tv Charlie Rose PBS November 14, 2014 12:00am-1:01am EST
12:00 am
>> welcome to the program. we begin this evening with the mayor of london, boris johnson. he's written a new book called the churchill factor: how one man-made history. >> what he thought was that britain and america, with american firmly in the lead, represented values, ideas of freedom and democracy, free speech, independent judiciary, habbuous corpus, whatever, that were incredibly important. and that were actually peculiar to those english-speaking cultures. he thought. this was his-- and actually there's a lot of truth in that.a those ideas are not banal, they're not trit, and they are not up contested. there are many parts of the world including china or russia or wherever that don't subscribe to that
12:01 am
approach. and churchill wanted to push it forward. and he saw the english-speaking peoples as away of insurancing that that was guaranteed. >> rose: also this evening, a new film called foxcatcher starring steve carell, vanessa redgrave, channing tatum and dected by ben the-- bennett pillar. >> hi seen capot, and obviously steve said that piece of work speaks for itself. and i knew i wanted to work with himment and then we started just talking about the story. and i done think he had a script then. and so i wept and rezferpd the characters and i hadn't-- i didn't have any knowledge of the story beforehand. and really just fell in love with the idea of this world that i don't think nip's seen before in film. in a deep way. >> rose: we conclude with the essayist daphne merkin, her book is you will cad the famed lunches. >> ef retime i start an essay again, i think hear we go again.
12:02 am
i think a mixture of skin, placing and some interesting idea about the-- about the person in that-- in setting the scene. like some perception you have that hasn't been out there. >> rose: boris johnson, steve carell, vanessa redgrave, channing tatum, director bennett miller and essayist daphne merkin when we continue. funding for charlie rose is provided by the following: additional funding provided by: and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide.
12:03 am
from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: boris johnson is here. he is, as you know, the mayor of london. he has served in that role since 2008. this summer he announced his intention to stand for election to the united kingdom parliament in the 2015 general elections. a lot of people read a lot into that. his latest book is about winston churchill. it is called "the churchill factor: how one man-made history" ""the wall street journal" reports there is a long history of ambitious burn shall their leadership credentials from profiles in courage to the audacity-of-hope that is from john f. kennedy to barack obama. the churchill book is more like jfk's than obama. it drops aical asal hint about candidacy. all from "the wall street journal". he would deny it all. i'm pleased to have boris general son back at this table. >> it's a great honor to be back. >> rose: so why did you write this then? >> i wrote it-- .
12:04 am
>> rose: how many books are there on churchill. >> probably about a hundred a year. but what the churchill family and the churchill estate said was they had the 50th anniversary of his death coming up next year. and they genuinely felt that although there is a huge weight of scholarship about churchill, there wasn't a book that tried to bring it together into argue again to a new generation the churchill was the great man that i think he was and the people of my generation think he was. i think the younger generation, he is receding a bit. he's fading. >> rose: because world war ii is fading? >> because-- because the vastness of his achievement is slowly being lost to people. i think it was a survey that showed that most people think that he is a an insurance company advertisement, the dog, an insurance company called churchill with a dog pass cot. that's what young people think. so it was an attempt to bring him to life again for a new generation.
12:05 am
and to show the sheer scale of what he achieved, but also why he was the only guy who could have possibly achieved it. how it came about that in may 1940, business an and the world was on the brink-of-absolute disaster. >> rose: paris had been captured. >> paris was gone, the french were hoping. >> rose: right. >> that we would do a deal with hitler because that what palliate their own indignity, their own hum iliation. -- was over there arguing, chamberlain, halifax, all the appeasers in the tory party were telling churchill, do this, make a deal with hitler. >> rose: mack a deal with hitler. >> and if he had, you would have had a nazi-dominated europe. >> rose: continent. >> would you have had an epic disaster for humanity, it's possible after all that hitler with have been able to invade russia successfully earlier. who knows what would have
12:06 am
happened. >> rose: instead he had to front a two front war. and he tried to go to moscow and that redale-- derailed everything. >> absolutely. and churchill always knew that if he could hold on for long enough, hitler what lose because in the end, the americans would come in. that was his whole strategy. >> rose: and he tried -- >> and it worked. in the end it worked. two years and four months before-- . >> rose: a good portion of the time he was trying to get rass velt to do it all those areas, john meacham road a good book about roosevelt and churchill. >> it's a wonderful subject. because, you know, don't forget churchill, though his mother was american and he came to this city in 1895 when he was only 20. he loved america. but he also i must confess to you, there was also a part of churchill that felt a certain sadness about america's eclipsing of britain. and in the '20s.
