April 18, 2024 • 50 mins
Malcolm recently sat down with friend and award-winning theologian Lee C. Camp to discuss his journey on the acclaimed podcast No Small Endeavor. In this episode, they explore a host of Malcolm's stories – from receiving permission from his mother to cut class to spending three days a week in Freudian therapy as a young adult – all which contributed to who he is today.
Produced by Great Feeling Studios and PRX, No Small Endeavor brings thoughtful conversations with bestselling authors, artists, theologians and philosophers – like Hollywood legend Rob Reiner, and Civil Rights hero Reverend James Lawson – about what it means to live a good life.
Listen to more episodes of No Small Endeavor here: https://link.chtbl.com/LN08h4po?sid=RevisionistHistoryEpisode
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:15):
Bushkin. Hello, Hello, Malcolm. Here today we're sharing something a
little different on revisionist history. I'm bringing you back in
time to my beginnings. I'm sharing an episode of the
acclaim podcast No Small Endeavor, where I sat down with
my friend, the host and award winning theologian Lee Camp
(00:36):
to discuss some of my most cherished moments in my
journey thus far. Produced by Great Fielding Studios and p
r X, No Small Endeavor brings you thoughtful conversations with
best selling authors, artists, theologians and philosophers like Hollywood legend
Rob Reiner and civil rights hero Reverend James Lawson about
(00:57):
what it means to live a good life. In my episode,
we discuss some of my favorite stories, from receiving permission
from my mother to cut class, spending three days a
week in Freudian therapy as a young adult, all of
which contributed to who I am today. Be sure to
check out No Small Endeavor wherever you get podcasts and
(01:17):
tell them I say hello, and without further ado, here
is the full episode.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
I'm Lee C. Camp and this is No Small Endeavor
exploring what it means to live a good life. You're
probably familiar with the work of Malcolm Gladwell. Perhaps you've
read one of his New York Times bestselling books like
The Tipping Point or Outliers, or maybe you listen to
Malcolm's podcast or Visionist History. But how well do you
(01:46):
know the man himself?
Speaker 1 (01:47):
There's a pear in my life where I spent a
huge amount of time in Freudian therapy.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Today we learn what made Malcolm malcolm like, what pushed
him to get really good at explaining things.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
My father and my brothers were incapable of explaining.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
Things, or how his dad influenced his curiosity.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
My whole childhood was spent listening to my father meet
random strangers and him asking them questions. He had no
insecurities about declaring himself ignorant in.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
An area all coming right up, I'm leasey camp. This
is no small endeavor exploring what it means to live
a good life. There's a fascinating scene in the TV
show Ted Lasso where Ted makes a huge bet on
(02:40):
a game of darts to help out a friend. His
opponent assumes Ted knows nothing about the game as Ted
makes a few less than excellent throws with his right hand.
But that's when Ted reveals that he's not right handed
and hits a bull's eye with his left and while
Ted is hustling his opponent, he says, guys have been
underestimating me my entire life. But he continues that he'd
(03:02):
come to realize that they're underestimating him had nothing to
do with him, but rather them. They had failed, says Ted,
to practice that wisdom be curious, not judgmental, and just
before he clinches the wind, Ted says that if they
were curious, they would have known that he played darts
every Sunday with his father from age ten until he
(03:23):
was sixteen, when his father passed away. It's one of
the great moments of television, in this poignant moment of
character development, granting insight that reveals new depth, new dimensions.
This fundamental posture to be curious not judgmental allows us
to ask good questions and thereby get a glimpse into
the fascinating journeys which have led another to become the
(03:45):
person they are. We try to do this in some
way with all of our guests, but our interview today
is an especially such poignant moment. You may think you
know Malcolm Gladwell New York Times bestselling author of Outliers,
The Tipping Point Blink, host of the wildly popular podcast
Revisionist History, and when I first began to prepare for
my time with Malcolm, I was first drawn into curiosity
(04:05):
about the stories Malcolm tells so well. But then I
began to note the tendencies and habits and traits Malcolm
exhibits in his storytelling, and that made me curious about
why Malcolm is Malcolm, How his family's inability to explain
things made him want to explain things, How his dad
taking him to a Mennonite barn raising as a kid
influenced what he thought was possible and what regrets he
(04:27):
may or may not have, including a year of Freudyent
therapy three times a week in New York City. Today,
our conversation with Malcolm Gladwell taped in front of a
small audience in Nashville, days before our annual Thanksgiving show
at Nashville's Skirmerhorn Symphony Hall, where Malcolm headlined Enjoy Malcolm.
Timothy Gladwell, Canadian journalist and author's been a staff writer
(04:51):
for the New Yorker since nineteen ninety six, wrote for
The Washington Post for ten years. Malcolm has published seven
books with at least five New York Times bestsellers. Appointed
to the Order of Canada in twenty eleven, and he
is the host of the podcast Revisionist History. Please make welcome,
Malcolm Badwell, Welcome to Nashville again.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (05:20):
Good to have you back here in music City. I
understand that you've at least had a number of entertaining episodes,
certainly those of us who've listened to your podcast a
good bit, no fascinating conversations with fascinating Nashvillians. But you recently,
like today, told me a very entertaining story about a
(05:41):
Nashville experience that you once had that seems classic Nashville
to me. And you were running.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
I went running. This is actually now only that I
reflect on it after talking to you about it. I
think this is the perfect national story. Yes, if that
doesn't raise the bar too high.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Yeah, yeah, I'm.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
A runner and I everyone tells me I got a
run in Percy Warner Park, so make my way out there,
get stuck in traffic, get there a little late.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
So far it is the perfect Nashville story.
Speaker 1 (06:09):
Yeah, it's I think it's July. It's probably ninety some
odd superhuman, still the perfect natural story. And I decide
it's too hot to go running with my T shirt,
so I just wear a per of shorts, which you
could do, right.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
I go running, which you can do, which I can do.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
So I go off and I climb that big road.
I'm going around Percy Water Park and it's a little late.
It starts to get a little dark, but I think
I'm fine, but I get lost, not just mildly lost,
like completely one hundred percent. I have no idea where
I am. I can't see any lights. I don't know
what am I gonna do. So I'm drenched in sweat
(06:52):
and I'm just wearing a pair of shorts, and I
stand by the side the road and I hitchhike. Big
beefy guys in like four f one fifties, don't stop,
take one look at me. There's no part of it. Finally,
a girl, and I say a girl, because she was
probably in her early twenties, little battered hond Accourt stops
(07:14):
rolled down the window. Can I help you, sir? And
I said, first of all, you should not be picking
me up.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
You're not.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
What are you doing that? Strange dude? In the middle
of the night, drenched in sweat. But I get in
and I said, why did you do that? And she said, well,
I was coming from Bible study, and today we studied
the story of the Good Smear.
Speaker 2 (07:41):
As a boy, you lived in like three countries, at
least briefly. Is that what I understand?
Speaker 1 (07:46):
Born in England, spend a lot sometime in Jamaic, my
mom's Jamaica, and then we moved to Canada, and then
I came down here.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
So your father's Englishman, My.
Speaker 1 (07:57):
Dad is an Englishman, my mom's They met in college
University College, London in the fifties.
Speaker 2 (08:04):
You have many memories of Jamaica at all.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
Well, we would go there regularly when I was growing up,
and so eventually most of my family there have moved
to Canada and the US. But as a kid, yeah, yeah,
we were.
Speaker 2 (08:20):
Yeah, all of those experiences. What do you think that
did for your just sense of self or sense of identity.
Speaker 1 (08:29):
Well, I'm a strong believer in the idea that we
have multiple identities and that we have the right to
rank them in the order that we choose. One of
the things that irritates me about the world is that
the world sometimes chooses for you how to rank your
(08:49):
own identities. I always think of my mom, who to
give you For example, my mom is a a black woman,
a Jamaican, a woman, a Christian, a therapist, a writer,
a mother, and a wife, and a Canadian. I mean
I going I would say that over the course of
(09:12):
her life, the way she ranks all of those identities
has changed, and I think it constantly changes. And I
think she's ninety two, I think they may change again.
But like the world, you know, various people in the
world would look at her and say she maybe she's
number one a black women, and she would say, I
don't know. I might have been number one a black
women when I was twenty three and in England for
(09:33):
the first time and being treated like, you know, less
than a full person, but I don't haven't been treated
that way in thirty years. Why should I foreground that
identity anyway? That idea that there are many parts of
us and we get to choose which part is most
important is I think that's what I picked up from
(09:54):
all of those kind of shifting situation's environments when I
was a kid.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
So two finow up questions on that one we unpack more.
Why that sharply irritates you.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
Well, because it diminishes. When we do that to people,
we diminish their humanity, and we presume to understand them
when in fact we don't. And so I had said,
did I get in trouble? I have part of a company,
and we have these company meetings every now and again.
(10:33):
I did it and asked me anything with the staff,
and someone's asked, in a relatively hostile way, did I
think the company was sufficiently diverse? And I said two
things in response. One is, don't I count? And the
second thing I said, Well, I said to the whole staff,
if any of you is a Republican, raised your hand,
(10:55):
and no one did. And I said, well, if we're
going to call ourselves a diverse company, shouldn't we have
some Republicans. Now this was treated like I had said
some terrible thing. I'm serious. I mean, my definition of
diversity encompasses a dozen different dimensions of human complexity, and
(11:17):
I think I actually value diversity very I take it
very seriously. And the book I'm reading right now has
a lot about diversity. But my definition of diversity is broad.
If I had my way, we would have more of
every kind of person, and we would be a richer
place for it. And I object to a definition of
diversity that's super narrow. And that's why this is a
(11:40):
kind of top of mind.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
Issue for Yeah. So back to your childhood and you
said that you think that that experience allows you to
begin to pay attention to multiplicity of identities and the
possibility of ranking those when you look back at that
young Malcolm, what were some of the key identities for
(12:02):
him at that time being raised in Canada.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
Well, so I'll tell you other story. My dad, who
passed sadly a few years ago, but who was a
marvelously independent minded man, a big beard. He was a mathematician,
and he al was dressed in a suit and a
tie even when he was gardening, which.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
Is his favorite thing. But he was an Englishman.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
He was an Englishman, took it very seriously, but he
loved we lived in this Mennonite community. He loved the
Mennonites and was sort of thought everything they did was
kind of fascinating him. And they used to have barn raisings.
