Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2016

The AIH Transcript for February 20, 2017

Hosts: Helen Mann and Jeff Douglas

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

HELEN MANN: Hello, I'm Helen Mann.

JEFF DOUGLAS: Good evening. I'm Jeff Douglas. This is As It Happens

[Music: Theme]

JD: Tonight:

HM: A human-caused humanitarian crisis. 100,000 people in South Sudan are facing starvation. And officials with the World Food Program say the famine is “man-made”.

JD: The war over the war on drugs. Last summer, we spoke with a senator in the Philippines who was investigating President Duterte’s violent drug crackdown. This weekend, she was charged with corruption.

HM: Familiarity breeds discontent. Not everyone is happy about a Republican congressman's proposed bill because it would require American officials to scour our social media feed before were granted a U.S. visa.

JD: Seeing through transparency. The book is called “Purity”, but its characters are all compromised in some way. And tonight, we will hear an encore presentation of Carol's interview with author Jonathan Franzen.

HM: A period of restructuring. Steven Menard lost his house in last year's wildfire in Fort McMurray and now, he and his family are rebuilding their lost home and their lives.

JD: And… at one time, he was obscene and not heard. Now, nearly 50 years after a controversy over some of phallic artwork, former enfant terrible Glenn Lewis has won a Governor-Generals award. As it Happens, the Monday edition. Radio not for the faint of art.

[Music: Theme]

Back To Top »

Part 1: South Sudan famine, Republican border bill, artist Governor General Awards winner

South Sudan famine

Guest: George Fominyen

JD: Today, officials declared a famine in parts of South Sudan. The UN is warning that around 100,000 people in that country are facing starvation. Millions more need food now. It has also called the famine in South Sudan “man-made”. George Fominyen is the spokesperson for the UN's World Food Program in South Sudan. We reached him in Juba via Skype.

HM: Mr. Fominyen, why has this declaration of famine been made today?

GEORGE FOMINYEN: What we have had today is the release of the food security outlook for South Sudan, which is done through this joint body where all the organizations which work in the area of food security and nutrition security bring together the analysis. And then together they can be able to project and to what levels of food and nutrition security we have in the country. And today, this was officially released by the National Bureau of Standards of the Republic of South Sudan.

HM: So which parts of South Sudan are worst hit right now?

GF: The famine-like conditions are affecting about 100,000 people. And these are particularly in the counties of Leer and Mayendit and possibly also in Koch counties. And this is in what is what's known as Unity State. It is in the very northern part of South Sudan.

HM: And how many other areas are perhaps on the brink of famine?

GF: What we can tell you is that the country as a whole, the figures in terms of food and nutrition security are really bad. Experts are talking here about up to 4.9 million people. That is nearly 40 per cent of the population, which is estimated to be severely food insecure. And if nothing happens, if we don't have a change in the situation, about 5.5 million people may face acute hunger around May to July. And May to July is the period when most people would have run out of whatever habits they’ve made or had and whatever reserves they have in stock. So in general the situation is really bad.

HM: You are in the capital Juba. Tell us how difficult it is to get food there and how it compares to the worst hit areas?

GF: The situation in the country as I said was quite challenging. And it's the result of the conflict resulting in multiple displacements. There's currency depreciation, the economic hardship is quite severe now in the country. There's high inflation and soaring food prices. You have severe deficits in terms of production because places where food was normally grown in excess, but because of fighting people could not grow. And so the production has dropped. So in a place like Juba, in the capital, we are also seeing that in towns like Juba there are higher levels of food insecurity. Why? Because people don't have the means even to access what you can have in the market. I've met people who've told me in Juba that they can't buy milk to drink anymore because if they do that they're not going to have enough money to survive for the rest of the month. There are people who will not buy fruit and that means mean that you can imagine the impact on the nutrition conditions. There are people who say that basically they are not eating as many times as they would. Some say we can eat two times a day. Others say we can eat one time a day. And so that's the sort of situation which you're facing even in urban areas such as Juba. In fact the World Food Program and our part one of our partners World Vision, we have just started a response within Juba in the urban area to try to support about 40,000 people in the area. So it's a situation which cuts across the country as a whole.

HM: So is this crisis entirely “man-made”?

GF: This is what we would say is indeed a “man-made” crisis in the sense that it would without conflict people would be safe and settled in places where they can grow their own food and maintain their own livelihoods. If we were in a situation where the security was OK, where peace was OK and we had stability then you would have had trade going on in its normal way. So that people can have markets working and they could have what produce they need or what food they want to buy whatever items they would need. But we don't have that at a moment. So it is important that there is peace that allows people to return to their normal lives and also peace to allow aid groups to reach those who are most need.

HM: How much worse might this have to get go for more is done to prevent people from dying?

GF: If the conflict continues, the scale and intensity of the needs may escalate and outstrip the ability of relief agencies to meet these needs of the people. If we do not have enough access particularly to the areas where they are talking about famine-like conditions then we risk to see this continuing or possibly extending to other parts. So here what is required is not just a one off response what is needed is consistent regular support. What led to this was a situation where humanitarian issues could get into these places for a short period of time then there will be fighting and then all humanitarians are not able to get in and provide assistance for two months or three months. Basically you lose all of the gains you've previously made. That is the sort of thing we should avoid. The take home here from the perspective of the World Food Program is that we can keep the famine from escalating or spreading if humanitarian access significantly improves so that relief agencies can reach people with significantly more assistance. And a massive humanitarian effort helped to basically stop a catastrophe from happening over the past three years. And what we believe is that if we have access we can repeat what we've been able to do in the past three years and beat back this unfolding catastrophe.

HM: Mr. Fominyen, obviously we wish you every success in achieving that. And I thank you very much for speaking with us.

GF: It was a pleasure and thank you very much for your interest in South Sudan.

HM: Ok. Goodbye.

GF: Goodbye

JD: George Fominyen is the spokesperson for the UN's World Food Program in South Sudan. We reached him in the capital Juba, via Skype.

[Music: Ambient]

Bob White Obit

JD: Canada is not going to see another union leader like Bob White. Not anytime soon. Mr. White was the founder of the Canadian Auto Workers and it was Unifor, the union that grew out of this CAW that announced his death today. Bob White was 81-years-old. He joined his first union when he was 14. He walked the line of his first strike the very next year. But on the surface, Mr. White seemed like an unlikely candidate to lead Canada’s once all-powerful car Union. He was a high school dropout and a woodworker by trade. He never made a car in his life. Regardless though, he did build a reputation as a fearless negotiator. And in 1984, it was Bob White who led Canada's car workers to split from their U.S. led parent, the United Auto Workers. The move was made possible by a deal that Mr. White had negotiated earlier that year. A separate and, by most accounts, sweeter deal between the Canadian workers and Detroit's Big Three. Bob White spoke to former As It Happens host Barbara Frum. Shortly after that deal was inked and she wanted him to explain his unlikely success.

