Bonnie Garmus, 65, grew up in California and lived in Seattle and Geneva before moving to London in 2017. Her internationally bestselling debut, Lessons in Chemistry, out in paperback next month, is soon to be televised with Captain Marvel star Brie Larson in the role of Elizabeth Zott, an American scientist who, sacked for being pregnant in 1955, takes revenge when she’s hired to front a teatime cookery show. For Stephen King, the novel is “the Catch-22 of early feminism: witty, sometimes hilarious, angry and often surreal”. Garmus, who also works as a copywriter and creative director, discussed the book on her return from a literary festival in Dubai.
What led you to write a comedy about sexism and misogyny?
I think any time a writer wants to take on a difficult topic without sounding didactic, humour really helps. Sexism is demeaning, depressing, infuriating, boring, inefficient, stupid, revolting and completely unscientific – in other words, not funny. But people reveal both their strengths and weaknesses when they try to deal with it, or not deal with it, and therein lies the potential for humour.
Why do you think the book has struck such a chord around the world?
Readers identify with Elizabeth Zott. There are so few of us who haven’t been put down, pushed aside, maligned, passed over, rejected, ripped off, lied to or treated badly simply because we’re women, people of colour, gender-diverse, neuro-diverse, too fat, too thin, too short, too tall – you name it. But Elizabeth is a rationalist; she doesn’t confuse societal prejudice with facts, nor does she accept direction from those who do. It’s fun to write a character like that. And it’s an honour to talk with readers from every corner of the world – the Middle East, Africa, South America, Australia, North America, Europe and beyond – and discover not only how aligned we are, but how dedicated we are to real societal change.
What drew you to the novel’s free-floating voice, which roams between the thoughts of each character, major and minor, to say nothing of Elizabeth’s dog, Six-Thirty?
I love the freedom of being in the heads of other people (and one dog). I know a few writing books will caution against it, but as long as you don’t lose the reader, I say go for it. I never wanted to write only from Elizabeth’s point of view: how others view her and react to her is ultimately what drives the story. Chemically speaking, she’s the catalyst – she changes every character she comes in contact with.
You have said that your agent had to change the title “about five minutes” before the manuscript went out on submission to editors...
The original title was Introduction to Chemistry. Which sounds like a textbook, right? My thinking was that getting to know ourselves is a process and what Elizabeth Zott reveals to us about ourselves is only the first step to self-discovery. But my title also meant the book might die a slow death on the nonfiction shelf.
You have also said that you partly had your mother in mind when writing the character of Elizabeth.
Actually, I had my mother’s entire generation in mind when I wrote the book. My mother didn’t inspire Elizabeth Zott; instead, I created Elizabeth Zott in honour of her and all the other women whose dreams were sidelined by a society insisting they were incapable of becoming anything more than an “average housewife”. My mother had been a nurse before having us four kids. She talked about it constantly and obviously missed it. When we were all grown, she renewed her nursing licence and returned to work, winning nurse of the year even though she’d been out of the workforce for decades. She was also an expert seamstress – would have made a great surgeon. My sisters all love the book and I think my dad would have, too – and my mom, although she would have been concerned about the swearing.
Who are your literary influences?
I always admired John Irving’s larger-than-life characters, Tolstoy’s reach, Agatha Christie’s ability to surprise, Roald Dahl’s humour, Gabriel García Márquez’s style, Gustave Flaubert’s understanding of human nature – those are the people I read in my youth and they still hold up. But in the end you have to find your own way. No one wants to read a poor imitation of a great writer.
What are you working on now?
Another book – all I’ll say is, I’m out of the 60s. It’s been a challenge to find uninterrupted time to write [because of the success of Lessons in Chemistry], although let’s face it: there’s really no perfect time to write a novel.
How does writing fiction compare with your work copywriting?
They’re cousins. Copywriting is storytelling and storytelling requires craft – precision, arcs, rhythm, structure, surprise, message and, most of all, style. A lot of great writers started out as copywriters, probably because it’s one way to get paid for writing every day. But copywriting is a sprint; novel writing a marathon. Actually, writing a novel is more like running five marathons back to back. Everybody hits the wall at some point. Or in my case, several.
What have you been reading lately?
Because I’m trying to write, I stick to nonfiction. Metaphysical Animals: How Four Women Brought Philosophy Back to Life by Clare Mac Cumhaill and Rachel Wiseman is excellent. I just finished The Exceptions: Nancy Hopkins, MIT, and the Fight for Women in Science by Kate Zernike: outstanding. And I’m looking forward to reading Oscar Wilde’s Only Dull People Are Brilliant at Breakfast. I’ve also had Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt’s How Democracies Die in my TBR pile for a long time. The title worries me.
What have you missed about living in the US since coming to Europe?
The beauty of the Pacific north-west and wider car lanes.
• Lessons in Chemistry is published in paperback on 2 March by Penguin (£9.99). To support the Guardian and Observer order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Delivery charges may apply