When a barn burned down, they would all gather. These
are mostly conservative Menonites, so people who drove horses and buggies.
They would all gather, they would get together, like the
(12:49):
next weekend, hundreds of them. They would descend on that
farm and they would rebuild the barn in essentially a
day right famous barn raising. My dad decided when I
was a kid once that he would attend a barn raising. So,
if you can imagine, we drove you off into the
middle of the countryside in our.
Speaker 2 (13:09):
Involv of course, and he's not a Mennonite, no, he's.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
A Presbyterian with a big beard, in an English accent
and wearing a suit and die. So we get in
our volvo and he shows up and everyone else's bandies
are clean shaven, and they're all wearing black cloth garments,
and they have their horses and buggies out front, and
they all go to the same church, and they all
know each other. And this englishman with a PhD in
(13:32):
advanced mathematics shows up in his volvo with his three
sons in tow and announces he'd like to join right now.
They were fine with it. They gave him stuff to
do and blah blah blah. But my point is my
dad was the kind of person who it never occurred
to him that that was a socially awkward thing to do.
(13:53):
It just didn't occur to him. He was like, I'm
your neighbor. I live down the road, I know some
of you. I love farming. He wanted to be a farmer.
I mean, there was no part of him. You know,
he believed in the same god.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
God.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
What does the Bible say, It says help your neighbor.
So he was there, right, that's the sort of that's
what I grew up with. Now would I do that,
Probably not. But it's incredibly powerful influence on you to
have as a father someone who does that without even
thinking about it. I mean he never even discussed it
with it. He just like, we're going get in and
(14:32):
came back and thought it was like the best experience.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
So were you bookish as a boy?
Speaker 1 (14:39):
I was. I would my father would take me, take
me out of school and take me to university and
just deposit me in the library. And it was the happiest.
It was like, those are my happiest child of memories
are playing hooky. It wasn't hooky. What do you call it?
When you are it's being done with your parents' consent.
(14:59):
I don't know what that is. But it was parental
hooky that we played. And I would just wander around
the university library well you know, be ten or eleven, huh,
And and then i'd have, you know, I have lunch
with him and have a hamburger in the cafeterias. Fantastic,
never had hamburgers at home.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
I think I heard you saying some interview that maybe
your mother would sign.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
That was later. My mom then became deeply complicit in
my truancy. She understood that I was going to seek
to rebel as a teenager, and so she decided what
she would do is just anticipate it and meet me there.
So she at one point, when she saw that I
wasn't that interested in going to school, she would write
(15:40):
notes Malcolm is sick today, can in school and leave
the date blank and just give me a bunch of them.
Amazing in retrospect, so genius, Like how do you rebel
against that? She's like, she's like already signed off on it,
you know, like it's fine.
Speaker 2 (15:57):
Whatever did you rebel as a teenager? No?
Speaker 1 (16:00):
How could I? My mother foreclosed out responsibility that avenue I.
Speaker 2 (16:07):
Were to think of one or two words and thinking
about the kind of work you do. I think curiosity
would be certainly high on the list. Or do you
see that coming from your childhood?
Speaker 1 (16:18):
Well, I'm going to talk to my dad again. He
was deep. I realized. It took me a long time
to realize this was unusual in someone. But in his
obituary I wrote that he considered him himself an expert
in only three things mathematics, gardening, and the Bible, and
(16:43):
on everything else he was open to suggestion, and that
was really his position. That he just assumed if he
met someone that they knew more than he did on
their subjects of chosen of choice, and that he should
just ask questions and learn. And my whole childhood was
spent listening to my father meet random strangers figure out
(17:06):
what areas they knew more about than he did, and
him asking them questions. I thought that was normal. I
discovered later that that's not normal. But so I had
a kind of model of this kind of extreme and
a lot of it was grounded in He had no
insecurities about declaring himself ignorant in an area. I didn't
(17:27):
have a problem with that. It's like, oh, I don't
want to go with that. Right, even on things he
knew a lot about. If he met a theologian, he
wouldn't even pretend to know more about them than the
Bible or gardening. If he thought that, you know more
about Delphinians and he did it all ears, let's go.
It's a kind of extreme version of curiosity. Again, I
don't think I can match that, but it's a really
(17:48):
powerful model to be given as a kid.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
How do you think the virtue of humility? I mean,
I would as sen there's like almost a direct correlation
or causative effect between humility and curiosity. But how do
you think about that? Oh?
Speaker 1 (18:04):
I do think I agree, I would agree to that.
I would think it's impossible without having It's odd though,
So there's two parts of it. One is humility that
you don't presume that you know things you don't know.
But you also have to have a lot of self
confidence because you have to be completely indifferent to the
(18:25):
consequences of letting the world know about what you don't know.
You do not care, right, And my dad was a
supremely self confident person. So that allowed him, I think,
to to kind of expose himself in this way. Is
as being you know he didn't have any kind of
hang up most people. The real reason people aren't curious,
I think is not so much that they lack humility,
(18:47):
but that they lack confidence and they're not willing to
kind of show themselves to the world as not knowing things.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
You're listening to No Small Endeavor in a conversation with
Malcolm Gladwell, I love hearing from you. Tell us what
you're reading, who you're paying attention to, or send us
feedback about today's episode. You can reach me at Lee
at No Small Endeavor dot com. Recently, for example, received
a lovely email from Anna Wildey, writing in from New
Zealand retired teacher of literacy, Miss Wilde, It's so very
(19:28):
nice to have you joining us. You can get show
notes for this episode in your podcast app or wherever
you listen. These notes include links to resources mentioned in
this episode, as well as a PDF of my complete
interview notes and a full transcript. We would be most
delighted if you tell your friends about No Small Endeavor
and invite them to join us on the podcast, because
it helps extend the reach of the beauty, truth, and
(19:50):
goodness we are seeking to sew in the world. Also,
Malcolm joined us for our big end of year blowout
show at the Skirmmelhorn Symphony Hall. We will be releasing
those interview segments on NSC plus. If you're not a
subscriber to NSC plus, you can do so by going
to our website at No Small Endeavor dot com and
click subscribe. Coming up, Malcolm and I discuss tactics for
(20:13):
explaining things to people, the moral and practical importance of storytelling,
and is rather strong opinions on Ivy League schools.
Speaker 1 (20:23):
Which I think are completely and utterly morally bankrupt.
Speaker 2 (20:41):
So fast forward to your vocation. You said at one point,
I just want to explain things to people.
Speaker 1 (20:49):
Yeah, so this we're talking excessively about my family. If
that's okay? Is that okay?
Speaker 2 (20:53):
We're gonna move on in a minute.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
Okay, there are two things. So my family's divided down
the middle. There's my mom and me on one side,
and then there's everybody else, my brothers and my father.
My father and my brothers were incapable of explaining things,
so my father would just go and then my brother Jeff,
(21:15):
who I love dearly, just would talk endlessly and not
get anywhere. And as a kid. This drove me crazy.
So you know how you're constantly playing games as a kid,
and there's always a moment where you've got to teach
your cousin how to play Hearts, and so my father
would be incapable, and my brother would give this incredibly
long explanation of a going over, and then finally, in frustration,
(21:37):
I would just say, okay, everyone shut up. This is
how you play Hearts and the mistakes people make it
explaining things just to drive me. As I can remember
it as like an eight year old being driven crazy
by this. The thing you start with is what is
the point of the game. Start with that. The point
of monopoly is to amass as many properties as you
(21:57):
can and put everyone else bankrupt.
Speaker 2 (21:58):
Right.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
You don't explain the game before you explain the point,
right like people would start without doing and I would
read the Parker Brothers at instructions and I would say,
why didn't you tell me what the point.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
Is in the you were speaking my love language.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
To drive me to this day, this drives me nuts.
Explain it properly, right. So I think that was where
my career as a journalist is born.
Speaker 2 (22:23):
Huh.
Speaker 1 (22:24):
I was like I grew up in a household where
sixty percent of the members of our house, my household,
could not explain the simplest thing to anybody else.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
So before we go on from just a note about
your father and higher education, I want to ask one quie.
I don't want to talk long about this, but you
certainly in your career as a journalists you seem to
have a pretty strong love hate relationship with higher education.
Speaker 1 (22:48):
Oh my god, don't even get me started. Leave you
said you only we only have ninety minutes, You're I
have just give.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
Us a three to four minute excursis on that. I mean,
I can't, Yeah, you can't.
Speaker 1 (23:01):
Can't even Okay, I'll ask follow up questions. Okay, I'll
tell you. I just wrote I'm writing a see to
my first book with Tipping Point. There is literally a
chapter called why does Harvard have a women's rugby team?
Which is six thousand words of explanation for why the
(23:23):
school would do something that otherwise makes no sense. So
it's not that I'm fine with them having a club
rugby team. They don't have a club. They have a
varsity women's rugby team, and they go to like New
Zealand to recruit people for it. They got like multiple coaches,
They fly around the country. They destroy other teams by
the score of like one hundred and five to nothing.
They have like a pro rugby team. They introduce this
(23:47):
in twenty thirteen, and they already, you know, Harvard already
has more varsity sports than any other college in the world.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
I did not know that.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
Oh yeah, by far, Ohio State doesn't even come close
or Alabama. Harvard's way off there. So I have a
whole grand theory about why they're doing it, which I'm
not going to go into because we don't have time.
But my point is, yes, I am obsessed with even
the smallest details. I have read stuff about, particularly Ivy
League colleges which I think are completely an utterly morally
bankrupt and should be shut down tomorrow. And the idea
(24:20):
that Americans stand by.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
Way, you can't just say that, Well that one's asking
to follow up, what's what's the what's the root of
the moral bankruptcy?
