15 Questions with Claire Messud and James Wood
Professor of the Practice of Literary Criticism James Wood and Visiting Lecturer on English Claire Messud represent two different ends of the literary world. One is an incisive critic, the other is a renowned author. And they’re married. FM caught up with them—as well as their five-year-old son, Lucien, out of school for a sick day—to discuss literature, criticism, and Harvard’s social scene.
1.
Fifteen Minutes: I notice you both teach class from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. on Mondays; do you carpool?
Claire Messud: No, we haven’t.
FM: Haven’t been bullied by the “Green is the new Crimson” initiative?
James Wood: No, though sometimes I bicycle in, so that’s fairly green.
2.
FM: What kinds of books are your children reading right now?
CM: Lucien is reading “Amos and Boris” [By William Steig], and we’ve read “Jack and the Bean Stalk”.
JW: Our daughter is reading “Harry Potter” and “The Railway Children” by E. Nesbit.
3.
FM: What is a typical dinner discussion like in your household? Do you discuss work, or recent literature?
CM: Much of the discussion at the dinner table last night was about how our daughter had pajama day. The level is not necessarily so high.
4.
FM: Does the writer-critic pairing inform your professional work?
CM: It’s easy for me and hard for him. When I show him my work, which sometimes I do, I want him to be my loving husband and a fierce and honest critic, and I want him honestly and fiercely to tell me how great it is (Laughs). It just puts him in an awkward position. But for me it’s a win-win; and I’ll never get reviewed by him.
5.
FM: How do you both like working out of Harvard?
JW: I think both of us feel all the intellectual benefits of academia and also the risks to the kinds of non-academic lives that we decided upon years ago. For me, this primarily involved the romance of trying to live by the pen, trying to make a salary from writing words. Obviously academics do that in a different way—but I never want to lose that primary business of essentially being a journalist, a word I’m happy and proud to use in my case.
6.
FM: You (CM) were quoted as saying in an interview with The New York Times, “I don’t trust people who are likeable”. What did you think of each other when you first met? Did you find Professor Wood “likeable”?
CM: I did, I did!
JW: (Laughs) Perhaps not trustworthy
CM: I did find him likeable, likeable and...
JW: ...and a little slippery.
CM: No, I did like him! When I said that, I meant people for whom their likeability is the supreme concern. I would say actually though—that being said—he is someone who totally puts on the charm. Maybe I should be wary of him.
7.
FM: Do you (JW) think there should be more emphasis on criticism in undergraduate English courses?
JW: Yeah, I do. If most English concentrators don’t go on to become professionally involved with literature, then the one thing you can give them actually, to carry with them in life, is some evaluative capacity. And it can be just another part of the whole repertoire of attending to a text—it doesn’t have to be a sort of “thumbs up, thumbs down” thing.
8.
FM: I guess that’s the danger?
JW: Yes, that’s the danger, and I think that’s why academics sometimes don’t do it. But I feel [to leave criticism out] is wrong.
9.
FM: You published a novel of your own, “The Book Against God”. What was it like waiting for the reviews to come out, being known as such an exacting critic yourself?
JW: Actually, torture. One would think that the experience would get better. That rather, like childbirth, you’d learn how to deal with the pain.
10.
FM: In your (CM) forthcoming novel, there’s a section about an old man moving to a retirement home. You’ve suggested that this might feel like living in a college dorm again. Does Harvard’s social scene really seem that bad?
CM: I don’t know if the Harvard situation is that bad. Although, the retirement home I visited looked pretty lively—there was a gym, a swimming pool, movies, dance class, lectures...
JW: ...writing papers all night.
11.
FM: If you could both pick one historical period to be either writing or criticizing in, it would be?
CM: 1890—1930. There was a huge amount going on. There was the rise of modernism and the excitement. They had a sense of the urgency of their project; I think we live in a time in which there is a sense of irrelevance sometimes.
JW: Either that period or the ’40s and ’50s. But even by that time there is already a slide in the excitement I think. The academy is beginning to take over criticism, for good and ill. But there’s something very exciting about being in London around 1910, just as modernism is about to take off—crazy Ezra Pound has come over from America and is running around town, saying, “we’re going to tear up the old forms”.
12.
FM: The issue of power between critic and writer is an interesting one; who runs thing in the realm of things domestic? If your (Lucien) mom and dad were yelling contradictory orders, whom would you follow?
JW: Who is in charge at home, Lucien?
Lucien: [silence]
JW: So both of us are in charge, mommy and daddy?
CM: It depends which domestic issue we’re discussing. James is the chef, I do the laundry.
13.
FM: So are you [CM] the food critic?
CM: (Laughs) I’m more a cheerful consumer.
14.
FM: You’re a critic, you’re a writer, you both live under the same roof. If this were a sitcom, who would you pick to play each other?
CM: If it were a sitcom no one would watch it!
JW: She would get Hugh Laurie to play me.
CM: He’s right. Hugh Laurie is best known now for doing “House”, but he used to be a comic actor. One thing that people don’t know about James is that he literally falls up stairs. So a British comic actor with a sense of physical comedy would work well.
JW: This is tough. Maybe Julia Davis, 20 years ago?
15.
FM: Obviously, you two are absurdly talented individuals. But say you couldn’t do what you’re doing now (writing works of fiction and literary criticism). What do you wish you were really good at?
JW: Playing the piano
CM: Just one? I wish I were a really good photographer.