May 11 2014: The wonderful and terrifying business of creating a whole new story—working title AMBER.

“There is no greater agony than bearing an untold story inside you.”

Maya Angelou

---

FORMULA IS THE ENEMY OF CREATIVITY. I don’t think there is any one single good way of coming up with a good story—and I’m glad there isn’t. If there was, we’d all learn it and we’d end up with the blandness of much of TV. Commercial interests are (normally) oriented towards formulae and predictability. Truly creative types value pushing the envelop and unpredictability. GAME OF THRONES is a perfect example of creativity winning out—something which is all too rare. It breaks nearly all the conventions—but it works brilliantly. It’s a remarkably fine TV series.

IN PRAISE OF MINI-SERIES. Incidentally, I have long been of the view that the mini-series is, in many ways, a superior creative format than the 90-120 minute movie. A min-series allows superior story development, allows more time for character development, and permits greater complexity. My top three mini-series: GAME OF THRONES, BAND OF BROTHERS, ROME.

A BOOK IS BORN. Currently, I’ve got an idea for a new book whose working title is AMBER. I have the theme, a great deal of context, some characters,  but no story. Or no story that I’m consciously aware of—which is not quite the same thing. Never underestimate your subconscious. I’m quite excited because I have never written anything like this before—but I have the strongest feeling it could end up being an important book. Through fiction, I intend to deal with a major issue. Is there a real Amber? Yes there is—and I hold her in high regard.

A SENSE OF WONDER. Crafting an original story is wonderful, both because it is such a magnificent creative challenge—and because even you, the author, at the beginning, has little or no idea how how the story will develop—let alone end. If you have 400 pages to fill for the kind of big thriller I like to write, that is quite a marathon. In fact, at times, the prospect can be terrifying, In my case, when I re-read some of my better work, I always think: This isn’t bad—but how did I do this? Surely, I’ll never be able to write this well again. It’s not that I lack confidence in my writing ability. It’s more a sense of wonder that I have been granted this gift—and I never take it for granted.

A STORY STARTS WITH FRAGMENTS. The way I like to work is to have a few pivotal ideas about a story before I start to create it. In the case of GAMES OF THE HANGMAN, they were:

• A hanged body found in a lonely wood on an island of the West of Ireland.
• A battle weary soldier turned combat photographer, Hugo Fitzduane, who finds the body.
• Fitzduane’s sense that it was not a suicide.
• The small castle he lives in on the island.
• An elite counter-terrorist unit known as ‘The Rangers.’
• Fitzduane’s friend, his former commanding officer in the Congo, Shane Kilmara.
• An investigation in Switzerland by Hugo Fitzduane.
• A master terrorist who always seems to be one step ahead.
• A siege of Fitzduane’s castle to end the book.

THE RELEVANCE OF REALITY. Hangman was heavily influenced by the fact that in real life I discovered a freshly hanged body under conditions almost exactly as described in the book. The experience was so surreal that I actually walked past the body for several paces before turning and thinking my life will never be the same again. I was so right. It hasn’t been.

Pretty much everything I write has its roots in actual experiences—which means it’s derivative. Does that mean I’m not creative? I don’t think so. Virtually all stories are derived in some way or other. It’s what you do with your initial ideas that counts—and to make the end result into a compelling story may look easy—but it’s hard (and extraordinarily satisfying).

I love it so.

---

 

 

May 10 2014: As distracted and deluded—as most of us are—we seemed to have failed to notice (or have chosen not to notice) that our earning power is in decline. It needn’t be and it shouldn’t be. But it is.

“Experience has shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.”

Thomas Jefferson

---

DECLINING EARNING POWER. When I write about the U.S. economy—which is arguably more often than a thriller writer should—but it’s such fun (well, the writing part it—experiencing it is more of a moveable feast) I regularly point out that the earning power of most Americans is in decline (a solvable problem—but one we don’t seem to be fully aware of—let alone trying to resolve). We don’t notice it as much as we might because:

