British Journalist Michael Smith, 'Downing Street Memo'

DATE July 6, 2005 ACCOUNT NUMBER N/A
TIME 12:00 Noon-1:00 PM AUDIENCE N/A
NETWORK NPR
PROGRAM Fresh Air

Interview: Michael Smith discusses receiving the leaked so-called
Downing Street Memo
TERRY GROSS, host:

This is FRESH AIR. I'm Terry Gross.

The use of anonymous sources is certainly in the news this week between the
case of Judith Miller and Matt Cooper and the publication of Bob Woodward's
book about Deep Throat. We'll talk with Woodward tomorrow. Right now, we're
going to hear the story of how an anonymous source leaked the so-called
Downing Street Memo to my guest, Michael Smith. He is a reporter for the
Sunday Times of London. That now famous memo was one of several that were
leaked to Smith. Six memos were leaked to him in September 2004 when he was
working for The Daily Telegraph.

Those memos covered the period of March to April 2002, leading up to the
summit between Prime Minister Blair and President Bush in Crawford, Texas. A
second batch of memos was leaked to Smith at the Sunday Times in April of this
year. Those included the Downing Street Memo, which was dated July 23rd,
2002. These top-secret memos from 2002 outline warnings that British Cabinet
members gave to Prime Minister Tony Blair about the risks of joining with the
US in an invasion of Iraq. The memos also express skepticism about the Bush
administration's claims about the threat posed by Iraq.

What seems to you to be the most important piece of information in these
documents?

Mr. MICHAEL SMITH (Journalist): There are three things that I think are
important, yes. The first thing is that Mr. Blair and Mr. Bush agreed back in
April 2002--not July 2002, as everyone keeps thinking--but April 2002, to take
military action to achieve regime change; that British officials then decided
that the only way--since regime change is illegal under international law,
under British interpretation of international law, the only way they could
make it legal was to go to the UN, get an ultimatum to Saddam Hussein on UN
weapons inspections, and then declare him in violation of that because he
wasn't doing enough, which is exactly what happened. They decided they'd do
that to justify a military action. So we didn't go to the UN to avert war.
We went to the UN to get an excuse for war.

That's the two things that, up front, I think politically are important, but
perhaps devastatingly important--and much, much more so because it has real,
real implications and real consequences--was all of the warnings they got
about how bad Iraq could be after a war, about the lack of preparation, about
how they weren't preparing enough for postwar Iraq, how they weren't working
out what they would do and how--a total mess it would be if they didn't work
it out properly.

GROSS: You know, in that July 23rd memo, the one known as the Downing Street
Memo, there's some discussion of how the case for war is thin. The memo says,
`It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even
if the timing was not yet decided, but the case was thin. Saddam was not
threatening his neighbors and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya,
North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to
allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal
justification for the use of force.'

It seemed that England was very concerned about the lack of a legal
justification for war, and it seems also that they were concerned that their
standard for a legal justification was going to be higher than that of the
Bush administration. Is that your reading of it?

Mr. SMITH: I don't think there's any doubt about that. The difference
between law--in a sense, the law was the same, but in many, many ways, it was
different. We needed the UN Security Council to say that Saddam was in breach
of his obligations under the cease-fire resolution, Resolution 687, which is
the resolution which constrains him on WMD and says he has to get rid of his
WMD. We needed the UN Security Council to decide that he was in breach of it.
The president himself--under American interpretation of law, the president
himself could decide that for himself. So he didn't actually need to go to
the UN at all, and it was Colin Powell and Blair between them--Colin Powell on
the basis that if you were going to build a coalition, you've got to get as
many people on board as possible.

So that was the whole point of going--as far as Mr. Bush was concerned, he
understood that he needed Blair on side. He needed as many people on side as
possible. Blair was the key player in terms of getting people on side,
because he was a big cou--Britain was a small country but with a big profile
that would stand alongside America and, therefore, give it more than just
America doing it. So Bush understood that. He understood Mr. Blair also had
political difficulties at home, that there was a sizeable minority here
against the war. So he was happy to go to the UN, but he didn't need to.

GROSS: The way I read the memos, it sounds like there was a lot of concern in
the Blair administration that there was no legal justification for war, that
one of the ways of getting legal justification would be to create this
ultimatum for Saddam Hussein, an ultimatum that Saddam Hussein would fail to
agree to, and that could be the opportunity for, you know, a legal
justification for war.

