Interviewing the Interviewers --Blog #4

                Alex Kotlowitz



Let me just first say that The New New Journalism is AWESOME. I really enjoyed how the writer of this book gives a literary journalism piece and background information for each writer. After reading two interviews, it was a great way to see what their point of view is. Our first interview to read was for Mr. Kotlowitz. I really enjoyed reading about him.



Alex Kotlowitz. Photo from Internet.



Something that stuck out to me is how he prepares for the interviews. If he knows he can stay in contact with somebody and see them more than once, he doesn’t prepare any questions. He’d rather see where the interview process goes and not expect where it will take him. If he visits a public figure or a prisoner, he makes sure to have questions prepared, assuming he won’t be able to talk to them again.

I really liked how he said that reporting can be hard for him, especially if he really has to push for an interview, because he is more of a shy person and more reserved. He says it can be difficult to “put himself out there and meet people.” I can relate, because I feel like I’m not shy, but I don’t want it to be an inconvenience for anyone to interview, especially if I have to go back to them for more answers. When people reject you, it’s hard to get back up and keep finding people to interview. It was hard in reporting and writing for me, because a couple occasions I would ask to interview a person and they would say, “Well, what are you interviewing for? Where is this information going to be shown?” Already I felt like I was wasting their time. Kotlowitz does a great job with saying that it’s okay to think that reporting is hard sometimes.



I like what he said about not taping. Even though I have always used a recorder during interviews, he makes a great point. He says that taking notes instead of relying on a tape recorder really forces you to listen, which actually helps and makes it easier to think of the next question.

                   Leon Dash



This was a great interview to pick. After reading it, I checked out one of his pieces of work called When Children Want Children. I really enjoyed his style of writing and how he places himself in his work.  While reading his interview, I felt like he was extremely professional and very independent. He seems genuine and he enjoys his work.



Leon Dash. Photo from Internet.



He starts off by explaining what kind of stories he likes and I like how he says it’s important for him to live among the people he is reporting. When choosing a character to write about, he says he’s looking for somebody who allow Dash to pose a lot of “why?” questions.

He talks about how he usually doesn’t know how much time he’ll need with a person, but he has found that no one really shows their true self until you’ve known them for at least four months. I respect him for the way he says the basic rule to his reporting is to keep a professional distance. He’s very strict about not crossing ethical lines during the interviewing. Another interesting fact was that during his one piece, Rosa Lee, under no circumstance would he give the family money. He knew where the money would probably end up, so no matter what he needed to stick to that.



I noticed something in his interview that I thought wasn’t right. When asked if he shares information about the people he interviews, he said yes. He said that it helped in one situation, when he told a woman he was interviewing about another woman who had told him she was raped, the woman being interviewed gave him information about her rape incident. He thinks sharing information about other people he has interviewed is a strategy to opening up people. I think it’d be more appropriate to start fresh with each individual, instead of saying, “Yeah the last girl I interviewed told me about being raped,” hoping that maybe they’ll talk about their raping (if they even had one).



Similarities between the two writers:

·         They both appreciate the help from their editor.

·         They both know that people don’t let their guard down, or show their true self, until after a few months.

·         They both know the importance of interviews in person versus on the phone and email. It’s more comfortable and a better way to get good responses.



·         They both have had incidences where they would have became too involved with the subject (telling a person what’s right from wrong) and they both knew that wasn’t the responsibility of the reporter to intervene, unless it was a life or death situation.

·         The writers both want to be in the spot of where their reporting from for long-term. They both have moved temporarily to be closer to the subject to really submerse themselves.

Differences:



·         When it comes to “off the record,” Dash still records it, just doesn’t write it. Kotlowitz doesn’t want to know at all, he’ll find another way to find out.

·         While writing the story, Dash gets opinions from friends and his editor. Kotlowitz doesn’t discuss it with anybody until it’s done.

·         When it comes to not using somebody’s name, Dash would rather leave the person out all together. Kotlowitz thinks it’s a good idea to change a name if it protects their privacy.

·         Dash uses a tape recorder, Kotlowitz doesn’t.

·         Dash likes to interview in restaurants, Kotlowitz can’t stand interviews in eating areas.

 

    New York Times Article - Behind the Wheel, Moving Up

                In the Friday New York Times, I found an article that I thought portrayed literary journalism quite well. It starts off with the sentence, "The man whom I shall call J showed up at my friend's apartment one evening. Already, it is starting off with a narrative style. Along with the introduction, he puts dialogue from the character "J." For the next section of the article, he gives background information and history on cars in India.



Siddhartha Deb, writer of Behind
the Wheel, Moving Up.
Photo from Internet.



       The writer then tells the reader about what the conditions are now in India. What I thought made it a good literary piece was how he puts himself in the story and uses "I." As he talks about India and their culture with cars, he is a credible writer because he has gone to India himself. In fact, I researched him and he is from India. He is a novelist, journalist, and associate professor from the New School in New York City.

      Anyway, he ends the article by going back to the apartment, where it started, and ends with a quote from J. What I've learned from reading New York Times articles is that it's hard for me to be interested in articles that I don't know too much about. I honestly had no interest in cars in India (I'm sorry!). It is a really well written article and it allowed me to picture scenes he was describing. I feel like if a person is writing about a different culture, but is part of that culture, I find them more credible. For example, Deb is from India and visits there. I'd rather read an article about India from him then a person born in the United States and has never been there.