I cannot believe this woman is lecturing him about his opinions. wtf? no one is there to hear yours that's for sure.

I find virtually everything about her demeanor fo be disingenuous. She's condescending, patronizing, and passive aggressive.

it's quite amazing and a little frightening to see that authentic liberal values like freedom of personal conscience, freedom of expression and the primacy of the individual, which suffuse Brett's conversation and world view, are becoming a thing of the past. he also has the humility to throw his hands up and say I don't know sometimes, another endangered species.

Not here for this interviewer.

I am sorry but she was a terrible interviewer. WHy was a tech writer interviewing a novelist?

"Who are you to decide what art is?" she says. Wut? Can a spectator not be critical of the art he's looking at?

The last question perfectly defines the fundamental difference in worldview between the 2 sides of our Culture. One side would NEVER arrogantly presume that they have world fixing answers, yet would sacrifice their life for their country to do just that. The other assumes that if only they were in charge of everything and everyone, utopia would manifest. Gratitude, humility, forgiveness, and grit or a sinister combo of Empathy and Rage.

This woman is exhausting. Bret Easton Ellis has a point.

Ellis talking about just being an individual talking about how he feels about things (rather than "lobbing grenades") is so vital. Our culture has been driven into this tiny wedge of acceptable views. Going outside that inch of space whether through genuine curiosity or trying to do scientific research or trying to understand another viewpoint is greeted with righteous indignation. You have a right and duty to be offended by anything that is outside of your narrow window of thought. As a Conservative Christian ALL of the artists I was into in the 90s had MANY views that clashed and even scoffed at my own. WHO CARES? Grow up and learn to interact with diverse and taboo views. It makes you smarter.

Moonlight was garbage. Get over it.

Bret says it as he sees it. He has a point of view uniquely his own. Good for him. The interviewer tried to lasso him into the mainstream SJW clique, and he was not having it. Bravo.

This interviewer emits such a condescending, smug energy.

Terrible interviewer.

Agree with Ellis on just about everything and I've always identified myself as a liberal. The fact is, no one wants to join ranks with their denouncers, and it's actually self-destructive towards the goals or change you're trying to achieve, to overreact to every thing that angers us and alienate would-be allies. Persuasion, even with people you find vile, is sometimes necessary to "move the needle." The interviewer was passively antagonistic and cringey though, from one San Franciscan to another.

This interviewer is exhausting. She so wants to "educate" this brilliant man. She's been brainwashed into thinking everyone must think the same about everything.

I have to quote Reich-Ranitzki here: To write about Beethoven you don´t have to be able to play in an orchestra.......

Love Bret! I just find him so cool.

The end of this interview is like being at a party with two bored & stoned people who keep forgetting the last thing they said.

Brett Easton Ellis. Total respect for this man, watching tonight's Channel 4 news (UK) 23.04.2019. The interviewer tried to put words into his head to gain a pro- liberal agenda. He didn't play the game and gave many examples of the danger of censorship and free speech. She also tried to get him to be very anti-Trump. However, he again was far too smart with her with his answers. She's not got over Hillary not getting in! Sadly, another example of CH4 media bias.

The problem with the problem and the outrage is that they assume that they are right and the other side is wrong..

that was painful.

Ellis’s most successful satire was self-satire: Lunar Park, a postmodern haunted house novel filled with post 9/11 dreads, in-jokes and autobiographical notes, with Jay and Bret themselves futzing around as doofus sidekicks. An uncharacteristically companionable novel from Mr Trendy Sicko, it also indicated a narrowing avenue ahead. After you’ve made yourself the hapless protagonist, poked fun at your own celebrity, vanity and substance intake, how much more meta can you go?

Easton is a god, American Psycho is a treasure.

24:20 "Entitled hysteria." Perfect.

Nellie is a terrible person and a wokescold. Brett is amazing!

This interviewer/moderator is awful.

Did they have a Jordan Peterson/Cathy Newman moment there?

I’m with Brent on ideologically possessed movies • no thanks to Black, Gay and Feminist movies •

Love Bret.

What an actual goat bro

He has a point. Refreshing

I generally agree with Brett, but I think there's too much of a generalization when it comes to millennials. Plenty of people who had (and are still having) a meltdown over Trump are in their 40s, 50 and even 60s. I work with several Americans who complained a lot about Trump (ranting constantly about Russia, Mueller etc) and they are all in their 50s.

It’s not a “political book.” It’s a book about how people are behaving in response to culture, which includes politics. Not the same thing at all.

She manages to suck at this almost as much as Cathy Newman and I don't say that lightly. (And Bret is a beauty of course.)

I love hearing this man speak, even if I don't agree with things he says.

A lesbian, vegan, yogi and writer for the NY Times..... Yeah I could smell her condescending and smug attitude within the first two minutes of this interview.