Mr. SMITH: When the prime minister discussed Iraq with President Bush at
Crawford in April, he said that the UK would support military action to bring
about regime change. And that was a crucial phrase here in Britain, because,
of course, certainly under British interpretation of international law, regime
change was illegal. So our prime minister had agreed back in April 2002 that
he would back military action to achieve something which was illegal under
British law. More than that, of course, both he and President Bush continued
right through 2002 to say that no decision had been made on whether to go to
war or not. And clearly, the decision was made to go to war in April 2002.

And still, I think, in some ways, the focus hasn't been enough on that in
America and a realization that if the prime minister is discussing Iraq with
President Bush and he agrees to back military action to achieve regime change,
by the very nature of things, the person persuading him to agree to it is
President Bush.

GROSS: The document also elaborates on what in a previous document was
described as wrong-footing Saddam Hussein. Would you read that part for us?

Mr. SMITH: Yeah, sure. It says, `The ministers are invited to agree to
engage the US on the need to set military plans within a realistic political
strategy, which includes identifying the succession to Saddam Hussein and
creating the conditions necessary to justify military action, which might
include an ultimatum for the return of UN weapons inspectors to Iraq.' So in
other words, the whole business of going to the UN wasn't to avert war, as
both President Bush and Prime Minister Blair said only last month when they
were in Washington together, but it was in order deliberately to wrong-foot,
as Christopher Meyer had said, Saddam into giving them an excuse to going to
war. They hoped that he would refuse or, in some way, they could say he was
refusing to work with the weapons inspectors and, therefore, he was in breach
of UN Security Council resolutions and, therefore, they had a reason to go to
war. And, indeed, that's, of course, what actually happened.

GROSS: Is there any evidence that Blair tried to talk Bush out of going to
war?

Mr. SMITH: Now I think this is probably--over here, this was perhaps the
most damning aspect of the whole thing; that here, we had our prime minister
in that whole month--you know, there were a plethora of memos, some of them,
you know, from very high-ranking people, and certainly one of them from Jack
Straw, his foreign secretary, his equivalent of Colin Powell at the time, or
Condi Rice now. And he is being told by all these people, `Don't do this.' I
mean, they're not saying it in those terms, but they're saying, `If you do
this, it's going to be disaster, and what's the point? You know, we know that
Iraq has no history of democracy. Once we leave, as eventually we will leave,
hopefully, we've no way of controlling what happens in Iraq, other than by
coming back in again.' You know, `Coup will follow coup' is one of--the
phrase used in these earlier documents. `Coup will follow coup. Eventually,
a Sunni strongman will come to power. He will be able to get WMD of his own
accord. There will be nothing we can do about it. What's the whole point of
this? Where are we going with this?'

And yet come April--you know, a few days later, a few days after that Jack
Straw memo, there is Tony Blair in Crawford agreeing with President Bush, yes,
he will back military action to achieve regime change.

GROSS: What kind of analysis has there been in the British press about why
Prime Minister Blair agreed to go to war with the Bush administration against
the advice of his own Cabinet? Now the advice might have changed, but the
advice through July 23rd of 2002--in the memos that you were leaked, the
advice is pretty much all negative about the war.

Mr. SMITH: It is. There was a piece by Robin Cook, who was Jack Straw's
predecessor as foreign secretary, in The Guardian the other day, and it said
that when he was in Blair's Cabinet, when he was foreign secretary, Cook was
forever coming up against this thing where Mr. Blair was so determined, for
political reasons over here, to make it clear that he could be as much the
president's friend as anyone from the right wing in Britain. Because, of
course, he was vulnerable as ostensibly part of the left-wing Labor Party, and
leader of the left-wing Labor Party, to accusations from the Conservatives,
the right wing, the equivalent of the Republicans over here, that they had a
better relationship with the president. And from the very outset, one of the
things that Mr. Blair set out to do was to show that, actually, he had a
better relationship with Mr. Bush. And Robin Cook puts it down to that, to
this idea that he had to be on side with the president as much as possible.

GROSS: My guest is Michael Smith of the Sunday Times of London. He's the
reporter to whom the Downing Street Memo was leaked. We'll talk more after a
break. This is FRESH AIR.

(Soundbite of music)

GROSS: My guest is Michael Smith, a reporter for the Sunday Times of London.
He's the reporter to whom the Downing Street Memo was leaked, as well as
several other top-secret British memos from 2002 in the lead-up to the
invasion of Iraq.

What can you tell us about how these memos were first leaked to you?

