a lesson before dying essay thesis

Literary Theory and Criticism

Home › Literature › Critical Analysis of Ernest J. Gaines’s A Lesson Before Dying

Critical Analysis of Ernest J. Gaines’s A Lesson Before Dying

By NASRULLAH MAMBROL on October 7, 2020 • ( 0 )

The year 1993 was an exceptionally good one for Ernest Gaines. Turning sixty, he married for the first time, won the MacArthur award, and published A Lesson Before Dying . Gaines had invested seven years in the writing of this novel, a book which echoes with familiar themes and characters. Set in Bayonne in 1948, A Lesson Before Dying centers around the education of two men: Grant Wiggins, a college-trained teacher in his early thirties; and Jefferson, a twenty-one-year-old field-worker condemned to death for a crime he did not commit. During his trial, Jefferson’s defense attorney will argue that electrocuting his client would be like executing a hog; thus stripping his client of his very humanity and rudimentary self-esteem. Recruited by his Aunt Lou and Jefferson’s godmother, Miss Emma, to teach Jefferson how to die like a man, Grant will, in the process, learn much about how to live. The lessons both men absorb concern the meaning of manhood.

Gaines had originally set his novel in 1988. However, unable to receive an answer from the warden of Angola Prison regarding whether a teacher could visit a death-row prisoner, he turned back in time to write a different novel, set in a period when racism was open and casual. Supplementing his own experience and knowledge by talking with sheriffs and death-row lawyers, Gaines blended factual details, such as Louisiana’s portable electric chair and the day and time of all state executions, with a created but representative experience regarding responsibility, justice, and human dignity.

STRUCTURE AND POINT OF VIEW

The novel’s action opens in late October, during the sugarcane harvest, and concludes soon after Easter in April, with the beginning of planting season. This six-month period comprises the academic year for Grant, when he teaches the children from the Pichot Plantation in his one-room school along with Jefferson. Six months also suggest the half measures of institutionalized education and justice accorded African Americans. While all of the physical supports of equal treatment, such as books and defense lawyers, seem to be in place, they are merely a sham. We see this immediately in Grant’s account of Jefferson’s trial. Though Grant has not been present, knowing in advance what the outcome will be, he feels as if he had been there precisely because the proceedings are so predictable. Furnished with the apparatus of American ‘‘justice,’’ Jefferson’s trial looks like any other, with his court-appointed defense attorney, prosecutor, jury, and judge—all white and all male. And the conduct of the trial contains some revealing practices, especially on the part of Jefferson’s lawyer. First of all, he doesn’t ask Jefferson to tell his story, thus denying him voice. Instead, his lawyer tells Jefferson’s story and in the process characterizes his client as ‘‘it,’’ ‘‘this,’’ ‘‘thing,’’ and ‘‘fool’’ (7). He continues his appeal to the jury’s prejudices by referring to the shape of Jefferson’s head as well as other physical and racial characteristics that seem to separate Jefferson from them. In fact, his oblique reference to the nineteenth-century ‘‘science’’ of phrenology, which ‘‘measured’’ character and intellectual capacity by the shape of the skull, emphasizes that there has been no change of mind regarding the legal and intellectual status of blacks since the nineteenth-century, when blacks were legally defined as property, not as human beings (Babb, ‘‘Old Fashioned Modernism,’’ 253). His ultimate argument, however, that justice would not be served by killing Jefferson since executing him would be like executing ‘‘a hog’’ not only denies the essential humanity of his client, it equates Jefferson with a domestic animal that generally thrives on scraps, lives in squalor, and is associated with utter uncleanliness. The courtroom scene, then, dramatizes and contains the ugly truth of how denial of legal rights and intellectual training have worked to imprison African Americans from their earliest days in this country.

The six months of Jefferson’s imprisonment parallel the academic year for Grant’s students, a ‘‘year’’ fully three months shorter than that of white students. Gaines plays on the legal justification of ‘‘separate but equal,’’ exposing its inequities in one of the novel’s strongest scenes, when the school superintendent arrives for his annual visit. Grant will point out that Dr. Joseph Morgan visits the black schools only once each year while visiting the white schools twice. Throughout the visit, Grant will address the superintendent as ‘‘Dr. Joseph,’’ his address suggestive of both familiarity and deference as he places the title with Morgan’s first name. In contrast, Dr. Morgan’s lack of interest in Grant or his mission is indicated by his repeated and mistaken address of Grant as ‘‘Higgins’’ instead of ‘‘Wiggins,’’ even after Grant introduces himself. More significant, though, is what Morgan chooses to inspect: hands, teeth, bible verses, and pledge of allegiance. These are telling indicators of what those in authority consider valuable as the children’s education. Recognizing Morgan’s inspection of the children’s teeth as being similar to that of a slave buyer, Grant ironically notes that ‘‘At least Dr. Joseph had graduated to the level where he let the children spread their own lips’’ (56). Declaring Grant’s students a ‘‘good crop,’’ and leaving them with a lecture on nutrition and the virtue of hard work, Morgan shows little interest in their intellectual achievements, and he dismisses Grant’s indirect plea for more school supplies and textbooks without missing pages. His final words urging more flag drill ring with irony since the final phrase of the pledge promises ‘‘liberty and justice for all.’’ Morgan’s visit reaffirms Grant’s belief that no matter what he teaches, his students will continue to be field-workers, and it sharpens Grant’s growing awareness of the connection between his students and Jefferson.

A Lesson Before Dying breaks into three distinctive parts told from differing perspectives. Chapters 1–28 and the concluding chapter 31, are told from Grant Wiggin’s point of view. Chapter 29 is Jefferson’s prison diary during the last weeks of his life. And chapter 30 is told from several narrative perspectives by members of the community as they feel the impact of Jefferson’s execution. These strategic shifts work to create a more comprehensive view than a single narrative angle, they detail Grant’s frustration as he struggles with emotional demands he would rather avoid, and they avoid stereotypical community responses on execution day. Most important, perhaps, is the role Jefferson’s diary plays. Throughout most of the novel Jefferson is silent, his lack of voice indicative of both his rage and inability to be heard. Convinced that no one will accord him human dignity, Jefferson avoids language because ‘‘hogs don’t talk.’’ Encouraged by Grant to write down anything that comes to him, Jefferson begins to reclaim his voice and stature.

President Obama presents the 2012 National Medals of Arts to Ernest J. Gaines in a ceremony in the East Room of the White House.

Grant’s narrative perspective is significant for a number of reasons. As a member of a small, intimate community, he has direct knowledge of gesture and nuance—the unspoken rules of behavior and expectation. Thus, he can literally feel his Aunt Lou’s eyes on various parts of his body and correctly interpret their meaning as well as give readers the actual meaning of such apparently simple words as ‘‘here.’’ Having grown up on the Pichot Plantation, Grant is aware of community history and the unspoken rules of caste and class. He can correctly and eloquently interpret the many silences so important to understanding, telling readers, for example, how Pichot’s gardener, Farell Jarreau, must gather information ‘‘by stealth or through an innate sense of things around him’’ (41). At the same time, Grant is also one of the few collegeeducated characters in the novel, and this makes him an anomaly not only because his grammar marks him as different from most characters— white or black—but because his experience has been broadened outside this confining system. Thus, Grant feels like an outsider, existing on the margins of his society, even while he is an insider. His feeling of estrangement and his reluctance to be involved add to his reliability as a narrator because readers understand that he acts and reports more out of honest duty than from personal interest.

Grant’s position is similar to that of Jim Kelly in Of Love and Dust . Both men become reluctant instructors for difficult characters, and, like Jim, Grant will change. Grant’s uniquely marginal status is important because it allows him to see quite clearly what goes on and to relate it in standard English. At the same time, Grant must have intimate knowledge so he can correctly interpret the meaningful silences and atmospheric nuances that comprise an essential part of human communication, especially among the oppressed. Thus, acting as a sort of translator, Grant becomes a conduit effecting communal change. His emotional distance is both an essential component of his character and his narrative reliability. Feeling superior to Jefferson, Grant believes that he has nothing to gain through their relationship. But he will, like Jim Kelly, reverse his initial opinion of his doomed student, coming to admire him. This transformation will carry in its wake Grant’s changing attitudes toward the children he teaches, his religious belief, and his need for emotional commitment. At the novel’s end, Grant, the most detached and eloquent character, will be unable to express the depth of his feelings in words.

By contrast, Jefferson’s diary, coming from the opposite direction, reveals a character whose humanity grows through the process of writing. Gaines’s decision to give Jefferson a written method of expression does more than allow him his silence throughout the novel, a silence that tells readers the depth of his lawyer’s insult and the degree of Jefferson’s rage. His diary, with its lack of capitalization and punctuation and its phonetic spelling, begins with the statement that he has nothing to say, thus suggesting Jefferson’s lack of voice and purpose. With Grant’s encouragement, however, subsequent passages quickly summarize his representative history, including Boo’s rebellious example and Jefferson’s admiration of him. Thus, readers are given a glimpse of spirit they couldn’t otherwise detect.

Like many students, Jefferson asks for a grade on his assignment, wanting Grant to place a value on his written expression of his emerging Self (Babb, ‘‘Old Fashioned Modernism,’’ 252). This accounts for Jefferson’s expression of disappointment when Grant, wanting him to plunge deeper into his consciousness, gives him a ‘‘B’’ instead of an ‘‘A.’’ Once Jefferson begins to write about the difficult subject of love, Grant raises his grade to an encouraging ‘‘B.’’ At this point, the diary conveys more strength and insight revealed by Jefferson’s claim that he knows the true characters of those around him, even though he has never said so. Jefferson’s spelling of ‘‘human’’ as ‘‘youman’’ emphasizes his kinship to all members of the community, including his jailers. And his value and relationship to the community are later underscored by their visits. As this chapter progresses, readers can trace Jefferson’s growing concern for others’ feelings when he writes that he has let Emma hold him for as long as she needs to, when he apologizes to Grant for having insulted Vivian, and most of all when he patiently waits for Bok, a mentally retarded character, to find an appropriate marble as a farewell gift. As Jefferson reclaims his humanity through language, his diary gains eloquence so that the last few lines command the power of poetry.

Chapter 30, written mainly from the third-person omniscient point of view, recounts execution day through the varying impressions and actions of the Bayonne community. From Sidney deRogers’s inattentiveness when the truck transporting the electric chair rumbles into town to the callous comments of a white sales clerk, readers are asked to witness a cross section of responses. By this means, Gaines maintains control over an emotionally charged situation. The fiction sustains its integrity without its author having to resort to such artificial and didactic methods as farewell speeches or melodramatic action. The very ordinariness of this chapter is the thematic point, which is further emphasized by its significant organization. Essentially, chapter 30 is a community catalog organized around the arrival and installation of the state’s portable electric chair. After introducing the truck’s image, successive sections will flash back to the night before, with the sleeplessness of those characters most affected by Jefferson’s death: Aunt Lou, Miss Emma, Vivian, Grant, and Reverend Ambrose. Then the chapter takes readers through the morning preparations: from Sheriff Guidry’s avoiding eye contact with his wife at breakfast, to the truck’s appearance and courthouse worker’s interest in the chair’s installation, to the generator hum as Bayonne literally vibrates with its current, and, finally to the physical preparation of Jefferson for execution. Embedding a good deal of authentic information in deceptively simple prose, Gaines’s verbal restraint triggers unexpected emotions, his objective invisibility the measure of an exceptional writer.

PLOT DEVELOPMENT

As suggested by the novel’s title, A Lesson Before Dying is structured largely through dramatic incidents in which the two main characters teach and learn from each other how to be men. This is a particularly difficult lesson because there are few models, little encouragement, and three hundred years of history working against them. Reviewing the lessons of living and dying around them, however, Grant and Jefferson will teach each other much about the essentials of true character.

When the novel opens, readers will experience, along with Grant and Jefferson, primarily lessons that deny manhood status to all males of African heritage. The legal classification of black Americans as ‘‘chattel,’’ or movable property, is a matter of historic record. From their earliest days in this country, black men have been thought of and called something other than men. These continuing denials, based on race, are explicit in forms of address like ‘‘boy.’’ Bayonne, Louisiana, in 1948 shows little indication of having changed its racial attitudes from those of a century ago. Thus, readers witness casual, everyday occurrences of personal insult designed to keep black people humble and intimidated, in other words, ‘‘in their place.’’ Since Grant has either been spared or has avoided much contact with the white power structure after his return to Bayonne, he must undergo a form of reindoctrination. He therefore enters through the back door to the Pichot Plantation, waits in the kitchen two and a half hours while the white folks eat their dinner, submits to other deliberate delays and searches at the jail, and holds his temper while being interrogated about his plans. These customary practices, designed to indicate Grant’s reduced social importance, also bring home the lesson that he and Jefferson share more commonalities than differences.

Grant’s education takes place in unlikely classrooms: the Rainbow Club and his room in Aunt Lou’s house. Listening to two men in the Rainbow Club discuss Jackie Robinson’s baseball feats, Grant connects this popular athletic hero to literary art by associating Robinson with Joe Louis and both with the James Joyce story, ‘‘Ivy Day in the Committee Room.’’ His apparently free association demonstrates to him how, rising from ordinary circumstances, the hero inspires pride in others. In other words, he is made to think about the role a hero can play in the community. Grant’s lesson centers, then, on individual actions that defy public expectation.

Ernest Gaines/Achievement.org

Grant also receives instruction from the women in his life, especially Aunt Lou and Vivian. Aunt Lou, of course, is memorable as a character who affects Grant by merely looking at him, her expectations of appropriate behavior long since implanted in him. Although Grant will at one point accuse Aunt Lou of helping white people instruct him in humiliation, he is usually conscious of her moral example and silent expectation. Grant uses the word ‘‘boulder’’ to describe both Lou and Emma, a word evoking their strength, endurance, and immovability. Aunt Lou obviously volunteers Grant’s services to teach Jefferson, insists upon his appearance at the Pichot Plantation, and expects his visits and consideration of both Miss Emma and Jefferson—all without her saying so. Refusing to hear Grant’s reasons for giving up, Aunt Lou exerts a moral pull. Late in the novel, Grant will tell Vivian that Aunt Lou requires from him exactly what Emma wants from Jefferson: a memory to be proud of after three hundred years of ‘‘failure’’ (166–67). If Aunt Lou holds Grant to a standard from the past, Vivian Babtiste presents an even stronger link to the future. Gaines has said that her role in the novel is to keep Grant in the community. Still married to another man and the mother of two small children, Vivian, a Roman Catholic, faces a number of restraints binding her to Bayonne. Vivian has already proven her willingness to make personal sacrifices for her beliefs through her commitment to teaching and to Grant. A light-skinned Creole rejected by her own family because she associates with darker-skinned people, she rejects discrimination based on color. She becomes Grant’s anchor, providing both encouragement and support when he most needs it and rejecting his pleas that they simply run away.

But it is Reverend Ambrose who possibly imparts the most important lesson by providing the missing block in Grant’s education. This scene, occurring at the end of chapter 27, brings the apparent conflict between religion and reason to a climax. Like many of Gaines’s protagonists, Grant has turned away from the church, finding its dependence on simple faith an inadequate justification for and management of the multiple injustices encountered by African Americans. Lacking belief in the power of the church, Grant feels suspended between two worlds, the past and the future. Despite Reverend Ambrose’s urging, Grant has consistently resisted encouraging Jefferson to find comfort in prayer because he believes he owes Jefferson the truth. But Grant’s thinly concealed contempt for Ambrose is replaced by a dawning understanding of his self-sacrifice for the good of the whole when Ambrose explains what Grant doesn’t see. Saying that he lies to ‘‘relieve hurt’’ hidden from the eyes of others, Ambrose directs Grant’s attention to Aunt Lou: ‘‘You ever looked at the scabs on her knees, boy? Course you never. ’Cause she never wanted you to see it’’ (218). And the reason, Ambrose concludes, that people cheat themselves and lie to those they love is their hope ‘‘that one they all love and trust can come back and help relieve the pain’’ (218).

Relieving Jefferson’s pain will prove to be acutely difficult not only because of the physical and temporal limitations set by authorities but also because Jefferson proves an exceptionally unresponsive student. Hurt and self-absorbed, he initially tries to live down to his lawyer’s description of him as a hog. Refusing to eat or respond to his visitors, he thus causes more anguish for his godmother, Emma.When Grant tries to make him see how his responses affect others, Jefferson retaliates by striking out at Grant. He insults Vivian and then threatens to scream, an act that will put an end to Grant’s visits. Sensing for the first time Jefferson’s need, Grant calls his bluff, telling him to scream if he wants to. Though Jefferson again tries to provoke Grant by continuing to insult Vivian, Grant now perceives what he had started to suspect, the pain beneath the grin. On his next visit, Grant will define the meaning of ‘‘moral’’ and ‘‘obligation,’’ thus beginning the intellectual aspect of his instruction.

