Colin Thubron draft

The speaker discusses how his parents never talked about money, which made him feel that money was not important. He pursued writing and travel, starting with a job in publishing. He traveled on a shoestring budget and wrote about his experiences. He reflects on the importance of experiencing different cultures and the impact of politics on ordinary people. He sees the rise of autocrats and the hardening of borders in the West as concerning. He believes that travel can help foster understanding and human connection. He also discusses vulnerability and the importance of being open to new experiences. He got married later in life, partly due to the demands of his career. Overall, he sees travel and writing as a way to explore and understand the world. I'm always grateful for the fact that my parents never really talked about money. They were reasonably well off, they certainly weren't rich, my father was an army officer, senior army officer, they had a nice house, but I never felt that they were short of money, although they think they were actually from time to time, or at least thinking about it, but they never spoke about it in front of me. So I grew up feeling that money was of no particular account, which is a great privilege. I think other parents in the same financial position as my parents, in other words, sort of modestly well off, might have made them much more aware that money was important, but I grew up thinking it wasn't really an issue. I had to think about money myself thereafter, particularly at the beginning of my career, when I wasn't making much money, and having to do some sort of what you might call hack work to get by, but it didn't often trouble me. I wanted to be close to books, that was my primary object. I wanted to be a writer from a very young age. I imagine myself being a poet, and I wrote reams of Lollabaird poetry, and I thought that I would become a writer by some magical process. I was just 19, didn't go to university, and I went into publishing, because I thought if I can't be a writer, at least I'll be close to books and to writing. It's very ill paid, but it's somehow scrabbled by. So you were 19 years old and living in London, but money wasn't... I mean, you were earning money. I imagine that it was easier then to live comfortably on not too much money. Not very comfortably. I remember walking around London, because I wouldn't afford a cab, and doing sort of minimal things. If I went to the theatre, it would be cheap seats and so on, and I didn't eat very well at all, and I was living in accommodation on Yarrow Street, where there was an enormous number of cheap hotels. I think we paid 15 shillings for the week, or something like that. Perhaps I got that wrong, but so it was frugal living, but it was exciting. Yes, and you lost your sister at around that age, I believe. And that propelled you into your career as a travel writer indirectly, because the holiday that you went on with your parents ended up with you going to Damascus for the first time. Is that true? That's right, yes. They took this very ambitious tour, as it was then, in a caravan, a motorised caravan, and we went down to Egypt via Turkey, Lebanon, Syria. Seems incredible now, Jordan, the things you can't do. And on the way, we went through Damascus. I didn't even know what a mosque was. I didn't know what Islam was, and I got fascinated by the inland cities of Syria, Aleppo, and Damascus in particular. They seemed sort of hidden. They were magic. I didn't understand them. You'd walk down those little alleys in the old quarter of Damascus, and look through a window, and there'd be a marble and basalt-paved courtyard, and a fountain dripping somewhere, and some lemon trees, and it was ancient architecture, really. And I felt this is an extraordinary world. I felt very romantic about it. And then I knew that this was a natural place to return to, and eventually I could. Did you know you wanted to write specifically about travel then, or was that something that happened more gradually? It's interesting how that sort of thing develops. I first wanted to, yes, write travel, because that excited me, but also novels, and that came much later. So first it was Damascus, when I eventually got out of publishing. And that was, as all one's first books are, a tremendous bit of delight, really. I love the city. I went back only two or three years ago. I managed to get back eventually, and found it very much the same architecturally. The people quite different, changed, the hospitality gone, but that lovely city itself was still virtually intact. And it was once the book was published that you jumped tracks entirely, career-wise? It was before, really. I'd made the commitment. I went to live in Damascus with an Arab family on the street called Straight, where St Paul was supposedly cured of blindness. I paid a pittance. It's terribly cheap. You could live in Syria in those days for almost nothing. And it was a high time for me. It was marvellous. And so you very quickly earned a living from your passion, which is a great privilege. Yes. Only intermittent. My next book was on the Lebanon, which was published the year after Damascus and then Jerusalem. While I was publishing it with that intensity, those first three books on the Middle East, it was okay financially. But later I wanted to start writing a novel, and I was doing other journeys in between on a shoestring which crossed Asia in a way that I can't now by