Interview starts at 9:55. Here’s a snippet:
AS: “What do you want people to get from this book?”
VNA: “Well, in the passage I just read where Hamlet [a conspiracy theorist] makes his big revelation. He makes some very logical points and asks some very good questions. But what’s the response to that? Evasion. Nobody really takes the point [chuckle]. Nobody really gets what he’s getting at. The whole thing is kind of ineffective, really [chuckle].
“One of the things I wanted to do for people, who have tried to talk to friends about some evidence they’ve read, is to give them a story that they can relate to. We’ve all gone through this. We all know what it’s like to bring up this conversation at dinner and have very good our friends treat us very coldly.
“And I wanted to give the conspiracy theorist a place in literature. He is a very important character, as was [Shakespeare’s] Hamlet, for really defining who the modern man is.
“Before Hamlet, people [in literature] weren’t really self-reflective; they didn’t wonder and they didn’t doubt. They thought everybody was born with a certain character and that’s just who you were. But Hamlet wonders about who he is and what he should do.
“I wanted to bring that modern man back. Hamlet was written around the birth of science, the beginnings of empiricism. I want to bring that back. Shakespeare’s Hamlet tests his theory. He tries to get the truth. I want to inspire people to actually read that [NIST] report for themselves, rather than just go on what you heard somebody else say somebody else said on Jon Steward, or something like that. If you want to have an opinion about 9/11, please refrain from forming that opinion until you have actually looked at the report and seen whether or not they actually did an investigation of how the buildings came down.”