some people have said, unoriginal, obvious, the story comes first, the science plays a supporting roleovergeneralized, oversimplified to the point you are wrong. how do you respond to that? malcolm: mostly i don't really think of them as criticism. the story is first and the science is secondary, because i want the stories to come first. stories are incredibly powerful ways to communicate sophisticated ideas. are my books simplified? of course. they are supposed to be. i spend a huge amount of time simplifying. so, when someone says, as a way of criticism, you're simplifying, i put my head in my hands and say, that is my intention. if i didn't simplify them, people wouldn't read them. emily: critics say, don't take him so seriously. malcolm: i do not take myself so seriously. i would say exactly right. chill out. ideas ought to be a source of joy. to think about something in a new way, even if you find it unconvincing. that is supposed to be something that brings you pleasure. emily: you can write whatever you want at the "new yorker." how do you choose topics? why do you write essays