Mr. SMITH: I was phoned by someone, a friend, who--you know,
he's--obviously, he's well-positioned, but I wouldn't say any more than that.
He'd come up with a few stories before, you know, gossip, tittle-tattle, which
led to stories. None of them had been major stories. I mean, The Washington
Post, of all papers, describe him as Britain's Deep Throat, but, you know, I
certainly wouldn't have regarded him as that. And he said to me--we met in a
bar. He was clearly nervous. It was fairly empty, actually, and we had to
sit in a secluded part, and he said, `Was anyone interested still in all this
stuff?' and I said, `Well, here'--we'd just had the Butler inquiry, our
equivalent of the presidential commission into intelligence, and, you know,
frankly, we were pretty much talked out on this whole subject, so I sort of
thought, well, it's got to be good, but I didn't say that. I said, `Well, you
know, it depends what it is.'

And he showed me the letter from Jack Straw and that, of course, was--you
know, it was very, very damning. It had much more of, you know, the whole
business of the intelligence being thin, that it was all likely to end in
disaster. You know, there were major problems with the legality of the whole
thing. And, you know, I said I thought it was quite good and could make a
story, and he said, `Well, I've got five others here.' And that's where it
all led to. And now I did a big piece on that in the Telegraph, and then I
got some more stuff from another source, and I'm not going to talk about that
at all, but, I mean, you know, it's been stunning stuff.

GROSS: Did you have any reservations about the authenticity of the memos when
they were first leaked to you and did you do anything to verify them?

Mr. SMITH: I didn't have any real problems with the authenticity of the memos
because of the people they were coming from, to be absolutely honest with you.
But the first lot, we--well, we were very, very careful with them because we
were extremely nervous that we might get taken to court to provide them back
to them. They matched up with things I'd been told earlier, but, of course,
this is on paper. This is not, you know, some source in Whitehall telling you
this. This is actually the paperwork. They were definitely MOD documents.
We didn't regard them as potential fakes. So going to the government would
have been difficult.

But once we'd published them, you know, there was absolutely no doubt at all
they were genuine. I mean, they were virtually confirmed straight away by Mr.
Blair, who had to respond, you know.

GROSS: So you didn't go to the government beforehand and say, `We're about to
go to press with this'?

Mr. SMITH: No. I didn't go to the government...

GROSS: `Verify the documents.'

Mr. SMITH: ...beforehand and say, `I've got these documents. Can you tell me
they're genuine or not?'--because, frankly, if I'd done that, I would have
lost the documents and probably the source.

GROSS: How would you have lost the documents?

Mr. SMITH: Well, because I was under very strict orders who I could talk to
about the documents from the lawyers from the very start, what I could do with
the documents, how I had to handle the documents. And those orders turned out
to be very prescient orders because we were jumped on straight away by a
special branch after we published. I was actually investigated for a breach
of the Official Secrets Act in that I had passed on intelligence to
other--information that was--I knew to be classified secret to other people.
And that was actually--I'd passed them on to two political parties who needed
to see the documents in order to comment on them.

GROSS: What was the outcome of that investigation?

Mr. SMITH: The outcome of that investigation is as far as we know, it's still
ongoing, but it's died a death because it's obviously very difficult to argue
that a journalist given documents, which are probably in the public
interest--the contents of those documents are known to the public. It's very
difficult to prosecute a journalist for breach of the Official Secrets Act on
that basis. I had passed them to two politicians, so in doing so, that,
again, was in the public interest.

Now one of those political parties passed the text on to someone else who was
working for them, an academic, and that academic put them on a Web site. And
that's the only reason we actually see those documents now, frankly, because
that's--the documents, as passed around on the Internet, they are actually
typed up text of what was in those original documents. They're not the
original documents. The original photocopies I was given I passed back to my
source, having photocopied them myself. And the photocopies that I'd made
from those original photocopies we shredded the night we went to press
because...

GROSS: Why? Why?

Mr. SMITH: We were very, very concerned that something in those photocopies,
maybe just a little crease from the original document that's reproduced on the
photocopy or some way in which the document is manipulated to identify it as
a specific copy of a document--and with top secret and secret documents in
Britain, we know that they use different methods of doing it. A misspelling
in--a document would be typed up on a computer, one copy printed out for such
and such; then a little change made somewhere and not on a copy printed out
for someone else. So that if you've got a dozen documents, a dozen copies of
one document, each of those will be different so that it can be traced back to
one person or another. That system...

GROSS: Oh, I see. I see.

Mr. SMITH: ...sounds complex and...

GROSS: You did this to protect the source, not because you thought the...

Mr. SMITH: Well, yeah. No, it's purely to protect the source...

GROSS: Right.

