This morning, while driving to work, I caught the rebroadcast of last night's
Fresh Air. Terry Gross was talking to R. Crumb in regards to
The R. Crumb Handbook.
You know what? The comics internet needs a Terry Gross.
I'm not saying we need a radio program devoted to comics interviews (and, hey,
we've got one anyway, and I've heard that there are others too, what with this "podcasting" thing I don't quite understand and all).
I'm also not saying that we need hard-hitting, fact-finding interviews. I mean, it can't hurt--had the CrossGen fiasco not gone down the way it did, who knows what might have happened? There's value in disseminating information like that, but I don't think the back-and-forth format in which most online (and, while we're at it, most print) comics interviews are presented. Of course, it's a case of "most," and not "all"--the recent
Newsarama interview on the Marvel: MAX line is a good example of a well-written, magazine-style story format. That piece also stands out for not just talking about the product itself, but the market factors and industry trends behind it.
Back to Gross for a moment... Gross's
bio on the NPR website dances around what I'm looking for:
Combine an intelligent interviewer with a roster of guests that, according to the Chicago Tribune, would be prized by any talk-show host, and you're bound to get an interesting conversation. Fresh Air's interviews, though, are in a category by themselves, distinguished by host and executive producer Terry Gross' unique approach. "A remarkable blend of empathy and warmth, genuine curiosity and sharp intelligence," says The San Francisco Chronicle.
Gross isn't afraid to ask tough questions, but she sets an atmosphere in which her guests volunteer the answers rather than surrender them. What often puts those guests at ease is Gross' understanding of their work. "Anyone who agrees to be interviewed must decide where to draw the line between what is public and what is private. But the line can shift, depending on who is asking the questions," observes Gross. "What puts someone on guard isn't necessarily the fear of being 'found out.' It sometimes is just the fear of being misunderstood."While I enjoy listening to
Fresh Air most of the time, I know the program isn't for everyone. Still, when I listen to it, I see depth mixed with enough information to make most interviews accessible to listeners--no esoteric knowledge of pop cultural/political/cultural minutia is required to get sucked in for an hour.
What I think we need, and what we can take from Terry Gross (and of course, you're welcome to disagree) is a greater focus on a body of work, on the ideas represented in the work, and more engaging questions. You know who gets it? Andrew Farago gets it--rereading his
Kyle Baker interview after listening to
Fresh Air, it's easy to see why it's getting linked to all over the place. Farago talks to Baker about more than one project, about industry trends in general, and about Baker himself.
Another thing worth mentioning about Farago's Baker interview is the flow of it. I would guess the interview was conducted either in person or over the phone, which allows for a more fluid, less bullet-point style interview.
As it stands, most comics interviews are less about the product, and more in terms of spreading the word about a product. This is not only obvious but also understandable--the reason people are willing to be interviewed is to spread the word on a project or a body of work. As
ICV2 notes, Crumb's
Fresh Air interview is part of a publicity blitz for
The R. Crumb Handbook. However, the questions probe deeper than the average "so, what can we expect from your run on TITLE X," and that has more to do with an awareness that the interview
itself is a project of its own, rather than the nature of Crumb's work--a similar interview could be done with someone working in mainstream comics, surely. Even listener-supported radio needs listeners to tune in. Magazines need to provide a reason for the audience to form an attachment to the publication, rather than relying on people who are just buying an issue for a single article. Perhaps the nature of the coverage is based more on the publicity aspect to drive sales in a somewhat moribund market, or maybe the relative dearth of comics coverage makes that kind of a need less crucial.
Perhaps the interviewing method is to blame. With free-to-read comics interviews, often written by volunteers, the discussion generally takes place via e-mail. I know I've sent bullet-point questions to creators in the brief period I conducted interviews, and I hated doing it that way--I realize that, in the end, it doesn't yield the best results. But I know why I did it, and I think the reasons may go beyond simple laziness--it's cheap and convenient. There are no phone bills to pay, no recording devices to worry about, and much easier to schedule. Of course, there's always the chance to send a few questions out at a time, and sending follow-up e-mails as the interview progresses, but that can be a timely process, and either party has the potential to lose steam as the conversation progresses.
What I would like to see is more questions of a probing nature. By that, I don't mean questions prying for gossip and juicy comments, but questions that ask a creator to analyze his or her work, to discuss his or her background in relationship to the work, to consider trends and movements to discern meaning or causation, to relate his or her work to both works in the medium and outside of it, and questions regarding his or her craft. I'm purposely leaving out creation-based interviews at sites for aspiring creators like
Scryptic Studios,
Comic Foundry and
Digital Webbing, because the focus of those sites steers the discussion to a certain audience. Somewhat tangentially, I'd also like to see more interviews done with people in roles other than writer or artist--editors and letterers, for example, but also people working in marketing, publishing, retailing and journalistic roles. They do get interviewed from time to time, but it's not frequent--generally, it's the writers and the artists that are the superstars. But with a good, inquisitive interview that touches on key points, industry concerns and personal revelations, just about anyone with some relation to the industry would make an interesting subject.
Of course, the bigger question is "is this what readers want?" Chances are, it isn't. While the focus of
The Comics Journal and
Wizard are obviously different, would a magazine without the (fair or unfair) reputation of
TCJ, but one that did more in-depth, focused interviews than
Wizard prints, work in the marketplace? I'd be curious to see the numbers that, say, the Bendis/YIR issue of
TCJ did when compared to the issue before it (which, I think, was the Eric Shanowar
Age of Bronze interview, so it's not as "alternative" or what have you than, say, the Phoebe Gloeckner issue a few months earlier). More relevant to the discussion of on-line comics interviews, the majority of comics fans seem satisfied with the current tone and style one sees in interviews at
Newsarama and
The Pulse. And while I had to chuckle at the opening parts of J.P. Dorigo's
Bendis interview, and the way the interview sprawled out in general,
the target audience seemed to enjoy it. The thing that stood out most for those fans? The conversational tone which, to me, reads like a conversation to the detriment of the interview as a product of its own.
Again, the issue isn't focus--if the market skews towards iconic superheroes, of course that's where the press will find most of its material. Focus is a different complaint entirely, and one I don't want to make, because it leads to further "us vs. them" complaints and arguements that I always feel uncomfortable straddling.
I'm not saying that this is what on-line comics interviews
should be; rather, I'm saying that this is what I would like to see more of. I'm selfish, obviously. But is anyone else with me? And who writes good comics-related interviews that are published online? I tend to like interviews conducted by Chris Arrant and Tom Spurgeon, for example, but I'm sure (or, maybe,
hoping) that there are other examples people would be willing to suggest as well.
