The interview
Since its invention a little over 130 years ago, the interview has become a commonplace of journalism. Today, almost everybody who is literate will have read an interview at some point in their lives, while from the other point of view, several thousand celebrities have been interviewed over the years, some of them repeatedly. So it is hardly surprising that opinions of the interview — of its functions, methods and merits — vary considerably. Some might make quite extravagant claims for it as being, in its highest form, a source of truth, and, in its practice, an art. Others, usually celebrities who see themselves as its victims, might despise the interview as an unwarranted intrusion into their lives, or feel that it somehow diminishes them, just as in some primitive cultures it is believed that if one takes a photographic portrait of somebody then one is stealing that person’s soul. V. S. Naipaul ‘feels that some people are wounded by interviews and lose a part of themselves,’ Lewis Carroll, the creator of Alice in Wonderland, was said to have had ‘a just horror of the interviewer’ and he never consented to be interviewed — It was his horror of being lionized which made him thus repel would be acquaintances, interviewers, and the persistent petitioners for his autograph and he would afterwards relate the stories of his success in silencing all such people with much satisfaction and amusement. Rudyard Kipling expressed an even more condemnatory attitude towards the interviewer. His wife, Caroline, writes in her diary for 14 October 1892 that their day was ‘wrecked by two reporters from Boston’. She reports her husband as saying to the reporters, “Why do I refuse to be interviewed? Because it is immoral! It is a crime, just as much of a crime as an offence against my person, as an assault, and just as much merits punishment. It is cowardly and vile. No respectable man would ask it, much less give it,” Yet Kipling had himself perpetrated such an ‘assault’ on Mark Twain only a few years before. H. G. Wells in an interview in 1894 referred to ‘the interviewing ordeal’, but was a fairly frequent interviewee and forty years later found himself interviewing Joseph Stalin . Saul Bellow , who has consented to be interviewed on several occasions, nevertheless once described interviews as being like thumbprints on his windpipe. Yet despite the drawbacks of the interview, it is a supremely serviceable medium of communication. “These days, more than at any other time, our most vivid impressions of our contemporaries are through interviews,” Denis Brian has written. “Almost everything of moment reaches us through one man asking questions of another. Because of this, the interviewer holds a position of unprecedented power and influence.”
Interview of Umberto Eco The interviewer is Mukund Padmanabhan
Summary of the Interview:
Introduction to Umberto Eco:
Umberto Eco was a famous Italian writer, philosopher, and scholar. He was not only a novelist but also a media expert, cultural theorist, and professor of semiotics (the study of signs and symbols).
His most famous work is "The Name of the Rose," a historical mystery novel.
Introduction to Mukund Padmanabhan:
Mukund Padmanabhan is a journalist who conducted this interview with Umberto Eco. He tries to understand Eco’s thoughts and his intellectual depth.
Key Points of the Interview:
Versatility: Eco was a multifaceted individual. He was simultaneously a writer, philosopher, and professor. He described himself as an "academic" who occasionally wrote novels.
Writing Process: Eco explained that his process of writing novels was highly disciplined and research-based. He took his work very seriously and invested a lot of time in it.
Semiotics and Culture: Eco worked extensively on semiotics (the study of signs and symbols). He emphasized that studying culture and signs was very important to him.
Knowledge and Information: Eco distinguished between knowledge and information. He stated that information is often disorganized, but knowledge is the process of organizing that information and deriving meaning from it.
Media and Society: Eco discussed the influence of media and its role in society. He believed that media shapes people’s thinking and should be used responsibly.
Humor and Seriousness: Eco mentioned that his writing included both humor and seriousness. He believed that both are essential in life.
Message of the Interview:
This interview provides readers with a deep understanding of Umberto Eco’s thoughts and his work. It shows how an individual can influence society through their knowledge and interests.
Eco’s life and thinking convey the message that through knowledge, discipline, and creativity, we can better understand the world around us.
Significance of the Interview:
This interview gives students an opportunity to understand the mindset and perspective of a great writer and scholar.
The chapter highlights the importance of knowledge, culture, and media, which are highly relevant in today’s society.
Conclusion:
Umberto Eco’s interview teaches us that through knowledge and creativity, we can bring about positive change in society. Eco’s versatility and profound thinking inspire us to move forward in life with discipline and curiosity.
Comments
Post a Comment