Understanding great literature is better than trying to read and understand (yet) another business book, Leadership Lessons From The Great Books leverages insights from the GREAT BOOKS of the Western canon to explain, dissect, and analyze leadership best practices for the post-modern leader.
Hello, my name is Jesan Sorrells and
this is the Leadership Lessons from the Great Books podcast,
episode number 189.
Opening up with a summary of
our book today because the book that we are covering is
still under copyright, strict copyright through Vintage
International. And so we don't want to read too much from here, but we're
going to open up with a summary of an idea.
Our book today opens up with a judge,
a judge named McKelva who is
in a hospital and he is dying.
The judge is joined at his
deathbed by his wife Faye, his second wife,
Faye, and the daughter from his first marriage,
Laurel. Laurel
McKelva hand was a slender, quiet faced woman
in her middle 40s, her hair still dark.
This is a woman who as we go through the first few chapters of
our book today, we find out a little bit about.
We find out that she is a woman who has escaped her
region. She moved away and now she
has been called back. She is a woman who has a
fraught or dare I say non existent relationship
with her stepmother, Faye. And her stepmother
Fay, who is significantly younger than her own mother was,
is trying to rally the judge to come back to life.
By the way, the judge died suddenly, not because
of anything having to do with with disease,
but just having given up.
Laurel stays, of course, with the judge during the course
of this opening to this book today. And she
spent her time and read Nicholas Nickleby and
that seemed like it was endless. Matter of fact, she
read to him while he was in a coma, understanding, of course, that
coma patients can hear everything.
Once, of course, Fay enters into the
picture more. Faye attempts her own
methods to bring Judge McElva back to
life. She attempts to appeal to his masculinity,
to his Southern manhood, and of course, to his
ability to defeat disease. This
does not work and the judge passes
away anyway. This
opens the door to our action and to our movement because this
book is not about a funeral or not about a judge's death.
It is instead about everything that happens afterward and the
way in which Laurel and Faye and all of the other
characters in this book react to and respond
to in a very regional and very specifically
Southern American way to death
and to what it brings to their lives.
And so we are going to be summarizing and talking about
probably one of the better books by any female
author of the late 20th century. Today on the
show we're going to cover a book I think you should pick up, the
Optimist's Daughter by Eudora
Welty, Foreign.
Now during the most recent golden era of our
time on streaming and cable television
entertainment, several popular shows played with the trope
of the witness who documents without fully
understanding. The best shows that did this
included the Wire, the Arrested Development
and Breaking Bad. At least I think they were the best
shows. Now these comedies and dramas
were part of a 20 year long mid century effort on
television and in novels, as we are going to see in our novel
today, to leverage the tension evident when a person
observes another person's empirical actions
and is unable to determine any deep meaning
from from those actions. In essence a
witness witnessing but not understanding what
they're seeing. The challenge of
determining meaning by witnessing another person's actions is one that
was visited upon the west sharply because of the West's
inability to collectively psychologically process the existential
evil of the horrors of World War II. From the
rape of Nan King to the trials at Nuremberg, the moral challenge that
faced the west in a post war context
was how to call observable evil what it was,
and without an appeal to the existence of a spiritual transcendent authority
whose existence all parties involved in the prosecution of the war may
or may not have agreed upon. This
friction, of course, led to an increase in existential dread, the toleration
of higher levels of cultural and social absurdity as a coping mechanism,
or as cope, as the kids would say these days, and finally at the close
of the 20th century, appeals to deconstructionism, to
the power of, well, raw power.
However, the person or the society who
witnesses evil and yet is shocked into incoherence has a problem.
They do have a genuine problem, and we're going to see this in the Optimist's
Daughter today. But their problem is not a lack of belief in a
transcendent good. The problem is one of a lack of
language to ask the right questions, interpret assertions that may
be bogus, and a lack of ability to discern and then critically think through
the challenge of interpersonal horror.
The writer, essayist and journalist Joan Didion, who
we're going to cover a little bit later on this month, keyed
into this exactly when she opened her 1961 collection of essays,
which we've covered on this show before, Slouching Towards Bethlehem and we will
cover again this month about the baby boomers who
are beginning to make their own contribution to the long
thread of cultural incoherence. Post war cultural incoherence, it was going to be
in America. When she quoted in the opening
of her collection of essays from William Butner Yeats,
the Second coming, published in 1920,
and I quote, turning and turning in the widening
gyre. The falcon cannot hear the falconer. Things
fall apart, the center cannot hold. Mere anarchy is
loosed upon the world. The blood tim tide is loosed
and everywhere the ceremony of innocence is drowned. The
best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of
passionate intensity.
And that is something that we are going to see here today. We're going to
see the attempts by Eudora Weltley
and the characters that she creates to make
sense of the horror that she is seeing.
But personal horror. The horror of the death of her father
and at a much larger level, the death of a way of life
that she had known since she was born.
Leaders. Today on the show,
I'm going to start off with a fundamental belief. I think we can
describe what we're witnessing. Matter of fact, I think we have a moral duty
to do so. There is objective reality and
documenting those moral challenges does require us to make
moral judgments. But we must lead
with the idea that we can do so first.
And of course, as usual along my journey, here to
explore some of these ideas and to discuss the
challenges of the witness who documents is our regular co
host, Tom Libby. You doing
Tom? I mean, if I was doing any better,
hy, I would think I was off in la la land. I'm doing so good.
It's, it's, it's crazy.
I'm doing just fine, thank you for asking. You're doing so
good. It's a level of insanity. I. You just can't describe it. You, you know,
it's. What's that line from? From, oh, gosh,
those old ESPN this is Sports center promos. What was it? No,
not. This is Sports Center. Stuart Scott used to say this.
You cannot hold him. You can only hope to contain him. He is,
dare I say, in fuego. And actually, that might not have been Stuart Scott. That
might have been Dan Patrick. Who's one of those guys? What? I'm pretty sure it's
Patrick, but that's okay. Might have been Dan Patrick. Yeah, might have been Dan Patrick.
So we open up today with the summary of the first few
chapters of the Optimist's Daughter by Eudora Weltley.
I sent you a bunch of paperwork and a bunch of information on.
On. On wealthy. And I'm going to keep probably
mispronouncing her name. It's W E, L, T, Y.
But I, I tend to reverse the L and the T and the Y. So
forgive me, folks, but it is T Y.
That's, that's. That's her last name, the author's last name here that we're covering today.
So, Tom, we've, I kind of sent you a bunch of information about her. You're
coming in fresh to this. In looking at the information that I sent you
and looking at sort of her life, what do you think of this? What do
you think of this author? I actually, I found it
interesting at the very least. And by the way, like, I found it
even more interesting that I had never heard of her, even though she's, you know,
she won the Pulitzer in 71 with this book.
Not that I know every Pulitzer Prize winning author. I'm not suggesting that I know
all of them. But as you've seen on this in our past episodes,
even if I hadn't read the actual book we're talking about, most times I've heard
of the author, like, you know, so I found it interesting that I
actually had never heard of her. And I think before we hit the record
button, and I'm sure you're gonna get to this a little bit more in depth
in a little, a little bit later. But I think your
point about, as we were talking before you, we started the recording,
I think your point about her being a regional author kind of
matters in this ca. In, in my case, because of like, not really being from
that area of the country. She was never really
brought up in our schools or, you know, we don't really talk about her, so
to speak. Even more so I think it's interesting that,
that she was in a relatively
dominated environment, dominated by black culture,
but yet she was white. So I think that's another reason why we didn't really
talk about her up here. I think she would have gotten more attention had she
been a black author in a black dominated, you know,
region of the country. So I, again, I'm not saying she wasn't worth
it or worthy. I'm just saying that I had never heard of her before. And
I'm trying to figure out, I was trying to figure out my brain why, because
what little I like, when I started reading her,
her bio and stuff like that seemed very interesting at the
very least, like, you know, talking about, you know, she didn't, it
wasn't one of those things where she like, grew up so dirt poor that she
had to write her way out of, out of her world.
She kind of grew up middle class and kind of did her thing and went
around very well educated. And
similarly, I went, I, I, I found some similarities
between this book and her life. If you then they're not
exact, but like some of the similarities about her dad getting sick in real life
and her going back and looking at the book and the daughter going back to
her dad getting sick, like certain things. I was wondering if this was like her
interpretation of her life at a, at a. She just kind of changed it enough
that people wouldn't recognize it. Like her friends and family reading it, so to speak.
Right. So anyway. But yeah, I, I thought it was, I thought she was my,
in my, my. Like my
initial reaction to her was I would, I probably would go
back and read her at this point. Like, I think, I think it would be
interesting to see what she has to say, especially considering she wrote for,
you know, the radio station and stuff. Like some of the jobs she held. Like,
it was interesting. And then to your point, she took a very similar
career path as others and felt obligated to go into teaching,
where today you probably wouldn't do that. Right. Like a writer
just wants to be a writer and they're going to go write and they'll figure
it out along the way. They may do odds and ends jobs like, you know,
but, but a writer, as a writer. As a writer, so to speak. And,
but I don't think they had that opportunity in her era,
like back in that time frame. So she seemed like a very normal, there was,
there was a lot of normalcy to her pathways, I think is what I was
getting at like, like the. When I started reading the bio.