Mr. SMITH: ...not for any other reason. And I know that some right-wing Web
sites have tried to extract from this somehow that we made the documents up in
the first place, which is ludicrous because, frankly, if you look at the
Downing Street Memo, it's got a dozen recipients, any one of whom would surely
have come forward now and said--and as it be--Mr. Blair--the easiest way out
for Mr. Blair would be to say, `This is a fake. It's not true.' Of course,
he'd say it straight away.

GROSS: Do you know if the Blair administration is trying to investigate who
the sources were for the memos that were leaked to you?

Mr. SMITH: Yeah. And you'd expect that. They're obliged to. I mean, I
think if you put yourselves in their position, I entirely understand why they
want to find out who it is that's leaked a secret document to a journalist.
Equally, it's my position that I'm determined that they don't find out or at
least they don't find out via me.

GROSS: We're recording this interview on Tuesday, July 5th. I'm wondering
what your reaction has been to the Judith Miller and Matt Cooper case?
They've both been threatened with prison for not revealing their sources about
who leaked the fact that Valerie Plame was a CIA agent. Now Matt Cooper's
magazine, Time, has decided to comply with the investigation. It's still
unclear whether Cooper and/or Miller will be sentenced to jail--it's unclear,
as we record this on Tuesday, July 5th. What has your impression been
watching this case? I figure you must be following it, having been the
recipient of leaks yourself.

Mr. SMITH: Yeah. I think Time's attitude over this has been disgraceful. Of
course, Time isn't above the law, but Time has a responsibility to protect its
sources. And, frankly, were I a source anywhere, the last place I'd go to now
would be Time magazine.

GROSS: Do you think there's any chance that your source had an agenda and was
leaking memos selectively and was only leaking memos that put the war in a bad
light or that put the Bush administration in a bad light, and that there are
other memos that would change the big picture if we'd seen them and if we were
able to see the Downing Street Memos in context with those memos?

Mr. SMITH: Well, the out-of-context--first of all, half a dozen memos--these
were the key memos over the period between March the 8th and April 2nd. We
got the key memos. I know from my own knowledge of what the attitude was
within the MOD, within the foreign office and within the intelligence services
over here to some of the things that were going on in the States and, all
these things do is put them on paper and show that they were actually genuine.
And, frankly, no, I don't think they're out of context.

But does the source have an agenda? Probably, but it's nothing to do with
America. It's nothing to do with putting the administration in America in a
bad light. The agenda here--and all sources have an agenda of some sort. If
someone comes to you to get something published, they have a reason for it.
Now, you know, the reason might be malevolent, and in that case you might look
at it with a bit of concern and say, `Right. You know, clearly malevolent.
What's the reasoning behind it. Is the stuff you're getting genuine?' Well,
the stuff is genuine.

GROSS: Michael Smith, thank you very much for talking with us.

Mr. SMITH: That's all right. Thank you very much.

GROSS: Michael Smith is a reporter for the Sunday Times of London. I'm Terry
Gross, and this is FRESH AIR.

(Announcements)

GROSS: Coming up, we meet actress Lauren Ambrose. She plays Claire Fisher on
HBO's "Six Feet Under." And Ken Tucker reviews "Blame the Vain," Dwight
Yoakam's 18th album.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Interview: Lauren Ambrose discusses her role on "Six Feet Under"
TERRY GROSS, host:

This is FRESH AIR. I'm Terry Gross.

The popular and critically acclaimed HBO series "Six Feet Under" is in its
final season, and most of the characters appear to be at turning points in
their lives. My guest is one of the show's stars, Lauren Ambrose. She also
starred in the independent films "Swimming" and "Psycho Beach Party" and
appeared in the movie "Can't Hardly Wait."

On "Six Feet Under," Ambrose plays Claire Fisher, the daughter in a family
that runs a funeral home. The series began with the death of the father. The
two sons now run the business. When the show started, Claire was in high
school. Now she's taking time off from art school. Earlier this season she
moved in with her emotionally and mentally unstable boyfriend, Billy, and
wanted to use her trust fund to travel. But her mother insisted the money was
for college and cut her off. It's one of many things Claire's been fighting
about with her mother. Here's a scene from earlier this season.

(Excerpt from "Six Feet Under")

Ms. LAUREN AMBROSE: (As Claire Fisher) Don't you think it's significant that
whenever I make a decision for myself, you hate me?

Ms. FRANCES CONROY: (As Ruth Fisher Sibley): I don't hate you. I hate your
choices.

Ms. AMBROSE: (As Claire Fisher) Look at me. I am an adult, and my choices
are none of your business. You had no right to call that lawyer. Dad loved
me. He wanted me to be happy. That's why he left me the money.

