Interview about TABOTD
October 16, 2009Henry Baum No Comments »An interview by Kristen Tsetsi that pretty much sums up where I’m coming from with my novel – printed in full from Backword Books.
Kristen Tsetsi: Why do you call your novel The American Book of the Dead? I ask because E. J. Gold’s American Book of the Dead is, as described on Amazon, a “contemporary and uniquely American interpretation of the timeless Tibetan spiritual classic The Tibetan Book of the Dead” and “an invaluable resource for anyone undergoing a spiritual crisis, preparing for death, or wishing to honor loved ones.” Are your characters undergoing spiritual crises, or are they preparing for death?
Henry Baum: Chris Meeks wrote to me how the movie “Jacob’s Ladder” was supposed to be a literal reinterpretation of the Tibetan Book of the Dead. I haven’t followed along the tome that much, but it’s definitely a spiritually-minded book. I’m sort of a mystic at heart, so there is a spiritual basis for this book. The book’s about evolution – but the next step in evolution is very possibly to be an expansion of the mind rather than physical strength. This isn’t a “2012″ book, but the Mayans talk about how there’s going to be a global change in consciousness. What would this type of evolution look like and how would people react to it? That’s the main thrust of what drives the book and the lead character. Sort of like “Heroes” but with less superheroic powers, more gradual, and maybe more cerebral.
KT: How many dead Americans are in your book? Or is it more like America’s book of dead foreigners? Those we’ve killed in wars, say.
HB: Hmmn, 8 billion across the world, give or take. It’s an apocalypse novel, so the entire world dies, except for a few thousand.
KT: I haven’t read The American Book of the Dead (ABD) for two reasons: 1. It hasn’t been available until now, and 2. I have my own book to write. But, when I finish writing my book, I’ll be taking at least two weeks to sit and read. Why should I include The American Book of the Dead in my two-week reading binge?
HB: I’ve actually had you in mind when writing the book and wondered how you’d take it. You’re such a great advocate for soldiers and in this novel the military is responsible for the entire obliteration of the earth. It’s not an anti-military novel, it’s an anti-fundamentalism novel, but I’ve wondered how you’d take that. I don’t think I’m taking a stance against the military any more than my last novel – North of Sunset, about a movie star who becomes a serial killer – justifies serial killing. It’s a way to explore some ideas about the future of humanity, and what better way to explore that than through war.
KT: I could get into anti-fundamentalism. I’d probably take the approach well. What is your favorite thing about ABD as a writer?
HB: That it’s apocalypse fiction, but doesn’t fit into the mold of “apocalypse porn.” I’ll admit it, there are a fair number of apocalypse stories coming out, but I started this novel five years ago when The Road and the like didn’t exist, yet. But even back then I kept this attitude in mind – other apocalyptic fiction like Lucifer’s Hammer kind of fetishize the pain and suffering. The Road also does that – makes you fear, makes you doubt humanity’s worth it. I really didn’t want to do that with this novel. It’s not about fear – in a way it’s about progress, how humans might improve, not about how we suck so much that we started a giant war.
KT: Is the positive progress something you have faith would actually happen in real life? This may be a “do you think humans are inherently good or bad” question.
HB: This gets into my mysticism. I read A LOT gearing up to write this book – and a lot of that research has to do with more fringe sciences, like UFOs and (serious) research into psychedelics. Though I think this novel can appeal to atheists who hate the pseudo-Christianity of the far-right, I’m actually not an atheist whatsoever. And I do think a time could come where current pseudo-science could become commonplace – ESP, remote viewing, conversing with the dead, etc. It could take a million years but I do believe in something “out there” that we can tap into. So the book is a kind of juxtaposition of what passes for religion vs. the potential of actual spiritual awareness.
KT: What would be your favorite thing about ABD as a reader?
HB: It’s sort of Philip K. Dickian in its scope. The novel’s about a writer working on a novel about the end of the world. Then events in the book turn out to be true – events that started as dreams. So it kind of weaves between dreams/fiction/history. It questions what’s real and what’s fiction and if there’s even a difference. People have told me that while reading the book, they view reality a bit differently, which is very cool to me.
KT: Who is most likely to read your book instead of the assigned text in high school Social Studies class: the stoner, the jock, the popular girl, the popular girl who feels like a loser inside, the proud band geek, the loner who wants to be popular, or the class joker? And, in 25 words or fewer, why?
HB: Funny question. The stoner, the band geek, and the joker. Of course, everyone should read it. But it’s a science fiction novel with some amount of geekery, so the geek and the stoner will like it. The joker because it’s in part a satire about how ridiculous Americans can behave. (More than 25 words? Probably).
KT: That was 50 words. Name three futuristic technological devices, activities, or weapons in ABD.
HB: S-Bomb, based on string theory, which vibrates objects to obliteration at the molecular level. Panspermia – a new virus from outer space. The Cell-V – handheld cell phone/TV/computer (that will probably exist in the next three months). I’ll admit – this isn’t a science fiction novel with an obsession about gadgetry – the main “gadget” that changes is the mind.
KT: How many primary characters are in ABD?
HB: It’s a first person novel, so there’s the main character – the writer, Eugene Myers. There’s also the group of people Eugene Myers starts dreaming about, focusing on three main “dream subjects” who turn out to be real people. Then, most importantly, the other half of the book revolves around President Charles Winchell, a sort-of George Bush character, both hapless and absurdly devotional. Then his father, Benjamin Winchell, who’s one part Dick Cheney, one part George Sr. – all a reflection of my most paranoid fantasies.
KT: Which two characters have the strongest conflict, and what’s the conflict?
HB: This might be revealing too much – but President Winchell starts believing he’s both the Anti-Christ and the Messiah. That’s a pretty strong conflict, and the book says (paraphrasing myself) “it was the worst identity crisis in the history of mankind.” I don’t want to reveal the other conflict with Eugene Myers (he and the president come together at some point) because I don’t want to reveal the ending.
KT: Which of your characters in ABD is most like you?
HB: Ha! Eugene Myers is written as me 20 years into the future. The book is as much a fantasy about what I’d like to achieve as a writer. I mean, he predicts real events and becomes world famous (granted, the world population at this point is very small). It’s also about the dissolution of a marriage – something that actually happened in the present. So the end of the world has more than one meaning because it’s about the writer’s personal life collapsing as well. And that sort of ties into the fiction vs. reality dynamic. Is all this a projection of the writer’s personal life coming to an end and his desperation to be successful, or are these events really happening?
KT: Quote your favorite sentence from ABD.
HB: The last one. Again, I don’t want to reveal it. But: it’s two words long.
KT: Quote your second favorite sentence. It can be a line of dialogue, if you want.
HB: Doesn’t really work by itself, so here’s my favorite sentence (last one) with the set-up:
I was still thinking about Dickens and Dostoevsky, Mozart and Beethoven, Lennon/McCartney, as if past achievements would somehow save us. They were proof, weren’t they, that the human race was worth saving? They were proof like DNA evidence is proof–irrefutable, perhaps, but invisible.
KT: Thanks, Henry. I’m now positive ABD will be included in my reading stack when I take those two weeks to read.
Go to Backword to read some additional questions and answers.
Live action version:
Join the discussion