12:07 am
and i will be honest, in the '20s and in the '30s he became so anti-american that clementine at one stage tells him he couldn't be foreign secretary because of the level of his feelings. you know, because america was-- . >> rose: but it was jealous-- jealousy. >> i think that is the rit word. i think its with a feeling that america was blowing britain off the-- elbowing britain-- elbowing, which was true. and-- . >> rose: and it want into high ger after the war. >> and public of churchill said of the great deal by which america helped britain to fight on and supplied those planes and those ships. he said it was the most unsordid act in history am but in private he said britain was
12:08 am
whatever it was, he should have gonement and i think he regretted it. and don't forget that at the end of his political career, when he's got his cabinet around for the last time in 1955, he has two pieces of advice. one man is spirit. whatever that may be. and and second, never be separated from the americans. >> when you set down this book is about what is greatness and how do you get there. it seems like this is a man who wanted to be great. and thought about it and did things that he thought would put him on that. >> that's very as future, that's right. i think that's it. there is a great element in churchill of
12:09 am
self--- self-assessment. he knows exactly who he has got napoleon in his sights, nelson, both of them on his desk. churchill, don't forget was not-- he was five foot six and a half inches tall, maybe five foot seven. his chest 31 inches. he was a shrimpy guy who sort of built himself up. literally using dumbbells and but morally also. >> dow have a feeling, though, that he believes so much in his own capacity that he could be britain. that he was willing to do almost anything to make that happen. >> yeah. >> whether it meant shifting parties, whatever was necessary. >> he did get power. >> oh, yes, yes. and he is famous. there would be no one like him before or since in british politics. he rats on the tories in
12:10 am
1904. and then rejoins them, of course he would claim that he had been consistent because the tories had abandoned free trade and then came back to free trade. he rejoins them in the '20s. and then becomes chancellor of the exchequer, this renegade, this traiter is made chancellor of the exquicker. >> rose: why was that, because they recognized that he had real ability? >> they did. everybody knew throughout his political career that they were dealing with somebody who was truly exceptional am they all pointed it out. so. >> rose: everybody knew that. >> they knew. actually in some ways. >> rose: but not to be trusted. >> correct. he was thought of as a loner, as a maverick, as a guy who continually got things wrong. but then in the late '30s, he takes this gigantic political position, this bet that hitler is wrong. hitler is a bad guy. he can see it. because he's been out there to write-- he had been out there in the early '30s. he had seen the marching kids and all that.
12:11 am
and he smells it. and he was totally right. >> rose: you wrote he wasn't what people thought of as a man of principles. he was a glory-chasing, gold-mouth hanging opportunist. >> he was. he took positions that crumpled beneath him. but the amazing thing was he survived. and the other thing about the positions that he took was that he never at any stage was morally compromised. you know, when politicians get things wrong in our times, very off ep there will be some element where their own honor and integrity, they will have been shown to have lied about something or whatever. you know, nixon-- . >> rose: . >> but that was never the case of churchill. >> rose: it is said about him that he was-- that he didn't-- his father didn't spend a lot of time with him. his father was not there for him. and so therefore he was overly protective. >> yeah, he had a very complicated relationship
12:12 am
with his father. and a tragic -- he writes called the dream after the war in which he imagines that the shade of ran dalf, sitting in an armchair next to me. and when ran dalf is saying well, you know, my boy, nice to see you. tell me about the world today. and he-- randolph doesn't understand that church hill has become the greatest living englishman. and you know, his father forms the impression that he is sort of a retired former army officer who is interested in painting. and churchill's bursting to explain his success to his father when puff, evannishes. and you have this sense of churchill yearning to impress his father. his father wrote him terrible letters when he was at school saying he was a confounded young wastrel and all this sort of thing. >> rose: you know how many come to this table and central to their psyche is
12:13 am
this idea, and testify's said it, i did okay, pop. >> yeah. >> rose: the whole notion that -- >> well, the monkey on churchill's back, as it were, was that. his relationship with his mother was fascinating. a woman, extraordinary woman. and new yorker, of course, she-- she was very influential in his early life. >> rose: what was his greatest skill? other than his will to prevail. >> other than his will to prevail. i was going to say it was never giving in. but i think the thing that he had that i found stunning in writing the become and researching about it. there are many people without dig into churchill come out with this feeling. he was his energy, his industry. i mean it was like the toy with the battery that just keeps going.