Before he is ready for this level of instruction, Jefferson must come to know that he has a place in his community. Grant ensures this through having the children of his school work to purchase a Christmas gift for Jefferson, by imparting community news to him, and by buying him a radio. This last gift—obtained through cash gifts from several Bayonne citizens, including Grant—links Jefferson to the outside world even as he uses it to drown out interior thoughts. Significantly, it is one of the few new items ever purchased for Jefferson, and he keeps it on constantly, showing both a childlike obsession with it as well as his need for company. Having established Jefferson’s humanity and his connection to others, Grant moves into a more challenging phase of instruction. After ‘‘moral’’ and ‘‘obligation,’’ he defines ‘‘hero’’ as one who ‘‘does something that other men don’t and can’t do’’ (191). A hero, Grant continues, is something that he cannot be. Only Jefferson has the potential to rise beyond expectation to expose the ‘‘old lie’’ of myth for what it is (192). That Jefferson has absorbed the lessons Grant teaches becomes evident in his changing behavior.

CHARACTERIZATION

Gaines creates his main character, Grant Wiggins, largely through explicit presentation. In other words, we see who Grant is through what he says and does. Early in the novel, Grant will ask three perennial human questions: ‘‘Who am I?’’ ‘‘Do I know what a man is?’’ and ‘‘What will I have accomplished?’’ (31). That Grant asks these questions in relation to Jefferson doesn’t lessen their personal impact because, having been asked to teach Jefferson his value as a man, Grant must inevitably discover his own. While Grant would like to believe that he’s emotionally and physically isolated from Jefferson, he must discover their mutual human characteristics. To do this, he must own up to his deficiencies. Initially, readers encounter a character who says that he is detached and yet demonstrates barely controlled anger. The sources of Grant’s anger are everywhere since he is an educated black man living in the deep South after World War II. While there are abundant signs of technological change, social and legal changes have not yet occurred. Thus, Grant is allowed only one profession, and even this is limited by a white power structure. Not only does Grant actively hate teaching, he believes that his efforts are wasted since his students will have little choice other than to become field-workers. Living in a region that denies him manhood and working at a job he believes to be futile, Grant dreams of a life where he might enjoy choice. When Aunt Lou insists that Grant assume the seemingly impossible task of teaching Jefferson how to be a man, Grant is understandably angry since this, too, will add to his sense of failure.

What, then, changes him? First, he must review the lessons of his own life. Grant recalls his teacher at Pichot, Matthew Antoine, a Creole whoopenly hated his students because they were darker than he and who taught them only one lesson: leave the South. Filled with self-hatred, Antoine’s parting advice to Grant—‘‘forget about life’’—denies any value of living (65). A young man, Grant is understandably reluctant to accept this negative instruction, recognizing that Antoine merely reiterates the white rationale for denying human value to blacks. When Aunt Lou insists that Grant endure routine humiliations—which she has worked to spare him for ten years—she assists in his review of social practices designed to indicate the reduced value of blacks. Thus, when Grant enters the Pichot house using the back door, waits in the kitchen, and submits to searches at the jail, he undergoes a form of reindoctrination to the multiple social gestures denying his human value. Every time he meets Jefferson, then, Grant submits to a process in which he is conscious of his injured pride. Only when he abandons his sense of personal sacrifice and injury does he begin to make progress.

Grant says that he believes in nothing, and certainly he describes himself to Vivian as ‘‘running in place . . . unable to accept what used to be my life, unable to leave it’’ (102). His primary strategy for coping seems to be detached compliance. By his own admission, he merely teaches what the white folks tell him to, and he similarly follows Aunt Lou’s instructions when he makes mere motions in visiting Jefferson. Vivian, however, insists that Grant do his best for Jefferson—and for her—thus forcing Grant to move to a new level of interest. All along Grant has recognized parts of himself in Jefferson, especially the futility of their positions. Now, though, Grant begins to see possibility. Grant’s verbal confession that he needs Jefferson, because Jefferson represents his ‘‘need to know what to do with my life,’’ suggests not only a reversal of roles but also an emotional breakthrough (193). Gaines will emphasize this with Grant’s fight in the Rainbow Club, illustrative of his passionate commitment to Jefferson and all that he has come to represent. Provoked by the conversation of two mulatto bricklayers, this fight is Grant’s physical response to racism. Grant’s level of commitment has become so intense that the owner has to threaten one of the bricklayers with a gun and knock Grant unconscious to stop him.

Despite himself Grant discovers unshakable emotional ties to the people on Pichot and in Bayonne, especially Aunt Lou, Vivian, and the children. All require his service and commitment, which he often resents. Conscious of their demands, Grant asks Vivian, ‘‘What the hell do you all want from me?’’ (210). And while she cannot say specifically what she wants, Vivian recognizes that he has not yet given his best. Preciselywhat Grant is willing to give is initially both limited and measured, signified by the Westcott ruler he carries. Not simply a token of his authority, this yardstick indicates the measured gestures of Grant’s existence, his controlled responses to the conditions he encounters. What Grant comes to understand is that the unspoken demands of Vivian and Aunt Lou add meaning and value to his life. Ultimately, Grant discovers that the power of love has returned him to Pichot after going to California; love ensures his reluctant instruction of Jefferson and his continuing commitment to the children he teaches. Readers witness the depth of his respect and commitment to his aunt in Grant’s understanding of her unspoken demands, in his insistence upon the children’s academic performance, and in his appreciation of the pastoral elements of Bayonne. Ultimately, Grant will come to fully apprehend the meaning of God and love, telling Jefferson that ‘‘God . . . makes people care for people’’ (223). And while he will reject Paul Bonin’s compliment of his being a ‘‘great teacher,’’ Grant shows such promise by revealing his emotions to his students (254).

Ernest J. Gaines/Jennifer Zdon for The New York Times

While Grant is able to express his views about the world and his relation to it, Jefferson is almost entirely mute. Like Grant, Jefferson is angry, so angry, in fact, that he cannot express his rage except to turn it inward or on those who love him. Seeing Jefferson from Grant’s perspective, readers have no access to his thoughts other than his expressed intention of acting like a hog. Gaines presents us with a hurt, inarticulate character absorbed in his own pain. Readers begin to witness Jefferson’s changing attitude, though, when he agrees to Grant’s suggestion that he show Emma respect by eating her food. But it’s his diary that most fully brings to life Jefferson’s character. Here, readers encounter a character who suggests the life histories of the inarticulate and unrecognized many whose labor is unstinting and unrewarded. Jefferson’s simple description of beginning fieldwork when he was six years old gives readers only a glimmer of the conditions he endured. More important, though, is his recognition that he was never expected to respond to these conditions as a human being, only as a work animal. The representation of Jefferson’s interior thoughts compresses in a few pages an affecting portrait of an intelligent observer sensitive to the needs of others. As the community begins sharing Jefferson’s experience, he moves from his selfcenteredness. Knowing that others care, Jefferson becomes stronger, setting, in the end, an example of compassionate giving. Thus, when he tells Paul to say he ‘‘walked like a man,’’ Jefferson refers not only to his courage but his willingness to be a community hero.

Once again Gaines’s women are models of commitment and caring. Both Lou and Emma have raised others’ children as their own, sharing their meager livings with love and generosity. Though they don’t openly ask for any reward, Lou and Emma do expect some return on their investment of time and love. Several times when she asks people to help her see Jefferson, Emma will remind them of the sacrifices she has made, suggestive of her long history of service. Just once, before she dies, she wants someone to do something for her, she says. Vivian shows similar altruistic characteristics by having violated the racial strictures of her Creole family and through her community commitment. Grant credits Vivian with his commitment to Jefferson. Certainly, she encourages his interaction, telling him that he will ‘‘do it for us.’’ When Grant believes that his efforts are futile, saying that nothing is changing, Vivian assures him that something is. Finally, when Grant attempts to leave behind Jefferson and Vivian, he finds he cannot do so because there is nothing outside Vivian’s house for him. The women, then, serve as the unshakable support of this community.

THEMATIC CONCERNS AND LITERARY DEVICES

Gaines has often said that his writing career was motivated in part by his desire to create characters absent from other novels and stories he read. Unable to find people he knew in the scarce and generally stereotyped black figures he encountered in American fiction, Gaines would create his own characters representing the truth of his experience and imagination. In so doing, he would necessarily create a fiction counter to prevailing modes, a fiction that, by virtue of its different perspective, would expose racial myths. He gives Grant Wiggins a similar task in A Lesson Before Dying by having him expose the ‘‘old lies’’ of racial mythology. Jefferson’s lawyer blindly summarizes the reasoning underlying racial myths in his concluding argument to the jury. Linking Jefferson to an animal from ‘‘blackest Africa,’’ he confidently states that Jefferson would not recognize the names of Keats, Byron, and Scott. Nor would he be able to recite a passage from the Constitution or Bill of Rights (7–8). Gaines holds the ironies of American history up before his readers, placing in the lawyer’s mouth language outlining how, having denied human status to African Americans on the basis of physiological differences, legislative bodies proceeded to outlaw teaching blacks toread and write and then justified denial of political access partly on the basis of intellectual deficiencies. Grant’s job, and the novel’s primary theme, then, is to dispel racial myths, to disprove the lie of white superiority.

Grant’s main challenge is to address the issue of manhood. He already understands that the key premise of discrimination stems from a definition of black men as ‘‘three-fifths human.’’ After three hundred years of indoctrination, this looms as an almost insurmountable hurdle. To be a black man in the South of the 1940s seems almost impossible. Like many, Grant believes that the strongest, most ambitious have fled, leaving behind their more submissive brothers. Reviewing his own education, Grant understands that his teacher, Matthew Antoine, has believed his superiority a matter of skin color. And as he submits to routine customs emphasizing his inferior status, Grant wonders, ‘‘Do I know what a man is?’’ (31). Casting about for a model, Grant sees none. He rejects himself as a proper example, believing his conformity a form of cowardice. As he says to Vivian, he teaches only what the white people tell him to, nothing of pride and identity, only ‘‘reading, writing, and arithmetic’’ (192). Reverend Ambrose seems similarly guilty of following the direction of white people. But, as Ambrose will point out, Grant is the ‘‘gump,’’ ignorant of people’s experiences and pain (218). Grant has to see beyond surface elements before he learns to detect levels of sacrifice and achievement. And he will discover the meaning of manhood and heroism in giving of oneself. Grant will ultimately define a hero as someone motivated by love, someone who ‘‘would do anything for people . . . because it would make their lives better’’ (191).

Eventually Grant expresses both confidence and faith in Jefferson, believing that he can prove the lie of racial mythology. Jefferson is the only one who can prove the lie precisely because he appears so typical. Seemingly slow, barely literate, docile, and expendable, Jefferson summarizes multitudes of dispossessed and disenfranchised Americans. Mute and powerless, Jefferson has adopted a purely deterministic view of life, where nothing he does matters. Believing himself without importance, Jefferson at first appears another example of racial inferiority. Given this advantage, white money is both literally and figuratively riding on Jefferson, signaled by the bet between Henry Pichot and Louis Rougan made immediately following Jefferson’s trial. Repeated references to this wager, in addition to Sheriff Guidry’s periodic interrogation of Grant to ensure that he is not making progress with Jefferson, support the white power structure’s active interest in seeing Jefferson meet his death as a ‘‘contented hog’’ (50). From all appearances, then, Jefferson is a sure bet—at least until Grant discovers a means of reaching him.

The solution to Grant’s problem lies in the community itself, as Grant inadvertently discovers in the Rainbow Club. Hearing the two men reinact Jackie Robinson’s baseball plays, Grant recalls the hope and pride a single figure can inspire, particularly when the odds are against him. Remembering the role Joe Louis’s boxing victory played in his own youth, Grant involves his students in Jefferson’s life, not as an object of pity, but as a subject activating their energy and effort. They will work to purchase a Christmas gift for Jefferson, and they will continue to remember him through gifts of pecans and peanuts, gifts of the land linking the children to Jefferson. The radio, too, provides a necessary connection not only because it imports the outside world but also because the community insists upon participating in this purchase. As the community, including Grant, comes to recognize itself in Jefferson, it also begins to respect his value.

Bayonne has been a community for which Grant has little hope because it has seemed impervious to change. Early in the novel, Grant will describe Bayonne as a town of six thousand, almost evenly divided between blacks and whites. Black citizens, however, can move freely only ‘‘back of town,’’ out of white citizens’ sight. Multiple instances in this novel will indicate a willful blindness on the part of whites, who choose not to see the very people who stand before them. This segregated coexistence seems both normal and desirable to white residents. But as he usually does in his fiction, Gaines dramatizes the difference between public and private social dynamics, illustrating the mutual dependence of both races and within this context the potential for change. Bayonne’s public dynamic is separate and unequal, as we see in references to the limited school year for black students, the courthouse toilet facilities, the Confederate flag, and the deliberate acts of rudeness directed at African Americans. The private dynamic, on the other hand, leaves more room for negotiation, as readers see when Miss Emma insists that Henri Pichot influence his brother-in-law, Sheriff Guidry, to allow Grant’s jail visits. Deliberately fingering a vein of guilt by reminding the Pichots of all she has given them, Emma demands—and receives—some recompense for her lifetime of service.

Resentful of racially imposed limits, Grant detects no changes in his community until he remains in place long enough to experience slight shifts. Once again, Gaines’s fiction emulates the texture of reality, measuring social change through small, often personal alterations. As he frequently does, Gaines shows his protagonist modifying his perception and direction. Readers can trace one of Grant’s most significant changes in relation to religion. He will move from his original position, where he claims not to believe in God, to a more moderate one in which he doesn’t believe in the church, to a final position of defining God as love to Jefferson. His ultimate conclusion suggests a personal progression from denial to acceptance, a changed perspective from exclusion to inclusion. This pattern is reiterated in his changing attitude toward his students and Jefferson and in his tentative friendship with Paul Bonin, a white deputy.

These changes occur only after Grant sheds his anger and self-contempt. Angry, he’s a poor teacher to the children and Jefferson, rude to Miss Emma and Aunt Lou, and resentful of Vivian’s demands. Like a child, he cannot resolve the paradox that their spoken and unspoken demands, driving him to perform services he would rather avoid, grow from their love. All along, Grant has known that Aunt Lou and Miss Emma want someone to be proud of, someone to compensate for the missing men in their lives. But he believes himself unable to shoulder the burden of three hundred years of failure. Looking into a dark void from the door of Vivian’s house, however, he sees nothing for him away from her. At this point, Grant consciously decides to shoulder the burden of personal responsibility and reconcile the advantages of his community with its disadvantages.

Gaines’s use of vision as a metaphor is extensive throughout A Lesson Before Dying . Unlike many writers, however, Gaines will call special attention to what his characters fail to see. One means of pointing this out is through characters’ awareness of natural beauty. When Vivian visits Grant on Pichot Plantation one Sunday morning, they joke about its ‘‘pastoral’’ qualities, referring to the sparse furnishings of Aunt Lou’s house and the outhouse. Making fun of its limitations, they almost ignore the natural beauty of the landscape. Their subsequent lovemaking in the cane rows, however, suggests a literal and figurative intimacy with place, a new relationship underscored by Vivian’s conviction that they have just conceived a child. Throughout the text, characters will call Grant’s attention to what is literally before his eyes, what he doesn’t see. His most direct lesson comes from Reverend Ambrose, who tells Grant that he hasn’t seen Aunt Lou’s suffering because he hasn’t wanted to look. Grant has indulged in a form of willed blindness, but he will learn to appreciate the subtle indications of meaning. Seeing Jefferson’s simplenobility rise before him, he will say, ‘‘My eyes were closed before this moment’’ (225). Significantly, as the time for Jefferson’s execution approaches, Grant and Jefferson will both express growing appreciation for the natural life around them.

Gaines’s use of natural imagery to indicate heightened vision recurs at the end of the novel. While the children kneel in their church/schoolroom awaiting news of Jefferson’s execution, Grant wanders outside, wondering if life and justice are more than mere coincidence. His answer appears in a singularly beautiful image, a butterfly alighting on bull grass. The juxtaposition of something so lovely in the middle of weeds strikes Grant. He wonders, ‘‘What had brought it there?’’ (252). In his mind, the butterfly image, a classic literary symbol of life, the soul, or rebirth, is clearly linked to Jefferson (Cirlot, 35). Thus, following its flight out of sight, Grant believes the long wait is over for Jefferson. Underscoring this image of rebirth is the subsequent exchange Grant has with Paul Bonin. Paul’s parting words, Grant’s invitation for a school visit, and Paul’s acceptance are indicative of a renewal of life.

Setting his novel between late fall and spring, Gaines reinforces his theme of death and rebirth. This classic literary scheme is emphasized by multiple references to the Christian calendar and to Christ. To say that Jefferson is a Christ figure may be too facile, but Gaines clearly wants readers to acknowledge certain similarities between Jefferson and Christ by placing the novel’s action between Christmas and Easter. The state of Louisiana seems quite conscious of the Christian calendar. Fearful that the Roman Catholic constituency might be sensitive to having two executions before Lent, it schedules Jefferson’s execution two weeks after Easter, believing this delay will dim any conscious connection between Jefferson and Christ. Ironically, the state schedules all executions between noon and three on Fridays to emulate the time of Christ’s execution. Gaines stimulates readers’ association of Christ with Jefferson by having Jefferson ask Grant if Christmas was ‘‘when He born or . . . when He died?’’ (138). Another inescapable comparison occurs during the school nativity play. Dressed in the denim work clothes of the poor, Mary will receive the pennies offered by the Wise Men, surprised that they address her infant as ‘‘Savior’’ (150). Her comment reminds readers of the humble origins of Christ and the sacrifical nature of his life and death. Resisting the idea of being a sacrificial hero, Jefferson asks Grant, ‘‘Who ever car’d my cross?’’ (224). Believing himself someone who ‘‘never had nothing,’’ Jefferson naturally struggles with the idea that he must now be ‘‘better’’ than others (222).

