Need a break from yelling at your computer screen and trying to impact swing state poll numbers through the power of your mind? I have just the thing! Take a few minutes to watch this excellent interview with author Dean Koontz that aired on The World Over earlier this month (also embedded at the bottom of the post).
The World Over always has good interviews, but this one is really special. When I first watched it, I knew I had the urge to send the link to everyone I know and tell them to check it out, but I couldn't quite articulate why. Then, when I watched it a second time, I realized what it was:
First of all, it's Catholic media at its finest. Raymond Arroyo is arguably one of the best interviewers of our time. His experience as a bestselling biographer undoubtedly helps him hone in on just the right questions, and he has an excellent sense of when to draw out his interviewee on a subject, and when to shift gears and move to a new topic. Combine that with a fascinating subject like Dean Koontz, and you have a recipe for a riveting interview.
In a larger sense, it shows the need for these kinds of personal profiles conducted in Catholic media. Koontz admits early in the interview that there are things that he could say in this kind of forum, i.e. a Catholic TV show, that he could not say in other interviews. It's amazing how much a shared moral framework cracks open the possibilities for conversation: I've noticed that I can have a more honest and intimate chat with someone I've just met whom I know to be a faithful Catholic than with a non-Catholic acquaintance whom I've known for years. You see this concept at work in the Arroyo/Koontz interview: Because he can assume a lot about the worldview of the show's audience, and shares that worldview himself, Koontz is able to delve deep into meaty subjects like good and evil and the intrinsic value of all human life, without wasting time on caveats and fundamentals.
But I think that the most important part of this interview is what Koontz shows us about what it means to be a Catholic artist, which is to say, what it means to be a good artist.
At the beginning of the interview, he emphasizes the importance of humility in the life of the artist. A writer -- or any other kind of artist -- must understand that producing good work takes a lot of hard work and patience (Koontz wrote consistently for years before he had a bestseller, and still works from sunrise until dinner each day, even skipping lunch). Perhaps more importantly, however, the artist must know that there is a source to his inspiration beyond his own intellect. From time immemorial people have taken it for granted that the best art comes the divine, and that anyone who hopes to produce something beautiful must first be open to receiving inspiration from a supernatural source. Sadly, modern culture has all but lost this concept, and so it's refreshing to hear Koontz discuss it so matter-of-factly. (Don't miss his goosebump-inducing story starting at 10:00 about how the idea for the Odd Thomas series came to him!)
Toward the end of the interview, Koontz emphasizes that all work should have a moral purpose, and that there is an urgent need for stories containing the hope-centered ideology of the Judeo-Christian worldview to act as a counterbalance to the nihilistic messages that dominate our culture (I'm paraphrasing a bit here; you can hear Koontz explain it much better at 40:20). For example, Koontz sees his Odd Thomas character as being on a journey to perfect humility, and has each book in the planned seven-part series reflect on a certain virtue. His 2001 novel One Door Away from Heaven fleshes out the idea that every human life has value, and shows the bleakness of the utilitarian worldview in which some lives are seen as being not worth living and therefore expendable.
Every story ever told takes place atop the foundation of a specific worldview. As Arroyo and Koontz discuss (at 44:50), these days it's popular to take traditionally evil characters like the Wicked Witch in The Wizard of Oz and create stories painting them -- and therefore evil itself -- as not really all that bad, their "wrong" actions ultimately just a matter of misunderstanding. I've also noticed more subtle but no less disturbing moral landscapes in which characters can commit adultery or live completely selfish lives, and this supposedly leads to good times and lasting fulfillment for all involved.
I think that this is exactly why the world is desperate for more Catholic artists, even if it doesn't know it: When we create stories that take place within a Catholic moral framework, they resonate as true. Catholicism articulates the laws of good and evil that are inscribed on every human heart, and people ache for these truths, even if they deny that they're true on the surface. A story that says that promiscuous sex and violence are glamorous might do well at the box office for a few weeks, but it's the stories that say that self-sacrifice is better than selfishness or that heroism is better than cowardice are the ones that are remembered over generations. Like hearing the high note of an opera sung at just the right pitch, you know a moral truth when you encounter it, even if you can't articulate the details of why it's true. And when you encounter it, it fills your soul with warmth, and you yearn for more.