• LET’S NOT THINK ABOUT IT. It’s not something most of us want to think about—or even accept.
• FATALISM. Even if we accept it, we have no idea what to do about it.
• DISTRACTED BY PROPAGANDA. The American Way of Life is heavily influenced by a constant barrage of political/corporate propaganda dominated by myth, consumerism, and distraction—which acts as something of a reality distortion field.
• CORPORATE MEDIA CONTROLLED. The mostly corporately owned media—subject to some notable exceptions—don’t cover the economy well. They are not allowed to. There is token criticism, but the scale of our problems is not communicated.
• WE DON’T KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON ABROAD. The media do a particularly bad job covering foreign news so we don’t realize that we are steadily losing ground compared to many other countries—where in many cases incomes are going up in real terms.
• POLITICIANS AVOID THE SUBJECT. Politicians don’t like talking about it—and are mostly personally wealthy so are unaffected.
• UNIONS CRUSHED. The one group, who might have been strong enough to arouse a popular outcry—the unions—have had their credibility undermined and have been largely crushed.
• ADD A SECOND WORKER AND HOUSEHOLD INCOME MAY GO UP. Many households have compensated by a previously having a non-working homemaker get a job—so the actual household income may have increased.
• RELIANCE ON DEBT. There has been an increasing reliance on debt.
• MINIMAL SAVINGS. Saving has become minimal.  People in other countries are saving 10% plus.
• SOME PRICES DOWN—MANY UP. The prices of many items have come down so although we are poorer, we don’t feel poorer. Unfortunately, the prices of key items like college education have gone up.
• INFLATION IS MINIMAL—OR IS IT? Official inflation figures—for some time now—have indicated minimal inflation.

MISLEADING GOVERNMENT STATISTICS. The inflation figures are extremely misleading for various technical reasons. However, the most important thing to note is that the Middle Class are being absolutely hammered by:

• Educational Costs
• Healthcare Costs
• Housing  Costs
• Car Costs
• Food Costs

In that context, although it is pleasant to be able to buy electronic gadgetry for much less than in the past, it doesn’t remotely compensate for the above.

---

May 9 2014: What’s the difference between an oligarchy and a plutocracy—and why does it matter to the U.S.?

“The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations.”

Thomas Jefferson

---

THE POWER OF WORDS. Words matter. They are the basis of almost everything we do—and they certainly anchor our system of government, not to mention every law in the land. And, let me tell you a secret: They are really handy for communication. Without words, I would be writing my thrillers in pictograms. Actually, that might work, now I think about it. In effect, I’d be in the comic business.

NO LONGER A DEMOCRACY. I have long maintained that the U.S. is no longer a democracy—actually a representative democracy if you want to be technical. Certainly, we have the trappings and the theater, but there is plenty of evidence that the rich get listened to—and the rest of us do not. Most recently a major academic study confirmed just that. In effect, the ordinary citizen is not listened to.

THE U.S. IS BOTH AN  OLIGARCHY & A PLUTOCRACY. What the definitions below indicate is that the U.S. is both an oligarchy and a plutocracy—but that the correct term should be plutocracy because there is every evidence that the dominant class consists of the rich.

I rest my case.

IS ANYONE DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT? Well, people like Senator Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Saunders are putting up a good fight, but there is no popular movement taking up the cause. In particular, I fault President Obama for not telling it like it is. He has the Bully Pulpit. He should use it to really rouse the American people. A series of million person marches around the country could have a significant impact—but Obama is just tinkering by focusing on using his executive powers. There is nothing wrong with that, as far as it goes, bit it’s nothing like enough. He needs to rally the nation.

OLIGARCHY

Dictionary.com offers the following definition.

1. a form of government in which all power is vested in a few persons or in a dominant class or clique; government by the few.

2. a state or organization so ruled.

3. the persons or class so ruling.

World English Dictionary adds the following.

4. Chiefly ( US ) a small clique of private citizens who exert a strong influence on government

PLUTOCRACY

1 the rule or control of society by the wealthy

2. a state or government characterized by the rule of the wealthy

3.a class that exercises power by virtue of its wealth

---

 

May 1 2014: About Interviewing People & Writing. Interviewing Can Be A Remarkably Intense Experience—And Is Always Revealing In More Ways Than You Might Imagine.

Whenever I think of how much pleasure I have interviewing scientists, I remember that they're having the real fun in actually being able to do the science.

Alan Alda

---

THE INTERVIEW FOR THE MEDIA. If you are in the media, an interview is an end in itself—or close to it. Subject to a certain amount of editing and tweaking—and sometimes a great deal—the interview becomes the product.

