Sign Up

Get the latest ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit.

All History Coverage

Interview by

“Less than one hundred years ago,” The Quest for Z opens, “maps of the world still included large ‘blank spots.’ ” If anyone is going to draw young readers into the story of Percy Fawcett’s early 20th-century explorations of these blank spots—an obsession that ultimately led to his disappearance—I’m glad it’s Greg Pizzoli. Here Pizzoli discusses his book’s unusual and welcome portrayal of failure.

As I understand it, this is the first book for children about Fawcett’s story. Did that make you feel pressured to get it just right?
Of course! I always feel pressure to get every book “just right.” But Fawcett was such a unique and often bizarre character that it took a lot of work to get the story to be just right for a picture book.

You write in the author’s note that, while working on this book, you’d often felt like you’d “lost your way.” Was it because Fawcett, as you also noted, wasn’t a “typical hero”?
I think what I meant was that it was tough to pace a book that wasn’t going to have a happy ending. It’s fascinating to know that Fawcett was correct about large cities in the Amazon, but it’s hard to polish the fact that he never returned home with a discovery. But I think it’s valuable to children (and everyone!) to read about failure, and to read more about figures in history that devoted their lives to something, worked toward a single achievement and failed in the end.

Plus, Fawcett was pretty bizarre figure with a lot of interesting and strange quirks, and I had to find a balance in what I wanted to include because I only had 48 pages to tell his story.

In what ways did your trip to Central America inform this story, beyond it giving you a jolt of inspiration to finish the story?
Seeing the pyramids and forests in Central America were influential, but I think the real bursts of inspiration came from visiting the Royal Geographical Society in London and holding some of Fawcett’s original journals and letters, and also visiting Angkor Wat in Cambodia. The way I imagined the city of Z is largely based on photos and drawings I made while in Angkor Wat.

What was the most challenging part of telling Fawcett’s story?
I hinted at it before, but the hardest part was cutting out all the really good stuff I just didn’t have space to include. Luckily I was able to include a “selected sources” page, so anyone interested can find some of the books and websites I referenced and get more information.

I love your illustrations of the anaconda, particularly the one where it’s shaped like a “Z.” Did that immediately come to you?
It did actually. I knew from the beginning that I wanted to create a theme with the pictures of hiding Zs wherever I felt it could be subtle enough to not detract from the story. There’s more than one.

What’s one thing it would make you really happy to hear that child readers have taken away from this story?
I’ve read this book with kids a few times already, and I love talking with them about the mystery of what happened to Fawcett and what Z might have been like. The thing that I like about it is that the book asks a question, it gives them something to talk about, and I’ve already been witness to a few disagreements over Fawcett’s fate! It’s so great.

It sounds like it’s been a long and winding road, working on this book. What was the most rewarding thing about it?
I’m not sure—I think that is still yet to come. Since it’s just coming out now, I haven’t done a ton of school visits with classes that have read it yet. I have really enjoyed talking with kids about Tricky Vic over the last couple of years, so I think the upcoming school year will be very fun. In terms of the art making, I think it’s my best work (except for what I’m working on right now).

What’s next for you?
I’m working on several projects—publishing next is The Twelve Days of Christmas with Disney-Hyperion, and next year Hi, Jack!, the early reader series Mac Barnett and I are working on, will start coming out. And a new nonfiction book coming in 2019! But I have to finish that one yet. . . .

 

ALSO IN BOOKPAGE: Read our review of The Quest for Z.

Julie Danielson features authors and illustrators at Seven Impossible Things Before Breakfast, a children’s literature blog.

“Less than one hundred years ago,” The Quest for Z opens, “maps of the world still included large ‘blank spots.’” If anyone is going to draw young readers into the story of Percy Fawcett’s early 20th-century explorations of these blank spots—an obsession that ultimately led to his disappearance—I’m glad it’s Greg Pizzoli. Here Pizzoli discusses his book’s unusual and welcome portrayal of failure.

Interview by

In What She Ate, food historian Laura Shapiro reveals the surprising stories behind six fascinating women’s appetites. Her subjects include author, poet and diarist Dorothy Wordsworth, sister of William; British chef Rosa Lewis, known as the “Queen of Cooks,” whose champions included King Edward VII; first lady Eleanor Roosevelt; Hitler’s mistress and eventual wife, Eva Braun; British novelist Barbara Pym; and writer and publisher Helen Gurley Brown. 

We asked Shapiro a few questions about the secrets food can reveal, the questions that still linger and her own appetites and cooking habits. 

You wrote that digging deeply into the stories of these women sometimes felt like probing into "the underside" of a Norman Rockwell painting. What surprised you the most? Do any unknowns still nag you?

There’s an image I just can’t shake; it’s been hovering over me ever since I started reading about Eleanor Roosevelt and the food at the FDR White House. It's an image of Eleanor herself, one of the most generous and warm-hearted First Ladies in history, gazing pleasantly around the luncheon table as the main course is served. Her guests try a bite or two of some dreary, lifeless dish; they push the food around, and as soon as they can politely do so, they put down their forks. I think about this scene so often, I feel as though I must have been there, but I still can’t figure out what Eleanor was thinking. She loved these people! They were friends, colleagues, people she admired, people working hard for FDR and the New Deal. And she was watching them get up from the table hungry. What’s unknowable here, at least to me, is the nature of the disconnect between Eleanor-the-empathetic and Eleanor-the-oblivious. In the book I write about the various reasons why she tolerated and/or promoted terrible food at the White House, yet enjoyed food in other times and places. But this disconnect runs even deeper, and it’s a mystery to me. I suspect it was a mystery to her, too.

“Everyday meals," you write, "constitute a guide to human character and a prime player in history." In addition to the Last Supper, what other famous meals come to mind, and what questions do you have about that meal?
One day in Paris, probably around 1913, Gertrude Stein invited the writer Carl Van Vechten to dinner. Van Vechten was a cultural entrepreneur and activist—he was involved in dance, music, the Harlem Renaissance and pretty much everything else going on in the arts before World War II. He wanted to cultivate Gertrude Stein, and she was very willing to be cultivated, hence the invitation. Stein, of course, lived with Alice B. Toklas, a great cook and very discerning food-lover. In other words, everything was in place for a noteworthy meal. Toklas herself didn’t make dinner—they had a cook, Hélène—but as Stein’s devoted lover and most fanatic admirer, Toklas surely would have overseen the menu. Or did she? That night, Hélène served them "an extraordinarily bad dinner," Stein wrote in The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas. "For some reason best known to herself she gave us course after course of hors d’oeuvres finishing up with a sweet omelet." Actually that sounds good to me, but then, I always like the hors d’oeuvres best.

At any rate, I’m dying to know more. Years later, when Toklas wrote The Alice B. Toklas Cookbook, she described Hélène as "that rare thing, an invariably perfect cook. She knew all the niceties of making menus. If you wished to honour a guest you offered him an omelette soufflé with an elaborate sauce, if you were indifferent to this an omelette with mushrooms or fines herbes, but if you wished to be insulting you made fried eggs." I have a feeling insult was on the menu that night—but why? Why?

When you visit people’s homes, do you yearn to peek inside their cupboards and fridge? How and why did you turn into a culinary historian?
Yes, it was exactly that impulse to sneak a look inside other people’s refrigerators that propelled me into writing about food. Growing up I was wildly curious about what everyone else was eating—I remember looking at other kids’ lunch trays at Broadmeadow School, and trying to guess why they skipped the Jell-O but didn’t mind eating those horribly flabby mashed potatoes doled out with an ice-cream scoop. When I discovered that this obsessive curiosity was perfectly respectable as long as I called it being a culinary historian, I was delighted.

The chapter about Eva Braun is fascinating, including her fondness for daily champagne and her penchant for new clothes and preserving her figure. You note that historians have reconstructed Hitler and Braun’s last hours in minute detail, yet there is "remarkably little documentation of the last meal." What might those details reveal?
It’s fascinating that Third Reich historians have described practically everything about the final hours in the bunker, except the last lunch. Or rather, they've noted it, but the accounts differ; and it’s impossible to say for sure exactly what was on the table. I made what I hope is a reasonable guess, based on the most consistent information; but I hate not having all the facts. I think what I’d see, if I knew the food more precisely, would have to do with the nature of appetite and the symbolic power of the act of eating. They were under siege; horror and destruction were just outside, and they had created that horror and destruction, so the chaos was inside them as well. How do you feed yourself, what does sustenance mean, when you’ve brought about so much death and are now looking straight at your own?

Of the women you profile, Cosmopolitan editor Helen Gurley Browns food story seems particularly surprising. Famed for being on the forefront of feminism, she was constantly dieting with protein, pills and Lean Cuisines while still trying to cook for her husband. Why do you think she was unable to escape this self-imposed trap?
I was fascinated by the young Helen I discovered in the Helen Gurley Brown papers at Smith College—a smart, ambitious woman determined to make her way in Los Angeles. She had such a lively mind, and I think she could have gone in all sorts of interesting directions if she hadn’t decided to focus practically exclusively on men and sex. The moment she hit the big time with Sex and the Single Girl it was all over. She didn’t dare let go of the formula. So for the rest of her life, she worked like crazy on maintaining the same body, the same skin, the same hair and the same single-minded focus on men. It really was her prison, and by the end of her life, under the wig and the plastic surgery, there just wasn’t much left.

What were your favorite meals as a child? And now?
My mother was a wonderful cook, and in fact she worked as a caterer during the ’50s and ’60s, so there was often a lot of cooking going on in our kitchen that wasn’t for the family, it was for one of her clients. She would pack it all up, put it in the car, and drive off to the event. Late that night she’d return home, unpack the car, and put the leftovers in the refrigerator. The leftovers! I used to get up very early, go right down to the kitchen in my pajamas, and forage in the refrigerator for breakfast—the most glorious breakfasts you can imagine. There were cream-cheese-and-mushroom rolls; there were slices of "party rye" with onion, mayonnaise and parmesan cheese; there were cream puffs filled with crabmeat; there was liptauer cheese dip; and I suppose there were things like meat and vegetables, but those didn't interest me. Then I would check the cookie tin for desserts—brownies, rugelach, and what we called "edges." My mother made excellent lemon squares, and she always cut off the messy edges so each square would look tidy. The edges— lemony, buttery and crisp—were saved for us.

