The opening night of the Dublin Writers Festival was a tremendous success. Despite their radically different approaches to global issues, the mutual admiration between Ian McEwan and Stuart Brand was clearly visible and they worked seamlessly together on the stage.
Questioning each other about literary technique and scientific understanding, they covered an interesting array of topics including nuclear energy, plutonium waste, writing styles, futurology, population, cultural pessimism vs. scientific optimism and the role of literature in scientific affairs.
There was plenty of laughter throughout the evening and members of the audience (including Michael John from The Science Gallery and journalist Frank McDonald) asked some excellent questions. Afterwards, the queues were out the door for book signing.
Both speakers made some extremely poignant and thought-provoking comments in the area of global affairs. However, as my own scientific knowledge is limited, I’d hate to paraphrase someone wrongly and do them an injustice, so I’m going to stick to some of the literary aspects which I found most illuminating.
Opening paragraphs
Both authors read their opening paragraphs, focusing on the difference in approach between fiction and non-fiction.
As a non-fiction writer, Brand’s opening was direct and clear, offering practical solutions to genuine problems. He discussed how “ideologies need to shift, as the earth is fine – it’s human beings who are in trouble.”
Before reading, McEwan pointed out that as a fiction writer, his opening paragraph doesn’t offer solutions, but reflects on human nature. “Novels do not flourish when they’re out to make a case, so the inner life features more.” This shone through as the opening paragraph introduced his protagonist, Michael Beard.
What particularly intrigued me is that McEwan builds his novels around an opening paragraph or even a single sentence (which can appear anywhere later in the book).
Brand: “Are you planting a hook and taking us inside the protagonist?”
McEwan: “I don’t know. I like writing irresponsible first paragraphs then trick myself into writing something that hooks me. Some of the paragraphs die, others end up as novels.”
Scientific literature
McEwan admitted being interested in science because of all the great science writers but was disappointed by the lack of recognition for scientific literature. He said we’re “living in a golden age of scientific literature” which is enabling an “aesthetic pleasure of science” – something which my friend accompanying me at the event agreed with wholeheartedly.
Both Brand and McEwan agreed that we should have anthologies made available which focus on scientific literature; starting from Aristotle and continuing up to the likes of John Kerry and Richard Dawkins. A point very well made was that writers with theories that have since been disproved should not be discounted, as mistakes need to be made for future generations to get it right. Well said!
Audience question to Ian McEwan: “Did you get a perverse pleasure in creating such an obnoxious protagonist?”
McEwan: “Yes! It was challenge to make the central character not a hero. Not everyone is marvelous. It was a rhetorical challenge to filter the world through the mind of an unsympathetic character. A great example is John Updike with his rabbit novels – I wanted to have my own timid go at a failed human being who is every now and again a comic victim.”
For more info on the event, you can check out the dubwritersfest account on twitter – there was a fantastic live account of the event which you can skim back through.
