EXCLUSIVE: Dialogue with Cormac McCarthy About Science, on the occasion of his newest book releases
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 май 2024
- Consider supporting the podcast and the Origins Project Foundation at www.originsproject.org/
Cormac McCarthy is a literary icon. Winner of the National Book Award and the National Book Critics Circle Award for his novel All the Pretty Horses, and the Pulitzer Prize for his apocalyptic novel The Road, Norma’s earlier novel, Blood Meridian has been labelled The Great American Novel.
Many people did not know that this cultural giant is also fascinated by, and amazingly knowledgeable about science. Reading his newest books, The Passenger and Stella Maris (released this week!), however, and that becomes obvious. The protagonists are mathematical and physics prodigies, and just as one may requires a dictionary to keep up with the the remarkably diverse prose in Cormac’s writing, some people may need to consult some popular books on science to fully appreciate the scientific asides sprinkled throughout both volumes.
Read more at lawrencekrauss.substack.com/
The Origins Podcast, a production of The Origins Project Foundation, features in-depth conversations with some of the most interesting people in the world about the issues that impact all of us in the 21st century. Host, theoretical physicist, lecturer, and author, Lawrence M. Krauss, will be joined by guests from a wide range of fields, including science, the arts, and journalism. The topics discussed on The Origins Podcast reflect the full range of the human experience - exploring science and culture in a way that seeks to entertain, educate, and inspire.
Full Episodes Playlist:
• Ricky Gervais - The Or... 
Наука
In this interview, McCarthy sounds like a man politely trying to get off the phone.
That’s just his social style. He’s not being rude. I think people in general trip him out if they aren’t behind the looking glass
@@Livingthedream333 it might shock you then to learn that people trying to get off the phone aren’t trying to be rude either
That squares entirely with who he is, how he writes, and the reason I love what he’s done
How popular, that this comment has reached the top!
😂😂😂
What a national treasure Cormac McCarthy is. It would have been great to hear him in this interview.
Came here for this comment. The interviewer was very fascinated with his own voice.
This may be the last chance we see Cormac McCarthy speak in such format and this gentleman keeps interrupting him... Sad. I hope this interview will come to be known as a warning for all aspiring journalists how NOT to do an interview with a literary legend
The great writers are not nationalists in any sense, much less in the sense that the gringos proclaim it. The great writers are the patrimony of humanity, universal citizens and in that sense they recognize it.
@@andrzejgozdzikowski4191 totally agree with you. I´m ashamed and shocked. It feels like the interviewer is literally abusing the author over himself. What a waste of an opportunity. I´m really sorry for the interviewer to come up with his personal "wanna be trauma" over the 20th and 21th century writer. Horrible.
interviewing Cormac is a tough gig. He's not exactly a chatty Kathy.
It's great to hear Cormac McCarthy saying yes and no sometimes in this interview.
Still laughing at this comment.
I tried clicking on a random time stamp 12 times. Krauss was speaking at every single one.
It's a shame. No words ...
Same here. Disrespectful really.
Just tried the same thing. 12 for 12 it was Krauss. Very impatient interviewing technique and I hope you read the comments Laurence because there’s a lot to learn in them
Tried that myself just now as well, but it was 15 of 16 Krauss. Disgraceful.
And when Cormac does speak he doesn’t even pay attention to him
its a tragedy that Cormac always wants to talk about topics he's interested in but interviewers never let him do so
Just for sake of being a contrarian here, I'd suggest that there's not that many examples of "always" to examine. McCarthy certainly could have provided many more interviews if he so chose; but, he didn't. It's not like he hasn't been invited lots of times in the past to give them. I'm also pretty sure that all his literary output gives a pretty good overview of his various interests. I can't wait to wade in on the last two about quantum mechanics and math. I probably won't get either one (especially the math); but it'll, no doubt, be great to give it a try. He's a formidable intellect.
As for the interviews, I'd love to see a bunch more myself; but, as Mick Jagger once said, "You can't always get what you want."
Especially this guy Krauss. I am sure he will regret this the rest of his life.
I’m a huge Cormac McCarthy fanatic.
And though I wouldn’t defend Krauss as an interviewer, I think he’s getting way too much grief in this thread. To be fair, McCarthy isn’t a very loquacious person to begin with. Add to that his avoidance of being interviewed in general, and the few interviews he does grant (I’m guessing) are meant to satisfy Knopf’s marketing department that probably pesters him into agreeing to sit for one or two interviews to help sell the book.