Alas, I’ve never again lived with a refrigerator that held such treasures, but to this day, leftovers are my favorite meal.

Once you got married, "the prospect of making dinner hovered over each day like a thundercloud that refused to break." To further complicate matters, you and your husband had moved to India.
It’s a good thing I got married back in the 1970s and not last week, because I’d be losing my mind even more definitively in today’s culinary environment than I did all those years ago. Back then I had cooked lots of meals as a woman but none as a wife, and I was frantically trying to figure out the difference between those two female identities. Yes, there was a male partner in my life, but it was the same male partner who had been there before the wedding, so why was I suddenly a different person? Or was I the same person, albeit wearing a ring and writing thank-you notes? In pursuit of some kind of answer, I focused on the act of making dinner, which I knew to be a special preoccupation of wives—at least, that was the message I had absorbed from all the women’s magazines that came to our house while I was growing up.

But suppose I were launching my domestic life today, and focusing on dinner as the prime signifier of wifedom. I’d be assailed on all sides by images of glamorous, perfect meals—they’d be on TV and social media, they'd be in newspapers and magazines, they'd be in every cookbook. The stakes would be impossibly high. I'd have wife-anxiety and also competitive-cookery anxiety. I’d be worrying about spending a fortune on flawless organic ingredients just to make my mother’s recipe for chicken tetrazzini, and I’d be worrying that I shouldn’t make it at all because it's so embarrassingly old fashioned, and I'd be worrying about whether to make some splendidly simple dinner instead, like grilled salmon, and then I'd realize I had no grill and that the good salmon cost $35 a pound—well, you get the picture. Mania in all directions simultaneously.

I think if I have any advice on starting to cook, it’s this—just cook. Regularly. Use fresh ingredients, and for heaven’s sake buy them in the supermarket if you want to. Follow some incredibly simple recipe, and cultivate a respect for the ordinary. The rest is commentary.

ALSO IN BOOKPAGE: Read our review of What She Ate.

(Author photo by Ellen Warner.)

In What She Ate, food historian Laura Shapiro reveals the surprising stories behind six fascinating women's appetites. We asked Shapiro a few questions about the secrets food reveals, the questions that still linger and her own appetites and cooking habits.&nbsp
Interview by

On August 7, 2006, a group of elite U.S. Army Rangers, including Alex Blum, who was preparing to deploy to Iraq, participated in a bank heist that was organized by Specialist Luke Elliott Sommer. In the incredibly gripping Ranger Games, Ben Blum attempts to understand how his clean-cut cousin Alex, who had dreamed of being an Army Ranger for his entire life, could be involved in this disastrous crime. What he discovers is a web of lies, alleged brainwashing and disturbing truths about the military, his family and himself.

We asked Ben Blum a few questions about the Army Ranger program, masculinity and how writing this fascinating book ultimately affected his family.

How do you think you would have reported this story if Alex Blum was not your cousin?
The short answer is that I wouldn’t have. I was a computer science graduate student with zero journalistic experience at the time I started corresponding with Alex back in 2007, and Army Rangers scared the crap out of me—let alone Army Rangers who had robbed a bank. Everything I learned about reporting I learned from my early mistakes with Alex: getting too close to a subject, taking a single perspective on an event as definitive, seeking evidence to fit a narrative rather than a narrative to fit the evidence. After the first couple of years, I managed to graduate from Alex’s friend and confidante to something a little closer to a true journalist, but toward the end, I found that even that role was insufficient to the project. Instead of just reporting what I had come to see as entrenched distortions in his perspective, I wanted to change his perspective, to be a kind of a therapist to him. That goes beyond the bounds of what a journalist is supposed to do. But for better or for worse, it makes the book what it is—a lot more intense than a piece of pure reportage could have been.

What was the most surprising thing you learned about the U.S. Army Rangers program?
That it is possible to become an elite Special Operations soldier in the American military, available for assignment to our most sensitive missions, without even a shred of combat experience.

How has this book affected your relationship with Alex Blum?
It put an enormous amount of strain on our relationship for a very long time, but we are now closer than we ever dreamed we’d be. As he put it in a toast at my wedding last year, we’ve laughed together, we’ve cried together, we’ve said “f— you” to each other, and we each consider the other one of our best friends.

Do you feel that America’s cultural beliefs about masculinity and war was a partner in this crime?
Absolutely. It reminds me of the parable that David Foster Wallace told at his famous graduation speech at Kenyon College. An old fish swims by two young fish and says, “Morning boys, how’s the water?” The two young fish swim on, and eventually one leans over to the other and whispers, “What the hell is ‘water’?” For Americans of Alex’s and my generation, the water is war. We breathed it in through our morning cartoons, our toy cowboys and toy guns, the explosion effects on sports shows, the movies we grew up watching, the videogames we played with our friends. Every branch of the military—Army, Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard—has its own Hollywood liaison office dedicated to ensuring that screenplays fit the image they want to convey to the young guys like Alex who watch action movies. If directors don’t play ball, they lose access to military equipment and locations.

Alex Blum held his superiors in the Army in high regard and respect. What do you think was different and so powerful about his relationship with Specialist Luke Elliott Sommer?
Fraternization with underlings is generally frowned upon among Rangers, but Sommer broke this taboo. He was more than a superior to Alex; he was a mentor, a role model. He made Alex feel chosen, deemed worthy of special attention by a member of a higher caste. It spoke to Alex’s ambition to excel.

Luke Elliott Sommer is a strange and complex character. Despite his many flaws and poor decisions, it’s difficult not to see the charismatic and ambitious—if not delusional—Sommer as some sort of genius. After completing this book, what are your feelings about Sommer?
I fear for him. I have come to think of his brain as something like a Lamborghini that lacks first, second, third and reverse. It looks amazing and sounds like a lot of fun to drive, but in practice you’re going to have a hell of a time getting to the grocery store and back. I think Sommer is in fact profoundly disabled, and the great tragedy of it is how hard it is for people to tell—sometimes even for himself. Nobody likes pain, but people who are born without the ability to feel it end up losing fingers and limbs. Sommer seems to lack the ability to feel a certain more abstract but equally life-saving species of pain, the kind that tells you that what you are doing is going to cause harm to yourself and others down the line.

Did your feelings toward the military evolve while writing this book?
Surprisingly enough, I ended the book far more sympathetic to the military than when I began it. Educated, middle-class Americans have grown so insulated from military culture that it tends to look a little strange and scary to them. Ever since Vietnam and the abolition of the draft, our wars have been fought by the rural poor, which makes it particularly easy for urban elites to attach their political queasiness about our recent, ever-more-unjustified wars to the men and women who fight them. But the soldiers I’ve met are amazing people—kind, reflective and unusually well-informed. As in all arenas of life, there is a right and a wrong way to conduct oneself as a soldier, and the majority strive to conduct themselves in the right way.

How has writing this book about your family affected your life?
It has completely transformed it. I used to feel pretty alienated from my family. The men were all big, tough jocks and I was this scrawny math nerd who had no idea how to keep up with their banter. I couldn’t wait to leave home for college. Writing about Alex and the army connected me back to my family culture in a way that I never dreamed possible as a kid. I discovered that there was more love and joy available in these classically male modes of interaction than I had ever understood from outside them, but also a tremendous amount of elided pain. Learning about our family history, particularly the foundational influence of my grandfather’s horrific experiences as a soldier in World War II, taught me a lot about my relatives and myself.

What do you hope for Alex Blum’s future?
I hope he is brave enough to show people his vulnerability, confusion and pain. I hope they see the goodness of his heart and give him the opportunity to show the strength of his character. I hope he starts a family and teaches his own kids how to skate. I hope this book doesn’t upend the impressive life he has managed to build for himself as a convicted felon (no easy feat in America).

You’re a former mathematical prodigy and have just completed a wide-ranging, engrossing book about the military, the nature of loyalty and truth, the complex dynamics of male relationships, bank heists and morality. What’s next for you?
I’m still interested in science, but seven years of thinking about Alex and morality have shattered so many of my old scientific beliefs—most notably, my commitment to materialist determinism. I now find the great and pressing mysteries to be the human ones. I am going to keep trying to make a living as a writer as long as they let me get away with it. My next project will address the psychology of morality, religion and trauma.

You dedicate this book to your grandmother, Oma. Can you tell me a bit about your relationship with her?
Oma is a tough Texan belle who taught me manners, pride and that ineffable quality called grace. So much of Ranger Games is about men, and so much of my childhood was about men, but Oma was, looking back, just as much an influence on our family culture as my grandfather. Alex and I both love her dearly.

 

Author photo by Ned & Aya Rosen

We asked Ben Blum a few questions about the Army Rangers program, masculinity and how writing his fascinating book, Ranger Games ultimately affected his family.
Interview by

In Roger D. Hodge's sweeping new book, Texas Blood, he mines the Lone Star state’s borderlands and ranching past for its incredible history and his own family’s generations-deep connection to Texas. We asked Hodge about his ambivalent feelings for his homestate, Cormac McCarthy, his family’s past and his thoughts on Texas’ future.

It’s clear from the book that you’re fascinated by Texas, but you also have a sharp-eyed view of its complications and imperfections. What do you think is most inaccurate about the conventional Texas mythology?
I suppose the biggest misconception is that Texans are all appalling Know-Nothings like Rick Perry and George W. Bush. Back home, those yahoos are what my grandmother used to call “all hat and no cattle.” Texas is a vibrant multi-cultural society, but you’d hardly know it from most of what you read and see in the media. How Texas came to be dominated by its most retrograde and backward elements is a fascinating story. The yahoos eventually triumphed in Texas, but the story didn’t have to end up that way.

The one thing everyone knows about Texas is the Battle of the Alamo, but most of Texas history occurred before the Alamo, before the Anglo colonists arrived; it was the history of the native peoples who lived there over the course of 14,000 years, some of whom left huge, magnificent cosmological murals in rock shelters along the Pecos River before they moved on as the climate changed and water disappeared. When the Spanish arrived, they found hundreds of different native groups, speaking a dizzying array of languages. Even during the historical period, all the way up to the American Civil War, the dominant power in Texas was not the Spanish or the Mexicans or the Anglo Texans; it was the Comanches.