WORLD CLASS CELIBRITIES. I did interviews like that in my teens when I was dipping my toe into the world of freelance journalism. Back in those days, I had no idea what you couldn’t or shouldn’t do—and because I was clearly so young and ignorant, much of my more outrageous behavior was tolerated with good grace, and high good humor, by my victims. These included some world class celebrities—in their day—such as Gregory Peck, Vicki Autier, Kenneth Moore, Peggy Lee, Johny Hallyday, Sir Anton Dolin, Carla Fracci, Christina Onassis—and many others of such standing. Many will have been forgotten today but, at the time, for instance, Carla Fracci was the prima ballerina at La Scala, Milan. As for Christina Onassis, she was married to Aristotle Onassis who went on to marry Jackie Kennedy, widow of JFK.

MY ONE AND ONLY QUEEN. My one failure was former Queen Soraya—in Monte Carlo—who was so drop dead gorgeous that I am amazed that I had the nerve to even approach her.

MONTE CARLO. Her reply to my request to talk to her constituted the shortest discussion with an interviewee I have every had, “No,” was the answer—and on she strode in her black bathing suit—all tanned flesh and sexuality, one of the most exciting women I have ever met. The location was Monte Carlo and the encounter took place at Le Beach—which was really a beach club made up of a pool bordered by an array of mostly topless women of stunning beauty, various bars and restaurants, and a strip of actual beach covered with imported sand. Soraya, you will call, had been married to the Shah of Iran. He had divorced her because she couldn’t bear him a son.

THE COMMAND TO WRITE. I was very tempted to stay with journalism (and should have) but adequately paid jobs in the field were rare in those days in Ireland—so I strayed into business. There, I received some excellent training in marketing, and enjoyed some significant commercial success—after some initial failure—but the desire to be creative and to write would not go away. In fact, it eventually became so strong it was almost as if I had been gripped by some alien tractor beam. It was an extraordinarily powerful feeling. People talk about a ‘calling.’ This was more like being commanded. Obeying it was the best decision I have made in my life—and I give thanks that I made it every day. Writing is so satisfying, so challenging, so enriching, and so exciting that it’s the one thing I can never adequately describe. I’m not particularly religious, but if ever there was a gift from God, as far as I am concerned, this is it.

THE QUALITIES YOU NEED TO WRITE. To write really well—and you will never write quite as well as you want—ideally you need quite a number of strengths (if you are me). Few of us are quite as well qualified as we would like—and it is noteworthy that one of my favorite authors, Jane Austen, wrote brilliant work while—on the face of it—living a somewhat circumscribed life. Nonetheless, these include:

• Experience of life so have something to write about. Here I include the full gamut of emotional experiences—from grief to being in love.
• To be widely read for the same reason and so that you will have absorbed—not necessarily consciously—how the process works.
• To have traveled because it really does broaden the mind.
• To have had adventures—and to be prepared to have more.
• To know a great deal about a great deal.
• To have a sense of story.
• To have an imagination. Almost everything we write is derivative in some way or other (Shaespeare being a perfect example) but it is how you put the elements together than normally makes the difference.
• To have an original cast of mind.
• To be observant
• To be empathetic
• To have a deep understanding of the human condition.
• To be intellectually curious.
• To have considerable interpersonal skills.
• To be able to draw people out.
• To be able to make associations where other might not.
• To understand the techniques that go into writing.
• To be disciplined in your work—and, in particular—to be pro-active. Most jobs are reactive in that circumstances, colleagues and customers dictate what you do. Where writing is concerned—particularly book-writing—you are normally on your own and no one but you knows whether you are working or not.
• To be able to withstand solitude.
• To be able to withstand rejection.
• To be able to deal with stress generally.
• To have clarity of mind. It is virtually impossible to write well unless you can think clearly. The world is a complex and constantly evolving place and you have to study it—and then convert your jumble of thoughts into clear, entertaining, and compelling prose.
• To be decisive. The number of choices you have when writing is truly staggering—particularly where fiction is concerned. If you try and evaluate them all, you’ll crazy—and you will write at the speed of an arthritic snail. Instead, you have to have to make the best choice you can within the limits of your capabilities—and move on. Writing is a decision making process.
• To develop an inner voice. This is vital—but takes time. It means that, in the final analysis, you will follow your own creative judgment rather than following the advice of the endless flow of people who will try and influence you. This doesn’t mean that you wont listen to advice and criticism—it’s virtually impossible to avoid. But, in the final analysis, you will develop the experience and confidence to decide.