Plus the man is 89. He looked frail and tired. His answers were curt one or two liners and that was it. There were moments when Krauss tried to get him to elaborate, but McCarthy didn’t seem interested in going into more depth with his answers. Krauss struggled with this because McCarthy wasn’t giving him much to work with. The result being a lot dead air that had to be edited out which could give
the impression that Krauss was cutting him off. Nothing wrong with McCarthy’s answers. If he wants to be curt that’s fine. But don’t lay all the blame on Krauss for a lousy interview. For an example of an interviewer talking over and constantly interrupting the guest, see Jordan Peterson interviewing Richard Dawkins.
And this is nothing new to anyone familiar with McCarthy’s interview history. He gives brief and precise answers. He gives interviews reluctantly and wants the process to be over as soon as possible and that demeanor is reflected in this interview.
You know what though? This was whatMccarthy was up for. This or nothing. Let’s take this. Other than hating endless ads, very grateful.
No American treasure has ever been interviewed so poorly, so often, as Cormac McCarthy
Proposed new title for this video: "Greatest living American author Cormac McCarthy, in possibly his final interview, listens patiently while some guy monologues for an hour about how much stuff this guy knows. Cormac occasionally tries to interject, but is swiftly silenced by the guy, who has much more to say."
I’m a huge Cormac McCarthy fanatic.
And though I wouldn’t defend Krauss as an interviewer, I think he’s getting way too much grief in this thread. To be fair McCarthy isn’t a very loquacious person to begin with. Add to that his avoidance of being interviewed in general, and the few interviews he does grant (I’m guessing here) are meant to satisfy Knopf’s marketing department that probably pesters him into agreeing to sit for one or two interviews to help sell the book.
Plus the man is 89. He looked frail and tired. His answers were curt one or two liners and that was it. There were moments when Krauss tried to get him to elaborate, but McCarthy didn’t seem interested in going into more depth with his answers. Krauss struggled with this because McCarthy wasn’t giving him much to work with. The result being a lot dead air that had to be edited out which could give
the impression that Krauss was cutting him off. Nothing wrong with McCarthy’s answers. If he wants to be Kurt that’s fine. But don’t lay all the blame on Krauss for a lousy interview. For an example of an interviewer talking over and constantly interrupting the guest, see Jordan Peterson interviewing Richard Dawkins.
And this is nothing new to anyone familiar with McCarthy’s interview history. He gives brief and precise answers. He gives interviews reluctantly and wants the process to be over as soon as possible and that demeanor is reflected in this interview.
Show less
Well, read Thomas Pynchon's work too
Krauss did a great job here given the circumstances. There’s only so much talking McCarthy is willing to do, especially now that he’s 90. Thanks for sharing
Cormac says more with less though!
Remember Krauss is a Sex offender...
We waited years to get an interview with CM.
Interviewer proceeds to talk over him for an hour…
I love McCarthy, and this interview was so bad, I wish it had not been posted.
Well said. Just my feeling. The Krakauer interview (dialogue in the real sense) is the one I'll go back to.
@@gregoryward3654 Agreed. Terrible interview. This guy is lecturing and in love with the sound of his own voice.
@@gregoryward3654 yeah exactly. Not every act of creation is a positive one...
Man, so frustrating
"Okay."
-Cormac McCarthy, 2023
There is an enormous difference between this video and “couldn’t care less” published a month ago. Cormac’s life is clearly ending and he was interviewed by a very annoying person who doesn’t even listen to the man. What a waste.
That interview was actually filmed 5 years ago in 2017. That's why he looks so alarmingly different.
@@timetheory84 I was referring to the "Couldn't Care Less" video. It was published a month or so ago, but filmed in 2017.
@@QuietExplorations is it so? i thought its a recent one.
@@aashishthakur77 nope, filmed in 2017, according to the video creators.
Agreed, I just watched “couldn’t care less”. Such a respectful interviewer. Krauss's energy is too much for Cormac. And he clearly doesn't really know him as well as he says in the intro. He's like a tornado. And Loud.
cormac is a really good listener.
The fact he hearted this pisses me off so bad
This is not an interview. It is a monologue.
He's old, thus tired. I got mad at Krauss, bcus he can't see that & talk a little slower.
I get the sense that when CM says “ok” or “right” that he isn’t necessarily agreeing but just doesn’t want to go to far with this guy. No chemistry between the two.
Extremely generous to describe this as an interview it's mostly the host talking at McCarthy.