SOUNDCLIP

BOB WHITE: I said if Bob White can get to be the director of the Auto Workers Union coming out of a woodworking plant there’s hope for anybody. You have to be in the right place at the right time. You have to be able to take advantage of it. You have to surround yourself with some intelligent people.

BARBRA FRUM: What fired you? What grabbed you when you went to that first union meeting in the woodworking shop.

BW: What grabbed me was that life in the factory is very dull. And I think it still is and there's a lot of things go on there that that should be corrected. I obviously had a chip on my shoulder starting out as a young person. I got elected steward at the meeting. I thought I had the world by the tail the next morning. I found out I didn't I had to argue things out. I just I a sense I wanted to help people. I still feel that way. Now, a lot of people would disagree with my ideas and that's fair I don't have any argument about that. But I am committed to try and help the working people in Canada get a better political and better economic standard of living and yet try and do it intelligently and carry the respect of our union publicly if that's possible.

BF: You're a vice-president of the NDP, not just Director of Auto Workers Canada. What do you see ahead for you politically? What do you see ahead for the union and NDP commitment and connection?

BW: I don't see anything for me politically. Now, do I want to become a Member of Parliament? I couldn't imagine taking my life into a style that says I ask one question every week about something. I mean I think it's important that people do that, but I don't want that.

BF: You say you got more power?

BW: I think it's more exciting I think I can do more for this country. I can do more for the political system. I can do more for my own party by working within the working people and talking to them about political issues. About issues of world peace where they maybe listen to me because I'm involved in their collective bargain. And I think I can play a greater role in changing the social and political life of working people.

BF: But you may end up as auto chief doing more for fewer people. If all the prognosticators are right and everybody's in it we were in the service sector and that's not going to be heavily unionized. Are you going to in fact be presiding over good day care and good legal plans for fewer and fewer people?

BW: My hope would be that somehow I can put together mergers of organizations in Canada with a number of other unions. And we've had some discussions with other unions like that. I tried to try the sort of the Canadian Metal Workers umbrella idea. And I think for the future that's what I would like to try and do. And I think with the UAW is still going to be a very important in the next 10 years in my judgment and that's certainly long enough for me.

BF: And what I'm hearing between the lines of the UAW is a better vehicle for you and for workers than the NDP is?

BW: Well, the NDP is the political arm. The UAW is collective bargaining, but we have certain things that we fundamentally agree on. Certain social objectives, certain political objectives that we agree on, but there is a clear separation of the two. I also believe that a Labor leader cannot just sit in isolation and say what we're about is just bargaining something in the paycheck. We have to be about the social issues of what's going on in the community, what's going on in the country, what's going on internationally and you can't set those things out.

JD: From our archives, that was Bob White in conversation with former As It Happens host Barbara Frum in 1984. At the time, Mr. White was about to lead the Canadian Auto Workers to split from its American parent. Unifor, the union grew out of the CAW, announced Mr. White's death earlier today. Bob White was 81-years-old.

Border bill: Republican

Guest: Jim Banks

JD: It has been said that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. And Jim Banks believes a lot of knowledge will reduce that danger significantly. Mr. Banks is a rookie Republican Congressman from Indiana. He has introduced a new border bill in Congress. His bill would require the Department of Homeland Security to review the social media of everyone applying for visas to enter the U.S. Visas for tourists, for temporary workers — anyone who needs to apply for a visa to enter the U.S. We reached Congressman Jim Banks in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

HM: Representative Banks, why do you feel a bill like yours is necessary at this point in time?

JIM BANKS: Well, the legislation that I introduced is really a common sense approach to vetting those who seek a visa to come to the United States by adding a layer to the background check that would require those who are performing the background check to check into the publicly available social media content of visa applicants. This is something that officials with the Department of Homeland Security tell me in most cases that they already do, sometimes not extensively enough and they admit they lack the resources to thoroughly vet social media content. But it's simple common sense approach to reviewing social media content to make sure that those that we are allowing to come to the United States are safe to allow to come within our borders.

HM: So if Homeland Security is already doing this what would your bill add?

JB: My legislation would codify and require those who are performing the background checks to vet social media content and provide additional funding to the Department of Homeland Security. Just last week, the Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kelly testified before the House Homeland Security Committee. And what he said was disturbing. He said that at this moment, this simple background check is not extensive enough. They don't have a lot of information or material to dig into to vet those candidates for a visa. So he recommended that more should be done. I believe that my legislation would be a step toward what Secretary Kelly is describing as is right now a dismal process.

HM: So what would the parameters be in terms of the discretion that Homeland Security might have to say you know we don't like this tweet? We don't like this YouTube video. You're not coming into the United States.

JB: My legislation wouldn't have anything to do with changing the discretion that the Department of Homeland Security already has. It would merely require that they that social media content along with the basic background check that they already perform. You know one statistic that I recently read is that last year a million applications for a visa were submitted for those seeking to come to the United States and only twenty two hundred of them were denied due to cause to be concerned that that applicant had some affiliation with a terrorist group or extremist tendencies. Out of 86 hundred of that million visa applications were refused. So this simple and common sense approach to reviewing social media content for those who seek a visa to come to the United States is I think it's entirely warranted.

HM: Doesn't the fact that those 2200 people who were rejected show you that the process is working as it should?

JB: Perhaps not. In fact, if that was in some cases without searching social media content 2200 were rejected out of a million maybe there's cause to believe that more should be refused as well. To your initial question, my legislation doesn't change the authority that the Department of Homeland Security currently has to make those decisions.

HM: You seem to be suggesting though that some of the people who got in might pose a danger. Do you have any evidence of that?

JB: I think in the United States of America today we have much evidence to believe that that terrorists have entered the country through legal means by exploiting loopholes in the current process.

HM: What evidence?

JB: We know that you can read and find evidence anywhere you look…

HM: Can you give me an example?

JB: We've had several incidents. I don’t have to give you examples its common sense to look for many examples of those occurrences that have happened in the United States in the past months and years. You’re a journalist you can find those examples.

HM: but I've got listeners who want to hear it from you. They don't want to have to go out and Google it. I mean this is your legislation, so I want to know what you’re trying to get at?

JB: my legislation is that common sense approach to reviewing social media content before awarding a visa, which I'm hard pressed to find a reason why that wouldn't be a good idea.

HM: But do you know what kind of things they would be looking for, some examples maybe?

JB: Well again, my legislation has nothing to do with the discretion that the Department of Homeland Security already has when they perform a background check. Just as Secretary Kelly said last week in his testimony before the House Homeland Security Committee, they don't have a lot to work with in many cases. This would codify an approach allowing officials of the Department of Homeland Security to look more thoroughly and vet more thoroughly publicly available social media content of those who seek a visa to come to the United States of America. It is largely a positive reaction by my constituents in my district who are looking for more safeguards in the process.