Speaker 1 (24:33):
Harvard is a school that educates what ten thousand students
maas and has an endowment of forty five billion, which
is subsidized by the American taxpayers. Can you think of
a more absurd situation where a handful of schools, the
total endowment of the Ivy League and Stanford is north
of one hundred billion dollars collectively, they educate one hundred
(24:58):
thousand students a yere a tiny, tiny drop in a bucket. Meanwhile,
they're hoarding one hundred and twenty billion dollars getting tax benefits,
all of which is subsized by the American taxpayer. And further,
the government's channeling funneling all kinds of cash towards them.
And it's absurd. And at the other end of the equation,
(25:18):
there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of students
in this country who are holding enormous amounts of debt
because the schools that they went to couldn't afford to
give them financial aid. Who would construct such a system?
It makes no sense. If you're going to have forty
five billion dollars in the bank, the very least you
(25:39):
should do is educate one hundred thousand students a year.
At minimum, you should educate ten times as many students
as you do. In Canada, where I come from the
most prestigious school in Canada's University of Toronto. It is
an undergraduate population of seventy thousand students, as it should.
Your most prestigious school should be your biggest school, right Like,
(26:01):
if you really do have the best faculty, in the
best facilities, and the most money and the greatest reputation,
you should try and help them some number of students.
This is like saying if I were to build the
greatest hospital in the South, and I said, Lee, I'm
going to open it in Nashville, It's going to be
the greatest hospital in the world. And here's what I'm
(26:21):
going to do. I'm going to let in one hundred
patients a year. You can bring in people on a
stretcher and fifty a day, have the ambulances line up,
and then I will spend the next two weeks assessing them,
and I will choose one for admittance to my elite
cardiac center and one for the dinner I'll take in one.
(26:43):
I'll have a neurosurgeon and he'll do one operation a day,
just to make sure it's the absolute top night. If
they did that, we would think that's bananas, right, Yep,
That's exactly the system we tolerate in American higher ch
It's preposterous. By the way, I'm not done. What do
(27:05):
rich people in this country do? They look at that
state of affairs, and they may they increasing large checks
to the schools that already have the most money. It's
even crazier, right, the marginal value of a dollar given
to Harvard University is zero. There's literally nothing they can
do with that, Like they're already every base is already covered.
(27:26):
If you gave a million dollars to this college, I mean,
we could talk all day about what that could do,
what you would do with that. If you give a
million dollars to Harvard, you might as well just burn
it in front of Harvard in Harvard Square. It's just crazy.
And literally not a week goes past when some hedge
fun guy doesn't a matter a check for two hundred
(27:47):
million dollars to Harvard University. And every time I see that,
I just think you are a moron.
Speaker 2 (27:53):
Right, Well, I'm glad that we found something that you're passionate. Yeah,
I want to move to a moral philosophy just a second,
And actually i'll do a quick callback to something you
said a moment ago about rolls and multiplicity of identities,
which is something that narrative theology and moral philosophy that
takes narrative and story seriously talks about that a lot.
(28:16):
But it strikes me that since the Enlightenment, moral philosophy
typically has much more focused on rules and principles, just
tell us the right thing to do, rules and principles.
But prior to the Enlightenment, a lot of ancient moral
traditions they focus very much more on story because storytelling
(28:37):
was fundamentally a morally formative practice in helping people think
about their sense of self, about what they saw as
beautiful and true and good. And obviously this wasn't moralistic storytelling,
but it was story as a moral practice. And it
seems to me that that's the kind of storytelling you
(28:59):
like to do. That is that you're trying to tell
stories that invite us to a different sense of self
or a different way of seeing the world that is
then an invitation to be changed in some way. Do
you resonate with that or does that seem to be yeah?
Speaker 1 (29:15):
Right, So going back to that story I told about
my national story, So does the girl stop if at
her Bible study they talked about how we have a
moral obligation to help those less fortunate than us. Right,
that's one option. That's what they could have studied if
they were just interested in rules and principles. But they didn't.
(29:37):
They studied a story, a very concrete story about, you know,
a member of a despised minority who goes out of
his way. He disrupts his routine and puts himself to
a lot of trouble to help somebody doesn't know, right,
very concrete story that's in her head. She's driving down
(29:59):
a road and what does she see someone in distress
by the side of the road, and she has to
put herself in some kind of jeopardy to stop and help.
And she has that the story in her head, so
she does it right, Like that's what a story can do.
I don't think she stops if it's just an abstract thing,
But there was some kind of in the specifics of
(30:21):
the story of the Good Samaritan. There is something really
powerful that moves people in a way that the abstract
discussion is not, Which is not to say the abstract
discussion is without value, sure, but there's a particular power
attached to the story that and I've always loved that.
And I did the six part series on guns this
for the Revision's history this year. In the last episode,
(30:43):
I went to the University of Chicago and I was
interviewing someone there for while I was there, she said, Oh,
you should really talk to my colleague Abdullah, and so
this is totally random thing, and I went, okay, and
I go and meet this guy who's a er doc
at the University of Chicago. Grew up in the South
Side of Chicago, black guy who chose to practice emergency
(31:06):
medicine in the same neighborhood he grew up, which is
one of the most dangerous neighborhoods in the country. And
he was describing the experience of on any given day
he will see someone brought in on a stretcher who's
been shot, who's someone he knew. And there's a moment
in a conversation where he talks about I asked him
how many friends he's had who have been killed, and
(31:32):
he actually has this He's a, you mean like people
I was close enough too that they were in my phone,
like I've been texting with him. I go yeah, he
goes fifteen, Oh right, And the whole conversation is I
had framed it in the episode is framed by this
comment that this I had done a couple of seasons ago.
This whole thing about the Jesuits thinking like a Jesuit,
(31:56):
and that's one Jesuit has said to me. Sin is
the failure to bother to care. And the whole episode
is all about what does it mean to bother to care? Now?
Sin is the failure to bother to care? Is the
abstract rule. This guy, Abdolah Price's decision to forego a
much easier, more lucrative life practice is an ear doc
(32:18):
in a suburb someplace to go back and practice in
his own neighborhood and run the risk of this traumatic
thing where it's kids he knows coming in right, that's
a story, it's real about his choices, and it's just
emotionally moving in the and it makes that principle come
(32:38):
to life. Right suddenly you get what suggests what mean
when he's saying sin is defailure to bother the care?
He means that he means, he means you have to
make the same kind of choice that that guy made.
Speaker 2 (33:04):
We're going to take a short break, but coming right up,
Malcolm's definition of happiness and what quality he values the
most in people. I want to talk about happiness a second.
So in this kind of school of moral theory that
(33:29):
I've raised her, happiness defined a particular way is seen
as the point of life. And I wanted to do
a little short experiment here, and I wanted to read
you a short passage from a Catholic theologian whose work
I like, Paul Waddell, and I've used his book in
(33:50):
a number of my ethics classes. It's a book called
Happiness and the Christian Moral Life, And I want to
see what you make of it. So what Ell says this,
the trajectory of our lives can be read as an
endless pursuit of whatever we think will satisfy us, content us,
and fulfill us. All of that reveals what we believe
will bring us happiness and satisfaction. The trouble, however, is
(34:14):
that we are often confused and easily misled about what
will really fulfill us. Then he's talking about Aquinas in Aristotle.
He says, for Aquinas in Aristotle, happiness does not reside
in having my wants and desire satisfied unless I have
learned to want and desire what is.
Speaker 1 (34:35):
Best that's lovely, lovely.
Speaker 2 (34:40):
I think it's lovely. Yeah, why do you find it lovely? Well?
Speaker 1 (34:44):
First of all, I like it gives us a definition
of the purpose of a religious life that's different, that
it adds to our understanding of that. And I like
the idea that I love any kind of notion that
says that are that left to our own devices, we
often get things wrong. I like that that's an important
(35:05):
reminder we just willly nearly follow what's in our gut
as often as not screw up right. I My book Blink,
which was misinterpreted as a book celebrating gut instincts when
in fact it was the opposite, was about this, like,
unless you're an expert, your instincts lead you astray. You
need to educate them in some way. And the idea
(35:25):
that one of those civilizing institutions in life is the
church is a really good one. That's like a life love.
The way he phrased it, you're sixty, don't remind me.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
Are you happy?
Speaker 1 (35:43):
Yeah? I mean I don't, Yes, I do think I'm happy.
It's funny, I never asked myself that question that comes
to mind in very very discreet moments, so I'm much
more comfortable saying I was happy doing X, Or I
was happy when do you know what I mean? I
fixed a problem in a chapter I was working on
this morning in a little coffee shop in Nashville. I
(36:08):
was happy when I realized that fixed it. Or I
will go running this afternoon afterward it be this, I
will be happy in the middle of that running. That's
how I like to think about happiness.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
Yeah, what about when you think about being sixty? What
regrets or hardest lessons learned? To whatever degree you want
to talk about those?
Speaker 1 (36:31):
I don't do I have. I must have regrets. I've
a ton of it. I suppose I have a lot, but
they're not like. The problem is that very often the
mistakes you made or the failures you have, turn out
to be so important in educating you, and that in
the end you don't think of them as mistakes anymore,
(36:52):
you know, I mean like, Yeah, So I do firmly
believe that you learn way more from your failures than
you do from your successes. I don't think success teaches
you much at all. The only thing that prods you
to dig deeper is when something doesn't work or when
something fails. And now, so after a lifetime of that,
can you really look on your failures as being can
(37:16):
you classify them as as regrettable? They're not regrettable because
I came out different than I get confused by that
question because I don't know how to categorize. Like, there's
a period of my life where I spent a huge
amount of time in Freudian therapy.
Speaker 2 (37:34):
Right, three days a week, you were receiving therapy.
Speaker 1 (37:38):
I was receiving it. I was in Manhattan. I was
new to Manhattan. I was like, all right, that's what
they do here. So and I had a job that
wasn't that demanding. You can't have a demanding job, and
you can't have a demanding job and be in three
days a week Freudian therapy because it just wipes out
the whole day. Right, there's something that happens, by the way.
