeutic riding programs. you can have a look at the place at www.horseboyfoundation.org
What has the reaction been from the autism community to the book?
The Autism Society of America have been super supportive and we've had a lot of letters and emails from parents in similar situations who thought outside the box. It is nice to feel that kind of community around you as the experience of being an autism parent can sometimes be pretty isolating.
What has been Rowan's reaction to being in a movie and book?
Just straight-forward interest in the adventure and enjoyment of seeing his story. I think re-living his experience has been a therapy of a kind too - helping with perspective-taking. Basically, he enjoys it.
How do you think growing up in South Africa has affected your take on working with/helping Rowan? There's the obvious part of making the connection with the bushmen, but what about the culture, history, or vast changes in politics in the past 20 years that may brought about "personal development/insight" that turned you into the great father that you are?"
Ah. Well, South Africans are notoriously crazy people. In fact, adventure there is considered very normal in a way that it isn't here. South Africa is an extreme kind of place - in terms of the nature and so on. But really it was my working with hunter gatherer tribes down there as a human rights worker and then being exposed to their traditional healing techniques that for sure made me realize that this kind of medicine is an option and makes a nice compliment (not alternative) to western therapies - meaning that i can and do pursue both
My family was political - my mom was basically in exile as an anti-apartheid activist, so social justice down there is kind of in my blood.
And didn't you say you were banned from South Africa because of your human rights work there?
No, banned from Botswana (neighbouring country) for helping the san, or bushmen, win the title to their land - the central kalahari game reserve (52,000 sq kms) after they'd been illegally evicted to make way for diamond mines. It was while taking these bushmen from Botswana to the UN, State Dept and Congressional Human Rights Caucus that they met Rowan.
They/we eventually won the case in 2006, the year before i went out to Mongolia with Rowan. Once the victory was secured the Botswana govt banned me and 16 other human rights workers and journalists from entering the country again
How has it been dealing with the media? I think you guys said you did some kind of a media blitz - like 20 programs in five hours - what was that like? Have you noticed differences in coverage of the book from American publishers vs those of other countries?
In America there has been a greater focus on the shamanic part of the journey - it has been controversial. Some think we're full of BS, some think there's validity. Some people who have not yet read the book or seen the film assumed that we abandoned western medicine which is not the case at all. Rowan had all kinds of orthodox bio-med and behavioural therapies and is still in a therapy called ABA.
Once they do actually read or see it they tend to be reassured that we're not extremists. In other countries I think complimentary medicine is more accepted and the shamanism side of the story has sparked curiosity but not hostility. That said, the American media have also been wonderful - for example, Dr Sanjay Gupta at CNN took a very interesting look at the effects of hippotherapy when he interviewed us, as did CBS's news team.
Lastly, what questions do you wish interviewers would ask but they never do?
How do the shamans say their healing works?
Did you notice a change in Rowan's overall happiness?
Does adventure bring you closer a family?