HM: How will this make people safer?

JB: Well, if the Department of Homeland Security has more resources to research and vet visa applicants and they, at their discretion, learn that there might be publicly available material on the Internet that might suggest that someone might pose a threat to the United States if they are awarded a visa. This is a simple step forward to prevent those who seek to do harm from coming to the United States by exploiting a loophole that might exist.

HM: Yeah. OK. Again though, can you give us an example of what they might find that could pose a threat to the United States? What are you looking for?

JB: Well I would point to those 2200 visa applications that were rejected last year. Who the Department of Homeland Security determined were posed a risk or a threat to America and that's why their visa was rejected. There are cases at their discretion that the department is warranted rejecting a visa application due to that, I would I would direct you to the department to learn more about what those cases were. I don't know they're not that's not publicly available, but by giving the department more resources and codifying a process and procedure that would require the Department of Homeland Security to look into publicly available social media concept before they award that visa application. I think that's a common sense approach to protecting America.

HM: I know you're just saying publicly available social media, but are we talking about retweets, posted videos, statements that might be critical of the United States. like what specifically would be on there that would deem someone a threat to the United States?

JB: That would be at the discretion of the Department of Homeland Security.

HM: Representative Banks, I appreciate you talking with us. Thank you.

JB: Thank you. Have a good day.

HM: You too. Goodbye.

JD: We reached Republican Representative Jim Banks in Fort Wayne, Indiana. And you can read more about his bill — the Visa Investigation and Social Media Act of 2017 on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Rock]

Artist Governor General Award winner

Guest: Glenn Lewis

JD: The winners of this year's Governor General Awards in Visual and Media Arts are hailed as being experimental, challenging and provocative. That last adjective is especially meaningful to the cross-disciplinary artist Glenn Lewis, whose art had once been considered a bit too provocative. We reached Glen Lewis in Vancouver.

HM: Mr. Lewis, congratulations on your award.

GLENN LEWIS: Oh thank you.

HM: What did you first think when you learned you won?

GL: Oh I was just I was very surprised. You know like they tell you ahead of time. I was in Medalta on residency at the Medalta Ceramics Museum and they just phoned out of the blue. And of course there were other people around. So I had to be a kind of quiet because it's strictly confidential evidentially until yesterday.

HM: When it was announced finally.

GL: yeah.

HM: Now a sculpture you made called “Artifact” was once considered too provocative for the Canadian government. You got an awful lot of attention over that one. What exactly were you commissioned to do?

GL: Well, it was a long time ago, so I was asked to make a mural for the Canadian Pavilion for the… what’s it called?

HM: It was the World Expo.

GL: Yeah. But it was it was like the special lounge or something for visitors. I forget the name of the actual room that it was in.

HM: So just to clarify, this was for the lounge at the World Expo in Osaka Japan right?

GL: That's right, in 1970.

HM: In 1970 so you made this sculpture what did it look like?

GL: It's made of ceramic, 22 feet long by eight foot high. And so there's 122 two tiles that are quite thick tiles one square. And each tile was dated I took 22 days to make them. I made eight salt shakers a day to go on the tiles right. So each one is dated and each one has a salt shaker or pepper shaker and its all white. It was glazed completely white and a lot of the salt shakers or pepper shakers are broken or squashed. It looks a bit like a kind of moonscape or something I suppose you could say. Has a kind of landscape look to it a little bit.

HM: Now you describe the parts that protrude from the tile as salt shakers. Back when you delivered this piece, the man in charge didn't see that. He saw something else potentially and he didn't like it what happened?

GL: The Commissioner General, he said that it was pornographic. He thought it was pornographic. So he invited all the employees at the pavilion to come and look at it and he asked them if they'd be embarrassed to explain this to their friends. And they all said yes. I guess they didn't want to put their jobs at risk or whatever. And so it was shipped back. They put up Canadian flags instead and it was shipped back to Ottawa. That was it. And they didn't pay me the last installment of the money for it.

HM: What did you think at that time?

GL: Oh I was furious. I was going to take them to court about it. But you know I got busy doing other artwork and stuff and never got around to that.

HM: Were they really just salt shakers?

GL: Yeah, I mean the salt has one hole and the pepper ones had five holes. But I mean of course they were suggestive of penises I suppose you could say. But then I mean that's not unusual. I mean I specialized in I guess you could say making utilitarian ceramics and putting them in situations that promoted them to artwork. And so I made tea cups and saucers and bowls and you know that kind of thing and salt shakers. So it wasn't unusual in any way.

HM: Did you ever get your sculpture back?

GL: Later on. I’m trying to remember the date. I can't remember exactly, it might have been in the 80s. A friend phoned me from Ottawa and said that he thought that my sculpture was at this architectural warehouse. And so I went out there and sure enough there was the crates of my mural. And so I discussed it with the owner and he said some bar in San Francisco was interested in buying it. Anyway, I bought it back from him. And then I sold it to the Vancouver Art Gallery and they still have it. They have shown it and so on.

HM: How did that whole episode and all the controversy around it affect your art and also your career?

GL: Well, I felt kind of dejected about it at the time, but I recovered. I don't like to dwell on stuff or get bitter about anything. So I just carried on and haven't stopped since. I'm 81 at this point.

HM: And you're still going strong?

GL: I guess so. I feel fine and I like doing what I'm doing.

HM: So where do you draw inspiration for the work that you do now?

GL: From the everyday like every poet every artist does I think. You know I make sort of ordinary bowls, salt shakers and I said that in a situation where I kind of force the audience or the viewers to consider them as artworks. I think that is important.

HM: Is there one piece now that you're working on that you are particularly proud of?

GL: Well I just finished a show actually and it was work I’d made in China. And I showed parts like they were bowls and lidded pots and I combine them with photos of gardens that I took in China. And some of the doorways in the gardens and Chinese gardens are very curious. They are shaped like pots actually. Anyway, you find these things artists I think are kind of like experts at perception and so maybe that’s why I was attracted to these things.

HM: Well thank you for talking to us.

GL: Not at all. Thank you.

HM: It's a pleasure. Bye bye.

GL: Bye.

JD: Vancouver artist Glenn Lewis is among the eight laureates of this year's Governor General Awards in Visual and Media Arts, which were announced last week. In 1970, Mr. Lewis's sculpture “Artifact” shook the Canadian art scene when it was banned from the World Expo for being too provocative.

Back To Top »

Part 2: Philippines senator charges, Fort Mac house

Philippines senator charges

Guest: Alex Padilla

JD: Filipino Senator Leila de Lima spearheaded an inquiry into President Rodrigo Duterte’s war on drugs. Now, she believes he is trying to silence her. Last week, the Philippines Justice Minister announced that he was charging Senator de Lima with three counts of conspiring to distribute illegal drugs. Groups like Human Rights Watch want the charges dropped. Senator De Lima says her arrest could come as early as this week. Alex Padilla is her lawyer. We reached Mr. Padilla in Manila.