(37:58):
So I have this whole Manu book. It's a top
of mind. I have a whole thing on the magic
number three, three years a magic number. So you do
one day a week, it's like, fine, whatever lots of
people do one day week, you do two, it's like
a lot. You do three, it completely takes over your life.
Nothing everything else fades into insignificance. You are someone who
does therapy. That's what your self definition is is, by
(38:21):
the way, astounding how it takes over your life. I've
never been through anything equivalent to this.
Speaker 2 (38:26):
How long a period of your life was this?
Speaker 1 (38:28):
I probably wasn't three days a week for I don't
even remember. Probably was a year. It was traumatic. It
was like, couldn't function, stop being productive at work, had
the most horrendous nightmares. Everything I was my unconscious because
all the Freudians cary about is you're unconscious. My unconscious
basically took over my life for a year. We see
(38:51):
a massive amount of time and a massive amount of
money was spent on this. It's the last year in
so you I say it was that a regret? I know,
because actually I didn't. It didn't solve any of my problems,
but it was, in retrospect a failure that was deeply fascinating. Yeah,
(39:12):
that taught me something really extraordinary about not really my mind,
but about the human mind. Man. There is a thing
called you're unconscious, and it is ginormous. It sits in
your brain wanting to get out, and if you even
so much as crack the door, it will rush out
a tick of your life it says we are scary, right,
(39:35):
human beings. That was a really interesting to learn, right,
I mean, a very costly lesson. But you know, who
knows what book I could have written in that year,
that last year. But I'm I'm glad I did it.
Speaker 2 (39:48):
Yeah, well, and that reminds me of you reframing the
notion of the regrettable. That another theologian I've learned a
lot from and has now a friend, Stanley Harrawass, And
when he talks about this way of thinking about our lives.
I once heard him to a lecture where he was talking.
I don't remember who it was, but it was a
man who went to Oxford, got trained in literature, was
(40:09):
a poet. But then after some time he decided he
wanted to go back home and be a shepherd. And
so he was a shepherd, and he was a shepherd
who would write poetry. And at some point on into
his life, near the end of his life, he wrote
this essay in which he examined the ups and downs
of his life and then he came to the conclusion
(40:33):
this is my life. I want no other. And then
Harawa said, that's the meaning of a happy life is
that you can look back on your life, whatever has happened,
and say I want this life.
Speaker 1 (40:49):
My friend Bruce has this wonderful corollary to that. He
had problems with jealousy. He was open about and he
cured his problems with jealousy by saying, you can no
longer be envious of a piece of someone's life. You
have to want the whole life. So you say, Okay,
I wish I looked like Brad It you're lendious of
(41:11):
Brad Pitt. He's handsome dude. Then you have to say, no,
you can't just have his looks. Gotta have his whole life.
You really want his whole life. No, you don't want
his whole life. You want Angeline and Jolie like you know,
like filing suits against you, and like you can't you
can't get you can't go to the store and get
like a pint of milk because you'll be mommed. I mean,
you're a prisoner, right. It's a horrendous life, right, and
(41:32):
you think about it, You're living in some grotesque house
in la and you can't go out with that. Some
guy's gonna pull up in a suburban to take you in.
You know, a black suburban with tinted windows, so you can,
you know, go to the movie. I mean, you don't
want it, right, and if you go down the list,
you realize you actually don't want anyone's life except your own.
It's really really a useful Uh, that.
Speaker 2 (41:52):
Is very useful. Yeah, it's striking how timid you are
about saying what you think. Okay, I want to shift.
I want to shift the conversation. Another another phrase that
I know I've heard you say repeatedly is a weeper.
He'll say, this is a real weeper. Yeah, So getting
(42:15):
ready for you coming to Nashville. I was listening to
your episode The King of Tears, which I would imagine
a lot of people in Nashville listen to Rob volves
around Nashville and country music, and it's woven together with
all these beautiful layers of storytelling about Bobby Braddock, famed
Nashville songwriter who you're calling the King of Tears because
he's written all of these amazing songs that are just weepers,
(42:37):
and you're especially weaving it together around his song he
Stopped Loving Her Today, which George Stones made famous. Yeah,
and so while listening to this episode, I was down
on the floor in my house, scraping baseboards, getting ready
for the painters to come.
Speaker 1 (42:55):
Did you start crying?
Speaker 2 (42:57):
Don't get asked my story. I can't believe you did that.
I would never do that to one of your stories.
So I'm down on the floor scraping basseboards, getting ready
vas and you come to this climactic moment of you know,
(43:18):
recounting George Jones' funeral, and then you weave into Vince
Gill singing his own weeper Go Rest High. And there
I am down on my hands and knees, sobbing as
Vince gil himself breaks down at George Jones' funeral and
cannot get himself through his own song, Go Rest High.
And so I'm in there file, you know, sobbing, tears
(43:39):
running in my face, and then you say something like
and if you're not crying, there's nothing I can do
for you.
Speaker 1 (43:47):
I can't help you.
Speaker 2 (43:48):
I can't help you.
Speaker 1 (43:48):
I can't help you.
Speaker 2 (43:49):
I can't help you. So what's behind your fascination with weepers?
Speaker 1 (43:55):
Well, it's too easy to make someone laugh. People were
just laughing now, right, super easy making someone cry. So
under what circumstances could I make some portion of you
right now cry really hard. Right, So I'm naturally attracted
(44:16):
to the more difficult of the narrative tasks.
Speaker 2 (44:19):
So what do you think is the line between kind
of manipulative or mawkish sentimentality on one side and emotion
that somehow is speaking to the fullness or the richness
of life for the possibilities of living life. Well, what's
what's it's like?
Speaker 1 (44:38):
And simple? It's whether it's you know, there are hall
there are Hallmark commercials that can get you a little weepy,
but that's not real, you know that, And then you
then you stop, and then I remember there was a
famous I say famous famous to me. It was a
Google an ad for Google for Google Chat or something.
It was a TV commercial and it's you see the
(45:01):
daughter who's just gone off to college, and you see
the dad who's chatting with her, and it's like the
dad's type being in the chat line, I miss you
so much, you know it's been And then you really,
you know, it's been so long since mom left us
or something, and you realize she's his only daughter, his wife,
(45:23):
the mom has died, and as he's typing that thing
about mom to her on Google chat, the cursor slows
down so you realize he's choking up. Right, It's insanely manipulative.
If I showed it to you right now, we're all
in tears. But that's not real, right, I want it real.
They're like you think about them, and you you ask
(45:46):
questions about your own life, like would I've done that?
Should I be doing that? Why am I not doing that?
Speaker 2 (45:52):
Right?
Speaker 1 (45:53):
Why am I not the good Samaritan? Like? That's that's
the kind of story that's important and powerful.
Speaker 2 (46:00):
I got one last question. It may be one that's
easy for you to dismiss, but let me ask you
to dig for a potential answer to it. What is
there about Malcolm Gladwell that you've not given us any
glimpse of that you would be happy for people to
(46:23):
get a glimpse of.
Speaker 1 (46:25):
That's a good question. I think a lot about work
and effort and how important effort is to me in
my own life and in my estimations of others. That
what I want to see from myself and from the
people around me is I want to see some level
(46:49):
of commitment and that what I as I get older,
what I'm I'm going to sound very very nineteenth century.
When I say this, I've become less and less tolerant
of idleness. I mean that in a very, very kind
of specific way, and that is, you have have to
(47:09):
care about something. I don't care what it is. You
have to care about something, and you have to make
a sacrifice in pursuit of that thing you care about,
and you have to try, right And if you're not caring,
putting some effort towards something and making a commitment to it,
then I, honestly I don't have any way to relate
(47:31):
to you anymore. I don't, I can't. I don't have
room in my life for people who aren't who don't
have a connection to whatever it is. I don't, like
I said, I don't care. I don't really care what
it is. I want someone to find something that they
apply themselves to, because if you're not doing that, I
don't understand why you're here, right. I don't think we
(47:51):
were put here to twiddle our thumbs. I just don't.
I wouldn't have said that at twenty five, because at
twenty five I think I was, in some sense twiddling
my thumbs. I look back on that with a little
bit of horror. You know, in my twenties. I did
what people in the twenties do. I partied a lot,
and I would sleep in until one o'clock on a Sunday,
(48:12):
and I would I don't understand that anymore. I don't know.
I'm not sure this is I'm not sure this feeling
I have is correct. I worry that it's ungenerous and whatever,
and but it just is. It's just like, that's what
I when I think about the people I surround myself with. Now,
I've kept the people who care about something, and I
(48:35):
have not kept the people who I think don't Like
I said, I don't know whether that's fair, but it
just is. You know.
Speaker 2 (48:42):
Well, we thank you for the way that you have
cared and that you have sought to make a contribution.
And we're grateful for that and grateful for your presence today,
thankful for your sharing your real self with us today.
Please show your thanks to Malcolm Wadwell, You've been listening
(49:26):
to no small endeavor. In our interview with Malcolm Gladwell, journalist,
New York Times bestselling author of multiple books, and hosts
of the podcast of Visionist History, we gratefully acknowledge the
support of Lily Endowment Incorporated, a private philanthropic foundation supporting
the causes of community development, education and religion, and the
support of the John Templeton Foundation, whose vision is to
(49:47):
become a global catalyst for discoveries that contribute to human flourishing.
All right, thanks to all the stellar team that makes
this show possible. Christy Bragg, Jacob Lewis, Sophie Byrd, Tom Anderson,
(50:08):
Kate Hayes, Mary ebel and Brown, Carriet Herman, Jason Cheesley,
Ellis Osborn and Tim Lower. Thanks for listening and let's
keep exploring what it means to live a good life together.
No Small Endeavor is a production of pr X Tokens Media,
LLC and Great Feeling Studio.
Speaker 1 (50:29):
If you enjoyed this episode of No Small Endeavor, there
are plenty more where that came from. No Small Endeavor
releases new episodes every Thursday. Follow No Small Endeavor on
Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you're listening now.
