. good evening from los angeles. i'm tavis smiley. stephen fry has been making pbs viewers laugh for decades as costar of the brittic comedy bl "blackadder." he is in front of a live audience for the great indoors" on pbs. he is known for short-form writing, 140 characters at a time. we will talk about his love/hate relationship with twitter and his 12 million followers. we are glad you joined us. actor stephen fry in a moment. ♪

♪ and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. ♪ thank you. ♪ ♪ i'm pleased to welcome stephen fry to this program. pbs viewers may remember him from "blackadder," "jeefs" and "wooster." he is getting back to his roots in the great indoors. he is the editor in chief of an

outdoor adventure magazine. >> oh, my god. dad, you look like -- jack, this is your wheelhouse. >> you look like winston churchill had sex with the mug shots. >> if anybody wants me, which they won't, i will be down at edwards dining on falia and fully loaded potato skins. >> role and, we have to talk. >> no, jack. i know what your gaeg the say. you don't have to quit the adventure society out of loyalty to your mentor. >> no, i wasn't. >> you don't have to. >> no, i wasn't. >> no, doubt have to. whatever your sense of honor tells you, you don't have to. >> i just became a -- >> no, no, please, i won't allow it. just ignore the right thing to do. i absolve you. >> i wasn't going to -- >> no, you really don't have to. i think i get it. what convinced you that this was the right vehicle at this point

in your career? >> well, it was a mixture. i think john is a wonderfully talented guy. i've seen a bit of community and i remembered him from "soup" when he began his career. i liked the script, the pilot. i spoke to mike givens, the creator, and he just -- he had worked with james corden actually, and i thought it was smart and funny and i had long wanted to go back to the old world of multi-camera, old school sitcom in front of an audience, you know. it is a specific type of entertainment, a rather delicious one. don't really work as hard as you do, not that that's of course -- >> yeah, yeah. what is it about the specificity of that multi-camera shoot that you like? >> well, i suppose it harks back to a day when television was a kind of national fireplace around which the whole family would warm themselves also. there's something very -- it is because of the laughter that's live and the performances that

are kind of chirpy and live with it, to just sort of -- there is a sense of what comedy can best do in terms of just warmth, i guess, and family. this show is a kind of family show, although it is a workplace comedy. it is about generations, my generation, joel's generation and the younger generation of millennials. so it is like grandpa and the children, if you like. >> and you embrace their medium, twitter, which i will come back to later in the conversation. you embraced their medium, but what do you make of hanging out with the youngsters onset every day? >> they're wonderful. they're terrifically warm and friendly. of course they live in a world i have no understanding of. i have never heard of the musical groups they mention. we come back after a weekend and i say what have you been doing, and they describe something they've done on the sunset strip at 3:00 in the morning and i say how i've been to see opera at the dorothy pavilion.

a different sort of world. but we respect each other. maybe that's a lesson for the wider world than the body politic. we may be different but we can celebrate our differences. >> i think we'll get back to that in some point in the conversation. this may be a silly question, and not the first or last i will ask on this program i'm certain, what is the difference for you if there's a difference between situating yourself in an american comedy versus the stuff that pbs viewers and others have seen you do around the globe? >> it is a good point. pbs, the kind of short-term for a pbs british drama is a masterpiece theater thing which involves cocktail shakers and vintage cars and the dame of the british empire at the very least in some form or another and an arrest o aaristocratic atmosphere in old england people want to exist.

in an american sitcom is the level of the audience, the sheer amount of whooping that goes on. you walk on the set and people scream and they're frenzied their thighs together or they've been spread a weird narcotic or something. there's a very different atmosphere. it is very lively. we british are a little bit reserved, as is probably known. >> yeah. >> and also, i mean, just technically things like we're a single camera. "blackadder" you mention was in front of an audience. i think in britain we make a comedy series, there will be six episodes in a season and you might do three or four series. you know, the greatest of them all in my opinion and in many other's opinion was "40 towers" and there was only two seasons of that, so 12 episodes. that was it. but then it is a very different way of doing it. john clease wrote it with johnny