car, through Afghanistan, Iran, Kashmir and so on. So I was quite ambitiously travelling just for the delight of it. But the novel was harder. You get paid less. It's a novel that nobody's read, I think, called The God in the Mountain. I'm not particularly proud of it. And that was a very sparse time in my thirties. It's hard to tell, looking back, what my parents exactly thought of this activity. My mother, I think, was fine with it. Her ancestor, her maiden name was Dryden, and she was of the family of John Dryden, the first poet laureate. She, exulted in this, thought I had the same talents, which are entirely different. John Dryden, actually, in my case, he had a very acute critical mind, above all, which I don't have. But she, I think, was not worried financially for me, or particularly about the future at all. She was thus delighted that there was quite an initial success with my books, the Damascus book in particular. When I look back at it, I was very lucky. It was very well-reviewed and prominently reviewed. My father, he was a military man. He wasn't literally. And I sometimes wonder what he privately thought. He adored my mother and went along with her feelings, I'm sure. But he must have worried a bit and wondered when I was going to settle down and be responsible and get married and so on. But he didn't say so. He never made me feel that I was, in some way, on the wrong track. And you mentioned your ability to, when you were traveling, to travel on a shoestring, which is something that you do to this day, presumably. Yes. It's always cheaper traveling, at least traveling abroad where I travel, than it is living an ordinary life in London of no particular luxury. And so you can last a very long time in a Syrian city, or an Indian one for that matter, or an Iranian one, or a village. You can exist on nothing almost forever. What do you take with you as currency when you do travel? I've always taken dollar bills. With travelers' checks, you might not be able to cash. Yeah. Because I'm in some difficult and obscure places often. But dollar bills are sort of common currency, even now, I think. Does it make you more vulnerable, traveling with cash? Yes, it does. And I've always kept the cash in different parts of my rucksack or my body. So, if one lot gets pinched, you'll have something to fall back on. I'm rather good at putting rilled-up dollar bills in very forbidding-looking medicine bottles, emptying the medicine out, so that it's the last thing anybody's going to want to steal. But I've been lucky that way. I mean, I could easily have fallen foul of a bad mug, you can say. But you never have. I never have. I've never been bad enough. You can live in what might seem like almost deprivation to other people when you're traveling. I mean, it really is the bare basics. Can you tell me what you take, the clothes you're standing up in? Yes, virtually. In a way, the excitement around you makes you not worry about those things much. Before I go, I lay out everything I'm going to need. And I say, do I really want this? Do I really want that? The answer is almost always no. Maybe one change of clothes and, I guess, a sort of layering, so that you're able to put on three pullovers if you have to. And that's about it. I don't take books. They weigh too much. I take language manuals, because I'm usually trying to improve Russian or Mandarin, whatever. I'm trying to talk where I am. And that's really it. There's a point in The Amour River, your latest book, which is extraordinary, in which you travel along the little known to lots of people Amour River, the thousand-mile river between Russia and China. And at a point at the beginning of the book, your life is almost saved by the fact that you're wearing a very cheap pair, you said, of trainers. Well, my feet were mud-clogged in the skivop, and it was so about ill-fitting my trainer that my foot slipped quite easily out of it. The horse went off on its own. Otherwise, I would have been in worse trouble than I was. Although you did break your ankle. Yes, and a couple of ribs, because the horse fell several times and rolled. They weren't used to this marshland. They were Mongolian horses, used to the hard step. But in this area of Mongolia, which is the source land of The Amour River, there'd been heavy monsoons, and it was very treacherous, and they panicked. And you were advised before you set off that seasonally and conditionally it wasn't optimal. Right. We were almost forbidden to go by the rangers at the mouth of this reserve. It's a 5,000 mile forbidden area by the Russian border, 5,000 square miles. And the rangers said we absolve ourselves of any responsibility for us, got us to sign documents which made them blameless, and went in with a couple of horsemen and a guide. I had got permission in the Mongolian capital, but the rangers just thought they would be going to be in trouble if anything happened to us, which in a way it nearly did, and the ground, the land was awful. It was a deep swamp. And of course there was, I imagine, always a part of you that the more awful it is, the better the story. Yes, there's always that. It's as if there are two of you going, there's the one who's having an awful time, and the one who's sitting on his shoulder that's going to write about it. And just as you're being mugged or falling into a swamp and having a lousy moment, the one who's writing about it is jumping up and down with excitement saying I'm going to write about it, this