You note that this book started years ago as a magazine essay. How did it evolve into a full book? How long did it take and what kind of research did you do?
The idea for this book grew inside me over the course of many years. I had long been fascinated by the history of the borderlands, by the stories of smugglers and outlaws and Indian fighting that I had heard growing up. I was curious about my family’s place in that history, but I was never able to find out much about the generations that came before my grandparents. I read all the big Texas histories but found them too broad and unsatisfying. So I always had a vague plan to write a long essay that would scratch that itch. In 2006 I wrote an essay for Harper’s Magazine on Cormac McCarthy’s No Country for Old Men that in some ways became the germ of Texas Blood. But at that point, the post-9/11 militarization of the border was just getting started. The Secure Fence Act was passed that year, and it was only later, after I had left Harper’s, that I began my reporting on border surveillance.

The book combines historical narrative with family memoir and reportage, so I had a number of different research strategies. First there was the border reporting, which mostly played out in many long road trips, crisscrossing the state, talking to people, going on ride-alongs with the Border Patrol, chatting up military contractors at security conferences, camping out with archaeologists studying rock art, and so on. I have stacks of notebooks, gigabytes of audio and thousands of photographs from that reporting.

At the same time, I was doing the library research. I spent untold hours reading primary sources and testimonies. Gradually it dawned on me that everything I was reading was an account of a journey through Texas: Cabeza de Vaca inaugurated the genre in the 1530s with his narrative of walking barefoot and naked across Texas and northern Mexico. Then came the expedition reports of entradas by Spanish soldiers, seeking to establish a colony in the north; the accounts of early Texans, the mountain men, trappers and scalpers; the prairie tourists and journalists; and the overland diaries of cattlemen and emigrant families and forty-niners on the road to the goldfields of California.

The family research was particularly challenging, because my ancestors didn’t leave much writing behind. But a couple of my relatives had spent years working out the family genealogy and they were extremely generous in sharing their findings. I built on that foundation and tried to fill in some important blanks with research at the Texas Land Office and in the Texas Archives. What was striking to me was how restless they were, moving in one generation from East Tennessee to Missouri to Texas, up and down the western border with the Comanches, out to California and back, then finally settling down along the Mexican border. I hit the road and traced their movements, reading as I went the accounts of others who traveled similar paths at more or less the same time, trying to see the world through the eyes of those I came to think of as my family’s fellow-travelers

Part of the book is in effect a literary essay on the works of Cormac McCarthy, whose writing you obviously admire. You say that his critics sometimes fail to understand his insight into the Texas borderland. As a border native, what do you think he gets right?
All the Pretty Horses was published in 1992, not long after I arrived in New York, and that book was a revelation for me because he had captured the peculiar voice and character of my home with such uncanny accuracy. I immediately read Blood Meridian and all the Tennessee novels, and then, as they appeared, The Crossing and Cities of the Plain. Those books became a source of comfort for me in my exile from the landscape of West Texas. When No Country for Old Men appeared and I realized that McCarthy had set the opening scene, in which Llewelyn Moss stumbles upon the aftermath of a cartel shootout, on my family’s ranch, I knew it was time, at long last, to write about these books that I’d been inhabiting for so long as a surrogate for my lost Texas landscape.

When I was writing the Harper’s essay I realized that the overlap between my family’s history and McCarthy’s fiction was more extensive than I had realized. My great-great-great-grandparents Perry and Welmett Wilson had followed the Southern Road to California in the 1850s, at roughly the same time as the events described in Blood Meridian, in which a band of American scalpers go marauding through far West Texas, northern Mexico and the Arizona territories. The climax of the novel occurs in Yuma, Arizona, and Welmett Wilson perished in the desert near there. McCarthy’s primary source for that novel, an extraordinary illuminated manuscript by a member of the Glanton gang entitled My Confession, became an important source for me as I retraced my ancestors’ journey along the Southern Road.

The book is a blend of genres and subjects, but the framework is your own family history of Texas ranchers, which began when Perry Wilson left Missouri in the mid-19th century. What did you learn about your ancestors that most surprised you? And what mysteries remain?

Almost everything about my ancestors’ lives remains mysterious. The Wilsons were working people who lived in hard places. They didn’t leave writings or paintings. Beyond the direct experience of my grandmother’s generation, all I really had was property records and a few tales that came down through my family. Everything else: their hopes and fears and ambitions, their jealousies and petty rivalries, their agonies of birth and death—all of that had to be imagined. But I’m not a novelist. As a nonfiction writer, I submit to the discipline of fact, so I found fellow travellers, eloquent contemporary witnesses who trod the same paths. They helped me see the world my ancestors saw.

I found Perry to be a particularly intriguing character. Like many Americans at the time, he was incredibly peripatetic, ranging from Missouri to California to Texas, then finally to Arizona, often on extremely dangerous journeys. What do you think drove him and others like him?
That’s one of the book’s central questions. Almost every character in the book is a wanderer of one kind or another: cattlemen, Indian hunters, Indians, conquistadors, missionaries, speculators, emigrants, scalpers—all of them were constantly moving, seeking their fortune, seeking adventure, looking for a healthy climate or just a some shelter from the storm of history. What caused Perry to travel back and forth to California, to carry his young wife down the Texas Road through Indian County, and then to load up the wagons again and head out to California? I can’t say for certain, but I think I glimpsed a possible answer.

As you trace your family’s migration, you travel at one point with a distant relative named John, who was an avid family historian and collector but is now suffering from dementia. How did you approach writing about that experience?
John Stambaugh, who died not long ago, was one of kindest, most generous people I met in my travels, and he couldn’t remember what was happening from one moment to another. He had forgotten almost everything he had learned about our family history, but he desperately wanted to share what he had formerly known. Every now and then bolts of insight would burst forth, as when he saw a barn he had played in as a child. But he wasn’t pathetic or desperate. He was very happy. So I didn’t overthink my approach to writing about him. I just described what we experienced together and told the truth. I hope readers see that portrait as something tender, but also funny, because John was very funny.

In the chapter “Beyond Here Lies Nothing,” you look closely at current border surveillance, through your travels and interviews with agents. What’s your assessment of what the U.S. is doing there?
Well, right now everyone wants to talk about Trump’s preposterous Wall. In some respects Trump’s Wall is a political fantasy, an empty campaign promise he’s determined to keep despite the fact that it’s an operational absurdity, a ludicrous and impossible object. On the other hand, the Wall is already in existence, and I don’t really mean the 700-odd miles of existing fencing. Those 18-foot-high fences and walls are not a barrier anyway. No, the Wall is not meant to keep people out, it’s meant to divide those of us who are already here. On one side of the wall are those, like Trump, who want to “make America white again,” who talk about how the “complexion” of America is changing, who want to send all the brown-skinned people who speak Spanish or Arabic or any other language but English back where they came from. On the other side are those who embrace cultural, gender and religious diversity and see it as a source of beauty and strength. Trump’s Wall already divides every community in this country.

When it comes to the border itself, the Wall doesn’t demarcate the international boundary so much as it defines an invisible barrier roughly 100 miles inland, trapping many thousands of undocumented people in what can be seen as the world’s longest prison. People are being walled into their own homes. In Texas, under Trump, any trivial encounter with law enforcement can now trigger deportation. People are being pulled over for minor traffic violations and taken into custody by the Border Patrol. Trump’s Wall is already doing its awful work, separating families, leaving U.S. citizen children alone without anyone to care for them after their parents are deported.

With the rise of mass biometric collection, people will soon be walking around with the Wall inside their own bodies.

The border zone has long been a laboratory for mass surveillance, and under Trump that process of experimentation is intensifying. I write in the book that the border is gradually expanding to fill the entire country.

I loved the section of the book where you visit with the Mexican Americans who tend to the shrine of Mount Cristo Rey near El Paso. Why did you include that episode?
Mount Cristo Rey is a magical place. It sits directly on the border, where the Rio Grande flows out of the southern Rockies and collides with its geopolitical destiny as an international boundary. Nowhere else in my travels did I feel so powerfully the full weight of the borderlands’ history. There, on the banks of the Rio Grande, a unique community called Smeltertown took shape in the shadow of the Guggenheims’ ASARCO smelter. Mexican immigrants settled there and devoted themselves to the company, which repaid them with heavy metal poisoning and death. The village was condemned and the people scattered. Yet the Smeltertown diaspora continues to maintain the shrine of Mount Cristo Rey, the shining cross on the mountain, envisioned as a “fortress against communism” but cherished as a site of tender devotion. Every October, tens of thousands of people perform the pilgrimage of Mount Cristo Rey, some without shoes, walking the long perilous hanging road to the peak, which looms over one of the most dangerous neighbourhoods in Ciudad Juarez. At the time, that little stretch of border was wide open. In that place, all the historical and political contradictions—and the extravagant weirdness—of the border country is on full display.

Aside from McCarthy, what books, either fiction or nonfiction, would you recommend to non-Texans to get a better understanding of the state?
The single best book on Texas was written by a young journalist named Frederick Law Olmsted, who later achieved fame as a landscape architect. Olmsted’s path along the western margins of Euro-American settlement—through what we’d now call Central Texas—eerily matches the peregrinations of my great-great-great-grandfather Perry Wilson, so I devote ample space to his observations. The book is a masterpiece of cultural criticism and political economy.

The book ends with an examination of the wonderful Pecos River-style ancient rock art that is abundant in the region where your family ranch land is located. Why did that seem like an appropriate finish?
The ranching culture that once nurtured my family and our neighbours is largely gone, swept away by economic policies and global forces that are relentlessly hostile to small-scale agriculture and, in fact, to sustainable communities of any kind. That particular world lasted but a few generations. Pockets survive here and there, mostly as a “lifestyle,” but real ranching has probably vanished for good in the harsh landscape of my birth. In that same place, however, another civilization thrived for thousands of years and left magnificent and enduring monuments to its struggles that will remain long after our metal implements have rusted and crumbled into dust. The Pecos River People painted the story of their world on the walls of limestone shelters along the Devils River and the Pecos. One of the defining characteristics of their belief system, we now know, was the idea that the rain, the source of all life for them, depended utterly on their actions. If they failed to perform their rituals, to care for the source of all life, the world would die. I am humbled by the profundity of that vision, and its glaring contrast with our own.