Bushkin. Hello, Hello, Malcolm. Here today we're sharing something a
little different on revisionist history. I'm bringing you back in
time to my beginnings. I'm sharing an episode of the
acclaim podcast No Small Endeavor, where I sat down with
my friend, the host and award winning theologian Lee Camp
(00:36):
to discuss some of my most cherished moments in my
journey thus far. Produced by Great Fielding Studios and p
r X, No Small Endeavor brings you thoughtful conversations with
best selling authors, artists, theologians and philosophers like Hollywood legend
Rob Reiner and civil rights hero Reverend James Lawson about
(00:57):
what it means to live a good life. In my episode,
we discuss some of my favorite stories, from receiving permission
from my mother to cut class, spending three days a
week in Freudian therapy as a young adult, all of
which contributed to who I am today. Be sure to
check out No Small Endeavor wherever you get podcasts and
(01:17):
tell them I say hello, and without further ado, here
is the full episode.
Speaker 2 (01:25):
I'm Lee C. Camp and this is No Small Endeavor
exploring what it means to live a good life. You're
probably familiar with the work of Malcolm Gladwell. Perhaps you've
read one of his New York Times bestselling books like
The Tipping Point or Outliers, or maybe you listen to
Malcolm's podcast or Visionist History. But how well do you
(01:46):
know the man himself?
Speaker 1 (01:47):
There's a pear in my life where I spent a
huge amount of time in Freudian therapy.
Speaker 2 (01:52):
Today we learn what made Malcolm malcolm like, what pushed
him to get really good at explaining things.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
My father and my brothers were incapable of explaining.
Speaker 2 (02:02):
Things, or how his dad influenced his curiosity.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
My whole childhood was spent listening to my father meet
random strangers and him asking them questions. He had no
insecurities about declaring himself ignorant in.
Speaker 2 (02:18):
An area all coming right up, I'm leasey camp. This
is no small endeavor exploring what it means to live
a good life. There's a fascinating scene in the TV
show Ted Lasso where Ted makes a huge bet on
(02:40):
a game of darts to help out a friend. His
opponent assumes Ted knows nothing about the game as Ted
makes a few less than excellent throws with his right hand.
But that's when Ted reveals that he's not right handed
and hits a bull's eye with his left and while
Ted is hustling his opponent, he says, guys have been
underestimating me my entire life. But he continues that he'd
(03:02):
come to realize that they're underestimating him had nothing to
do with him, but rather them. They had failed, says Ted,
to practice that wisdom be curious, not judgmental, and just
before he clinches the wind, Ted says that if they
were curious, they would have known that he played darts
every Sunday with his father from age ten until he
(03:23):
was sixteen, when his father passed away. It's one of
the great moments of television, in this poignant moment of
character development, granting insight that reveals new depth, new dimensions.
This fundamental posture to be curious not judgmental allows us
to ask good questions and thereby get a glimpse into
the fascinating journeys which have led another to become the
(03:45):
person they are. We try to do this in some
way with all of our guests, but our interview today
is an especially such poignant moment. You may think you
know Malcolm Gladwell New York Times bestselling author of Outliers,
The Tipping Point Blink, host of the wildly popular podcast
Revisionist History, and when I first began to prepare for
my time with Malcolm, I was first drawn into curiosity
(04:05):
about the stories Malcolm tells so well. But then I
began to note the tendencies and habits and traits Malcolm
exhibits in his storytelling, and that made me curious about
why Malcolm is Malcolm, How his family's inability to explain
things made him want to explain things, How his dad
taking him to a Mennonite barn raising as a kid
influenced what he thought was possible and what regrets he
(04:27):
may or may not have, including a year of Freudyent
therapy three times a week in New York City. Today,
our conversation with Malcolm Gladwell taped in front of a
small audience in Nashville, days before our annual Thanksgiving show
at Nashville's Skirmerhorn Symphony Hall, where Malcolm headlined Enjoy Malcolm.
Timothy Gladwell, Canadian journalist and author's been a staff writer
(04:51):
for the New Yorker since nineteen ninety six, wrote for
The Washington Post for ten years. Malcolm has published seven
books with at least five New York Times bestsellers. Appointed
to the Order of Canada in twenty eleven, and he
is the host of the podcast Revisionist History. Please make welcome,
Malcolm Badwell, Welcome to Nashville again.
Speaker 1 (05:20):
Thank you.
Speaker 2 (05:20):
Good to have you back here in music City. I
understand that you've at least had a number of entertaining episodes,
certainly those of us who've listened to your podcast a
good bit, no fascinating conversations with fascinating Nashvillians. But you recently,
like today, told me a very entertaining story about a
(05:41):
Nashville experience that you once had that seems classic Nashville
to me. And you were running.
Speaker 1 (05:47):
I went running. This is actually now only that I
reflect on it after talking to you about it. I
think this is the perfect national story. Yes, if that
doesn't raise the bar too high.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Yeah, yeah, I'm.
Speaker 1 (05:58):
A runner and I everyone tells me I got a
run in Percy Warner Park, so make my way out there,
get stuck in traffic, get there a little late.
Speaker 2 (06:07):
So far it is the perfect Nashville story.
Speaker 1 (06:09):
Yeah, it's I think it's July. It's probably ninety some
odd superhuman, still the perfect natural story. And I decide
it's too hot to go running with my T shirt,
so I just wear a per of shorts, which you
could do, right.
Speaker 2 (06:28):
I go running, which you can do, which I can do.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
So I go off and I climb that big road.
I'm going around Percy Water Park and it's a little late.
It starts to get a little dark, but I think
I'm fine, but I get lost, not just mildly lost,
like completely one hundred percent. I have no idea where
I am. I can't see any lights. I don't know
what am I gonna do. So I'm drenched in sweat
(06:52):
and I'm just wearing a pair of shorts, and I
stand by the side the road and I hitchhike. Big
beefy guys in like four f one fifties, don't stop,
take one look at me. There's no part of it. Finally,
a girl, and I say a girl, because she was
probably in her early twenties, little battered hond Accourt stops
(07:14):
rolled down the window. Can I help you, sir? And
I said, first of all, you should not be picking
me up.
Speaker 2 (07:21):
You're not.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
What are you doing that? Strange dude? In the middle
of the night, drenched in sweat. But I get in
and I said, why did you do that? And she said, well,
I was coming from Bible study, and today we studied
the story of the Good Smear.
Speaker 2 (07:41):
As a boy, you lived in like three countries, at
least briefly. Is that what I understand?
Speaker 1 (07:46):
Born in England, spend a lot sometime in Jamaic, my
mom's Jamaica, and then we moved to Canada, and then
I came down here.
Speaker 2 (07:53):
So your father's Englishman, My.
Speaker 1 (07:57):
Dad is an Englishman, my mom's They met in college
University College, London in the fifties.
Speaker 2 (08:04):
You have many memories of Jamaica at all.
Speaker 1 (08:08):
Well, we would go there regularly when I was growing up,
and so eventually most of my family there have moved
to Canada and the US. But as a kid, yeah, yeah,
we were.
Speaker 2 (08:20):
Yeah, all of those experiences. What do you think that
did for your just sense of self or sense of identity.
Speaker 1 (08:29):
Well, I'm a strong believer in the idea that we
have multiple identities and that we have the right to
rank them in the order that we choose. One of
the things that irritates me about the world is that
the world sometimes chooses for you how to rank your
(08:49):
own identities. I always think of my mom, who to
give you For example, my mom is a a black woman,
a Jamaican, a woman, a Christian, a therapist, a writer,
a mother, and a wife, and a Canadian. I mean
I going I would say that over the course of
(09:12):
her life, the way she ranks all of those identities
has changed, and I think it constantly changes. And I
think she's ninety two, I think they may change again.
But like the world, you know, various people in the
world would look at her and say she maybe she's
number one a black women, and she would say, I
don't know. I might have been number one a black
women when I was twenty three and in England for
(09:33):
the first time and being treated like, you know, less
than a full person, but I don't haven't been treated
that way in thirty years. Why should I foreground that
identity anyway? That idea that there are many parts of
us and we get to choose which part is most
important is I think that's what I picked up from
(09:54):
all of those kind of shifting situation's environments when I
was a kid.
Speaker 2 (10:02):
So two finow up questions on that one we unpack more.
Why that sharply irritates you.
Speaker 1 (10:13):
Well, because it diminishes. When we do that to people,
we diminish their humanity, and we presume to understand them
when in fact we don't. And so I had said,
did I get in trouble? I have part of a company,
and we have these company meetings every now and again.
(10:33):
I did it and asked me anything with the staff,
and someone's asked, in a relatively hostile way, did I
think the company was sufficiently diverse? And I said two
things in response. One is, don't I count? And the
second thing I said, Well, I said to the whole staff,
if any of you is a Republican, raised your hand,
(10:55):
and no one did. And I said, well, if we're
going to call ourselves a diverse company, shouldn't we have
some Republicans. Now this was treated like I had said
some terrible thing. I'm serious. I mean, my definition of
diversity encompasses a dozen different dimensions of human complexity, and
(11:17):
I think I actually value diversity very I take it
very seriously. And the book I'm reading right now has
a lot about diversity. But my definition of diversity is broad.
If I had my way, we would have more of
every kind of person, and we would be a richer
place for it. And I object to a definition of
diversity that's super narrow. And that's why this is a
(11:40):
kind of top of mind.
Speaker 2 (11:41):
Issue for Yeah. So back to your childhood and you
said that you think that that experience allows you to
begin to pay attention to multiplicity of identities and the
possibility of ranking those when you look back at that
young Malcolm, what were some of the key identities for
(12:02):
him at that time being raised in Canada.
Speaker 1 (12:07):
Well, so I'll tell you other story. My dad, who
passed sadly a few years ago, but who was a
marvelously independent minded man, a big beard. He was a mathematician,
and he al was dressed in a suit and a
tie even when he was gardening, which.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
Is his favorite thing. But he was an Englishman.
Speaker 1 (12:28):
He was an Englishman, took it very seriously, but he
loved we lived in this Mennonite community. He loved the
Mennonites and was sort of thought everything they did was
kind of fascinating him. And they used to have barn raisings.