booth. he wrote every episode. there wasn't a staff. on this show, "the great indoors" it was probably by episode 11 we started to repeat the lead writer. that's how big our writing staff is on the show. you know, each episode will have a different writer and you will go through 12 people virtually before you start to -- >> well, you need that if you expect to get to syndication. >> to feed the beast, exactly right. make the wheel, yeah. >> exactly, that's how that works. i was laughing, stephen when you say your brits are a bit reserved. you are, but i would not call that jacket reserved. what clorp olor is that, my fri? >> pumpkin possibly. i'm going to go orange, burnt april railway c apricot. it is a cheering thing, isn't sft. >> yes. >> what i believe the interior decorators call a pop of color. just a side bar. >> sure, sure. >> when i first lived in america i was in new york and the first people ask you is whereabouts are you, upper east, soho,

whatever. the second question is who is going to decorate. what? why should -- i buy a picture and put it on the wall. i got so kind of overwhelmed and bullied by people recommending decorate ors i got this decorator who came into this house with an extraordinary book. he had done a connecticut beach house, i thought he was going to be so expensive. so i said, i'm sorry, i've never had a decorator before. he said, oh, oh, do you -- no, aim not a decorator, no, no, no. i find the decorator in you. >> wow. only in new york. >> yeah. from him i first heard the phrase pops of color. >> pops of -- >> yeah, classic with a twist and pops of color. >> yeah, i find the decorator in you. i'm laughing, thinking the kinds of questions you would be asked in l.a. like, who are you wearing. >> yeah, there would be a touch

of that. >> i guess every city has those kind of questions one gets asked. you went there earlier so i want to come back to this now, which is this moment that we find ourselves living in. let me back up a bit and we will come to the trump era in america. you were for or against, i think, i would assume against brexit? >> i was against brexit. i was for remain. >> remain, yeah. >> but it is an interesting point because, you know, one's kind of -- it was a negative that we were defending. the positive was to leave whereas one tried to suggest the positive was to stay. i joked to my american friends here in california in particular, i said, you know, i left britain to avoid this rise of populist, nativism and right wing xenophobia and i come to california and it is five inches a day for seven weeks of rain, and a whole new political identity for the country. it is interesting for an outsider. it's fascinating to watch.

as someone who has long been involved in a small extent in politics, i have always felt, as i have almost every believe firmly, is i've hated those on my own side who bully the enemy or that say our opponents, and i think of what has happened here as much more a failure of the left than of a triumph of the right. and when i hear people say, we've got to do this and demonstrate about that, i say, who -- whom, whom are you thinking you will convince by appearing on the street or shouting? whose mind are you going to change? >> yeah, yeah. >> i'm a practical fellow. i think if you do want society to change or you want the political outlook to change, then you have to think practically about it. rather than being right -- anybody can be right. >> sure, sure. >> scream that they're right. you've got to achieve what is right. >> yeah. >> and that takes patience and practicality, and it takes the understanding of the point of view of others. and, you know, i sort of want to

strangle the person that came up with the phrase "basket of deplorables" because it is so dumb. it failed to understand human nature. human nature is, you know, what we all live with. it is no good having ideas and abstract thoughts about politics. you've got to understand, it is about people. i believe if you -- you know, if you go to a crowded shopping mall or a busy town square and you threw a pebble, it would land on the head of a decent person, you know. >> yeah. >> a person that would help you and be good. there are, unfortunately, on the fringes people who are noisy and intemperate and deeply tribal. i think the tribal instinct in humanity is a sad one, don't you feel? >> i concur. i also will say that this is not at all unexpected. i figured we would get into a conversation. >> yeah. >> as bright as you are that would open me up in 18 different ways. i was listening, i didn't want to interrupt. i have three or four questions i want to follow up.

>> yes. >> stephen, in no particular order, i hear your point about the liberal nature the liberals have taken on. in some ways i would concur with it. what troubles me about it mostly i think is that it gives rise to idiots like -- what is this guy, milo yanipolous. it gives rise to that kind of racist -- i find him to be irrascible, i find his rhetoric to be not just racist but a -- >> and it wakes in male students the worst kind of bratty attitude to women. >> exactly. i totally agree. i guess the question is how much of that, which people will celebrate until they get caught, so he was invited to speak at cpac until they learned more. simon & schuster gave him a book deal until they learned more. >> and now he's left brightbart.