But whatever touches him—whether Grant’s instruction about the nature of racial myths, Emma’s expressions of love, or his own discovery of voice—leaves its effect, and thus Jefferson finds in himself the courage to face his own mortality. Grant will remark on his growth by noting Jefferson’s physical stance, ‘‘big and tall,’’ at their last meeting (225). That Jefferson has risen to be a hero to his community is signaled by their insistence on paying their respect both in the form of visits before he dies and in their refusal to work on the day of execution. This last gesture ensures that the white community, which might prefer to ignore the execution, feels its impact. A demonstration of pride and solidarity, this communal act provides ample evidence of Jefferson’s lasting effect. Having walked to his death as ‘‘the bravest man in that room,’’ Jefferson has begun to change the lives of those around him (256). And Paul Bonin’s promise to tell Grant’s students of Jefferson’s courage suggests his continuing presence in the life of Bayonne.

September 23, 2014: Ernest Gaines at his home library in Oscar, Louisianna. (Paul Kieu, The Advertiser)

A FEMINIST READING

Given Gaines’s focus on male characters and his recurring theme of manhood, the feminine element of his novels might easily be overlooked. A feminist reading of A Lesson Before Dying , however, is certainly possible, and it offers readers an opportunity to examine more closely the role of women and their values in Gaines’s world. What, then, is a ‘‘feminist’’ reading? Since its emergence as a critical lens in the 1970s, feminist literary criticism has developed in a variety of ways mentioned in the alternative reading of Catherine Carmier. Drawing upon historical and Marxist theory, British feminist theory directs readers’ interest in social change through engagement with historical process. Gaines’s fiction, with its drama evolving from the conflict of change, lends itself to this kind of reading, and thus one feminist reading of A Lesson Before Dying might look closely at the role of feminine values with respect to social change.

Embodying the history of Pichot Plantation, Emma and Lou have accepted their roles as cook and laundress, raised others’ children, faithfully attended church, and remained silent. To all outward appearances, they conform to sexual and racial stereotypes as nurturing, submissive female figures. Grant, however, describes these women in terms of ‘‘stone,’’ ‘‘oak,’’ and ‘‘cypress,’’ indicative of their solidity and permanence. Later, he will use ‘‘boulder’’ in recognition of their immense strength and power. These women wield primarily silent power, illustrated by Grant’s consciousness of Aunt Lou’s meaningful looks, but they also know how to speak. Both will claim a hearing in inescapable terms. Still, their characters appear largely secondary in the construction of the novel. But like many elements of Gaines’s fiction, the more important elements are the unspoken and unseen. A feminist reading of this book will emphasize the women’s roles as revolutionaries.

The seeds of revolution have been planted in Grant as ideas. Lou insists that Grant learn everything he can from Matthew Antoine and promises him other, presumably more knowlegeable, teachers. She helps him to create a positive self-image by excusing him from using Pichot’s back door, and she willingly sacrifices for Grant’s university education. In short, she raises Grant not simply as someone to break racial stereotypes but someone who challenges it by his very presence in the community. Grant’s awareness of his role as challenger is frequently expressed by his dilemma over acting like a true teacher, or the ‘‘nigger that [he] was supposed to be,’’ a dilemma vividly expressed by his conscious use of grammar and his significant pauses before adding ‘‘sir’’ while addressing white men (47). Emma and Lou also act in concert to make Grant visit Jefferson, and they keep him at it, playing on the sense of duty they instilled. Most of their coercion is quiet, but Aunt Lou remains adamant that Grant will visit Jefferson, teach Jefferson his value as a man, and not quit until the very end. Grant will try to argue, sulk, and avoid contact with both women, but he cannot escape them.

Nor can he convince Vivian to simply run away with him from the weight of his responsibility. When Gaines created Vivian as a married Roman Catholic mother of two in 1940’s Louisiana, he effectively chained her to her community. Women do not typically write divorce law, especially not in Louisiana, which based its laws on Napoleonic code. Louisiana legally termed husbands ‘‘lord and master’’ of their homes, wives, and children. Thus, Vivian’s husband, despite having deserted his family, has legal precedence over her. Vivian will tell Grant that one condition of her husband’s agreeing to a divorce is that she remain in Bayonne. The implication of his condition is that if Grant wants to marry her, they must stay in the community. But she has other reasons for staying, not the least of which is her being the sole support of her two children. Apart from these constraints on her movement, Vivian has already shown her commitment to the community as a whole by rejecting her Creole family’s belief in its racial superiority. Choosing family exile over racism, Vivian demonstrates the strength of her morality. And she further demonstrates it by encouraging Grant to visit Jefferson. When she tells him to teach Jefferson ‘‘for us,’’ she may mean the two of them, but Vivian may also mean the community (32). The depth of Vivian’s commitment surfaces at regular intervals in A Lesson Before Dying , primarily in her refusal to run away with Grant. Like Aunt Lou, Vivian wants a man to stand up for himself and for others, she wants a man brave enough to give his best, and she is strong enough to show the way. Thus, her presence in the novel is more propelling than merely supportive. Vivian’s role is to make Grant act beyond his own selfperceived limits.

One historic measure of manhood has always been sexual prowess. Gaines will employ this metaphor throughout A Lesson Before Dying , and he will imbue it with a different meaning. Grant would like to believe his physical engagement with Vivian is evidence of his love and commitment. When his sexual performance falters after frustrating sessions with Jefferson, Grant is embarrassed, expressing his sensitivity by saying that things had not been going well lately. His belief that his manhood and sexuality are one and the same is directly contradicted by Vivian in their climactic argument. Vivian contends that sex is not enough, certainly not evidence of Grant’s best effort, his best expression of himself. She insists that his ‘‘best’’ involves ‘‘consideration,’’ implying action which takes others into account (210).

These values clash directly with those of the white establishment, particularly with reference to its treatment of black citizens. Taking them into account is something whites simply refused to do. Having created the myth of racial superiority and perpetuated its ‘‘truth’’ by rigging the educational and legal system, whites sustain the illusion of their right to power. Represented by Pichot the landowner, Rougan the banker, and Guidry the sheriff, Bayonne’s power is all white and all male; its values tend to be active, blunt, and authoritative. These characters say they know what happened, and they are convinced of their rightness. Grant, however, knows that there is another story, another set of values, such as self-abnegation, sacrifice, and silence often defined as ‘‘feminine.’’ Living in a culture that has systematically denied manhood to black males, Grant must redefine manhood in terms of what is both understandable and possible to achieve. He does this by embracing the feminine. As Grant’s understanding and description of heroic action sharpen, his language becomes distinctly feminine, with its emphasis on love and willing self-sacrifice. Rather than reverse the meaning of heroism, though, Grant co-opts it and gives it a more sustaining quality.

Thus, A Lesson Before Dying works to redefine manhood in terms of personal commitment and sacrifice. Though perhaps implicit in heroism, these terms are too often lost in the bombast of achievement. Gaines, however, shifts reader attention from epic action to domestic. Focusing on the ordinary, he points readers toward the extraordinary acts of courage required of those willing to remain in place to fight for change. The social revolutions Ernest Gaines writes about are individual and yet representative. At the very center of these revolutions are female characters who, like boulders, remain firm and immovable. From them emanate the moral actions his male characters reluctantly assume.

WORKS ABOUT ERNEST GAINES Babb, Valerie Melissa. Ernest Gaines. Boston: Twain, 1991. Bevers, Herman. Wrestling Angels into Song: The Fictions of Ernest J. Gaines and James Alan McPherson. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1995. Bryant, Jerry H. ‘‘Ernest J. Gaines: Change, Growth, and History.’’ Southern Review 10 (1984): 851–64. ———. ‘‘From Death to Life: The Fiction of Ernest J. Gaines.’’ Iowa Review 3:1 (1972): 106–20. Byerman, Keith E. Fingering the Jagged Edge: Tradition and Form in Recent Black Fiction. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1985. Estes, David C., ed. Critical Reflections on the Fiction of Ernest J. Gaines. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1994. Folks, Jeffrey J. ‘‘Ernest Gaines and the New South.’’ Southern Literary Journal 24.1 (1991): 32–46. Greene, J. Lee. ‘‘The Pain and the Beauty: The South, the Black Writer and Conventions of the Picaresque.’’ The American South: Portrait of a Culture. Edited by Louis D. Rubin, Jr. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1980. Hicks, Jack. ‘‘To Make These Bones Live: History and Community in Ernest Gaines’s Fiction.’’ Black American Literature Forum 11 (1977): 9–19. Lowe, John, ed. Conversations with Ernest Gaines. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi, 1995. Rowell, Charles H. ‘‘Ernest J. Gaines: A Checklist, 1964–1978.’’ Callaloo 1.3 (1978): 125–31. ———. ‘‘The Quarters: Ernest Gaines and the Sense of Place.’’ Southern Review 21 (1985): 733–50. Shelton, Frank W. ‘‘A Gaines Gold Rush: A Review Essay.’’ The Southern Quarterly 34.3 (1996): 149–51.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Babb, Valerie. ‘‘Old-Fashioned Modernism: ‘The Changing Same’ in A Lesson Before Dying.’’ In Critical Reflections on the Fiction of Ernest J. Gaines. Athens: The University of Georgia Press, 1994. Ruben, Merle. Review of A Lesson Before Dying. Christian Science Monitor, 13 April 1993. Senna, Carl. Review of A Lesson Before Dying. New York Times Book Review, 8 August 1993. Sheppard, R. Z. Review of A Lesson Before Dying. Time, 29 March 1993.

Source: Carmean, Karen. Ernest J. Gaines: A Critical Companion. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press, 1998.

Pardon Our Interruption

As you were browsing something about your browser made us think you were a bot. There are a few reasons this might happen:

You've disabled JavaScript in your web browser.
You're a power user moving through this website with super-human speed.
You've disabled cookies in your web browser.
A third-party browser plugin, such as Ghostery or NoScript, is preventing JavaScript from running. Additional information is available in this support article .

To regain access, please make sure that cookies and JavaScript are enabled before reloading the page.

A Lesson Before Dying

By ernest j. gaines, a lesson before dying essay questions.

Does the behavior of Reverend Ambrose reflect well or poorly on Christianity as a whole? Explain your reasoning.

Like the other characters in the novel, Reverend Ambrose sometimes makes mistakes and behaves immaturely. However, he ultimately possesses a kind of strength that Grant lacks, and is a demonstration of how religion can help people survive adverse circumstances. Ambrose's vindictive condemnations of Grant's agnosticism make him seem immature at times, an impression that is compounded by his jealousy of Grant's early success with Jefferson. However, he is able to do the right thing when Grant is not, bringing news of Jefferson's execution date to Miss Emma, and witnessing the execution while Grant teaches school. As Grant says at the end of the novel, religion can give strength to people in need even if one disagrees with its tenets.

Discuss the style of Jefferson's diary. Why does Gaines make Jefferson's writing style so different from Grant's?

Jefferson's writing style, rife with misspellings and grammatical errors, reveals his lack of education and also his emotional stress. Unlike Grant, who understands most of what he sees, Jefferson often does not grasp the meaning of what is going on around him. This emphasizes Jefferson's innocence and the injustice of his cruel treatment.

How are mulattos portrayed in the novel? Why does Grant take the time to explain the prejudices mulattos have against full African-Americans?

Mulatto men, such as Matthew Antoine and the bricklayers with whom Grant brawls, are portrayed as bitter and prejudiced against full-blooded blacks. However, Vivian is also mulatto and she is kind, beautiful, and well-liked by people of every race. Their portrayal in the novel suggests that anyone can be racist, even those who are victims of racism itself, and there are good and bad people of ethnicity.

Is Grant a good teacher? How do his teaching strategies reflect his character development?

At the beginning of the novel, Grant is a very apathetic teacher who believes that he cannot make any difference in his students' miserable lives. He often leaves his classroom in the care of older students or Irene Cole, the student teacher. Vivian, who is also a teacher, encourages Grant to become more active in his students' lives, and he holds a Christmas pageant for them and becomes outraged at their lack of textbooks. At the end of the novel, he is much more dedicated to his job, overcoming the emotional moment of Jefferson's death to try to help the next generation avoid the same fate.

Discuss the role of food in A Lesson Before Dying .

Many detailed descriptions of Cajun cuisine appear in the novel. Gaines describes the meals Miss Emma makes for Jefferson in great detail, and Grant frequently dines with Vivian at the Rainbow Club. Food, then, is a symbol of love and friendship, and it reflects the essential role that these play in the lives of the characters. Food also serves as an indicator of Jefferson's maturity, when he changes his mind and requests Miss Emma's cooking instead of a gallon of ice cream for his last meal. The descriptions of food also showcase the local culture, something Grant worries will be lost due to prejudice and black people abandoning their regional mannerisms.

How does Grant's self-image change over the course of the novel?

At the beginning of the novel, Grant holds himself aloof from the people in the quarter because he is more educated than they are, and longs to move to the North with Vivian. However, Jefferson teaches him that dignity is intrinsic and not tied to education. After teaching Jefferson, Grant knows that his job as a schoolteacher is vital and important, and his self-esteem is based on that rather than his college degree.

What is the significance of Jefferson's attorney's statement that Jefferson is a "hog" and too stupid to plan a murder?

Although Jefferson's lawyer believes that this argument will acquit him, it does not save him from execution, and it destroys his dignity. In prison, Jefferson constantly repeats that he is a hog and behaves like one. In order to impart strength and dignity to Jefferson, Grant must convince him first that he is a human, which he does by teaching him empathy.

What is the significance of the digression about the Joyce short story, "Ivy Day in the Committee Room"?

Although Grant does not initially understand the relevance of the story to African-Americans, he later interprets it to be about how much people value their heroes. The inclusion of the Joyce story adds a literary dimension to Grant's discussion of the sports heroes Jackie Robinson and Joe Louis. The story helps Grant come to the conclusion that a true hero must show empathy and consideration for others, and this is the lesson he imparts to Jefferson.

How does Gaines complicate Henri Pichot's character? How does he develop over the course of the novel?

Initially, the wealthy plantation owner Henri Pichot seems like more of a caricature than Gaines's other characters. However, it becomes clear that despite his coldness and heavy drinking, he usually does the right thing when Miss Emma asks him for help with Jefferson. At the end of the novel, it is apparent that even his brief interaction with Jefferson has left him a changed man; he is kind to Jefferson at the end of the novel and gives him his pocket knife as a gift.

Why does Grant believe the women in the quarter are so possessive? Does Gaines seem to endorse this view, or does the novel undercut it?

Grant believes that the women from the quarter are possessive because Southern black men have only two options: to lose their dignity at the hands of white men, or to flee the region and live in the North. According to Grant, women are waiting for a black man who can retain his dignity while also being a good husband and father in the South. He seems to believe that men bear the brunt of racism's effects, while women escape the worst suffering and still expect men to provide for them. However, Gaines undercuts this worldview with numerous examples of strong, self-sufficient women, such as Tante Lou, who works hard so Grant can attend college, and Vivian, who has her own job and lives independently of her husband and family.

GradeSaver will pay $15 for your literature essays

A Lesson Before Dying Questions and Answers

The Question and Answer section for A Lesson Before Dying is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel.

Grant’s girlfriend is a light skin Catholic mother of two who is not get divorced. How do these differences create tension in the relationship?

The color of Vivian's skin creates tensions because of their biracial relationship, which is not accepted during this time period. The fact that Vivian is still married means that her relationship with Grant could cause her to lose custody of her...

Lessons before dying Chapter 29,30,31 *NEEDED*

Does the chair, and the truck (it’s black) serve as some form of symbolism?

When it arrives in a large black truck, the chair in which Jefferson must die represents many different reactions from people in the town. The truck itself is black: the...

Gaines uses the first person point of view to tell the story of Grant Wiggins. That is, Wiggins tells the story himself as the events affect him. By using his voice, Gaines can easily portray the intense emotions that Wiggins feels in relationship...

Study Guide for A Lesson Before Dying

A Lesson Before Dying study guide contains a biography of Ernest J. Gaines, literature essays, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.

About A Lesson Before Dying
A Lesson Before Dying Summary
Character List

Essays for A Lesson Before Dying

A Lesson Before Dying literature essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of A Lesson Before Dying by Ernest Gaines.

Belief and Teachings
The Art of Storytelling: Gaines's Authorial Talents in 'A Lesson Before Dying'
The Psychological Events of Jefferson

Lesson Plan for A Lesson Before Dying

About the Author
Study Objectives
Common Core Standards
Introduction to A Lesson Before Dying
Relationship to Other Books
Bringing in Technology
Notes to the Teacher
Related Links
A Lesson Before Dying Bibliography

Wikipedia Entries for A Lesson Before Dying

Introduction

A Lesson Before Dying: Summary, Characters, Theme, and Personal Opinion Essay

To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
As a template for you assignment

Summary of the Plot

Analysis of the two main characters, personal opinion.