When a barn burned down, they would all gather. These
are mostly conservative Menonites, so people who drove horses and buggies.
They would all gather, they would get together, like the
(12:49):
next weekend, hundreds of them. They would descend on that
farm and they would rebuild the barn in essentially a
day right famous barn raising. My dad decided when I
was a kid once that he would attend a barn raising. So,
if you can imagine, we drove you off into the
middle of the countryside in our.
Speaker 2 (13:09):
Involv of course, and he's not a Mennonite, no, he's.
Speaker 1 (13:11):
A Presbyterian with a big beard, in an English accent
and wearing a suit and die. So we get in
our volvo and he shows up and everyone else's bandies
are clean shaven, and they're all wearing black cloth garments,
and they have their horses and buggies out front, and
they all go to the same church, and they all
know each other. And this englishman with a PhD in
(13:32):
advanced mathematics shows up in his volvo with his three
sons in tow and announces he'd like to join right now.
They were fine with it. They gave him stuff to
do and blah blah blah. But my point is my
dad was the kind of person who it never occurred
to him that that was a socially awkward thing to do.
(13:53):
It just didn't occur to him. He was like, I'm
your neighbor. I live down the road, I know some
of you. I love farming. He wanted to be a farmer.
I mean, there was no part of him. You know,
he believed in the same god.
Speaker 2 (14:07):
God.
Speaker 1 (14:08):
What does the Bible say, It says help your neighbor.
So he was there, right, that's the sort of that's
what I grew up with. Now would I do that,
Probably not. But it's incredibly powerful influence on you to
have as a father someone who does that without even
thinking about it. I mean he never even discussed it
with it. He just like, we're going get in and
(14:32):
came back and thought it was like the best experience.
Speaker 2 (14:35):
So were you bookish as a boy?
Speaker 1 (14:39):
I was. I would my father would take me, take
me out of school and take me to university and
just deposit me in the library. And it was the happiest.
It was like, those are my happiest child of memories
are playing hooky. It wasn't hooky. What do you call it?
When you are it's being done with your parents' consent.
(14:59):
I don't know what that is. But it was parental
hooky that we played. And I would just wander around
the university library well you know, be ten or eleven, huh,
And and then i'd have, you know, I have lunch
with him and have a hamburger in the cafeterias. Fantastic,
never had hamburgers at home.
Speaker 2 (15:14):
I think I heard you saying some interview that maybe
your mother would sign.
Speaker 1 (15:18):
That was later. My mom then became deeply complicit in
my truancy. She understood that I was going to seek
to rebel as a teenager, and so she decided what
she would do is just anticipate it and meet me there.
So she at one point, when she saw that I
wasn't that interested in going to school, she would write
(15:40):
notes Malcolm is sick today, can in school and leave
the date blank and just give me a bunch of them.
Amazing in retrospect, so genius, Like how do you rebel
against that? She's like, she's like already signed off on it,
you know, like it's fine.
Speaker 2 (15:57):
Whatever did you rebel as a teenager? No?
Speaker 1 (16:00):
How could I? My mother foreclosed out responsibility that avenue I.
Speaker 2 (16:07):
Were to think of one or two words and thinking
about the kind of work you do. I think curiosity
would be certainly high on the list. Or do you
see that coming from your childhood?
Speaker 1 (16:18):
Well, I'm going to talk to my dad again. He
was deep. I realized. It took me a long time
to realize this was unusual in someone. But in his
obituary I wrote that he considered him himself an expert
in only three things mathematics, gardening, and the Bible, and
(16:43):
on everything else he was open to suggestion, and that
was really his position. That he just assumed if he
met someone that they knew more than he did on
their subjects of chosen of choice, and that he should
just ask questions and learn. And my whole childhood was
spent listening to my father meet random strangers figure out
(17:06):
what areas they knew more about than he did, and
him asking them questions. I thought that was normal. I
discovered later that that's not normal. But so I had
a kind of model of this kind of extreme and
a lot of it was grounded in He had no
insecurities about declaring himself ignorant in an area. I didn't
(17:27):
have a problem with that. It's like, oh, I don't
want to go with that. Right, even on things he
knew a lot about. If he met a theologian, he
wouldn't even pretend to know more about them than the
Bible or gardening. If he thought that, you know more
about Delphinians and he did it all ears, let's go.
It's a kind of extreme version of curiosity. Again, I
don't think I can match that, but it's a really
(17:48):
powerful model to be given as a kid.
Speaker 2 (17:53):
How do you think the virtue of humility? I mean,
I would as sen there's like almost a direct correlation
or causative effect between humility and curiosity. But how do
you think about that? Oh?
Speaker 1 (18:04):
I do think I agree, I would agree to that.
I would think it's impossible without having It's odd though,
So there's two parts of it. One is humility that
you don't presume that you know things you don't know.
But you also have to have a lot of self
confidence because you have to be completely indifferent to the
(18:25):
consequences of letting the world know about what you don't know.
You do not care, right, And my dad was a
supremely self confident person. So that allowed him, I think,
to to kind of expose himself in this way. Is
as being you know he didn't have any kind of
hang up most people. The real reason people aren't curious,
I think is not so much that they lack humility,
(18:47):
but that they lack confidence and they're not willing to
kind of show themselves to the world as not knowing things.
Speaker 2 (19:06):
You're listening to No Small Endeavor in a conversation with
Malcolm Gladwell, I love hearing from you. Tell us what
you're reading, who you're paying attention to, or send us
feedback about today's episode. You can reach me at Lee
at No Small Endeavor dot com. Recently, for example, received
a lovely email from Anna Wildey, writing in from New
Zealand retired teacher of literacy, Miss Wilde, It's so very
(19:28):
nice to have you joining us. You can get show
notes for this episode in your podcast app or wherever
you listen. These notes include links to resources mentioned in
this episode, as well as a PDF of my complete
interview notes and a full transcript. We would be most
delighted if you tell your friends about No Small Endeavor
and invite them to join us on the podcast, because
it helps extend the reach of the beauty, truth, and
(19:50):
goodness we are seeking to sew in the world. Also,
Malcolm joined us for our big end of year blowout
show at the Skirmmelhorn Symphony Hall. We will be releasing
those interview segments on NSC plus. If you're not a
subscriber to NSC plus, you can do so by going
to our website at No Small Endeavor dot com and
click subscribe. Coming up, Malcolm and I discuss tactics for
(20:13):
explaining things to people, the moral and practical importance of storytelling,
and is rather strong opinions on Ivy League schools.
Speaker 1 (20:23):
Which I think are completely and utterly morally bankrupt.
Speaker 2 (20:41):
So fast forward to your vocation. You said at one point,
I just want to explain things to people.
Speaker 1 (20:49):
Yeah, so this we're talking excessively about my family. If
that's okay? Is that okay?
Speaker 2 (20:53):
We're gonna move on in a minute.
Speaker 1 (20:54):
Okay, there are two things. So my family's divided down
the middle. There's my mom and me on one side,
and then there's everybody else, my brothers and my father.
My father and my brothers were incapable of explaining things,
so my father would just go and then my brother Jeff,
(21:15):
who I love dearly, just would talk endlessly and not
get anywhere. And as a kid. This drove me crazy.
So you know how you're constantly playing games as a kid,
and there's always a moment where you've got to teach
your cousin how to play Hearts, and so my father
would be incapable, and my brother would give this incredibly
long explanation of a going over, and then finally, in frustration,
(21:37):
I would just say, okay, everyone shut up. This is
how you play Hearts and the mistakes people make it
explaining things just to drive me. As I can remember
it as like an eight year old being driven crazy
by this. The thing you start with is what is
the point of the game. Start with that. The point
of monopoly is to amass as many properties as you
(21:57):
can and put everyone else bankrupt.
Speaker 2 (21:58):
Right.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
You don't explain the game before you explain the point,
right like people would start without doing and I would
read the Parker Brothers at instructions and I would say,
why didn't you tell me what the point.
Speaker 2 (22:08):
Is in the you were speaking my love language.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
To drive me to this day, this drives me nuts.
Explain it properly, right. So I think that was where
my career as a journalist is born.
Speaker 2 (22:23):
Huh.
Speaker 1 (22:24):
I was like I grew up in a household where
sixty percent of the members of our house, my household,
could not explain the simplest thing to anybody else.
Speaker 2 (22:35):
So before we go on from just a note about
your father and higher education, I want to ask one quie.
I don't want to talk long about this, but you
certainly in your career as a journalists you seem to
have a pretty strong love hate relationship with higher education.
Speaker 1 (22:48):
Oh my god, don't even get me started. Leave you
said you only we only have ninety minutes, You're I
have just give.
Speaker 2 (22:56):
Us a three to four minute excursis on that. I mean,
I can't, Yeah, you can't.
Speaker 1 (23:01):
Can't even Okay, I'll ask follow up questions. Okay, I'll
tell you. I just wrote I'm writing a see to
my first book with Tipping Point. There is literally a
chapter called why does Harvard have a women's rugby team?
Which is six thousand words of explanation for why the
(23:23):
school would do something that otherwise makes no sense. So
it's not that I'm fine with them having a club
rugby team. They don't have a club. They have a
varsity women's rugby team, and they go to like New
Zealand to recruit people for it. They got like multiple coaches,
They fly around the country. They destroy other teams by
the score of like one hundred and five to nothing.
They have like a pro rugby team. They introduce this
(23:47):
in twenty thirteen, and they already, you know, Harvard already
has more varsity sports than any other college in the world.
Speaker 2 (23:55):
I did not know that.
Speaker 1 (23:55):
Oh yeah, by far, Ohio State doesn't even come close
or Alabama. Harvard's way off there. So I have a
whole grand theory about why they're doing it, which I'm
not going to go into because we don't have time.
But my point is, yes, I am obsessed with even
the smallest details. I have read stuff about, particularly Ivy
League colleges which I think are completely an utterly morally
bankrupt and should be shut down tomorrow. And the idea
(24:20):
that Americans stand by.
Speaker 2 (24:22):
Way, you can't just say that, Well that one's asking
to follow up, what's what's the what's the root of
the moral bankruptcy?
