This writer tells you why men are so lost (and why there's so much obsession with money)

Caledonian Road (Libros del Asteroide) is one of the most entertaining novels of the year, and one that also throws a few truths in your face. If Galdós were alive, he would have written something like this: a journalistic and realistic portrait of the society we live in, with all its miseries, its baseness, and its few virtues.

In this case, the author is British journalist and novelist Andrew O'Hagan (Glasgow, 1968). With a reporter's pulse, he has immersed himself in the most abject landscapes of current affairs in the United Kingdom—which could be that of Madrid on a not much smaller scale—with its aristocrats and those "good people" rubbing shoulders with magnates who come from corrupt regimes and are filthy rich; he has delved into the world of hackers and those eager for easy money from cryptocurrencies ; he has delved into the world of influencers and digital emptiness; he has delved into that world where the Glennfidich cup in the private club coexists with the social housing neighborhood with an ever-widening inequality gap ; He has gotten involved in the obscenities of money... And he has also gotten involved in the moral and conscience crisis of white men (who thought they were liberals) and who don't know what to do with almost anything that is happening (much less with women).

Caledonian Road is one of the novels of the year , and O'Hagan has come to Madrid to tell us about it. Despite the bleak outlook, he remains optimistic about the future: we are facing a regime change, and things will get better. He already sees the light at the end of the tunnel .

QUESTION. I read that it took you about ten years to build this whole story. Ten years ago, it was 2015 or 2016, a moment—I don't know if you perceive it that way—when everything changed: President Trump, Brexit, the Metoo movement, waves of reaction…

ANSWER. That was precisely the starting point for writing the book. It was like trying to dance on a stage where the scenery was constantly changing; everything was in motion. I started the play in 2013, and by 2016, a semi-fascist regime had already been established in Washington. In the United Kingdom, a Conservative government was promoting austerity and anti-immigration policies. Then Brexit came , then the pandemic. All of this was happening while I was researching the book. It was crazy, and the material was slipping through my fingers, but then I decided to capture the bigger picture. And that enriched the play. The book had to be revised and reworked, but ultimately, that evolution strengthened the story. It's a narrative of how we've lived these years, a chronicle of our time.

Q. How did we get here?

A: I had no idea that these energies, this darkness, would be unleashed over the decades, and that they would be unleashed by technology. That's why this book, although reminiscent of a Victorian novel —with its cast of characters, politics, poverty, and inequality—what really makes it palpable is technology: social media, the internet. We must ask ourselves the question, and the book does: technology should have brought us closer together, made our communities more connected. Why, then, has it further exacerbated social differences? Why is the gap between rich and poor now deeper than ever?

This is a question for both novelists and journalists, I think. This is a journalistic novel, and I put all my reporting skills to work every day to create this book.

A person without journalistic instinct couldn't have written it. Because you need to be willing to do what you do as a journalist: put on your shoes, your jacket, and go out into the world. Novelists sometimes live only in their heads. Yes, there's a lot of my mind in this book, but the real action was outside. A lot of things were happening there.

"Technology should have brought us closer together, so why has it further exacerbated social differences?"

Q. You mentioned the pandemic. This book is set in 2021, when masks were still required and there were restrictions. In Spain, the government talked a lot—I don't know if it was the same in the UK—about how after the pandemic we would be better, that everything would improve, that we would be more united, more supportive, and more community-minded. And what we're seeing, and this book speaks to this, is an even wider gap between everyone. A wider gap in inequality, between the poor and the rich, and between people themselves.

A. I think COVID showed us all, in every one of our societies, the true depth of inequality . Quite simply, the poorer you are, the more vulnerable you become. People with fewer resources died in greater numbers. Furthermore, many of them were already overweight, highlighting the crisis in food, nutrition, and the healthcare system. This happened in Spain, France, Germany, Italy, the United States—everywhere. We needed a clear demonstration, and the pandemic gave it to us.