12:14 am
and churchill is not like anybody or any journalist i know. codrink, red wine at dinner. >> rose: a lot. >> red wine, white wine, brandy. you know, i will quarters. >> rose: prodigious. he would then get up from the table, 10:00, go upstairs to his office in-- he would walk around while some poor secretary was waiting up all night. >> rose: and talk. >> and dictate, dictate until like 2:00, 3:00 in the morning. >> rose: dictate what, a book, speeches. >> speechesing memo. and that way he composed not just more words than dicen, not just more words than shakespeare, but more words than dickens and shakespeare combined. and he won the noble prize for literature. and his paintings still sell for about a million dollars. >> rose: thises with a nobel prize he won for his history with the second world war. >> that's right, that is right. and some people say well, it was the sweds feeling a little gillee about their tra vesty during the war and maybe the nobel committee
12:15 am
felt that-- you know, but still, the nobel prize is the nobel prize. >> rose: an incredible amount of work. >> extraordinary. >> rose: what is interesting about it is, i once visite visited-- and they showed me where he would write. >> yeah. >> rose: and he would-- he would have everybody who was present at anything. >> that's right. >> rose: during the war, they were in the room, they would send him their story of what they remembered. >> that's right. >> rose: and then he would write his own version which would be-- consist with that. >> he would have --. >> he would take everything and put his stamp on it. >> that's completely right. it was a gigantic word processor of a house. would you have the search engines, the data bank. he with press the key and scuttle up with this paper. that is how he did it. >> rose: when i asked about the greatest thing, i thought was-- i think it was -- >> i mean charm, charm.
12:16 am
wednesday had a fantastic lit ree gift. an ability to speak directly to people, to move them, to sway them. >> rose: but he understood it too. because it is said that, you know, he built the pauses and the halting because he knew that if it appeared that this was something he is just thinking, and had a more powerful appeal, he would pause as if looking for the right word. >> which of course is completely-- because his speeches were very far from unpremeditated. they were declarations of text, on which he had worked very hard. and his secret was using short anglo sackson words when he really wanted to grip-- he would say youñi know, we'll fight them on the beaches. we'll fight them on the hills, on the streets. we'll never surrender. the only -- word is surrender. he like using shortening
12:17 am
lish words. >> rose: he liked films too. >> he did like films. >> rose: we would have these movies shown. i know people who were there during world war ii. but they would talk about going out to his house for movies. >> they would. >> rose: on the weekends of the war. >> i'm afraid he watched the lady hamilton by alexander-- 17 times. and wept every time. he was a prodigious blubber. he wept at almost everything. but he was an emotional guy. >> rose: you would know this better than i may remember. jack kennedy, the president said mobilized the english like -- >> he was an add -- either way they are heroes. >> they are both heroes. de mobilized. and he sent it into battle. and the great thing about his speeches and his wartime broadcast was that they were aimed not just at the british, but he always had an eye to america. and he knew that that was the crucial audience. and that if he could reach
12:18 am
his mother-and-as it were, and persuade them, then he would have done his duty. and get them into the war. that was his big achievement. >> rose: so why did the ungrateful british turn him out of office? >> it is one of the great questions of politics. and i think the answer is blindingly obvious. he had become-- because he had become somehow detached from the conservative party, he straddled politics. he was above it. he, it was felt possible to vote against the conservative party, without people thought that it was okay to be anti-tory. and yet to support churchill. so the labor slogan was cheer for churchill, vote for labor. >> rose: that's pretty good. >> that's a good one. and so they kicked him out. and-- and but again, you know, look at that. he gets this incredible poke in the eye. he's 70. what does he do? he keeps going. he never gave in.
