Credit...Rebecca Clarke

The Vatican-set thriller “Conclave,” based on Robert Harris’s 2016 novel, has been nominated for eight Academy Awards. In an email interview, he theorized why the book and movie have dodged controversy. — SCOTT HELLER

What books are on your night stand?

A biography of Henry V by Dan Jones, and the life of Caesar Augustus by Adrian Goldsworthy.

What’s your favorite book no one else has heard of?

“Journey to the Abyss: The Diaries of Count Harry Kessler 1880-1918,” edited by Laird M. Easton. An amazing firsthand account of some of the leading cultural and political figures at the turn of the century.

Do you think any canonical books are widely misunderstood?

The Gospels. I reread them when I started work on “Conclave.” Their message is much more revolutionary than anything in Marx and Lenin.

Do you distinguish between “commercial” and “literary” fiction? Where’s that line, for you?

I don’t think there is a line. Look at the great novelists of the 19th century. They turned out a book or two a year, often in serial form, aimed at a large readership. If you’d asked Dickens or Trollope or Thackeray to distinguish between “commercial” and “literary” fiction, they’d have given you a blank look.

Eight of your novels have been adapted for the screen. What still surprises you about the process?

How seldom the original vision is preserved, how many egos — often with the best of intentions — conspire to distort it. But very occasionally, when the process works — as it has with “Conclave” — you end up with something wonderful, both recognizably the book and much more.