is a good copy. So it's true. It makes you travel in a very different way. It is as if you're a little bit dissociated from yourself in a way. You're watching yourself going, you're seeing what's going to happen, and it makes you do things that you'd never normally do for pleasure, or for interest even. You do it because you're going to write about it, and because it's perhaps part of the personality of the country that you're in, of the country that you're in. And so to refuse to go, say, to that dicey village, or this difficult terrain, seems to be a sort of betrayal of your subject rather. You've got to do it in order to give what seems momentarily to be a balanced picture of where you are. We live in such a commercialised world here in the West. How do you mentally make the leap from a man who lives in Holland Park when he's here, to a man who lives free of financial concerns when he's there? Really, I never think about it very much. What you have to do is make the leap to understanding what the people you're travelling amongst are feeling and suffering. To realise what their lives are like, even as they're being hospitable to you probably, putting you up for the night, giving you a meal. You have to realise what their condition is. They don't know about you, of course. How could they? And they probably think that if you're travelling poorly, that you're not rich at all. And by their standards I am. And so they would be surprised if they were to come back to my flat in Holland Park and find it to be rather comfortable. And so that transition is something more of accommodating yourself to a world that is both financial and financial needs are so different from my own. And does one conclude that money matters or not at all? Money matters. It does matter. It's no good saying that to a Pakistani villager that it doesn't matter. They know it matters quite profoundly. It may matter less than we think in terms of our happiness. I think we all know people who are rich and miserable and people who are poor and happy. But for people in the sort of streets that so many of those I travel amongst have to endure, then money matters. We'll move on if it's okay, on that note, to politics. Because you have written extensively about Russia and China. Is politics something that you try to avoid when you're writing? I tend to treat politics as something that's kind of more contextual to people's lives than to be actually writing specifically myself about politics. It's how politics affect ordinary people that is reflected in their conversation or their way of thinking. I haven't felt comfortable writing about politics. For one thing it's very changeable and in a short while it's very outdated. What is less likely to be outdated is the lives of ordinary people and it's those that I tend to concentrate on because you have access to them and you can converse with them to a point and find out about their lives a little in a way that is not directly affected by politics but inevitably, particularly in places like China and even Russia, is surrounded by some sort of political world that's unfamiliar to me but is probably more impingent on them than, say, politics in England. Then that's the value, I think, of what I do if it has value. It's more that not specifically politics. With the Amur River, of course, you get Chinese and Russians meeting one another on the ground and this is the only place where it happens. Beijing and Moscow may talk to one another in one way but actual Russians and actual Chinese when they encounter one another is a different story and that, of course, is intensely interesting. You get these two wildly different cultures meeting, supposedly, and on the whole not getting on too well. It's a relationship, certainly in the book, of mutual distrust. Yes, particularly on the Russian side. The Russians feel, of course, threatened by the Chinese, not in any immediate way. Most of them don't feel that Chinese come marching over and subsume them tomorrow but there's a general feeling that they can't be trusted and that they have, as the Russians say, closed hearts. In business, certainly, the Chinese have proved themselves more canid than the Russians and the Russians find them hard-headed. There's not much communication linguistically and very little intermarriage, really. There's some but not much. How do you view the future relationship between these two superpowers? I suppose it's impossible to predict, isn't it? It's impossible to predict. I can only say that if they have a unifying motive it's antagonism to the West. Are you politically engaged as a person? Is politics something that enters your everyday world? I'm ashamed to say not domestic politics. It's always foreign affairs that have interested me and that have seemed more important as indeed they do now with the Ukrainian war. All this seems huge and more important than anything that's happening here. However depressed our economy may be, in whatever states the NHS is and so on, all these things come up against a background of disasters in many other parts of the world which far outstrip anything that we're suffering. I read you saying quite recently that you're increasingly despairing of the West. I hate Brexit. I hate what's happened with the general hardening of borders which seems to be happening and the rise of autocrats in the West. The way things are going is not appealing to me. The larger the country the more provincial it is as far as I can see. And in