The issue of racism is prevailing in Gaines’s novel A Lesson Before Dying , wherein the author casts a shadow on the generalized attitudes toward black people in the American South of the post-WWII period. Wrongly accused of the crime by the all-white jury, the protagonist of the story is sentenced to death, facing racial discrimination and belittlement from the community members. An analysis of the novel’s plot, characters, and theme provides a sustainable basis to argue that even brutal racial discrimination cannot eradicate the individual’s right for humanity.

In his novel A Lesson Before Dying , Gaines narrates an emotional-evoking story of Jefferson, an uneducated black man, erroneously accused of the robbery and murder of a white male. Notwithstanding the attempts of the defense attorney to persuade the court that Jefferson is not intelligent enough to conduct such a crime, the jury declares the man guilty. “Justice, gentlemen? Why, I would just as soon put a hog in the electric chair” (Gaines 1993, 8). As followed by Blanco and Vidal (2014), the black man’s effort to deliver testimony during the trial is not taken into account, as he is convicted of the misdemeanor solely based on his racial features (85). Although slavery was condemned approximately 60 years ago, racial tensions continue to arise in the segregated Louisiana of the 1940s, where the story takes place (Blanco and Vidal 2014, 83). Following the court’s decision, Jefferson stays in the prison cell, waiting for capital punishment.

Lonely and humiliated by the insensitive comment made by his defense attorney during the trial, the black man internalizes his remark, losing a sense of self-dignity. To help Jefferson revitalize his belief in himself, his godmother, Miss Emma, persuades Grant Wiggins, a black teacher at a local school, to educate him. As highlighted by Blanco and Vidal (2014), during the several months of imprisonment, Jefferson establishes a tight personal bond with his mentor, undergoing a real spiritual transformation (83). Together with Grant, the man explores the significance of personal choice, self-respect, and the ability to oppose racial inequality in society. “As long as none of us stand, they’re safe… I want you to chip away at that myth by standing” (Gaines 1993, 191). Though at the end of the story, Jefferson is unfairly executed, he walks to the electric chair with a sense of spiritual liberation, symbolizing a living example of humanity for all members of the community.

Gaines’s complex novel contains multiple characters; however, the scope of this literary essay allows us to discuss briefly only the two prominent figures in the story: Grant Wiggins and Jefferson. The only educated black man in Bayonne, Grant Wiggins, serves as a teacher at a local plantation. Reluctant to help Jefferson, at first, he eventually agrees to educate the man, hoping to oppress the stereotypes of the old racist community. “I want you to show them the difference between what they think you are and what you can be” (Gaines 1993, 194). By the end of the story, Grant does not only assist Jefferson in his studying but also revitalizes his belief in the approaching end of racial inequality.

Jefferson, a twenty-year-old protagonist of the story, is a black man, unfairly sentenced to death for the murder of a white owner of the store. As explained by Blanco and Vidal (2014), after being labeled as stupid and aggressive by society, the man stops trying to prove his innocence in the court (85). “Because I know what it means to be a slave. I am a slave” (Gaines, 1993, 225). Only when he meets his future educator Grant, Jefferson manages to regain his sense of personal value and stand up against the racial system, teaching the community a powerful lesson through silence before execution. “That’s how I want to go, Mr. Wiggins. Not a mumbling word” (Gaines 1993, 226). Taking the vow of silence, Jefferson demonstrates the towners that, similarly to Jesus, he now dies for the crime he never committed.

A Lesson Before Dying combines several ideas; however, the reoccurring topics discussed throughout the novel is a blended mixture of injustice, prejudice, and racism. As followed by Zeitler (2016), in the Bayonne community, all people’s roles and their social status are set following their racial background (130). Notwithstanding the individual characteristics and professional achievements, black people in the novel are more likely to be objectified and erroneously convicted for the crimes, following the patterns of the nineteenth-century racial discrimination. “He told us that most of us would die violently, and those who did not would be brought down to the level of beasts” (Gaines 1993, 62). Such a revelation proves that there was no hope for Jefferson to be justified for the crime he never committed; thus, the only solution for him was to accept the sentence with dignity and humanity.

Gaines also focuses on the ways race contributes to the formation of an individual’s perceived identity in society. As noted by Magill (2016), prejudiced perceptions of the black find reflections in the image of the black man’s masculinity of the time, associated with violence and brutality (61). A notable example of such unjust prejudice is a perception of Grant in the community. “I tried to decide… Whether I should act like the teacher that I was, or like the nigger that I was supposed to be” (Gaines 1993, 47). Despite his honorable position as an educator, the man is still disparaged for his background.

In my opinion, the moral behind Gaines’s novel lies in the perspective that racism cannot be eradicated from society only by the passage of new legislation. A collective effort of the individuals is vital for the positive change in the discriminatory attitudes formed and maintained in the community for decades. A Lesson Before Dying also argues that people’s origins should not predetermine their destiny. Racial tensions described in the story do belittle not only the main character but also limit his freedom. Liberty, in this case, does not refer literally to Jefferson’s imprisonment, but rather to the lack of choice, education, and respect given to the black people in the times. “And that’s all we are Jefferson, all of us on this earth, a piece of drifting wood. Until we – each of us, individually- decide to become something else” (Gaines 1993, 143). In his writing, the author encourages readers to oppress inequality and remember that discrimination will continue existing in the community until people consciously choose to reject societal stereotypes.

Consequently, a brief examination of the novel’s plot and theme, along with the character analysis, suggests that racial features should not be the reason for an individual’s inhumane treatment. Although slavery was abolished decades ago, Jefferson is erroneously convicted for murder based on the societal racial prejudices. Nevertheless, by undergoing spiritual transformation after meeting Grant, the black man accepts the death sentence with dignity, teaching the community that all people, regardless of the race, deserve benevolence and respect.

Blanco, Maria-Jose, and Ricarda Vidal. 2014. The Power of Death: Contemporary Reflections on Death in Western Society. New York: Berghahn Books.

Gaines, Ernest J. 1993. A Lesson Before Dying. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.

Magill, David E. 2016. “Make Him a Man: Black Masculinity and Communal Identity in Ernest J. Gaines’s a Lesson Before Dying.” Studies in the Literary Imagination 49 (1): 61-76. doi: 10.1353/sli.2016.0005.

Zeitler, Michael. 2016. ““Mr. Joe Louis, Help Me”: Sports as Narrative and Community in Ernest J. Gaines’s a Lesson Before Dying.” Studies in the Literary Imagination 49 (1): 129-140. doi: 10.1353/sli.2016.0009.

A Christmas Carol by Dickens
Life of Pi: Key Characters, Plot, and Themes
Feminism in “A Long Day in November” by Ernest Gaines
"The Sky Is Gray" by Ernest Gaines
Chopin’s "The Story of an Hour", Harris’s "Mississippi Solo", and Blanco’s "One Today"
The Outsiders by Susan Eloise Hinton
The Coming of Age in Mississippi: Memoir by Anne Moody
The Bluest Eye by Morrison: Characters, Themes, Personal Opinion
Much Ado About Nothing by Shakespeare
Invisible Man by Ralph Ellison
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, December 3). A Lesson Before Dying: Summary, Characters, Theme, and Personal Opinion. https://ivypanda.com/essays/a-lesson-before-dying-summary-characters-theme-and-personal-opinion/

"A Lesson Before Dying: Summary, Characters, Theme, and Personal Opinion." IvyPanda , 3 Dec. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/a-lesson-before-dying-summary-characters-theme-and-personal-opinion/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'A Lesson Before Dying: Summary, Characters, Theme, and Personal Opinion'. 3 December.

IvyPanda . 2019. "A Lesson Before Dying: Summary, Characters, Theme, and Personal Opinion." December 3, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/a-lesson-before-dying-summary-characters-theme-and-personal-opinion/.

1. IvyPanda . "A Lesson Before Dying: Summary, Characters, Theme, and Personal Opinion." December 3, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/a-lesson-before-dying-summary-characters-theme-and-personal-opinion/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "A Lesson Before Dying: Summary, Characters, Theme, and Personal Opinion." December 3, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/a-lesson-before-dying-summary-characters-theme-and-personal-opinion/.

A Lesson Before Dying

61 pages • 2 hours read

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Before You Read

Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Chapters 1-3

Chapters 4-6

Chapters 7-9

Chapters 9-11

Chapters 12-15

Chapters 16-18

Chapters 19-21

Chapters 22-24

Chapters 25-28

Chapters 29-31

Character Analysis

Symbols & Motifs

Important Quotes

Essay Topics

Explain the impact of racism on the characters in this story. What impact does racism have on Jefferson and his situation?

What role does religion play for the elders of the quarter? What role does religion play for Grant? For Jefferson?

Explain the significance of Paul Bonin’s character.

Related Titles

By Ernest J. Gaines

A Gathering of Old Men

The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman

The Sky Is Gray

Featured Collections

African American Literature

View Collection

Community Reads

Ask LitCharts AI
Discussion Question Generator
Essay Prompt Generator
Quiz Question Generator

Literature Guides
Poetry Guides
Shakespeare Translations
Literary Terms

A Lesson Before Dying

Ernest gaines.

Ask LitCharts AI: The answer to your questions

From its first page, A Lesson Before Dying portrays a racist society in 1940s Louisiana. Bayonne, Louisiana is a plantation community in which the descendants of slaves work on the same plantations where their ancestors worked; while they are paid for their labor, they’re paid far less than white workers. The legal system is similar. While it’s true that a black person in the era of slavery would never have received a trial at all…

Grant Wiggins , the narrator of A Lesson Before Dying , is a teacher. And education plays a key thematic role in the novel. Yet the novel’s portrayal of education is not the simple “education is good” that you might hear from a politician. In fact, in the beginning of the novel, there seems to be no evidence that education, as traditionally understood, yields any long-term results whatsoever.

Grant runs a schoolhouse, filled by poor…

Religion, Cynicism, and Hope

Throughout A Lesson Before Dying , Grant , a Catholic living in a largely Catholic community, grapples with questions of religion. Although nearly all of his peers and family members are Catholic, Grant distrusts organized religion, at least as the people around him practice it. In large part, this is because Grant distrusts the concept of Heaven: the notion that all misery and suffering is strictly short-term, because good people will receive an eternal reward…

Heroism and Sacrifice

During one of Grant ’s visits to Jefferson near the end of the novel, he gives Jefferson his definition of a hero: “A hero is someone who does something for other people.” The broader implication of Grant’s definition is that heroes sacrifice their own interests for the interests of other human beings. Grant insists that he himself is not a hero—in fact, he says that he’s only looking out for his own interests as an…

Women and Femininity

Dozens of times in A Lesson Before Dying , we hear Emma and Tante Lou say that Grant must teach Jefferson to die “like a man, not a hog.” This suggests that A Lesson Before Dying is about how a man should die, and more importantly, what a man should be. This raises the question: what’s Gaines’s idea of what a woman should be? More to the point, how should a woman live?

Especially in…

Roots, Connections, and Morality

Many times in A Lesson Before Dying , Jefferson and Grant are told that they should help other people, or that they owe other people their respect and service. These “other people” include family, members of the plantation community, and even strangers. In the novel, Gaines explores the way that interpersonal connections compel people to behave morally to one another.

For Gaines, the interpersonal connection begins with the family. Both Grant and Jefferson are impacted…

Roots, Connections, and Morality Theme Icon

Quizzes, saving guides, requests, plus so much more.

Home — Essay Samples — Literature — Books — A Lesson Before Dying

Essays on A Lesson before Dying

“a lesson before dying” essay, types of a lesson before dying essays.

Character Analysis Essay: This type of essay analyzes the different characters in the novel, including their personalities, motivations, and relationships. Some of the characters that can be analyzed include Jefferson, Grant Wiggins, Miss Emma, and Tante Lou.
Theme Analysis Essay: This type of essay focuses on the major themes of the novel, such as racism, justice, identity, and redemption. The essay can analyze how these themes are presented in the novel, how they are connected, and what message the author is trying to convey.

Character Analysis Essay

Choose a character to analyze: Select a character from the novel that you find particularly interesting or that you think plays a significant role in the story.
Gather evidence: Collect quotes and examples from the novel that support your analysis of the character's traits, actions, and motivations. Be sure to include page numbers to help readers find the evidence you are referencing.
Analyze the character's personality: Use the evidence you have gathered to analyze the character's personality. Consider their motivations, strengths, weaknesses, and how they change or grow throughout the novel.
Connect the character to the novel's themes: Discuss how the character's actions and personality contribute to the overall themes and messages of the novel.
Use literary devices: Incorporate literary devices such as symbolism, imagery, and foreshadowing to support your analysis.

Theme Analysis Essay

Read the novel carefully and take notes on the major themes and symbols.
Identify the central themes of the novel and consider how they are developed throughout the story.
Choose a specific theme that you want to analyze and explore in your essay.
Develop a clear and concise thesis statement that reflects the theme you have chosen to analyze.
Provide evidence from the novel to support your analysis and interpretation of the theme.
Analyze how the author develops the theme through the characters, plot, setting, and other literary devices.
Use quotes from the novel to illustrate your points and provide evidence for your analysis.
Consider the historical and cultural context in which the novel was written and how it relates to the themes presented.
Write a clear and concise conclusion that summarizes your analysis and reinforces your thesis statement.

Tips on How to Choose the A Lesson Before Dying Essay Topics:

Choose a topic that interests you: When choosing a topic, it is important to choose something that you are interested in and passionate about. This will make the writing process more enjoyable and help you produce a better essay.
Read the novel carefully: Before choosing a topic, it is important to read the novel carefully and take notes. This will help you identify the major themes, characters, and symbols that can be analyzed in your essay.
Brainstorm ideas: Once you have read the novel and identified some potential topics, brainstorm some ideas. Think about what you want to say about the topic, what evidence you can use to support your argument, and what message you want to convey.
Choose a narrow focus: It is important to choose a narrow focus for your essay, rather than trying to cover too much ground. This will help you produce a more focused and cohesive essay.

Prompt Examples for "A Lesson Before Dying" Essays

Racial injustice in the jim crow south.

Discuss the theme of racial injustice in the novel "A Lesson Before Dying." Explore the historical context of the Jim Crow South and how it impacts the characters and their experiences.

The Transformation of Grant Wiggins

Examine the character of Grant Wiggins and his journey throughout the novel. How does he evolve as a person, and what lessons does he learn about life, identity, and responsibility?

Education and Empowerment

Explore the role of education in the novel. How does education empower individuals, particularly Jefferson, and how does it serve as a tool for change and self-discovery?

Justice and Redemption

Discuss the themes of justice and redemption in "A Lesson Before Dying." How does the trial and eventual fate of Jefferson reflect broader questions of justice and the possibility of redemption?

Community and Solidarity

Analyze the importance of community and solidarity among the African American characters in the novel. How do their bonds and support systems help them cope with adversity and oppression?

Symbols and Motifs

Examine the use of symbols and motifs in the novel, such as the radio, the notebook, or the hog. What do these symbols represent, and how do they contribute to the overall themes of the story?

The Impact of the Execution Date

Discuss the significance of the impending execution date for Jefferson. How does it shape the characters' actions, relationships, and sense of urgency throughout the novel?

Women's Roles and Strength

Explore the roles of women in "A Lesson Before Dying," including Miss Emma and Vivian. How do these female characters exhibit strength, resilience, and influence in the face of adversity?

The Power of Love and Compassion

Discuss the themes of love and compassion in the novel. How do characters like Grant and Jefferson experience and express these emotions, and how do they impact their lives?

Moral Dilemmas and Choices

Examine the moral dilemmas faced by various characters, particularly Grant and his decision to help Jefferson. What ethical choices do they confront, and how do these choices shape the narrative?

Symbolism in "A Lesson before Dying"

Analysis of a lesson before dying, by ernest gaines, made-to-order essay as fast as you need it.

Each essay is customized to cater to your unique preferences

+ experts online

The Importance of Religion in a Lesson before Dying

A lesson before dying by ernest j. gaines: depiction of injustice against the black population, the theme of justice in a lesson before dying by ernest gaines, the issue of causality and direct instutionalized discrimination of coloured people in "a lesson before dying" by ernest j. gaines, let us write you an essay from scratch.

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Jefferson's Character in Romulus Linney's a Lesson before Dying

Symbolism in a lesson before dying by ernest gaines, ernest j. gaines’ representation of the inevitability of change as illustrated in his book, a lesson before dying, a look at the ineffectiveness of high education as portrayed by ernest j. gaines in a lesson before dying and mary shelley’s, frankenstein, a lesson before dying by ernest j. gains: the impact of injustice on one's view of themselves.

Ernest J. Gaines

Relevant topics

A Rose For Emily
Brave New World
Persepolis: The Story of a Childhood
American Born Chinese
A Long Way Gone
Pedagogy of The Oppressed
Fish Cheeks
A Good Man Is Hard to Find
And Then There Were None

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

A Lesson Before Dying - Text Analysis Writing Prompt, Citing Text Based Evidence

Google Apps™

Also included in

Description

Introducing how to write a literary analysis essay citing text evidence for A Lesson Before Dying by Ernest J. Gaines has never been easier! This in-depth text dependent analysis (TDA) writing prompt resource guides students through a step-by-step process of writing an expository / informative essay with textual evidence as support. It includes an expository writing graphic organizer , rubric, expository writing quiz , and an expository writing template .

