Living to tell my tale

I tend to be a perfectionist and I knew that if did not start my project with anticipation I would be stressing on the small details and would not have completed it in time as the deadline approached; hence, my research project, living to tell my tale, is almost finished. So far I have interviewed my friends, recorded and researched my community, talked about my life and edited the video. I am still missing a reference page for pictures and works cited and the ideal song to place as background music, but I do not know if I should even include music because it might interrupt one of my interviews.

 For this project I have a timeline, which depicts aspects of my life and mindset now at age 19 and focuses on future predictions of my community (i.e. Washington Heights) based on present times. I have spent a lot time working on it and hopefully everyone that watches it enjoys,especially myself in a couple of years.

The man behind the camera

Observing the interview of Roger Ebert with Michael Apted was an interesting experience. For some strange reason since I had learned of the existence of Up Series I had not seen the creator of these masterpiece documentaries. Unfortunately for Apted and like Jackie, Lynn and Sue (the three working-class participants) he was really affected in his appearance by age. Time certainly took its toll.

I am fascinated by the series; however, I’m afraid that after learning about Apted’s experiences, inner thoughts and details in making the series now I am more hooked than ever. In this interview I discovered interesting details I did not know of like how (when age 22) covering 7Up as a researcher for Granada Television was Apted’s first job, and that as the series progressed he “felt a terrible urge to play God” by anticipating what would happen in the lives of two of the participants: Tony and Neil (Apted, 2006). Apted also believes that some of the participants have moved from their initial class system; the class system in England was eroding, but not to the extent to make a definite conclusion.

Apted confirms that the series initially had a political agenda because World in action was a leftist, socialist program; however, over the years he learned “we cannot predict lives. The series shows us that life and its changes are eternal” (Apted, 2006).  After 7Up, the series does not give the audience a strong political context because Apted believed it seemed trivial. The series was focused on the characters and the politics of the films were the lives of the participants. Their lives were the political statements not their opinions on a certain matter. Before Ebert had finished his sentence, Apted interrupted him by making the clarification that 21Up is an exception to the rule.  Apted argues that we see in the participants changes from the old England to the new. They talk about trends which were revolutionizing the nation: the libertine, the rock music, etc... He sees himself as fortunate by being able to record the awakening of this liberal generation.

The Up series became much more than it was expected. He recognizes that apart from viewing the participants’ lives we can relate to each of their lives in a certain way; “there’s something in it for everybody” (Apted, 2006).  I now know that I am not the only person that can identify with the Up Series characters (some more than others). As I see Suzy in an unhappy and desperate state at age 21, Peter struggling with his loneliness at ages 28 and 35, Nick selling his father’s farm at age 42 and Tony as a conservative grandfather in Spain at age 49, I wonder what will be of my life at these ages and how such changes will determine my future. I guess I will also find out every 7 years.

Reference:

Ebert, Roger. “Seventh time 'Up' for Apted”. (October 12, 2006)  Interview with Michael Apted.

On introversion and the Up Series

In Clive Thompson on the Power of Introversion, Thompson provides us with insight of how introversion has been frowned upon in American society and how being introvert is far from a negative quality. It is actually useful when performing teamwork. “[A] new picture is emerging. Forcing everyone to act like extroverts harms the quality of our work and our lives.” (Thompson 2012) On a different matter, In The Up Series directed by Michael Apted and Keeping Up With the Seven Up, Schneider and Corliss provide us with a review of the Up Series and how it has had an impact on its audience’ life , the understanding of society, science and art over the years.  The Up Series, they argue, is a sociological masterpiece of films, the greatest work of humanity, that has gone beyond the agenda the original documentary exposed (i.e. how social classes and inequalities in England determined an individual’s life) to provide a “powerful meditation on the meaning of existence."(Schneider 2007) 

Corliss believes the series has become “less a window into their [the participants’] lives, more a mirror into our own [lives].”(2006) This quote immediately caught my attention, as the one I related to the most. As the series progresses and I watch the participants evolve and devolve (like Neil or Jackie) over the years, I have wondered how my life would be every 7 years. Will it play out as I have planned or will it be completely different than my expectations?  