the case of the states, the United States, it's extraordinary cultural blindness or numbness in the American government that assumes certain things can be expedited simply by looking at a map. It might be old-fashioned British colonialism that you can do this and do that. If they were more culturally aware I do genuinely think that even a short immersion say in the Arab world, let alone the Afghan one, would make people think much more circumspectly about invading countries like this and imagining that you can alter them fundamentally by the imposition of some government that's not going to last anyway. You see of course in the people you meet the human consequence of political action. Yes. What would your reply be to someone that might say that travel writing is a sort of neo-colonial act? I can sympathise at the point of view and I can see it and it certainly arisen quite forcibly in academia largely. But I think the idea that as a single white male from a privileged country that you are necessarily in some way imposing yourself because of the inequality, if you like, the imbalance between our country and say a poor Asian or African country that that imbalance must prevent you from travelling at all seems badly mistaken. If you regard all human contact as being a matter of a power balance then any human relationship descends into paranoia. You can't do it. In our world in particular it's important that people travel and understand one another. I'm not talking about the package holiday, let alone a business trip. I'm certainly not about the internet which is the illusion of travel sometimes. I'm talking about serious encounters with another culture or country which may take months. It's not a big monstrous greenhouse gas explosion. Of course you have to take an aeroplane probably to your initial destination but after that you may be a very long time as I was on the Amur River hitchhiking, taking the odd boat, going by horse for a long time. I think in the end if we are to say that human understanding is of real importance then nobody should be inhibited from that sort of serious travel. I think lots of people because of the internet, you're right, a lot of people think they can journey when actually they're going nowhere. Yes, you're not exposed, you're not vulnerable, you don't get the real smell and feel of a place by looking at a screen. How important is being vulnerable to really experiencing life do you think? I think it is important if you go on guarding yourself against hurt then there's no openness of mind or heart. That sounds rather highfalutin but I always travel alone. I think if you travel with somebody from your own culture you create a kind of bubble of westernness together and validate your own ideas and values together in that sort of safety bubble. If you're alone you're the one that is at risk if you like or feel that you're more vulnerable and you probably are as a single person but you are much more likely to come to an understanding of the people around you because you don't have that safety and that sort of mental safety of constantly referring things back to a so-called normality which is yourself and your western world. So this sort of travel does make you vulnerable and it should. You got married at 71 I believe which is pretty late in life. Was that because I've heard you describe previously thinking of marriage as a sort of cul-de-sac, the end of adventure? These things are complicated you know and seem to depend so much on who you happen to have met, who you've fallen in love with and I think for a long time I felt I couldn't afford to marry, have children. It's a difficult profession and I certainly wouldn't have welcomed it in my 20s and even perhaps in my early 30s because I would feel that it takes a long time to write a book and particularly a travel book and to be not earning for say three years in the course of writing a travel book might be disastrous. So that was an element. I wouldn't say it was the primary reason for my not marrying. That was not so sort of conscious. I think I felt that it was who I met up to a point. I fell very much in love with a woman that did not want to marry me or venture to anybody else and that took a long time to get over. I think I felt very secure in myself. I never felt that I needed anybody in the way that so many people do. There wasn't that active need to fill a loneliness, the need for companionship. So there were quite a lot of potentially negative things that I might say that I did not feel which might have impelled or do impel people into marriage. And I never felt very conventional about it. I realised I was different from almost everyone else or my friends or getting married. But it didn't particularly impinge on me. It became part of one's identity almost that you're a single travel writer. And the travel writer and the singleness seem to be quite a natural combination. So it didn't worry me that I was different from so many of my friends. And then what changed? What changed was really it was meeting my wife really. Although we were only married 1971, we'd been an item as I think the Americans say for over 25 years. We'd been together. She was working in the States. She's a professor of English literature. And so there's a lot of commuting going on. And that's fundamentally what changed. And when you go away on your trips, you don't even take a mobile phone. There are very sort of romantic moments in the book where you snatch a brief