Speaker 1 (24:33):
Harvard is a school that educates what ten thousand students
maas and has an endowment of forty five billion, which
is subsidized by the American taxpayers. Can you think of
a more absurd situation where a handful of schools, the
total endowment of the Ivy League and Stanford is north
of one hundred billion dollars collectively, they educate one hundred
(24:58):
thousand students a yere a tiny, tiny drop in a bucket. Meanwhile,
they're hoarding one hundred and twenty billion dollars getting tax benefits,
all of which is subsized by the American taxpayer. And further,
the government's channeling funneling all kinds of cash towards them.
And it's absurd. And at the other end of the equation,
(25:18):
there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of students
in this country who are holding enormous amounts of debt
because the schools that they went to couldn't afford to
give them financial aid. Who would construct such a system?
It makes no sense. If you're going to have forty
five billion dollars in the bank, the very least you
(25:39):
should do is educate one hundred thousand students a year.
At minimum, you should educate ten times as many students
as you do. In Canada, where I come from the
most prestigious school in Canada's University of Toronto. It is
an undergraduate population of seventy thousand students, as it should.
Your most prestigious school should be your biggest school, right Like,
(26:01):
if you really do have the best faculty, in the
best facilities, and the most money and the greatest reputation,
you should try and help them some number of students.
This is like saying if I were to build the
greatest hospital in the South, and I said, Lee, I'm
going to open it in Nashville, It's going to be
the greatest hospital in the world. And here's what I'm
(26:21):
going to do. I'm going to let in one hundred
patients a year. You can bring in people on a
stretcher and fifty a day, have the ambulances line up,
and then I will spend the next two weeks assessing them,
and I will choose one for admittance to my elite
cardiac center and one for the dinner I'll take in one.
(26:43):
I'll have a neurosurgeon and he'll do one operation a day,
just to make sure it's the absolute top night. If
they did that, we would think that's bananas, right, Yep,
That's exactly the system we tolerate in American higher ch
It's preposterous. By the way, I'm not done. What do
(27:05):
rich people in this country do? They look at that
state of affairs, and they may they increasing large checks
to the schools that already have the most money. It's
even crazier, right, the marginal value of a dollar given
to Harvard University is zero. There's literally nothing they can
do with that, Like they're already every base is already covered.
(27:26):
If you gave a million dollars to this college, I mean,
we could talk all day about what that could do,
what you would do with that. If you give a
million dollars to Harvard, you might as well just burn
it in front of Harvard in Harvard Square. It's just crazy.
And literally not a week goes past when some hedge
fun guy doesn't a matter a check for two hundred
(27:47):
million dollars to Harvard University. And every time I see that,
I just think you are a moron.
Speaker 2 (27:53):
Right, Well, I'm glad that we found something that you're passionate. Yeah,
I want to move to a moral philosophy just a second,
And actually i'll do a quick callback to something you
said a moment ago about rolls and multiplicity of identities,
which is something that narrative theology and moral philosophy that
takes narrative and story seriously talks about that a lot.
(28:16):
But it strikes me that since the Enlightenment, moral philosophy
typically has much more focused on rules and principles, just
tell us the right thing to do, rules and principles.
But prior to the Enlightenment, a lot of ancient moral
traditions they focus very much more on story because storytelling
(28:37):
was fundamentally a morally formative practice in helping people think
about their sense of self, about what they saw as
beautiful and true and good. And obviously this wasn't moralistic storytelling,
but it was story as a moral practice. And it
seems to me that that's the kind of storytelling you
(28:59):
like to do. That is that you're trying to tell
stories that invite us to a different sense of self
or a different way of seeing the world that is
then an invitation to be changed in some way. Do
you resonate with that or does that seem to be yeah?
Speaker 1 (29:15):
Right, So going back to that story I told about
my national story, So does the girl stop if at
her Bible study they talked about how we have a
moral obligation to help those less fortunate than us. Right,
that's one option. That's what they could have studied if
they were just interested in rules and principles. But they didn't.
(29:37):
They studied a story, a very concrete story about, you know,
a member of a despised minority who goes out of
his way. He disrupts his routine and puts himself to
a lot of trouble to help somebody doesn't know, right,
very concrete story that's in her head. She's driving down
(29:59):
a road and what does she see someone in distress
by the side of the road, and she has to
put herself in some kind of jeopardy to stop and help.
And she has that the story in her head, so
she does it right, Like that's what a story can do.
I don't think she stops if it's just an abstract thing,
But there was some kind of in the specifics of
(30:21):
the story of the Good Samaritan. There is something really
powerful that moves people in a way that the abstract
discussion is not, Which is not to say the abstract
discussion is without value, sure, but there's a particular power
attached to the story that and I've always loved that.
And I did the six part series on guns this
for the Revision's history this year. In the last episode,
(30:43):
I went to the University of Chicago and I was
interviewing someone there for while I was there, she said, Oh,
you should really talk to my colleague Abdullah, and so
this is totally random thing, and I went, okay, and
I go and meet this guy who's a er doc
at the University of Chicago. Grew up in the South
Side of Chicago, black guy who chose to practice emergency
(31:06):
medicine in the same neighborhood he grew up, which is
one of the most dangerous neighborhoods in the country. And
he was describing the experience of on any given day
he will see someone brought in on a stretcher who's
been shot, who's someone he knew. And there's a moment
in a conversation where he talks about I asked him
how many friends he's had who have been killed, and
(31:32):
he actually has this He's a, you mean like people
I was close enough too that they were in my phone,
like I've been texting with him. I go yeah, he
goes fifteen, Oh right, And the whole conversation is I
had framed it in the episode is framed by this
comment that this I had done a couple of seasons ago.
This whole thing about the Jesuits thinking like a Jesuit,
(31:56):
and that's one Jesuit has said to me. Sin is
the failure to bother to care. And the whole episode
is all about what does it mean to bother to care? Now?
Sin is the failure to bother to care? Is the
abstract rule. This guy, Abdolah Price's decision to forego a
much easier, more lucrative life practice is an ear doc
(32:18):
in a suburb someplace to go back and practice in
his own neighborhood and run the risk of this traumatic
thing where it's kids he knows coming in right, that's
a story, it's real about his choices, and it's just
emotionally moving in the and it makes that principle come
(32:38):
to life. Right suddenly you get what suggests what mean
when he's saying sin is defailure to bother the care?
He means that he means, he means you have to
make the same kind of choice that that guy made.
Speaker 2 (33:04):
We're going to take a short break, but coming right up,
Malcolm's definition of happiness and what quality he values the
most in people. I want to talk about happiness a second.
So in this kind of school of moral theory that
(33:29):
I've raised her, happiness defined a particular way is seen
as the point of life. And I wanted to do
a little short experiment here, and I wanted to read
you a short passage from a Catholic theologian whose work
I like, Paul Waddell, and I've used his book in
(33:50):
a number of my ethics classes. It's a book called
Happiness and the Christian Moral Life, And I want to
see what you make of it. So what Ell says this,
the trajectory of our lives can be read as an
endless pursuit of whatever we think will satisfy us, content us,
and fulfill us. All of that reveals what we believe
will bring us happiness and satisfaction. The trouble, however, is
(34:14):
that we are often confused and easily misled about what
will really fulfill us. Then he's talking about Aquinas in Aristotle.
He says, for Aquinas in Aristotle, happiness does not reside
in having my wants and desire satisfied unless I have
learned to want and desire what is.
Speaker 1 (34:35):
Best that's lovely, lovely.
Speaker 2 (34:40):
I think it's lovely. Yeah, why do you find it lovely? Well?
Speaker 1 (34:44):
First of all, I like it gives us a definition
of the purpose of a religious life that's different, that
it adds to our understanding of that. And I like
the idea that I love any kind of notion that
says that are that left to our own devices, we
often get things wrong. I like that that's an important
(35:05):
reminder we just willly nearly follow what's in our gut
as often as not screw up right. I My book Blink,
which was misinterpreted as a book celebrating gut instincts when
in fact it was the opposite, was about this, like,
unless you're an expert, your instincts lead you astray. You
need to educate them in some way. And the idea
(35:25):
that one of those civilizing institutions in life is the
church is a really good one. That's like a life love.
The way he phrased it, you're sixty, don't remind me.
Speaker 2 (35:42):
Are you happy?
Speaker 1 (35:43):
Yeah? I mean I don't, Yes, I do think I'm happy.
It's funny, I never asked myself that question that comes
to mind in very very discreet moments, so I'm much
more comfortable saying I was happy doing X, Or I
was happy when do you know what I mean? I
fixed a problem in a chapter I was working on
this morning in a little coffee shop in Nashville. I
(36:08):
was happy when I realized that fixed it. Or I
will go running this afternoon afterward it be this, I
will be happy in the middle of that running. That's
how I like to think about happiness.
Speaker 2 (36:15):
Yeah, what about when you think about being sixty? What
regrets or hardest lessons learned? To whatever degree you want
to talk about those?
Speaker 1 (36:31):
I don't do I have. I must have regrets. I've
a ton of it. I suppose I have a lot, but
they're not like. The problem is that very often the
mistakes you made or the failures you have, turn out
to be so important in educating you, and that in
the end you don't think of them as mistakes anymore,
(36:52):
you know, I mean like, Yeah, So I do firmly
believe that you learn way more from your failures than
you do from your successes. I don't think success teaches
you much at all. The only thing that prods you
to dig deeper is when something doesn't work or when
something fails. And now, so after a lifetime of that,
can you really look on your failures as being can
(37:16):
you classify them as as regrettable? They're not regrettable because
I came out different than I get confused by that
question because I don't know how to categorize. Like, there's
a period of my life where I spent a huge
amount of time in Freudian therapy.
Speaker 2 (37:34):
Right, three days a week, you were receiving therapy.
Speaker 1 (37:38):
I was receiving it. I was in Manhattan. I was
new to Manhattan. I was like, all right, that's what
they do here. So and I had a job that
wasn't that demanding. You can't have a demanding job, and
you can't have a demanding job and be in three
days a week Freudian therapy because it just wipes out
the whole day. Right, there's something that happens, by the way.