"Do you know what Trump stands for and why he's president? He's a poor person's idea of ​​what a rich person looks like."

While researching the book, I asked a British minister which social group was dying in the greatest numbers. He was very specific: Bangladeshi women in the Midlands, specifically in Leicester. I decided to go to Leicester . I took the train and visited a factory, a sweatshop, where Bangladeshi women were making clothes. They were dying in large numbers because they were sharing materials without protection, the machines were in poor condition, and they were passing tools around. So they were getting COVID and dying, often young, healthy women. I thought: these women earn four pounds an hour, about six euros. If this isn't about poverty, racism, or the way we live now, then I don't know what else it could be.

So, to answer your question, I think COVID was like a neon light. It showed us, it illuminated society. And I think that will be the biggest lesson of those years of confinement. What we do with that information, however, so far has been to use it to justify expelling migrants. So, after COVID, did we become more compassionate? Did we say, “Look, we came together, we got through this together, our children learned a lesson in solidarity, the healthcare system worked, and we developed a vaccine quickly globally”? Nobody says that. What we say is that migrants should be kept out. And if we look at what happened internationally, we have Donald Trump calling the pandemic “the Chinese flu.” We hate China. We hate foreigners. That’s what made the world even more divided.

Q. And everyone wants to be obscenely rich.

A. There's an obsession. And let me tell you, that's why Trump is president. Do you know what Trump represents? He's a poor person's idea of ​​what a rich person looks like. If I asked you how you imagine a rich person in your fantasy, you'd probably think of someone successful, good at business, who makes a lot of money. You'd say someone with good taste, culture, who has a nice, well-decorated house, who eats well, who is kind, who donates a lot of money, and supports good causes. You'd say, "That's a rich person." That would be the rich person I would be if I were rich, okay? But poor people say, "Trump." He has orange face. He has gold faucets in his bathtub. He's a fanatic. He travels on a private jet. He's a monster. He eats terribly. He has no culture, except for the culture of making money. But that's what a rich person is for poor people. That's where we are now.

And who can describe that? A novelist can. It's very difficult for a journalist to write an editorial every day saying, "There's a vulgar swine running America who's selling young people a false idea of ​​virtue and goodness." That's complicated. Whereas a novelist can say, "Let me show you the connections that lead poor people into this trap." The context of the novel is comical, it's entertainment, but the message is moral.

Q: And what has happened to men in this context? I feel like men are a bit lost in this society we have today. Campbell Flynn's character represents this liberal white man in his 50s who doesn't know what to do with almost anything.

A: Yes, he's a typical man of my generation. He thought he was on the right side of history. He's a liberal, he makes the right decisions. He's not racist, he's not misogynistic, so he congratulates himself. But in reality, he's a liberal in crisis. Yes, because, as Milo [the young student and the other main character] tells him, he's much more racist than he thinks. The institutions he supports are misogynistic. He's in trouble because he's going through a crisis of conscience. He's lived a life in which he saw himself as Tony Blair : "I'm a good guy. Look at me, I'm a good guy. I'm a liberal white man." And they respond: "That's fucking hard to be because you're not doing enough to fix the world. You're destroying it. You liberals living in seven million pound houses in London, Paris, or Madrid should ask yourself the question: how good are you really?"

Since the origins of the novel, since the beginning of landfills, literature has asked this question: What is goodness ? What is a good life? We continue to ask that question. With different tools, in different moral contexts, but we continue to ask: What is a good life? That question is the central question for Campbell Flynn.