HM: Mr. Padilla, I understand you were with your client Senator De Lima earlier today. How is she dealing with all of this?

ALEX PADILLA: Well, she's sort of expected the filing of the criminal cases before the court. She's also preparing herself psychologically I think that she will be or she may be arrested any time and claims that she will be the first political prisoner of this government.

HM: What are the actual charges against her?

AP: The charges are talking about drug trading and that out of that trading, she supposedly extorted money from the convicts or problem from certain persons in order to finance or fund her senatorial campaign.

HM: Now these charges are being reviewed right now is that right? What's the status of them?

AP: Well, we filed a motion to quash the report the courts for many reasons. First we said that the rightfully should have been filed before our anti-graft court and not the regular courts. We also said that there was no proof whatsoever about the drug planting. It was the mere allegations and at best it should have been even if the allegations of receiving money were true, it should have been merely extortion or bribery. Which is bailable under our laws and she would have retained her seat. So yeah that's it, but they made it drug trading in order to make it a non-bailable offense.

HM: Now the charges are based on testimony from a number of detainees held in prison accusing her of accepting money from drug lords. Is there any truth to the testimony that she allowed the drug trade to flourish inside the prison when she was Justice Secretary?

AP: Well first let me say that the allegations talk about drug trading through, but there was nothing to show there was not an iota of evidence about drugs. They did not show one gram of shabu. They did not show any drug precursors, nor did they show any trading of the drug. It was mere allegation and what they tried to prove was that she received money.

HM: Has she received any money?

AP: Of course not. We are likewise denying that. She has said she said it herself that there's no truth to it. In fact, if that if that was true and she supposedly received something like onetime 70 million another time 10 million. There would have been some form of any evidence that would show that she actually pocketed and there was none.

HM: Human Rights Watch is today, saying that this prosecution of Senator de Lima is an act of political vindictiveness. Why does she believe these charges are being filed against her? What's the motive?

AP: Well again, I think there is a long history between Senator de Lima and President Duterte. When she was Commissioner on Human Rights, I think he tried to investigate the allegations of the Death Squad in our time and I think it went all the way up to when she became Secretary of Justice et cetera. So on the part President Duterte, I think — well I would assume — that he never forgave her for those intrusions.

HM: But do you have a sense of why it's happening now?

AP: Well, President Duterte has already come out openly saying that she's going to be jailed. So I think most of the allegations now are being done in pursuit of that order.

HM: Does Senator De Lima plan to stay in the Philippines to face these charges if they are indeed filed?

AP: Yes, she said so already. She said that she does not intend to go to the hospital or be sick or even to wear a brace just like some of our politicians who tried to escape the jurisdiction of our courts. And she says quite proudly that she will become the first political prisoner of this administration.

HM: The Philippine Congress conducted an investigation on the charges. She did not attend that hearing those hearings. Why not?

AP: Well, there were also many reasons. First of all, the inquiry was being done by the Lower House of Representatives. So we felt that it was an insult to the separation of powers between the two chambers of our legislative assembly. And of course true to form, I think the Lower House was doing it in conjunction with the order of the president.

HM: If the charges against her are as you say bogus are you confident that the courts will be able to see through this?

AP: Well, it will take some time. I'm confident that once we get into trial, we will be able to show the character of the witnesses, the paucity of evidence and everything else that we believe was wrong about this investigation.

HM: What sentence could Senator de Lima face if she's convicted?

AP: Assuming she is found guilty of drug trading, drug trading is a pretty strong offense. It's like drug trafficking. So I think the penalty is something like life imprisonment

HM: And you say she remains resolute. Has she frightened or is she determined?

AP: Well she's determined. She says she will not back down in her fight. She says that this is obviously politically motivated and that eventually not only will the people find that out, but that the entire system would. And she's been getting more and more support not only from her political party, but from the people as well. And I'd like to believe that eventually I think the truth will come out and maybe it's just difficult at this time with the new government in power.

HM: Mr. Padilla, we appreciate you taking time to talk to us. Thanks very much.

AP: Thank you. Thank you very much.

HM: All right. Goodbye.

AP: Bye bye.

JD: Alex Padilla is the lawyer for Philippines Senator Leila de Lima. We reached him in Manila. You can find more on this story on our website: www.cbc.ca/aih.

[Music: Ambient]

Vitaly Churkin obit

JD: He is being hailed as a “diplomatic giant”. Today the long-time Russian ambassador to the United Nations, Vitaly Churkin, died suddenly in New York City. He was 64-years-old. He would have turned 65-years-old tomorrow. Mr. Churkin had a reputation for being clear, blunt and at times fiery. For example: from 2013, here he is speaking to CNN's Christiane Amanpour about Russia's involvement in the war in Syria.

SOUNDCLIP

CHRISIANE AMANPOUR: Let's talk about what seems to be an escalating arms race in Syria between the Russian side and the Western side. Reports on Friday, that despite objections from the United States and Israel, you have transferred sophisticated anti-ship cruise missiles to Damascus. The Wall Street Journal has said that you've sent at least a dozen warships to the port that you control in Tartus over the last several months. And Russia is now saying that it is going to go ahead with these sophisticated, advanced S-300 surface to air missiles.

Vitaly Churkin: Well first of all, it's not part of any kind of an arms race there.

CA: But you are doing that.

VC: we are doing those things at least some of them. But in fact, we make no secret of the fact. The way you presented it you made it sound rather threatening and sort of surprising, but there is nothing surprising. All of those things come from the contracts which were concluded with the Syrian government well before the start of the conflict. Our military of our Navy is present in the Mediterranean from time to time.

CA: But there seems to be a rapid and recent escalation?

VC: I wouldn't describe it like that we have made no secret. We’re trying to act in a very transparent way that we have had contracts with the Syrian government for air defense. This is something which has nothing to do with the current domestic conflict in Syria. When you talk about the arms race you create an impression that like we are supplying the government and somebody else the supplying the opposition…

CA: Well, that it exactly what's happening as you know.

VC: Not with our participation. The people who are supplying weapons to the opposition, they are supplying weapons to be used in the domestic civil war conflict. Our weapons are part of a regional stability going back to the Syrian situation as a country in the Middle East. So it's a completely different proposition.

CA: It might be in your mind it might be, but certainly a senior Russian official has told me on this program that in fact, these S-300 missiles — at least the ones I asked him about. are specifically designed to deter and send a message to the west not to get involved in this.

VC: They are specifically designed to shoot down aircraft. This is what the military systems are about.

JD: That was the long-standing Russian ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin on CNN in 2013. Ambassador Churkin died today. He was 64-years-old.