What a beautiful old man. I’ve never seen him this old. Right away his eyes pierced at me. Rest in peace. Read his book The Road twice when i was homeless got me through so much. Memories I will always cherish.
"I've never seen him this old."
What an interesting thing to say. On the one hand- no shit. People only get older. On the other hand, I get what you mean. He look dilapidated.
@@debrachambers1304 I meant the last picture or video I saw of him was in 2008
In any photo you see of him, his eyes are just infinitely wise. I will go out on a limb and say that "The Passenger" and "Stella Maris" are his two best books. I know that's like saying A+++++ is better than A++++, but those two books blew my mind. Total curveballs but profoundly pitched.
I think listening to Krause might have helped make him appear older
"In that mycoidal phantom blooming in the dawn like an evil lotus and in the melting of solids not heretofore known to do so stood a truth that would silence poetry a thousand years."
McCarthy: "It's just a sentence."
the problem is that it's wrong. poetry has not been silenced.
incredible
@@charleshouse1125 Who is a great poet writing now? I need recommendations.
Kraus ought to be ashamed. Every time McCarthy gets into a second sentence Krauss looks away at his computer for his next question. Krauss has interesting things to say but the internet has hundreds of hours of him talking. We've read McCarthy for years and heard him talk for probably less than five hours. What a wasted opportunity.
...and for wearing that annoyingly distracting shirt.
Krauss brings too much nervous energy and self absorption to his role as interviewer, taking the spotlight off Cormac, the subject. Distracting and self centered. So, more Cormac and less Krauss would have made it better, At least for me.
This interview shows why McCarthy does so few interviews and after sitting through this one he may never do another. To be so talked over was a disservice to him and us, a waste of precious time.
Agreed. I don't think I've ever heard an interview before where the interviewer spoke more or the interviewee spoke less. Have more respect for your subjects, Lawrence. It's your job to draw them out, not to get them to nod along to your long-winded rants.
@@ericfurze7400 I’m a huge Cormac McCarthy fanatic.
And though I wouldn’t defend Krauss as an interviewer, I think he’s getting way too much grief in this thread. To be fair McCarthy isn’t a very loquacious person to begin with. Add to that his avoidance of being interviewed in general, and the few interviews he does grant (I’m guessing here) are meant to satisfy Knopf’s marketing department that probably pesters him into agreeing to sit for one or two interviews to help sell the book.
Plus the man is 89. He looked frail and tired. His answers were curt one or two liners and that was it. There were moments when Krauss tried to get him to elaborate, but McCarthy didn’t seem interested in going into more depth with his answers. Krauss struggled with this because McCarthy wasn’t giving him much to work with. The result being a lot dead air that had to be edited out which could give
the impression that Krauss was cutting him off. Nothing wrong with McCarthy’s answers. If he wants to be Kurt that’s fine. But don’t lay all the blame on Krauss for a lousy interview. For an example of an interviewer talking over and constantly interrupting the guest, see Jordan Peterson interviewing Richard Dawkins.
And this is nothing new to anyone familiar with McCarthy’s interview history. He gives brief and precise answers. He gives interviews reluctantly and wants the process to be over as soon as possible and that demeanor is reflected in this interview.
Have some common sense, people. It was pretty obvious, after the first freaking question, that McCarthy wasn't going to give very elaborate answers, for one reason or another. So we would have either Krauss speaking most of the time to try to keep the ball rolling, or we would have lots of awkward silence inbetween the questions. There was no other option, clearly.
@Daniel Rodrigues he never gave him the space to think and speak. If that's the way you read the interview okay, but there were moments all the way through where if given time he probably would have answered more.
@@mrdeadhand you might be missing that the space you’re lamenting the absence of might have been edited out for flow.
So frustrating. I’m sure it’s hard to draw CM into a conversation, but nervously filling 90% of the silence with jibber jabber was not the way to go. Maybe waiting for CM to expand on a comment, just once would’ve helped. What an opportunity squandered. This is the problem trusting interviews to amateur interlocutors.
I watched about 7 minutes of this interview and I cannot go any further. I can't abide a mind as brilliant as McCarthy's to be repeatedly talked over and interrupted. This is a man that is notoriously reclusive and doesn't give interviews and then the conversation gets hijacked. I'm content to just continue to read his works instead.
Yeah, it was more like the interviewer was interviewing himself!
You are right. The worst part of it is that this is maybe (I hope not) the last interview of the greatest american writer alive. And this is it. No words ...
It could be his age as well.
@@mauiswift6391 in this case, why bother publish the interview?