Part of the problem, as you say, for him, for me, and for all of us, is masculinity . Society was built on a false perspective of male power. Women, of course, have known this for a long time. It's you who have really led the charge to improve the world. I grew up surrounded by strong women. My father was useless, absent, toxic. He couldn't stop being a prejudice machine. He didn't like gay people, was quite racist, and had no interest in women's rights. But here's the kicker: he had four sons, and we're all feminists. We learned by watching my mother. I used to say to her, "Why are you making dinner for my father? Let him make it for you; you've been working all day." She'd say, "Well, I have to make dinner, then I'll clean up." And I'd say, "No, you don't have to. Not in my world." I have a wife, I have a daughter, and I wouldn't expect them to clean up after me. It's a small example, but society as a whole is in crisis because this model of male domination is completely broken.

Q. And isn't that toxic masculinity returning among young people with YouTubers?

A. Yes, we have toxic masculinity circulating on the internet. People talk about Andrew Tate . And yes, there are young men online, watching porn, who have a completely misguided idea of ​​what sex is. They think it's some kind of rape fantasy and that women love being abused. No man I know believes that women enjoy being hurt during sex. And I know plenty of men. I'm the youngest of four brothers, and I'm surrounded by men who want to improve, although we still have a long way to go. I don't know a single real man who believes that women enjoy being choked during sex. Not one. On the internet, you can hear messages that say, "Women like pain. Women like two men fucking them at the same time." That's all made up. There are young men who are stupid and follow that example, but I don't think that will last for long because it's tremendously offensive. And, besides, it's completely counterproductive. Women are becoming stronger, and a generation of women is emerging who won't speak to or approach men like that. Yes, there are still problems with male attitudes, but they're no longer applauded. No woman thinks it's okay. There's enough already with all this.

"A generation of women is emerging who will not speak to or approach men who are toxic."

Q. In the novel you again show that gap between young and middle-aged men.

A: Yes, Milo's character says: You think you've answered all the big questions, but you're all tied to institutions that are wrong. The banks: bad. The universities: bad. The media: bad. Big business: bad. So what Milo says is: "I'm going to send gremlins and computer Trojans into your companies and I'm going to blow them up." He's a modern ethical hacker, but he, too, will discover his own problems in his generation.

Generation Z will face major challenges. Every generation thinks it's the one that's going to solve human nature. My generation thought it would, too, but we didn't. So here's the story: Someone my age, an idealist from my generation, is confronted by an idealist from a younger generation. I truly believe a younger generation will say, "Don't use that language with women." The way my father spoke to my mother is disappearing. On an everyday level, yes, there will still be radicals, but if that kind of toxic male behavior returns, I think there would be a war with women because women won't allow themselves to be spoken to like that anymore. Society has changed.

Q. But we have a few radicals on the rise… and they use very sexist, very loud language. And they also use a lot of racist messages.

A. I think the far right is a kind of last gasp… You know when an animal is dying and gives one last lash with its tail? I think that's precisely what's happening: the tail wagging as it dies. The right will grow over the next few years, driven by Brexit in my country or migration elsewhere. You'll see it in Spain, where you'll hear people saying, "Kick these people out of our community; they're using our resources, they're robbing society." But I think, within a generation—I hope—Milo's generation will start to take over. That's what usually happens.

Believe it or not, I'm young enough to be surprised by how many people of my generation already run the world. The newspaper editors are my age. The prime minister is my age. I remember when all those people were just students, idealists, utopians. But there will come a time when Generation Z will be running the government, the newspapers, the media. They will be in charge of something big. That's how the world works. And I think, by then, the old world will look like it did in Victorian times, when it was thought okay for women not to be able to vote. It's only been 150 years since then. Just 100 years ago, slavery still existed. I think every generation has to go through the darkness to get to the light. And right now, we're in that dark place because we don't quite know how to end the old regime.

P. And there will be artificial intelligence.

A: And the question will be: Will the artificial intelligence be programmed with the right values? Will a robot refuse to perform a misogynistic task? That's a good question. Will they be programmed to say no? If I say, "Robot, discriminate against that woman. Bring me the tea, but don't take it to her," will the artificial intelligence respond, "That's not possible"? It's a novel question.

"You know when an animal is dying and gives one last thump with its tail? I think that's what the far right is."