12:19 am
and he gets back into government. >> rose: this is what the economist say, you know the economist magazine. the semi articulated and perhaps semi conscious musing on contemporary politics that seep from mr. johnson's analysis in which deep similarities emerge. this is the economist. your own home group economist. >> very great paper. >> rose: they're saying you are drawing this comparison because you want people to think of you as a churchill in the making. >> no, its-- i explanned the origins of the book which is entirely-- they just, they pick ited out. they wanted-- . >> rose: it had nothing to do with the mayor of london write about winston churchill. >> i had written an essay about churchill which they liked. they thought captured something that they wanted to get over. and it was a chance to expand that message. and to try to bring him to-- but i no,i have more in common with a three today
12:20 am
sloth or whatever. one eyed pterodactyl than churchill. so and-- . >> rose: but you also, i mean he had-- they said this about lincoln too. ambitious. you know how many times lincoln lost an election before he was elected president? like ten times. >> amazing also loz lost. ran for the congress, defeated. ran for the senate, defeated. but he kept-- because ambition burned in him. >> thank good continues did. thank goodness. >> rose: it's not a bad thing. >> not a bad thing. not a bad thing. >> rose: so fess up. >> yeah, yeah, no, no. i got 18 months to go as mayor. and then i've got to finish that off and do my bestment and then we'll see what happens. but. >> rose: so we'll see what happens. we're thinking about it, but we'll see what happens. >> no, i know what will happen in london. london will continue to make progress i hope very much and we will continue to do
12:21 am
things. >> rose: the great urban experiment in london is alive and well? >> it is, it is. you know, it is always wonderful to be here in new york. we've got a lot to learn from each other as great cities. but london is going gangbusters at the moment. there is no question. we're fortunate. the objective now is going to be for common ground, we've got to see the london affect spilling out across the rest of the country. that's what we want. >> rose: the thing about churchill and seeing america becoming, you know there are those who look at america and they look at china. and they say-- that china is coming. >> uh-huh. >> rose: they're going to make in their 21st century will be chinas. >> i think that's interesting. and i think it's one of the reasons why people will think about churchill and study what he had to say. because what he thought was that britain and america, with american firmly in the lead, represented values.
12:22 am
ideas of freedom and democracy. free speech, independent judiciary, habbeas corpus, whatever, that were incredibly important. and that were actually peculiar to those english-speaking cultures, he thought. this was his-- and actually, there's a lot of truth in that. and those ideas are not banal, they're not trite and they're not uncon cessed. -- uncontested there are many parts of the world including china or russia or wherever that don't subscribe to that approach. and churchill wanted to push it forward. and he saw the english-speaking peoples as a way of insurancing that that was guaranteed. and he saw america as the gaurnt err of that. and i think that the people of this earth are going to want america to play that role for as long as i'm around. and i think that will mean that in america, the idea of
12:23 am
america losing a position of moral leadership in the world is very remote. i want america, i think the world should want america to retain that position. >> the book is called the churchill factor. how one man-made history. the mayor of london, boris johnson. back in a moment. stay with us. >> rose: foxcatcher is a new movie by bennett-- bennett miller based on the true story of john dupont and his relationship with olympic wrestlers. here is the trailer for foxcatcher. >> do you have any idea who i am? some rich guy calls you on the phone. who wants to speak with you about what you hope to achieve. >> what do you hope to achieve, mark? >> i want to be the best in the world. >> good. here's a key for you.
12:24 am
also a big house is off limits. >> okay. >> coach dupont has a vision. he would like-- to be the observation training site for the national team. >> what are you thinking? this is it. this is all that we've ever wanted. >> mark, you have been living in your brother's shadow your entire life. it's your time. now promise me. you are everything i have. >> i am leading men, and i'm giving america hope. >> i spent my lifetime looking for a father and i have found one in john dupont. >> it doesn't matter, the sport of wrestling is no sport. and i don't like to see you being -- >> why is there nobody in the gym. >> yeah, no i gave -- >> i am ungrateful ape.
12:25 am
>> mark, mark, mark. good. >> i don't need your help. >> you want to tell me what is going on with you and dupont. >> what did i just say? >> a coach is a father, a coach is a mentor. a coach has great power on an athlete's life. mark. >> rose: joining me now is bennett miller, the director, and three of the film's stars, steve carell, channing tatum and van esar redgrave. welcome. -- vanessa redgrave. welcome. tell me what it was that caught your attention when you first heard this story. >> well, eight years ago a stranger approached me in the store and handed me an envelope that contained newspaper clippings of this story. and it took me almost no
12:26 am
time after reading the first story, the first clipping that something i wanted to do. and what it was, i mean, it's a long time ago. but looking back on it, there's elements of my other films that have these outsider characters who have been alienated and have got some great ambition that is meant to remedy the problem of their life. but this particular one had, you know, an allegory underneath it that spoke to me. that had something to do with class and wealth and entitlement. and country. family. i mean so many things woven into it. and i just couldn't put it down. >> sounds like a bit of shakespeare and a bit of a hell of a movie. >> it did to me. i read the script and i was-- i thought it was-- incredible.