Yeah. She was born in, she was born in 1909 and she died in
2001, so. Only died 25 years
ago, as a matter of fact, as of July 23rd, it'll be exactly
25 years since, since she passed.
She mostly wrote short stories to kind of kick off her career
and then she gradually moved into, into larger and larger
or more, more challenging, more challenging work.
She was a photographer as well. Kind of close to my heart there a little
bit. And one of the things that, that Tom
is mentioning here, and it's a good point to mention for our, for our listeners,
is she wrote at a time and she came of age during
a time when the author William Faulkner, who was sort of
the, the powerhouse of the
cultural standard of what a regional author could be, specifically a regional
Southern, you know, American author could
actually, you know, be and do and succeed at.
He was the gold standard. His writing was the gold standard that everybody was, that
everybody was judged by.
Her peers included folks like Catherine Ann Porter, who actually
wrote, I believe, an introduction to one of her books,
Harper Lee, who we covered in episode number 109, who wrote
to Kill a Mockingbird, Zora Neale Hurston,
who, to Tom's point, African American author. We've covered
a couple of her books on this show. In episode number 100,
she, along with those other female authors, she wrote in that space that Faulkner
pioneered. And it is a space of, as I was saying before we. We hit
the record button to Tom, it is a space,
interestingly enough, of regionalism. And
I want to talk a little bit about that for just a minute, because I
think that that's part of the setup for this book, that if you're going to
read it, you've got to really understand that and really sort of imbibe
that. So if you are a
reader or a leader who has
been reading and consuming what we now call content,
books, movies, television shows, I'm sure you've noticed over
the course of the last 25 years that things have become
more homogenized, more globalized.
Now, part of that is because of the ubiquitousness
of cell phones attached to the Internet and social media.
Part of that is due to what the algorithm pushes versus what it does
not inside of those platforms and where people's eyes and ears are.
But also part of it is that
you're going to get more homogenization when
things are flattened, when content is flattened, when ideas are
flattened, and everybody seems like they're saying the same thing. And that's one of my
troubles with, with books written in the last 25, 30
years. And that's why I tend to not cover newer books on this show,
because most of them aren't saying anything that's dramatically
interesting or dramatically different than any other
book you could get. Whereas if you go back to
the Optimist's Daughter, or you go back to any
books by Zora Neil Thurston, or you go back to books written by
Katherine Ann Porter. They are not part of a global
culture. They're part of very much part of a regional perspective on.
On writing. And this is not just in the American South. You have writers that
were specific to the American Northeast. You had writers that were specific to the American
West. One writer that jumps out to me in particular is Charles
Portis, right, who wrote the book True Grit that we covered
on this show and that the movie was made out of. And even when a
book was turned into a movie, it still rang very specifically
of being of a specific region. And other folks, other
readers who lived in other regions of the United States, recognized that
author or that movie as Being part of. Part and parcel of
that region. And even to Tom's point, like, we didn't get this up
here, quote, unquote, right, because it didn't match our region.
That's all gone. All that, all that, all that,
all that differentiation has passed and now
everybody sounds like everybody else. And you don't get that with.
You don't get that with. With Welty. She said
that. That her interest was in the relationships between
individuals and their communities, and that stemmed from her natural
abilities as an observer. And she observed people
in her community. She observed people in her own place. She observed
people in her own customs and traditions, and she even
referred to folks who lived in the south as her people.
Nobody talks like that anymore, Tom. Like that's. That's all gone.
It's even a struggle for. I mean, you. You know this
as a. A proponent of the native peoples and the native
people's perspective and NATO people's voice. I mean, how hard a fight
is it to. To avoid the globalization there?
Oh, it's. It's very hard. It's very hard. I will tell you though, one thing
that surprised me. One day I met a.
I was with a person from Russia. He
was. He was here visiting for business. And when he had
said that, like, some of the.
There are descendants over there of our native.
Of our native people, and I. It. It took a second for me to
understand how in the hell that could happen. But then I remembered
like, some of the. Some of the slave trade went the other way. Right?
Like, so as the. As the black and African slaves were coming
over here, native people were being taken over to Europe as slaves.
So yeah, like, we have descendants like this. This connection over
there. So I guess to your point, when those
people start wanting to learn about the culture that they left
behind hundreds of years ago, this is, you know, similar to
maybe somebody like yourself trying to look up roots from your ancestors, et
cetera, et cetera, really is
difficult for them. It's difficult to hear, I guess, kind of
circum back circling back to what your. Your question being. It's very difficult for them
to find something so regionally located or,
you know, or it's it for us. Maybe it's tribal
affiliation. So you say, like, I know I'm this tribe, so I can go
research that particular tribe. That's fine. That's not easy.
But it's at least a. A pointed direction to what you're talking about with regional
writing. But if you're looking for like an
overarching commentary about like Say
the Southwest, whether it be Navajo or Hopi or something like that. And
you want to have like a general. There's no generalization like,
or, or not. I, I shouldn't say there's zero. But it's very difficult to
find where you can have a single author that's going to write about
several tribal affiliations in a, in a way that makes them all
make sense and makes them all true to
form and true to identity. Right. If they're using, if
they're generally using overarching terminologies and stuff like that,
somebody's going to be irritated that they wrote it that way. So
it's, you're right. It is very difficult in that sense to, to find something that's
generalized like that. Well, and I'm seeing something, and I
pointed this out this year on the show during
Black History Month when we covered African American authors. And I pointed it out last
year and I pointed it out the year before that because I've been seeing,
I haven't, not even seen. I have a suspicion, not even a
suspicion. I'm sensing the cultural wind
blowing in a particular direction. And a lot of,
a lot of African Americans aren't ready for the cultural wind to blow in this
direction, but it's going to blow this way anyway at a certain
point. And I know
from a Native perspective, we're all foreigners here. We're all visiting. Got
it, Got it. We're all, we're all invaders in your house.
I get it. I understand
among the invaders, though, there are distinctions with a difference.
And, and, and as time has gone on
over the last 25 years, because of the flattening of globalization,
because of the ubiquitousness of Internet communication,
and because of the nature of the ways in which
voice, tradition, custom, community are being
scaled up, I am
convinced that African Americans, at a certain point, and it
won't be in the next 25 years because there's still too many of us who
grow up with that designation with the dash in the middle. Yeah,
but that's going to go away. It's going to go away in 50 years. It,
it'll be probably closer to the end of my lifetime before that goes away, but
definitely in my kids lifetime that'll go away. It's, it's going to be all
flattened out and we will just be, much
to African Americans dismay in this country, we will just
be Americans. That's it.
And I don't think folks are ready for that kind of revolution. And it's, but
it's going to happen gradually. It's going to happen soon, so gradually that no one's
even going to pay attention to it. And, and I think the
seeds for that flattening are the same
seeds that don't allow. This is my last point, that
don't allow a writer like Welty, and I do think there are still
writers like her floating around. I just don't think they could
get any traction and get anywhere even with self publishing,
which was a point that you were making, you know, because I
wonder. I don't think the audience is there anymore.
I think the audience was probably barely there in the late part of the 20th
century. Probably was there more in the early 20th century when Faulkner was writing in
the late 19th century. But in the early part of the 21st century,
getting into the middle part of the century, I think that audience is going to
go away. To your point about being with somebody from Russia, you were with somebody
from Russia at a, at a networking event.
That's, that's, that's globalism. That's the triumph of globalism.
Now, what you talk about in the language you use to do business, of course,
will be English, but you're gonna have to find some way to relate
to that person. And I'm not saying that if a regional author
is writing, they can't find a way to relate to somebody from Russia. But I'm
saying that the level of internal creative strength that they will have to have
just to commit to that region is going to have to be so
high that they're not gonna. They're not gonna
get that far. Well, I think, I think it. I.
It's interesting that you say that because I think there's some language things too, that
matter. Meaning. Like. Like to your point, right? The
globalization of even, like, lingo,
right? For example, like up here in New England, for some strange
reason, people use the word wicked for everything, right? Wicked cool,
wicked bad, wicked ugly, wicked beautiful, whatever. It doesn't matter. It's like an
adjective that goes with everything. So if you're a writer from New England
and you're writing things like that and somebody from Russia picks it up
to your point about global flattening, it's not lost on them
anymore. They could just look it up. Like, what does New England mean when they
say wicked? Like, and then they. Now they start understanding our lingo
to the point where it's not a regional writer anymore. Like, I, I'm agreeing with
you, but I'm using, like, a very specific example of how so people
can understand what you mean by this is like, like when you.
