Michael Chabon on Edgar Rice Burroughs – Unedited Interview
There has been oh so much discussion here about Andrew Stanton and Edgar Rice Burroughs — what does Pulitzer Prize winning writer Michael Chabon, who co-wrote the John Carter screenplay, have to day about ERB? Here is an unedited interview, courtesy of IO9
How old were you when you first read Burroughs?
I think I must have been about twelve, when Ballantine issued the complete series with those new fantastic covers by Gino D’Achille, and they had them in my local bookstore [in a pile]. All 12 or 15 of them, with these beautiful covers and a big piece of art on top. It was just this incredibly arresting object [that had] materialized in the bookstore in the mall in Columbia, MD, where I grew up. Without explanation, you know — it’s just how things happen when you’re a kid.
[And these new editions were presented as though] it’s this incredibly important thing, that one ought to know about: John Carter. I recognized the name of Edgar Rice Burroughs, but I hadn’t read any of his work yet. So I just started with the first book.
What appealed to you about these books when you were a kid?
For me, it was a combination of two things. Obviously, Burroughs was a narrative machine. He really knew how to keep a story going, and he knew how to use cliffhangers, and really propel you through the story. He had that great “pulp novelist” narrative drive. He also had a really fertile imagination, in a way that reminds me of Jack Kirby in comics, where he would just toss off one concept after another, in many cases never to return to them again…Just continually dreaming up new amazing vistas or societies or creatures whatever they may be. [There’s] kind of a heedless quality to that imagination.
I got caught up in all of that, but even at age twelve, I was aware that there was a historical importance to this material. It had obviously been the forebear to lots of other science fantasy adventures. There was just this sense that you ought to know about this, this is important — it is culturally important to people who share your culture. I had a slightly dutiful sense toward it. I don’t want to imply that it wasn’t pleasurable, but I did some how feel like it was my duty to immediately master this material. At the same time, the science fiction book club, as I quickly discovered, was doing these hardcover 2 for 1 deals with those much more famous covers by Frank Frazetta. If anything is associated with John Carter, it’s those Frank Frazetta covers.
I think that Frazetta is a big reason why people even know about John Carter.
I think in a way up until this movie, it’s sort of the last remaining reason — which is kind of sad. Not to knock on Frazetta… I know Andrew [Stanton] constantly tried to step back from Frazetta a little bit [in visualizing the movie]. He just felt like it had period associations. The period being the 1970s and the side of vans, spray painted custom fans. To me, there is more of a [Michael] Whelan feel to the look of the film. I think it even harkens back [to earlier sources.] Andrew had a strong sense of the period on earth in which the film was taking place in the latter half of the 19th century and there’s even evocations of the original artwork from the series, which was being done by this guy Frank Schoonover. There’s a real, rich depth to the visuals in the film.
I was re-reading A Princess of Mars, and one of the things that jumps out at you is just how much aplomb John Carter has. He’s just so matter-of-fact. “Oh, I’m on Mars.” He barely blinks.
He doesn’t waste a whole lot of time on the impossibilities. In the book, he’s already this bizarre guy who’s immortal – [and] people make so much of that whole element of it, people who are discussing this book. It’s so clear to me that Burroughs was just writing by the seat of his pants, and started with that idea, thinking he was going to be writing about this immortal guy. And clearly, he thought he was starting with that, and then he got this other idea and went with it instead. And he was probably trying to keep his word count up, because he was getting paid half a penny per word. So he left that in there, but it plays no role in anything that happens thereafter.
Just like the telepathy and a lot of other stuff.
Yeah, like the telepathy too. The thing to remember about Princess of Mars is, it was his first book and the first thing he ever tried to write. It wasn’t just the first John Carter book. It’s a real learner’s book, and he was a gifted amateur when he started writing John Carter of Mars. By the time you get to about the fifth book of the series, I think it’s Chessmen of Mars, then you’re in the hands of a true professional.
So the Martian Agent was a screenplay that you wrote almost 20 years ago.
Getting close. 17, 18 years ago.
And what’s in the McSweeney’s Mammoth Treasury of Thrilling Tales is just the first chapter of the novelization of your unproduced screenplay. Why did you give up after just one chapter?
Just time. I would love to someday, but I never found the time. It’s not like there was an ovewhelming demand, I didn’t get an avalanche of letters from people, begging me to continue the story. On the contrary, I didn’t even get a snowflake of letters begging me to continue the story. I did it as an experiment. It was really fun to do, and I thought well, it could be cool. But I never got back to it. And then it sort of got continued in this other way that I could never have dreamed.
Do you think that there’s any of the DNA from your Martian Agent screenplay in John Carter?