Read an excerpt of Texas Blood, published in The Oxford American

(Author photo by Deborah Hodge.)

We talk to Roger D. Hodge about his history of Texas and his personal connections to the Lone Star State, Texas Blood.
Interview by

The Christmas trees, the feasting, the stockings hanging over the fireplace . . . It’s all pretty standard seasonal fare. But where exactly did our beloved Christmas traditions come from? Historian and bestselling author Judith Flanders explores the unexpected sources of the winter holiday in her fascinating and festive Christmas: A Biography. We asked Flanders a few questions about what she discovered during her research. 

I think my favorite tradition I learned about from this book are the Bean Kings, the lucky recipients of a slice of cake with a bean baked into it who were celebrated in medieval Europe and England. Bean kings sound like they were the life of the party! What was your favorite Christmas tradition that you discovered during research?
It probably had to be that boring gifts of underwear have a long history. In 1805, on the great Lewis and Clark expedition, the first expedition to map out the western part of the USA, Captain Lewis gave Lieutenant Clark ‘a present of a Fleeshe Hoserey vest draws & Socks’, with a ‘pr Mockerson’: fleece hosiery, or stockings, and a vest, underpants, socks and moccasins, or slippers.

How much influence do Victorian traditions, rooted in the writings of Washington Irving and Charles Dickens, hold on our current ideas about Christmas?
Victorian traditions did make a lot of difference to the holiday: In particular, I explain in the book why I think it is likely that Washington Irving ‘invented’ Santa Claus, rather than drawing on an old Dutch tradition, as he claimed to have done. Dickens, in turn, read Irving. But the most important Victorian elements were not seasonal. It was railways, urbanization, the press and the mass market, all of which were invented, or flourished, in the 19th century, that took older seasonal traditions and either elaborated them, or reshaped them for the new century. This was what created the Christmas we know today.

Why do you think Christmas is so wrapped up in collective nostalgia, a hearkening back to “the good old days”?
Ultimately, my research showed that Christmas isn’t so much wrapped up in nostalgia, as nostalgia is a major part of the holiday. It is a way of creating a collective illusion that life was once better—an illusion we need, one that lets us believe we can get back to that state once more. Because Christmas has always been about nostalgia, and it was never better at some mythical ‘before’ date. In the 4th century, only 30 years after the first recorded Christmas, an archbishop was already preaching against holiday gluttony. And by 1616, a character in a play was looking back to the good old days when Christmas was really Christmas, nothing like the modern day, he said.

Sounds like (over)eating and (over)drinking have been a part of Christmas since Roman times, before it was even called Christmas. What was your favorite Christmas delicacy you found while researching, or what’s your personal favorite holiday treat?
Actually my favourite thing was not a delicacy at all, but perhaps an anti-delicacy. I’ve always thought Christmas pudding was disgusting, greasy and rich and—well, just ick. So I was pleased to find an 18th-century Swiss traveller who was horrified when he tasted the British ancestor to Christmas pudding, then called plum broth, or plum porridge. He was adamant: you had to be English to like it.

You grew up mostly in Canada, but now live in London. Do you see any major differences between the Christmases of Canada and Britain?
I’m sort of a cheat when it comes to Christmas in life as opposed to on the page. I’m Jewish, and my family only made the most token gestures towards Christmas—we had a tree once or twice, I think, but that was it. So the differences I see are mostly from the outside: It seems to me that in Britain there is more emphasis on the Christmas dinner part of the day, in North America, more on the tree and the decorations. But the one thing I found researching was, it’s not just every country that does it differently: Every family does it differently, and every family believes that their way is the only right way.

As your book makes clear, Christmas has evolved a lot since its roots in Roman revelry. Do you see any transformations for the holiday on the horizon?
Well, in some ways I don’t agree with your question. I think the details of the holiday have changed, because the world has changed, but I think the holiday has from the start been about consumption, and it still is. Before the mass market, and industrialization, most of the consumption was food and drink, while now it’s consumer products. But it’s still consumption.

From carols, which originated in the 16th century, and the Nutcracker ballet to It’s a Wonderful Life and Nat King Cole’s “Chestnuts Roasting on an Open Fire,” the creative types have always found inspiration in Christmas. What’s your favorite Christmas-themed creative work?
I’ve been a ballet-goer for decades, so my least favourite Christmas pastime is The Nutcracker: I’ve just seen it too often. And I was amazed to realize that Handel’s Messiah was not, until the 20th century, a Christmas tradition at all, but an Easter one. If I had only one Christmas creative work, though, it might just be James Stewart in It’s a Wonderful Life: I don’t think you can have too many seasonal weepies.

As you point out, Christmas means many things to many different people, from a time of religious celebration to a time for commercial gain. What does it mean for you? Did your views change while writing this book?
I think my great realization when researching the subject was to realize how miraculously chameleon-like Christmas was: how it could be so many different things in so many places to so many different people. That might just be my favorite.

Any Christmas festivities that you’re looking forward to celebrating yourself?
Would I sound too Scrooge-like if I said it was closing my front door and staying home and not talking to anyone? Bah, humbug.

The Christmas trees, the feasting, the stockings hanging over the fireplace . . . It’s all pretty standard Christmas fare. But where exactly did our beloved seasonal traditions come from? Historian and bestselling author Judith Flanders explores the unexpected sources of the winter holiday in her fascinating and festive Christmas: A Biography. We asked Flanders a few questions about what she discovered during her research. 
Interview by

In Damnation Island, Stacy Horn explores the horrific past of a small island in New York City’s East River, where the “criminally insane” were imprisoned in the 19th century.

How did Blackwell’s Island capture your attention and inspire you to write this book?
I had a vague awareness that the island had a dark past—that something terrible had happened there—but I didn’t know the details. This is irresistible to me. A horrific but forgotten story? I had to recover it.

You researched so many individuals for this book—can you briefly share one story that you find the most affecting?
Adelaide Irving, a mixed-up, headstrong 15-year-old who was sent to the penitentiary for two years for her first offense: picking someone’s pocket. It was an outrageous sentence, and she never recovered. She was dead by the time she turned 23. They buried her in a convict-built coffin on a hill. I was once a mixed-up, headstrong 15-year-old, and I was acting out in all sorts of ways. But I come from a background of relative privilege. There are million safety nets for people like me, and people like me don’t usually go to jail. It was true in the 19th century, it was true in the 20th, and it’s still true now.

Blackwell’s Island was founded with very positive intentions. How and why did things go so far awry?
They wanted to save money. To reduce overhead, they starved the inmates, didn’t properly clothe or house them, and instead of hiring paid nurses and attendants, the administrators employed convicts from the workhouse to look after the inmates in the lunatic asylum and other institutions on the island. (The workhouse was a prison for people convicted of minor crimes.) It was not a secret. The abuses on Blackwell’s Island were regularly reported in the papers, and grand juries would visit and issue damning reports. Priests attending to the spiritual needs of the inmates would alert their superiors. But nothing ever happened. I recognize this paralysis. There isn’t a day that I don’t hear about some horrible miscarriage of justice in America. If I pay attention to the papers and my Twitter feed, I’m reading about fresh new cases every few minutes. We all are. And just what are most of us doing about it? Why is extreme injustice allowed to continue?

What did undercover reporters find when they visited the island?
To use an expression of Emma Goldman, an anarchist who was sent to the penitentiary, they found patients who were “legally murdered,” either by the lack of food, improper hygiene, careless attendants, murderous roommates or by succumbing to lethal epidemics. Police courts would continue to send people to the island even when they knew there was an active disease outbreak.

In what way does the history of Blackwell Island continue to haunt us—either in terms of contemporary New York City or in terms of misguided ideas about the relationship between mental illness and crime?
By throwing the poor, the mad and the convicted altogether on one narrow island they unwittingly reinforced a devastating association which persists to this day. That the mentally ill are dangerous and poor people are thieves in disguise. The priest featured in my book wrote, “The dark shadow of crime spreads right and left, from the Penitentiary and the Workhouse, over all the institutions, the Asylum, the Alms-House and Charity Hospital, so that, in the minds of the people at large, all suffer alike from an evil repute. . . .” Being poor had become a character trait that needed “correction,” like the impulse to steal or cheat. If they were poor it was due to their own moral failing and laziness. The Christian impulse to help the needy had been tamped down and replaced with an inclination to punish them.  

There were so many aspects of Blackwell’s Island that inspire disgust—the food, the shelter, the hygiene, the quickness with which disease spread. What do you think was the worst aspect for those living there?
I always go back to what could I have withstood. Have you ever had an anxiety or panic attack, or suffered from depression? Imagine that instead of kindness you’re thrown into a chair, strapped in so you can’t move or get up, and you have to stay there hour after hour, all day long, without talking, and if you go to the bathroom in your chair because no one will unstrap you, an attendant will likely come along and beat you or drag you to a tub of used bathwater and hold your head under until you’re near death. People could do whatever they wanted to these helpless inmates because they were out of the public eye on this now off-limits island. It’s the same today. Look how long it took people to acknowledge that what goes on in the facilities on Rikers Island is immoral, and to start talking about change. I cried reading a Justice Department report of what happened to teenagers on Rikers Island. What they describe has been going on for centuries. What took us so long?

Why did the people who suffered from the abuses of Blackwell’s Island so rarely have a chance to be heard by people in authority?
I read through a 900-page report from a Senate investigation of the conditions inside asylums in New York. In all those pages there was not one single testimony from an inmate. It’s hard for the poor, the mentally ill and the convicted to have a voice and to be heard and not dismissed today. It was almost impossible then.

Who are the heroes of Blackwell’s Island, if there are any? 
Even though most did not succeed in effecting change, I came across many wardens who tried. They showed up every week, day after day, doing what they could. I don’t know if I could have faced inmates crying to me for help, inmates dying, knowing that so much of their suffering was preventable. I think it would have destroyed me. But they showed up.  