>> yes, and at a certain point even they have to cut their losses so to speak. how much of the liberalness breeds that or is it him run amock? >> i think it is an interesting generation. another person who had a huge base here, was cutie pie who paid people to attend shows with signs as a joechlkt there's a sense among young male figures that -- who never watches television. they'll never watch this, never watch, you know, pbs. they never watch the main networks. they won't even watch the fringe or specials, freedom yum cables or any of the others. they spend their life picking up material from the internet, from youtube and all kinds of other sites and they speak languages that we don't understand. they use phrases -- i mean one of the favorites of beauty pie

and this milo guy is sjw, who we are the enemy. sjw means social justice warriors. we grew up in an age in which the young questioned -- it was part of the social contract and the international consensus that social justice was something we all aimed for. that is not -- they think social justice is a busted flush at the very least, they think it is entirely the wrong path for humanity to go down and that it is basically liberal speak for trying to tell people how to think and behave. and we find ourselves, those who would guard ourselves as vaguely progressive or who just want the world to be a nicer place and a friendlier place without putting too big a philosophical or political gloss on it. we find ourselves suddenly we are the ones regarded as the orwellian threat to freedom because we tell people how to think apparently. that's something we have to address. but it is a really important question, you know, because

transsexuals get beaten up, gay people are beaten up, black people are killed by the police. >> the question is, is it legitimate or an excuse? >> that's the point, exactly that. >> right. >> there is a problem, you know, that minorities suffer, but there is also a lack of understanding amongst those who wish to protect those minorities and wish to see them taking their full and proper place in society, whatever their -- you know, their gender or anything else. there's a lack of understanding that if you force people into -- you tell someone to respect, then if they've got any self-respect they might say no, why should you i. it is like if you are stopped in the street by someone who just wants to mickpick a fight with and says, show me some respect. i have a nightmare i will say to them, well, look, show me that you deserve my respect and i

will respect you. i will show you fear, but by all means, yeah, i'm afraid of you but i don't respect you, i have to say. >> yeah, yeah. >> i don't respect your gun or your knife, i fear it. takes different thing. >> yeah, yeah. >> respect is earned. and i think if you just tell people, this is what you must think about, then -- and i don't -- i'm not suggesting i have the answer except there are -- there are virtues that the older i get, the more i believe in them. they are not the great capital letter virtues like justice and mercy and compassion. they're smalling things, and they are kindness and cheerfulness. i think in the face of adversity cheerful people become mightily heroic. it is a great quality. you know, the cheerful person at the store, the cheerful person that lets you in through the traffic, the cheerful person who is -- thinks and is considerate. you know, politicians don't tend to put those words into a

program or a manifesto and say, we will be cheerful. it comes from inside obviously. i think what you -- the way you question a politician is when they don't seem to adduce those kind of qualities as being what they stand for. i think there has been a tendency of the left to speak in abstracts, to talk about people but not individuals. the great jonathan swift, one of the great satirist said, i love peter, paul, john, andrew, but i hate and loath and detest that race called man. and i think we have to just get back to our individual treatment of each other. >> yeah. i think though there are those who see those kind of virtues as a weak response. >> yes. >> to the kind of attack that's being waged now in the era of donald trump. so i'm not saying those things are not legitimate. >> no. >> do you see my point? >> no, i do.

it is ironic because i often feel that the way i want to respond as a pretty dyed in the wool atheist is a christian way, or what used to be considered christian. >> not these christians. >> no. but it is to take, you know, take the enemity and take their hatred and not throw it back and not scream. but you're right, i think this is the problem with being a liberal. i am a liberal, i'm not a hard left and i'm not anything, and liberal is flabby and weak and isn't sure and says, oh, dear, me, can't everybody be nice to each other? oh, dear, what a pity. oh, let's try harder. oh, come on now. oh. that's it. one of the great heroes was an author who wrote a book called "two cheers for democracy" and he couldn't summon the third. that's how i feel. >> let me ask you this, so the other thing i want to get back to was you were talking about

bullies, and if donald trump is anything he is a bully to my mind at least. the question that comes to my mind listening to what you said, stephen, is how you contest, how you push back, how you -- to use the world of the day -- resist. how do you resist a bully and honor your edict to not attack the bully? >> well, i used to be very keen on chess, and i remember a chess master told me, he said, you know, the bust move est move to chess is not the best chess move. it is to figure out the move your opponent lest wants you to play. if you can figure out what they don't want you to play and play that. so it is easy to talk about the bullying and the lying and the bragging and all of the qualities we see in the president, the thing -- you know, my first thought was it is very simple.