12:27 am
and an opportunity to work with bennett certainly was a huge component. because his work speaks for itself. he's really good. and to be a part of that world was a real honor. >> rose: he casts well too, doesn't he. >> i think he tends to cast against the grain. i think in terms of me, i don't think i was on any list for this role. and i think bennett took a chance in casting me. >> rose: why did you cast him? >> well, nobody ever expected that john dupont would kill anybody. and so part of it is putting somebody in a role who you do not believe is capable of, you know, you don't think of in that way. one of our early conversations between steve and i, steve said, he had only ever played characters with mushy centers.
12:28 am
and john dupont seems to have a mushy center but he doesn't. he's dangerous. and the way steve spoke about him and the understanding he had also, you know, my feeling about comic actors. i'm just very attracted to them and the idea that there is another aspect. there tends to be another aspect to them. a darker side, perhaps. that you know, you can access and surprise people with. and i also just think he's a great actor. i always found him very compelling. >> rose: channing, was it bennett, was it the story, was it the role that brought you on board? >> i first met bennett about seven years ago before i had been in even one successful film. so you know, i had seen capote and obviously, like
12:29 am
steve said, that piece of work speaks for itself. and i knew i banned to work with him am and we started just talking about the story. and i done think he had a script then. and so i went and researched the characters. and i hadn't-- i didn't have any knowledge of the story beforehand. and really just fell in love with the idea of this world that i don't think anyone has seen before in film. in a deep way. and i didn't know anything about this event. and then i read the script. and to be completely honest, i didn't understand it. i think i was too green and my knowledge of film thought that there needed to be some sort of resolve or some sort of lesson learned. and i just really didn't understand it and the movie just didn't happen, you know. so it's not like i passed or anything. and then the movie sort of came back around and i met bennett on the lot at sony.
12:30 am
and he had just finished money ball. he said come see it. and i saw it and we got to talking about foxcatcher. i think i had just done a lot of breauxing, and a lot more lessons learned, in a way. and reading it with fresh eyes and bennett sort of talking me through it again, it just made sense. you for example i literally threw myself at his feet. >> rose: said i'm in. >> yeah. >> rose: and then you found vanessa. >> yeah. >> much later on, i think, wasn't it. >> it was later on. >> rose: this is between john dupont and his mother. here it is. >> i think we'll give it to the children's museum if they have room. do you agree? >> i don't care what you do with the train set. i don't care about trains. mother, i am leading men. i am training them.
12:31 am
i am teaching them. i am giving them a dream and i am giving america hope. >> hope. it doesn't matter. i'm glad you have your trophy. it can go in the trophy room. not in the-- i don't like the sport of wrestling, as you know. it's a low sport. and i don't like to see you being low. >> rose: tell me who john dupont was. >> he was the heir to the dupont fortune. i think he was a very lonely, sad guy. he was-- he's someone who grew up, essentially by
12:32 am
himself, with his mother. who by all accounts was pretty chilly. and his parents were divorced when he was two years old. so he grew up with just her in this house. and was isolated, i think, because of his wealth. and it's documented he had mental issues. you know, who was he? it's our best guess as to who he was. but i interviewed people. i read books that he had written. books about him. i don't know. i just-- ultimately i think he was a tortured, very tragic individual. >> rose: seeking something. >> seeking, well, yeah, i think part of the reason he became involved with wrestling, why he started this wrestling facility, and sports in general, he had cate an extensive sports program on his estate. he wanted that greatness, i think, to rub off on him.
12:33 am
he embraced it. he just-- he loved the idea of being a leader of men. and he wasn't, naturally. but the character that mark rufallo plays, dave schultz, was a leader of men. he was one of the greatest wrestlers of all time. and dupont zeroed in on people like that. and wanted-- wanted to be-- it was a conflict, i thinkment because he wanted to be that person's mentor as well as be mentored by him. he didn't-- i think he was-- he was trying to fit himself into this world. and he didn't really possess the tools to do so. >> rose: it took you eight years to get this made. >> yeah. >> rose: what was the reservation on the part of studios. >> it's an unusual film. and it doesn't fit into simple economic model, you know. movies get financed based on
12:34 am
formulas. and you know, there's a value given to it based on the estimatesations of foreign presales driven by cast, with genre, director considered. and this film did not make sense to anybody. never did make sense to any standardized metric that is used. and when money ball was wrapping up, i met megan ellison and showed her the script. talked to her about it. and she disregarded her counsel and just took a shot. >> rose: took a shot, yeah. tack a look at this. this is a clip this is john dupont talking to the schultz brothers during training. here it is.