@@nicolasbourguignon8360 Or rather, just don't interview the guy if he doesn't want to be interviewed.
The moment in All the Pretty Horses when the protagonist decides, despite almost being killed in a Mexican prison, to go back for his horse, is one of the finest in American literature in the last 50 years. Also, CC is the greatest sentence craftsman since Hemingway.
disagree
CC?
Agree, CM's prose out-Hemingways Hemingway's. In fact, I've always thought CM achieves what EH was trying to achieve. Consider CM's 'Border Trilogy' the finest English prose I've ever read. Many passages are pure poetry even though the prose is simple and stark.
I'm 15 minutes in and so far it's only Lawrence Krauss speaking. McCarthy, who I've tuned in to hear, is relegated to monosyllabic responses. Is this a way to conduct an interview? Is this enlightening, does it present to the viewer the guest, his views, his personality, his inner world?
Seems like far too many people nowadays take up broadcasting gigs while understanding little what is that they are supposed to be doing and what the core competence needed to do it is, as the interviewer. If I may suggest one, it's to keep your mouth closed more of the time.
I’m sure there’s reasons Cormac hasn’t done many of these and what you’ve pointed out are among those reasons 😆 💀
As someone who has conducted many interviews, it's clear that Cormac isn't engaging with Krauss and is dodging the questions. Krauss could have done a bit better but he's not an interrogator, he's an interviewer.
@@georgesalisbookhauls what's there to engage with? cormac can be quite talkative, in fact an interview with him was published recently, -taking place on the same couch- and he was anything but reticent - just search for "cormac mccarthy interview couldn't care less". it's time far better spent than listening to the krauss monologues, with all due respect.
@@gavranarh Yeah I saw that. It's about 5 years old. Win some, lose some. As I said, I think Krauss could have done a bit better but Cormac was in an invasive mood here.
@@georgesalisbookhauls as I recommended the video I skipped through it and couldn't help but notice the marked difference in Cormac's appearance. I thought that the interval between the interviews was shorter, since they both came out a month apart and I became worried that he deteriorated so visibly in such a short time span. I thought he was gravely ill. possibly dying and maybe that's the reason for his demeanor. Thanks for pointing that out, it's a load off my mind.
Can't wait for the interview when CC actually gets to answer some questions.
He did get to answer some questions. In fact, he got to answer all of the questions. But it's not Krauss's fault if McCarthy won't go beyond answering in ten words or less. Sometimes three words or less.
Nevermind...
I've got some bad news for you buddy..
i kept wanting Lawrence to just slow down. There were several times that Cormac had more to say but Lawrence was so worked up with his lists of questions. I had the privilege of chatting wirh Cormac half a dozen times a few years ago, and Cormac told me much more about he got interested in physics than he told Lawrence - who was just in such a rush. If anything it felt to me like Cormac was being patient and indulgent with how wound up Lawrence was. Still a good conversation, oc!
Lawrence is so damn nervy and skittish! Unfortunately it ends up being a bit of a wasted opportunity. Even I - as someone who hasn't had the great fortune to have met McCarthy (wow!!) - could see that there was so much more to his interest than what was shared here. Can you recall much of what he said on this subject?
Ah I would love to hear what he told you. As a fan of McCarthy's work and as someone who studied physics it was a joy to read The Passenger and Stella Maris.
Cormac is a literary legend. Pay attention as closely as possible while we still have him.
is there an uncut whole steadycam on Mr. McCarthy or what
We will have him forever, he is inmortal.
Great comment
And yet this Interviewer barely let's him answer a question before cutting him off
He passed away today.
The difference in Cormac between this interview and the Krakauer interview from 2017 is remarkable. I hope Cormac stays well. Thanks for doing this interview!
Seriously. Krakauer led an incredible conversation. This comes across as a cross examination. Early on Cormac makes the point that the character was talking ‘at’ his grandmother and this guy should have picked up on that subtle hint.
I was completely taken aback seeing Cormac here. Hard to believe it’s only 5 years from his Krakauer conversation.
@@gypsyfreak6666 Agreed. He looks REALLY frail and withered.
@@QuietExplorations While his age should be no surprise to anyone, perhaps the effects of Covid measures and lockdowns kept him from a certain level of travel and activity that he routinely enjoyed shortly before
Having two hour long McCarthy interviews released so close to one another but filmed years apart hits you with the old bitter feeling of time's indifference. We just witnessed a wizard become just another human being, and that illusion born from his wise and timeless passages was severed...