conversation. Yes. I don't like the idea of the mobile being there and likely to ring at any moment. It would always be turned off if I had one. And I've never travelled with any sort of contact with the world back in London. And that's a definite decision. The feeling that you've cut yourself loose entirely, that you're no longer tethered. And the more you love somebody, the more that would be likely to impinge on your journey. And even this last journey, I borrowed a mobile phone once or twice to reassure my wife that I was still alive. But really at about three week intervals, perhaps, I was able to talk to her. And it was a bit rough on her, but she understands that need. And she says, think about the journey. Don't think about me. Think about the journey. So I have full backing there. I don't think, correct me if I'm wrong, you've ever had a strict faith as such? I did in my teens. I was quite strongly and rather tiresomely Christian. But not thereafter, I think. By the time I was 22, I would say I was agnostic. And this was not necessarily a response to my sister's death, who was killed when I was 19. It was, although that certainly had an influence, it was more, I suppose, I regarded it at least due in retrospect as a sort of intellectual awakening. And the journey to the Middle East didn't help restore Christianity at all. It was a recognisable world in some ways, but it wasn't one that was likely to restore faith that had been lost several years before. And is it something that tugs at your sleeve ever? I know you embarked on a, for your book, A Mountain in Tibet, you embarked on a pilgrimage around the holy mountain, Mount, how do I pronounce it? Kailash. Kailash. When you contemplate the spiritual, which you must do inevitably in your work and in the people you meet, how do you work it in your mind? I'm always interested in other people's faith. I think that has been left to me. It always has engaged me as a travel writer. If I find somebody is a fervent, say, orthodox Christian, as in some parts of Syria, or Muslim or Hindu, for myself it doesn't change my own attitudes to religion or to faith. I think it's part of a fascination. It's hard to say why it doesn't and why it wouldn't move me a bit. I'm attracted to, or was certainly attracted to mysticism quite strongly at one time, but again it wasn't very personal. It was more of a preference among the great religions for those that are less dogmatic. I suppose almost anybody might say this. But the sort of Sunday Christianity that I was brought up in now I feel quite alien from. KM. As a travel writer, inevitably you contemplate the horizon, I suppose. You're looking at the edge of the world or the world beyond, somehow. Are you ever struck by spiritual moments, not religious moments necessarily, but spiritual moments? The boring answer is no, I think not. Not really. Moments that give a great latitude for thinking, places of great beauty. But it's hard to say they're exactly spiritual. Travelling the mountain, again I selected a mountain, Mount Kailash in Tibet, that is multi-denominational if you like. It's Hindu and Buddhist and Jain. It seemed to me just to be an object in the landscape that was beautiful and remarkable and a natural object for the pilgrimage of faithful people. And it's never been climbed. It's one of the few mountains in the world that's never been climbed because it's too sacred. And so people walk around it at a high altitude, up to 19,000 feet. So it's arduous. But I think I wanted, after my mother's death, to put some space between that and the next part of my life. As if there was something wrong about just carrying on in the ordinary way. I wanted to mark it in myself. It's an instinct that's difficult to precisely rationalize. But it was that desire to break away completely from anything I'd previously done and from any contact with my back to home. So that it was a period of isolation. But not religious inspiration particularly? Not really. One thing in general about my sort of traveling is you meet so many people of so many different faiths, whether it's Islamic or in this instance Hindu and Buddhist and various denominations of Christian in the Middle East. And it certainly doesn't help you select one above the other. You simply find that people are maybe fervent in their belief that one is right and the others are wrong. And that of course only makes you feel that it's all relative. Does it make you, because you are getting older, does it make you feel more that how one is in this life? Or how one's, you know, that this life is the only life and that one needs to live it to the full? Well, you were 80 when you were... Did you have your 80th birthday on your Hamur trip? Just after. I've just come back. I mean it is a remarkable age to be doing what you're doing. But I'm aware that you don't necessarily think that. No, it didn't particularly occur to me. I think younger people look at old people like me thinking how extraordinary and that you must in a way be very much changed and maybe contemplating your end and so on. You're not. I mean I'm not. I'm always thinking about the next thing, what's ahead and the next project. And I was certainly like that up to the age of 80. That where am I going next was certainly a question. I had some health problems as people do in their early ages which have given me pause when I saw immortality. But I've not felt that that it was in any particular big deal going along the Amur River. It turned