he is the most extreme example of a narsistic person as i understand it, not as a professional psychiatrist obviously, that i can imagine in public life. and i know that in my lifetime there has never been a single individual on this planet who has been more talked about at every bar, every table, in every restaurant, every talk show, every radio talk shoechlt everybody show. everybody is talking about him all the time. he is like a dr. seuss figure who is like a balloon, and every time his name is mention he gets a bit bigger and a bit bigger. he feeds off this energy, all of this -- like a star trek, you know, alien who feeds off the mention of his name. so the answer, of course, is to stop talking about him. >> but does he just keep getting bigger or does he at some point implode? does he implode or explode? >> that's what everybody is thinking. i know people on the show i work with who never said he will win

who now say he will never last the first year. >> won't have a second term. >> and so on. but if you imagine that the press decided they would cover congress and various cabinet members and what they said and did but they would simply never talk about him, they would actually ban his name from the pages -- of course it won't happen because he's bait, you know. >> they hate him but necessary love him. >> you see how much junk mail comes through saying, trump's latest something because they know people will click on it. they want to see what fury he has unleashed on this or claim he made on that. that will be the answer, to not feed his appetite for being mentioned and never to mention his tweets and never to mention his statements. that would work, but, of course, no one will do it. >> yeah, yeah. and tell me more then about your speaking of tweets, about your

love/hate relationship, as i would characterize it with twitter and social media. >> yes. i was a very early adon'tpted o all things -- i was the second person to own an apple mackintosh in january of '84. first was my friend douglas adams. we went in the shop together and he got the first and i got the second. it was january 25th. it was a great day in the history of computer. i loved these things. when social media began, i saw twitter as a very interesting and exciting thing and so i joined it early and so amassed quite a following. >> 12 million and counting. >> 12.5 million at the moment, yes, which is terribly useful in terms of publicity. i'm afraid i discovered before trump that you can by pass the press. in britain, you know, the print media, you know -- once you are following exceeds the circulation of all of the

british newspapers, then when you are doing a film or book or whatever it is, a tv show, and the publicity person says, will you do this profile for the "times" or "daily mail" or whatever, no, i'll just tweet. i believe in twitter in the same way i believe in the internet, as foolish and optimistic and naive i am, that this would be a way the world would come together, and we would understand each other better and we would like each other better. we would know more. it would be a fantastic tool for education and for the spreading of ideas and sharing of thoughts and sharing of experiences and that we would come together. instead, the opposite thing has happened. rather than being centrifugal, it's been centripedal, you know what i mean. everyone's opinion, as we discussed, trapped in their filter bubble and they don't

listen to each other anymore. that's a depressing side of it. i'm afraid my relationship with twitter now is one-way rather than two-way. that is to say i tweet but i don't read. i don't even look at the page of general tweets. i only look at my own and just put out because, i'm incredibly sensitive. when people are nasty to me, i get very, very upset. i know people who can take it, they don't mind. my friend, the marvelous writer j.k. rowling, she gives as good as she gets to anybody. she is fantastic. she doesn't seem to get upset by it and good on her. >> i'm with you. >> you know, my husband is reading your book at the moment. it is about michael jackson, the last days of michael jackson. >> yes, "before you judge me." >> yes. he is enjoying it. >> tell him thank you. >> i should have brought it in for you to sign. >> i appreciate it. i'm happy to know it, there's a book of mine in your house. >> we'll get the whole -- >> that makes me happy. maybe watching "the great indoors" will take our minds off all of this. >> let's hope.

>> and save us from this dreaded future that we seem to be sinking into. anyway, i'm honored to have you on the program. >> it's been a pleasure. >> please come back again. that's our show tonight. thank you for watching as always. keep the faith. ♪ for more information on today's show, visit tavis smiley at pbs.org. hi, i'm tavis smiley. join me next time with a conversation with author joyce carol oates. that's next time. we'll see you then. ♪

♪ and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

milan's monumental cemetery. while there are many evocative cemeteries in europe, this one -- with its emotional portrayals of the departed and their heavenly escorts -- in the melodramatic art styles from the late 19th and early 20th centuries -- is in a class by itself. it's a vast garden art gallery of proud busts and grim reapers, heartbroken angels and weeping widows... soldiers too young to die. acres of grief, hope, and memories.

good evening from los angeles. i'm tavis smiley. tonight, first a conversation with artistic director ronlt battle. actress michelle monaghan joins us about "the path." robert battle and actress michelle monaghan in just a moment. . ♪ ♪ ♪