I don't see why a book shouldn't be intellectually sound, entertaining, and fun to read. Historians who write academic history, which is unreadable, are basically wasting their time.
Neither of us were experienced hosts on television. But the show seemd to moved in the direction of our characters, the way we approached things. It evolved around us and the things we think are interesting.
There are no dull subjects. There are only dull writers.
You try to find things that are challenging and interesting and hopefully it will be the same to the audience.
I always find the most depressing stuff most interesting.
It's so much more interesting to study a ... damaged world. I find it difficult to learn anything in a place that's too civilized.
I don't plan to write another science book, but I don't plan not to. I do enjoy writing histories, and taking subjects that are generally dull and trying to make them interesting.
You might be the funniest guy in the world, but if you don't have anything to talk about, people are eventually going to gravitate towards the guy that's actually saying something.
I watch things that are fun, or funny, or interesting.
I talked once with Harrison Ford about Wright's houses and how impressive they are.
It's important, at least for me, that while we're entertaining, there's also something substantive to talk about.
In the past, I've never tried to discount or stop what people are saying because on some levels I find it interesting.
The thing about a good podcast is you have to have a good host. If you don't have a compelling host then you have nothing.
Content is king. When you are asking people to read you several times a day, you better have some fine content.