Not really, no. I think my approach to writing characters of that period — adventuring characters of that period — is probably similar. Whatever it was that made me think I knew how to write an American military adventurer of the middle 19th century transplanted to the planet Mars in The Martian Agent, I drew on that same internal resource — compounded by books I’ve read and movies I’ve seen, dealing with adventures of that period. I definitely drew on that, when I was trying to imagine how John Carter would talk, and the type of things he would say. Burroughs himself is not the best guide in that regard because his dialogue is typically very stilted, and his people don’t talk like people really talk. So I didn’t turn to Burroughs for guidance, when it came to writing dialogue.
16 comments
Crust, you’re too obtuse for me. Are you mocking Chabon, or making a statement about what you think ERB is all about?
My earlier post was an off-the-cuff “hulk speak” impromptu attempt at levity.
I don’t believe subtle satirical pokes at current politics of ERB’s time is what gives his
writings what some would call “timeless appeal”.
At the root is something more primal that resonates across the generaration gaps.
Furthermore ….
Was JC a moral man or was he a homicidal confederate redneck?
Dotar Sojat wrote:
“My personal solution is the same one the Pixar Braintrust suggested — we go to Mars with John Carter and we learn about Mars as he learns about it. Think how much more powerful the moment would be when he looks through the binocs and sees Dejah Thoris and goes: “She’s a human!” — if he, and we, had no idea there were humans on Mars up until then.”
Yeah the one good idea they had and Stanton kicked it to the curb. Sorry couldn’t resist but I agree it would have been a good way to open the story and maintain Carter as our entrance into this world. Imagine if The Wizard of Oz opened with a similar opening as the one Stanton came up with for John Carter? I doubt that movie would have worked as well.
And one comment on something Pascalahad wrote:
“A lot of the critics that didn’t “get it” were, to me, legit. I know I had the same problem, so other viewers certainly had it too. I appreciate the work Stanton did with the characters, but to me one of his failures is at establishing clearly the stakes.”
That didn’t work for me either. Part of it was making the Therns and their goal so vague to the point that even Matai Shang said “we have no point” basically, we’re just doing it for kicks. Also the film suffered from what I call “Batman Syndrome” where Stanton stuffed in so many antagonists for John Carter to overcome-Sab Than, Matai Shang, even Tal Hajus since Stanton wimpifed Tars Tarkas-that none of them made an impression or stuck out.
Yes, and it was explained much better in the longer, deleted opening scene. The real tragedy is that in editing a movie, if you remove something crucial from the first two minutes of the movie (in this case the first four minutes, cutting them down to two), then it affects the way the audience reacts to everything that follows. Laying a better foundation for the Helium/Zodanga war would have made everything that follows play better. The original scene did this pretty well, but the feeling was, it’s too long.
And indeed, the film had three openings — Helium/Zodanga Conflict, ERB gets the journal, and then Carter in Arizona. The decision to have three openings really did put a lot of pressure to keep things moving.
My personal solution is the same one the Pixar Braintrust suggested — we go to Mars with John Carter and we learn about Mars as he learns about it. Think how much more powerful the moment would be when he looks through the binocs and sees Dejah Thoris and goes: “She’s a human!” — if he, and we, had no idea there were humans on Mars up until then.
But Stanton felt that would be “lazy” ….. his thinking being that all the exposition which he had to get out of the way would now come 1/3 of the way into the movie, and cause the movie to grind to a stop there, at a point when he couldn’t have let it do that.
I do get that point, but if I had been his producer I would have argued that it doesn’t have to stop because he will learn that stuff through Dejah Thoris, and while he’s learning it, there will be compelling subtext between the two of them — he will be half listening to her exposition, the the story will be moving forward on the strength of the growing relationship between the two of them. He would see in her the passion and pride and belief in self and country that makes Dejah so attractive….. and all of that will keep this from stopping the story in its tracks.
But getting back to Stanton’s approach, using the brief Tars-narrated clip at the beginning, my biggest complaint about that is that it jars me every time I had “became lost in a sandstorm”…. somehow that just feels strange to me.
Anyway …… I’m used to dealing with films at the developmental level and acknowledge there are more ways to skin a cat than the one I personally recommend. I don’t think this was the best choice but I don’t think it’s a hideous decision either. It’s just different than what I would have proposed……..
obtuse
First time I have made a link and it works, yip yip yea ha
I am in the process of putting my own barsoomian story together at another
JC fan website. I admit obtuse in a few parts that could use rewrites but click the link
anyway and read it, read it, read it.
ALL comments welcome, good or bad, I got my big boy pants on and need
acknowledgment.
obtuse
Dotar wrote :
“Frankly, my take on that was that the general audiences are willing to not have a complete handle on every aspect of what it is they are seeing — they did not demand to understand fully what the whole conflict between Zodanga and Helium was about, trusting that it would become clear enough with time.”