There's so much good stuff to dig into in this interview -- Koontz's inspiring work with service dogs (16:15), his thoughts on the complementary role of faith and science (12:45), his insights about the critical role of beauty and symbols in the Church (53:30) -- but I'll step back now and just let you watch it. I hope that everyone takes the time to check it out, but I think it should be required viewing for Catholic storytellers of all kinds. Whether you're a writer, a blogger, a film or television producer, a playwright, or anyone else who hopes to transform the culture through the power of a tale well told, you could hardly find a better use for your time than listening to this rare interview with Dean Koontz.
Comments
Post a Comment
“From time immemorial people have taken it for granted that the best art comes the divine”
and they have simply been fooling themselves.
“that anyone who hopes to produce something beautiful must first be open to receiving inspiration from a supernatural source”
How silly.
“his thoughts on the complementary role of faith and science”
Hilarious nonsense. Why should he have any “authority” on such a subject?
What astonishes me, Earl, is how someone like you - someone who apparently prides himself at being above the “hilarious nonsense” of believers, of being a man of intellect, science and reason - is comfortable posting a comment that amounts to nothing but a scoff and a sneer, is loaded with emotions instead of clear reasoning and does not add any good arguments to the discussion. It would’ve taken you only a minute to write down *why* you think faith and science cannot be complementary, which would’ve allowed others (christian scientists, for example, who might have some more “authority” on this a subject) to provide counter-arguments. As it is, you’re shutting yourself out of any reasonable discussion.
On topic: the video is a bit long for me to watch right now (got an essay and presentation to write, bleh), but it sure sounds interesting. I’ve really enjoyed reading Tolkien’s views on the relationship between an artist and God (Mythopoeia is amazing), but he’s the only catholic writer I’ve read on the subject, so it’d be good to get some other perspectives. As a writer myself this sort of things are inspiring to read about. :) I agree about the responsibility of an author, *especially* when it comes to young adult fiction. Some of the books out there are simply horrible when it comes to themes and messages - Hush, Hush (the love story of a teenage girl and a fallen angel) is a good example.
What a pleasure this was Jennifer. Thank you! Dean Koontz was so interesting and intelligent. His own life story is the most powerful message of all. Thank God for good souls like this who use their talents thoughtfully and strengthen the brotherhood of man. Quite the opposite is the first comment on the thread. What a poverty of mind and spirit. I had always heard about Dean Koontz novels, and now am eager to read one. I wonder what the best one would be to get my feet wet.
I as an artist may have a clear view of what you claim Mr. Thompson. I have been an artist for 40 years and I have found time after time, that if I remember to pray first the painting is better, where I do not know but it is better. People who go to church live longer, artists who paint live longer, beauty is real, I have lived under an atheist state and what they built was ugly, what they painted was ugly, what statues they produced was ugly, in 50 years the society became a society of thieves, because it was necessary to steal, to bribe, to lie, to live under atheism you must have an internal life and an external life these two lives do not touch. Atheism is evil. You may not wish to believe this but it is true. Ask Poles, ask Czechs ask Hungarians. An Atheist asked me why I believe, he was so unhappy, I answered because of beauty and wish to share that beauty with another. Beauty is a proof for me that God exists. Reason is the answer given by the Jewish professor in the camps why they should more valuable as workers, true but to evil it just wants them dead. To reason every thing is reasonable in season including excluding children from school because of the parents imaginary friends. Reason is a trap, Ask any soldier if they will serve an atheist officer they will not, they have their lucky soupcan, their lucky towel, their lucky spoon, they do not need a officer who they fear has offended God, they have enough problems, they will kill that officer.
This was a terrific interview and very informative. I did not know Koontz was Catholic and this interview deepens this reader’s understanding of how his faith informs him writing. I’ve read many of his books and love his Christopher Snow character. Alas, there are only two titles for the Snow character. I sure hope we will see more of him. And wouldn’t an Odd Thomas/Christopher Snow cross-over be cool?
I wish I had the time to watch this. I’ve read a handful of Koontz’ books, including a couple of Odd Thomases, some of the Frankenstein trilogy, and couple whose names escape me. He is entertaining and his works have a strong moral undertow. But as a writer/artist, his work is uneven. He tends to wallow in the grotesque* and the points he makes can be rather heavy-handed.
*Grotesque in the slasher-film sense of the word, rather than what Flannery O’Connor meant when she used the word.
Just have to say: That was awesome.
Thanks for sharing. A great interview to watch during NaNoWriMo!
“comfortable posting a comment that amounts to nothing but a scoff and a sneer”
Is this really the place for a discussion of the incompatibility of science and religion? There are a thousand posts already out there on the web. Read WEIT. Fundamentally, science is about the natural world and religion requires a supernatural world. Science requires “evidence” and there is no evidence for anything supernatural. So they are incompatible at a very fundamental level.