STEEP LEARNING CURVE. Do I possess all these attributes now. Yes, I do—though to what extent it is hard for me judge. However, I certainly did not when I started to try to write. In fact, if I had know how steep the learning curve was, I might have run for cover—if I had been allowed.

CONFIDENCE. What I did have going for me from early on was the confidence that I could interview people and gain a great deal from the experience. Was I formally trained in interviewing? Unfortunately not. However, perhaps because of my emotionally charged upbringing I am extremely sensitive to atmosphere, empathetic, and can normally deduce a great deal from a single interview. Here, I am not just referring to the conversation itself, but the setup of the meeting, the attitude of staff, the bearing of the interviewee—and so on.

EMOTIONALLY INTENSE. My mother used to say I was psychic or had “second sight.” Frankly, I am not sure I believe that, but I am unusually intuitive, and am normally able to read a situation and gain a sense of things with some accuracy. Beyond that, I seem to be able to get people to talk without really knowing how I do it. Partly, it has to do with my genuine interest—which people seem to sense. Another part has to do the emotional intensity I put into the process. When I’m doing an interview, the only person who exists for me is the other—and when an interview is over, I often feel quite drained and need time to get my bearings.

THE ART OF THE SECOND QUESTION. I have one extra attribute that is vastly helpful. I am good at what I tend to think of as “The Art of the Second Question.” That isn’t so common in U.S. media—where there seems to be a tacit understanding that an interviewee shall not be pushed too far—but I come from a different culture where the questioning can be remorseless. That said, I make it a point to be courteous and to keep the tone of my voice friendly.

GIVE A BOOK IN ADVANCE. All in all, I enjoy interviewing greatly and would like to do even more of it. Apart from anything else, it’s a great way to meet people—and it seems to shortcut the getting-to-know-you process. And I should probably add, it works better still if I have supplied one of my books in advance.

SOMETHING DIFFERENT THIS WAY COMES. I do have a new series of interviews planned for a new book—but all I’ll say a this point that both the interviews and the book will be somewhat different (something of an understatement).

---

A LIFE-CHANGING EXPERIENCE

Reading THE CENTURIONS was a life changing experience as far as I was concerned. Not only is it an extraordinary novel about the French in Algeria—but it explains more about war than just about any other book I have read.

After completing it, I set off to track down and visit with the French Foreign Legion—quite an adventure.

---

 

 

April 30 2014: The Pleasure & Power Of Listening

Don't knock the weather. If it didn't change once in a while, nine out of ten people couldn't start a conversation.

Kin Hubbard (1868 – 1930 )

---

THE THEME OF GREAT CONVERSATION. Not sure quite why, but the theme of conversation—of really good conversation where you actually listen to each other, learn, and exchange ideas (and change your mind if the argument is persuasive) is still very much on my mind. It’s actually not a subject I normally think much about in the abstract—it is more something one just does—but the more I contemplate conversation now, the more I appreciate how extraordinarily important it is. And, it is substantially a learned skill. Hmm. I’m far from sure we quite grasp the significance of that fact.

THE ABILITY TO ENGAGE ANYBODY. My mother—about whom I have decidedly mixed emotions, as regular readers will know—was not one of life’s great listeners—but she had the impressive ability to talk to, and engage, just about anybody, without benefit of introduction, and regardless of the circumstances—a truly admirable quality. She was socially fearless. Primarily, she used this talent to pick up men—but it also meant she attracted some extraordinarily interesting people of both sexes, whom—as like as not—she would  bring home for a meal (and who frequently then entered our social circle). They would normally be unusual in some way—and entertaining. She had a particular weakness for actors, diplomats, and aristocrats.  

CHARISMA. Though mother was decidedly charismatic—and had a directness of conversational style that could be most attractive—she was not intellectually curious so tended to focus on relationships above all. Matters political, scientific, and of social concern held no interest for her. She was a “people person” through and through. In particular, she had a truly uncanny ability to read someone’s sexuality—both in terms of orientation and intent—and would normally express an opinion of their sex appeal into the bargain. At a time when such matters were not discussed nearly as much as they are today, her forthrightness could be quite disconcerting. But it was also a refreshing quality and could fascinate people.