What do you hope readers take away from this book?
I didn’t want to force it down anyone’s throats, but I hope people pick up on the fact that in many ways the same things, and worse, are taking place today. The idea that some people are unworthy and they have all these terrible things coming to them is still prevalent, as is the conviction that the poor are entirely responsible for their financial struggles and that we should not help them.

 

ALSO IN BOOKPAGE: Read our review of Damnation Island.

In Damnation Island, Stacy Horn explores the horrific past of a small island in New York City’s East River, where the “criminally insane” were imprisoned in the 19th century.

Interview by

With Ruthless Tide, Al Roker offers a riveting account of the 1889 Johnstown Flood, one of the worst disasters in U.S. history, and shines a light on the human causes behind this tragedy.

Why did you decide to write about the 1889 Johnstown Flood?
This was one of those stories that you hear about in weather folklore, but I didn’t really know the full story. When I started to look into it, I was blown away by its complexity and its underlying layers of class, wealth and power in this country.

Nature alone was not responsible for the flood. Can you expand?
The Johnstown Flood was a confluence of events: severe weather, a disregard for proper engineering and proper planning, and a disregard for the environment and the people living within it who are less fortunate.

Were you surprised by the seeming callousness of the elite society in the face of the disaster? Do you think such upper-class indifference still affects matters today?
I don’t think you have to be a student of societal problems to see that, in many instances, class differences and total disregard for those less fortunate still exist today. And we are seeing a rollback of the protections for environmental and societal issues at a rapid pace. It’s only a matter of time before another natural disaster brings destruction and misery because of the elimination or relaxation of those rules put in place over the years to protect people.

Clara Barton’s Red Cross faced its first real test in Johnstown after the flood, and many doubted that the organization would be effective in providing relief. How do you think this played out?
I think that expectations were low for Clara Barton and her organization’s success, and in a way, that worked to her advantage. She was able to work in and around the establishment to really get things done. And once she started to achieve results, her momentum added to her success.

Lending greater historical reality to the event, you write about the thieves, scammers and exploiters who preyed upon the survivors. Is that something you felt the overall record needed?
Anytime there are human disasters, it follows—just like night follows day—that there are those who will exploit, prey upon and take advantage of those less fortunate or people thrust into a horrible situation. We’ve seen it time and time again after hurricanes, floods or tornadoes. It’s just interesting to note that it’s not just a modern phenomenon.

Tom L. Johnson, who worked to make public transportation free as Johnstown recovered, was a revolutionary urban planner ahead of his time. What intrigues you about people like Johnson and Barton?
In the face of human tragedy and natural disasters, people can be changed forever and can rise to great heights when called upon. Tom L. Johnson went from being a somewhat callous pursuer of wealth to a believer in the greater good for his fellow man. Clara Barton helped expand an organization that to this day is synonymous with help and healing.

 

ALSO IN BOOKPAGE: Read our review of Ruthless Tide.

This article was originally published in the June 2018 issue of BookPage. Download the entire issue for the Kindle or Nook.

Author photo by NBC Universal.

With Ruthless Tide, Al Roker offers a riveting account of the 1889 Johnstown Flood, one of the worst disasters in U.S. history, and shines a light on the human causes behind this tragedy.

Interview by

Margalit Fox vividly remembers the day she first read about a case she could hardly believe: Arthur Conan Doyle personally investigated and helped commute the sentence of Oscar Slater, a wrongfully imprisoned German immigrant in Glasgow, Scotland.

Fox was riding the A train on her way to work. “I almost dropped the book in the middle of the train,” she recalls. “I thought, my God, the creator of Sherlock Holmes turned real-life detective and used those same methods to overturn a wrongful conviction. Why on earth isn’t this story better known?”

That was about thirty years ago. Fast forward to the present, and Fox, now a New York Times journalist, has brought the story to light in the endlessly riveting Conan Doyle for the Defense: The True Story of a Sensational British Murder, a Quest for Justice, and the World’s Most Famous Detective Writer. The case was certainly a sensation in its time, and Fox begins her account in storybook fashion: “In Glasgow at the turn of the twentieth century, there lived an old lady whom few people liked.”

“She didn’t sound like a particularly nice woman,” Fox notes, speaking by phone from her office at the Times. “That said, she certainly didn’t deserve what happened to her.”

Eighty-two-year-old Marion Gilchrist was bludgeoned to death in her apartment on December 21, 1908, her face and skull smashed, most likely with a wooden chair. Gilchrist owned an expensive jewelry collection, but nothing was stolen except a diamond brooch. Residents in the apartment below heard strange noises, and one neighbor—along with Gilchrist’s maid who was returning from an errand—arrived at her doorstep just in time to see a mysterious, well-dressed man stroll out.

Slater was a Jewish immigrant from Germany, a gambler and an easy scapegoat for this high-profile crime. He was accused and wrongfully convicted, although police had determined his innocence within a week.

“It’s terrifying,” Fox says. “What just ripped my guts out is he had literally made arrangements for his own burial, and his sentence was commuted to a life at hard labor 48 hours before he knew he was going to be hanged. You’re not supposed to know the date of your own death. That just sends chills down my spine.”

Death is something that Fox deals with every day, having written obituaries for the Times since 2004 (she’s featured in Obit, a wonderful documentary film about the department). The work, it turns out, has been perfect training.

Speaking in the crisply enunciated, fact-filled sentences one might expect from a seasoned journalist, Fox elaborates: “Writing obits is really extraordinary training for writing narrative journalism in general, and particularly narrative journalism in which the lens of an individual life is used to examine larger social issues. And in this case, the social issues are all about the things that we see in the papers every day today: racism, xenophobia, class tension.”

As a writer who chooses each word with a surgeon’s precision, Fox could not be more clear-eyed about the importance of this story. “History is very, very much appearing to repeat itself,” she says, “so this 1908 murder in Glasgow has never been more relevant to America in 2018.”

Conan Doyle believed in Slater’s innocence from the start and became publicly involved with trying to free him in 1912. He was obsessed with the case; he scoured court documents and spotted myriad inconsistencies and fabrications by police and prosecutors. Despite Conan Doyle’s efforts, Slater continued to languish in prison for more than a decade, when a freed prisoner managed to carry a secret message—wadded into a tiny pellet hidden beneath his dentures—from Slater to Conan Doyle. The short message urged Conan Doyle to renew his efforts, and by 1927, Slater was freed, having spent more than 18 years in prison. Fox says, “Conan Doyle used almost to the letter the methodology of his most famous literary creation—and it worked.”

“History is very, very much appearing to repeat itself, so this 1908 murder in Glasgow has never been more relevant to America in 2018.”

The story has been largely untold, however, requiring herculean research on Fox’s part. She began in Scotland in 2014, requesting documents at various archives. She visited Peterhead Convict Prison in Aberdeenshire (which is now a museum), about which she notes: “It is freezing cold and wet and raining. I took a picture of the state of my umbrella after waiting for a bus for 20 minutes, and the umbrella had been completely decapitated and had its spine snapped. I can’t imagine 18-and-a-half years [there].”

Back at home, bulging files soon began arriving at Fox’s doorstep, “easily three or four thousand pages of documents,” including trial transcripts, police records, interview notes and letters to and from Slater’s family. It took Fox about 18 months to go through everything.

“I used the same skills we use doing daily obits on deadline,” she says. “The research is exactly the same. . . . [You’re] trying to distill all of these diverse, often atomized, often seemingly unrelated documents into one cogent narrative that one hopes gives the sense of a life.” In the meantime, she was riding back and forth to work and reading Sherlock Holmes stories during her daily commute. “Basically I was really tired and had no social life,” she admits.

The publication of Conan Doyle for the Defense marks a bittersweet time for Fox, who will soon retire to write books full time. She already has her next idea: a prisoner of war’s escape story.

“I know it has to be narrative nonfiction,” Fox confesses, “because I, unfortunately, was not born with a fiction gene. I would love to be able to just make stuff up and be relieved of the onus of having fealty to historical facts—but no such luck for me.”

 

This article has been modified from the edition originally published in the July 2018 issue of BookPage. Download the entire issue for the Kindle or Nook.

Author photo by Ivan Farkas.

Margalit Fox vividly remembers the day she first read about a case she could hardly believe: Arthur Conan Doyle personally investigated and helped commute the sentence of Oscar Slater, a wrongfully imprisoned 36-year old immigrant in Glasgow, Scotland.

Interview by

Award-winning historian Doris Kearns Goodwin has coalesced her presidential expertise in her stunning book on four presidents, Leadership: In Turbulent Times.

You were already familiar with these four presidents: Lincoln, two Roosevelts and Johnson. What surprised you most as you looked at them again?
Collectively, I had studied these four presidents—Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson—for almost five decades, so I thought I knew them pretty well. But when I went back to study my guys—as I like to call them—anew, through the exclusive lens of leadership, I was surprised by how much there was still to learn about their lives as young people, when they first realized in themselves that they were leaders, and how they grew into their leadership positions through loss, self-reflection and experience. I got to know them more intimately than ever before—and I hope the reader feels the same.

Perhaps historians shouldn’t have favorites, but you close your book with reflections on Lincoln’s death and legacy. Is he perhaps your favorite president?
Yes, you are correct on both accounts. I’m not sure I should have a favorite, but I do—and it’s surely Abraham Lincoln. Confident and humble, persistent and patient, Lincoln had the ability to mediate among different factions of his party, and was able, through his gift for language, to translate the meaning of the struggle into words of matchless force, clarity and beauty. For me, it is Lincoln’s legacy that burns the brightest. He saved the Union, won the war and ended slavery forever.

Neither Franklin Roosevelt nor Abraham Lincoln lived long enough to lead the peace they worked so hard to achieve. Do you feel America would be different had they finished their terms?
Though Abraham Lincoln recognized that the challenge of Reconstruction was even greater than winning the war, he was without doubt the best man to face that challenge. Above all, he wanted a healing tone toward the South as evidenced in his Second Inaugural. Yet at the same time, Lincoln would have been fiercely protective of the rights of the newly freed slaves. As for Franklin Roosevelt, how I wish he could have lived to see the end of the war and the beginning of the United Nations. I do believe, though, that Harry Truman carried out much of what FDR would have done.

