5 ms·
Ursula K. Le Guin: By the Book
- joshmarinacci 11y agoThat may be the worst author interview I've ever read.
- nornagon 11y agoWhat a cringe-worthy interview. It's clear the interviewer is asking from a set list of (stunningly boring) questions, and despite Le Guin answering nearly every question with "please ask a more interesting question", the interviewer doesn't waver.
- azakai 11y agoSadly I agree. Le Guin is a remarkable talent but the interviewer asked stock questions, nothing tailored to her. Some interviewees might find a way to turn that into something interesting, but it just seems like Le Guin and those questions did not find any common ground.
- 100k 11y agoPretty sure it was a standard list of questions - perhaps emailed. Still, she is one of my favorite writers so it's interesting to read what she likes reading.
- technomancy 11y agoI would like to think it was certainly emailed because I can't imagine a live interviewer getting those kind of answers and continuing in that vein; I really want to assume the only way that could have happened was if there was no real back-and-forth between the interviewer and the interviewed.
- dang 11y agoIt's a standard thing NYT does and it's pretty obvious that the questions are pre-written and sent as a batch. http://www.nytimes.com/column/by-the-book http://www.nytimes.com/column/by-the-book
- nornagon 11y agoAlas, what a lazy approach. An opportunity wasted.
- dang 11y agoI don't think that's fair. It's one of several standard types of interview, and legit in its own right, as long as one doesn't confuse it with the others. It's not like Ursula Le Guin hasn't done plenty of face-to-face interviews too.
- technomancy 11y ago> It's one of several standard types of interview Except it's not actually an interview. Call it a Q&A or something if you like, but "interview" implies back-and-forth conversation.
- dang 11y agoThat's fair enough re my usage of the word, but the article never calls itself an interview, and the point that this is a well-known standard format holds. Let's not dismiss things for shallow reasons.
- anifow 11y agoMore appropriate to call it a questionnaire than an interview.
- liuliu 11y agoExactly. See The Paris Review's interview with Ursula K. Le Guin for a comparison: http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/6253/the-art-of-fiction-no-221-ursula-k-le-guin http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/6253/the-art-of-fic...
- kwhitefoot 11y agoThank you for the link, that's an informative piece.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- pmcginn 11y agoIt's explained in the interview, but since you missed it: "And I am applying the Dirri (Do I Reread It?) Test"
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- technomancy 11y agoThe previous answer defines it as the "Did I re-read it" test.
- joshmarinacci 11y agoThat may be the worst author interview I've ever read.
- steveax 11y agoAnd sadly, such a wasted opportunity with such a terrific author. Of all the interesting question the columnist could have asked, sigh.
- DonGateley 11y agoGood god that was uninteresting.
- tempodox 11y agoIf you really want to botch an interview and bend over backwards to not ask any pertaining (or even interesting) question, this is the way to go. NYT, I want my time back.
- lucasnemeth 11y agofun times.
- teh_klev 11y agoBBC's Radio 4 did a feature to celebrate her 85th birthday back in April this year: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05pkmyg http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b05pkmyg