Also this issue: It’s (not) a Living -Meredith Broussard Culture Vultures Appreciation or appropriation? Writers explore white people's love for black culture. -Cindy Fuchs Where the Wilde Things Are Revisiting the legacy of Oscar Wilde, two very different authors find surprising common ground. -Juliet Fletcher Children’s Books -Harriette Behringer Book Quicks -A.R, B.H, Justin Bauer, Andrew Ervin, Brian Howard, Maura Johnston, Elisa Ludwig, Sara Marcus and Alex Richmond

March 27-April 2, 2003

cover story

Walter Mosley

Photo By: Anthony Barboza

Interview by Deborah Bolling

In 1992, Walter Mosley gained national attention when former President Bill Clinton identified him as one of his "favorite" authors, citing his affection for Mosley’s hard-edged detective character, Easy Rawlins. The 51-year-old Los Angeles native is still best known for his prolific mystery series, which depicts the seamy side of the California suburbs circa the 1950s, but Mosley’s most recent book, his 17th, is a non-fiction essay titled What Next: A Memoir Toward World Peace (Black Classic Press). What Next takes an analytical look at present-day America, post-9/11, through the author’s own eyes. Mosley says he wrote this book to address the concerns he has about black folks surviving in America, the United States and its war on terrorism and the dubious leadership of President George W. Bush.

City Paper: When you were on Booknotes, it definitely seemed like the host, Brian Lamb, took issue with the book's first line: "Everyone is invited to read this book. But before you begin, you should know that it has been written specifically as an address to African America."

Walter Mosley: I didn't feel like he was taking exception to it. When he said, "It's not for me," I thought he was being ironic -- but maybe he wasn't.

CP: So, what African America are you talking about?

WM: It means African Americans, people here who are descendants of slaves: Caribbean Americans, African Americans, Cubans and South Americans. It means all people of color from the African diaspora and the United States.

CP: So it's not necessarily just for black Americans?

WM: It isn't that I think that people from outside can't read it. I just think black Americans are the wealthiest, most powerful, most influential group of black people in the world, and therefore we have a certain level of responsibility.

CP: You're demanding a sense of inclusion and participation from black folks, saying that it's our civic duty and our obligation as citizens. But there wasn't a lot of discussion about the roles played by [National Security Adviser] Condoleezza Rice and [Secretary of State] Colin Powell. Can you explain why not?

WM: For my arguments, I dismiss both of them. The one thing they do right for me is that they represent how powerful black people in America are because they are in some of the most powerful positions in America -- but only because Bush needs them there. He needs their faces; he needs their color; he needs who they are. They mean things to people around the world, which African Americans would never even have imagined 10 years ago. They represent our power. More so, though, a misuse of our power by Bush, and that's all I really think about them. To get into a deeper argument about either one of them being lackeys for this administration means nothing to me.

CP: It seems like the black community is overwhelmingly against this war in Iraq, yet Secretary Powell is one of the people pushing hardest for it. How do you think that black people are faring knowing that their collective voice isn't being reflected?

WM: I don't think that anybody thinks that Colin Powell speaks for black America. I don't think white America thinks it; I know black America doesn't think it. So the fact that he's a black man is almost inconsequential. Nobody thinks of him like they would think of Martin Luther King or Jesse Jackson or [Al] Sharpton. He's not a man who speaks for black America and everybody knows that.

CP: You write that we need "the subtle compassion of Black America, with its fine-honed attention to the etiquette of liberation." Where are we going to look for it, how do we get it and how long is it going to take?

WM: We have to find it in ourselves -- that's the first step. The second step is that we have to recognize our power, our wealth, our ability. We have our vote, we have our money and we have the influence that we have not only in America, but around the world, culturally. We have to articulate a spine of togetherness. Black people in America used to all have the same problem: Either we were all enslaved, or it was the Ku Klux Klan or it was Jim Crow. But it was one thing. Now, it's a lot of different things. We have a lot of issues, and what we need to do is to identify a spine of unity and the principles that we should vote by -- and we should all vote. And if we do that, we can stop most of the madness that's going on in this country.

CP: You write, "While the American government was selling arms to the world, we were delivering jazz. While U.S. presidents waged war on foreign ideals, African Americans spoke of peace." Is that as much about a lack of economic empowerment as it is about our spirit?

WM: No, I don't think so. It's true, we weren't equal members in America over many centuries, and that formed us into a different kind of culture. So whether or not it came from 400 years of economic abuse or not, I'm not sure. What black people have done is we've talked about unity in the world and we've talked about freedom. Black people really believe in America -- more than most people do.

CP: So how do you think black folks are going to fare mentally and emotionally while we're at war?

WM: That's a hard question. I hope that we stand strong against [the Bush administration]. That's the only thing that I can say. I don't want to be the radically thinking black person who thinks he can speak for all of black America. But what I can say is that I think that many black Americans are in the army, and are planning to do their duty because that's how they see themselves and their citizenship. I disagree with them, but I understand it. I think a lot of people will just sit and worry and be fearful about what the ramifications of this war are. I think many of us, more than other groups, will feel guilty and a great deal of compassion for the innocent hundreds of thousands who will die because of this stupid war. But what will be our psychic response? I don't know.

CP: I thought it was very interesting that you made a distinction between capitalism and democracy, how they're incompatible ideals that cannot live together. Do I understand that correctly?

WM: Capitalism as a foreign ambassador is a nightmare. Capitalism loves dictatorships and fascism and people dominating the people. Capitalists hate democracy and socialism because both of those things want to give minimum wage and medical benefits to people.

CP: You summed it up beautifully when you wrote, "Survival of the fittest is the slogan for capitalism, while justice and fair play are the watchwords of democracy."

WM: This book is a monograph. A monograph is not meant to be answers, really, but to start political discussions. There's certainly not a political movement in this book. But it might be a discussion that could be had before talk of a political movement -- and that would be absolutely wonderful.