If you were to add a fifth president to this book, who would it be?
If I were to have added a fifth president to this examination of leadership, it would have been George Washington. I realized only when I finished the book that taken together, my four guys—Lincoln, Teddy, FDR and LBJ—form a family tree, a lineage of leadership that spans almost the entirety of our country’s history. Lyndon Johnson looked to Franklin Roosevelt as his “political daddy”; Franklin Roosevelt’s hero was Theodore Roosevelt; Theodore Roosevelt saw Abraham Lincoln as his role model; and the closest Lincoln found to an ideal was George Washington.

Have you ever been tempted to write about a living president?
No, there’s not been a living president that I’ve been tempted to write about because I am so in need of handwritten diaries and intimate letters and the kinds of correspondence you wouldn’t have with a president living now. Communication today is much, much faster, which may prove a challenge for future biographers. With email and social media, we have a breadth of information but I don’t think a depth that we had in the past.

Today we have more former presidents living than at any other time in history. If you could get them in a room, what is the first question you would ask them?
I would ask them why there’s not a club for former presidents. It’s such a small, exclusive group, yet they rarely meet or advise each other. When Barack Obama was president, he asked me to help organize a group of historians who would come to the White House as the presidents we’ve studied—not dressed in costume but bearing their stories and offering advice and camaraderie.

Your interactions with Lyndon Johnson gave you first-hand experience of this president. In a few years, we’ll be coming up on the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States. Which of our early presidents do you wish you could interview in person?
I would love to get the Founding Fathers all in one room and talk to them—a historian’s dream come true!

You write that the example of Lincoln’s leadership has provided the leaders who came after him with a moral compass. How can Americans in a divided nation rediscover a shared purpose and vision?
What history teaches us is that leadership is a two-way street. Change comes when social movements from the citizenry connect with the leadership in Washington. We saw this with the antislavery movement, the progressive movement, the civil rights movement and the gay rights movement. Whether the change we seek will be healing, positive and inclusive depends not only on our leaders but on all of us. What we as individuals do now, how we band together, will make all the difference. Our leaders are a mirror in which we see our collective reflection. “With public sentiment,” Lincoln liked to say, “nothing can fail. Without it, nothing can succeed.”

Americans seem to witness new tensions between the press and the White House on a daily basis. Are we in an entirely new era, or has this all happened before?
There have always been tensions between the press and the White House, especially with presidents bristling at criticism. But I do believe we are in new and dangerous territory now in the era of President Trump deeming the press the “enemies of the people” and frequently making “fake news” claims. Think back to Teddy Roosevelt’s time and the kind of collegial relations he formed with the press—inviting reporters to meals, taking questions during his midday shave, welcoming their company at day’s end and, most importantly, absorbing their criticism with grace. A celebrated journalist mercilessly lampooned Roosevelt’s memoir of the Spanish-American War by claiming Roosevelt should have called the book Alone in Cuba, since he placed himself at the center of every action and every battle. Roosevelt replied with a capacity for self-deprecation: “I regret to state that my family and friends are absolutely delighted with your review.”

Many Americans feel we are living in turbulent times. As a historian, what advice do you have for us?
People stop me on the street, in airports and restaurants and ask, “Are these the worst of times?” We are living in turbulent times, certainly, but the worst of times—no. I would argue that it’s the lack of authentic leadership in our nation today that has magnified our sense of lost moorings, heightened our anxiety and made us feel as if we are living in the worst of times. The difference between the times I have written about and today is that our best leaders of the past, when faced with challenges of equal if not greater intensity, were not only able to pull our country through, but leave us stronger and more unified than before. We cannot ignore history, for without heartening examples of leadership from the past, we fall prey to accepting our current climate of uncivil, frenetic polarization as the norm. The great protection for our democratic system, Lincoln counseled, was to “read of and recount” the stories of our country’s history, to rededicate ourselves to the ideals of our founding fathers.

You will be traveling across the country this fall to talk about your book. What do you think audiences will most likely want to ask you about leadership in turbulent times?
With Abraham Lincoln on the cover and my four guys on the back of the book jacket, people have asked me how this book is relevant today. Using history as my guide, I sought to shine a spotlight on the absence of leadership in our country today through the analysis and examples of leaders from the past whose actions and intentions established a standard by which to judge and emulate genuine leadership. The study and stories of Presidents Lincoln, the two Roosevelts and Johnson set forth a template of shared purpose, collaboration, compromise and civility—the best of our collective identity in times of trouble. Through Leadership: In Turbulent Times, I hope I’ve provided a touchstone, a roadmap, for leaders and citizens alike.

What are you working on next?
I am still thinking about what’s next! In the meantime, I am working on some film and television projects and preparing to spend the next three months traveling around the country talking about leadership.

 

ALSO IN BOOKPAGE: Read our review of Leadership.

This article was originally published in the October 2018 issue of BookPage. Download the entire issue for the Kindle or Nook.

Author photo credit Annie Leibovitz.

Award-winning historian Doris Kearns Goodwin has coalesced her presidential expertise in her stunning book on four presidents, Leadership: In Turbulent Times.

Interview by

The idea began with an interview. Susan Orlean’s then 6-year-old son had a school assignment to interview a city employee in their new hometown of Los Angeles.

A boy after his mother’s own heart, he chose a librarian. As the pair walked through the doors of a nearby branch library, Orlean, the famed author of The Orchid Thief, was overcome by what she calls “a Proustian kind of moment” filled with memories of countless childhood visits to the library in Shaker Heights, Ohio, with her mother, who worked in a bank but frequently declared that she would’ve loved to have been a librarian.

Now, years later, that moment has come full circle with the publication of Orlean’s spellbinding love letter to this beloved institution, The Library Book, dedicated to her son (now a teenager) and late mother, who died from dementia as Orlean wrote her tribute.

“I got very emotional, thinking, these are amazing places and my association with them is so profound,” Orlean recalls, speaking by phone from Banff, Canada. “I love writing about places that I feel that I know very well but have never really examined. The library was exactly that sort of place.”

Nonetheless, when she casually mentioned to her publisher that she would enjoy spending a year in a library to see what goes on, she knew some sort of essential ingredient was missing from her pitch. “It felt a bit amorphous. I loved the idea of it, but it had a little bit of a saggy-baggy feel, and it didn’t quite create a narrative.”

“I love writing about places that I feel that I know very well but have never really examined. The library was exactly that sort of place.”

It wasn’t long before Orlean discovered—quite literally—the spark to enliven her account. She was invited on a personal tour of the Los Angeles Central Library, and at one point her librarian guide cracked open a book, held it to his face and “inhaled deeply,” saying, “You can still smell the smoke in some of them.”

Orlean was puzzled, asking if patrons had been allowed to smoke in the building in the past. The librarian shot her a wary look, then proceeded to tell her about a disastrous fire that consumed the building on April 29, 1986, reaching 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit and burning for more than seven hours, destroying or damaging more than a million books. Miraculously, there were no fatalities.

“I just about fell off my chair,” Orlean says. “It was such an amazingly interesting and complicated story, and it provided me with this other narrative thread to take me through this bigger story of writing about libraries in general.” Adding to the narrative appeal, the fire’s cause remains a mystery—arson was suspected.

Orlean’s account of the arson investigation reads like a whodunit. In her minute-by-minute account of the conflagration, she writes, “The library was spreading fluidly, like spilled ink.” The stacks acted as fireplace flues, while the books provided fuel.” One firefighter later told Orlean, “We thought we were looking at the bowels of hell.” The main suspect was a young wannabe actor named Harry Peak, who died in 1993. An infuriating yet irresistible personality, Peak had a series of constantly changing alibis.

After interviewing Peak’s family and friends, Orlean concludes that as likable as he seemed to be, he was “mighty close” to being a pathological liar. She notes that he offered each of his changing alibis “with certainty and a full-throated delivery of, ‘This is exactly what I was doing that day.’”

That’s very rare, Orlean explains. “A lot of people have an alibi for a crime. It’s rare to have seven.”

She spent four and a half years researching, interviewing and writing. “I made a decision that I wanted to spend time in every department. Every piece of the library, from the people in the basement cataloging all the way up through all of the subject departments. That took a good amount of time, as well as just going [to the library] a lot to get a feel for the place.”

Orlean’s far-reaching research even involved starting her own little inferno so she could see firsthand what Peak might have experienced if he had indeed started the fire. Appropriately enough, she decided to burn a paperback copy of Ray Bradbury’s classic book-burning novel, Fahrenheit 451. She chose a windless day in her backyard, finding the task “incredibly hard,” because she has “come to believe that books have souls.”

She was amazed to discover that books catch fire “like little bombs.” She adds, “It just seemed like [the book] grabbed the flames and went boom. I remember asking my husband, ‘Did that just happen?’ I kept thinking, ‘Wow, that was just crazy that went so fast.’ There was nothing left.”

With crackling, page-turning prose, Orlean manages to seamlessly weave the story of the library’s devastating fire and the aftermath with a bird’s eye look at both the mechanics of LA’s immense city library and its unexpectedly riveting history. Just like the library itself, Orlean’s book is filled to the brim with a wide array of fascinating details and behind-the-scenes personalities and anecdotes. For book lovers, it’s a veritable treasure trove.

Orlean mentions that librarianship has become more popular. “It really does combine a sense of social contribution with a generation of young people who’ve grown up with information technology. I think there’s a fascination with curating and accessing information, and then you combine that with doing something that feels like it has a social value.”

Might her latest book inspire readers to join the profession?

“If that were to happen, I would feel that I had done something amazing.”

 

This article was originally published in the October 2018 issue of BookPage. Download the entire issue for the Kindle or Nook.

Author photo by Noah Fecks.

The idea began with an interview. Susan Orlean’s then 6-year-old son had a school assignment to interview a city employee in their new hometown of Los Angeles.

Interview by

Author, professor and academic Emily Bernard answers questions about storytelling, her writing process and the real-life experiences behind the essays in her latest collection, Black Is the Body.


