5 Questions with Charlie Siskel, director of AMERICAN ANARCHIST
One of the most controversial books ever published, William Powell’s “The Anarchist Cookbook” offers “recipes” for making drugs, bombs and other weapons of guerrilla warfare. After its 1971 publication, Powell gradually faded from the public eye, but his manual lives on. Still in publication, it has sold over 2 million copies and been linked to perpetrators of terrorist attacks, abortion-clinic bombings, and school massacres, including Columbine.
Whatever happened to Powell, and how does he feel about his book’s legacy? Director Charlie Siskel (FINDING VIVIAN MAIER) attempts to find out. In his new doc, AMERICAN ANARCHIST, he confronts Powell —at the time a 66-year-old ex-pat school teacher— in a sometimes contentious series of interviews.
We caught up with Siskel, who is also the nephew of our namesake, Gene Siskel, on the eve of the film’s Chicago premiere.
Lori Hile: You seem drawn to somewhat elusive and enigmatic figures in your films — first, Vivian Maier, now William Powell. How did you land on Powell as the subject for this doc, and was he immediately amenable to an interview?
Charlie Siskel: Both Vivian Maier and Powell are complex people with hidden, secret, or double lives. As a viewer, I like trying to understand the choices and motivations of complex characters, both in fiction and in nonfiction. And as a filmmaker, those are the kind of characters I’m drawn to as subjects, so I essentially communicated that to Bill, who was reluctant at first — he was not interested in participating in a documentary and didn’t think his story was worthy of treatment in a film. I explained what drew me to his story and him as a character, and fortunately, he eventually agreed to participate in the film.
LH: In 2003, shortly after BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE (of which you were a producer) linked “The Anarchist Cookbook” with the Columbine massacre, William Powell disavowed the cookbook. Yet your interview, conducted in 2015, depicts a man who at times still seems defensive about the book. What do you make of his conflicting sentiments?
CS: I do try to show that conflict. That’s what interests me in him and in characters who are complex, whose behavior demonstrates conflict and contradictions. For me, that rings true to life. Bill’s conflicts played out in a very public way, but I think we can all relate to or have heard stories of people who do things when they’re young that they come to regret. I was interested in examining the ways that the book took a toll on him.
I imagine that there were many times throughout the years that he had a crisis of conscience or responsibility about the book. And as you say, part of him wants to defend it. It was written at a time when young people were being drafted to serve in a war they didn’t believe in. And the brutal conduct of police and authorities was also a source of anger for many people — the crackdown on civil liberties. So, I think that Bill had a sense of righteousness about the book in some ways.
He says he has remorse but doesn’t regret writing it. What he means is that it‘s had an influence on his life, certainly for the worse — but in some ways, it has maybe spurred him to do good in the world. He went on to become a special needs teacher and a lifelong educator — and I think that’s a redemptive thing in his life. Who knows if that would have happened without the book?
LH: What surprised you the most in the making of this film?
CS: I found the reactions to the film really surprising, really polarized. Some viewed Bill as a sympathetic character, and some didn’t empathize with him at all and found him to be a monster. I wanted to show all those different sides. Some people think the interview is fair, others think it’s too harsh. I like when people have different reactions to the story, because I think conversation is good. There is an element of journalism in documentary storytelling — getting the facts right— but there’s also an element of art, in which you’re revealing a deeper truth and making people respond and feel something.
LH: William Powell died quietly of a heart attack last July. Do you think Powell was at peace with himself and his past when he passed?
CS: I don’t know how to answer that in any definitive way, and I don’t feel like it’s my place to do that. The book brought Bill and his family a lot of pain and almost a life of self-exile, away from the United States and moving from place to place. He was writing a memoir when I met him, and he showed me a draft. I don’t think he had fully integrated the book into his life and the life story he was writing at the end, but I think in some ways, the film pushed him as far as he had ever pushed himself to confront and deal with the legacy of the book. In that way, I think he was on a journey towards reconciling his choices and the role that the book played in his life.
LH: What’s next for you?
CS: I have a couple of different ideas, and I’m always looking for the next thing, but I haven’t committed to anything yet.
AMERICAN ANARCHIST will screen at the Gene Siskel Film Center from Friday, Aril 14 through Thursday, April 20.
For tickets and more, click here.
