Moderator: Welcome, Bret Easton Ellis. Thank you for taking the time to join us online this evening. How are you doing tonight?
Bret Easton Ellis: I am in the middle of a book tour, so I am stressed, but otherwise happy to be here.

Brian Knoll from University of Michigan: I thought everybody was predicting that the '90s would be a values-oriented decade that came as a result of society feeling bad for the horrific '80s. What happened? Do you believe that your book incorporates the fact that the tabloid news has now become "real news"? I have yet to read it but am very excited about reading it.
BE: I don't see myself exactly as a sociologist. I have always been uncomfortable as a novelist who predicts trends or thinks he can predict the future. When I am working on a book like GLAMORAMA, the things that interest me more are purely literary rather than the culture at large. But GLAMORAMA's narrator, Victor Ward, is a compendium of a lot of traits of the men of my generation that I have found annoying and bothersome. So I suppose there is some cultural reporting in the creation of that character. I believe that people behave not how a decade directs them, necessarily, but have had certain problems that are just basically human. What century they are living in notwithstanding. I was, as a writer, disgusted by the '80s, and I am disgusted by a lot of things in society in the '90s. I am basically a satirist. I hope I will be disgusted after the millennium.

Zak Buckley from England: Do you feel fascinated or oppressed by the spell of mass consumer goods?
BE: When I was writing GLAMORAMA, what I felt most oppressed by was this tyranny of physical perfection that our society keeps selling to us. We, against our better instincts, buy into it. The connection I was making between the fashion world and terrorism is that they both operate on making people feel insecure. That is oppressive. I don't know if I necessarily think consumer goods are oppressive. Probably because we are so inundated with them, we don't notice how inundated we actually are.

Niki from Niki_palek@yahoo.com: In your new book, GLAMORAMA, you write many celebrities in as characters. The intention behind this seems clear; however, I am curious to know how and why you feel justified in using celebrities' names and characters in the context of satirical fiction.
BE: I would like to tell you that no celebrities were harmed in the writing of GLAMORAMA. The thousands of them throughout the book -- they function just as names. Their meaning is reflected in the characters' reactions to those names, and what, say, Winona Ryder means to a character -- just her name rather than anything she has accomplished. And when I started writing the book, it became apparent to me that Victor, because of the world he lived in and his "job," was going to be very interested in celebrities, and they were going to be, in fact, his currency, so I felt justified in a literary way to use them.

Tracey from San Francisco: I read AMERICAN PSYCHO, and there seemed to be a sort of viciousness underlying the entire novel. Certain passages seemed to depict violence simply for violence's sake, a sort of gratuitous orgy of torture. Why did you consider it fundamental to your novel to go to the extremes you did in depicting violence?
BE: With AMERICAN PSYCHO, I felt it was necessary to stay as true to the narrator's voice as possible, as I do with all my books. Here the narrator was a serial killer. Because of my aesthetic, he was going to describe the killings, torture, and violence in the same numbing detail that he describes every other aspect of his life. It would have seemed dishonest to me and not a full representation of that character if I had omitted those scenes. I do not feel by nature that I am necessarily, in my everyday life and personal life, interested in violence. I often wince and turn away in movies with graphic violence; but in the fictional world I create, I seem to be drawn toward characters who commit violence, and to stay true to them, I feel I have to describe that violence as unflinchingly as I can.

Pat from NY: What was up with all the body doubles? Jamie Fields saying, "I'm not Jamie Fields." Or Victor at the end being in both places, D.C. and Milan? Was this all part of his imagination? Was he just insane? Is the movie being made real, like a snuff film? Or was this, too, a product of Victor's drug-addled brain? Or an actual studio-type film starring Victor?
BE: I can answer this -- but what I will say is that I don't want to give away too many of the surprises in GLAMORAMA. If I answer some of these questions, the shock will be diluted. Sorry, bro!

Judy Grogan from Ocean City, NJ: I read that you wrote this novel over the course of many years. Did you have to go back and change all the celebrity names in the first part of the book to be up-to-date for 1999? Who are some of the people who didn't make the final cut?
BE: Actually, there is a secret history to this book, if you are a careful reader. You can tell that the book was written in sequential order from early 1990 to '97 by noticing which celebrities are mentioned in the first section, the middle, and the latter part. For example, in the opening, a lot of the actors in the TV series "Twin Peaks" are mentioned. In the last chapters, people like Fiona Apple and Ben Affleck are mentioned. I did not update anything. It didn't seem important to me. As I said earlier, the celebrities themselves weren't the message. Simply the lists of names were. And actually, I don't think anyone is left out of this book!

