Each day you are required to contribute to the blog. This blog will be used as a supplement to regular writing assignments. Late entries will not be accepted.
Keep all comments appropriate, relevant, and grammatically correct.
I now wonder if an interview is more than just sitting down with someone and asking them questions. This interview tells a short story about Sinatra. There isn't really an instance where the writer asks anything. I do wonder if the writer interviewed Sinatra with just straight up questions, and then wrote the piece an the style he did, more of a narrative it seems.
"Frank Sinatra has a cold" was an artical interview written by Gay Talese. It was about Frank Sinatra in the 1960's one night at a bar. And how he was acting sullen and quiet. This artical was originaly sixteen pages long. This artical didnt really change my original opinion about interviews. Its still, basicly, a question and answer prosces between two or more people. Gay Talese just had a unique and indirect way of interviewing the singer and actor, Frank Sinatra.
By reading the interview Frank Sinatra Has a Cold, I now have a diffrent view point on what intervies should be like. Although the interviewer did not once actually talk to Sinatra, you still have an idea of what Frank Sinatra was like when he turned 50. You still got the idea of what kind of things he said, and what particular mood he was in. I feel this interview was great and gave just enough, if not more information about Frank Sinatra, than if he had actually sat down with him and asked him questions.
The way this interview is told, it seems more a story than what I once thought was an interview. The way this interview is written captures the reader, gives them information, and entertains them in a very different way than usual.
I agree with gio, interviewa can be put in all differnt ways. in this one there interviewing Sinatra but they are also not getting to invloved in his personal life. The writer may have asked him questions and bu all of the awnsers that he got he made up a short story out of it.I say that beccause this wasent just an interview it also came out to be like a short story.
I guess an intertiew dosent have to be just dioloug.It can be a picture of someone and the atmosphere around them,like the Frank Sinatra article. Not one word was spoken, yet the reporter learned so much just by looking at him, and his commnication with others.I never knew an interview could be done like this. ITs not the point of the interview, its the point of the person themselves.
I now see that to interview someone, is not necessisarily to sit down and ask them multiple questions. It can be simply watching them and writing a story about their expressions, demeanor, and actions. That is how the writer in this interview had done for Franl Sinatra. I really only had one look on interviews, unitl I read this last one.
At first i had thought that interviews were just like the ones in magazines. Where its says Question and then the answer, but with this interview, it was sort of like a story. I found it much more interesting to read than your ordinary interview. It had so much more detail about the scenery and what was happening during the interview that normal reporters wouldnt talk about. Normally I don't read interviews, but after reading this one I've become more interested in them. It made it seem as i was actually there when the interview happened. And that made me want to read more.
I felt that this interview was a little different then most interviews I see or would read about. I think Sinatra is a dark person. I do agree with Gio about how this seems to be more of a narrative.
This article makes me think...did Frank Sinatra even know Gay Talese was in the pool room? Was Gay even trying to perform a usual interview or was he just standing there studying sinatra? I agree with Gio, maybe an interview is more then sitting down with someone and asking questions. Maybe an interview is sitting down and observing, how someone acts, talks and interacts with other people.
Although this interview is unlike most, it is very interesting. Frank Sinatra doesn't talk once, but the way that he is acting, it seems like he's almost sick and tired of his life and surroundings. He was very well known in his day, and instead of embracing his popularity, his made his life seem boring and dull.
After reading this article, my views on interviews have definitly changed. It's not just about being prepared with questions to ask the person or people that you are interviewing. It is about observing their life and drawing conclusions about it. You have to be patient in order to be an interviewer, you can't expect who you're interviewing to just answer anything you want to know about them. You have to find different ways of gathering infromation other than just talking to them. I think the interviewer who wrote this article was very skilled because Frank Sinatra was a difficult person to interview considering he would not talk. But the interviewer was still able to learn about his life in other ways and produce a well written article about him
Before reading this article I thought interviews are just sitting down with someone in a small room and asking questions. But this interview is different. The interviewer didnt really ask many questions, and Frank Sinatra didnt answer any questions. It was like the interviewerer was more of a narrative. I thought that this story was very interesting.
At first I only saw an interview as sitting down and asking a celebrity a question and them answering it. But after reading this article I realized that my outlook on interviews are only a portion of what interviews really are.
