By the looks of many of these posts and comments, it seems quite clear that the majority of us were far more drawn into the Interview Project then the other sites presented. Trying to override my David Lynch fanaticism, I’ve been thinking about what makes these interviews and stories ‘feel’ so starkly different than stories on the other sites. It seems to me that a clear differing factor is spontaneity. I think you get a different degree of circumstantial truth from a subject when they wake up in the morning and have no idea that they will be interviewed about their life later that day. Even if you tell a subject that they need to do no preparations for an upcoming interview, you can’t stop the inner gears grinding within someone’s head as they think about what they might say or how they might come off. Not only does the spontaneous interview relieve a huge degree of pressure from the subject, but it allows for that magical moment of direct response to happen.
I think this process also allows for more compelling answers from your subject. When you ask someone if they have any regrets, their mind isn’t going to dilly-dally a chain of connections. The responses are direct – it’s never ‘if I had done this, then this would have happened, then I could have gone here, and then I wouldn’t have done that.’ The response is ‘THIS’ – ‘I regret this.’ It really makes the act of anything done spontaneously seem so much more real.
The other great thing about the Interview Project is that it shows that everybody has a story. Even the people who don’t think they have one – we are all a culmination of our actions. Each one of us is a story, and that’s a beautiful and magical thing that helps me personally alleviate the anxiety I feel by reading Digital Culture and getting overwhelmed by the notion that we’re all just numbers and statistics.
Good point about the spontaneity of the interview when it comes to the Interview Project. What made these interviews so compelling was that they were not only real people that you would probably pass on your way to school, work or to a restaurant — all of whom have a deep, rich personal history — but that they didn’t seem to have time to prepare talking points or position themselves in a light that did not accurately reflect them.
All of this reminded me of when I was working as a sports editor and I interviewed a high school wrestler after his individual victory over a high-ranked opponent was not only stunning, but his win also gave his team a narrow win. The crowd had gone nuts and he was completely excited. I interviewed him shortly after the match and his responses were a journalist’s dream because they were real and authentic. He had never been interviewed before and he had never been put in that position before (to win a crucial team match) and he started to answer my questions as if he were a WWF wrestler giving an interview. For me, it was great because I would not be getting the standard quotes, and thus, the readers would read his quotes that were eye-popping. His interview still is something I remember fondly, even though it happened about 10 years ago or so, because it was engaging, real, spontaneous and done in a place where he was comfortable.
The Interview Project captured the authenticity that so many of us want from our stories. The format of the videos didn’t really leave room for sugarcoating your life story. I felt there was a real sense of “this is what it is, take it or leave it.” This project was profound for me also because it captured the essence of the game we all find ourselves playing at some point: what is that stranger thinking? The project gives validity and authority to people who might not have otherwise had their stories heard.
The spontaneity that you wrote about is what made reality television so interesting to watch back when it first stated. I know that some people still “act” differently when the camera is on, but that could be edited out (secretly, of course). The Interview Project is a step back to what reality television started as. The unscripted reality is presented to us objectively, letting viewers decide how they want to feel about each person interviewed.
I really enjoyed the way the Interview Project presents it subjects. I think it is ultimately what reality TV should have been, and like Derek said where reality TV had it’s genesis. There is something to be said about the way the subject matter was presented particularly the hook, the one sentence every subject said that was used to pull us into the interview, was really well executed, and it kept me moving from interview to interview.
That site was a perfect example to me of stickability, as I spent far more time on that site than I did for any of the others. It also reminded me a bit of the 1 in 8 Million Project: http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/1-in-8-million/index.html Which I love, love love.
I did enjoy the Interview Project as well. I thought it was interesting how each had the exact same format–it made the production value of each seem a little higher since there was an intro, and must have required less time in the editing process.