She may have read the book but did not get it

gen wusser here to point out how triggered i am by the interviewer

How are you TELLING the author what the themes of HIS book are? She should write a book entitled WHITE PRIVILEGED TRIGGERED WOMAN.

Uh oh NYT, this interviewer is kind of weak. For example 28:00 "Every movie is a message movie, every movie is ideological." Hokay if you believe that, but you'd be a better interviewer if you acquired a bit of nuance in your thinking. As she said, she suffers from being triggered. Poor thing, even with all of the power that she has, she still needs comfort and reassurance. 46:32 - discussion regarding the backlash against American Psycho. I'm not sure but I think that moral backlash was from the Right. These days most moral backlash comes from the moralizing Left. However I have to give credit to the interviewer for noting that there is no difference between the moralizers of the past (the Right) and the moralizers and censors of the present (the extreme Left.) I agree. I also think that she's correct when she states that the bar for triggering has gotten much lower. But at the end of the interview she states that the social pathology of "triggered culture" indicates decadence in the culture. As a subscriber I am concerned that the NYT has an interviewer who's so susceptible to the very problem (weak and easily triggered human beings) she attributes to the problems of our culture. Gawd, I'm so concerned....

Bret: Do you believes that things are cyclical, that things come in cycle and that it may be this way now but its going to be something else later? Her: I use to think we where like on a LINEAR trajectory of constant progress... (while I was cringing inside from her answered) Bret answers: Ok... so who did I say I'd fuck? Just made this whole hour even more satisfactory

Twitter is digital tattoo's! you can't get rid of them if you regret them.

I've watched a number of (long) interviews with Bret Easton Ellis now and the man really puzzles me. I love literature and generally prefer to go for the classics: I often find they've stood the test of time for a reason. On US literature I can be clear: the limited amounts I've read of it has never enticed me to read more as all I read (that is held up such high regard) seems to me to be substandard. I started reading American Psycho purely as some light read for quick entertainment purposes and was absolutely stunned by two things: the brilliant literary quality in terms of writing skill (something Easton Ellis seems to refer to as 'esthetics' and in my opinion fits quite well with Nabokov's view of literature as being "not about ideas, but about images" - an approach to literature I've never fully adhered to, but can respect) and the depth of insight into the then present day society. To me, Easton Ellis didn't just provide a brilliantly funny, but a brilliant allegory of 80's ('New York' and by extension (at the time) 'modern') society and its values. Delivering piercing insights with a great literary zest. I later didn't read much more of Easton Ellis's work (contrary to what I usually do with authors I like), but saw a number of movies based on his novels (less than zero, the informers,...). I saw a lot of that same insight and relentless drive to expose false images of confidence and success. Although admittedly, rather monothematic. The interview really stunned me, because by now I was expecting your typical intellectual writer showing a deep understanding of human nature with a measured, calm and piercing eye for modern society and its fallacies. Instead you constantly get this rather non-opinionated, superficial, responsibility evading individual that doesn't really make any point or set out an intriguing point of view. Just non-compromising chatter and adolescent mischief. A real poster boy for the adagium "never meet your heroes". I think Bret Easton Ellis had better stick to the novel as a medium: it seems to afford him the opportunity to reflect and both deepen his insight and sense of esthetic that is so clearly missing in the everyday version of himself.

I’m with ol’ white hair at the end of the isle here (5:02)

25:35 Bret Easton Ellis

I love how unbothered he is when people disapprove about what he says, like this interviewer.

She just doesn’t get it.

Smug alert! "Who are you to decide what's art--?" IT'S CALLED AN OPINION.

I'm leaving this interview. Will find Bret Easton Ellis elsewhere. He's so engaging, but . . . the interviewer is insufferable. Over and out.

You can tell that she wanted to hate him sooo much

Yeah, Dave, Twitter aint real life.

Yes she admitted she is triggered!!

Wow usually you have to skip about three minutes for the talk to get interesting... This looks like it gets spicy right from the off lol.

38:19

To those criticizing the interviewer, remember: that's what makes the interview so entertaining 👍👍

Worst interviewer ever. What were they thinking

In the immortal words of Bart Simpson this moderator sucks and blows. What happened? Weren't there any professionals around?

"We barely hung out..." The Brat Pack? Didn't Donna Tartt dedicate The Secret History to Ellis?

An appalling interviewer.

This isn't an event horizon

If you ever wondered what it would be like to watch a person get banged over the head with a 12 inch cast iron pan..we just watched it 59:51

A brilliant host......Jesus Christ......🙄

His boyfriend is his SpongeBob Square Pants friend. The man's life is a cartoon.

God, the interviewer is gorgeous. Not a skilled interlocutor, but she sure is beautiful.

Wow. She was atrocious.

A worse interviewer could not have been paired with BEE.

It s amerika...it s amerika.

Man, there's nothing redeeming about this interview. The presenter is terrible and Ellis reminds me of Brian from Family Guy.