In the Frank Sinatra interview, he wasn't actually asked direct questions. Instead of recieving information from Sinatra, the interviewer had to use observations about him (such as his actions, his attitude, his behavior) in order to draw conclusions. This was a very clever interview due to the lack of conversation, especially when the only communication the interview had directly from Sinatra wasn't even aimed at him. Although the article lacked direct information from Sinatra, we can still gather the kind of mood he was in just based on his actions- quiet, solemn, angry. It gives off an appearence of how he's been lately, and sometimes actions do speak louder than words. From this, I now know that an interview doesnt just have to be direct questions, but it can also be through observations and actions.
This interview was not exactly what I expected. I assumed that an interview was simply a series of questions and answers, however this interview was quite different. This interview almsot told a story and was interesting as well as informative. There was a good amount of detail put into this interview. I agree with some of my classmates when they said that taking interviews also consists of observing their lives and going deeper than the surface of them. I found it quite intriguing that this person could interview Frank Sinatra despite his refusal to speak.
After reading this interview I am now aware that interviews can be formatted in various ways. Previously, I thought interviews had a question answer format. However, I am curious to find out, what makes an interview, and interview. I always thought that for something to be considered an interview, one had to ask questions that were answered and it was put on paper. This interview seemed more like a narative, based on observations. One thing I did notice however, was there was a lot of detail in this interview which I don't see as much in the "question answerer" interview. The setting was set well and I was able to get a good idea of Sinatra's feelings.
I think Gio's comment was interesting. In the article, the writer never really had any conversation with Sinatra. It seemed to me as if the whole thing was just his interpretation of this night at the bar. I never thought about if he actually had asked Sinatra questions and wrote this interveiw the way he had. That seemed like a very clever technique, should it be true. I think had he asked a list of questions and wrote answers it would not turn out as well as it did.
I now wonder if an interview is more than just sitting down with someone and asking them questions. This interview tells a short story about Sinatra. There isn't really an instance where the writer asks anything. I do wonder if the writer interviewed Sinatra with just straight up questions, and then wrote the piece an the style he did, more of a narrative it seems.
ReplyDelete"Frank Sinatra has a cold" was an artical interview written by Gay Talese. It was about Frank Sinatra in the 1960's one night at a bar. And how he was acting sullen and quiet. This artical was originaly sixteen pages long.
ReplyDeleteThis artical didnt really change my original opinion about interviews. Its still, basicly, a question and answer prosces between two or more people. Gay Talese just had a unique and indirect way of interviewing the singer and actor, Frank Sinatra.
By reading the interview Frank Sinatra Has a Cold, I now have a diffrent view point on what intervies should be like. Although the interviewer did not once actually talk to Sinatra, you still have an idea of what Frank Sinatra was like when he turned 50. You still got the idea of what kind of things he said, and what particular mood he was in. I feel this interview was great and gave just enough, if not more information about Frank Sinatra, than if he had actually sat down with him and asked him questions.
ReplyDeleteThe way this interview is told, it seems more a story than what I once thought was an interview. The way this interview is written captures the reader, gives them information, and entertains them in a very different way than usual.
ReplyDeleteI agree with gio, interviewa can be put in all differnt ways. in this one there interviewing Sinatra but they are also not getting to invloved in his personal life. The writer may have asked him questions and bu all of the awnsers that he got he made up a short story out of it.I say that beccause this wasent just an interview it also came out to be like a short story.
ReplyDeleteI guess an intertiew dosent have to be just dioloug.It can be a picture of someone and the atmosphere around them,like the Frank Sinatra article. Not one word was spoken, yet the reporter learned so much just by looking at him, and his commnication with others.I never knew an interview could be done like this. ITs not the point of the interview, its the point of the person themselves.
ReplyDeleteI now see that to interview someone, is not necessisarily to sit down and ask them multiple questions. It can be simply watching them and writing a story about their expressions, demeanor, and actions. That is how the writer in this interview had done for Franl Sinatra. I really only had one look on interviews, unitl I read this last one.