All aspects of text evidence writing are covered in this resource: brainstorming ideas , developing a thesis statement , introducing supporting details , writing hooks and leads , and incorporating the 6 Traits of Writing ™. From the struggling writer to the advanced writer, this resource offers something for everyone.

The video, slide show, graphic organizer, worksheets, writing template, and rubric allow students to practice and develop their informative writing skills. The writing quiz reinforces guided note-taking techniques when used in conjunction with the instructional video. The detailed lesson plans make implementing expository writing easy for teachers .

This no-prep lesson is adaptable for in-class instruction, distance learning, or independent student work. The instructional video with writing tutorial and template can be presented as whole class instruction or assigned for students to complete at home.

All materials are available in both Google Drive™ and print formats, ensuring easy access for all students.

*****************************************************************************************

This Citing Text Evidence Expository / Informative writing prompt lesson includes:

Entertaining Instructional Video with:

Brainstorming ideas
Prompt identification and comprehension
Thesis statement development
Rubric explanation
How to Write an Expository Essay tutorial and writing template
How to Write an Expository Essay writing quiz / guided note-taking

Detailed Lesson Plan with:

Common Core State Standards indicated on lesson plan
Instructional Focus
Instructional Procedures
Objectives/Goals
Direct Instruction
Guided Practice
Differentiation
ESE Strategies
ELL Strategies
I Can Statement
Essential Question

Worksheets with:

Brainstorming section

Slide Show Presentation with:

Introduction slide with prompt (interactive for students to identify key vocabulary)
Brainstorming slide (interactive for students to list ideas)
Standard and implied thesis development slides
How to Write an Expository Essay tutorial and writing template slides
Checklist slide

Expository Writing Quiz

Expository Rubric

Expository Graphic Organizer

Helpful Hints Writing Worksheet

Google Slides ™

Check out my other High School Text Based Analysis Writing Prompts:

Text Analysis Writing Prompts

Connect with me for the latest Write On! with Jamie news:

Write On! with Jamie Blog
FB Community for 6-12 ELA Teachers

. . . and visit my WRITE ON! with Jamie website for a free TEXT EVIDENCE WRITING LESSON!

© Google Inc.™ All rights reserved. Google™ and the Google Logo are registered trademarks of Google Inc.™ Write On! with Jamie® is an independent company and is not affiliated with or endorsed by Google Inc.™

Copyright © Write On! with Jamie. All rights reserved by author. All components of this product are to be used by the original downloader only. Copying for more than one teacher, classroom, department, school, or school system is prohibited unless additional licenses are purchased. This product may not be distributed or displayed digitally for public view. Failure to comply is a copyright infringement and a violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Clipart and elements found in this product are copyrighted and cannot be extracted and used outside of this file without permission or license. Intended for classroom and personal use ONLY.

Questions & Answers

Write on with jamie.

We're hiring
Help & FAQ
Privacy policy
Student privacy
Terms of service
Tell us what you think

Share full article

Supported by

The Ezra Klein Show

Nate Silver on Kamala Harris’s Chances and the Mistakes of the ‘Indigo Blob’

By Ezra Klein

Nate Silver on How Kamala Harris Changed the Odds

Nate Silver came to fame in American politics for election forecasting. But before Silver was in politics, he was a poker player. And after getting into politics, he went back to being a poker player. He’s been running through poker championships and out there on tables — partly because he’s been writing a book about risk.

The book is called “ On the Edge: The Art of Risking Everything .” And it applies the frameworks of the gambler to politics, to A.I., to venture capital.

The way Silver thinks about politics I find very useful. So I invited him on my podcast to talk about how that thinking has guided him over the past year and how he’s thinking about the election going forward.

This is an edited transcript of part of our conversation. For the full conversation, watch the video below, or listen to “ The Ezra Klein Show .”

The election forecaster discusses 2024 and what politicians can learn from gamblers.