Ms. CONROY: (As Ruth Fisher Sibley) He did not intend to finance you while
you play house with a crazy person.

Ms. AMBROSE: (As Claire Fisher) Look who's talking.

Ms. CONROY: (As Ruth Fisher Sibley) He wanted you to be educated, to learn,
to go to college!

Ms. AMBROSE: (As Claire Fisher) I am learning from life. You don't even know
what college is. You never went. That was your choice. And now you hate
yourself for it, so you're going to take it out on me?

Ms. CONROY: (As Ruth Fisher Sibley) That is not true.

Ms. AMBROSE: (As Claire Fisher) Then stop being such a controlling bitch and
give me my money.

Ms. CONROY: (As Ruth Fisher Sibley) Don't. I will hit you back this time.

Ms. AMBROSE: (As Claire Fisher) Billy and I are moving to Spain, and you
can't stop us.

Ms. CONROY: (As Ruth Fisher Sibley) Get out of my house!

(Soundbite of footsteps)

GROSS: Claire's mother Ruth is played by Frances Conroy. The character of
Claire is so well written and performed, it's easy to feel like you know her.
I asked Lauren Ambrose about the reaction she gets to her character.

Ms. AMBROSE: It's funny, everybody says, `That's me. That's me. That was me
in high school. It's me now.' And sometimes I wonder if it's because Claire
gets to say so many witty quips from the pen of Alan Ball and other very
clever people that we all wish we could be as clever as Claire some days.

GROSS: You're a few years older than Claire.

Ms. AMBROSE: Right.

GROSS: Is that helpful in the sense that, like, can you draw--like, when she
was in high school, were you able to draw on high school experiences, and did
you have enough distance on them so that you could interpret them?

Ms. AMBROSE: Yeah, I think I had just the right amount of distance without
forgetting. I was able to make it--try to make it very personal over the
years. You're actually catching me on the day--my first day of freedom here.
This is--I just finished shooting "Forever" yesterday.

GROSS: Oh, you must be in a really emotional spot then.

Ms. AMBROSE: I am. I am. It's very strange to be even talking about it, but
it's wild. It's a wild thing. We were out--jeez, I don't know if I'm allowed
to say this, but we were out shooting in the Mojave Desert yesterday, and it
was very beautiful and very hot. And I was alone, and it was--everyone's done
already, and I had the very last moment to myself of our show.

GROSS: At what point did you know what the ending was going to be for your
character and the others? Did you know when they gave you the script, or did
you know before that?

Ms. AMBROSE: Well, we didn't know what was going to happen in the final
episode until Alan wrote it. We kind of knew vaguely a trajectory of the
season. And we knew that this would be the final season. From the very
beginning--Alan called us at the beginning--called us each and said, `This is
it. We're going to be working towards the end.' And he sounded inspired and
excited to make this final season. And he sounded like he had a lot of ideas.
So it was just kind of exciting to see what was--how they were going to figure
out a way to bring an end to this.

GROSS: Well, this year your character's--in this, the final season, your
character is a little physically different. She's lost weight.

Ms. AMBROSE: She...

GROSS: And I wasn't sure whether your character lost we--whether Claire lost
weight or whether Lauren Ambrose--you, yourself, had lost weight and, thus,
Claire was--had lost weight, too.

Ms. AMBROSE: Well, yeah, I got a little skinnier because I was living in
England. I was living in London. I did this Sam Shepard play at the National
Theatre over the hiatus. And I was just working every night, you know,
working on stage, and so I shed some pounds. And, also, the food was so
horrendous in London that I was eating so healthily. I was sort of preparing
all meals for myself and eating a lot of salads instead of fried things and
pastas and things that were available to me, yeah. And then, actually, I
was--the play that I did in--it overlapped with "Six Feet Under" with the very
beginning. The producers were kind enough to make room for me to do both
projects. So I was--because the play was running a repertory with another
show, I was flying back and forth in between my little breaks from the play,
coming to Los Angeles, doing a few days of "Six Feet Under" and going back and
doing the play. So that will make you skinny.

GROSS: Well, was weight an issue for you as an actress?

Ms. AMBROSE: Not really.

GROSS: Good.