Shameel Arafin from East Village, NYC: Bret, I greatly admire AMERICAN PSYCHO. You've talked about the narrative in GLAMORAMA as something new to your work, reflecting your own growing up and realizing that lives actually do have their own narrative. But do you think that comes across in GLAMORAMA, where Victor goes to law school, gets the girl, likes dogs, gets the part in "Flatliners II"...but is still involved in some secret society or whatever. Any implications you might like to share? (Has he grown up? Has he started living a "real," rather than shallow, film life?)
BE: The maturing process of Victor Ward -- and again, I want to be careful and not ruin any surprises for a reader -- probably means more to me then it might to someone enjoying this book simply as a work of fiction. I know that I matured considerably during the writing of GLAMORAMA; I left my 20s and entered my 30s during the writing of it. The process of getting older is reflective in the tone, in that it is a narrative, and that characters alter and change (whereas in my earlier fiction they did not, because I didn't view the world that way); and I think that Victor is the only one of my narrators to experience a change of mindset. But then, what does it mean that perhaps ultimately it doesn't save him? I don't have an answer for that yet.

Guillaume from Cambridge: Could you comment on the political turn that your work seems to be taking with GLAMORAMA, and the enigmatic opening quotations?
BE: The opening quotations reflect to me the two very different halves to this book: One is from Krishna, the other from Hitler. Though both epigraphs sum up nicely what the book is about, they also dovetail neatly the fact that the first part is almost a frothy screwball-like comedy of manners, and the second half is a much darker, sinister and evil part. As for the political bent in my work, I don't really see it. Victor's father is involved in politics, and part of the conspiracy at the heart of GLAMORAMA is connected to Washington, D.C., but that doesn't necessarily mean that the book is at all touching on anything political. My new novel, that is in its planning stages now, does take place in Washington, D.C., and tangentially revolve around the political world. But again, it is not because I am interested in the day-to-day lives of politicians or how politics affect the country, but just because as a social backdrop to a novel about many other things, I think it will be very suggestive. But I feel that I am rather apolitical myself, and though I loathe to admit it, I don't vote.

Jannine from Sydney, Australia: Do you and Jay McInerney discuss the fact that you seem to play with each other's characters (Alison Poole is featured quite significantly in GLAMORAMA). How does Jay feel about your extending one of his characters, and in particular Alison, in GLAMORAMA?
BE: I only play with Jay's characters, but I will not let him play with mine. I think I first used one of Jay's characters from STORY OF MY LIFE, in AMERICAN PSYCHO. If memory serves me right, I think why that occurred was because Jay had pissed me off somehow that week, and I decided the best way to get back at him was to have Alison Pool have an encounter with Patrick Batemen. I know that sounds passive-aggressive, but sometimes that is the only way to deal with Jay. I also liked the character of Alison Pool and decided to use her in GLAMORAMA. See, she did survive! I think Jay was nice to me, so I let her survive her encounter with Patrick. I think Jay is flattered and amused -- and also wishes I hadn't done it!

John Gibson from Huntsville, AL: Your books seem to divide people, both critics and "normal" people. They either love it or hate it. Do you feel a sort of satisfaction that your writing is able to affect people so strongly and so deeply, whether they like it or not?
BE: Well, I have to say, I really don't think about that too much. It isn't part of the process of writing a novel, how people will respond to it; a reaction or a response to anything I have written doesn't register with me, because it is not part of the process of writing the book. On the other hand, of course, I like it when people are interested in my fiction, and it is nice when people tell me that the books meant something to them. Really the only good part of a book tour is meeting those readers. But I don't really feel either way about how my work divides critics. I do know, however, that my readers tend to be much, much smarter than my critics.

Sump Cush from Holly hood: Would you say that the decadent inanity of GLAMORAMA's characters is an opportunity for you to make your points even better than the characters of your '80s novels? In other words, does the '90s make for better material because we have progressed further down that trajectory of inanity? Thank you.
BE: I don't think that as a writer I am particularly interested in the "'80s" or "'90s." People assumed I was a chronicler of the '80s simply because I published four books that took place in that decade. I felt like I was writing about more things that were more universal than just how a decade affected the youth of this country. I don't look at GLAMORAMA as a book that is particularly about the '90s, even though it takes place in that decade. My concerns are more literary and not necessarily purely journalistic.

Jovan from Serbia: What sort of music do you listen to nowadays?
BE: Okay, what is in my car right now? Here we go: P. J. Harvey, Lauryn Hill, Hole, Beastie Boys, Lucinda Williams, Public Enemy, Elliot Smith, the Elvis Costello and Burt Bacharach album ("Painted from Memory"), and that is just off the top of my head. Oh, and also, I have to admit this: Marilyn Manson.

Raskolnikov from England: Does it surprise you that the violence in AMERICAN PSYCHO drew such criticism and disgust from all quarters, while in GLAMORAMA the lucid description of the brutal slaughter of hundreds on an airplane goes almost unnoticed? Is society desensitized to political murder and more in fear of deranged individuals?
BE: No. I think that the outcry to AMERICAN PSYCHO occurred simply because that violence had a sexual nature. That seems to be far more upsetting to a reader than violence that isn't overtly sexual in nature. And I actually think I have become less desensitized to violence as I got older. For better or worse, and because I was tapping into a psychopath's mind, there is a certain kind of glee in the violence, and that was reported in a flat and pornographic tone. I think that is absent from GLAMORAMA, and because of the nature of the narrator, there is real pain and horror at the violence, which again reflects my feelings as I have gotten older. But then, I am just as horrified by reports in the paper or in the news of a mass murder or a rapist as I am of a bombing of an airplane or embassies or government offices.