When I remember as a kid when I read certain things, there was no
Internet for me to look up what it meant. I just had to move on
and say, oh, that must be a regional thing down there or up there, over
there, or whatever it is. And I, I went and tried to interpret
it myself and moved on, but I didn't feel like I was a part
of that culture, a part of that region. Whereas
today people would do that. I, I can tell you, I know
people, I know people personally that would just look something up and then all of
a sudden adopt it and be like, oh, and wait, no, this is something they
only say in Texas. Like, why would you say that? You know what I mean?
But you read it in the book somewhere that you like the book, so now
you're going to use it. Or they say things in England. There
are certain words that they use in England that are very frowned upon here. And
I'm not gonna say them, but there's one particular one that pops into
my head very frequently that when they say it over in England, I'm just like,
oh, my God. And. But again, I go back to. If you
read that from. We might take it as offensive where they don't
like. And that's that global, that flattening globalization that you're talking about,
where now people can just absorb whatever that
culture is in that book, in that writing, and it's no longer a
regional writing. Right? Like the definition of regional
writing is, to your point about the dash. And it's going to go away.
I think it's gone already. There might be, there might be some proud. There might
be a little proudness. Like if you go back to. I thought for sure we're
going to avoid it on this episode, but we're not. If you go back to
the film industry and like the, like the, the
filming of episodic television, whether it's
streaming or network, there is a certain sense of
pride with visualization of it. Meaning, like when I see
the cityscape of Boston in a show that's kind of cool, and I
like that. And I can, I can start associating my. Like, I
can feel the world like it's my world, right? Like, but,
but that's a visualization because as soon as they start talking and they
butcher the Boston accent, and I think it's so overplayed and I'm like,
nobody from Boston speaks. Speaks like that. What are you doing? Like,
like, there's like, like they over accentuate the
Boston access. Boston accent for for
effect. Right. So, but, but. So there's. I
still think there's some pridefulness in that regionality
of certain things when it comes to, like film and, and, and
in, in recording television. But I think in the writing it's different
because you don't have that visual aspect of. I think that I
would agree with you if you're talking about. And maybe this is
the next major sort of division, right? So we,
we've, we talked about in our. In
our most recent episode where we
covered. What was the last one we did. I can't remember. We
do so many episodes, but the, the last
episode that we did, a couple.
Never mind. I just lost it. I just had it. Because we recorded it twice.
We did. We recorded it twice exactly. Because we forgot to press the record button.
But we. I made a point in there that I think needs
to be revisited. And the point is that.
Or not a point, but I made an observation, right. I think
that the division between. Oh, yeah, because you were talking
about Taylor Sheridan's myth of not being able to, you
know, sell a story that occurs in a rural area
to, to television and movie executives, Right? Because
they've committed, according to him, since the
1970s, to only showing
stories that come from an urban area or based in urban
environments. Right? Now, whether that's psychological
manipulation, a psyop, as the kids say these days, or not,
that's a whole other thing all together. We're not talking about it in that context.
I'm bringing that up to say that I
wonder or to mention or to wonder if the
next great divide is not at a regional level in the United
States. Maybe the next great divide is because you brought up
Boston, right? So Boston is fundamentally different
as a city than where I
live in north central Texas. I live in a very
rural. What would be considered by folks who are in
Boston, it would be considered to be a very rural area. Now, it's
not that rural to me, but
it seems that way to people. The
stories that are in rural areas
and the stories that are in urban areas, I think that's the next
great dividend. And, and, and I wonder, just as I
did in that episode where we're talking about this point a little bit further,
I wonder if the next great sort of creative
strength is going to come from. From a writer
or an author in a rural area who's going to say, no, I'm committed to
this rural area east of Eden. That's what we're talking about it. I'm committed
to this rural area and I Don't care what you all are doing in the
city. That's interesting, but the next time you film my stuff,
you're not going to see a skyscraper in Boston. Like, that's not what I write
for. I don't write for the skyscrapers in Boston. I think that's already happening and
I don't think you're realizing that it's happening. It's not the style or
the, it's genre driven. If you think about this for a second,
most like a tremendous amount of horror movies start in
urban America. Like they start in those urban environments. Most
crime dramas end up in cities. Like
so. Yeah. If you think about Last Cabin on the Left and like all these
other like, horror, like horror movies, they're all in these like
little rural suburban neighborhoods. You don't see a
horror movie in downtown New York City, like, like in Manhattan or. Right.
Like, or in downtown Boston. Those are, those are crime. Those are
crime movies or gang movies. Like, I think it's already
happening. I think it's just happening by the genre instead of the authors, that's all.
Okay, Okay. I mean, and you may, and you know what? You might have something
there. Maybe, maybe this does descend into genre because I don't,
I, I. Human
creativity is too powerful to be bound up for too long.
Right. It's just, it's, it's like, it's like you're trying
to. It's like you're trying to dam up a raging river. Right.
You know, the Chinese tried to damn the Yangi, the Yellow river, and it didn't
work because it's, it's a river. Like, it's, it's a force of
nature. It just is. And that's what human creativity is. It's a
force of nature. And so if you dam it up
in tamping down regionalism, right, for the last 25
years, it's going to pop up in. Maybe to your point,
all those people who would have gone regional are going now into genres,
right? Because they can, they could play a little bit more. They could play a
little bit more or in there. Well, they could play to an audience that
understands. Right. Like that's instead of a regional understanding.
It's a, it's a, like, instead of like southeastern
United States regional, it's now it's either inner city
or suburban or rural. And anybody who lives in those
environments will get it. Like they'll, they'll understand those, that, that, that
the writing. Well, I wonder if it's also because one of the things that Welty
did And we'll get back to the book here in just a moment, folks. But
one of the things that Welty did really well is she observed, right? She said
that all of her writing was based on observation, observation
of people in her communities, observation of place.
Place was hugely important to her, right? This
place, this geographical
designation has meaning, right? It's not, it's not value
neutral. It has meaning here. And of course, being a
Southern American, it's interesting that I'm reading this book
or that I read this book now and that we're talking about this on the
podcast, because one of my older daughters is my older daughter. My
oldest daughter not older. My oldest daughter is.
She's writing a paper for college right now for her American history
class around the Civil War. So we've been talking a lot about the Civil War
in my household, right? And been sort of
laying out to her, laying out for her with Proximate
and the, the first order, second order, third order causes were for the war. Da
da da da da. And one of the points that I make to her, and
it is a point that I think Welty would appreciate along with Faulkner
and Zora Neale Hurston and Katherine Ann Porter, all
the Harper Lee, I mean, To Kill a Mockingbird. Come on. Like,
one of my favorite books of all time. Exactly. The
reason why those books are so powerful is because they tap
directly into the plot place of the south in its own
psychological conception of itself, which is, of course,
all the things that we know about the American, the American South.
I wonder if there is a. I
wonder if one of the other factors that we're. That we're, that we're,
we're seeing in creatives is
that lack of observation. Like, I wonder how sharply people observe things
anymore, right? So, like, if I was going to write a book about
Carl Hiason, I'll use him as an example. Carl Hiaasen,
he was a mystery writer back in the day, and he
wrote mystery novels that were based in Miami,
Florida, or in Florida just in general, right.
He knew Florida. When I would read Carl Hiaasen
mysteries and I read a whole bunch of them when I was like
late teens, early 20s. I like banged through a whole bunch of them and then
I like jumped off of that train and went to something else. I've heard a
Carl. I haven't thought about Carl hiason in like 25 years. Good Lord.
But, but he was a specifically Floridian writer.
You could tell that he understood Florida. He knew
Florida. He observed Florida. He
also attained national prominence from selling books about Florida.
So selling literally. And Weldy Welty would appreciate this. The
myth of Florida to people in like South Dakota,
the myth of Florida to people in like Idaho who are never going
to go to Florida or the myth of Florida to people in New
York City who when they would retire would like to
go and experience the reality of Florida in the middle of
that state. So
Carl Hiason in the mystery genre, the detective
genre, the crime genre, was an
author who captured all that regional flavor from his
observations. Just like Welting captured regional observations
and was able to turn that into, into dramas and short stories.
I think that's a strength that modern authors are missing. I don't,
I wonder how many of them are on their phones too much.
Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, you got it. You got it. You got to put the
phone down and look around, right? Like this is what we tell leaders. Like, you
got to put the phone down and look around. Like, does that, does that
lead into the observations?
I wonder if our next generation of writers are going to do what you're
asking them to do, but it's going to be through the lens of their phone,
right? So like all of their observations are gonna come from tick tock or Instagram
or Facebook, whatever, like whichever the, whichever the flavor
is. But. And, and you're gonna start
seeing books written in that
instead of, I guess goes back to your point about. Instead of like the flattening
of the, this global globalization. Flattening globalization thing is
because now they're going to be seeing everything they see on their tick tock talk
is from all over the place. So there's not one universal
like you're just talking about the gentleman writing from Florida
or in Welties, you know, writing from the, the South.