(37:58):
So I have this whole Manu book. It's a top
of mind. I have a whole thing on the magic
number three, three years a magic number. So you do
one day a week, it's like, fine, whatever lots of
people do one day week, you do two, it's like
a lot. You do three, it completely takes over your life.
Nothing everything else fades into insignificance. You are someone who
does therapy. That's what your self definition is is, by
(38:21):
the way, astounding how it takes over your life. I've
never been through anything equivalent to this.
Speaker 2 (38:26):
How long a period of your life was this?
Speaker 1 (38:28):
I probably wasn't three days a week for I don't
even remember. Probably was a year. It was traumatic. It
was like, couldn't function, stop being productive at work, had
the most horrendous nightmares. Everything I was my unconscious because
all the Freudians cary about is you're unconscious. My unconscious
basically took over my life for a year. We see
(38:51):
a massive amount of time and a massive amount of
money was spent on this. It's the last year in
so you I say it was that a regret? I know,
because actually I didn't. It didn't solve any of my problems,
but it was, in retrospect a failure that was deeply fascinating. Yeah,
(39:12):
that taught me something really extraordinary about not really my mind,
but about the human mind. Man. There is a thing
called you're unconscious, and it is ginormous. It sits in
your brain wanting to get out, and if you even
so much as crack the door, it will rush out
a tick of your life it says we are scary, right,
(39:35):
human beings. That was a really interesting to learn, right,
I mean, a very costly lesson. But you know, who
knows what book I could have written in that year,
that last year. But I'm I'm glad I did it.
Speaker 2 (39:48):
Yeah, well, and that reminds me of you reframing the
notion of the regrettable. That another theologian I've learned a
lot from and has now a friend, Stanley Harrawass, And
when he talks about this way of thinking about our lives.
I once heard him to a lecture where he was talking.
I don't remember who it was, but it was a
man who went to Oxford, got trained in literature, was
(40:09):
a poet. But then after some time he decided he
wanted to go back home and be a shepherd. And
so he was a shepherd, and he was a shepherd
who would write poetry. And at some point on into
his life, near the end of his life, he wrote
this essay in which he examined the ups and downs
of his life and then he came to the conclusion
(40:33):
this is my life. I want no other. And then
Harawa said, that's the meaning of a happy life is
that you can look back on your life, whatever has happened,
and say I want this life.
Speaker 1 (40:49):
My friend Bruce has this wonderful corollary to that. He
had problems with jealousy. He was open about and he
cured his problems with jealousy by saying, you can no
longer be envious of a piece of someone's life. You
have to want the whole life. So you say, Okay,
I wish I looked like Brad It you're lendious of
(41:11):
Brad Pitt. He's handsome dude. Then you have to say, no,
you can't just have his looks. Gotta have his whole life.
You really want his whole life. No, you don't want
his whole life. You want Angeline and Jolie like you know,
like filing suits against you, and like you can't you
can't get you can't go to the store and get
like a pint of milk because you'll be mommed. I mean,
you're a prisoner, right. It's a horrendous life, right, and
(41:32):
you think about it, You're living in some grotesque house
in la and you can't go out with that. Some
guy's gonna pull up in a suburban to take you in.
You know, a black suburban with tinted windows, so you can,
you know, go to the movie. I mean, you don't
want it, right, and if you go down the list,
you realize you actually don't want anyone's life except your own.
It's really really a useful Uh, that.
Speaker 2 (41:52):
Is very useful. Yeah, it's striking how timid you are
about saying what you think. Okay, I want to shift.
I want to shift the conversation. Another another phrase that
I know I've heard you say repeatedly is a weeper.
He'll say, this is a real weeper. Yeah, So getting
(42:15):
ready for you coming to Nashville. I was listening to
your episode The King of Tears, which I would imagine
a lot of people in Nashville listen to Rob volves
around Nashville and country music, and it's woven together with
all these beautiful layers of storytelling about Bobby Braddock, famed
Nashville songwriter who you're calling the King of Tears because
he's written all of these amazing songs that are just weepers,
(42:37):
and you're especially weaving it together around his song he
Stopped Loving Her Today, which George Stones made famous. Yeah,
and so while listening to this episode, I was down
on the floor in my house, scraping baseboards, getting ready
for the painters to come.
Speaker 1 (42:55):
Did you start crying?
Speaker 2 (42:57):
Don't get asked my story. I can't believe you did that.
I would never do that to one of your stories.
So I'm down on the floor scraping basseboards, getting ready
vas and you come to this climactic moment of you know,
(43:18):
recounting George Jones' funeral, and then you weave into Vince
Gill singing his own weeper Go Rest High. And there
I am down on my hands and knees, sobbing as
Vince gil himself breaks down at George Jones' funeral and
cannot get himself through his own song, Go Rest High.
And so I'm in there file, you know, sobbing, tears
(43:39):
running in my face, and then you say something like
and if you're not crying, there's nothing I can do
for you.
Speaker 1 (43:47):
I can't help you.
Speaker 2 (43:48):
I can't help you.
Speaker 1 (43:48):
I can't help you.
Speaker 2 (43:49):
I can't help you. So what's behind your fascination with weepers?
Speaker 1 (43:55):
Well, it's too easy to make someone laugh. People were
just laughing now, right, super easy making someone cry. So
under what circumstances could I make some portion of you
right now cry really hard. Right, So I'm naturally attracted
(44:16):
to the more difficult of the narrative tasks.
Speaker 2 (44:19):
So what do you think is the line between kind
of manipulative or mawkish sentimentality on one side and emotion
that somehow is speaking to the fullness or the richness
of life for the possibilities of living life. Well, what's
what's it's like?
Speaker 1 (44:38):
And simple? It's whether it's you know, there are hall
there are Hallmark commercials that can get you a little weepy,
but that's not real, you know that, And then you
then you stop, and then I remember there was a
famous I say famous famous to me. It was a
Google an ad for Google for Google Chat or something.
It was a TV commercial and it's you see the
(45:01):
daughter who's just gone off to college, and you see
the dad who's chatting with her, and it's like the
dad's type being in the chat line, I miss you
so much, you know it's been And then you really,
you know, it's been so long since mom left us
or something, and you realize she's his only daughter, his wife,
(45:23):
the mom has died, and as he's typing that thing
about mom to her on Google chat, the cursor slows
down so you realize he's choking up. Right, It's insanely manipulative.
If I showed it to you right now, we're all
in tears. But that's not real, right, I want it real.
They're like you think about them, and you you ask
(45:46):
questions about your own life, like would I've done that?
Should I be doing that? Why am I not doing that?
Speaker 2 (45:52):
Right?
Speaker 1 (45:53):
Why am I not the good Samaritan? Like? That's that's
the kind of story that's important and powerful.
Speaker 2 (46:00):
I got one last question. It may be one that's
easy for you to dismiss, but let me ask you
to dig for a potential answer to it. What is
there about Malcolm Gladwell that you've not given us any
glimpse of that you would be happy for people to
(46:23):
get a glimpse of.
Speaker 1 (46:25):
That's a good question. I think a lot about work
and effort and how important effort is to me in
my own life and in my estimations of others. That
what I want to see from myself and from the
people around me is I want to see some level
(46:49):
of commitment and that what I as I get older,
what I'm I'm going to sound very very nineteenth century.
When I say this, I've become less and less tolerant
of idleness. I mean that in a very, very kind
of specific way, and that is, you have have to
(47:09):
care about something. I don't care what it is. You
have to care about something, and you have to make
a sacrifice in pursuit of that thing you care about,
and you have to try, right And if you're not caring,
putting some effort towards something and making a commitment to it,
then I, honestly I don't have any way to relate
(47:31):
to you anymore. I don't, I can't. I don't have
room in my life for people who aren't who don't
have a connection to whatever it is. I don't, like
I said, I don't care. I don't really care what
it is. I want someone to find something that they
apply themselves to, because if you're not doing that, I
don't understand why you're here, right. I don't think we
(47:51):
were put here to twiddle our thumbs. I just don't.
I wouldn't have said that at twenty five, because at
twenty five I think I was, in some sense twiddling
my thumbs. I look back on that with a little
bit of horror. You know, in my twenties. I did
what people in the twenties do. I partied a lot,
and I would sleep in until one o'clock on a Sunday,
(48:12):
and I would I don't understand that anymore. I don't know.
I'm not sure this is I'm not sure this feeling
I have is correct. I worry that it's ungenerous and whatever,
and but it just is. It's just like, that's what
I when I think about the people I surround myself with. Now,
I've kept the people who care about something, and I
(48:35):
have not kept the people who I think don't Like
I said, I don't know whether that's fair, but it
just is. You know.
Speaker 2 (48:42):
Well, we thank you for the way that you have
cared and that you have sought to make a contribution.
And we're grateful for that and grateful for your presence today,
thankful for your sharing your real self with us today.
Please show your thanks to Malcolm Wadwell, You've been listening
(49:26):
to no small endeavor. In our interview with Malcolm Gladwell, journalist,
New York Times bestselling author of multiple books, and hosts
of the podcast of Visionist History, we gratefully acknowledge the
support of Lily Endowment Incorporated, a private philanthropic foundation supporting
the causes of community development, education and religion, and the
support of the John Templeton Foundation, whose vision is to
(49:47):
become a global catalyst for discoveries that contribute to human flourishing.
All right, thanks to all the stellar team that makes
this show possible. Christy Bragg, Jacob Lewis, Sophie Byrd, Tom Anderson,
(50:08):
Kate Hayes, Mary ebel and Brown, Carriet Herman, Jason Cheesley,
Ellis Osborn and Tim Lower. Thanks for listening and let's
keep exploring what it means to live a good life together.
No Small Endeavor is a production of pr X Tokens Media,
LLC and Great Feeling Studio.
Speaker 1 (50:29):
If you enjoyed this episode of No Small Endeavor, there
are plenty more where that came from. No Small Endeavor
releases new episodes every Thursday. Follow No Small Endeavor on
Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you're listening now.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.