“Nate Silver came to fame in American politics for election forecasting. He built models that were pretty damn successful at predicting American politics.” “Nate Silver is the founder of fivethirtyeight.com, a polling website that correctly predicted the winner of 49 of the 50 states in the last presidential election.” “Election Oracle, ESPN’s Nate Silver, he predicted every state in the last presidential election.” “And once again, Nate Silver completely nailed it.” “The guy’s amazing.” “But before Silver was in politics, he was a poker player. And after getting into politics, he went back to being a poker player. He’s been running through poker championships and out there on tables —” “Savage, savage bluff by Silver. Oh, my God.” “— partially because he’s been writing a book about risks. The book is called ‘On the Edge: The Art of Risking Everything.’ And it applies the frameworks of, I would say, the gambler, maybe say the poker player, to politics, to AI, to venture capital. Nate, the way he thinks about politics I find very useful. I find that he thinks more clearly about risk and probabilities than a lot of people do and maybe more people should follow. So I wanted to have him on to talk about how that thinking has guided him over the past year and how he’s thinking about it in the election going forward. As always, my email, [email protected].” [THEME MUSIC] “Nate Silver, welcome to the show.” “Thank you, Ezra. Happy to be here.” “Last I looked, your model has Harris winning the election at around 52 percent. It might be mildly different today. But this has been an unusual election. So how much stock do you put in your model right now?” “I think the model is balancing the different factors pretty well. I mean, there are some things you could argue are favorable to Harris, one of which is that for the past few weeks we’ve been in what the model thinks is supposed to be the convention bounce period for republicans, where typically you poll pretty well after your convention. There’s the afterglow of the new nomination and things like that — the afterglow of the VP pick, often, too. And Kamala Harris kind of stomped on Donald Trump’s news cycle. So maybe it’s an overly favorable assumption for Harris. There’s also in polls what’s known as nonpartisan response bias. So when voters get more enthusiastic, you’d rather have that than not as a candidate. But it also means that they sometimes are more likely to respond to polls. At the same time, her momentum has been pretty good, which usually I dismiss. We don’t really kind of know what the baseline is here, right? You know, Hillary Clinton, who was, I think, kind of a terrible candidate, won the popular vote by two points. Is she a little bit better than Hillary Clinton? Probably, right? So can she win by three or four? Well, if you win by three or four, then you win the electoral college in most instances.” “I don’t think many people expected — if you did, I’d like to know it — the turnaround in her numbers we have seen since she’s become the presumptive nominee. She’s gone to net favorables, which I would not have bet a ton of money on at this speed at least. People were looking at a lot of data on Harris and assuming that data was solid. That data was not solid.” “When a candidate’s a hypothetical candidate, you have to treat that polling very carefully. People are — I think it’s a weird thing to ask, you know, what if Gavin Newsom ran against Trump. It’s not the same thing as when you actually have the candidate in front of you, and have the advertisements, and have the news articles, and everything else to actually evaluate. I mean, I think this is, like, on the higher side for a jump in favorables, but, you know, she was amazingly well-organized at getting the entire establishment behind her within literally minutes [LAUGHS]: of Biden announcing that he was going to step down. And so that suggested that maybe she did have more support in the party than she let on. And also, you know, I don’t — I think the Biden people may have been in somewhat bad faith. Maybe not consciously, but I’m not sure they weren’t trying to undermine her. Because the obvious thing to do would be to have this qualified, if not always that politically adept, you know, much, much younger vice president take over for you when you’re about to be 82. But they gave her the border. They gave her voting rights, which is kind of the one major domestic policy area where they got very little done. So I don’t think they gave her a very good hand to play. But meanwhile, she’s getting a lot of reps, and giving speeches, and building connections, and played the game really well. I have a lot of respect for that.” “Well, the key thing, I think, is that Biden had a huge amount of influence over how the party viewed her in both directions. There was a long period, I would say, when the quiet signals out of Biden world were this isn’t going well.” “Yeah.” “And when there was pressure to push Biden off the ticket, those signals got louder — Harris cannot do this. If you get rid of him, you’re going to get her. You’re going to lose. But then the thing you saw happen is a moment Biden actually stepped aside and fully endorsed her. That was a signal so powerful that it functionally won the potential primary for Harris instantly. Nobody was going to go against Joe Biden in that moment. And so, in both directions, Biden had, and the team around him, a lot of influence. When implicitly Biden world told the Democratic Party Harris can’t do it, the Democratic Party believed them. And then when explicitly Biden himself told the Democratic Party and the world Harris could do it, the Democratic Party believed him. And by the way, from what I could tell, it seems he was right. And I don’t blame Biden, I think, for things that happened earlier in the administration. That was a lot of staff talk. And to be fair, it was based on some things. There were problems in her office. There were reasons to be skeptical. But he and they had tremendous power. In a way, this was not, to me, like a mini primary. This was a parliamentary process, right? The party came together and chose a leader through endorsements from elected officials. That’s functionally what happened.” “Yeah, it felt very British. It felt like —” “It felt very British.” “— the Liz Truss kind of thing or something, right, where, yeah. There’s a loss of confidence. Those are fascinating dynamics to study. But yeah, it’s interesting to have the inside view versus the outside view a little bit. And, you know, again, we talk about this in the book a little bit, but I come at a position where I’m more skeptical about the competence of people who work in politics. Right? Even if I like the candidates they endorse — I mean, I plan to plan to vote for Kamala Harris. I would not have voted for Joe Biden, by the way. I think it was deeply irresponsible to nominate him, and I would have voted libertarian or something. But I have a more skeptical view, and I think even the rationales they state out loud are sometimes maybe the rationales they believe or not. But, you know, I think human behavior is pretty strategic when you understand people’s incentives, and kind of information set, and things like that. And I think it was in Biden’s narrow self-interest to make Harris look weaker. And I think that plays a role at all sorts of subconscious margins in terms of how she was treated.” “Well, let’s talk about that skepticism. You and I have known each other a long time. We’re old-school bloggers. And my read of you is that somewhat over the 2016 election, then specifically over the pandemic —” “Yeah.” “— and your experience, I think, with online liberalism in the pandemic, you became much more disillusioned with the people who once felt to you like your group, your coalition, your tribe. There’s been a kind of an alienation for you. Is that a fair read?” “Yeah, I’d say it’s three things, right. Number one, the 2016 aftermath, I thought a lot of the kind of liberal and centrist news media, kind of were in denial about their own role in the ‘But her emails’ stuff and then picked scapegoats for Trump’s victory that were not the real reasons that he won. You know, Russian bot farms have approximately nothing to do with why Donald Trump won the 2016 election. And the Russia stuff, in general, I think was treated with an order of magnitude more importance than it probably objectively had. And blaming Facebook and the tech industry for that, I thought that was irresponsible. And also kind of the obsession over the polls in 2016, where I think there was some revisionist history where the polls actually showed a pretty close race. I mean, we had Trump with a 30 percent chance. And it was kind of the conventional wisdom that assumed that he was dead in the water. So the ability to conveniently lie a little bit or manipulate facts and spin facts, I mean, that was part one. Part two was the pandemic. Absolutely. And, you know, ‘orange man bad,’ I think, was often the reason that people believed a lot of what they believed. Because in some ways, the move to shut down society in some ways kind of went against the values of traditional liberalism, right? There’s a transfer of welfare from younger people [LAUGHS]: and people who are not able to work from home to wealthy suburbanites and older people who you’re protecting their health, but you’re undermining the education of millions and millions and millions of schoolkids around the country, and essential workers are still putting themselves at risk that you deem unacceptable for people who are able to work with laptops to take. So I thought it was very self-serving, and I thought kind of expertise was co-opted and corrupted by political partisans. And then third was the Biden stuff.” “Well, it seemed to me it happened for you before the Biden stuff.” “Yeah. I mean —” “And you were crosswise with a lot of liberals on Twitter. I mean, I came back to Twitter for three weeks during the height of Bidenmania to try to be sort of in touch with that sentiment and mostly stay away from it. But Twitter is a place that groups that exist outside the online hothouse purify inside the online hothouse. So there’s the public health community outside Twitter, and then there’s how it acts inside Twitter — political scientists outside Twitter and then inside Twitter, republicans outside Twitter, then inside Twitter. And my sense was that you ended up in a lot of fights with liberals who had a much lower risk tolerance than you did. And between that and what was, I believe, unfair criticism of the 2016 model, which got the election much more right than most did, that it sort of — you began to see habits of — you call it ‘the village.’ The village is your term for —” “Yeah. And that’s been a term that’s been used by other right. But the village is basically media, politics, government, progressive —” “The establishment.” “The establishment, ‘The New York Times,’ Harvard University.” “The regime.” “The regime. Yeah. The Democratic White House. Maybe not a Republican White House, but that’s a more complicated kind of edge case.” “Or maybe a different Republican White House.” “Yeah.” “Right? George W. Bush was part of the village.” “Absolutely.” “Maybe Donald Trump wasn’t.” “Absolutely.” “I think you’ve also called it the indigo blob in different ways, that you began to see it as a kind of set of aligned cognitive tendencies that you disagreed with. What were they?” “So one of them is the failure to do what I call decoupling. It’s not my term. Decoupling is the act of separating an issue from the context. So the example I give in the book is that if you’re able to say I abhor the Chick-fil-A’s CEO’s position on gay marriage — I don’t know if it’s changed or not, but he was anti-gay marriage, at least for some period of time — but they make a really delicious chicken sandwich. Like, that’s decoupling.” “I abhor their treatment of chickens.” “Yeah.” “I have a strong direct take on Chick-fil-A. I don’t like how they treat chickens.” “O.K. Or you can say or separate out, you know, Michael Jackson, Woody Allen, separate the art from the artist kind of thing. Right? You know, that tendency goes against kind of the tendency on the progressive left to care a lot about the identity of the speaker in terms of the racial or gender identity and in terms of their credentials. And this other world that I call ‘the river,’ the kind of gambling, risk-taking world, all that matters is that you’re right.” “The river is your name for the community of people who think about risk roughly the way you do and are willing to make big bets, willing to accept loss. The river is your — it’s your world of gamblers at all levels of society.” “Capital and lowercase g gambling.” “So hedge funds —” “Expected value.” “— venture capitalists.” “Yeah. And then you get kind of the more —” “Crypto.” “— groundwater stuff where it’s like crypto, and meme stocks, and things like that. It doesn’t matter who you are, it matters that you’re right and you’re able to prove it or bet on it in some way. And that’s very against, I think, the kind of credentialism that you have within the progressive Democratic left, which I also call the indigo blob, because it’s a fusion of purple and blue. There’s not a clear separation between the nonpartisan, centrist media and the left-leaning progressive media that’s kind of rooting for Democrats. Different parts of ‘The New York Times’ have both those functions in place. And as someone who’s kind of more on the nonpartisan side, even though, again, I would prefer to see Kamala Harris than Donald Trump, I think people are exploiting the trust that institutions have earned for political gain. And particularly in the kind of pre-Elon pandemic-era Twitter days, the pile-ons were kind of insane, and 98 percent of people don’t have the tolerance for that. But I didn’t really care because these people are not my friends, and I have a good life outside of Twitter, and because, you know, to some extent, even if you run a newsletter, being a little polarizing is O.K., right? If I have 10 random people yelling at me on Twitter and 10 people sign up to be paid subscribers to ‘Silver Bulletin,’ then I come out like way ahead in that deal. And so I think I couldn’t do my job without running afoul of this group of people.” “Let me ask you about the definition of decoupling there, because I think decoupling is interesting. And I found the examples you pick also interesting but contestable.” “Yeah.” “So in the Chick-fil-A example, I’m between a vegetarian and vegan these days, so I got my own issues with Chick-fil-a, but was not a believer necessarily in boycotting it if you didn’t have my issues. But I understood it as more like a boycott, that theory, right? You don’t want to give money to something that’s going to work against your interests. The question of decoupling art and artist, which I’m more on the side of decoupling, but also has a dimension of — those both strike me as versions of activism, right? What you want to do, what people who hold those positions are trying to do, is affect change in the world by applying consequences to beliefs. And maybe you don’t want that, or you don’t agree that the beliefs they are trying to affect should have those consequences on them. But it’s kind of different than the idea of things are being pressed together that don’t go together. I think an interesting sort of decoupling issue that happened in the pandemic was the same public health voices who were at one point saying you had to be so careful, even outside oftentimes were then pro joining the George Floyd protests, which a lot of people found very upsetting. What people were looking to the public health world for right then was not their views on protests but their views on distancing. And that felt like it coupled things in a way that undermined one to achieve another.” “Well, and they framed it in, like, oh, this is good for public health reasons, right? If they had said, look, I’m a big believer in racial equity; there is a little bit of risk here; but outside, wear a mask, and probably not a huge problem — I mean, that would be honest, right?” “Which ended up being true too.” “Yeah. But instead it was in the name of public health, right? I think people don’t do enough thinking about thinking and don’t read enough of the literature on cognitive biases. Ironically, this is kind of like the expert literature on how powerful the human mind is at confirmation bias, and how powerful a drug political partisanship is, and how smart people are maybe better rationalizes in certain respects. I mean, a lot of irrational traits are like rational on some halfway approximate different version of the universe. You know what I mean?” “My first book was on polarization. And what I understand you as doing in the book in part is making an interesting cut in society between people with different forms of both risk tolerance and thinking about risk. And you write something that caught my eye where you say, quote, ‘COVID made those risk preferences public, worn on our proverbial sleeves and our literal faces.’ And you go on to say, quote, ‘People are becoming more bifurcated in their risk tolerance, and this affects everything from who we hang out with to how we vote.’” “Yeah.” “Tell me about both sides of that — the way that it made risk tolerance visible, but then your view that since then risk tolerance is becoming a deeper cleavage in society.” “I mean, on the one hand, there are lots of signs that risk tolerance is going down, right? Among young people in particular, they’re smoking less, drinking less, doing fewer drugs, having less sex. A different type of risk tolerance, they are less willing to defend free speech norms if it potentially would cause injury to someone. That’s kind of a — free speech is kind of a pro-risk kind of take in some ways because speech can cause effects, of course. On the other hand, you have this boom and bust, and various booms and busts, in crypto. You have Las Vegas bringing in record revenue. You have record revenue in sports betting and things like that. You have the CEO of OpenAI saying, yeah, this might destroy the universe, but it’s worth it. It’s a good gamble to take. You have FTX and all this stuff. And the first trip I made after COVID was to a Casino in Florida, which is every bit the shit show that you think it might be. And the tournament drew record numbers of Poker players. And so it just seems to me like we are in a world now where institutions are less trusted. And some people respond to that by saying, O.K., I make my own rules now, and this is great, and I have lots of agency. And some respond by kind of withdrawing into an online world, or maybe clinging on to beliefs and experts that have lost their credibility, or just by becoming more risk averse. I mean, I think the pandemic also revealed that there’s a lot of differences in introversion versus extroversion. I just can’t deal with being cooped up inside all day. This doesn’t work for me at all. But I think some people kind of secretly like the idea that, O.K., there’s no more FOMO. I can kind of be cozy all day. And that’s fine. There’s differences in desire for human companionship and things like that too.” “Let’s talk about a couple of those people. One of the things that’s kind of fun about the book is you spend time with people whose approach to risk you find sophisticated and interesting.” “Yeah.” “One of them is Peter Thiel. What were your impressions of Peter Thiel? What did he learn spending time with him?” “The first impression is that he’s a weird dude. I interviewed him by phone. And the first question I asked him he took half an hour to answer. So he’s very thoughtful. And the question was what I thought was kind of a softball question. It’s like, if you ran the world 1,000 times or 10,000 times, how often do you think you’d wind up in a situation like the one that you’re in? And it was kind of a nerdy way to ask, do you think you got lucky. Which in Thiel’s case is interesting. There’s an anecdote in the book about this famous or infamous car trip he took with Elon Musk. They were going to pitch Michael Moritz at Sequoia Capital, and Elon had a new McLaren F1 and was going way too fast, and spun out of control in the middle of whichever Sand Hill Road or whatever, and they totaled the car. They could easily have been killed. And instead, they actually hitchhiked to this meeting and saved what was then called Confinity — it was like the future of Paypal, right? And so this twist of fate, twist of good fortune, kind of helped [LAUGHS]: Peter Thiel out. But most people understand, like —” “Wait, how did it help him out? I mean, he didn’t die.” “Well, he didn’t die. So he avoided — yeah, he avoided dying, I guess I’d say. So probably the expectation was not that he’d die. But the point is still that you can easily have a world in which Elon Musk and Peter Thiel are not a part of it if there’s a car going the wrong way and the other side of the road. So most people, when you ask that question — I asked Mark Cuban, for example — they’ll give the politically correct response. Which is, oh, of course I’ve been very lucky, and I’m a talented person, but of course it’s a 1 in a million thing. Right? And Thiel objected to the question. He said, you know, well, if it’s predetermined, then the odds are 100 percent. And if the world’s not predetermined, then the odds are probably approximately zero. But that doesn’t really make sense. Like, how can you perturb the world by exactly this amount? But I think he kind of believes in predestiny a little bit. And —” “As a spiritual thing or as a matter of classical physics?” “There’s a good book by I think Max Chafkin was the journalist — or ‘Chaff-kin’— I don’t how you say his last name — about Peter Thiel called ‘The Contrarian,’ which is convincing that Thiel is actually quite conservative, more than libertarian, and probably quite religious. But I also think that if you ARE one of these people, just the amounts of wealth, and success, and power that Silicon Valley has, I do think some of these people kind of pinch themselves and wonder if they have been one of the chosen ones in some ways or been blessed in some ways, or, maybe the nerdy version of it, think they’re living in a simulation of some kind. Like, what odds would you give yourself that that actually makes sense that you’re the protagonist of the story? It must be kind of weird, right?” “So I used to interview Thiel. Not super regularly but every so often. My impression of him, which has been my impression of a lot of the I would call them ideologist VCs, which is not all VCs, but the ones who are heavily behind or out online and sort of pushing a kind of what I would think of as like VC ideology that leans now right, talking to him always interesting. Because over the course of a conversation, he would offer like 15 or 20 ideas. I would call them more thought experiments than analytical arguments. They were not empirically backed, typically. And you would leave and be like, 13 of those seem genuinely ridiculous to me. Two of them might be very importantly right. I’m not 100 percent sure which are the two and which are the 13. And Peter Thiel, I think, is very — he is a sort of template of the VC mind, and a lot of VCs try to be him. And he’s been very successful. I mean, he’s a guy who has backed a number of very important companies, found a number of very important founders. He is able to do something there. But it is oriented towards being right in important and counterintuitive ways, like, three out of 20 times and doesn’t care about being wrong 17 out of 20 times. Whereas if you think about media, media is oriented towards being right 17 out of 20 times, and the three that it gets wrong are going to be really big because they’re going to be correlated across the entirety of American institutions. But it’s a very different way of thinking about risk. It’s like you want big payouts, not a high betting average.” “And that’s because this is core to the VC mindset. The two things that you hear from every VC, one is the importance of the longer time horizon. So you’re making investments that might not pay off for 10 or 15 years. But number two, even more important, is the asymmetric ability to bet on upside. They are all terrified because they all had an experience early in their career where Mark Zuckerberg walked through their door, or Larry Page or Sergey Brin walked through their door, and they didn’t give them funding. And then they wound up missing on an investment that paid out at 100x or 1000x or 10,000x. And so if you can only lose 1x your money, but you can make 1000x if you have a successful company, then that changes your mindset about everything, and you want to avoid false negatives. You want to avoid missed opportunities. And I think there’s a tendency for a certain type of smart person to provoke, to troll a little bit. I think he’s like that a little bit mean. This is also partly the thing on Twitter, right? I kind of us Twitter sometimes as a sketch pad [LAUGHS]: a little bit for slightly irreverent, half-trollish ideas that might later turn into newsletter posts or something like that, or might be developed further, and probing around and seeing what things land and what don’t. Like a stand mic night at a comedy show or something. And I think that’s how Twitter is meant to be used. But other people use it for enforcing consensus. But we’ve already talked about Twitter. But yeah —” “Well, you can never talk about it enough, particularly with these people. The one thing I will say on that, and I think this is true for virtually everybody I know who has been on that platform for a long period of time, is they will tell you that I have this persona on Twitter.” “Yeah.” “Right? Twitter is not real life. I mean, I use it to provoke. I’m having fun. I’m shitposting. I’m trolling. And people, over time, if they spend a lot of time there, become more like who they are there. That is true for Marc Andreessen, another person who you profile and talk to in the book. It’s true for lots of people in politics I know. Ted Cruz has become his Twitter persona even more than he once was. It happened in Democratic politics I think in 2020. Different campaigns became more like their Twitter incarnations than that person had been in politics before. And I think it has to do with social dynamics. Because over time, the people you get praise from become more persuasive and credible to you. The people who begin to hate you, you sort of repel from. People I think always think they can be playful in their social dynamics, but actually who you end up surrounding yourself, even online, you become them. It’s very, very hard to maintain that kind of separation.” “I mean, clearly, Elon Musk maintained a stance for a while that, oh, I’m just kind of a libertarian moderate. Like, no, he’s kind of like a right-pilled conservative.” “Yeah. And I’m just having fun. I’m posting funny things. He’s his Twitter persona now. You spent some time with Sam Bankman-Fried.” “Yeah.” “Tell me what you learned from him or learned about him.” “I think Sam is kind of insane [CHUCKLES]:, and I’m not very sympathetic to him. I mean, I’m sympathetic in the sense that this is this very dramatic reversal of fortune, where he’s kind of literally emerging and on top of the whole world, and shooting commercials with Tom Brady, and it kind of all collapses, and he becomes very abandoned overnight. So he’s kind of reaching out to a couple of journalists to have conversations because he basically no friends left in the Bahamas anymore. And his parents are there and two of his employees are there, but everyone else has fled the island. Sam is somebody who has to be owned by the river. But, you know, he is unabashedly a part of that world. I mean, he had his tentacles in every part of that world. He was active in Democratic and actually, under the radar, Republican political donations. He was trying to figure out how to get into sports betting legally and things like that. And so he is kind of everywhere. And of course, most of all, with the effect of altruists — in the original plan for the book, there was this awkward transition between the chapter on crypto and the chapter on effective altruism. I’m like, how do I have a natural transition? And then SBF is very important in both worlds, and it’s a very strange connection that somehow crypto profits are funding these people who want to cure malaria or something in Africa. But, you know, I think there are a couple of things. One is that I think people were overly impressed by SBF, partly because he was able to manipulate his self image. I mean, he’s not the most conventionally normal guy, right? But he was very aware that founders — the founder algorithm, the VC algorithm is like we can’t — weirdness is good for VCs. The fact that SBF would play video games in investor pitch meetings or things like that, or dress down, or have a fidget spinner, they’re like, oh, he’s a little bit on the spectrum, and that’s actually probably good for a founder because you want the single-minded devotion. And he’s a little weird, but you want variance, variance, variance.” “Sleeps on a beanbag. Right? There was a real mythos around him.” “Which is kind of carefully constructed. He’s kind of inhabiting a character which is inspired by some inner SBF. And he’s kind of playing that character and then kind of forgets what has ever inner core values, whatever they were, might have been. But he is not a very competent manager of risk. He invested all this money in this Democratic primary for a candidate named Carrick Flynn in Oregon’s — I forget which — six or seventh district, maybe eighth district. And the candidate had been ahead in the polls by 15 points and wound up losing by 15 points. Because to spend $8 million in a congressional primary is kind of insane if you’re not in the New York media market or something. So the candidate would go to people’s houses, and they’d be like, hey, I’m Carrick Flynn. I’m a candidate for the Oregon primary. And they’re like, oh, I have your literature and bring out a stack of 20 flyers that SBF’s super PAC had sent on behalf of Carrick Flynn and made him look like a weird freak backed by this mysterious crypto billionaire. So, yeah, he had a tendency — and this is based on testimony from both the court case and an interview I did with Tara MacAulay I think his her name, his original co-founder at Alameda. He had the kind of often good initial instincts, and being a good estimator is an important skill in my world, but then would kind of double down on that a lot and rationalize things a lot. And there was also a bystander effect problem where so many people vouched for him — Sequoia Capital and all these Oxford philosophers, these effective altruists. And he’s on stage with Bill Clinton or whatever, and he’s invited to the Met Gala, and Tom Brady is shooting commercials with him. So what could possibly be wrong with this guy? I mean, maybe he seems a little bit weird to me, but all these other people are kind of in his corner. But no one was doing the due diligence. And he kind of figured out that despite — there’s a little contradiction in the river, where on the one hand we tend to think of ourselves as being contrarian. On the other hand, we’re pretty big fans of markets, because we know that it’s kind of hard to beat the Las Vegas point spread or it’s hard to beat the S&P 500 Index funds or things like that. So the market judgment is that SBF is a credible actor, and how would I trust my own judgment over the market judgment a little bit. And there was too much deference toward that and too much actually groupthink about SBF, because the problems were evident the whole way. I mean, he told Tyler Cowen that if he could flip a coin to double the amount of utility in the world plus 1 epsilon or something but there’s a 50/50 chance of blowing the world up, that he would take the coin flip and repeatedly.” “So you’re actually getting two earths, but you’re risking a 49 percent chance of it all disappearing.” “And again, I feel compelled to say caveats here of how would you really know that’s what’s happening, blah, blah, blah, whatever. Put that aside. Take the hypothetical — the pure hypothetical. Yeah. Yeah.” “And then you keep on playing the game. So what’s the chance we’re left with anything? Don’t I just Saint Petersburg paradox you into non-existence?” “Well, not necessarily. Maybe Saint Petersburg paradox into an enormously valuable existence. That’s the other option.” “I remember seeing that Tyler Cowen interview and thinking, that’s nuts. But I think it gets at a kind of nuts that there is a bias towards in the world you’re describing. There is an aesthetic around talking in probabilities. There’s an ability to think in probabilities, and there’s an aesthetic around probabilities — people attaching, I would often say, almost random probabilities to things. I see this a lot in Silicon valley, people who I would call it like faux Bayesian reasoning where they’re given some probability, but they have no reason to base the probability — 50 percent of this. And it makes you sound much more precise. It makes you sound like what you’re talking about. SBF was known for always talking in terms of expected value. Which is very appealing to the kinds of people you’re describing, maybe the kind of person even that you are. And people who know how to talk like that get through a lot of filters, because you sort of assume, if they’ve converted everything into probabilities, and they’re great at math, and he worked at Jane Street. I worried about this a lot with effective altruists for a while, which is a group I have a lot more sympathy for than most people now have. But there can be this tendency, I think, to fetishize a certain form of discourse. It’s like the first people into that form of discourse are doing something valuable, and then, after that, I think it can become a kind of costume of sloppy thinking. This worries me about models too. I’m curious how you think about it, because I often find that people talk in terms of probabilities but people hear them in terms of certainties. That somehow talking in terms of probabilities makes people more willing to believe you without actually being skeptical or attaching a failure risk to you.” “Yeah. I mean, there’s two things here. One is just there is a kind of jargon. In some ways I liken being from the river to being from the South of the United States or something, where there’s just a lot of shared cultural norms and unspoken discursive tendencies — it’s just the way we communicate, I think, in the river. But also, it’s really easy to build bad models. Even in narrow problems, like I want to forecast the NFL or something or build an election model, it’s easy to build bad models. And on these open-ended problems, it’s really easy to fall in love with the incomplete model of the world and then forget that — what’s the Kamala Harris coconut tree quote? A model does not fall from a coconut tree. It exists —” “It exists in the context of all that came before it. Sure.” “So a model is supposed to describe something in the real world. And if you lose sight of the real world and it fails to describe the real world, then it’s the model’s fault and your fault for building the model and not the real world’s fault. And that’s a lesson that people, I think, have a lot of trouble learning.” “Bankman-Fried is in prison. Thiel might in some ways be responsible for destroying the Republican ticket this year. I mean, in a close election, JD Vance now seems to have about as much negative value as we’ve seen from a recent Vice President. I’m not saying Peter Thiel’s the only reason Vance got chosen for the ticket, but he is one of the key reasons Vance is in politics. Before now, you would said JD Vance was Peter Thiel’s political bet that paid off best.” “Yeah.” “And now it might be his political bet that pays off worst. You mentioned Bankman-Fried’s political donations, which were kind of disastrous in a direct way sometimes. Also ended up taking a lot of other people down over time. If these guys are so good at making bets or seem to be so good at making bets, what are they missing in politics? As somebody who straddles those worlds, what is not in their models? So both these groups, both the river and the village, are groups of elites. And