Damn, Cormac corrects a single word of your recitation of a random line from the novel, off the top of his head!
It shows the depth of the underlying logic of his plot. "talking TO someone" vs "talking AT someone" implies a completely different relationship dynamic.
@@brandonkindt1205 The way he corrects him is sublime.
I don’t like the interview style: interviewer talks too much, has poor eye contact, and quickly goes from topic to topic on his list without giving his guest any opportunity to express his thoughts beyond short answers, and for both to develop an interesting dialogue from which new can insights emerge. The interviewer’s admission at the start of the video of talking too much does not take away from the fact that the interview style leaves much to be desired.
Related to my other comment here - do this experiment: jump around the timebar of this video at random from beginning to end and count how many times you land on Cormac speaking and how many times you land on Lawrence speaking. Do at least 10 od 20 samples. The results should give you one way of judging the quality of the interview.
I did exactly that and concur.
He could have just let Cormac speak more freely, elaborate on his points. Could have given him a little bit more time and space to gather his thoughts and express himself, especially considering his age. It was painful to watch him get interrupted all the time.
This is why Cormac McCarthy does not do interviews.
That is, perhaps, the best comment of all.
(Just saw the Krakauer interview again. What a difference. It is brilliant, with Mr McCarthy doing most of the talking.)
Yeah feels like the interviewer never shuts up. Seems like he just wants the attention upon himself.
Lawrence is great too. Cormac was fine adding & also listening. Your criticism is typical
krauss is the kinda guy that'll listen to his own interviews but skipping the parts where he's not talking.
talking too much is bad enough, and talking about yourself too much is worse, but it's entirely another thing to cut off your interviewee or try to talk over him. How vulgar to hear Lawrence instinctively raising the volume of his voice to finish his point, stopping Cormac from joining and filling that peaceful room with his rambling, poorly planned questions. It made me wince.
I find this was the case with Lawrence's Herzog interview also and with a lot of American interactions in general. These interviews feel like wasted opportunities.
Is fascinating how I am waiting this interviewer to finish his question to listen to Cormac, and then about 3 or four words this guy stops and interrupts him again and again. How is that? He just questions himself and answers himself. A tragedy.
Mr. McCarthy. Living legend. Would have been nice to hear him speak more:)
It might do you good to ask yourself why you feel this need to get everyone else to answer the big questions the same way you do.
For the love of God and all that is good, let the man (Cormack) speak! There's no "dialogue with McCarthy" when you don't let him adequately respond without jumping in.
I’m a huge Cormac McCarthy fanatic.
And though I wouldn’t defend Krauss as an interviewer, I think he’s getting way too much grief in this thread. To be fair McCarthy isn’t a very loquacious person to begin with. Add to that his avoidance of being interviewed in general, and the few interviews he does grant (I’m guessing here) are meant to satisfy Knopf’s marketing department that probably pesters him into agreeing to sit for one or two interviews to help sell the book.
Plus the man is 89. He looked frail and tired. His answers were curt one or two liners and that was it. There were moments when Krauss tried to get him to elaborate, but McCarthy didn’t seem interested in going into more depth with his answers. Krauss struggled with this because McCarthy wasn’t giving him much to work with. The result being a lot dead air that had to be edited out which could give
the impression that Krauss was cutting him off. Nothing wrong with McCarthy’s answers. If he wants to be Kurt that’s fine. But don’t lay all the blame on Krauss for a lousy interview. For an example of an interviewer talking over and constantly interrupting the guest, see Jordan Peterson interviewing Richard Dawkins.
And this is nothing new to anyone familiar with McCarthy’s interview history. He gives brief and precise answers. He gives interviews reluctantly and wants the process to be over as soon as possible and that demeanor is reflected in this interview.
Show less
This is by far the worst interview I have ever seen. I've never commented on a RUclips video before. I've never left a negative review of anything online, ever. But man... this interviewer got the chance of a lifetime, and it would be difficult to overstate how bad he blew it.
His tongue is light and nimble. He never shuts up. He says that he will never let the interviewee talk. He monologues in light and in shadow and he is hated by all. He never shuts up, the interviewer. He is going on, and on. He says that he will never let the interviewee talk.
lol
really frustrating to hear you talk over him and watch you fiddle with your ipad while he is speaking
I agree, this became a soap box where you spoke constantly, and Cormack barely got a word in
Yes, Cormac's a gentleman. I'd have had more patience with a Jehovah's Witness in my home. The Judge would have cut his head off.