ReplyDeleteAt first i had thought that interviews were just like the ones in magazines. Where its says Question and then the answer, but with this interview, it was sort of like a story. I found it much more interesting to read than your ordinary interview. It had so much more detail about the scenery and what was happening during the interview that normal reporters wouldnt talk about. Normally I don't read interviews, but after reading this one I've become more interested in them. It made it seem as i was actually there when the interview happened. And that made me want to read more.
ReplyDeleteI felt that this interview was a little different then most interviews I see or would read about. I think Sinatra is a dark person. I do agree with Gio about how this seems to be more of a narrative.
ReplyDeleteThis article makes me think...did Frank Sinatra even know Gay Talese was in the pool room? Was Gay even trying to perform a usual interview or was he just standing there studying sinatra? I agree with Gio, maybe an interview is more then sitting down with someone and asking questions. Maybe an interview is sitting down and observing, how someone acts, talks and interacts with other people.
ReplyDeleteIt is good for you to think of an interview as somewhat of a story...you are telling a story...the story of a person's life.
ReplyDeleteAlthough this interview is unlike most, it is very interesting. Frank Sinatra doesn't talk once, but the way that he is acting, it seems like he's almost sick and tired of his life and surroundings. He was very well known in his day, and instead of embracing his popularity, his made his life seem boring and dull.
ReplyDeleteThis also makes you wonder what more an interviewer says or sees while they interview someone.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article, my views on interviews have definitly changed. It's not just about being prepared with questions to ask the person or people that you are interviewing. It is about observing their life and drawing conclusions about it. You have to be patient in order to be an interviewer, you can't expect who you're interviewing to just answer anything you want to know about them. You have to find different ways of gathering infromation other than just talking to them. I think the interviewer who wrote this article was very skilled because Frank Sinatra was a difficult person to interview considering he would not talk. But the interviewer was still able to learn about his life in other ways and produce a well written article about him
ReplyDeleteI didn't think of this as an interview, I thought more as a story. A sad story based on his life. A story about depression and being in a dark room.
ReplyDeleteBefore reading this article I thought interviews are just sitting down with someone in a small room and asking questions. But this interview is different. The interviewer didnt really ask many questions, and Frank Sinatra didnt answer any questions. It was like the interviewerer was more of a narrative. I thought that this story was very interesting.
ReplyDeleteAt first I only saw an interview as sitting down and asking a celebrity a question and them answering it. But after reading this article I realized that my outlook on interviews are only a portion of what interviews really are.
ReplyDeleteIn the Frank Sinatra interview, he wasn't actually asked direct questions. Instead of recieving information from Sinatra, the interviewer had to use observations about him (such as his actions, his attitude, his behavior) in order to draw conclusions. This was a very clever interview due to the lack of conversation, especially when the only communication the interview had directly from Sinatra wasn't even aimed at him. Although the article lacked direct information from Sinatra, we can still gather the kind of mood he was in just based on his actions- quiet, solemn, angry. It gives off an appearence of how he's been lately, and sometimes actions do speak louder than words. From this, I now know that an interview doesnt just have to be direct questions, but it can also be through observations and actions.
ReplyDeleteThis interview was not exactly what I expected. I assumed that an interview was simply a series of questions and answers, however this interview was quite different. This interview almsot told a story and was interesting as well as informative. There was a good amount of detail put into this interview. I agree with some of my classmates when they said that taking interviews also consists of observing their lives and going deeper than the surface of them. I found it quite intriguing that this person could interview Frank Sinatra despite his refusal to speak.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this interview I am now aware that interviews can be formatted in various ways. Previously, I thought interviews had a question answer format. However, I am curious to find out, what makes an interview, and interview. I always thought that for something to be considered an interview, one had to ask questions that were answered and it was put on paper. This interview seemed more like a narative, based on observations. One thing I did notice however, was there was a lot of detail in this interview which I don't see as much in the "question answerer" interview. The setting was set well and I was able to get a good idea of Sinatra's feelings.
ReplyDeleteI think Gio's comment was interesting. In the article, the writer never really had any conversation with Sinatra. It seemed to me as if the whole thing was just his interpretation of this night at the bar. I never thought about if he actually had asked Sinatra questions and wrote this interveiw the way he had. That seemed like a very clever technique, should it be true. I think had he asked a list of questions and wrote answers it would not turn out as well as it did.
ReplyDelete