MY ADORED GRANDMOTHER. The first person I recall conversing with—who had impressively wide interests—was my adored grandmother. She was about as different from my mother as any two people could be—so I can only conclude that my  mother’s personality was largely formed by her rebellion against my grandmother. And I have to wonder about my grandfather’s wilder side—because I’m fairly sure my mother’s remarkable personality was partly genetic. Sadly, having survived World War I—he was a Ghurka officer—he succumbed to cholera in Burma early in their marriage. My grandmother had a deliriously happy marriage, but a short one. She worshipped his memory until she died.

“THE OLDEN DAYS.” For my part, I spent a great deal of time with my grandmother both because she adored me—and because I was frequently sent to stay with her since my mother had a hyper-active social life and had a hard time handling me. As a consequence, in that pre-TV era, I would talk to her for hours about anything and everything. She was widely read, socially concerned, and politically active so we had a great deal to talk about. When I was small, I was particularly fascinated by the two world wars she had experienced—and what it was like in “the olden days”—by which I meant when she was young. And now I can’t write any more about her because I’m tearing up. She has been dead for decades, but I her miss her so.

A TRULY FASCINATING MAN. The person who really gave my conversation bite—and fostered my sense of humor—was my much loved stepfather, Alfred Lyons. Movie-star good-looking, much younger than my mother, and more like a big brother to me, he was witty, sarcastic, vastly intelligent, conversationally ruthless—and quite, quite fascinating. Conversing with him was akin to fencing with someone who was exceptionally good with an un-tipped blade. You displayed weakness at your peril. The man was exhilarating. Sadly, the relationship broke up—as was inevitable given my mother’s destructive nature—and Alfred died far too young—but he had a profound effect on me over many years. Mind you, he was a menace where girlfriends are concerned. They all fell for him and he would flirt outrageously.

LISTENING IS A LEARNED SKILL. I can’t recall who taught me how to draw out other people—but I remember asking the question after noticing that some people just had the knack of putting people at ease. The advice I received was simple and has served me well ever since. It was, in essence, “Ask them about themselves. Encourage them to talk—and listen.”

TO LISTEN IS TO WRITE BETTER. There are many elements involved in the writing process—and I would guess reading would top the list, because that is how you learn from the masters—plus a great deal more from the content. But listening would be high on the list—very high indeed—and it is one of life’s greatest pleasures. Words—one way or another (read, written, heard or spoken) are really the focus of my life. And they all emanate from people. Good grief! Maybe I really am a people person after all!

---

 

 

April 29 2014: REALLY GOOD CONVERSATION IS NEARLY AS STIMULATING AS REALLY GOOD SEX—AND BOTH ARE BEST WHEN PROLONGED

“Conversation, like certain portions of the anatomy, always runs more smoothly when lubricated.”

Marquis de Sade

---

CREATIVITY. I missed one rather crucial point when I was the listing the merits of being a good conversationalist yesterday. It is this: Really good conversation stimulates creativity (and, with luck, solves problems). It does so because it draws you out, encourages you to be at the top of your game, brings other perspectives' to the topic at hand, and offers—as always—the stimulus, challenge, and pleasure of interacting with other human beings. And, at its best, that is profoundly energizing. 

So why don’t meetings work better than they do? Possibly because the quality of dialog in many meetings isn’t very high—and all sorts of subtle factors come into play such as corporate culture, pecking order, politics, sexuality, and so on. Then there is the underlying fact that many organizational cultures—whether government, corporate, or academic—do not really encourage truly honest communication (a separate but important subject in itself).

THIS LISTENING THING. The essence of dialog is that we should listen to each other—and emerge from each conversation a little wiser. Are we good at listening? No—generally speaking we are terrible at it—and much more concerned with getting our point across. And the U.S. is a competitive, declarative culture where self promotion is the norm.

Listening is something of an art form. You want to encourage the other person to speak without either invading their personal space—or letting long silences mar the conversation. Companionable silences are fine—but you have to know someone fairly well for them to feel natural—or, paradoxically to be indifferent to them. If you have grown up with servants, as I have, you don’t feel obliged to engage them in conversation—and the unspoken rule is they don’t speak until spoken to. I was a waiter for several years while working my way through university so I have experienced both sides of that particular issue.

PROPAGANDA LIKES TO KEEP OUR MINDS CLOSED AND DISTRACTED. It is a great help to have an open mind, but we live in a society that devotes truly enormous resources to keeping it closed and distracted. In particular, a whole slew of words has been demonized—mainly by Republicans with the aid of that very smart man, Frank Luntz. I don’t agree with what he does, but I cannot but admire his talent. He also comes across on TV as extremely likable. He is also, I’m sad to say, hugely destructive because he is peddling ignorance—and this Great Nation is scarcely short of that.