out to be tougher than I thought. I didn't know horses were going to throw me into the mud all the time. Otherwise I might have thought twice. But it seemed a perfectly feasible journey to me. Physically quite gruelling it turned out. Yes and politically a bit dicey. I didn't know what would happen on the Chinese side of the river and the Russian is heavily guarded. So I wasn't sure how I was going to fare. But that was my main concern rather than a physical hardship. And as I think you've said before if the spirit is willing then the body follows. Yes it drags the body along with it. Yes I think that's true. You tend to minimise your pain if you're having it. Because of the fascination of where you are and where you're going and what you're going to do. The brain is very funny with aches and pains. As somebody said pain is an opinion. And it can change very much depending on where you are, what you're doing. You can minimise it really by paying attention to other things. Which of course in travel you do. You're so set on getting somewhere or so interested by where you are that the pain I think probably if it monitored your brain they could find that the pain receptors if they are all muted or changed. I remember being told with my very young son who had a little operation when he was younger, very young, that pain is learnt. So a child who hasn't learnt to associate a feeling with pain will experience pain fleetingly because their mind hasn't learnt to dwell on it. How interesting. It's fascinating. I think it's true that certainly certain kinds of patient in hospital, their pain level or how they experience pain can be changed by all sorts of things including a doctor's manner. There have been numerous tests on this sort of thing which have proven that pain is variable depending on all sorts of outside influences. It appears to come inside your body. And pain of course might be seen as your friend sending signals to you that something's wrong and that something can go on long after or appears to go on long after the physical signs of the pain have vanished. I did a very early basic course in philosophy when I was at university. I did English at university but I did a little side course in philosophy and was learning about Buddhism at a very basic level and about how the Buddhists watch their own pain. So they will externalise the pain and watch it as if it were an object, objectify it somehow. And that makes it more manageable if you take it out of the subjective. That's interesting. I know, I've certainly read that people who have had amputated hands, arms, legs can go on feeling pain in the leg that is no longer there or the hand that is no longer there. So it's as if the brain has not coped with the fact that this has now stopped. And there was an interesting experiment in which a man, a doctor, simply created a box with two holes in it and a patient put his two arms through. One had no hand and the other had a hand. And this was very healing apparently that he was able by looking away to imagine that his hand was back there. And with that imagination he was able to reconcile himself if you like to the pain. Or the pain disappeared. Actually it wasn't there anymore. It was as if the brain was saying something. It was saying that it's all okay, the hand's back. A very strange experiment. So do you think the brain can be persuaded to decide not to be impeded by old age? Yes, I think it can. Up to a point. I'm afraid it's not to say that pain is not real. One begins to think it's all in the mind. Of course it's not. But it can help a great deal. Just your attitude honestly. If you don't, if you succumb to all the aches and pains that the flesh is there to and think any of them and don't have anything else much to consume your day, then I think the pain would be much worse. And your attitude is very much to keep going? Yes. My mother used to say you must always have a project. She died at the age of 97 and she still had projects in her mind even if she couldn't quite fulfill them. And may I ask what your next project is? Well it's a novel. Actually there are two. The novel is just a glimmer in my head which is how novels begin. But which I'm hoping to be able to get to fairly soon. The other thing is I think that one has to think about what happens after his death. What people have to cope with in the way of what you've accumulated. In my case an awful lot of correspondence and manuscripts and I've even got my parents' letters to one another from India in the 1930s. And what is my poor wife going to do with all this stuff after you're gone? It's going to be an unhappy time and people get stuck with all this having to make decisions. And I'd rather sort of economize my archive, shrivel it down, throw out an awful lot of junk and try to find somewhere that would be interested in receiving the archive. Such as it would be... I mean there are some obvious letters. I've got letters from Paddy Lee Furman, Bruce Chaplin and people which obviously of some interest. They're not major letters. But other things I don't know how to deal with yet. I would like to be able to package up at least my manuscripts and some relevant correspondence on those so that they've found a home before I've dropped off my perch. Do you take photographs when you're travelling? Yes I do and that's another thing. There are an awful lot of those. And I took an awful lot of cine films at one time which I should dedicate to those. They're all ridiculous.