Jonathan Franzen interview on 'The Corrections' (2001)

Jonathan Franzen talks about his novel "The Corrections," winner of the 2001 National Book Award, and the place and value of fiction in the culture.

Share this video!

[wordswordswords]

I think novels are more than entertainment, they are educational, they are therapeutic, they are nice to have and hold, they bring people together, I could go on. Books and writing are just wonderful things.

[patralink]

I loved this book. The opening is one of the best I've ever read. Reading about families is a favorite theme for me. I've read this book twice.

[ramdularsingh]

Franzen is a brilliant novelist ! He must be awarded with all the honours of our beloved world

[ЕржанНасанов]

The Corrections is an incredible book, a life altering one for me

[KashifReads]

I just started reading this book it just took me away. Dude I just love that Chip character what a mess he is, I love this author too how humble he is...

[michaelwilcox]

I couldn’t believe how good this book was. I kept waiting to hit a lull, and it never happened. A true masterpiece.

[spyology]

Franzen: "It's fun to think sometimes"

[alekspiter]

Just have finished it and only now comprehend that while be reading I whole time imagine Jonathan himself as Chip

[prognition]

I’ve noticed, most instances in which people have such a distaste for an author i.e. DFW, Alexander Theroux, and Franzen, usually it means they are fucking awesome.

[rozzaziobrown]

One of my favorite books. I haven't read for pleasure in at least a year but once I picked this up I wouldn't put it down and finished it in 3 days.

[Earbly]

Interesting that he seems to find reading books so tremendously useless in his utilitarian, food-in-stomach type of way. Yet he writes books apparently from this pleasure of uselessness? He's published a number of books now. I don't really share his view. I think if you take someone who never read a book past age 10 and someone who read 40 books a year, both at 40 years of age I believe there will be a tangible difference in perspective, cognitive function, memory. Open mindedness. And since this effects humans than by default it effects the world of humanity, our sort of constructed world.

I think it is a way to bridge cultures, bridge gaps in cultural perspective. A book can lay out a large, nuanced, detailed, meticulous and persuasive argument and vision from a certain perspective from a certain time. Also reading depends on what you read. Yes there is some reading that could be strictly categorised as "entertainment" like Tom Clancy etc.. Or books that can really shift your perspective on the world, and actually change who you are and thus the course of your entire life.

[ajithpr]

Let's see what the wise people of the Internet has to say...

[librini]

The interwiever is good too. Who is he?

[jonathanhenderson]

"The mind is its own place, and in itself can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven.” John Milton wrote that in Paradise Lost, and it's as true now as it ever was. The importance of novels is that they (the best ones, at least) give us insight into our own minds and the minds of others. They give us perspective, new and other way to see the world and ourselves. They "hold the mirror up to nature" (to quote Hamlet). The goal of being a "productive member of society" is noble, yes, but the emphasis placed on material gains is useless if we lose sight of what our ultimate goals are. It does no good to build roads if we lose sight of where we're going, and no good to invent medicines if we forget for what purpose we're trying to live. The best novels can remind us, or help us discover, both of those things.

[rrfirefly]

Oprah, Oprah, Oprah! an eclectic mix of high and low culture. It's an odd place for a serious writer to appear. One easily remembers: 1) Oprah loco over John Travolta and Tom Cruise, whipping her audience into a frenzy, 2) "And YOU get a car... and YOU get a car...etc." 3) Oprah's obsession with expensive consumer items. Jonathan Franzen won a Guggenheim Fellowship -- not a typical guest for her show.

[TheNewYorker]

When Norman Mailer was asked his opinion of Jonathan Franzen, he said, "Well, I've read him, and I'll tell you, I got exactly the same impression from his writing as I did from reading Thomas Pynchon. And that is: he is either a great writer, or he has perpetrated one of the greatest literary frauds in history. That's how I feel about him. As I said, I felt the same way when reading Pynchon. And I admit it: I can't tell whether it's great writing or he's an absolute literary fraud. I would lean toward the latter explanation. But I just don't know."

[RustyShackleford-eqie]

I love the comments sections under Jonathan Franzen related videos. There's so much hate for him, and most commenters seem, almost instinctively, to disagree with everything he says. It's almost like reading the comments under any Quora post about Donald Trump. The "Never-Trumpers" on Quora are among the most passionately spiteful people on the internet.

[alekspiter]

I think perhaps it would have been seemed a bit more intresting if interviuer had read the book that he obviously hadn`t

[mrtuesdayafternoon]

Charlie Rose is a poor interviewer even for a boomer

[theanthropism]

Franzen saying he wasn't trying to convey any sort of message in the book but was instead simply trying to create an experience in which the reader just might happen to think is laughable and antithetical to the nature of pretty all writing. Everything written is imbued with meaning and message, whether it's conscious or not. I really liked The Corrections, but c'mon.