Initially, I was struck and confused with these articles. I could not understand how such could possibly relate. However, as I continued my reading I did find a connection: an interesting quote by Schneider. Neither do I nor would Thompson like or agree with Schneider, who argues that “[t]he extroverts and introverts as children are extroverts and introverts in middle age.” He disregards the participants’ ability to change and how the widespread view of the series and face-to-face interviewing with Apted may have lead to more introversion and pressures when decision-making. I believe his view contributes to the stigma against introversion and agree with Thompson when he argues that “[t]o really get the best out of people, have them work alone first, then network later.” (2012) Regardless of the degree of introversion, as the participants overcome their desires for privacy, reveal themselves and show us their lives each 7 years, “these septennial TV celebrities have become, in a modest but modern way, true movie heroes.” (Corliss, 2006)

            I do not want to seem biased towards Corliss’ viewpoint; however, once again I found the quote I like the most in his article. Corliss argues that “Apted wants to be faithful to his subjects' dreams, moods and rancors, we have to wonder what important elements are lost as he reduces the two days of interviews he does with each subject to 10 or 15 mins…Sometimes the truth, whatever that is in understanding a person's life, is also at risk.”(2006) Most of the readings on the Up Series have exalted Apted for his contribution in sociology; however, it is always interesting to read articles where Apted’s editing is questioned like Thorne’s "The Seven Up! Films: Connecting the Personal and the Sociological". What we see is what is known of the participants, but what happens with what we do not learn?

*Note: Some parts of the response may have a larger font than other. My blogger is having problems with this.

References:

 Corliss, Richard. "Keeping Up With the Seven Up." Http://www.time.com. Time Magazine, 1 Dec. 2006. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. .

Thompson, Clive. "Clive Thompson on the Power of Introversion." Wired.com. Conde Nast Digital, 21 Mar. 2012. Web. 06 Nov. 2012. .

 Schneider, Dan. "Hackwriters.com - The Up Series - Dir Michael Apted - Dan Schneider on the UK Documentary Series." Hackwriters.com - The Up Series - Dir Michael Apted - Dan Schneider on the UK Documentary Series. Hackwriters.com, 2007. Web. 06 Nov. 2012. .

On Interviewing

In Reporting on Your Own and Writing about People: The Interview, Kalita and Zinsser provide us with guidelines for effective interviewing of people. Interviewing, they argue, is more than reporting what we discover or asking and answering questions, but is a process in which we learn peoples’ actions and thoughts, and unlearn what we think we know. “We’re telling our subjects’ stories, not our own.” (Kalita 49)  Whether an experienced writer like Zinsser or a rookie future sociologist like me, Interviewing is best (and early) mastered through practice. Consequently, to apply their approaches we must start by interviewing.

Interviewing is itself a process. According to Zinsser, first, we must choose an interviewee “so unusual that the average reader would want to read about the person”, second, if we do not know the interviewee, we must get him or her to trust us in order to avoid awkward silences or fear; third, we must do our homework, have an idea of what questions to ask and be prepared to direct the interview based on our intuition or on different directions than our initial and finally, we must choose a method (based on our preferences) of taking notes of the interviewee’s answers. (104)

Kalita’s approach focuses on how to report our own community to a general audience. From her experience she explains that “journalists personally connected to that context [his or her community] should use extra caution to get facts and perspectives precisely right…  We obviously must stay free of obligation, but we shouldn’t also get in the way of our own work.”(49)

Kalita and Zinsser’s guidelines will be extremely useful for my multimedia project, “Living to Tell My Story”. Rather than simply applying my ethnographic method, their approaches give me a better understanding of the process of interviewing and more flexibility with what questions to ask and how to interact with my interviewees.

For my project I have many interviewees in mind: my parents, friends and neighbors I know I want to record my interviewees and take notes (just in case); however I am still debating if I should “do my homework” and prepare a specific questionnaire focused on my life or follow Michael Apted’s manner of interviewing in the Up! Series, a mixture of broad  questions based on intuition and the interviewees’ answers. Since settling this issue has been my main problem (so far) with my project, I may reach a midpoint between both approaches: ask my interviewees specific question about me (e.g. Where do you see me in 14 years?) and questions based on their answers [e.g. Do you believe Washington Heights, my community, will be more than what people expect (i.e. "Dominicanland") ?] Surely, I am noticing that Kalita and Zinsser could not be more right, the process of interviewing is much more than I had expected.

*References:

Kalita, S.Mitra. “Reporting on Your Own”. Telling True Stories: A Nonfiction Writers' Guide from the Nieman Foundation at Harvard University. New York: Plume, 2007. Print.

Zinsser, William. “Writing About People: The Interview”. On Writing Well: The Classic Guide to Writing Nonfiction. New York: HarperCollins, 2006.