I think, ironically, both groups’ critiques of one another are kind of true, right? I mean, they kind of can be epistemic trespassers, but they are not very data driven when it comes to politics. And part of it, too, is that if you’re a VC, and you’re evaluating a lot of pitches and a lot of opportunities, you have very quick twitch reflexes for saying, O.K., something about this founder seems smart. Let’s investigate further. Let’s do an initial seed round of investing. But it’s like thin slicing and not necessarily — for this part of the river, the VC part of the river — more profound analytical takes on things. And so you’re surrounded by people that are inclined to agree with you, and you kind of see enemies on the other side. He thought maybe that people had some deeper intuitive sense in 2016 that something was wrong with Hillary Clinton, even though she was ahead in the polls. And to his credit, he did back Trump at a time when that seemed like a big risk to take. It seemed like it was probably going to be the wrong bet, and it seemed like he was losing a lot of credibility. And now, it turns out that he was kind of ahead of the curve. You know, people like Peter Thiel thought that the village had been discredited by 2016 and other things. You can’t really trust the polls, and they said Trump would never do x, y or z. But no, I mean, these guys often are pretty dumb about [LAUGHS]: politics. And it’s the same — the guys in the hedge fund poker game that I play sometimes are the guys that are like, I think Gavin Newsom is going to replace Joe Biden on the ticket. And it’s like, you actually were kind of right about part of this, but why Gavin Newsom? What is the infatuation with Gavin Newsom.” “I heard so many versions of that. I always thought it was so crazy.” “Yeah.” “But, you know, it’s funny. I would say what they’ve often missed, and Thiel’s particular on this, is how human beings react to different human beings. So JD Vance, for instance, wildly underperforms in the Ohio Senate race. And Vance’s problem right now, he’s pushed onto the ticket by, as best we can tell, people like Steve Bannon, Don Trump, Jr., Tucker Carlson, Elon Musk — so the very online, very reactionary pale, the people around Trump. And what is missed about him is he’s kind of offputting. He doesn’t talk to other people in a way they would like to be spoken to. He’s able to make even popular ideas like a child tax credit sound completely bizarre when he talks about them in terms of punishing childless adults — that there is something here, I think, when people look at the world — and I’ve seen this in a lot of different dimensions of these kinds of folks — when they look at the world too much in numbers, the intangibles begin to dissolve for them.” “Although I think some of these tangibles aren’t so intangible. Right? Where you can look at JD Vance’s margins in Ohio, you can look at historically candidates who don’t have experience getting elected to some lower office and then ascending the ranks, underperform. It’s been a factor in our congressional midterm models for years, for example. But, look, in some ways, these VCs are obviously incredibly, deeply flawed people. And so, why do they succeed despite that? I think because the idea of having a longer time horizon, number one, and being willing to make these plus expected value, positive expected value, high risk, but very, very, very high-upside bets, and gathering a portfolio of them repeatedly, and making enough of these bets that you effectively do hedge your risk, those two ideas are so good that it makes up for the fact that these guys often have terrible judgment and are kind of vainglorious assholes — half of them, right? They’re interesting people too. I mean, they’re very interesting I think. And they — I’m happy that the book is able to present, I think, a complete journalistic portrait of some of them. But they have lots and lots of flaws, and it’s made up for by the fact that this is kind of a magic formula for making money.” “Let me get us back to the election. So we mentioned before Harris’s approval ratings have gone from significantly underwater to net favorable very, very fast. She’s now leading in head-to-head polls. More than that, there’s a real deep, whatever Republicans have convinced themselves to the contrary, organic enthusiasm that has unleashed itself around her. She turns out to be very memeable in a way I’m not sure people quite predicted. I know most Democrats didn’t predict this. I don’t think you predicted it. So what was missed here? What wasn’t in the Harris model that should have been?” “Yeah, maybe you really can meme your way to victory. [CHUCKLES]: I don’t know. I wouldn’t necessarily have thought that. I mean, there’s something about how it’s off trend a little bit, and it’s kind of unexpected a little bit. And there’s something about that, that I think people were ready for a vibe shift, right? I think people in politics neglect just how annoying the pedantic, dramatic, no fun tone of politics was and the having to be like serious all the time. And if the worst Republicans can say about Kamala Harris, oh, she laughs a lot, maybe it kind of suits the mood a little bit after so many years of doom and gloom. So maybe it was just spontaneous and lucky. I mean, it’s also the case maybe when Kamala Harris was a candidate for the nomination in 2019, I had these tiers, and the top tier was Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. And the line was always, O.K., I got one of those right and one of those about as wrong as possible. But she was seen as this rising, up-and-coming political talent, and maybe the combination of misaligned strategy in 2019 and then not being marketed well by the White House, and we debated before what the reasons for that are, maybe that was the underperformance. And the rising star that people thought she was kind of the real Kamala Harris after all.” “So Harris ended up choosing Tim Walz, the governor of Minnesota, as her VP pick. You made a case that it should have been Josh Shapiro. Tell me why.” “Pennsylvania, number one. There’s about a 4 percent chance in our model that Harris will lose the election because of Pennsylvania, where she wins the other Midwestern swing states but she’s 19 votes or fewer electoral votes fewer because of Pennsylvania. And if you’re a probabilist, then a 4 percent chance — because campaigns often don’t make a difference, right? If we go into a recession in the third quarter, then Harris will probably lose through no fault of her own. But in the worlds where campaign strategy can make a difference, then the VP being from Pennsylvania is a reasonably big upgrade. And the fact that he has demonstrated his popularity with this very diverse state that’s kind of a microcosm of the US as a whole — in Pennsylvania, you have the Northeast, you have the Midwest, and even you have a little bit of the South creeping in the Appalachian part of the state. You have the suburbs, you have rural areas, and you have one of the biggest cities in the United States. You have a big African-American vote. You have lots of famous colleges and things like that. You have everything there, and he’s 15 points above water approval-wise. And that’s pretty powerful information to work with. I happen to think that Tim Walz is an above-average pick, better than most, better than JD Vance. Not a particularly high bar, but better than a lot of the recent picks. I mean, I think he’s kind of memeable as America’s goofy dad kind of way, and he had a pretty moderate track record in Congress. And again, my premise is that, generally speaking, moderation wins. A lot of people disagree with that, but I think the empirical evidence is strong there. More progressive governance, of course, in Minnesota. But I think it was a somewhat risk-averse decision. Now, if you read —” “Why do you say that? I found this argument you’ve made very weird. So I think there’s a very good chance — I always told people on the VP pick my head says Shapiro and my heart says Walz.” “Yeah.” “I think that because I am a cautious person, if I were running for president, worried about losing Pennsylvania, I would have found it very hard not to pick Shapiro. Because if you don’t pick Shapiro, and you end up in a we lost Pennsylvania scenario, everybody’s going to blame you for blowing the decision that could have won Pennsylvania. In terms of the expected value, both on the front end and the back end, I understood Walz as a choice on vibes, this sort of energy, this momentum she has created. He was sort of able to upend and remake all Democratic messaging in a single morning Joe appearance. There is some intangible charisma to Walz that has made him — developed him overnight, this huge online fan base, that the cautious candidate, the one, listening to the consultants, the one reading Nate Silver polls, that candidate goes with Shapiro. Walz is something else. Why did you say that you understood Walz as risk averse?” “Because I think they were worried about news cycles where the left got mad, and/or the Gaza issue was elevated, and/or you had protests at the convention in Chicago in a couple of weeks. I think they were worried about that, and maybe kind of undermining what is clearly good vibes right now, and maybe overrating — I mean, maybe it’s not. Maybe I just think it’s the lower expected value decision of what gives Kamala Harris a higher chance of winning the electoral college in November.” “I think one of the questions I’ve been reflecting on — because I often think about, where do I disagree with writers I otherwise agree with? And I think I’m typically pretty aligned with you on a bunch of things, or Iglesias, or [INAUDIBLE], or some others. But a lot of you have really gotten into a view that I think takes the median voter theorem almost too seriously. That it’s like as if politics is unidimensional, and how close you are to ideologically the median voter is what decides elections. Which I do think moderation has an effect in. I mean, we see this in the political science research. But that doesn’t have a lot of room in that model for energy, for enthusiasm, for the mediation of politics — the thing that happens in between the candidate and the public for what is happening on social media, for what is happening on cable news. And you can often sort of back out explanations here and there. But I, for instance, think this sort of in retrospect explanation that what led Obama to victory was careful moderation — one of the things he did was moderate on some issues like gay marriage. Another thing he did was unleash astonishing levels of enthusiasm in the electorate for reasons orthogonal in many ways to his policy positions. And so I’m curious how you think about that. Because to me, one of the questions Shapiro and Walz raised, Shapiro and Harris sort of are a lot like each other. I think they sort of come off as the two smartest members of the law review. Right?” “Yeah, that’s interesting —” “Which is like kind of —” “— for sure.” “— not necessary the visual you want — maybe it is but might not be — and that there is something here that is I guess people call it vibes now. I feel like it’s a little dismissive. But how you play out in earned media, in social media, how much people want to talk about you, that feeling of enthusiasm, how do you think about that as somebody who builds models and handicaps politics?” “I mean, look, if you’re literally building a congressional model, there’s a model that forecasts the vote based on fundamentals, which means not the polls if you don’t have polling, for example, based on whatever it is, seven or eight factors. And one of those factors, if you’re incumbent, is how often do you vote with your party. And the more often you buck your party, actually the more often — like Susan Collins or Joe Manchin — then you tend to overperform in your congressional race. Now, that’s also one of eight factors. Right? And even when you have all eight factors, there’s still quite a bit of uncertainty in the race. So to me, it’s like this is something where if you’re used to looking at larger data sets, you can come up with counterexamples of Jon Tester is pretty progressive actually and somehow manages to get reelected in Montana with this kind of maybe Tim Walz-like folksy personality or something —” “Sherrod Brown. Sort of similar to that.” “Also pretty progressive. But if you take all the data from every congressional race since 1990, then it becomes clear in the aggregate, right? And I’d also say, if we could get progressives to the point where — I don’t know who we is in this sentence, because I’m not sure I identify as progressive — liberal but not progressive, I’d say — if we could get them to the point where they said, yes, the median voter theorem is mostly true but sometimes outweighed by other factors. But yeah, to get them to that point, instead of thinking, oh, you win elections by winning the base — I mean, that might have narrowly been true in an earlier —” “Wait, you’re turning this around on progressives. Because I’m asking it of you. I agree that progressives should take the median voter theorem more seriously. But I am asking you whether energy, enthusiasm, media — I just think attention in politics is undertheorized. I think if you look at Donald Trump, and you do a thing that I’ve seen people do, and say, look, he is more like the median voter on certain things like immigration, et cetera, or at least he was perceived as more moderate than Hillary Clinton and that’s why he won, I think that is an undertold story about Donald Trump that is somewhat true. I think that missing the showmanship of Donald Trump, the entertainment value, the energy he unlocks in people. There’s a reason that Trump had Dana White from the UFC and Hulk Hogan on his night of the RNC. So in 2020, Joe Biden’s view is that the election should be about Donald Trump, and Donald Trump’s view is that the election should be about Donald Trump. And that was a theory of attention they both agreed on, and it worked out for Joe Biden. In 2024, Joe Biden’s view is the election should be about Donald Trump. Donald Trump’s view was the election should probably be about Donald Trump. And that was a bad theory of attention. Biden had no way of shifting a narrative that wasn’t any good for him.” “Yeah.” “And so I guess this is what I’m getting at, that one thing that I worry about in some of this thinking among people I like is that attention is important. Candidates have different theories of it, but I don’t know that we know how to think about it as rigorously as I wish we did.” “Look, I agree. I mean, again, with Harris, maybe you do have to revise your views a little bit. I think also maybe in a campaign that’s a sprint and not a marathon, then maybe you never reach the long run. It seems possible. Usually, I’d say don’t worry about momentum over the next two weeks, because inevitably you’re going to have a bad news cycle later on. It’s just how the media works and it’s how elections work. It is possible they can just sprint their way to a memeified victory in this shortened, modified campaign. That they have a good convention, and that she wins whenever the debate is held, and then you’re in October and everyone’s crazy and explicitly partisan, they may be able to sprint to a narrow electoral college victory without having this skeptical news cycle. So that may be an argument for Walz, I think.” “One of the reasons on my mind is not actually Walz. And as I said before, because I do want to say this, I’m not sure who she should have picked as VP. I actually have very conflicted views on this, although I really, really enjoy Tim Walz, and really enjoyed interviewing him, and think he’s a pretty unusual political talent. But I think you could say the same about Josh Shapiro in different ways, and Pennsylvania is a very big state. But I’ve been interested in the shift in — look, you have a campaign staffed by many of the same people, particularly in the first two weeks, and yet the campaign’s tenor has completely changed. The tone of press releases is now they are trying to get you to talk about them and doing that by courting controversy, by being kind of mean in a way. Democrats have not been mean in a long time. That Tim Walz actually made a JD Vance couch joke in his introducing himself as her vice presidential pick speech — let’s put it this way, that is not something that Joe Biden campaign was going to do. They want people to talk about them. They want to court kind of controversy, outrage. They want attention. But I think the reason it’s all on my mind is what I am seeing in them is a radically different relationship to attention than the campaign that the same people were running two weeks ago.” “Yeah. And this why we rely on you for how much these people overlap. Like, that’s not something I really —” “They overlap tremendously.” “Yeah.” “I mean, it’s not the exact same people. Mike Donilon isn’t running things anymore. But there’s enough of the same people here that you’re not dealing with ‘nobody knew how to write these press releases’ a month ago.” “It is interesting that Joe Biden, based on the polling, would probably have been better off in election with low turnout. The one thing that might have saved him is if you get that special election, midterm election, lower turnout where people aren’t very happy about it, but they go to the polls and vote for Biden and the Trump people don’t bother to show up. Because unlike in the past, the marginal voters have been more likely to vote for Trump than for Biden. So maybe by having a really boring campaign, it kind of suited their interests. With Harris, who is bringing back some of the younger voters and some of the voters of color that had defected to Kennedy, or defected to Trump, or defected to sitting out the election, those are also some of the more marginal voters. And so, now, all of a sudden, she probably doesn’t mind as much higher turnout which is going to get young Latino women to vote for her or young Black men to vote for her when they might not have voted for Biden. And so it kind of matches the incentives of where you want to turnout to be on November 5.” “Tim Alberta in the Atlantic had a great piece on the way the Trump campaign was thinking about the race that came out around the time of the debate or right after the debate. And they felt they had Nevada, North Carolina completely locked up — and Georgia — and that this was really a race in three, maybe four states. My understanding is Harris and her team think they have re-expanded the map. They think that Nevada, Arizona, Georgia are for sure back in play. They think that North Carolina might be back in play. Do you think that’s true? Do you think the map has gotten bigger?” “I think that’s right. Because, again, look at the voters that Biden was falling off with. Nevada, people don’t remember, they think of it as kind of libertarian old miners, right? No, Nevada is extremely diverse, and it’s working class voters of color. Big fall-off constituency for Biden. Georgia, you have tons of young professionals, and tons of great colleges and universities, and, of course, tons of Black voters — the same groups that he’s declining from a little bit. North Carolina has been, interestingly, kind of close in the polls. Arizona is the one that didn’t seem to have moved quite as much, though there was one poll yesterday with Harris ahead there. But that’s right. I mean, I think the map has expanded, and it’s obviously plausible again now that she would win Georgia, especially with the Brian Kemp stuff not helping Trump one bit. At the moment — I was playing in a poker tournament, very on-brand, right — when Trump gets shot and has the iconic photo, which I’m not a Trump fan, but you kind of have to admire that, I think a little bit, I think a lot of people assume he’s going to win the election. I mean, with Biden already, he’s not going to lose after this. They try to shoot him, and he has this great photo opportunity, right? And then it seems like he’s at a high water mark. And then he picks JD Vance, and I think got a little arrogant.” [LAUGHS] “Because his initial instinct apparently was not to pick necessarily JD Vance and kind of talked out of it by his sons. And I don’t know what influence Peter Thiel or whatever had. But the VC guys were like, oh, JD Vance is kind of one of us. And he probably is smarter than the average VP or something. But that appeal has been demonstrated not to work. I mean, you saw it with Blake Masters for example, right? It works every now and then. I guess Rick Scott had a background in I don’t know what exactly, but like —” “Medicare fraud.” “O.K., yeah. [LAUGHS]: But for the most part, these —” “The guy the guy ran a health company that was convicted of the single largest Medicare fraud at that point in history.” “What I tell my VC friends is if you have a rich guy, just have him buy a basketball team or something. He’s not going to come across very well to the average voter. And I think they don’t understand that. And then, again, in a poker tournament or a poker home cash game, when you go from having a big stack and you’re kind of like, oh, this is so nice. Man, I’m going to go home and cash out my winnings. Maybe I’ll have a nice little whiskey at the bar or something. And this is going to be — I’ll text my friends about how well my session ran. And then you lose a big pot, and then you lose another big pot, and then you go on tilt. And before long, you have no chips left.” “What is tilt?” “Tilt is playing emotionally, particularly in poker or other forms of gambling. It’s often sparked by a bad beat. Meaning that you got unlucky. Or it can be sparked by getting bluffed and getting mad at your opponent. Or bad luck. Or sometimes you can actually have what’s called winner’s tilt too, where maybe this is what Trump had in picking JD Vance. You have a bunch of things that are going really well. I mean, this election was going about as well as it could for Donald Trump. He’s not a popular guy, yet he had moved ahead in some of the National polls by four or five points. It’s pretty hard to do. I mean, he’s lost the popular vote twice.” “Trump feels very on tilt to me. When you think about him, for Donald Trump, he had been pretty on his message. He was talking a lot about immigration. He was talking a lot about inflation. He was letting it be known that he was thinking about picking Doug Burgum. He seemed to be enjoying this idea that he was — people were longing for a stability They now associated with his presidency rightly or wrongly. They wanted the lower prices back. They don’t like the war in Gaza. They don’t like the war in Ukraine. Maybe Trump is a strong man who can bring it back. And he was kind of playing into that. And since the Harris switch and him beginning to fall in the polls, you feel this old Trump returning. The Trump who goes to Georgia and begins yelling at the governor — the Republican governor — of Georgia. The Trump that goes to the National Association of Black Journalists and begins to talk about how nobody knew Kamala Harris was Black. The Trump who is just trying out attack lines, trying to find something that will work no matter what the kind of cost might be. I mean, your description of him playing emotionally — he’s not listening to anybody right now. He’s flailing.” “And the fact that, according to the reporting, that they weren’t prepared for the eventuality when Joe Biden dropped out was kind of inexcusable. I mean, if you looked at prediction markets, it was immediately a live consideration after the debate. I think they overestimated the degree to which Democrats are a personality cult. I mean, they can be. There was maybe a personality cult around Obama, or Bill Clinton, or things like that. But there wasn’t one around Joe Biden. He was kind of always the candidate of the party. And it was not in the party’s interest any longer to have him as their nominee. And so the Democratic Party is capable and powerful in a way the GOP is not. And they extrapolated from their views to how Democrats would behave and underestimated the smart decision that the party was capable of making.” “I talked to Republicans about this, about why they weren’t more prepared, and one thing I heard from them is they just didn’t think Biden was going to step aside. I mean, if you’re a party that has completely bent the knee to Donald Trump and is now years and years into not being able to convince Donald Trump of functionally anything, it might shift your sense of how people in power, particularly the apex of power, act. It’s one reason — this is a place where you and I’ve been a little bit different — I’ve been more on the side of Joe Biden did something difficult that deserves praise. Because — and I think you see this in how Republicans were thinking — leaders just often don’t do this. The kind of personality that gets you to that point is not the kind of personality that leaves power gracefully. It’s why, when people are talking about dictators, there’s endlessly this talk of how to create golden parachutes for dictators. You’re dealing with a kind of human being that has told a story about their own essentialness. Going back to your point about Elon Musk and feeling like you’re the main character of global life — particularly you’ve become the American president — you sort of were the main character of global life for a while — that does something to you. Those people don’t give it up easily.” “No. And if you look at the history of — before there was whichever Amendment it was, 20-something Amendment —” “22.” “— that prevents you from running for more than two terms, it was pretty routine for candidates to tease — Woodrow Wilson had a stroke and wanted a third term. Harry Truman had like a 32 percent approval rating and wanted a third term, second full term. Old men are often pretty stubborn. And I think the most interesting thing is that if Harris wins — or maybe comes close, but mostly if she wins — what that will say about the primary system, right? Maybe we should go back to giving a larger role to superdelegates for example.” “I want to end on a part of your book I found really interesting, which is about the physical experience of risk — in gambling, but in other things. You talk about pain tolerance. You talk about how the body feels when you’re behind on a hand and you’re losing your chips. You’ve talked about being on tilt. But I see it in politics too. I mean, there is a physical question that comes into the decisions you make. I see it on this podcast. There are times when a question is physically uncomfortable for me to ask another person. Tell me a bit about how you think about this relationship between the body and the ability to act under pressure to make intuitive decisions in moments of very high stress.” “So human beings have tens of thousands of years of evolutionary pressure which is inclined to respond in a heightened way to moments that are high stakes, that are high-stress moments. If you’ve ever been in a situation where you saw someone’s life in danger or your own life was in danger — you know, I was in LA in January, and there was an armed robbery outside the place where I was trying to get just a cup of coffee. And time kind of slows down a little bit in situations like that. And you don’t realize how stressed out you are until I texted my partner and be like, LOL, almost got shot, ha, ha. And I was kind of like, oh yeah, I was too cool for school. And then an hour later, I’m getting some tacos or something and I almost break down. It’s like, oh my god, it could have gone really, really badly. Public speaking also triggers this for people because objectively it’s a pretty high-stakes thing. If you’re playing a $1 or $2 poker game, and it’s nothing for you, your body will when you’re playing a $100-200 game where it really matters — you will just know. You’ll experience that stress. Even if you suppress it consciously, it will still affect the way that you’re literally kind of ingesting your five senses. So if your heart rate goes up, that has discernible effects. But actually, your body is providing you with more information. You’re taking in more in these kind of short bursts of time. People who can master that zone — and I use the term zone intentionally, because it’s very related to being ‘in the zone’ like Michael Jordan used to talk about, or golfers, or hockey goalies, or whatever else — learning to master that and relish that is a very powerful skill. Because you are experiencing physical stress whether you want to or not.” “How much is that, in your view, in your experience, learnable, and how much of it is a kind of natural physical intelligence some people have and some people don’t?” “I think it’s actually quite learnable. It’s a little bit like if you’ve been on mushrooms before [LAUGHS]: then you kind of learn, oh, this is the part of the brain that is — this is the things that look a little funny when you’re on mushrooms, right? You can kind of maybe tone it up or tone it down a little bit. So it’s very much like that. I mean, it’s terrifying the first time it happens. But when you start to recognize it, and you kind of make a conscious effort to slow down a little bit, and take your time, and try to execute the basics, it’s not as much about trying to be a hero. It’s about trying to execute the basics. Because when everyone’s losing their shit, if you can do your basic ABC blocking and tackling, then you’re ahead of 95 percent of people. And keeping bandwidth free for dealing with emergency situations, that will take you very far.” “It’s funny, because that feels to me like a very important question that is hard to test in politics.” “Yeah.” “People have to make profound decisions under incredibly high stress. And we have simulacrums of it. The debate, in a way, is a simulacrum of that. Very, very high stress. Speeches on teleprompters are not very good analogies for that. But this question of how good is a person at that moment —” “I mean —” “— how do you evaluate that?” “I mean, Trump, after getting shot, kind of performed very well. And I think, again, the Harris moment of leaping right into action to secure the nomination also has to be seen as very good performance under stress. And Biden’s failure under stress — I mean, he went to some kind of spiral of some kind or another, physical, or mental, or whatever else. So those kind of three pivotal moments — the assassination, the debate, and then Harris seizing the nomination in record time — speak to the difference in performance. And that’s why the two of them, Harris and Trump, are still candidates for the presidency, and Biden is not.” “I was just reading Nancy Pelosi’s new book before I was reading yours, because I just had her on the show, and she talks about how, above all, she says, that what a Speaker of the House needs is intuition. They need to be able to act. And she says that the key thing is you have to act fast. Because every moment you don’t act, your options are diminishing. And I ended up thinking, then, when reading your book, of it. Because what she was describing is quite, I think, for her, physical. Like something in her knows how to act and is unafraid to act in those moments. The thing that was crucial about her, I think, in this process, inside the Democratic Party of getting Biden out, is she was willing to act in public to take the pressure of that in ways very few people were. And somebody had to be doing that in public to create space for others to be considering it in private. But you look at her career, and she has this sort of intuitive capability to know when to move. And there’s something in it that I don’t think she can explain how she does it, but it makes her a fascinating leader. People believe that she will act. And she will act because something in her knows when to act, and she’s unafraid.” “Yeah. So is gut instinct overrated or underrated? Well, it depends on how much experience you have, right? Poker players have — because now poker is actually kind of a solved game. There are computer solvers they’re called that spit out this very complicated solution to poker. Hard to execute in practice, but it’s technically speaking a solved game. However, the best poker players can have uncannily good instincts based on reading physical tells, just the kind of vibe someone gives off. And if — you know, I played a lot of Poker and writing this book, more live poker than I have in the past, and you develop a sixth sense. Not all the time. It helps if you’re well rested. But you develop a sixth sense for whether someone has a strong hand or something. Like they’re glowing green or something almost sometimes. And you can test it, because you can say, I know that I’m supposed to fold this hand here. It’s a little bit too weak to call against a bluff. But I just have a sense that he’s bluffing. And lo and behold, you’re right more often than you’d think — more often than you need to be to make that call correct based on the odds that you’re getting from the pot. So if Nancy Pelosi has decades and decades of experience in politics and reading the moves of how the coalition is moving, I mean, that’s something where intuition probably plays a pretty good role. And also the fact that being willing to work with incomplete information — I mean, I don’t know how much longer Biden could have — maybe they could have run out the clock [LAUGHS]: potentially.” “Oh, they 100 percent could of. That day when he sent that letter to congressional Democrats and said, I’m not leaving — this conversation is over, stop trying to overturn the will of the primary voters — I was getting congressional Democrats telling me, this is done. It’s a fait accompli. He’s quelled the rebellion. It looked to me like he had. I was talking to other people. They said, 10 percent shot he’s out. Nancy Pelosi goes on ‘Morning Joe’ two days later and says, we’re really looking forward to him making a decision. And I asked her about it. And I said, what was happening? I mean, he had just sent that letter. And she said, yeah, but that was just a letter.” “Yeah.” “I didn’t accept the letter as anything but a letter. I mean, there are some people who were unhappy with the letter. Let me say it a different — some said that some people were unhappy with the letter. I’ll put it in somebody else’s mouth. Because it was a — I don’t think — it didn’t sound like Joe Biden to me.” “I’m like, oh, you read a bluff.” “So I think Nancy Pelosi might be pretty good at poker.” “Good place to end. Always our final question — what are three books you’d recommend to the audience.” “So one book is pertinent to the discussion that we had a moment ago, which is called ‘The Hour Between Dog and Wolf.’ It’s written by John Coates, who is an academic economist who then became a derivatives trader, I think, for Deutsche Bank in New York and found out that the traders that he studied were really weird. Like these traders would have strange physical and mental stress responses to the market rising or falling. And he was so fascinated by it that he went back and became a neuroscientist and basically did studies of traders. So you test the testosterone of like an options trader or a guy who works at a hedge fund and see how it varies from day to day and correlates with performance. So yeah, so he studies the physical responses of risk-takers, and the book is called ‘The Hour Between Dog and Wolf.’ So that’s one recommendation. Number two, in a totally different direction, ‘The Making of the Atomic Bomb’ by Richard Rhodes. We didn’t talk as much about some of the AI stuff today, but at the end of the book there’s a pretty long, elaborate comparison between the Manhattan Project and the building of these large language models that some people think could be potentially very dangerous. And nuclear weapons are, I think, a pivot point in human history, and this book is kind of the best history of that. The third is called ‘Addiction by Design,’ by Natasha Schüll. And Natasha is an NYU anthropologist who studied Las Vegas as her thesis basically. She did a lot of reporting just about the properties of slot machines, and how addictive they are, and about the kind of casino gambling industry in general. And of course, she draws metaphors between that and the rest of society.” “Nate Silver, thank you very much.” “Thank you, Ezra.” [THEME MUSIC]

