HN Explorer

24 comments

[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 69.6 ms ] thread
nornagon
What a cringe-worthy interview. It's clear the interviewer is asking from a set list of (stunningly boring) questions, and despite Le Guin answering nearly every question with "please ask a more interesting question", the interviewer doesn't waver.
azakai
Sadly I agree. Le Guin is a remarkable talent but the interviewer asked stock questions, nothing tailored to her. Some interviewees might find a way to turn that into something interesting, but it just seems like Le Guin and those questions did not find any common ground.
100k
Pretty sure it was a standard list of questions - perhaps emailed.

Still, she is one of my favorite writers so it's interesting to read what she likes reading.

technomancy
I would like to think it was certainly emailed because I can't imagine a live interviewer getting those kind of answers and continuing in that vein; I really want to assume the only way that could have happened was if there was no real back-and-forth between the interviewer and the interviewed.
dang
It's a standard thing NYT does and it's pretty obvious that the questions are pre-written and sent as a batch.

http://www.nytimes.com/column/by-the-book

nornagon
Alas, what a lazy approach. An opportunity wasted.
dang
I don't think that's fair. It's one of several standard types of interview, and legit in its own right, as long as one doesn't confuse it with the others. It's not like Ursula Le Guin hasn't done plenty of face-to-face interviews too.
technomancy
> It's one of several standard types of interview

Except it's not actually an interview. Call it a Q&A or something if you like, but "interview" implies back-and-forth conversation.

dang
That's fair enough re my usage of the word, but the article never calls itself an interview, and the point that this is a well-known standard format holds. Let's not dismiss things for shallow reasons.
anifow
More appropriate to call it a questionnaire than an interview.
[deleted]
(comment deleted)
technomancy
The previous answer defines it as the "Did I re-read it" test.
pmcginn
It's explained in the interview, but since you missed it:

"And I am applying the Dirri (Do I Reread It?) Test"

[deleted]
(comment deleted)
[deleted]
(comment deleted)
joshmarinacci
That may be the worst author interview I've ever read.
steveax
And sadly, such a wasted opportunity with such a terrific author. Of all the interesting question the columnist could have asked, sigh.
[dead] joshmarinacci
That may be the worst author interview I've ever read.
tempodox
If you really want to botch an interview and bend over backwards to not ask any pertaining (or even interesting) question, this is the way to go. NYT, I want my time back.