[Music: Ambient]

Fort Mac house

Guest: Steven Menard

JD: It is considered Canada’s costliest insured disaster ever. Last May, an enormous wildfire destroyed more than 2400 homes and forced people to flee for their lives from Fort MacMurray. Steven Menard was one of the evacuees and now, he is rebuilding his home in the dead of the Alberta winter. He is one of fewer than 500 to receive approval to do that. And it is the first home he's ever built. We reached Steven Menard in Fort McMurray.

HM: Mr. Menard, how is the rebuild going?

STEVEN MENARD: Well it's so far so good. It's definitely been an uphill battle, but every day is positive progression. So I do see a light at the end of the tunnel for sure. I say when we started the project banging the first piece of wood back in November; I really didn't think I'd be sitting up where my dining room is going to be you know speaking to the folks with CBC you know discussing the rebuild.

HM: How many people have asked why you would start building a house in November in Northern Alberta?

SM: Well, you know there's going to be such a rush on everything here come the spring. Actually it’s starting now pretty much. There's well over 2,000 homes that were lost in the fire. And these folks are going to be scrambling come spring I guess you could say. With all the builders and there's a limited amount of suppliers here in town and you know construction workers et cetera. And it's just going to be a crazy go this spring, so I figured I'd get a jump on it. And far enough it worked out.

HM: Now I understand your stepson, Doug was a big reason that you decided to take this project on yourself. How is that? What did he do?

SM: Well absolutely. Doug, of course, is the father of my three grandchildren here and been a part of his life for over 30 years and he's built three homes here in the past for his family. He is a busy guy, he likes to stay busy and you know he just basically said Steve, you know we can do this. With the people you know and he's really good at banging nails. So I'll take that end, you take this and in between the two of us, we’ll get the house built. I said OK, sounds good.

HM: Based on what you're telling me. I’m figuring you have never built a house before?

SM: That is correct. I had a little experience and everything. You know dad always wanted you to have a summer job when you're growing up. So I was fortunate to learn a little bit about a whole lot.

HM: Some of us will take on a home repair project maybe by Googling how to fix your washing machine? But how do you learn how to build a house? That’s going to be a lot of Googling.

SM: Funny you should say that, I did a lot of Googling of course. Now Doug has the knowledge, so he knew what the next steps are going to be. So I’d go home at the end of the day and now for example, we're going to be putting in floor heating in the basement. Now, I've got to go on Google and I've got to Google this and see how thick the concrete has got to be and how big your loops are etc. and educate myself a little bit about this. The next morning we’d come in, I could be roughly on the same page he's on — if that makes sense? So every step of the way I would sneak away and I'd be doing some Googling to see what we're doing. It was quite interesting. I've learned so much in this project. I've learned so much.

HM: Take me back if you will to the day you left your home last May. We all remember so well those horrible images of what people around you went through. What was that experience like?

SM: My gosh, well it all happened so fast. It was roughly 1:22 in the afternoon on the 3rd of May. My wife was at work. She works for Canada Post and the kids were in school. My grandkids were in school and my stepson was off work. My daughter was out in the yard working and I looked out the front window and just across the way, I live in Abasand. The area directly south of here would be Beacon Hill and that was the first area to be taken over the fire. So I'm actually looking out my front window looking at this. I can't believe it, step on the deck and sure enough it looks like Beacon Hill is on fire. So I call the family, they say I'm overreacting. I said I’m taking one picture, I'm grabbing the dogs and then I'm heading downtown to grab the wife and look them up to get you guys. We've got to get out of here. It's just not right. And at some point there was still no evacuation order. Again people are at school. People are at work. It wasn’t until 2:00 p.m or shortly thereafter when an evacuation was called.

HM: So when did you get back to Fort McMurray?

SM: I’d say the middle of June is when we when we came back. It was so overwhelming. It's really hard to put into words. When I drove up to Abasand to look at our house — what used to be our home — just unrecognizable the entire area. I've never seen anything like, it on the news perhaps you know, in photos, but actually see it and then the way I felt was one thing. But when I looked around and saw that all these other people feel the same way I do and the same way my wife does right now. That's a lot of hurt.

HM: So what does your neighborhood look like now?

SM: There’s a few homes sprouting up. My neighbor started construction roughly the same time I did. But again that was done by contractors all the way and they should be in probably mid-March, I’m thinking. So I’ll have a neighbor directly on one side of me that's moved in. It’s starting to feel like a neighborhood again. But if you look you know 100 yards past that house on the right, there's nothing. It was probably 30-40 homes that are just gone and the same thing when you look to the left.

HM: are hoping most of your neighbors will get back there?

SM: You know I've had the opportunity to speak to most of them. And yes, that's their plan. Fort MacMurry is such a wonderful place to live. I grew up here you know pretty much raised a family here. I have three grandkids here. I coach minor hockey. I play old-timers hockey. It's just a really really solid community and I think the proof is in the proverbial pudding when you look at how we all pulled together get through this hell. Over 80,000 people evacuated this city. You know how we pulled that off and how we all came back and you know it was just really something to see.

HM: When do you hope to have your home finished?

SM: Well we're looking at July 1st. My wife is pretty excited to be looking at that date for our move-in.

HM: We have a special Canada Day 150 party that day at the house?

SM: Oh my gosh, you know it's a pretty magical day for me. I lost my father a few years back on Canada Day and it's really never been the same to me. So it's going to be a very emotional day, but I'm sure it's going to be wonderful.

HM: Is it going too far to say that your experience has been therapeutic not just for you, but for some of the people in your community too?

SM: Absolutely. I’m a Kirkland Lake boy born and raised. And since the fire, I've driven home twice to visit with friends and family to you know to help with getting over it as well. But you know, I drive to Kirkland lake and then back to Fort MacMurry, turn the foolscap over and carry on. The whole process has been very healing. And again to see the support from friends, from family, from strangers it's just overwhelming sometimes. It truly is.

HM: What does your wife say about the idea of moving back home?

SM: Oh my gosh, she is so excited. You know the whole process again now we get a new kitchen. So she has to pick new kitchen cabinets if you can imagine. A new light fixtures and carpet and things of that nature, so it's just so gratifying to see her happy at the end of the day — see her laughing.

HM: Mr. Menard, thank you so much for talking to us. Good luck with getting the project completed in time for Canada Day.

SM: Wonderful. Thank you so much. I appreciate it.

HM: All right. It's nice to talk to you. Goodbye.

SM: Bye for now.

JD: Steven Menard and his family lost their home in Fort McMurray in the wildfire last May. He is now in the process of rebuilding that home and he hopes to move back in July. We reached Steven Menard in Fort Mac.