It's, it's going to be maybe, maybe, maybe
that's what it is, right? They're observing. They're still observing. Listen, if
you, you're gonna, you're observing whether you think you are or not, whether you're registering
it in your brain is observing, observing or whether you're like whether you understand
that that's what's happening or not is not the is is
you. It is happening. You're. You are definitely. Now if you're always
observing this right then people are going to start writing
about what's in the little box instead of the
regions of the world. Well, one of the ironies of our time, both of, both
of us are film guys and we'll go back to the book after I make
this point. One of the ironies of our time is as the phone has become
more ubiquitous as a physical object in our lives,
the integration of the communication and the physical object of the phone
into movies and television, which
basically have overtaken the novel and have killed it, I think.
Not the book, by the way, just the novel. Right.
Those tools, the phone, that phone is
an object, but also the phone is a communication tool. The struggle
that, the struggle that film people have had to integrate that
into stories has been kind of amazing to me. Kind of funny. Yeah,
it's kind of amazing because it's like
the analogy that I can make is how often do you see someone
in a horror movie? You talked about horror movies. Okay, how often
do you see someone in a horror movie go to the bathroom?
Not because something horrible is about to happen, but just like, because people have to
go to the bathroom. Or, or. My favorite part is when this thing does come
into play in a horror movie, it's all of a sudden out of Service. Like,
we have 99. We have 99.9 of this coverage around
our country, folks. But yet inevitably, you are in a dead zone
when you're in a horror movie.
It's my favorite part of the horror movie. That's true. That's true. And you could,
and you could time it almost to like the beginning of the second act. Like
the, the second act kicks in and then all of a sudden we're in a
dead zone. You're like, really? Like, Sprint has 100% coverage. What are you talking
about? There's no dead zones. Just call somebody. There's no dead zones in the United
States anymore. I mean, come on. I mean, I mean, maybe there are. I'm not,
you know, whatever, but they're, they're very few and far between. You know, there's a,
there's, there's a 15. Not even a 15. There is a 10 minute dead zone
between where I live in Dallas, Fort Worth and
it. And it doesn't even, it's not even dead. It goes from, it goes from.
What do you call it? It goes from a 5 bar
5G down to like 1 bar 1G. So
I can still like stream an audiobook. And I've
done that before. I just can't have a phone call. Hey, son. I can drive.
I can drive from New York City. From New York
City, which is four and a half hours south of my home. Yep. I
can drive from. I can drive from New York City past my home,
drive all the way up to Portland, Maine, which is another two hours
north of My home and never hit a dead zone, not
once. See, that's. Yeah, I mean, but that's
inevitably. I think they're getting clever
to it now though, because every once in a while you'll watch a horror movie
where the phone doesn't work and they'll be like, oh, there's some interference. Like
something's happening to the. Yeah, okay, so. So it's not a dead zone anymore, but
some, you know, the cell tower's down because the
electrical storm or some jack wagon stuff.
By the way, h. By the way, we will actually,
at the end of our episode today, we're gonna have a little bit of an
extra bonus because Tom and I are going to talk about Project Hail Mary because
I have some, we have some thoughts on that. I have some thoughts on movies.
So if we have some time at the end of our episode, we'll do that
today. Okay. So going to book two. So Optimus Daughter is
divided up into, into four books, right? Sort of an old
classic, sort of novelist's approach. And so we're going to go into, we're going to
head into and summarize a little bit of book two. So book two opens up
with, with a funeral. Right?
Now I am a big fan of
funerals. Pause
in literary works. Because a funeral is a place
where we can not
only play with an understanding as an author or as a,
as a, as an audience member or as a reader, as
a witness. Right? We can play with perceptions of
reality, but we also get to play with things that are existential.
Themes that are existential, like life and death, themes
of renewal and redemption, themes of forgiveness and reconciliation.
And of course, when a funeral occurs in real life, as
it does in a novel, as when it does in a novel,
everybody who is at the funeral, well,
everybody doesn't need to be there. So in book two, we
open up with Laurel McKelva
returning to her father's home. And
all six of her bridesmaids from her wedding that she had had years
ago show up. And these six bridesmaids
begin to help her navigate the funeral
process. The community shows up to help her
bury her father, the judge.
Now the interesting thing
about these six women is that they
are the ones who hold the memories
of the community. And it's interesting, so
wealthy Welty sits on, on an observation here
that women, and by the way, Welty was born in
1909. So she, she saw and
grew up in a pre feminist world
in the south and then
matured and had her career in a post
feminism world in the south
feminism doesn't enter into this book. That's a warning, by the
way, for some of you who are looking for it. So if you're, if you're
reading this book and you're looking for that, that doesn't, it doesn't enter
in here. Except.
Not even. Except it enters in, in one. I
shouldn't say it. Interest in it. It glides across the top in one
fashion. And how Laurel, the character Laurel talks about leaving the south
and going to Chicago where she got married at, at
the beginning of the beginning of World War II.
But, but Laurel is comforted by these six
bridesmaids and by the way, they swoop in and they do
everything they can to help her. Now with that
it there of course, is gossiping, backbiting,
conversations that we would consider to be more feminine coded
and more female coded that do occur in this part of the
book. But there's also the giving of food and the preparation
of meals. There's the turning down of the bed.
And the. The African American maid
returns who used to work with the judge and who helped raise
Laurel, returns to, of course, help her
during her time of need. This is the coming
together of community in the second part of the
Optimist's Daughter. Now, a couple of other things
happen in here too. So there's, there's Fay, the
judge's second wife, Laurel's stepmother, such as it were.
And Faye's family comes
in to the narrative in part two. And Faye's
family is from Texas.
They are not from Alabama. No, not from Mississippi. And they're not from Georgia. They
are from Texas. And there is a distinct
regional flavor given to them, as I often say,
about conflicts that happen across the world. We in the United States don't
know the difference between XYZ ethnic group and ABC ethnic group,
but they know the difference. Same thing here,
people in the American South. They know the difference between folks from Georgia,
Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas
and Texas. And yes, I can tell you, living in Texas, they all talk dirty
about each other. Absolutely. Still
these days, states do still
matter. And in this narrative it matters as well,
because the family of Fay rushes in and
behaves as one of my old
ex girlfriends. Back in the day, their mother would have said to me, they behave
like a bunch of wood ticks.
Some old school terminology there.
Finally, there are the men who help
bury the judge, the judge's male friends
and the judge's male friends. The men in part two of the
Optimist's Daughter behave in a fashion
that is old School, Southern patriarchy. They
run around, they do the things they're supposed to do, they listen to the women
when they need to. And then when they can scatter off and not take any
responsibility, they scatter off and not take any responsibility. There's a
whole, there's a whole sequence in there of one of the judge's friends.
I don't want to ruin it for you. Go, go read the book. But one
of the judge's friends going and getting some lemonade for his wife,
who literally berates him into going and getting the lemonade and, and then coming
back and he delivers the lemonade and then he runs outside to go smoke
cigars. And Laurel observes this as a, as a
witness, both of those, both as a witness of the new
generation, the next generation that's beginning to come in and is, is observing and judging
this old school behavior, but also as someone who grew
up in that behavior and finds comfort in it during her time of need,
when she's mourning her, her father.
Welty hits on something in here, in the second part of the book that Joan
Didion also hit on another point that her and Didion, you know, sort
of, sort of share where she's writing
part two of this novel. And at one level it operates as
a regional documentary of behaviors of people in the south
during that time around funerals, but it also
writes, she also engages with it at a social
documentary level. She's making some social commentary on what she's
seeing and what she's, what she's thinking about. And I think this is where
Welty's genius is. I think this is what won her the Pulitzer Prize because
she's doing the social documentary without being heavy handed.
She's not being judgmental. She's merely saying, this
is what we saw. This is, this is the way that it was.
And you make a judgment about it
now in our time, everyone documents everything. We talked about that extensively
in the first part of the show with the phones and everything else, from every
small aspect of their personal lives to the larger social moments of our culture.
But no one ever stops to ask what
documenting and making and sharing all of this quote unquote content
actually means matter of fact. I think that historians of the future
300 years from now are going to wonder at the flood
of irrelevancy that we have created.
And I think they're going to be, they're going to be choked. They're not going
to know what to do. They're not going to know how to sift out meaning.
And I think they will come to the conclusion that we, we didn't know how
to do it either. And I don't think that that'll be, I don't think that'll
be a check mark plus for us. I don't, don't think that's going to be
a good thing. So Tom and I were talking about
something that I want to bring up here in a little bit of a different
context. Previously we were talking about this book and getting
ready to prepare for the show. A couple days ago we were talking about this,
the issue of disinterested journalists. And Tom was going on a little bit of a
rant about journalism. I don't know if he's going to revisit this here,
but Welty sort of behaves like an anthropologist and a journalist and
a social commentator without
she mastered journalistic. Just like Joan Didion early
in her career, not later. Later Didion got wackadoo a little bit
on this. But, but early in her career they
both mastered, and they were both of the same generation,
mastered the idea of that disinterested journalist
where you couldn't sense what their biases were.