Q. There are also criticisms of the left in the novel. You say they, too, have had a role to play in all of this.

A: Yes, I think so. It would be a mistake to blame the right alone for the crisis we're in, whether in terms of gender or economics. The left has also contributed to making life absurd, with examples like political correctness . I support the values ​​of enlightenment thinking, but I think canceling people for disagreeing with them isn't enlightenment. I quite enjoy people disagreeing with me. And I also enjoy being insulted. I can be insulted, I can take it. You can say to me, "You're an idiot, I've been listening to you for half an hour and you're full of nonsense." And I wouldn't think, "You can't say that, how dare you?" Being insulted is part of human life. Satire, ridicule... I like being ridiculed. I like comedy because it's often based on pointing out some uncomfortable truth about something. I don't like living in a world where people constantly say, "I feel insulted."

Q. The offense continues.

A. Everyone gets offended. Young people can't stand it when you say something to them. I don't know, I don't think I can be insulted anymore. We're losing our sense of humor . Young people are very solemn. Everything is like an intense feeling. Okay, fine, but can we laugh a little? Jokes about what we think, what we said, how we look, what we did to our hair today. Before, friends would come to the bar and say, "What did you do to your hair?" Now that would almost be a serious offense.

Q: I want to ask you about Julian Assange… You worked with him and were later censored by him, a man considered precisely a champion of freedom of expression.

A. Julian didn't want me to write the truth about the time we spent together. I liked Julian and admired his cause, I admired his work with WikiLeaks and was happy to collaborate with him. And I also asked him to remember who I am. I'm a writer and a journalist. Don't invite me to your house and then tell me not to be myself. I had a tape recorder on the whole time and was taking notes. I didn't pretend to be someone else. I didn't promise him I'd never write anything down. So what we're really talking about is control. You asked earlier about the mistakes of the left as well as those of the right. The left has also tried to control discourse, just like the right. If you want to see control in action, go to an editorial meeting at a left-wing newspaper. Do you think everyone is open, that everyone has their opinion and expresses it in the newspaper's content? No. WikiLeaks, I'm afraid, was tyrannical with its control. He tried to control me, and I told him: you're not going to control me, I'm going to write what I know to be true because I've documented it with my own notes and recordings. You either believe in freedom of expression or you don't.

"It's a dark period for my generation, but the next one is full of idealism and resistance to manipulation."

Q. The left was enthusiastic about Assange.

A. He's a guy who fights for freedom of expression , but at the same time he tried to control my freedom. That's a contradiction. And you're right, because I was there at that time too, and I thought: these left-wing people are very, very... in agreement with Assange, but at the same time he acts in a way that is not liberal. He's neither left-wing nor liberal, at least not to me. And I don't think those people who defended him were really on the left. I want to protect the true values ​​of freedom of expression. I will never censor someone trying to express their truth, whatever their truth may be. He tried to censor it. He silenced me.

Q. We've talked about money, society, men, and institutions. Are you afraid of democracy?

A. No, I'm actually quite optimistic about it. We're moving towards the light and coming out of a dark period. It's a dark period for my generation, but the one coming after is full of idealism, renewed energy, and resilience in the face of technological manipulation: Facebook, marketing, algorithms , Android, artificial intelligence. They have a healthy skepticism, so I have a lot of faith in the next generation. I think they're going to transform democracy into something new, something more open. That's why I liked WikiLeaks . It was a sign of the future. You can't have a government that lies to its people about military matters when those people pay taxes to support it. That's no longer possible because we're going to publish that shit. That's the good side of the internet. I don't want surveillance everywhere, but I do want evidence. And I think the next generation is a little more responsible than ours when it comes to proving things, especially about the planet. They're not going to pretend they don't know. My generation pretended they didn't know that using hairspray was polluting, even though we did. We were going through a time of pretense. The next generation has stopped pretending.