[Music: Guitar]

Good kids

According to comedian and father Jim Gaffigan, children are only as well-behaved as the least behaved child around. He argues quote, “the laws of physics dictate that if there is a kid screaming and running in the hallway of a hotel, all the other children will scream and run in the hallway of the hotel.” That is generally true, but as with every rule there are exceptions and a restaurateur in the northern Italian town of Padua has made it his mission to reward the exceptional or more precisely, the parents of the exceptional. Antonio Ferrari is the owner of a wine bar called “Storie di Cibo e di Vino” or “Stories of Food and Wine. It caters to families on Sunday afternoons. And Signor Ferrari has been doing a gratitude to the guardians of well-mannered minors with a discount on their bill. If that sounds like a lovely gesture, it sounds even lovelier in Italian: sconti bimbi educati. As it appears on the tab, is worth a 5 per cent discount. Signor Ferrari says he first conceived of the sconti when a family of 11 came in for Sunday brunch. The party included five bambini, who he described as seated quote, “with much composure.” But Signor Ferrari, who has no kids of his own, is quick to point out that the point of the sconti is not to cast judgment. He told the Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera, “I imagine how difficult parenting is today,” but he says when it comes to his restaurant, he is ultimately responsible for what happens in it. He has since offered the discount to two other families, one of which left a generous tip. So apparently the policy is win-win. Although you could argue that incentivising good manners this way only feeds the growing disparity between the behaves and the “behaves” and the “behave-nots”.

Back To Top »

Part 3: Encore: feature interview with author Jonathan Franzen

Paris Olympic slogan

JD: They call them “The Immortal's” and “Sacre bleu!” Are they angry. The Immortals are 36 French academics tasked with defending the language of Moliere from that global bully of languages English. So you can imagine The Immortal's response when Paris announced that it would be bidding for the 2024 Olympics using an English language slogan. You don't have to imagine, The Immortals and the slogan have a rendezvous in court. The mayor of Paris insists that the slogan, “Paris Made For Sharing” is an invitation to the world. However she did insist that at a news conference which she conducted almost exclusively in English. As you can imagine, this was a faux pas as The Immortal's are concerned. “Absurd!” Declared one academic. To quote, “Paris, the capital of the Francophone world is bowing to the language not only of Shakespeare, but also that of Donald Trump!” Unquote. The Immortal's lawyer has taken to insulting the slogan by comparing it to a cut-rate corporate pizza pitch. He says he is filing legal papers that would force the city to give top billing to the French translation, “Venez partager.” However this war of words turns out, we advised both sides to watch their language.

[Music: Orchestral]

Encore: Jonathan Franzen

Guest: Jonathan Franzen

JD: “Purity” is a very big word. So when Jonathan Franzen called his most recent novel “Purity”, it was immediately clear that he was aiming for a big statement and tackling some big ideas. Well that wasn't surprising. His 2001 novel, “The Corrections” and his follow up “Freedom” were about everything from the dynamics of dysfunctional families to the changing global economy to the State of the United States, among many many other things. And in “Purity”, Mr. Franzen is thinking big again. The book is about the journey of a character called “Pip”. It is about the Internet age, sexual politics and family secrets. And it is about the dangers of the very idea of purity. Jonathan Franzen visited the As It Happens studio to speak to Carol about the book in October of 2015. And here is an encore presentation of that conversation. A note of warning: at one point, there’s a little profanity.

SOUNDCLIP

CAROL OFF: Jonathan Franzen, welcome to the As It Happens studio.

JONATHAN FRAZEN: Nice to be here Carol.

CO: One of your first interviews about this novel “Purity”, you said that you didn't yet know how to talk about it. That was four months ago. Have you figured out how to talk about “Purity”?

JF: There may have been a sweet spot about three weeks ago. So five weeks into touring, perhaps you can hear I've come up with a bad cold here, so it's hard to talk about anything. But there was maybe about three weeks ago a sweet spot where I had figured out how to talk about it and I wasn't tired of talking about it.

CO: And have you passed over there to being tired of talking about it?

JF: Yeah. Now it's actually I was just in Krakow, Poland for the Conrad Literary Festival. It was a lovely event, but there was a press conference and then some further interviews and then they said would you do one extra interview — just one question for radio. And I said OK, one question and the question was what is the meaning of your title “Purity”? And I you know I basically answered — words came out of my mouth — I'm at the point where it is physically a torment to be asked that question. And of course I answered it.

CO: That was part of your answer?

JF: Yeah, it is actually you don't ever have a really good answer. And I guess part of what's a torment to me is saying the same thing over and over again. I can't do that, but then to try to think about something you never had a good answer to begin with and find a new way to give an inadequate answer to define the question asked by absolutely everyone. It's I don't use the word physical pain lightly.

CO: So I guess this question I have here about what is the meaning of the title isn’t going to… no… never mind… forget it.

JF: Could you talk about the concept of purity?

CO: Let's talk about the woman whose name is Purity in this book, who actually goes by “Pip” in most of it. Pip is the name that she likes to have even though her name is Purity. Very compelling character Pip, she's just so many things and delightful and original. And just how does she become the central character?

JF: Well, I don't really see her as the central character. She's the title character and the book does begin and end with her. But I think actually in terms of total number of pages there is probably more about some of the other characters than there is about her. How did she become a significant character in the book? That's a good question. She is above all Californian and I wanted to finally set a book partly in California. Because I have come to love so many people in California including Californian women and I have a particular admiration for Californian women for a lot of reasons, but partly because they seem so effortlessly, unselfconsciously feminist. Things that people are still self-conscious about people are no longer self-conscious about in California. Nobody ever seemed to tell them women couldn't do certain things and I like that. I felt right at home — surprisingly right at home — the first time I really went to California. Having met great California woman anyway, I wanted to I wanted to do some kind of justice to my experience of California. And also I wanted to write about a marriage that was probably where there were several initial ingredients almost random ingredients for the book and one of them was a story of marriage that would go to places that I had not recently seen a novel taking us in a marriage.

CO: You mean the parents?

JF: The parents yes. And we shouldn't we shouldn't say too much about who those people are.

CO: Exactly

JF: Because…

CO: Spoilers.

JF: Right, although the book is not set up around keeping information from the reader. You pretty much know everything you need to know by about a third of the way through. Nevertheless, we should probably keep that quiet. And somehow it just seemed like a child of that marriage might be the missing perspective that I really needed. And so out of nothing came of this character Pip.

CO: And Pip the name from “Great Expectations”. Was it also enjoyable to write not just about a young woman, a woman in California, but a young woman? A woman in her 20s and living in many unconventional ways for her generation, but I guess she's comfortable and she's comfortable with who she is.

JF: Oh, I'm not sure she's comfortable with who she is. But certain hang ups that her parents’ generation had, especially regarding sex are not present in her generation. No, if anything it was it was embarrassing to be writing about a young woman. There was a certain shame that had to be overcome because like what's a middle-aged guy doing making one of his main character this attractive young woman? There's something kind of innately creepy about that it seems to me if you don't do it right. So you really have to work hard as that male novelist to establish complete authority of her subjectivity early. You have to be very very vigilant about not making her a fantasy creature.