And now we live in a world where everybody's a
marketer all the time. We're all marketing all the time.
Whether we want to be marketing or not, we're marketing all the time. Even I
am marketing right now. I cannot help it. We are all
marketers now,
but no one seems to know what meaning we can grasp from this.
So I'm going to use optimist daughter and the funeral and all that that
I just set up. There is a setup for this question. Question, Tom, if.
What does all of this mean? I'm going to ask you the existential question. What
does all of this mean? Give, give us some meaning for all of
this. That way at least we'll have something on the
Internet that Maybe will survive 300 years from now that
can be found. Because I'm, I'm, I'm not yelling nearly as loudly with my voice
as I could be. That maybe in some quiet
corner of the Internet some historian 300 years from now will find and they'll go,
Tom Libby. Got it.
Good luck to them. I mean, I'm not sure. I mean, you know, all I
got right now are some opinions and as you know, they're pretty strong
this case because I, you know,
kind of like you're leading, leading to here. There is a
major difference in what you just described as
wealthy's writing style, which is
observational, no bias. I'M just going to tell you what I'm
seeing. And that just doesn't seem to exist anymore. And
because journalism has turned into marketing. And
one of my frustrations, as we were talking, as you alluded to as we were
talking the other day, I cannot find
anywhere anymore where I can just get factual data.
Right. Just give me what. Folks, listen, we all know what's
going on around the world right now. We have wars in Iran, we have Israel
doing this, Ukraine and Russia having this fight, et cetera, et cetera. We know that
there's, there's turbulence in the world.
But I want to know what the turbulence is stemming from
without somebody giving me their, to your point, their
bias. Whether you, and again, whether you
are, whether you are, whether you stand behind
our current, current administration blind
faithfully, or you are on the other side and you hate him,
you hate the administration with the passion of a thousand sons. I
don't care which side of the coin you are, you're on, but give me factual
reasons why you stand on that side of the coin. And
nobody does it. Nobody is giving us
factual information. Why are bombs being dropped
here or there? Well, this happened, then that happened, then this happened, then that
happened. The bombs dropped. Okay, now it's up to me
to determine what side of the coin I, I fall on because
of the, the factual data. If you have a
hundred. This, this goes to me, this goes directly to
the heart of a problem that I was told when I was very, very young.
When I was very, very young. Somebody asked me, one of my elders at the
time asked me, me if I understood the difference between right and wrong.
What's the difference between not right and wrong, True,
true or false? Sorry, what is the difference between true or false? And I
said, well, one is right and one is wrong. And they said, no, it's the
majority. If the majority of people
think something is true, then you are going to start believing it's true. Whether it
is or not, it's the, the, the true or false, it lies
with the majority. And, and that, that's kind of what I'm
seeing with journalism. If enough journalists say this is happening this way,
then we all just follow that leader. It's very rare that you find somebody trying
to buck the system not because you have alternate views,
just because you want to hear factual information. It's very
strange to me that, that you know, and again, I'm not saying I
believe that, by the way, that the truth, the difference between the difference between true
and false or the difference between between right and wrong is the majority. I, I
understand that is not, that is not how you should be living your life.
I get that. But that was said to me when I was a young kid
that had no other, I had no other point of reference to
understand the dynamics that they were talking about. So it's like it was the
easiest version of that explanation to me as I grew
older and I started understanding what they meant by that. That was
the shock, that was the shocking awe for me. Like that's what I was like,
oh, they're right. But it's not, it's not truly the
definition of right and wrong or the definition of
true or false. It is just people tend to lead
or follow like sheep to that, that majority.
The like. It's very rare that you find somebody that says, we're not gonna anyway
to go back now circle this back. Because in my
opinion, journalists are marketers in a sense. They
just need the clip clicks. Right? Like so they will say and do
wherever the majority leads them because they want all the clicks, because
that's their job survival at this point. They're not being, they're
not being hired by CNN or Fox News or ABC or
whomever. They're not getting hired by any of those people to
just dragnet it. Right. Like dragnet just the
facts, man. No, they want clicks, which means you have to do
something or say something to drive those clicks. You are marketing
your opinions or your biases. The.
That's the only way for they, for them to survive. The problem is that is
now leaking and seeping into everyday life because of
these things. Yep. So
now, now whether you speak loud or not,
you're going to basically be judged by the number of clicks you get on this
web, on this podcast. Podcast, or a number of downloads you have on this podcast.
So your success or failure is going to be based on the number of downloads,
not on the quality of the content. Because you could have the best podcast
in the market right now. And if you don't have enough downloads to justify
that statement, you're not making it. So,
so I will say this. I. I do have the best. I do have
the best podcast in the market right now. You are part of the best podcast
in the market right now. And then you're right, I don't have enough downloads to
justify that. You're exactly correct.
And this is why
on the other side of the idea
that we are all marketers is
also the idea that, or, or not the
idea, but the, the fact that
for lack of a better idea,
the Idea that marketing ruins everything, right?
And it's not that the Internet was this like, you know, pristine
sort of virginal territory with no bad actors.
That's never been the Internet. Tom. Tom and I both
been. We've both been here since. Since the dark
magic. The rails for the dark magic were originally laid. We've been around here for
a while. It was never.
Oh, I just saw today that that
ask.com finally just shut down, right? I was like, oh, really? I didn't even know.
Yeah, I didn't know that was still rolling. Good Lord.
But my point is that human beings are going
to be bad. Human beings are going to be good. This is. This is. This
is just sort of the human nature kind of thing, right? The.
The challenge we have is. And. And Tom, you named
it correctly, the challenge we have is if the vast majority
is pursuing clicks and behaving in a way where they are only
pursuing marketing outcomes, then of course they're going to be
biased. Now, with that being said, my oldest son is in
journalism, and I will tell you that the way he writes
is not a way that. That, that pursues clicks.
He's actually trying to get to maybe not capital
T truth, but just the facts. Right now there are
people who believe that his pursuit, because they
have been so warped. And this is the thing on. This is the other side
effect. They have been so warped by people who
are pursuing clicks, they're running after him going,
well, you had to be pursuing clicks to say this thing about me, even though
it was factual. You had to be pursuing clicks because that's the only way that
someone would bring up this factual. Right. That even remotely bring up this factual thing.
Thing. Right? Which. Which of course
leads to an inability
of the audience who is observing this
and reading this and trying to discuss out what is
not true. Again, I'm not using that word on purpose. What
is factual from what is opinion to be confused.
And so you have the people who don't like what's happening
muddying the waters. You have the people who
are manipulating the system muddying the
water. And then you have people who are
seeking to navigate the waters, like myself or my
son, in a way that neither muddies them nor. Nor
further causes problems, who can't get traction no matter how loudly
we yell. Which, by the way, I'm of the opinion that. And I'll just
sort of preface this a little bit. This is sort of how I'm going to
end today. I'm of the. I'm of the ability. I'm of the thought process now
that actually speaking quieter is probably better rather than
yelling louder. But, but that's, that's, that's for a little
bit later on. So I know I saw you sort of have that. You sort
of had that, had that, had that response. Because this is, this is what, this
is what is happening. And it's still at the end of the day.
And, and, you know,
people want to know what all this means. We want to know what it means.
Not necessarily. Like, you picked. You pick something big, right? You pick like
Ukraine and Iran, and these are big things. Yeah. Okay. Because
there are things everybody knows. I'm less interested in what those
things mean, and I'm more interested in. In what.
I'm more interested in what the tax abatement
promises mean for my community
around data centers. Which has nothing to do with anything
that you're doing in Boston. Right. It has everything to do
with what's happening in my local community. I want to know what that means.
And Facebook, even Facebook
muddies the waters of that meaning. I can't get
meaning on that because you know what the people. And again, it's,
it's, it's a smaller microcosm of a much larger thing at scale that you're
seeing with larger international events. So we've scaled
down that sort of marketing behavior to the
average person, and that's been deleterious, that's been damaging to our culture.
That's why we can't communicate about the same things. Yeah, no,
and you're right, I, again, I, I use something because, you know, people
listening to this podcast are listening from all over the place. So I was trying
to find something universal. Right? Like that everybody on the planet
could put their fingertip on if they wanted to. Yeah. Fact still remains the
same, though, because I agree with you too. Like, if I'm looking at, like, you
know, we have a, A thing up here. You know, we have a special prop,
what's called Prop 2 and a half, right? Like, there's a, there's a. There's this
automatic trigger that your town could pull. It's
called a. A property tax of 2 1/2 percent. So it's an automatic prop
2 1/2 increase. If they need revenue
for something now, they can only pull the trigger, like X so many number of
years. Like it's like once every five years or something like that.