Tonci from Croatia: Are there any sorts of terrorist groups with whose causes you sympathize, and do you think that violence can sometimes be a valid path to a certain solution?
BE: In GLAMORAMA, the terrorists do not have an overt political affiliation. They just seem to represent chaos and destruction. Add to this the fact that the narrator doesn't seem to understand what is going on, and it remains unclear at the end of the book what their motives are. That probably reflects my personal reaction toward terrorism. I suppose because I have been raised as a bourgeois white boy from a "comfortable" middle-class existence, I of course don't see how the violence that terrorists inflict on people solves anything. This comes from basically a fairly sheltered individual, and that may be why I have that attitude toward terrorism. Basically, I have never felt culturally or societally oppressed.

Peter from England: What do you think about all this millennium fuss? And are we in for some sort of an Armageddon this year? BE: Only if Robin Williams makes another movie like "Patch Adams."

Janice from Iowa: Bret, do you agree with the John Waters's theory in the film "Female Trouble" that crime enhances one's beauty, and the more heinous the crime, the more glamorous the individual?
BE: Well, it depends on the cheekbones. It depends on how sexy that person is to begin with. And it depends on the crime they have committed. Of course I do not condone O. J. Simpson, but because high-profile criminals are photographed so much and the media is fascinated by them, they do become fetishized, and there is an element of glamour to that. By casting Divine in that role, I think Waters was actually proving that it is not true and ridiculous to think so. I think Waters was satirizing this culture's fascination with turning murderers into celebrities.

Jamie from Miami, FL: Who are some contemporary writers that you respect and read? What are three of your favorite books? Thanks.
BE: Don DeLillo is at the top of my list. Also Joan Didion, Robert Stone, Martin Amis, and Lorrie Moore's new BIRDS OF AMERICA. Three books that I admire a lot: Ulysses by James Joyce, Didion's PLAY IT AS IT LAYS, Hemingway's THE SUN ALSO RISES.

Velimir from Croatia: Plans for next book? What about memoirs?
BE: It has been reported that I am working on a memoir about my adolescence in L.A. and my college years at Bennington in Vermont, and even though a lot of people have snickered at this idea, it is, in fact, true. Whether I will publish this memoir that I am working on is another story. I feel that because of the subject matter of my next novel, which will be more autobiographical than anything I have written so far, I need to write the memoir to psychically clear my head. Whether it will work out or not, I am not sure yet.

John-Shaw@hlp.com from Houston: You offer no hope for your characters in your books. What hope do you hold out for yourself in your own personal life, if any?
BE: My fictional world and my personal life are two distinct entities, and just because within my fictional world hopelessness interests me, it is not necessarily true of my real life. There are many elements in my fiction that don't correspond to the life I live on a daily basis. I live like any other healthy, normal person, despair about the state of mankind and our society and our culture; and I suppose that helplessness is reflected in my fiction. But on the other hand, I am not a suicidal person, and I can pretty much get through a day without crawling into a fetal position and putting a pillow over my head. At least now I can, I guess. Ask me that five years ago and you might have gotten a different answer.

Martin from Tallinn/Estonia: Do you find it interesting or shocking how often a lot of people have misunderstood your art? Have you thought out any explanation for that?
BE: No, I don't find it shocking. There is a wide array of readers out there with a wider array of opinions. There are a lot of people who hate my work and a lot who love it. And even the people who hate it understand what I am doing, but just don't like the way I have written a novel. Then there are people who probably love my work and don't understand my intentions. Reading is a completely democratic experience, completely subjective, and the feeling that you get from a novel is very, very personal. I do think, however, that there has been a willfulness on the part of some readers and critics to ignore the text of the books and to concentrate on criticizing me simply because of subject matter or my perceived public persona. That is, I think, probably unfair, but in the end, as I said earlier, it doesn't influence my writing one way or another. If your opinion is smart and measured, no matter whether it is pro or con, I pretty much have to respect it.

Malka from Pat Bateman's alma mater: Now that you've written many books about "chic" issues -- drugs, sex, rock 'n' roll, violence next door, violence abroad, models, and so on -- how do you think up-and-coming authors will fare in trying to make their own name in publishing rather than just becoming an element of the "Bret set"?
BE: Well, by being themselves, by writing what they feel passionate about. It is very simple: If you really believe in your material and it is deeply felt and there is honesty and truth in it, no matter how wild or dark the subject matter will be, I think you will find an audience and people who like your work. I don't think any writer is under the shadow of another and then it will be harder to get published because of that. I really think, if you stay true to your own feelings and the way you want to express them, you will always find responsive readers. I don't mean to sound so sappy and inspirational, but that is basically the bottom line.

Moderator: Thank you for joining us online tonight, Bret Easton Ellis. Judging from the amount of questions, you have quite a few readers interested in your new novel, GLAMORAMA. Do you have any parting thoughts for the online audience?
BE: Thank you for tuning in tonight, and I will be at a bookstore near you within the upcoming months. Don't be afraid to stop by. Thank you.

Copyright 1997, 1998, 1999 barnesandnoble.com