THE DEMONIZATION OF LANGUAGE. It is a huge mistake to demonize a word or a phrase because it effectively blocks further dialog—or, at least, it’s a warning shot. The word ‘socialist’ is a good example of this. It has been my experience that if you praise socialism in any way in the U.S., people look at you with suspicion. Good grief! You might even be a communist.

SOCIALISM. The irony here is that most Americans don’t know what socialism is, that it is compatible with capitalism, that it comes in variations, and that it underpins most of the most successful economies in the world such as Germany, Austria, Holland, France, Sweden etc. In fact, it is currently delivering a higher standard of living than the American Business Model for all except the ultra rich.

SAVED FROM SOCIAL DAMNATION. My great flaw (I have many, but we are talking about conversation) is that I have little time for small talk—and tend to want to move on to issues in a world where a great many people don’t want to think about serious things like defense policy, or hunger or unemployment. Worse still, I have no interest in sport. However, I’m saved from social damnation by being genuinely interested in people—and I’ll talk to an attractive women (and I find most women attractive—regardless of age) any time, any place, about anything—including sports. 

---

 

April 28 2014: How Important Is Conversation In A World Where You Can Text—And Does It Help An Author Who Writes?

A conversation is a dialogue, not a monologue. That's why there are so few good conversations: due to scarcity, two intelligent talkers seldom meet.

Truman Capote

---

NEED SOLITUDE. DECIDEDLY NOT A RECLUSE. Having written yesterday about the need for solitude in order to think, research and write—I’m now going to undercut my image as a recluse (which I’m not) by saying that I regard good conversation as one of the greatest pleasures in life—and one I am far from sure we give enough consideration to. Do we  give any serious consideration to it? Not very much. Instead, we mostly assume that once children have learned to talk, adequate conversational skills will follow as a byproduct of the mere business of living. Indeed, , that is exactly what does occur—though whether that produces good conversationalists is another matter entirely. There is one hell of a difference between adequate and good.

WHY IS BEING A GOOD CONVERSATIONALIST AN ADVANTAGE? But what are the advantages of being a good conversationalist?

• It helps you get on better with people in general.
• It promotes trust—the basis of the finer aspects of human behavior
• It enables you to be more empathetic
• It enables you to share your own concerns more effectively.
• It improves your popularity
• It is highly likely to improve your love life and it certainly promotes intimacy
• It promotes mutual understanding
• It helps you learn, to evaluate and to teach
• It promotes intellectual curiosity.
• It is both innately interesting and a pleasure—and, with a bit of luck, vastly entertaining.
• It both reduces stress and promotes health.
• It hones the mind, helps you to appreciate subtlety, and to think better in almost every way..

All in all, it adds up to a formidable host of advantages—which affect just about every aspect of out lives—which we don’t give much attention to. Damned odd, when you think about it.

CONVERSATION IN THE U.S. Are conversational standards high in the U.S.? Well, there are certainly plenty of interesting people here—but whether our conversational skills are to scratch is another matter entirely. Based upon my own experiences and observation, they are not. But leaving out what I think, I was interested to see a headline in THEATLANTIC.COM stating as follows:

My Students Don’t Know How To Have A Conversation

The thing is this: Although aptitude may come into it, conversational skills are primarily learned—and now they are undermined by:

• Television
• The internet.
• Smart phones and other digital devices.
• A constant barrage of both political and commercial propaganda.

WHERE CONVERSATION IS CONCERNED, I’VE BEEN LUCKY. I’m a fairly good conversationalist because others took the time to teach me, because I had an expensive education, because I’m widely read and travelled, and because I have worked at it. Also, I come from a culture—Ireland—where good conversation is valued, and where wit is the stuff of life. I was also brought up in a house without TV—and where conversation was the primary source of entertainment.

Without good conversational skills, I doubt very much that I could function as an writer.

THE TOUGHEST CONVERSATION I HAVE EVER HAD? This was with Dr.Edward Teller—“Father of the H-Bomb”—shortly before he died, and it took place at Lawrence Livermore National Lab where I had gone to see their supergun shoot. The shot was delayed so to keep me entertained I was introduced to Teller and other luminaries. It was a great experience—but it was hard pounding during the interview (which took place in front of an audience.

---