But. And I don't remember all the details to that, but the point is, to
your point, when they pull that trigger and you want to know why, like, okay,
what's going on that you need the revenue, like for the city. Like, you're
like, you're abatement problem. I'm like, we can't find like,
oh, there was, you know, a school blew up or not blew up, but
you know what I mean? Like, they needed to expand a school or they needed
to pay for whatever, whatever it was. And you want to be able to
justify it. And you can almost never find. But to your point, Facebook
forums and all this stuff are just people throwing mud at each other. Like, well,
you know, and then of course, every once in a while you get the, you
try to get the voice of reason in those groups that say, hey guys, stop.
You guys are neighbors. Stop throwing mud at each other. When you realize that
the government can do this whether you want them to or not.
That's why they call it a prop two and a half override. Like, they, they,
they can just do it and you're just asking them for why
out of. And they're going to tell you out of the nicety, not out of
the requirement. Like, there's no requirement that says they have to tell us what the
money is for. For. But every government official does just because they know we can
vote them out. Right? Like, if you don't tell us what it's for, we're going
to vote you out next. The next election, you're gone. So they tell us.
But they're finding that information is literally like finding
a needle in a pile of needles. Never mind the haystack, it's
like a needle in a pile of needles and you just don't, don't know which
one you're grabbing onto to try to figure out what the hell's going on. So
again, I agree with you that it's like the muddying of the water is
not. And by the way, we're not picking on journalists here because to, to
your point, with this, this, you know, Facebook forum situation
or Facebook group posts, whatever you're talking about, it's not
just journalists, it's everybody. Like, people will say something in those
forums just to get reactions from people. Correct?
They're not saying it because they're trying to add to the conversation or they're trying
to clarify something. People will throw comments in there just
to see how people react. And that's
not helpful. Stop that, guys.
Like, it's not helpful. And that's even before we've gotten to the
trolls and the bad actors and the bot farms that are offshore
that are, that are mucking around in our internal infrastructure. And by
the way, where we're mucking around with our trolls and our bot farms in our
country, in other countries, infrastructure. Because everybody's doing it to everybody
else, right? This isn't just something the Iranians happen to be doing or the
Russians happen to be doing, where the Chinese and the North Koreans happen to be
doing. The United States is doing it, the British are doing it,
you know, the French are doing it. The first world, the first
world, whatever that may mean. The first world nations are doing it to the
third world nations. Everybody's doing it to everybody. This, this is,
this is the problem. And there's no meaning behind it. To your point,
Tom, it's just trolling. It's getting a
reaction to get a reaction. It's.
I'm not saying, I'm just saying. And then go ahead and saying the thing
and then, you know, they just walk away, like I, I,
something some. Was it today? Might have been today,
maybe it was a couple days ago, in preparation for this podcast, but
apparently somebody ran their mouth in England online about some
boxer or something. And the boxer, like, actually showed up to their house, like,
found out where this person lived, because of course, you know, everybody could be doxed
on the Internet and like showed up to this person's house and was
like, you're gonna say that to my face? And the guy's like, oh. You know.
And apparently there was like a whole like commercial ad campaign about
this. Like, don't say the things on the Internet that you. And of course they
use it because there's no free speech laws in the UK and
it's libel and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So there was a larger sort of
of state cultural apparatus behind this thing.
And those kinds of
things work other places. The reason they don't work here is because we have this
thing called the First Amendment. And as Dave Chappelle infamously said,
the reason the Second Amendment follows on the First Amendment is because you're free to
say whatever it is you want to say in this country. Government can't stop you.
But here's the but. You're gonna need a
gun.
If you run your mouth that hard.
I still don't think we've underst. We know what it means. We haven't really
figured that out. I think maybe we got close to something
with your idea of perception, and maybe that's the thing for leaders here, is,
you know, we can talk about perception equaling
truth and what other people observe, but if
you're observing something as a leader, that makes no sense. I Think it is
incumbent upon you to go and figure out what that thing is
and why it makes no sense. I also think it's incumbent on
us to. And this is why I started with the funeral.
I think it's incumbent on us to revisit and re
rebuild traditions and structures and
customs because we've talked a lot about the Internet and social
media. One of the other knock on effects of those tools is
that it's convinced us that we can just sort of float along above things
and just not be impacted by them. And that's
a lie. That, that's a lie. And Welty, you know,
doesn't believe that the culture that she came out of didn't believe that. Tradition
was the thing that grounded you. Community was the thing that grounded you.
Family and, and even,
even, I mean, nature. Like in part three of this book,
it opens up with Laurel and her six
bridesmaids who have come back to her house after they've cleaned out the Texas
clan and everybody's gone home and the funeral's over.
And yes, I did use the word clan. Clean them all out. Right.
And. And the six bridesmaids come over
and they're all helping her garden and they're gossiping
and talking in the garden. Right? And it's just six ladies
talking in the garden to Laurel. And there's such, there's. There's. One of the things
that's interesting about parts two and three of this book is there's such a sense
of community. Like at first I was like, oh, I'm reading this. It
is a man. You know, men perceive community differently than women
do. And how that grows is different than how it grows among
women. But you could definitely see that like
Eudora had sat down with. Not even
sat down, had seen women behave like this.
Older women behave like this and pass along these traditions and
engage with the nature, such as it were, you know, in the
garden bed and use that engagement as a way to grow
relationships between people. And by the way, they're still gossiping the way the
people gossip on Facebook. That's not gone away. But it was only
the six of them. It wasn't at scale. And everybody in the neighborhood wasn't trolling
in. That's the fundamental difference.
Yeah, the anchoring to small dramas and small things.
So let me talk about these women for just a second. The
characters of Faye, Laurel and the four.
The four. Four of the six bridesmaids who stuck around. Mrs.
Pease, Ms. Adele, Ms. Tennyson and Tish, they
all hold memories of the Past, and that's in part three. Is, is,
is. It's all about the past memories of the judge, the past memories of
Laurel when she was a child. It's kind of this attempt by these
bridesmaids, these friends of hers, to build Laurel back
up after the funeral had happened. And that's what great
tight knit communities do for people. And that's the thing that we're missing by
thinking that we could float above it.
You're a person, Tom, who, not only out of your cultural tradition,
but I think just how you're wired, the way you've talked, and we've never actually
directly talked about this, but I do think the cultural memory is very important for
you, just how you're naturally wired.
Unfortunately, it's not. It's not. I think
that that's again, one of those things that's either dying
or maybe needs to be renewed.
But I do think it's important for leaders to hold cultural memory. So how do
we, how do leaders do that? Not just in an organizational
structure, but how do leaders do that in general? How do they,
how do they hold memories? Like, how do they connect with
people and do that? What is, maybe some ways that they can do that? Because
that's, that's something that definitely jumps out at you from the optimist's daughter.
I think there's, I think there's an awful lot to actually unpack there because
I think it, it matters from which angle you're looking at the business
itself. Meaning like so for example,
when you're talking about sales and marketing, you have to have a pretty short
memory and not allow the, not
allow the mistakes of the past to hold you in fear of
trying to advance the future. Meaning like so just to give you an example,
like I, I, you know, you encounter somebody who is, got a new
product on online or whatever, and you're suggesting they do maybe
a social media campaign or something like that, and they go, no, no, time out.
I tried social media. It didn't work. We're not doing social media.
And that, that, that memory of them failing at social media
is not allowing to them to realize that social media
today is not the same as it was 15 years ago. Right.
Like, so there are ways and mechanisms and levers to pull there
that didn't exist 15 years ago and that you should revisit this.
But the holding on to those memories stop them from doing so. So
it stops them from progressing into thinking that. Now on the flip side,
there's. I was again, I was told,
I remember working for as very young, I was probably in my early
20s and I was working for this senior VP
level person and this guy was just super nice, like super
nice all the time, even when he had to discipline
like, like enforce a disciplinary action, whether it's
putting somebody on a pip or whatever, right. But he was always just genuinely
nice about it. He genuinely cared about
you, you as a person, not you as an employee. Well,
he did still carries you as an important. But he went be. It went beyond
caring about you as an employee and it went into the,
the realm of caring about you as a person. And I asked him one day
because again, as you know me, I'm trying to learn everywhere I can for
I asked him, I was like why, why is it important for you to do
that? And it had nothing to do with like it was just being
inquisitive, right? And he said, well, you've got to be really nice
to people on the way up because you're going to see them again on the
way to down. So I may be a regional VP
of sales and mar, like you know, sales now it's like but 10,
20 years from now when I'm obsolete, I might have to go get a
job from that person that I just put on a pip that now
they're the VP of sales and marketing and now I would need a job from
them and they're going to remember that I was a human being to them first.
So that theory of like remember, remember things
on the way up because you're going to see them again on the way down.
That was very impactful to me when I was a young guy, like when I
was learning some of the about when I was learning about leadership, that,
that put a peg in a place where I don't think a lot of
people actually took from like that wasn't
everybody's instinct to do that is, you know, to be nice to somebody on
the way up because you're going to see them on the way down. So I
think again, depending on which facet of business you're looking at, I think all, all
of these things have.
They hold water, right? Like there's something to be said about
letting memories go versus hanging on to the like all of it
matters. Like, and it's not a simple box to put everything in that
says you should learn this from memories and then move on, right?