A lot of the critics that didn’t “get it” were, to me, legit. I know I had the same problem, so other viewers certainly had it too. I appreciate the work Stanton did with the characters, but to me one of his failures is at establishing clearly the stakes.
In the novel, the conflict between Zodanga and Helium is clear, it’s a struggle for domination, plain and simple.
In the movie, it’s linked to an environmental threat we don’t experience, and which doesn’t make sense when you think about it: since the technology of Helium and Zodanga is apparently the same, how are the Zodangans more evil than Heliumites? Why does Zodanga need extra resources for, that would be of no use to Helium? How can two cities entertain a thousand-years war when one is moving supposedly across the planet (to the point of threatening it whole), and the other is static? How do Therns “feed off planets”? All this is told, not shown. Perhaps it would have been clearer established in the sequels, but as a stand-alone film, all these apparent logical problems are part of the letdowns many critics experienced.
I made a list of all the logical problems I had with the movie. All of them (24 entries as of now) originate with the screenwriter’s changes to the original story.
Crust, you’re too obtuse for me. Are you mocking Chabon, or making a statement about what you think ERB is all about?
ERB simple message, no complicate.
JC no get girl. JC kick that ass. JC get girl.
ATTENTION All Geeks!
Your utterly inept platitudes annoyed the girl of your dreams.
Do not despair geek! – Just follow the ERB manual.
Very soon the super rockin voluptuous body of the girl will spellbind another geek who will manage to annoy her even more then you did.
In front of the girl brutally hack the head off the offending geek who managed to annoy her
even more then you did.
The sight of blood spurting out of severed neck arteries is a guaranteed
panty drop. – Make the sweet love while corpse watch in mute horror
ERB – the ultimate teen male fantasy for geeks who get sand kicked in face all time by bully
who gets all the girls.
I’ll buy that, Michael, for the ERBophiles. 🙂
I find many critics really biased anymore. It was interesting that the critics that have been around like Ebert, Medved and Travers, accepted much of JC without much fuss. I give those three credit for having a brain. The critics who couldn’t follow it, I wonder about, as the only people I personally know who couldn’t follow it so far are not really bright.
It is almost predictable the direction some newer critics will go in their reviews. I can almost always predict that a chick flick or indie film involving a controversial theme will get a good review when the general audience will react with a meh or that it’s crud. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy was one that many critics loved, but the general audience thought sucked 83% critics, 65% audience at Rotten.
Kevin, I also think that for a lot of us “ERBophile” types, there was a whole lot going on inside our heads during the first and even second or third viewings. It took me quite a few passes before I could just relax and not over think it, and absorb what was there instead of constantly jump to what I thought should or shouldn’t be there. There was a lot of “static” in the system on my viewings.
But that doesn’t explain all the critics who complained that they were confused. Frankly, my take on that was that the general audiences are willing to not have a complete handle on every aspect of what it is they are seeing — they did not demand to understand fully what the whole conflict between Zodanga and Helium was about, trusting that it would become clear enough with time. Many of the critics seem to have reacted that since there was a prologue that explained some things, if those explanations weren’t entirely clear or “absorbable”, then it was a blunder, and a supremely irritating one at that. Stanton’s theory that the audience should react more or less like children, taking the basics from the prologue (there are these guys, and they are fighting these other guys, and some third party has entered the fray to help one side and hurt the other) but not worrying too much about the details, seems to have been a fair assumption with regular audiences, but not critics.
Sorry, but to me he really likes ERB. The problems he has are the problems that trained writers (those that have been locked into a paradigm or way of thinking by teachers and professors, and literary critics) have had for years with ERB’s early work (the best comment is often “it’s pretty good for pulp fiction” – a backhanded compliment). It’s the same problem anyone who trained in a specific field has for one who hasn’t had the “formal training and experience” they deem necessary. It’s the same problem that those who think live action directing is different from animation directing….
Not much to add to that, Michael, your comment hits the nail. I love that passage from your book, too. I’ve always respected Chabon as a writer, but for all his claims of fandom it’s clear he sees Burroughs as inferior to his skill. Which is the tone I get from Stanton, too.
Let’s see if anything they do in their lives is still being read, watched, or debated a century from now.
_________________
D’Achille::
The D’Achille covers are what I fell in love with originally, and still capture Barsoom with a heft and realism. His APoM features possibly my favorite Dejah Thoris – she’s not looking up at the Thark, she’s not afraid, but she’s also not in some fighting stance… her gaze is fixed on Carter. She’s watching to see how her man handles the situation, and there’s a ton of character on display even in that pose. Putting the viewer behind Carter psychologically binds you to his perspective as well. I also always loved what a common body his Thuvia has, too. Beautiful, yes – but not exaggerated in any way. She was a real woman on another world with a gift of empathy and communication.