The last I looked, your model has Kamala Harris winning the election at around 52 percent — it might be a little different today. But this has been an unusual election. How much stock do you put in your model right now?

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

Want all of The Times? Subscribe .

IMAGES

A lesson before dying thesis
A Lesson Before Dying reserach paper ideas.docx
Heroism in "A Lesson Before Dying" by E. Gaines
A Lesson Before Dying Essay Example
≫ A Lesson Before Dying: Ernest T. Gaines Free Essay Sample on Samploon.com
"A Lesson Before Dying" by Ernest J. Gaines

COMMENTS

Critical Analysis of Ernest J. Gaines's A Lesson Before Dying
The year 1993 was an exceptionally good one for Ernest Gaines. Turning sixty, he married for the first time, won the MacArthur award, and published A Lesson Before Dying. Gaines had invested seven years in the writing of this novel, a book which echoes with familiar themes and characters. Set in Bayonne in 1948, A Lesson Before Dying centers around the education of two men: Grant Wiggins, a ...
A Lesson Before Dying Study Guide
The best study guide to A Lesson Before Dying on the planet, from the creators of SparkNotes. Get the summaries, analysis, and quotes you need.
A Lesson before Dying Analysis
Gaines sets A Lesson Before Dying in and around the fictitious Bayonne, a small town in Louisiana. It is 1948. Some events occur on the plantation, either in the school where Grant Wiggins teaches ...
A Lesson before Dying Critical Essays
In A Lesson Before Dying, Gaines is true to the concerns and qualities manifested in his fiction throughout his career. He has always been a reflective, rather than an "angry," writer, and he ...
A Lesson before Dying Essays and Criticism
A Lesson Before Dying, though it suffers an occasional stylistic lapse, powerfully evokes in its understated tone the "new wants" in the 1940s that created the revolution of the 1960s.
Point of View, Plot, and Setting of A Lesson Before Dying
Critical Essays Point of View, Plot, and Setting of A Lesson Before Dying Although Gaines uses first-person narration (the story is told from Grant's perspective), readers are not limited to Grant's point of view.
A Lesson Before Dying Essays
A Lesson Before Dying literature essays are academic essays for citation. These papers were written primarily by students and provide critical analysis of A Lesson Before Dying by Ernest Gaines.
A Lesson Before Dying Essay Questions
A Lesson Before Dying study guide contains a biography of Ernest J. Gaines, literature essays, quiz questions, major themes, characters, and a full summary and analysis.
A Lesson Before Dying: Summary, Characters, Theme
A Lesson Before Dying: Summary, Characters, Theme, and Personal Opinion Essay. The issue of racism is prevailing in Gaines's novel A Lesson Before Dying, wherein the author casts a shadow on the generalized attitudes toward black people in the American South of the post-WWII period. Wrongly accused of the crime by the all-white jury, the ...
A Lesson Before Dying Essay Topics
Thanks for exploring this SuperSummary Study Guide of "A Lesson Before Dying" by Ernest J. Gaines. A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Heroism and Sacrifice Theme in A Lesson Before Dying
Heroism and Sacrifice Theme Analysis. LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in A Lesson Before Dying, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work. During one of Grant 's visits to Jefferson near the end of the novel, he gives Jefferson his definition of a hero: "A hero is someone who does something for other people.".
A Lesson Before Dying Themes
Need help on themes in Ernest Gaines's A Lesson Before Dying? Check out our thorough thematic analysis. From the creators of SparkNotes.
Essays on A Lesson before Dying
Absolutely FREE essays on A Lesson Before Dying. All examples of topics, summaries were provided by straight-A students. Get an idea for your paper
A Lesson Before Dying
A Lesson Before Dying is Ernest J. Gaines ' eighth novel, published in 1993. It won the National Book Critics Circle Award. The novel is based on the true story of Willie Francis, a young Black American man best known for surviving a failed electrocution in the state of Louisiana in 1946. [1]
A Lesson Before Dying Essay Topics
A Lesson Before Dying Essay Topics. Sharon has an Masters of Science in Mathematics and a Masters in Education. Helping your students understand a novel like 'A Lesson Before Dying' can be tricky ...
A Lesson Before Dying by Ernest J. Gaines
READERS GUIDE The questions, discussion topics, and author biography that follow are designed to enhance your group's reading of Ernest J. Gaines's A Lesson Before Dying. We hope that they will provide you with multiple ways of looking at-and talking about-a novel whose eloquence, thematic richness, and moral resonance have called forth comparisons to the work of Richard Wright, James ...
A Lesson Before Dying Essay Examples
Stuck on your essay? Browse essays about A Lesson Before Dying and find inspiration. Learn by example and become a better writer with Kibin's suite of essay help services.
A Lesson Before Dying
Description Teaching how to write a literary analysis essay citing text evidence for A Lesson Before Dying by Ernest J. Gaines has never been easier! This in-depth text dependent analysis (TDA) writing prompt resource guides students through a step-by-step process of writing an expository essay with textual evidence as support.
Tim Walz's Class Project on the Holocaust Draws New Attention Online
Several years later, when he was studying for his master's degree in experiential education at Minnesota State University, Mankato, Mr. Walz wrote his thesis on Holocaust education, the Jewish ...
Opinion
Nate Silver on How Kamala Harris Changed the Odds The election forecaster discusses 2024 and what politicians can learn from gamblers.

Literary Theory and Criticism

Critical Analysis of Ernest J. Gaines’s A Lesson Before Dying

STRUCTURE AND POINT OF VIEW

PLOT DEVELOPMENT

CHARACTERIZATION

THEMATIC CONCERNS AND LITERARY DEVICES

A FEMINIST READING

Share this:

Related Articles

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Pardon Our Interruption

A Lesson Before Dying

A Lesson Before Dying Questions and Answers

Study Guide for A Lesson Before Dying

Essays for A Lesson Before Dying

Lesson Plan for A Lesson Before Dying

Wikipedia Entries for A Lesson Before Dying

A Lesson Before Dying: Summary, Characters, Theme, and Personal Opinion Essay

Summary of the Plot

A Lesson Before Dying

Essay Topics

Related Titles

Featured Collections

A Lesson Before Dying

Ask LitCharts AI: The answer to your questions

Religion, Cynicism, and Hope

Heroism and Sacrifice

Women and Femininity

Roots, Connections, and Morality

Essays on A Lesson before Dying

Character Analysis Essay

Theme Analysis Essay

Tips on How to Choose the A Lesson Before Dying Essay Topics:

Prompt Examples for "A Lesson Before Dying" Essays

The Transformation of Grant Wiggins

Education and Empowerment

Justice and Redemption

Community and Solidarity

Symbols and Motifs

The Impact of the Execution Date

Women's Roles and Strength

The Power of Love and Compassion

Moral Dilemmas and Choices

Symbolism in "A Lesson before Dying"

The Importance of Religion in a Lesson before Dying

Jefferson's Character in Romulus Linney's a Lesson before Dying

Relevant topics

A Lesson Before Dying - Text Analysis Writing Prompt, Citing Text Based Evidence

Also included in

Description

Questions & Answers

Nate Silver on Kamala Harris’s Chances and the Mistakes of the ‘Indigo Blob’

Nate Silver on How Kamala Harris Changed the Odds

The election forecaster discusses 2024 and what politicians can learn from gamblers.

IMAGES

COMMENTS