In your introduction to Black Is the Body, you quote the author Zora Neale Hurston. Did her artistic legacy inform or shape the overall narrative of your collection? And if not, who are some of the writers that helped solidify your vision?
Zora Neale Hurston’s 1937 novel Their Eyes Were Watching God, as well as her autobiography Dust Tracks on a Road, excited and inspired me when I first read them many years ago. Throughout her career, Hurston was writing against the grain and defying expectations of what a woman writer—what a woman in general—was supposed to be doing. Their Eyes Were Watching God looks like a love story, but it is really about a woman learning to tell the story of her life. I read it when I was very young, and the deep lesson of that book didn’t occur to me until much later. I didn’t realize how much and how precisely Their Eyes had influenced me and shaped what I was going for in my own book until almost the very end of writing the final draft. What I love about Zora Neale Hurston is her ability and willingness to surprise, which is something she does a lot in her autobiography. Good writing, I think, should surprise the reader. When we get what we expect, we don’t have a chance to consider life in a different way, which is what all meaningful stories should enable us to do.

As both a writer and a reader, how does the act of storytelling provide freedom or resolution from trauma—both personal and generational?
As a child, I watched my mother, who was a poet, use writing as a way to remember, understand and master the past. For me, writing is freedom. Freedom from pain, rage and memories that haunt me. Writing enables me to discover resources of strength that I didn’t even know I had.

I don’t believe that storytelling really provides relief from trauma. I used to think it did. I actually thought writing “Scar Tissue” would dilute, if not completely obliterate, the trauma that I describe in the essay. Years after its publication, however, I was in yet another emergency room facing down another bout of adhesions in my bowel. It had been 10 years since the last hospitalization; I truly thought that I had written myself well. I was wrong. So, I no longer think that writing can provide absolute liberation from pain. What it can do is enable a person to learn to live with pain and transform it into something meaningful.

In the essay “Scar Tissue,” you write, “If my story is about pain, it’s also about rage. Rage is a physical condition.” How does rage, in the aftermath of a tragedy or violent situation, form a lasting scar in either the physical or emotional sense?
Rage is a symptom of helplessness. It’s normal, it’s predictable, it’s human, but it’s not productive in the long run. It can overtake you if you’re not careful and corrode you to the core. Rage helped guide me to the writing of “Scar Tissue,” it’s true. But in the end, I consider the essay a kind of love letter to the entire experience of being a victim of random violence. It is my attempt to honor the rage and offer it a civilized, humane place to live. Writing is a means of confronting rage with love.

Many of your essays touch upon pain—what it means to sit with it and also deal with it head-on. If pain can be weaponized against a victim, how can it be used as a tool on behalf of the victim to seek justice?
One thing I wanted to explore over the course of writing this book is how pain can be utilized, maybe not so much in a search for justice (which is ultimately so subjective) but in a search for truth. As for me, I was satisfied with what happened to the man who stabbed me, but I know that other victims felt that he should have suffered more. Personally, I felt acutely aware that there would never be true vindication because the damage caused by his knife could never be corrected, not really. I did not feel triumphant at his sentencing; I did not feel angry at him. I still don’t. He was sick; 25 years later, that still feels to me like the beginning and the end of the part of the story that involves him. My own pain is my own story. Ultimately, the degree to which it defines me is something I cannot control. Above all, I believe it is important not to let pain shame or silence you.

Your essay “Teaching the N-Word” is a powerful recollection of your attempts to get your all-white honors class at the University of Vermont to say the word in question and the complicated social politics surrounding the word. When responding to Sarah, a student who refuses to say the word, you tell the class, “I’d just like to remind you all that just because a person refuses to say ‘nigger,’ that doesn’t mean that person is not racist.” How does the concept of “wokeness” or “being woke”  contribute to racial politics? What does it reveal about our current political landscape and the way in which America handles race?
I am suspicious of handy terms like “woke” which, like “diversity,” looks like an answer to a problem—the problem of racism—when in fact there is no easy solution. Racism is durable; like a cancer, it adapts to its environment and changes shape over time. Language can’t cure a sickness; racism won’t be eradicated by a term like woke or any term at all. I like that the term has gotten people to aspire to be alive to the problem, but I think there is a huge possibility that becoming fluent in the language of wokeness can lead a person to a sense of self-satisfaction that does nothing toward actual social justice. In so far as wokeness seems to suggest a state of being, it is the polar opposite of action, which is the only way change can be achieved. True and lasting change happens incrementally, through the mundane, puny choices that we make every day.

“Teaching the N-Word” is a study in ambivalence, which is why I tell it in fragments. The spaces in between the episodes are there to give the reader room to imagine and insert their own experiences. Even though the books and articles I bring into class make it impossible to ignore the “n-word,” I am impressed by the students who have a philosophy about why they won’t say it, Sarah in particular. It looks like I want the students to say the word out loud, and maybe I do, but I desperately do not want them to do that at the same time. So much is going on inside of me that I cannot share with the class because I worry it will conflict with the linear aim of teaching, which is to make sure my students have something concrete to take away at the end of class. In my writing, I feel free to tell stories rather than give lectures. Readers will use them how they see fit.

In the essay “Interstates,” food is mentioned as both a way to access familial memories and a way to unite people across different cultures. If there was one dish specific to your family that represents you, what would it be? Why?
I am a little sheepish about answering this question since I still don’t cook well. When I do cook, I wind up serving meals that have no personality. I don’t as much make meals as put a bunch of different ingredients together. Despite my distant relationship with cooking, it is in kitchens and around dining tables that I have experienced heartiest and most intimate relationships of my life. I miss my mother every day, but most piercingly around the holidays. I miss her Thanksgivings; I miss watching her prepare squash casserole with onions and sour cream, and green beans with bacon and almonds. For New Year’s Eve, she would create the Caribbean meals my father grew up with, like ambrosia with Cool Whip and souse, which is pickled pig’s feet. These days, my daughters and I agree that my husband’s broccoli cavatelli brings us all to the table faster than any other meal he prepares for us.

A combination of guilt and stubbornness sends me back to the kitchen periodically, despite my culinary insecurities. The problem is, when I get close to mastering a dish, my husband comes around with his kitchen magic and turns it into something a million times better than what I could come up with.

The title essay, “Black Is the Body,” begins with the line, “My brown daughters became black when they were six years old.” Can you tell me a bit more about what that line means to you? Looking back at your own personal history, was there ever a similar moment for you?
That line captures, for me, what it means to raise my daughters and witness the profound and yet utterly mundane process of their growing up. Writing that essay was a way of accounting for the experience of watching them truly become their own people, making sense of the world in their own language. Eavesdropping as they revealed to each other their growing understanding of what race meant left me feeling exhilarated and sad at the same time. I felt I hadn’t done my job to guide them into the world of race. I had left them to figure it out on their own. But the lessons my elders tried to share with me during my childhood I rejected out of hand immediately, if only because I didn’t want to be told how to understand myself; it was as if they were trying to tell me how to feel about my own body. In the end, in not doing my job maybe I’ve done my job, at least as I see it, which is to allow them the space to define themselves.

The essay “Her Glory” discusses the politics of black hair and what it means to have so-called “good hair.” How does the concept of “good hair” relate to respectability politics and the policing of the black, female body?
It floors me, how many stories are contained on the tops of our heads, particularly when it comes to women, and even more particularly for black women. “Good hair” is a shorthand that I try to avoid using because of the way that it seems to condone an unforgiving standard of beauty. It is a concept that menaced me during my adolescence, another way I knew my body was being evaluated by others. Regrettably, as I got older, I started to make direct connections between the way I put my hair together and the way I thought others would perceive me as a black woman. I’ve recently begun getting my hair braided in cornrows, and it’s a completely liberating experience, more than I expected it to be. For me, it’s a way of turning my back of the burden of respectability politicking.

How do you practice the concept of self-care as a black woman, a writer and an academic?
I think I’m pretty bad at self-care, and I admire others who practice it well. I tend to run headlong into scary things, the same way I do in “Scar Tissue.” I can’t seem to help myself. It is the goal of my life to find a balance, to practice recklessness in a smart and safe way. Writing allows me to lean into fear and pain in a way that is productive and enriching, not only for myself but for other people, or at least I hope so.

What is one major misconception about being a writer that you wish people would understand?
There is no magic to writing, only labor. Well, there’s always magic involved in anything that comes about as the result of love, but just like true love, there are no shortcuts on the road to good writing. It takes time.

Writing is rewriting. It’s a simple lesson, and it’s a lesson that I have to keep relearning every time to sit down to write anything. It is only after I get sentences down on the page that a story begins to emerge, and only then after I’ve made my way through multiple drafts. For me, the terror and anguish that accompany almost every writing effort diminish only after I’ve put in the work. The good news is that if you stick with it, the labor itself can turn out to be the most satisfying part of all.

 

ALSO IN BOOKPAGE: Read our review of Black Is the Body.

Author photo by Stephanie Seguino

Author, professor and academic Emily Bernard answers questions about storytelling, her writing process and the real-life experiences behind the essays in her latest collection, Black Is the Body.

Interview by

Monica L. Smith is an archaeologist and professor of anthropology at UCLA. Her fascinating new book, Cities, looks at the 6,000-year-old phenomenon of urbanism. She draws on her fieldwork at archaeological sites worldwide as well as on scholarship and contemporary observation to produce a thought-provoking look at cities. Naturally, we had some questions.

You say that this book was a lot of fun for you to write. What are the top two or three things that made it so much fun?
First of all, writing the book was a chance to relive many exciting moments that I’ve experienced at the ancient (and modern) cities I have known and loved. And it was possible to go from one to the other in my mind and on the page in ways that wove together a story about continuities and similarities. Secondly, as an archaeologist I’m accustomed to solving puzzles in which there are a lot of missing pieces. Through a comparative approach, even if a piece is missing in any particular ancient city—some cities have historical documents but others don’t, and some cities have been thoroughly excavated while others have not—we can put together an urban picture by creatively examining the parts that are preserved. And searching for images was enjoyable, too, because I found some amazing things in my research like Juan de Solórzano Pereira’s drawing from 1653, in which he fancifully placed eyes on the city walls—300 years before the invention of CCTVs!