CO: But you do talk about the sex that she has. You to talk about her sexuality, was that awkward?

JF: Oh no, the sex stuff is never really awkward for me. I kind of take the position that Patty Berglund took is “Freedom”. It's just sex for God's sake — it's just sex.

CO: You do hate sex in all your novels though. I mean I would think that I mean a lot of writers have a hard time with it. I've asked that question of others, you know how comfortable are you writing sex scenes? And they're always sort of vague. Your sex scenes are never vague. They're not pornographic, but they're certainly not vague.

JF: Yeah, I mean I think there are a lot of things you have to do psychologically and I would even say morally as a writer with regard to the reader. My credo is I am not going to inflict stuff on the reader. I'm not going to make them uncomfortable because of something I could control, so in the case of sex scenes that particularly means making sure that I have removed my shame so that there is not this residuum of shame that the reader picks up on and kind of perceives as ickiness. And of course, it's very important not to get yourself not to be working out some fantasy when you write a sex scene. Because oh boy, can you see those when you've been reading along and trusting the writer and suddenly the whole sentences change because we're in a sex scene and it's like they've forgotten about the reader. They're a little too into that. So you know there are certain kinds of places you're trying to be centered as a writer, so that you can continue not to inflict stuff on the reader.

CO: I would go deeper into this conversation. It is a supper-hour show and there are as I say there's some really juicy parts in this novel as there are in all your novels of sexuality. But I’m going to do an I.D. here. I'm talking to Jonathan Franzen, he's in the studio with me here at As It Happens and we're talking about his new novel called “Purity”. Another not to say a major character or a central character if Pip isn't one. Andreas Wolf is another major character…

JF: He may get the most pages.

CO: He may get the most pages. He's charismatic and then you have a character who even describes him as “the definition of the word charismatic”. Where does that character come from?

JF: I think a variety of places. I mean I had in mind a kid I knew in high school, who was himself very charismatic. I probably had a little boy crush on him in a certain way. And certain stories I heard when I was a student in Berlin about people who getting in trouble with the East German regime in the ‘80s.

CO: And we should say he comes from East Germany.

JF: That's right. he's an extremely privileged kid, who throws away his privilege. He commits a kind of adolescent act of rebellion aimed at his mother with whom it's safe to say, he does not have a good relationship. And to embarrass her, he ends up kind of getting kicked out of ordinary society and living in the basement of a church.

CO: And he is Julian Assange-like.

JF: Later on.

CO: Later on he does become that.

JF: Having been mistaken for a dissident, he goes on to be mistaken for a bringer of sunlight to all the dirty secrets of the world.

CO: And he takes to that. This is where he feels the comfort zone or discomfort zone. But he is a deeply disturbed man with the dark secrets, as you alluded to there. And you obviously had to spend a lot of time in the head of Andreas Wolf to write this. And what was that like?

JF: I think I've written about crazier people in this book than I had previously. I think I'd been in the realm of neurosis, which is of course a perennially comic subject in my previous novels. So I was interested in going a little farther into somewhat more disturbed states of mind with a couple of the characters. And it's an interesting process because just as when my father was succumbing to dementia, I found a way to understand, to have a conversation with him even though it didn't make any rational sense. Spending a lot of time with him, I began to have a sense of where what he was saying came from. And I could go with it and have these seemingly totally crazy conversations that nonetheless, seemed to be real conversations with each other. And I think in the same way if you are a practiced novelist and accustomed to trying to imagine what it's like to be someone else. You don't have to scrape very far; I think any person can be driven crazy you know. And the United States prison system is pretty good at driving people crazy with solitary confinement. And so you really begin with a lot of your own capacity for extreme states and things that might just be a moment — a little flicker of homicidal rage that I have. You know you kind of develop that. It's substantially a work of imagination in that regard.

CO: But being inside Andreas Wolf's head is also to be inside the head of a narcissist is it not?

JF: Absolutely, yes. A fairly pathological narcissist.

CO: What did you learn about narcissism through Andreas Wolf?

JF: Well, I learned what a lonely place it is. It's funny, a German interviewer said wow you created an old fashioned villain for your novel. I never thought you would create an old fashioned villain. It's like wow to me he's the most sympathetic character of the book in a way because he's very smart. He's very honest with himself. He recognizes there's something very dark in him. And yes maybe his honesty is an advanced form of narcissism. He is very narcissistic about how honest he is with himself. There are these kind of infinite loops that get set up. But nevertheless, I thought he was somebody who was trying to be less sick than he was. And that to me is an extremely moving position for anyone to be in. He's aware there is something not right with me and he is trying. You know as one part of him is behaving in these kind of compulsive and narcissistic ways. Another part of him is really trying to stop and have an ordinary life.

CO: He launches “The Sunlight Project” as you mentioned, which is described as, “like WikiLeaks, but more purpose driven.” And he believes in the importance in his role of revealing state secrets, of letting the sunshine into the dark places. And not allowing for governments to have dark secrets or to keep things or to know things that we don't know. When someone like your Andreas Wolf character or Julian Assange or Edward Snowden, who is another person who felt compelled to tell the world things from the inside. Is it necessary to be narcissistic in order to do that? To believe that somehow you have a moral probity that others don't have? What you do the right thing even if it might be wrong for somebody else?

JF: Yes. I mean narcissism is one of those words that has a pop meaning and also a clinical meaning that are somewhat at odds. And it's become a kind of all-purpose insult you know. And it has become a kind of shorthand-y critique of a lot of what the Internet fosters. What is the selfie? It's a culture of narcissism and there's some truth to that. But I think Assange for instance, does appear to have narcissistic features to his personality.

CO: In the clinical sense not the pop sense.

JF: Yes, in the clinical sense. And Andreas is very much his own creation and much of his story is in East Germany. It's not about his Internet success and his Internet fame. But one thing I did, I was very struck by in Andy O’Hagen's long long piece about Assange was Assange becoming trapped by needing to see what people were saying about him. And he finally reached the point where that was all he could do was monitor what was being said about him. That's where you want to kind of reclaim clinical narcissism as a pathological state. That is not something to sneer at in the pop sense, but to actually have real compassion for.

CO: But what kind of a character, what kind of a person do you have to be in to be able to do… Edward Snowden lives in exile, so does Julian Assange. These people believed that they had a responsibility to reveal secrets. I mean you have to be a certain type of person don’t you?

JF: Am I allowed to say asshole on Canadian radio?

CO: Yes, you can say asshole.

JF: Well, there's a point when Pip has gone to Bolivia to work for Andreas's Sunlight Project and she befriends this woman, Colleen. Who says Well Andrea, he's an asshole. And Pip says really? And Colleen says yeah, to do this kind of thing you have to be. And probably to do the kind of thing that I do. There needs to be a narcissistic streak in the personality, something that is not satisfied by you know conventional happy relationships with family and friends and all of that. That you will need something more, something that’s driving you to be obsessed with a novel you're writing and to be compulsive about making it right and also to exhibit yourself in public in such a you know overt way. I'm sure it's a streak in my own personality.