12:35 am
i'm really sorry about your mother. >> oh, no, no, no, no it's fine. >> are you okay. >> yes. >> are you sure. >> david, we have a lot of work to do the next couple of months. and you are an integral part of that. do you understand. >> i understand. >> i'm going to need you. and i will be relying on you to a great extent. i want more than anything to win a gold medal. and we have someone who can do that. >> we're going to win a gold medal, john. >> how are you feeling? >> i feel very good about it. >> i'm a little concerned that there are some psychological issues that we need to take care of. >> i think he's going to be in real good shape. >> well, i think you're
12:36 am
doing a great job. >> thanks, john. >> and i think that with you and i working in tandem, if we can't get him there, no one can. >> all right, get back. >> okay. >> mark, mark. mark. >> he's okay. good. >> rose: what is it, i know, that is at the central core of this film? what is he speaking-- seeking from them and what are they seeking from him. >> that is the question. what is the transactionment i think dupont cast himself in a role where he would be, you know, the leader of these guys. i think he was as steve pointed out a very lonely guy. a very alienated guy. i think he was attracted to
12:37 am
the fraternity, to the culture of these guy was do have a moral code. and you know, they're in it for the virtues because you're not getting rich. you're to the getting famous. >> rose: it was something he could never do and could have never done. >> yeah. >> rose: it gives him an in. >> yeah. and you know, it's sort of a-- parallel to the mother who got her stable of horses and she was a world-class equistrian. and part of it was rebellious. but i also think you know, he imagined himself being some kind of cold war hero that he had visions of 1980 hockey type of victory or like a boris basky, bobby fisher type thing. >> rose: what happened that changes when dave arrives? >> i think this false sense
12:38 am
of, i guess security. and someone that you thought believed in you, it all just comes crashing down. i mean dave even though was largely a father figure for mark, i think was always a bit, you know, mark could never be as shiny and important as dave, i think. largely because dave brought him into wrestling. and every accomplishment that mark ever achieved, whether it be the worlds or the gold medal, even, was a bit attributed to dave. and i think when dave gets here, it's just, you know, it's probably the thing that, you know, saved him, but also his biggest nightmare. >> rose: is this an all he gory on america? >> well-- allegory on america? >> well, i was drawn into it, you know, i'm drawn into these things. but you have to be careful
12:39 am
when making the film. because you have to acknowledge that it's implicit within the story. but then you know, give all importance to these characters. and what is happening. but for me, i i do see a lot of relevancy. >> rose: take a look at this clip. this is between john dupont and mark. here it is. >> do you have any idea why i asked to you come here today. >> no. >> rose: well, mark. >> well, mark, do you have any idea who i am? >> no. >> some rich guy calls you on the phone. i want mark schultz to come visit me. wbltion i'm a wrestling coach. and i have a deep love for the sport of wrestling. and i wanted to speak with
12:40 am
you about your future. about what you hope to achieve. what do you hope to achieve, mark? within i want to be the best in the world. >> rose: so what is the biggest challenge for you here? do you think in acmaing this after you got it financed and you put together this cast that you liked. >> it's a very quiet film that-- that what it is really aboutdó doesn't get expressed explicitly. and so finding a way to coordinate these moments so that we, you know, that we register what is happening. what's being unspoken. >> he's so good. i mean he really is. and he will put his head down and get very shy about that. but i have never had an experience like this.
12:41 am
and to have complete trust in someone and feel-- i talked to rufallo one night after we were shooting am i didn't socialize with these guys very much. >> rose: on purpose. >> yeah. i think we all just sort of-- you guys got, you know, got tight as brothers. but i very much felt to be on the periphery. but one night i was commiserating with mark on the which back to the hotel am and we both expressed this fear of where, what are we doing? this is either the biggest mistake and the worst thing that we've ever donement because we're way out on a limb in terms of these characters. but for both of us, i think and i think for the three of us, four of us, five of us, all of us, trusting bennet bennett-- bennettment and just knowing that he knows. that was for me the comfort factor.