One of the worst interviews / chats I've ever seen. Even Oprah got more from him. Think about that. I honestly don't know what the point of this was. I'm flabbergasted at the hubris of this interviewer.
They feel like old friends though, and old friends act kind of jerky that way.
It doesn't really help that CM doesn't speak much though. I imagine the host was getting frustrated (and you can hear it in his voice) and had to talk to avoid any awkward silences
Why would he agree to an interview with you? You just wanna talk. You don't let HIM talk.
Interviewer: "I'm a philistine, I have to admit." I have to agree.
The interviewer dominates this conversation. I didn't click on this to listen to him; I came here to listen to Cormac.
You probably could have gotten him to expound on some things if you didn’t keep jumping from anecdote to anecdote and digressing. It was like you were so terrified of awkward silence, you wouldn’t let there be silence at all.
I agree. Quite often the interviewer asks a question only to answer it himself. I know he puts out a disclaimer at the beginning saying McCarthy's getting old and therefore requires stimulus but I think its more a case that this guy just likes the sound of his own voice.
I think he knows Cormac better than you and as a better sense of when he’s finished talking. This is also an audible podcast so many are just listening and can’t see what’s going on so you can’t just wait around for seconds hoping your guest has something more to say, it’s called “dead air” and maybe watching you don’t mind but if you’re just listening it’s bad.
The flash to Cormac's face when he said, "The truth is, he killed himself because he was suicidal" was one of the greatest things I've ever seen on film 😂😂😂
Time?
@@kevgh3869 30:14
But WHY was he suicidal? It's a disappointing statement from a supposedly profound mind...
@@rustneversleeps85 But is the reason why one is suicidal necessarily important? Doesn't being suicidal point to a state of mind that has no rational relationship between cause and effect? I Think he is correct. One commits suicide not for a "reason" but because of a suicidal state of mind.
We need a great deal further understanding of suicidal mindsets. Especially since our leaders in 2022 seem to be exactly inhabiting suicidal mindsets.
As a journalist, one of the first things you learn is to let your interviewee talk. You may want to look into this.
21:20 great moment. Cormac is so sharp. Correcting an earlier line, dismantling the premise here... I have to admit I just wanted Lawrence to let him speak more, but maybe the lesson McCarthy teaches us is to listen intently and think carefully.
I was annoyed by Krauss in the first third of the interview, then I came down here and everybody is roasting him. But having finished it now, there were many moments where Cormac laughed out loud and smiled and agreed, or said, 'Well said'. Cormac has talked about how much he enjoys the company of scientists. I think we're witnessing him in the mode he loves: hanging out with a theoretical physicist. I imagine they all do all the talking. And the people I know who are this aged tend to conserve energy in conversation.
Coming here to leave a comment that is probably hurtful to the host, but I feel that is secondary. Responsibility is what this man had in his hands when interviewing Cormac McCarthy in his last ever interview. He threw it away to speak about himself and what not. Irresponsible towards history. Farewell Cormac McCarthy. This is very sad.
"He didn't talk to his grandmother, he talked at his grandmother." Lol
"Back up here a second. That's not me talking. That's my character talking."
Hahaha don't mess with Cormac McCarthy.
I love Cormac's use of the word, "Okay." He's not agreeing or disagreeing, but he's acknowledging what's being said.
Cliffs Notes description: A bemused McCarthy listens to an hour-long monologue.
It's pretty funny in a cosmic sort of way
Can you just post the parts with Cormac speaking?
Yeah…
The video would be two minutes long.
I jumped to a random spot about a dozen times and every single time the guy who is not cormac mccarthy was in the middle of some monologue.
Can someone with editing skills please cut all parts where mr. Krauss speaks and leave only McCarthy’s? I am curious about how many seconds are left.
No wonder Cormac hates doing interviews. This guy barely let's him speak the whole time and insists on confining the discussion to within his own interests
So crazy that as little as the host was getting out of Mr McCarthy, he still felt the need to cut him off whenever he seemed he was about to go beyond a three-word answer.
I'm not going to lie, I had listened to the mentioned radio show with Herzog and after the publishing of the new books, I wanted to write an email (to who, I don't know) and ask wether of you guys intend to do interview with McCarthy. It absolutely made my day to wake up to this. Thank you so much. Fascinating and VERY lacanic human being. It honestly looks like he is the one who is doing the interviewing, which I think it's because he is an avid fan of the old saying that you get two ears and one mouth, so listen double and speak as half. Which sounds fair when you realize he has surrounded himself with all the heavy thinkers at the Santa Fe Institute who have a lot of interesting stuff to say.