Weird, one could describe the D’Achille covers and the Stanton film using the same adjectives (ruddy, a flat/lifeless palette, dusty, realistic) and yet they have very little in common tonally.
R Mohr, how you can not include Frazetta on the list of ‘sense of wonder’ is beyond me.
_________________
To the van comments::
Yeah, the title font the publisher chose is vintage 70s, and bad 70s at that. The text is actually terrible enough to start undermining the spectacular timeless quality of the artwork, and I wonder if these jokers were honest to themselves about that. It’s a shame, either way. Truly mars the work (hah). It’s not my ideal Barsoom, but the masculine tone feels right, and his ‘Swords of Mars’ is near-perfect in my book. That’s how John Carter moves! I said it before, and I’ll say it again – Frank Frazetta was the Rembrandt of the 20th Century.
Whether or not they agreed or even liked it – from a PR view, his art was a ring to kiss, not something to spit on.
It’s clear to me that when Chabon says this:
“Andrew and I were very strongly aware and really, I think, hoped to avoid that as much as possible. [That theme] is unquestionably inherent in the source material. The vital American coming from this young nation, who kind of revitalizes this aged and decrepit society or series of societies on this planet that is in decline. That wasn’t a story that necessarily interested us in telling.
I hope it’s the case when you see the film to suggest that Carter’s really just a catalyst for change — that the characters on Mars that he encounters, Dejah Thoris and Tars Tarkis, are already seeking change. They are already actively working for change, and the appearance of Carter is a catalyst that makes it possible for the Martian characters to continue to act on their own behalf, and bring change for the planet Mars. It is not so much, hopefully, that he’s the savior or that he knows things they don’t know.”
He doesn’t understand the novels at all. To me Carter never tried to impose his views to others, he is JUST a catalyst for change in the novels, and nothing more. That’s called “reinventing the wheel that was already there”.
“those new fantastic covers by Gino D’Achille,” ??? Fantastic??!! Whaaa…? Not to disparage D”Achille, but I remember when those were hitting the bookstands and thinking they were about as exciting as mud! The palette was flat and lifeless! Abbett’s previous covers ruled (and still do)!!! The only cover artists that have properly conveyed the Sense of Wonder of the Mars series is Bob Abbet, Roy Krenkel and Michael Whelan.
Well since this is about someone else…
Dotar Sojat wrote:
“to a true ERBophile, one thing that jumps out is that Chabon is not that knowledgable.”
At this point Chabon is knowledgble about how a paycheck works. I used to really love his work, especially The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier and Clay but it seems ever since he decided to become a screenwriter his work has went downhill. The worst thing I heard was that his original script for Spider-Man 2 had Doc Ock the same age as Peter Parker and becoming romantically obsessed with Mary Jane Watson. Most of the producers reportedly found that idea terrible and he was quickly replaced.
Also I don’t buy the constant comments that Burroughs didn’t know what he was doing when he wrote A Princess of Mars. It almost seems to be their defense for their changes, to make people think that Burroughs was sloppy and they’re fixing it. If it was sloppy it wouldn’t be in print for a 100 years.
Also from the interview:
“He just felt like it had period associations. The period being the 1970s and the side of vans, spray painted custom fans. ”
Seriously again with Frazetta and the vans? Is that all anyone involved with this movie really thinks of Frazetta’s work? Why was this covered in the Painting with Fire documentary from years ago if that’s all the man’s work ended up being? And honestly I’ll take Frazetta over those “fantastic covers by Gino D’Achille.” The Warlord of Mars cover is the worst with Dejah looking 20 feet tall and being held by a midget.
“What really floors me is how so many readers seem to really miss what was going on with the whole death/rebirth aspect of Carter’s transport to Mars. It’s actually quite beautiful when you break it down. Here is what I wrote about it in John Carter and the Gods of Hollywood: ”
Actually it is and your section from your book captures it beautifully. There a positive comment to end on.
I’ll jump in and start by saying ….. to a true ERBophile, one thing that jumps out is that Chabon is not that knowledgable. I mean (snort) ….. how dare he not know that there are exactly 11 books in the series?
This part is basically nonsense:
Really?
APOM was his first book and he wrote it without knowing what to expect in the way of payment, and he surely wasn’t just making it up as he went along, especially the beginning.
What really floors me is how so many readers seem to really miss what was going on with the whole death/rebirth aspect of Carter’s transport to Mars. It’s actually quite beautiful when you break it down. Here is what I wrote about it in John Carter and the Gods of Hollywood:
Sorry, but Chabon, gifted writer that he is, really underestimates ERB and is a little tone deaf to his genius. That said, it doesn’t make me stark raving mad or filled with vitriol and passive/aggressive snarkisms ….. just makes me a little sad, and makes me wonder a bit…..