“I have been an artist for 40 years and I have found time after time, that if I remember to pray first the painting is better”
Hilarious. Your anecdotal “evidence” and the usual $5.95 will get you you know what at the usual place. Try simply “meditating”?
“Atheism is evil.”
Well, Sharia is “evil”. There is a lot of “evil” and “injustice” in this world. Some of the things done in the name of religion have been “evil”. Probably dictatorships are “evil”. So what? Do you really think “religion” is a cure for “evil”?
“Beauty is a proof for me that God exists.”
How silly. Beauty, like the “gods”, is in the eye of the beholder?
I saw this interview (twice) on EWTN and had much the same reaction! I was blown away by his insight into the problems of modern culture and his understanding of the Sacramental life. I had never read any of his books, but the interview was so refreshing and encouraging that I went to the library to find one the next day. Thanks for writing this article and getting the word out about his interview!
Earl Thompson -
If this is not the place for a discussion on the compatibility of science and religion, then it certainly isn’t the place for a comment on them that is not discussion. If you don’t think it should be discussed here in detail, then don’t bring it up. That is, it hardly makes sense to say you posted a sneering insult because you didn’t think real discussion was appropriate, because sneering insults are nothing more than a sad parody of discussion and aren’t ever appropriate - and especially aren’t appropriate when you don’t think we should be discussing the issue anyway.
I watched some of the interview with Raymond and Dean Koontz, and within a day went to library to check out one of his many books, Odd Thomas that was terrific, and I have in 2 weeks read 3 more of his books.
I don’t want to take away from the good novels he has written, but there
are a couple I have read that are immoral in content. I compare those parts of his books with movies that are terrific and all of a sudden they throw in sexual encounter that takes away from the movie, something they could have done without.
If you want me to name books I will, but all I am saying is to prepare
for the parts that might be offensive to some.
Matt from Seattle
Mr. Thompson, as a retired person, you should have ample time to listen to the interview of Dean Koontz. Since that was the foundation of Jennifer’s comments, you would be more authentically honest to respond to this actual interview. Your comments about science and religion are quite superficial, and you demonstrate an intellectual vacuum that could be constructively informed by opening yourself to the wisdom of Mr. Koontz. It has been years since I have read fiction, and I can’t wait to open a Koontz novel and move through them. For those who are not retired, the interview is truly wonderful and worth returning to for short periods of time as they become available.
Troll alert! Calling out the closed-minded Mr “Earl Thompson”. Do not feed the trolls.
“Your comments about science and religion are quite superficial”
Hilarious. I notice that you did not deign to try to contradict them.
“opening yourself to the wisdom of Mr. Koontz.”
Hilarious. Many/most of his novels have silly fantasy supernatural components. From Wikipedia:
“In the beginning of the book, Odd Thomas is silently approached by the ghost of a young girl brutally raped and murdered, and through his unique ability to understand the dead, is psychically led to her killer, a former schoolmate named Harlo Landerson.”
Is this really “wisdom”? Or just silly escapist nonsense?
“It has been years since I have read fiction”
Don’t you read your holy book of mythology? It’s fiction!
Earl-
Your claim that science and religion discuss completely different things would actually show that they are completely compatible. Put it this way - if you have a person in one corner who only makes comments about cheese, say, and makes no comments whatsoever about, I dunno, let’s say pool tables and isn’t sure they exist, and then another person who only talks about pool tables and is aware that cheese exists but never bothers to say anything about it, then they will never disagree. Of course it’s not quiet as simple as that, but it’s not too far off. It doesn’t matter that the cheese man doesn’t see evidence for the pool table - this is not a contradiction because he’s a cheese man.
-
You may also want to know that calling things “hilarious” does not count as a refutation. And if your knee-jerk reaction to fantastical elements in literature is not only that such elements themselves must be no more than escapist nonsense, but that the person who put them there can have no wisdom, then I pity you your poverty of experience.
-
Or maybe I should respond in your own language so that you understand. You say “Don’t you read your holy book of mythology? It’s fiction!” In keeping with your style of logic and debate, I respond: Hilarious! you must not know how to read.
“Of course it’s not quite as simple as that”
The point is that religions claim that this “supernatural being” actually affects the real world. Science studies the real world and determines that there are no effects that cannot be explained. So the absence of evidence really is evidence of absence. Your religion claims that there are “miracles”. Science says no. Your religion claims that there is life after death and heaven and hell. Science says no. Your religion claims that humans are “special”. Science says no. So your religious claims are incompatible with science.