Like it's not that simple. And I think that we as people
sometimes want something wrapped nice and neat in a little package
and we say, okay, this is how we do something we learn that we move
on to learn something else in this particular case, and holding on to
memories. Memories are so impactful to us that.
That there are lessons to learn and there are lessons to unlearn because of
them. And you need to be able to kind of go back to the well
multiple times in order to kind of indicate what you're supposed to
do next. Like, the past will teach us for sure. You and
I have talked about this so many times about, like, the past
repeating itself. The more things change, the more things stay the same. If you have
those memories rooted in that, in that past, then you can go back to that
well over and over to try to teach yourself how to anticipate
things, how to have predict. We have
predictive analytics built into us based on our past.
Based on our past, we can predict how we're going to react to a future
event. Like that's. We have a built in, you know, predictive.
So memories allow us to use that. Memories are what allow us
to use that predictive analytics on the inside. Now, real quick, from a
cultural perspective, though, I think
there are things getting lost that once
they are gone, are going to be so missed
that we're not going to understand why we even miss them. I'll give you
an example of. And this is going to be. This will be
a little behind the curtain here. So for any of you who are listening, who
happen to be native, I really. I apologize for giving away some of our
secrets. But this one, I think is important because it directly
goes to what you're talking about here. My daughter and I were at a
powwow yesterday and we were observing. Her and I were just observing a few things
and we were observing some of the younger dancers and
how there used
to be. And my daughter has. My daughter is only 24, and she has
memories of this. When you wanted to be a particular style of
dancer, there was a particular way
that you would go and ask somebody to teach
you. And today nobody's really doing that because
they're all online now. And they just can watch the steps and learn the
steps, and they can, but they're not learning the meaning behind the dance.
They're not learning. They're not learning that value that
there's this intrinsic value to understanding
how to ask somebody for help. That
from our culture is literally
vital. It's like the root. It is the root of the
culture of being able to look at an elder or look at somebody old,
like, ask. There's a mechanism there that you're supposed to
leverage. So that that elder knows that
you're sincere in wanting to learn. And
the sincerity of the want is going by
the wayside because we have just such easy access to the footwork
or to the steps or the styles or the regalia styles
that match the footwork. And we can just look it up on YouTube and watch
a few steps and learn how to dance and just go. And I
think that's heart wrenching to me that
the memories of how to ask, how to be
asked, the honor, the honor it has for somebody to come
to you and ask you to that, that,
that being missing from the cultural perspective
is terrifying to me. And my daughter
still has memories of being taught those things
and she's watching younger dancers that are just
not being taught that. And it hurts her heart at
24. So again,
what leaders can take from some of these memories, especially if you're talking from the
cultural perspective. Stop. Stop allowing them to
do this. Stop allowing them to use that as a
cultural reference point. You have
this deep rooted ancestral culture
that is going to be gone if you don't hold on to it. Now that
being said, there's this small, like this
little woodpecker thing inside me that bangs my brain every once in a while that
says, just remember your culture is a living, breathing thing and it will
adapt and move forward. That that's the way it's supposed to happen. But
there are just certain things that just
cannot be forgotten. That. To your point about holding on to the
memories, I absolutely refuse to let those memories
go. Refuse. And, and I'm
starting to be viewed as an elder in our culture. And I'm not. I don't,
I do not think of myself as an elder. I am certainly not old enough.
Although my kids think I am. I'm not. I am not.
I find there are elders that are, that I still go to
for a lot of guidance. I still ask a lot of questions to. I
still ask and I ask in very particular ways the way that I'm talking about
and they appreciate the fact that I still do that. So when I have
grandkids, you bet your damn bottom dollar my grandkids are gonna
learn that. And I don't care what cell phone they have in front of them.
If they don't do it the right way, they're gonna have to. Gonna. They're. They're
going to contend with me. So it's.
Anyway, I, I can go on and on. Like I said, I think there is
a lot to unpack with this one because I think this one is really really
important. This is huge because.
The solution. Let me go to a solution.
Maybe I don't know. Or trade off, I don't know. I, I think, I think
the trade off is to your point and I think you hit on it correctly.
The trade off is,
it's a trade off between the advancement of culture
and the gatekeeping of tradition.
Yes. And by the way, thank you for sharing
that. I appreciate that, that, that was a little bit behind the curtain.
I, I didn't ask for that. But it's a great example of, of
what we're, what we're talking about here. I
think, I think that trade off
has been made in the direction of
advancing culture for benefit and gain.
And we could talk about what those benefits are, what those gains are. But I
think too often in the last 25 years,
particularly sharply. And by the way, that trade off has always been
made. That's always been sort of the tension. I think what's happened in the
last 25 years is that trade off has been made more and more often in
the direction of
progress, whatever the hell that may mean,
versus gatekeeping tradition. And I'm going to use a
popular culture example of this. So we're recording this today.
The date of this recording, not the date of the release of this episode.
The day of the recording of this episode is May 4, 2026.
Star Wars Day. May the fourth be with you. Yeah.
Okay. Now I'm not
going to go on, on and on about Star Wars. Not going to do
that. I could, I could do an entire series
of shows on Star Wars. I'm a Star wars guy.
George Lucas did not gatekeep
that franchise correctly. And
when he made the trade off between
progressing a vision of story
in order to maybe get paid or maybe he was
tired, whatever the entity he sold
it to, Disney then proceeded to make all the wrong trade
offs, removed the boundaries and the borders.
And to your point, I love how you've mentioned this about permission. This is
genius. Disney believe they didn't have to
ask the permission of the elders of strangers. Star Wars. And the elders of Star
wars weren't George Lucas. The ones who held the cultural memory of
Star wars were the fans. Yeah, the original
geek fans that watched those movies. And,
and, and were a subculture of culture.
And yeah. Was it majority males? Were they majority white? Were they
majority dopey dudes who couldn't get dates? Yeah, absolutely.
That's, that's who the Star wars fans are. They're dirty, smelly, video
game gaming, tabletop gaming dudes who can't get dates. Yes.
Okay, so what, they're the elders, though, to make the, to make
the parallel here. They're the ones that hold the memory of what Star
wars was and Disney was like, nope, we don't care because we got to go
get this new audience over here. We have to progress the culture. This has
happened consistently in popular cultural properties over
the last 25 years. And then when the people
who hold the cultural value, who were never asked what their
opinion was, when they riot online,
then somehow they're the problem. They're toxic.
They're the issue. Now, I want to be very clear.
I am not minimizing what Tom is saying at all. What he
gave is a very high example.
I think the exact same thing that Tom is talking about is what's happened is
what's happening everywhere else in our culture too. I don't think that this is, this
is an outlier thing. And that's a real problem
for me. It's a problem for me too. And to your
point, when, but when you say something about it, you're, you're like, you're old
fashioned and you're not, you know, you get labeled all kinds of weird things
and I don't even care if, if, if troublemaker or, you know,
dissident. I don't, I wouldn't care about those. But I don't like when it
comes back to you as being too stiff and too,
too, too, too wrapped up in the old ways. You don't like, you
don't, you don't like, you can't see the future. Like, stop. You're
opposed to progress. Yeah. Like, especially,
again, especially in my culture, I laugh when I say that. I'm like, I use
AI more than anybody. Like, like, trust me
when I tell you it's not because I don't want to see the futuristic part
of the world. That's not what it is. But there, to your point, there,
there needs to be some, I think there needs to be guardrails in place where
this stuff doesn't happen on a regular basis. I just think it's, it's
unfair. It's unfair to the people that
matter. And to your point, it's the elder generation. That elder generation is, is the
ones that, that matter in those cases. It's also the use of, and this
is where technology as a tool, tool is now
neutral because it's not the technology's problem. Yeah. So
the technology of the phone and YouTube
disconnected. To your point that the mechanics
of being able to do the
traditional dances correctly from the meaning of the
traditional dances that was held by the elders at. At a. At a.
If I may use the term, a pow wow. Right. Okay.
That separation was facilitated by technology.
And if it hadn't been YouTube plus the phone, it had been something
else that would have made. That would have separated those things. Right. Okay.
Now, with that being said, I think of
the line from Jurassic park, the original Jurassic park, the. The great Ian
Malcolm line. You
were. Your scientists were so worried about whether or not they could,
they didn't stop to think about whether or not they should. Yeah,
our technologists were so worried about whether or not they could. Our
marketers were so worried about whether or not they could. The people who were
tearing down cultural guardrails like Disney, I'm looking at you, were
so worried about whether or not they could, they didn't stop
to think about whether or not they should. And every time
someone causes, calls, pause and says, should we be doing
this? They're getting the dirty end of the stick. And that's that. That's my
opposition. That's my opposition. You know, the,
the should we do this? People, they're not enemies of progress.
They understand that when you separate the mechanics of a thing from the
meaning of the thing, the meaning always goes away and the
mechanics stay. But now they're hollow.