Ms. AMBROSE: Once when I was--I did this movie "Can't Hardly Wait" when I was
19 years old. And I remember the director came in--and there were two
directors. The woman came in and said, `Oh, you know'--we were rehearsing the
job, and she said, `Oh, you know, I hate to do this. I hate to do this. I
don't want to do this, and--but I--we want to get you a trainer.' And I
thought, `Oh, God, an acting trainer, a coach? I'm going to get fired. I
know I'm going to get fired.' And she said, `Oh, no, no, no. We just--we
want you to try to lose some weight.' The thing is I've always been pretty
skinny. I just--I have a very youthful face, even then. I mean, I think back
when I was 19, I was a skinny gal, but I think I just have a round face.
Hopefully that will provide for less wrinkles or something as I get older.

GROSS: How did you get the part of Claire in "Six Feet Under"?

Ms. AMBROSE: I auditioned for it. I auditioned for Alan Ball. I think I
auditioned for it when I was visiting Los Angles and--in his office. And then
we went to--when you do a television show, you--there's this harrowing process
of testing for the television show, where they essentially pit actors against
each other and have them sort of compete. So they'll pair, you know, one Nate
with one Claire in scenes from the pilot. And then you do it for the suits at
HBO or whatever the big studio is--or the network, rather. You do it for the
studio, then you do it for the network. So I went through that process with
couple of other actresses.

And I remember the pilot is where I learned of my father's death, and I've
just smoked crystal meth--Claire has just smoked crystal meth, which she'd
never done before. And they--and I remember Alan Ball coming out to the
hallway and saying, `OK, OK, they want to see the effects of the drug more.
So just act really nervous and just show more effects of the drug.' And I
thought, `OK, OK.' I went back to my piece of paper that I had all my notes
written from my research about what the effects of crystal meth were, which I
never experienced personally, and went back in there and tried to be more
drug-addled.

GROSS: Do you have a favorite scene or plot development with your character
Claire?

Ms. AMBROSE: All of the scenes with Franny Conroy and that arc over the
years, the mother-daughter arc, has been an interesting one to me and, really,
all of the scenes in the kitchen. Those have always been my favorite scenes,
where it's the four of us sitting in the kitchen. As our characters have gone
off on all of these tangents and there's been a lot of plates spinning in the
air and all these extra story lines, going back into that kitchen and sipping
coffee or having breakfast and talking to the four members--the other three
members of the family, those have always been the touchstone of, `Oh, yeah,
this is who this character is,' and always sort of special days to shoot those
scenes.

And one of my favorite memories of the show was a day that--I think it was the
very first season, and Kathy Bates was directing. And I had a scene with
Peter Krause, who plays my brother, Nate. And we were just sitting on the
washing machine. It was blocked, so we were sitting on the washing machines,
and I was going through something very dramatic with a boy and just very upset
about it, and he was comforting me. And it was just a lovely scene between a
brother and sister. And we shot the master of it. And then--people in
television, they always go in and shoot coverage--shoot a master, and then you
shoot the coverage, and then you shoot the coverage closer, and maybe you do a
different shot or a move or something else, and then they have all of these
choices to choose from.

And I said, `Oh, and Kathy'--and so we shot the master, and it was really
lovely, and it was just this two-shot of us sitting on the washing machine.
And Kathy said, `That was great. Let's move in and get coverage.' And I
said, `Oh, do we have to?' And she said, `No.' And then I got really
nervous, because then there was nothing to hide behind. But it ended up that
was--that ended up being in the show, and it was just exactly what we did.

GROSS: Well, why don't we actually hear the scene that you've just described?

(Soundbite of "Six Feet Under")

Mr. PETER KRAUSE: (As Nate Fisher) Is he your boyfriend?

Ms. AMBROSE: (As Claire Fisher) No. Just he needs me. It's the first time
in my life I felt important, like someone needed me, you know, like, not just
like some annoying extra person just lumped in with everyone else. No one's
ever needed me.

Mr. KRAUSE: (As Nate Fisher) I need you.

Ms. AMBROSE: (As Claire Fisher) Right. I felt this really intense
connection. Now it's gone, and I want it back. I want him back. Is there
something wrong with me? Is there something about me that makes me deserve
something like this?

Mr. KRAUSE: (As Nate Fisher) Deserve what?

Ms. AMBROSE: (As Claire Fisher) To be really, really close to someone and
then just having them disappear, like, I mean, nothing.

Mr. KRAUSE: (As Nate Fisher) Claire, OK, he just went to visit his father for
a day. I think you're talking about Dad. Look, we never talk about him, and
that's OK. That's what you want. But at some point you're going to have to
deal with how you feel.

Ms. AMBROSE: (As Claire Fisher) Oh, God! Can't I just get upset without
having to focus on what's really making me upset?

Mr. KRAUSE: (As Nate Fisher) Well, it worked for me for 34 years.