12:42 am
>> it's amazing. >> yeah, i've gotten to work with a few people now. in my short career compared to these two. i don't know anybody that lives it with you as much as bennett. i mean this movie is not a fun movie. and i don't mean thats alike it wasn't enjoyable. because there is an immense amount of gratitude and appreciation that goes into doing something that was hard. and you know for a fact that he's right there next to you, just going through it with you. and there's something, you know, just very comforting. and just committing and going all the way. and doing it for him. and for the story. >> rose: sounds fairly interesting to me. >> i think it's-- i am fascinated. one of the greatest experiences is actually being able to be part of the,
12:43 am
like with you today and with q & a because i like to hear what bennett has to say. and each time i see the film, i think oh my goodness me. pie goodness me. it's like going down a-- down six miles and creatures are coming up. and it's such, such resonances underwater resonances that are not made explicit. which i'm so flipping fed up with. >> yeah. >> beautiful, it was beautiful. s' great writing. and all the greater writing because the writer didn't exist. and all this, to be in the scene and explain everything,
12:44 am
which i'm sure he didn't, being the good requires that they were. and you are such the further director. and i have to pitch in and say i was frightened. because the frirtening thing knowing that i mustn't have any assumptions and this was exactly what the journey was about. and yes, i was playing a very spec woman. but i had to just listen what bennett gave and then confront my son. and the very fact-- to say hello which is great. but talking about this thing, you have to keep alienated if you are going to be an alienated person. you can't jump from one to the other. or it's very difficult, in fact, impossible. but i guess-- i guess to se
12:45 am
see-- it's both micro and macro. i can't-- i was simply amazed watching the film. >> thank you all. great to meet you. >> thank you very much. >> good to see you, thank you. one more time, the film opens on -- >> limited, friday. >> rose: limited on friday night. back in a moment. stay with us. daphne merkin is hear. a former columnist for "the new yorker" magazine and contributor to elle magazine. she published a new anthology called the famed lunches. it spans her four decade career as a literary and cultural critic. waddy allen says her essays are strikingly original and take on the human conditionment i'm pleased to have her back at the table. welcome. >> thank you. >> this is like the second anthology. >> yes. >> rose: how do you a poach an an tolling? -- anthology. >> i think one of the problems of anthologies or collections of essays is you
12:46 am
want to try and make them look organic, when they're not organic. >> rose: they weren't mont to be together but they are together. >> they are thrown together. so i try to put together pieces, you know, through different themes. and one of the wounded icons, really interested me. >> tell me what that is about. >> it's the title essay called the famed launches. it's about my, how would i put it, effort to gain some significance in my own eyes or attain a certain kind of status in the world by harnessing myself to as i say, famous people but famous people who were themselves wounded. >> rose: you are drawn to them. >> yes. >> rose: you say you are drawn to fragile sorts of celebrities or famous
12:47 am
somebodies who feel they are misunderstood nobodies. >> right, right. >> rose: what is it about them that attracts you? >> i think the notion that someone becomes an accomplishment-- accomplished person or celebrated person, but is not totally intact ike logically. i find fascinating. i mean none of us are totally intact psychologically. but the notion that they work around their woundedness to kind of make something. >> rose: yeah, an sometimes the impression is because they are so successful, then they must be just so solidly okay. >> right, right, absolutely. >> rose: an they're not solidly okay. >> no. >> rose: an all the thins that they thought fame and celebrity would bring, it didn't bring. >> right, absolutely. but i think as a culture, we look on and think like about a robin williams. >> rose: yeah. >> what could have been wrong in his life.
12:48 am
and in truth, we never know the demons that drive people. >> rose: of all these, which one is the most revealing for you? >> for some reason, marilyn monroe fascinates me unendingly. >> rose: what was it about her. >> it's interesting. >> rose: what did she say about sex and fame and -- >> right. i don't know, i read her diaries that came out last year. >> rose: yeah. >> these, they are really not diaries, they're little notes she wrote to herself. one of them is a dinner menu. she was trying to teach herself how to entertain. i think she was an interesting-- . >> rose: was the beauty that sort of-- everybody. >> i think it was the beauty and vulnerability it was a potent combination. >> rose: why would she show up two or three hours late for a scene. >> yeah. >> rose: drive everybody crazy. >> i know. she had enormous anxiety of performance. >> rose: every review i have
12:49 am
read about your book says the following. she did not include the famous essay on spanking. >> right. >> rose: is that the most famous essay you have ever written. >> i shudder to think that it might be. >> rose: but why is it. >> because i think first of all i include it in my last collection. >> rose: that's a good reason right there. >> so i wasn't going to double it. but because i think a certain kind of kantor about sex remains. >> rose: missing. >> right. it's not one of the things people are most up front about. i mean keeping it away from the area of porn which isn't about kantor anyway. so i think that piece, as i write in the thing, has haunted me. >> rose: because everybody remembered it. >> remembered it. because it was in "the new yorker". because i mean when i reread it, i thought i can't believe i said all this. >> but that's who you are.