Now, question for you as follow up to this said
your daughter's 24. My oldest daughter's
21. My
second oldest daughter is 15. Get ready to be
16 in about a spin of a minute, about a month and a half. That
girl's going to be 16 years old, by the way. I just signed up to,
like, be her parent instructor, which. You can do that in Texas. Be her parent
instructor for driving lessons. Yeah. Good. This is going to be good times.
In the under 25s.
I think we can take heart.
I think they're sick of the. The technical
disconnects. I think they're sick of the surgery. They don't
like what they've been left with. They don't like the technique without meaning.
I think you can take heart, Tom. I think that that
will be the generation that will bring you the grandchildren,
and that generation will tell you those grandchildren will tell their
kids. You shut your mouth and you listen to Tom. Yeah.
Put that crap down and you shut up and listen to him. Well,
I don't want to. This is old and boring. You don't get a vote.
Be quiet.
That's not. That's not a. That's not. I don't know how she'll approach it.
But I sense that if she's anything like my daughter, there's a lot
of folks in that, as they call them, the zoomers. There's a lot of folks
in Generation Z that want that,
that they want those two things clicked back together because they've been through the,
the disintermediation with technology. They've been through the trade off.
They understand what's at the other end of the trade off. Like I talk about
myself as an African American who was born on the other side of the civil
rights movement. I saw what happened on the other side of the civil rights movement.
I would. Jim Crow wasn't great. Let me be
very clear. Okay. And
the legal function as a technology of the
Civil Rights act disconnected the
techniques from meaning in black community, which is why black
community has particularly underclass. Black community has
floated anklelessly in worse and worse ways for the
last 50, 60 years. My generation didn't have enough
power, nor were there enough of us to click those two things back together.
And then the cultural flattening started. And
I say these things and people don't even understand what I'm talking about. Right, right.
It's, it's already gone. It's, it's too far gone. We, we have to go to,
in my case, we have to go to the future because the past is just
too far gone. We, we can't get back to the
way Thomas Soul was raised and educated. We,
we can't get to a, we can't get back to a pre civil rights conception
of African American existence in this country. We can't get there.
The way the bridge is, the bridge is burned. It's gone.
And so you're correct in defending that. And I think your
daughter on the other side of that and other folks in her generation
are going to be the ones that are going to do the yeoman's work of,
of making sure that, that, that, that gets, that it gets maintained.
At least I get that sense. I hope so. I, I hope you're right. And
to your point, I mean, I, I get that, I get that feeling from,
from, you know, kids, her age group as well, because again, they're the ones that
are going to start having kids in the near future. But some of the
teenagers that are a little younger than her like that, 14 to 6,
14 to 17, I don't get that sense from them. Yeah,
well, well, there's always so, so millennials. Millennials. And the
millennials and the Gen Z are going to have
an out andout street war socially that's already starting
because, and this is, this is how it always goes, right?
And then whoever's coming up behind Gen Z, Gen Alpha, they're going to have
an out andout social street war. Like it's just going to, it's just going to
happen because of the nature of how
technology has speeded up the, the progression between
generations. And the technological, which we brought up last time we talked in east of
Eden, the technological separations now that matter more than generational or
even historical. Right? So the 14 year old
doesn't understand why they can't go to YouTube. They, they, they, they literally do not
understand the question. Like it doesn't. You could bring it to them.
They would be shocked at even having to consider that. That would open up new
parallels of, of stuff in their brain.
Whereas, you know, the 24 year old, only 10 years
older goes, oh, I know what we've lost, or I
recognize what we've lost. You know, so
gatekeeping, gatekeeping is huge. And I think, I think we've got a.
I think everybody in the United States has. I think every cultural and subcultural
group in the United States, and not just in the United States, but also I
think other places around the world kind of get this a little bit better even
than we do. But you have to culturally gatekeep, otherwise
you can't, you can't protect, to your point, what's valuable.
Okay. Rounding the corner. Don't
want to talk about Project Hail Mary. I want to wrap up this book. This
book is great. Go pick up the Optimist's daughter
in book four of the Optimist's Daughter. Book four is actually one long chapter,
so don't be surprised it's not divided up into different chapter pieces. And book
four is about the confrontation between
Laurel, the, the judge's daughter, and
Faye, the stepmother, the young stepmother.
And they get into, they get into a fight over
a breadboard. A breadboard that was Laurel's
mother's breadboard. A breadboard that has specific
meaning because it's part of the estate. Right.
That's going directly to Laurel. And
one of the things that's interesting in this
is that Laurel wins the fight.
And actually this was in the review that I sent to you from the New
York Times. I don't know if you had a chance to read that, Tom, but
Laurel wins this fight because Faye doesn't actually understand
what she's fighting over. Faye only
understands that to my point that I was just
making earlier. She only understands that she
doesn't understand and she doesn't even know the right
questions to ask. And so Laurel wins
by not fighting. Laurel wins by
in essence abandoning her, not her roots, but
abandoning the thing in order to pursue something
higher. And then she gets on a train and goes back to
Chicago.
One of the points that I like to make at our close here today is
that.
Eudora Welty and, and, and what she was writing about in the Optimist
Daughter her entire career. And I think Tom and I have kind of covered this
really, really well today. So go pick up Optimus. His daughter.
Eudora Welty really was sincere in
what she was trying to do. She was trying to make a sincere representation of
people that she observed mythologies that
she believed in or maybe that she did not, maybe not that she
believed in. I don't know if she believed in them or not. And that's a
great thing. I don't know if she believed in them or not. She presented them
though, as if she did, which is genius. That's how that's where her real talent
was, was she presented tradition and custom as things
that anchor people to reality into meaning.
And that those things, when you lose them, when
you are disintermediated from them, as Tom has brought up, you
really do lose something. It's not just about breadboards
or in Tom's case, footwork, or in my case education
in a pre civil rights black America. It's not just about
those things. It's about the things that they
mean and the way they anchor to us, to the world and us
to meaning. And Welty got all that, but she could only write about it
in a sincere kind of way. You and I have
talked about this on the show before, Tom. I think that for Gen
X, sincerity is one of those things we're going to have to pick up.
You and I are both firmly in that generation. We're the generation of
cynics and ironic detachment. I've said that before
on this show and I don't think that works
like I see the passion which you're talking about, what you were observing,
that's sincere. When I talk about the things I talk about on the show,
this is sincere. I couldn't do this show without sincerity. Wealthy couldn't
write her book without sincerity. And sincerity is not
cringe. It's not even cringe worthy. It's the thing we
actually need, need to
get where we need to go. I
know we didn't talk specifically about specific pieces in the book, but final thoughts
on the Optimist Daughter. What can leaders learn from this. Tom, what.
What should we all take from. From our conversation today, even?
Well, I've used this phrase on the show before,
and I think it was something that we kind of joked around a little bit
here and there, but I think it applies here as well. Again, when
I. Some of the leadership training that I've had in
the past, one of my favorite parts of it was,
you have heard a hundred times in your life, don't just stand there, do
something right? So they. People want action when things are happening,
when in reality. And I think this leads back to what she was doing
is don't just do something, stand there right? Like
so observe. Make sure you completely understand what's
going on before you just jump in to answer questions or jump in to answer
or give solutions or anything like that. I think into your point with
her observation skills, I think leaders
can learn from those observation skills. Being
able to objectively view something without
bias, without predetermined, without allowing certain
things to influence your thought processes,
I think it's. I think it's a talent that you need to
hone. It's not inherent. Like, you don't just get this
automatically. I think it's something that she probably learned over the years. And when
we were talking about her bio earlier, if you thought about, think about what she
did for work, how her education was, it
taught her to be that observant. And I think even if
you are not, if you don't have access to those teachings directly,
then you should just go look for them. You should be observant as to what's
going on. Make sure you know and understand the. All
of the details and happenings around you before
you start making those decisions. I think that lesson is all over
this. Like, anyway, that's my
take out of it, anyway. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. Well. And you know
what? Like, the challenging of determining meaning, as
we brought up at the begin, I brought up at the beginning of this episode,
from what you're watching other people do, is a challenge that dogged
us through the 20th century. It dogged us at a
social level, dogged us at a cultural level. And we're going to explore
more of this in A Book of Common Prayer by Joan Didion and Sting towards
Bethlehem. We're going to cover both of her books. We're also going to visit a
17th century novel and talk
about that as well. Because the challenge of observation, the challenge of being
able to determine meaning, the challenge of being able to sift that as an
observer is huge, I think for all
of us. Because we do spend a lot of time
observing the world now
in those rectangular devices that we have in our hands.
Yeah. All right. Well, Tom and I didn't
resolve anything today, and I'm actually glad about that, actually. Normally, I was like, well,
we should have resolved something. Now we didn't resolve anything. We brought up a bunch
of different points, and you know what? I'm fine with that. So
I want to thank Tom for coming. Oh, go ahead. In the. In the. In
the words of CNC Music Factory, we gave you things to make you go,
hm, CNC Music
Factory. With that, well, we're out.