GROSS: Lauren Ambrose and Peter Krause in a scene from the first season of
"Six Feet Under." My guest, Lauren Ambrose, will be back after a break. This
is FRESH AIR.

(Soundbite of music)

GROSS: My guest is Lauren Ambrose. She plays Claire Fisher in the HBO series
"Six Feet Under."

This show is about a family that has a funeral parlor, a funeral chapel
business. And you've said that you went to a surprising number of funerals
when you were growing up with your grandmother. Why did you have so many to
go to?

Ms. AMBROSE: Well, I just spent a lot of time with my grandmother, who is now
96 years old and living in Connecticut. And so she was just an older lady,
and in spending a lot of time with her, one of her things she had to do often
was go to wakes and funerals, and I would tag along with her. And she was
also very good friends with the people who owned the funeral home in the town.
And her husband, my grandmother's, my grandfather, owned a tavern in the town.
It was sort of a meeting place, and so everybody knew her, and so she knew
everybody. And she had a lot of funerals to go to when I was growing up, so I
would always tag along with her. And then she, of course, suggested that I
become a funeral director because I would always have work, which...

GROSS: (Laughs) Close.

Ms. AMBROSE: ...I conveniently melded into this current job.

GROSS: It's interesting that she would take you to so many funerals 'cause
there are a lot of parents who really try not to take their children to
funerals, except for, you know, closest friends and members of family, so as
not to trouble their children about death and not expose them to the agony
that...

Ms. AMBROSE: Right.

GROSS: ...family and friends feel when they lose a loved one.

Ms. AMBROSE: Yeah. Well, I remember in going to all of these funerals--I
still think of it--she just always has this incredible ease in that
environment and would sort of lead me through the process that had to be done:
going up and kneeling and saying goodbye to, most of the time, people I never
knew, or if it was some distant relative, she would explain to me who this
person was. But she just always made it very easy and not something to freak
out about. And I suppose that has found its way into my performance as
Claire, and growing up with that is a little bit of a backdrop. I never
really thought of it as something unique.

GROSS: You've also sung at funerals. Was that, like...

Ms. AMBROSE: Right.

GROSS: ...with choirs or on your own?

Ms. AMBROSE: Yeah. Well, when I was in high school, I--and I grew up in New
Haven, Connecticut, and I grew up singing and studying singing and singing
with different choruses at Yale and different choruses in New Haven and around
there and then found my way into making money by singing weddings and funerals
and, you know, in churches.

GROSS: A lot of teen-age girls and young women have kind of high voices that
are, like, placed in their throat or even higher, maybe in their nose, and a
very kind of tentative way of speaking. And in the roles I've seen you in,
you have this really kind of full, assertive voice. And I guess I'm wondering
if you think that taking singing lessons helped you literally find your voice.

Ms. AMBROSE: Absolutely. I think studying the vocal mechanism and breathing
has contributed to that. And I think it's maybe the most important tool an
actor has and then studying the link later, freeing your natural voice,
working on that kind of voice work, too, as I get tentative and start saying
`um' when you start talking about my free voice...

(Soundbite of laughter)

Ms. AMBROSE: ...I start retreating.

GROSS: But that's another interesting thing about Claire--is that, you know,
she has a full, assertive voice. She is rebellious. She has--she's not
just...

Ms. AMBROSE: Although I've gotten into these habits of speaking down into the
back of my throat and sort of lazily because that's how a teen-ager from
California talks. So...

GROSS: What do you mean? Give me a sense of how that sounds.

Ms. AMBROSE: Well, just, like, you know, lazy and in the back of the throat
and talking a lot like this and stuff. So I've been doing that for five
years, and so I'm trying to shake that out of my system in hopes of someday
playing another character.

GROSS: You have very red hair, and I'm wondering if that's been a useful
thing as an actress or something that's stood in the way of certain roles
because it's such a defining part of you physically.

Ms. AMBROSE: That "Psycho Beach Party," they wanted me to bleach my hair
blonde. I said, `Absolutely not.'

GROSS: Why not?

Ms. AMBROSE: Well, first of all, I thought that they were missing the boat of
having this sort of--the red-headed comedian that's sort of an iconic thing,
and I thought that would help the film. And, plus, I, of course, made a vow
to my mother that I would never dye my hair. So...

GROSS: Why did you make that vow?

Ms. AMBROSE: Well, because she had hair similar to mine, and she, I guess,
throughout the '80s bleached and dyed and permed and did all kinds of things
to it, and it was never quite the same. And she's tried to get it back since
then, but it just was never quite the same. So I'll be a wig girl. I'll cut
it, but I don't know that I'll dye it.

