From our reading, I most related
to Isabel Wilkerson’s “Interviewing: Accelerated Intimacy”. I had my first
interview with the person I want to do my profile on, and the way it went
seemed to align with what Wilkerson talks about in her article. I didn’t bring
a recorder with me because I wanted to test out what it’s like to conduct an
interview by hand. Because I was taking notes, I felt like I sacrificed eye
contact and might have missed out on a few body language cues. For my next
interview, I plan on using a recorder so I’ll be able to compare both methods
of note taking.
I did, however, feel like my
subject and I had a guided conversation. As Wilkerson said, “The overall
interaction is more important than the particular questions”. I also
experienced most of Wilkerson’s seven phases, especially Phase Six:
Deceleration. As soon as I put my notebook away, the source opened up even
more. He began telling me the stories behind his paintings and giving me life
advice. Lastly, I connected with
Wilkerson’s point that “Empathy is the balance to power”. Although I notice it
in every day interactions, during my interview I became acutely aware of how
much more comfortable my subject became once I engaged in eye contact and was
fully involved in his stories. He no longer felt like a source I was gleaning
information from, but a person whose story held importance and meaning.
In “Frank
Sinatra Has A Cold”, I was particularly struck by the fluency of the article.
Talese masterfully wove in an immense amount of detail about Sinatra’s life,
yet at no point did I feel overwhelmed in reading it. Talese crafted a
remarkable portrait of Sinatra—a man who was seemingly untouchable. He
portrayed Sinatra’s harsh temper as well as his gentle philanthropic side.
Talese successfully incorporated the contradictory elements of Sinatra’s personality,
and in a manner that didn’t seem weighed down by personal judgment.
Overall, my
questions revolve around the subject of access. What comes first: access or the
story? Do you write a story based on how accessible it is? Or do you look for
an interesting story and then fight for the access? Does it depend on deadline?
Paula,
ReplyDeleteI personally think that access comes before story. If you are able to immerse yourself in a subject's world, you can almost always find some sort of compelling story somewhere. You can always lift up a normal-looking rock and find a bunch of amazing, weird stuff crawling around underneath.
If you don't have access, even the most interesting subject with fall flat. because the story won't have as much depth. I can't remember which author used this metaphor, but it's like wandering around a foreign country without being able to speak the language.
Anyway, those are my immediate thoughts.
Trevor
I thought it was very interesting that you say that your subject began to open up more when you put your notebook away. I think that this is definitely true and I wonder how to get around this kind of shyness when it comes to a subject's willingness to share information about their life. I know for me, in my preliminary interview my subject, I had a hard time dealing with trying to make "natural" conversation and having the audio recorder right in front of her face. I did not want to alienate her, but I wanted to capture all of the material I needed, as well. I think it is a fine line to walk and I hope we can talk more about this in next week's workshop. I want to know how people pull this together and execute it for their first drafts.
ReplyDelete