The Interview--- Christopher Silvester,
The author Christopher Silvester, considers The Interview as a
Journalistic Tool:
Part 1 of "The Interview" introduces the practice of interviewing, which
has become a commonplace in journalism over the past 130 years,
with varying opinions on its legitimacy and impact
Contrasting Views:
Opinions on interviews are divided.
Supporters-: Some view interviews as an art form and a vital source
for uncovering truth and understanding individuals discusses how
interviews are viewed as a source of truth or a form of art by some.
while celebrities often feel victimized by them, as they considers them
as intrusions into their private lives.
This section highlights contrasting perspectives on interviews, from
figures like
V.S. Naipaul and Rudyard Kipling and Lewis Carroll: who have
strong negative views on the practice.
Negative Reactions of celebrities-
They see interviews as an unwarranted intrusion that can damage or
distort their personal and public image.
V.S. Naipaul: Feels that interviews wound people and cause them to
lose a part of themselves.
Lewis Carroll: Had a strong aversion to interviews, fearing the
attention and refusing to participate.
Rudyard Kipling: Famously described interviews as immoral and a
crime, similar to an assault
o H.G. Wells, who considered interviewing an unpleasant experience,
was a frequent interviewee and had also interviewed Joseph Stalin in
the later years of his life.
Saul Bellow had once described interviews as thumbprints on his
windpipe..
Part II
This part is extracted from an interview between Umberto Eco
and Mukund Padmanabhan
.- Umberto Eco is a well-known professor of semiotics from the
University of Bologna in Italy.
-The interviewer Mukund Padmanabhan worked for The Hindu.
Umberto’s works were limited to academic pursuits till he started
writing fiction.
He achieved stardom in 1980 when his book The Name of The
Rose was published. The book sold more than 10 million copies.
Mukund starts the interview by quoting English novelist David
Lodge who had remarked that Umberto Eco was one man
capable of doing all things.
.---Umberto replies that it is true that he gives the impression that
he is doing a lot of things but is always convinced at the end that
he is doing the same thing.
--He elaborates that all his works ultimately represent his
philosophy of peace and non-violence.
They are just a bunch of ethical philosophical interests.
Umberto also goes ahead to reveal his secret that he works in
the empty spaces of lives which he calls interstices.
Next, Mukund comments on Umberto’s style of fiction writing. He
points out that Umberto’s style of writing fiction is quite informal
and playful in nature as compared to his serious and dry style of
academic writing.
Umberto remembers about the presentation of his first Doctoral
Dissertation in Italy.
One of the professors had commented on the unique
presentation by Umberto Eco.
Instead of talking about his hypotheses, and drawing conclusions
by correcting them, Umberto told the story of his research along
with the trials and errors involved in them.
Umberto then discovered that it was more functional to write
scholarly books in the form of narratives.
This finally led him to start writing narratives at the age of fifty.
He talks about how his friend Roland Barthes had always wanted
to engage in creative writing but could never do so. Umberto
reveals that he never felt this kind of frustration in life.
He had started writing narratives accidentally, and they satisfied
his taste for narration.
Interestingly, Umberto has written over forty academic articles as
compared to the minimal number of five fictional novels.
Mukun wanted to know if it bothered Umberto when the majority
recognised him as a novelist rather than an academician.
Umberto admitted that it did bother him because he considered
himself a university professor who writes novels on Sundays.
However, he acknowledges the fact that he cannot hope to reach
a big audience of 1 million readers by just writing academic
articles on semiotics.
The next question is on Umberto’s successful work – The Name
of the Rose.
Mukund finds it a wonder that the book which was on
metaphysics, theology and mediaeval history enjoyed such a
huge mass audience. Umberto explains that only journalists and
publishers are puzzled about this. They assume that people do
not like difficult reading experiences. If The Name of the
Rose sold between 10 and 15 million copies in a world of 6
billion people, it meant that this particular number of people did
not like easy reading experiences.
As to the question about Umberto’s book being a success
because it dealt with a period of mediaeval history, the writer
calls the reason behind this a mystery.
Umberto’s American publisher loved the book but did not expect
the book to sell more than 3000 copies in a country like the U.S.
where nobody had seen a cathedral or studied Latin. However,
the book sold two or three million copies in the U.S.
Conclusion of The Interview
The interview Summary demonstrates that the public can
connect to its significant contemporary counterparts through
interviews conducted by journalists.
Interviews not only help us understand the interviewee’s point of
view but also give us new information and perspectives to think
about.
These facts and perspectives can act as eye-openers for us and
offer us new food for thought. Umberto Eco reveals his secret of
working in empty spaces is a fresh outlook of looking at things.
He also proposes that not all people succumb to works of easy
reading, some enjoy a difficult reading experience too.