12:50 am
i mean you say what you see an hear. >> yes, it interests me to do that. i always think of a tight el, of a collection of esquire pieces that came out years ago. the title of which was all our secrets are the same. >> i always kept that in mind. >> what does that mean to you sm. >> that if we told them, if we spilled them. >> what we don't want to tell is the same regardless of who we are? >> yes. that we keep the same things hidden. >> and a lot of it has to do, i assume, with ego and fear. >> absolutely. >> you also have this really new piece called-- about therapy which called making my therapist laugh. what is that about? >> i wrote it for this new section of the sunday review called couch. >> yes. >> and they called and asked if i would write something. and i was thinking to myself, about my own tennessee to try and entertain my therapist, my many
12:51 am
therapists instead of droning, you know, in a way i thought the opposite of entertaining was that you run the risk of being boring. i'm talking about your psychic life is repetitive by its very nature. so i talked about how i, one they werist couldn't stop laughing. and i wane that funny. and he said to me, why don't i become a stand up comedian. and i thought i'm trying to hard to entertain. >> rose: your own therapist. >> yes. so, right. >> rose: have you been in therapy? >> yes. >> rose: was it helpful. >> i'm still, sad to say or not sad to say i'm still in it. yes. in a incremental way. you don't see big changes on the next street corner. >> rose: but when you write an essay, where do you start? with an idea, a person, a scene. >> i would say-- . >> rose: how do you get in. >> i would say that's such a
12:52 am
good question. because i'm always, every time i start an essay again, i think here we go again. i think a mixture of scene, placing, and some interesting idea about the-- about the person in that setting the scene. like some perception you have that hasn't been out there. >> rose: yeah. >> right. >> rose: i mean and especially if it goes against the grain of presumption. >> right. >> rose: if it is something that is so crucial, you know. i mean how could someone who cares so little about fashion, care so much about jewelry. >> absolutely. that would be a great opening. >> rose: that would be an opening line. >> that would be great, true. >> rose: when you-- was's the normal link for an essay? is it about-- how many words. dependses on the magazine. new york is different than el we right, can rang from a thousand for a certain length essay for the times
12:53 am
to 4,000, $5,000 words. for some-- . >> rose: and when you look into the pantheon of essayists, who is up there that -- >> i love an essayist, very sick now named clive james. >> rose: oh, sure. >> i find him a wonderful essayist. >> rose: he lives in london, doesn't he. >> he lives i think in australia, i think. just read a collection by him. >> rose: is he writing about dying. >> he is. >> rose: that is what i thought. >> yes. with a sort of sense of humor, which is interesting. i always go back to virginia woolf for certain kind of essay. certain kind of personal yet informed kind of essay. >> rose: then there is the famous orwell essay, why do i write. >> why i do write, absolutely. he was a great essayist, great, yeah.
12:54 am
>> rose: when you-- what dow-- tell me how you employ language. are you looking for telling details? are you looking for contradictions? are you looking for what? >> should be a book editor. i look for a mixture of as you said correctly the detail that will capture a reader and i like praises that stand out on a page, you know, that you don't just sort of close over. >> rose: what i would like-- when i read an essay, i like to read something in which somebody has characterized somebody which i haven't thought of but instantly i said yes. >> yes. >> that's who they are. >> that is actually very-- i wrote in my introduction that i hope the essays would elicit nods of recognition. >> exactly. >> i think that is what one wants. >> that is what a writer should do. a writer should force somebody to say oh my god,
12:55 am
you know, i couldn't express it but that's what i thought. >> that's exactly what i thought without expression. >> yes. >> i think that's the goal, pretty much. >> you did say at a point that you were always in search of love. or did you not? >> it sounds like something i would say. >> it does. >> i once told a therapist that i wrote, you are right, he said what dow write for. and i said for love. >> yeah, exactly. >> and he said you will never get it that way. but i go on writing. >> rose: good for you. we're all glad. the book is cull cad the famed lunches. daphne merkin, thank you, thank you for being here. thank you for joining us. for more about this program and visit us yen line at pbs.org an charlie rose.com.
12:56 am
1:00 am
>> female announcer: this program was made possible by by a generous educational grant from: and by: >> what if you discovered that dementia can be prevented? if you could make just three simple changes in your life to prevent or even reverse memory loss and other brain disorders, wouldn't you? well, you can, and i'm gonna tell you how. the impact these changes will have is nothing short of remarkable.
448 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
WHYY (PBS) Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on