“that the person who put them there can have no wisdom”
There are tens of thousands of books of fiction published in English every year. Many of them contain some “wisdom”. It’s silly to try to read them all to find a nugget or two of “wisdom”. The Odd Thomas books are “fantasy” “thriller” fiction. Such books are simply escapist - it would be silly to go looking for “wisdom” is such a book.
Based on the interview of D. Koontz, I ordered an audio copy of Odd Thomas. I look forward to listening to/from work and on road trips. Thank you, Jennifer.
@Earl- The natural is but a subset of the supernatural. Therefore all natural evidence IS supernatural- and science is but a subset of the reality shown by religion.
In other words, your natural evidence wouldn’t exist without a supernatural cause; a universe without God is like an algebra equation without numbers.
“The natural is but a subset of the supernatural.”
That’s been an interesting assertion for the last several thousand years.
How would you actually provide “evidence” to support this assertion?
“your natural evidence wouldn’t exist without a supernatural cause”
Hilarious nonsensical assertion.
For your amusement, here is a discussion between two atheists:
http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/11/08/shermer-and-i-disagree-on-the-supernatural/
Coyne:
“I disagreed with him, arguing that the presence of a divine being, one able to either obviate or manipulate the laws of nature, was at least a hypothetical possibility. The proper scientific attitude, I claimed, is to say that based on a lack of evidence for a god (and the presence of evidence arguing against the existence of an intrusive and beneficent being), we can therefore ignore a god hypothesis.”
Shermer:
“My argument is that the most any natural science could ever discover in the way of a deity would be a natural intelligence sufficiently advanced to be god-like but still within the realm of the natural world.”
People! Earl is loving all this attention. Just stop responding.
Earl! Check out Aquinas’ Law of Motion in the Summa.
“That’s been an interesting assertion for the last several thousand years.
How would you actually provide “evidence” to support this assertion?”
By the existence of the natural, of course. And from the actual meanings of the words, as opposed to the lies that atheists tell each other to make themselves feel good.
“For your amusement, here is a discussion between two atheists”
Not really interested, for I already know the truth- which is that atheists are only atheist out of a selfish need to avoid authority and evidence to support their own lack of good.
Antiheros—
I’ve been wondering if people are writing antiheros because—they want to redeem them, and that is a question of who is redeemable—what depths is a person redeemable from.
I’m not convinced that antiheros are upside down, I think they’re people asking the deepest questions.
Just a thought.
“which is that atheists are only atheist out of a selfish need to avoid authority and evidence to support their own lack of good.”
I love you, too.
There is no good in humanity, but God.
Take God out, and there is no way to support Good.
Which is why I said what I said.
“From The Corner of His Eye” was the Koontz novel that hooked me. As a lover of science and a philosopher, the ideas that Koontz tries to explore really even transcend his talent. He writes about the value of every member of society, including those with horrible, tragic and dark upbringings, and catastrophic disabilities, categories that have become fashionable to dismiss as unworthy now.
Considering how aggressively anti-faith much of today’s media elite are, I am always pleasantly surprised when I learn that an artist whose work I love shares my faith and my worldview. I have been reading Dean Koontz’s books for years. Perhaps I’ll read them all over again with this new insight.
Thank you for sharing this!!
Coming to this thread so late in the game, I just have to say that Mr. Thompson is a seeker and I am glad he spends so much time here. We are broken vessels that can’t adequately communicate with him the love of God, the love God has for him but the fact that he’s here, gives me hope that we are an important part of his journey to God. The Dean Koontz interview gave me so much to think about. No, Mr. Koontz isn’t perfect, his books aren’t all masterpieces, but he has an ability to communicate through his words, many beautiful and heartfelt things, things he’s learned personally. I was taken with his humility and his clear desire to show love in this world. I immediately got hold of the Odd Thomas books and I can’t help seeing some of Mr. Koontz in Oddy. As a convert, I find it so interesting how completely a clearly Catholic writer (unlike many of you, the “Catholicness” of his writing jumped out at me) weaves his faith in and out of the story. I was thrilled.
“Mr. Thompson is a seeker and I am glad he spends so much time here”
Hilarious.
“We are broken vessels”
Hilarious.
“his books aren’t all masterpieces”
I tried reading one that was different from Odd Thomas and gave up.
And the Odd Thomas books are interesting, but ultimately just fantasy.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.
The time period for commenting on this article has expired.