I just listened to that and I agree
This is amazing. I love Cormac's vast range of knowledge and sense of humor. The imperfect lighting makes it more charming.
I recognize that the host stated up front that he wished he hadn't talked so much but I WISH HE HADN'T TALKED SO MUCH. God bless, please ask a question and permit the 20th century's preeminent author to respond. Cormac remains sharp as a tack and as elusive as ever.
Good interviewers do much more listening than talking.
Tsutomu Yamaguchi survived both atomic bomb attacks. While on a business trip in Hiroshima, he saw the Enola Gay flying over Hiroshima and the big bomb it dropped. After surviving that (2 miles from ground zero), he went home to Nagasaki. He initially thought the second bomb was an after-shock of the first. He was 29 in 1945 and lived to 93, despite having experienced untreated radiation sickness. In other words, he lived at least 15 years longer than the average Japanese man of his generation.
I feel a great opportunity was lost here...
I finished Blood Meridian recently and it was excellent.
An intensity of brutality exceeded, in literature, only by King Lear.
Who is Blasarius? Tell me, please. And the Judge Holden, who is he?
Judge Holden is the main antagonist in the great work of Blood Meridian by McCarthy. He is a Faustian character of epic proportions. The purest embodiment of the highly rational, scientific man, and his murderous escapades through the new world frontier.
@@TrevorTisdaleMusic Oddly, this comment of yours is shadowbanned. I've come to think the demons who control Google-Y-tube ban some comments randomly and others politically. The game is nine-tenths mind control, one-tenth profit.
Also, I disagree with your characterization of Judge Holden. He is a prophet of war for the sake of war and comes across as a mythological being. Men of great intelligence, like Holden, are not necessarily rational--consider the case of Kurt Godel, for instance.
@@PedroRodriguez-dl5ytthe spirit of he who says, “what exists without my knowledge exists without my consent.”
You have the honour to interview the greatest american writer alive and you annoy him?
This is not an interview, is a monologue.
You can see multiple times the face of McCarthy annoyed. In some points he wanted to answer and open an argument but then the interviewer starts again with his monologue. Wtf. I'm very disappointed cause this is maybe the last interview of this great man and you ruined it this way. No words.
This has got to rank as the saddest wasted opportunity imaginable. It cannot even be adequately expressed.
Thank you so much for this interview, I just finished The Passenger today, this is a true gift.
I've adored Cormac McCarthy's work for over thirty years, and would have loved to hear his wisdom and insight at the great age he's reached. I'm sure it would be profound. But all that's present in this interview is the interviewer talking about himself and his ideas and what he thinks, allowing CMcC the opportunity to say yes and no. What a tragedy and a travesty. There may not be a chance for another interview where the author can speak his mind.
I wish I could have one chance to hear Cormac talk about Blood Meridian at length
The sequence where Glanton's gang gets attacked by Comanches remains the greatest and scariest passage I've ever read in literature.
You're either thinking of Captain Whyte and the Comanches or mistaking the Yumas for them I believe. Either way, I agree haha
Finally finished the last 20 minutes... (5 months later.) Lawrence is a monstrous egomaniac. To have McCarthy available for a discussion and to hog, literally, 90% of the hour is shameful... Didn't learn much, but sure loved "The Passenger" and the coda "Stella Maris." Thank you, Cormac, for your love of story... What a gift your books have been to my life...
Thankful that this exists. Thank you. Great job and I really appreciate the courage to bring up lines from his books.
many thanks.
Absolute gold. I was nervous about the new book based on the mixed reviews, expecting that the physics might alienate me, but with 70 pages to go it's remarkably accessible and certainly compels one to pursue, at the very least, a beginner's level understanding of physics
Sounds much more accessible than, say, Gravity’s Rainbow . . .
Why did you do this, Lawrence?
You apologize in your intro for talking too much during the interview, but I don’t think you did. Cormac is a tough interview. Getting him to expound on something is like pulling teeth, and many interviewers would be at a loss, and the interview would be a failure. Your ability and willingness to talk about yourself - a tendency I don’t particularly love when you, as fascinating as you truly are, are interviewing more forthcoming people - was, I think, an excellent technique for coaxing out those shy bits of Cormac’s views. Bravo, and thank you.
thanks very much. I think you got it exactly.. very much appreciated.
yes he does talk way too much
What I wouldn't give to pick his brain. He's such a legend, and yet totally pretensionless. He can so eloquently fuse philosophy and science with breathtaking writing. Wish he would do an interview where he talks more about the philosophies that underpin his works. This was quite fascinating though.