GROSS: Well, I want to thank you very much for talking with us.

Ms. AMBROSE: Thank you.

GROSS: Lauren Ambrose plays Claire Fisher in the HBO series "Six Feet Under."
Our interview was recorded last week. "Six Feet Under" is in its final
season. The first three seasons are on DVD.

Coming up, Ken Tucker reviews Dwight Yoakam's new CD. This is FRESH AIR.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Review: Dwight Yoakam's new album "Blame the Vain"
TERRY GROSS, host:

Dwight Yoakam has just released his 18th album, the first one not produced by
his longtime collaborator Pete Anderson. Yoakam's been an outsider from the
national establishment. Born in Kentucky, he was raised in California and has
occasionally pursued an acting career, appearing in such movies as "Sling
Blade." But rock critic Ken Tucker says Yoakam's new release "Blame the Vain"
is not only one of his best; it's also one of his most revealing.

(Soundbite of "Blame the Vain")

Mr. DWIGHT YOAKAM: (Singing) I blame the vain for what we wear, and I blame
the blind when we can't see. I blame it all on someone else till there's
nobody left. Then I just blame me.

KEN TUCKER reporting:

Listening the first time to the title song of "Blame the Vain," I was reminded
of a hippie description uttered by Sharon Stone after her brief fling with
Dwight Yoakam. `Kissing Dwight,' she said, `was like eating a dirt sandwich.'
Now coming from a piece of work like Stone, that's a pretty cold put-down.
But then one theme that has run through all of Yoakam's recordings for 20
years is that he can be one mean little SOB, a self-pitying guy with a taste
for the put-down and revenge via songwriting.

But "Blame the Vain" is the first album on which he actually seems not only
aware of what a jerk his lyrics can suggest he is, but he actually catalogs
his faults as though he was offering testimony at a country music AA meeting.
On the song "Blame the Vain," he acknowledges his own vanity and his
propensity to ascribe it to anyone but himself until there's no one else to
blame. And on a fantastic piece of honky-tonk called "Three Good Reasons," he
proudly suggests that he's so cavalier about dumping his latest entanglement
that he can't even bother to give her three good reasons for doing so.

(Soundbite of "Three Good Reasons")

Mr. YOAKAM: (Singing) Well, I'll give you three good reasons for leaving.
Number one is that I've forgotten number two. Number three is in a place
that's been kept hidden for so long I can't remember, but it's true. Then
I'll give you three...

TUCKER: Yoakam's frequently beautiful music sung with a meticulous tremble
surrounded by hard-core country and rockabilly instrumentation has often
smothered the harsh cutting edge of his words. What distinguishes him from
every country singer this side of Jerry Lee Lewis, who only does it part time,
is that he doesn't care about being liked.

From outlaws like Waylon Jennings and Willie Nelson to political advocates
ranging from the Dixie Chicks to Toby Keith, country music's image creation is
the exact opposite of gangsta rap. Country singers may swagger, may boast,
may posture as though they're spoiling for a barroom brawl. But they want,
above all else, to be liked, to be considered at one with their audience. For
better, and sometimes for worse, Dwight Yoakam has never had any use for this.
It's pushed him to the margins of commercial country, but it sure has fueled a
lot of excellent songs.

(Soundbite of "Intentional Heartache")

Mr. YOAKAM: (Singing) She drove South I-95 straight through Carolina. She
didn't use no damn map to find her way. She pulled off on the state route
just north of Charlotte and took mostly county roads the rest of the day. She
said, `I'll give him some intentional heartache that'll hurt a lot worse than
the one he left in me. Would you all step back, so a girl might to get
started? Then he won't have to look twice to see.'

TUCKER: Parts of "Blame the Vain" are downright weird. For no apparent
reason, he affects an ostentatiously bad British accent in a spoken word intro
to the song "She'll Remember." He goes into an ad lib rant near the end of
the song I just played, "Intentional Heartache." But this sort of
role-playing is consistent with the theme of the album, which is all about
role-playing in love and life, about how cruel someone can be either in a
conscious or clueless way. The difference this time around is Yoakam is
acknowledging that he's the cruel guy. After all these years, he's finally
made his coming-out album.

GROSS: Ken Tucker is film critic for New York magazine.

(Credits)

GROSS: I'm Terry Gross.
Transcripts are created on a rush deadline, and accuracy and availability may vary. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Please be aware that the authoritative record of Fresh Air interviews and reviews are the audio recordings of each segment.