You write that your favorite place in Rome is not among the usual tourist sites but instead an ancient trash dump. Where’s the fun in that?
Archaeologists aren’t driven just by the romance of ruins but by the sheer thrill of putting together a story of the past through the bits and pieces that we find. The trash dump of Monte Testaccio is at first glance nothing particularly special, but then you look closely at the hill and realize that the whole thing is made up of potsherds. Just think of all of the wine and olive oil that was shipped and spilled there! There must have been lively chitchat 2,000 years ago about whether Falernian or Sardinian or Cilician wine was best (just like the conversations that you have in your local Trader Joe’s about the relative merits of vintages from France, Italy and Argentina). Another fun aspect is that Monte Testaccio is much less crowded than the usual tourist sites, where it’s sometimes hard to contemplate the past because there are so many people trying to get the perfect angle on a selfie.

You are a professor in UCLA’s Institute of the Environment and Sustainability. Yet in this book you more or less sing the praises of consumption and ancient takeout food. Aren’t consumption and sustainability at odds?
That’s a great question, and one that I’ve also been thinking about. As ecologically minded global citizens, our approach to consumption might be all wrong if we try to stop consumption rather than figuring out why we want to consume in the first place. For the past million years, our species has been focused on getting more stuff, which is not an impulse that we are going to be able to stop or turn around very easily. Having “stuff” is a marker of what it means to be human. (Even Marie Kondo isn’t trying to get us to give up all of our stuff but to focus on things that are meaningful and joyous!) As for takeout food, it’s probably more sustainable in terms of food waste than preparing meals at home. Just imagine that you want a kale salad for dinner: If you buy a whole head of kale and a jar of garlic dressing, much of it will go bad in between tonight and your next kale craving. But if a restaurant buys that head of kale, then it will be used up by a whole variety of consumers and thus not go to waste. And takeout food has a certain kind of social justice encoded in it, because of the jobs that enable a vast diversity of people to make a living.

You note that most ancient cities were not built in “paradisiacal locales.” In a nutshell, why do cities seem to prosper in challenging environments?
Most cities are really great for something (like being a trade port or a ski capital or a manufacturing place), but few cities are all-purpose, and some of them are downright illogical in their placement—like New Orleans because of floods or Tokyo because of earthquakes or ancient Rome because of malaria that was at the time endemic to the swampy lowlands of the Tiber. Yet their residents are happy to overlook a city’s deficiencies because other characteristics make it worthwhile to dig out from disaster, over and over again. And once you get a population in a densely occupied area like a city, there are opportunities for new kinds of jobs that keep people there. Richard E. Ocejo (Masters of Craft, Princeton 2018) has recently written about cities in the U.S. that were once manufacturing hubs but have evolved into centers for the knowledge economy (information management, finance and technology). Even though there are “growing pains” such as gentrification associated with those transformations, the cities themselves don’t lose populations and just keep right on going.

You write of humans as migratory beings and of the vibrancy of cities being in part due to their mixture of people and cultures. In what way, if at all, does that shape your opinion of our contemporary debates on refugees and “illegal” immigrants?
Cities are intricately bound up in national discussions of migration and ethnicity around the world. We know that when immigrants can choose their destinations, they tend to head toward cities to maximize their employment and continuing-education opportunities. (Remember that immigrants include professionals as well as manual laborers.) In the U.S., programs of refugee resettlement target cities as places that are already diverse. So we shouldn’t be surprised that cities are front and center for discussions about all types of migration.

At one point, you write that we need an archaeology of the disenfranchised. What would that look like and mean?
Most archaeologists have focused on elite residences, tombs and temples, which makes it appear as though ancient societies were somehow richer or more prosperous than ours. Low-income people and slum dwellers are part and parcel of every urban center in the modern world, and increasing amounts of archaeological research show that they were omnipresent in ancient societies as well. We can study these low-income populations by digging in areas on the “backsides” of fancy houses to find servant quarters and makeshift housing, and by looking at the health and well-being of the whole population as archaeologists in Rome and Mesopotamia have started to do. That research can make us a little uncomfortable with our assumptions about ancient behavior, because mortality profiles and habitual violence as revealed by skeletal evidence show that urban life has always come with haves and have-nots. If we want to combat that trend in our own cities, we have to recognize that we need to work harder on equalizing urban opportunities instead of assuming that everyone will do well on their own.

Most of your current fieldwork is in India. What are you discovering?
Along with my Indian colleague Rabindra Kumar Mohanty and our many faculty collaborators and students, we have been digging at both a large urban center and smaller village sites in eastern India. The village sites are particularly interesting to study because they are quite modest: there are very few consumer goods, and the housing was made of perishable materials like bamboo and thatch. Once the city was started, it seems that people—especially young people!—ran away to the “bright lights” of urbanism where they could experience things that seem very mundane to us now but that would have been new and exciting to them: brick and stone buildings, formal marketplaces where they could get ready-made food, new types of construction work on projects like the mighty city wall and the opportunity to spend their earnings on cheap but stylish trinkets like beads and terracotta ornaments.

You cast many of your descriptions of ancient cities and activities within those cities in surprisingly contemporary terms. Why did you decide to write about the long-ago past in this way?
Actually, it’s the data from the past that provide a compelling first-person realization that people in ancient cities had the same experiences and perspectives that we do. When you read in 2,000-year old poetry from India that “bejewelled dames in sky-high mansions live, whose fine clothes wave about their waists,” you can’t help but think about Beverly Hills. When you read a text from ancient Mesopotamia about 350,000 goats and sheep, you can’t help but think about the Chicago Board of Trade. And when you read about Juvenal complaining that he can’t walk in the street without being bumped by some clumsy guy with a barrel, you can’t help but think about the way that you dodge delivery people on the sidewalk whether you’re in Manhattan, Mumbai or Mombasa.

I’m curious about your observation that “the excess of anxiety is not a flaw of urbanism but a design feature.” How is something unpleasant like anxiety helpful to city life?
Most of the anxiety that we face in cities isn’t necessarily debilitating or unpleasant but simply a result of calculating the benefits of the increased choices of food, work and goods that we have in an urban setting compared to rural places. When we have an examination or a job interview or are simply buying a new appliance or trying out something different for lunch, what we are really doing is engaging in a process of risk and reward as we try to have something “better,” even if we are not quite sure how it is going to work out. In cities our choices are amazingly varied, and at every scale: what neighborhood to live in and what school for your kids, but also, “If I buy those cool shoes, will I finally start running again?” And on a serious note, when we do face significant and debilitating anxieties, there are more facilities and experts to treat them in cities than in the countryside. (Many studies have observed that the suicide rate in rural areas is higher than in cities.)

With our largely interconnected planet today, isn’t almost every person a city-dweller, even if they live in the sticks?
Well, there’s still a difference between being affected by cities (which practically everyone in the world is) and actually living in one. One telling example is the way in which tech companies such as Google and Facebook are sticking with the urban form even though they have to pay much higher prices for office space. If they were being logical about costs, they would locate themselves “in the sticks,” as you say. (They are digital corporations after all!) But instead they are going right into the heart of cities because they want to attract the kinds of workers who thrive on the amenities and diversity that only cities can offer.

 

ALSO IN BOOKPAGE: Read our review of Cities.

Monica L. Smith is an archaeologist and professor of anthropology at UCLA. Her fascinating new book, Cities, looks at the 6,000-year-old phenomenon of urbanism. She draws on her fieldwork at sites worldwide as well as on scholarship and contemporary observation to produce a thought-provoking look at cities. Naturally, we had some questions.

Interview by

Jazz-Age America promises all the drama you could ever hope for: bootleggers and flappers, parties and criminals and crooked government agents. All this and more come alive in Karen Abbott’s compulsively readable The Ghosts of Eden Park.

For all the surprises packed within its pages, perhaps the greatest is that every single line of dialogue comes directly from a primary source. It’s a true researching feat—and it means we’re extra excited to see Abbott at this year’s Southern Festival of Books. We reached out to her about book-tour traditions and what it’s like to interact with her readers.


What is the mark of a really great book event?
The enthusiasm and the energy of the crowd, lots of sales, people who laugh at my jokes . . . 😉

What have you most enjoyed about interacting with the readership of The Ghosts of Eden Park?
I love hearing people’s personal connections to the history: Someone’s grandfather was a bootlegger; another’s grandmother was a flapper; and numerous others share fascinating tales of far-flung ancestors who operated speakeasies or ran errands for George Remus or sought legal help from Mabel Walker Willebrandt. Those kinds of connections make these long-dead characters come back to life.

When visiting a city for a book event, do you have any rituals, either for yourself or to get to know the city?
I like to find an off-the-beaten-path local bar—something tucked away, with an interesting and possibly wicked history—and enjoy the signature cocktail while I review my notes.

If you could sit in the audience of an event with any author, living or dead, who would you like to see read from and discuss their book?
Tough one! Male author: Edgar Allan Poe, talking about The Fall of the House of Usher and The Philosophy of Composition. Female author: Patricia Highsmith on This Sweet Sickness, The Blunderer, The Talented Mr. Ripley or any of her choosing.

What have you learned about your book through your interactions with its readers that you didn’t know before it was published?
This book was a bit of a departure for me; I structured it like a true crime thriller and whodunit. Even though The Ghosts of Eden Park is history and the events are google-able, I am pleasantly surprised that people want to approach it as it if were fiction. They want to be surprised by the twists and turns and to guess who murders whom.

Were there any elements of your research into The Ghosts of Eden Park that didn’t make it into the book?
I could have written an entire chapter on ways ordinary citizens smuggled alcohol or subverted Prohibition laws. There was a “book” titled The Four Swallows that disguised a flask; flip the top and you’d find four vials to be filled with the whiskey of your choice. There were “cow shoes” that didn’t hold liquor but were invaluable for bootleggers who made moonshine in meadows or forests. The wooden heels were carved to resemble animal hooves, and they literally covered the bootleggers’ tracks when being pursued on foot by Prohibition agents. And one more: a female Prohibition named Daisy Simpson, aka “Lady Hooch Hunter,” who deserves a book of her own.

 

ALSO IN BOOKPAGE: Read our review of The Ghosts of Eden Park.

Author photo by Gilbert King

Jazz-Age America promises all the drama you could ever hope for: bootleggers and flappers, parties and criminals and crooked government agents. All this and more come alive in Karen Abbott’s compulsively readable The Ghosts of Eden Park.

Sign Up

Stay on top of new releases: Sign up for our newsletter to receive reading recommendations in your favorite genres.

Recent Reviews

Author Interviews

Recent Features