CO: in this character Julian Assange type character, Andreas Wolf. He believes that we have to reveal these dark secrets. Do you believe that there's something unethical about revealing the secrets of governments? Of putting this putting that which is secret or that which is not in the public domain in the public domain against the wishes of the government?

JF: No, as Rachel Kershner points out, we sure wish someone had been doing that with the weapons of mass destruction lies in 2002-2003.

CO: the war in Iraq.

JF: Yeah, because conventional journalism wasn't getting the job done. So no I would never make a blanket statement that we don't need that. In times of emergency that's necessary.

CO: To be able to have state secrets?

JF: Yeah, the Pentagon Papers same thing. There are times when governments’ are really not doing where they're doing things that they would not do if they were known generally known to the public and journalists can't always get at that information. So I think that the new leaking capabilities are you know it's a nice tool to have in the arsenal. And I think you know ironically given that people seem to think this is the book is an attack on the Internet. The novel you know seems to come down on the Internet as a force for good in the end. But what you know the issue I have is with this idea that perfect transparency is always good, which is just a fatuous piece of nonsense.

CO: Because in your character —to return to your novel — Andreas Wolf has a lot of dark secrets as he is conducting “The Sunlight Project” to expose all the secrets of others.

JF: Well there are some ironies involving Andreas. Yes as a bringer of sunlight. He does have some dark secrets, but I would say more to the point, there is a long portrayal of a marriage. One of which is premised on several things. First of all, the radical equality of the man and the woman it, second on the premise that they're going to not really have individual identities — they're going to have a shared merged identity. And third crucially that that means they will never have any secrets from each other. And I think anyone who has tried that in almost any realm of life, certainly an intimate relationship or but business, government, diplomacy, anyone who has tried radical diplomacy has seen that it's a nightmare.

CO; And you're talking about the relationship between Tom and Annabell?

JF: Yes.

CO: And Tom, who just was a very strong-minded man and finds himself so in love with Annabell. He subsumes his character to hers and finds himself peeing sitting down because she thinks that men should not be peeing standing up and has moments of defiance where he pees in her sink.

JF: Well he keeps the secret. Yes, he secretly pees in the sink.

CO: And that's the part that pees in the sink. The part that eventually says I have to get out of this relationship.

JF: Kind of yeah. I mean Andreas himself has theories about how important it is to have some things that only you know because how else do you know that you have a self? If everything about you is always broadcast to everyone then who are you when you go to bed? What’s secret?

CO: I'm talking to Jonathan Franzen about his novel “Purity” and he's here with me in the As It Happens studio. There is one really grown up, lovely marriage relationship that isn’t marriage relationship actually: Leila and Tom. At the center of it, two very committed professional journalists. And there’s a lot of things you say that are really important in this. About the distinction between what they are doing as journalists. What the role of what they do as journalists and how it differs from what Andreas Wolf is doing with his “Sunlight Project” and can you can you tell us what the difference is between those two things — those two activities?

Well Leila, as I call her, she's an investigative reporter and she comes from a competitive Lebanese-American family. And she is very aggressively anti-leaker because she thinks they're it's overrated and she makes the point that yeah you can dump all these documents, but without paid reporters we can't make any sense of these documents. And democracies need real journalists and the Internet is driving journalists out of business. And so she's very anti-Internet. Her boyfriend, Tom is this more of a moderate line which is well, we need both. Both is good, but particularly what she's thinking of is she. Her chapter revolves in part around a nuclear weapon that has disappeared in Texas. Boots on the ground, she is gone as a journalist to look into this missing nuclear warhead. And really there are some very basic things that she can do as an investigative journalist that cannot be replaced by anything that Silicon Valley is offering. She can call up the head of the weapons plant and say you know I've got this institution behind me. What is your statement? You know a citizen can’t do that. And if no one's leaking, there is no way in. So there's basically a whole lot of things that that you still need real journalists for.

CO: But there is this I guess illusion that a lot of people have that they don't need journalists, they have the Internet. They will find out whatever they want to know. They can go into their sites. They can go to their Facebook and know what's going on and they don't need anything else.

JF: Well yeah, but the platforms are killing the goose that laid the golden egg. The platforms are still sucking conventional news sources. I mean how do you know what's happened in Washington? It's not because somebody was walking down the street and happened to overhear what was being said in Congress. Somebody Politico or Talking Points Memo or Washington Post, somebody was there writing it down spending seven hours listening to the speech to find the one interesting minute that goes up on the Internet. You think oh well I found that on Facebook. No you didn't, that's a piece of news someone generated somewhere that is not being fully paid for.

CO: You've also written about this in same terms when you wrote about television and the effect that television has and this goes back. The Internet is very similar isn't it? I mean Edward R. Murrow was saying that TV has the ability to transform our world into an international conversation where we can all talk to each other or it can go the way that it actually did go into a form of escapism entertainment. Are we at the same juncture with the Internet do you think?

JF: Well, television itself is threatened by the new streaming models. And the whole economic structure of television is getting shaken up. But one really has to point out the TV at its high end has gotten so much better. It has gotten so good that I consider it a sub-genre of the novel.

CO: As a storyteller?

JF: As a storyteller. Yeah, and its values are really the novelist's values. Which is serial drama about complex characters. It doesn't do everything a novel can do. It doesn't give you Interior's. It doesn't do tone in the same way. It doesn't do perspective at all. I mean the point of view is very clumsy in visual media compared to what it can be and in a in a novel. But many of the things that a good novel delivers TV delivers and it demands sustained attention. So it is it has become kind of the anti-Internet at its high end.

CO: You wrote about 20 years ago an essay you were writing about the instant gratification of television at that time, obviously as you point out it's changed. But you wrote the novelist has more and more to say to readers, who have less and less time to read. Are things any better or worse for novelists now?

JF: Well, I think we need to put that quote in context. It was in the context of a long essay in which I was essentially abandoning the idea of the social novel — the novel as a tool of social reporting. And if you construe the novel as having things to say to the American people or the Canadian people, then yes it's competing with a lot of other things. If you construe it the way I do by the end of that essay and have come ever more to, which is as a way to have an experience. As a form of art that has unique capabilities and offers unique rewards then the answer to the question seems kind of different.

CO: Jonathan Franzen, thank you for this novel. This very funny, intriguing romp of a novel and thank you for coming to the studio.

JF: It's a pleasure.

JD: That was an encore presentation of Carol's conversation with Jonathan Franzen. It first aired on Oct. 27th of 2015. Mr. Franzen's most recent novel “Purity” is published by Bond Street Books

Back To Top »

Provide Transcript Feedback

CBC would like to acknowledge the support of the Broadcasting Accessibility Fund.