Sounds like you are lecturing CM … not interviewing.
"George is a very good friend of mine, we talk on the phone all the time"
Cormac and Zweig, best buddies. That must be a sweet manifestation of the divine.
Just heard the sad news RIP to an excellent writer
God how the world feels so vacant without your being here anymore. You will be terribly missed, Cormac. At least you left behind a wonderful legacy.
"If poets have something to say, why don't they just say it?" 😆
I’m watching this a form of mourning for this eminent American author.
Krauss is a brilliant guy, but he’s a terrible interviewer. He is talking 90% of the time. Lack of self awareness that he’s totally dominating in a way that’s over-bearing.
I finally see Cormac’s age in this… I live near NM/Texas border and I can recall Cormac’s “El Paso years” where he lived in a house with no electricity, had no car, and wrote two of his absolute best books there (Suttree and Blood Meridian)… El Paso’s landscape also inspired The Road. Always wanted to meet him, but would probably just piss him off by asking about his books! Lol
Isn’t The Road set in the south eastern US? Seems weird that El Paso’s landscape would inspire a book set in Appalachia.
@@giuseppejones1554 Because it's post-apocalyptic Appalachia
This might be crazy of me to say, but I can't help but feel like interviews should be about the person you're interviewing and not the person who is doing the interviewing. Just my crazy take.
If you just click at random points in this interview, you'll hardly ever hit a point where Cormac is speaking.
AND THIS MY FRIENDS IS WHY CORMAC DOESNT DO INTERVIEWS. look at the look on his face while this dude rambles on about himself. Jesus, im sorry Cormac.. thank you for everything
Competent interviewers don’t do this. Even Oprah allowed space for him to respond.
Cormac McCarthy is a fabulous writer.. Blood Meridian is one of the greatest novels of the C20th.
I love how cormac’s literally just chilling in the shadows through the whole interview. Probably one of them fancy pants metaphors or somethin’
He’s just a guy who’s got nothing to prove.
He knew where to sit
This is so special to hear from someone who doesn't usually like to express opinions.
The interviewer talks way more than McCarthy. What a pro!
70% interviewer talking
30% Cormac McCarthy
literally,
unfortunate
one of my favoruite authors. brutal, unflinching and unapologetic with his writing.
At one point they say something to the effect of "Do they still write poetry?" Reading McCarthy feels like reading Milton or Coleridge. He's the modern poetic genius.
"It's exhilarating"
"Yeah it's okay"
Perfection
At the 30-minute mark Lawrence says he "wants to talk about Quantum Mechanics, because YOU talk about it in an interesting way in your book,,," and then he proceeds to not let Cormac talk about it, or anything, at all, again... sad.
RIP to my favorite author. I don't know what else to say.
I'm reminded of this quote from Saul Bellow: "As for types like my own, obscurely motivated by the conviction that our existence was worthless if we didn't make a turning point of it, we were assigned to the humanities, to poetry, philosophy, painting - the nursery games of humankind, which had to be left behind when the age of science began. The humanities would be called upon to choose a wallpaper for the crypt, as the end drew near."
Still, if aliens were to dig up our civilization, I think they'd be more fascinated by our art than by our crude science which would be nothing compared to theirs.
I was deciding between mathematics and physics, and I had this revelation that physicists have personalities like Krauss. So I chose mathematics.
Most are not. Most are delightful. Maybe your thought process was projection?
It was, like, a joke. 😅
@@brianzaha Oops sorry. I will delete. Maybe add a smiley for us dimwits? ;-) And I agree about Kraus.
Let the man speak.
Love your talks with all these fascinating and knowledgeable people. I find it both enjoyable and valuable. Please keep it up. It’s much appreciated!
Thank you so much for this, Lawrence. I love McCarthy's books - I'm always struck by how fascinating your dialogues with non-scientist science enthusiasts are. I've watched your talk with Werner Herzog many times. Very grateful that there is increasing recognition of the connection between art and science - as you often say in your conversations, there is deep creativity and sometimes fuzziness and hunches, educated guesswork in science, but also deep rigor in making art/films/writing books/composing music (as I do). Reminds me of something Salman Rushdie once said about great art - that it "pushes the universe out" - whether it's the universe of creative possibilities, or the universe of our scientific understanding, that's a great phrase. Thank you for your terrific channel.
Thanks so much.. This means a lot!