Interviewing interviews with Napoleon Dynamite and Dengue Fever
- Read this short interview with Jon Heder, who played Napoleon Dynamite in the film by the same name.
Then read this short interview with the drummer for the band Dengue Fever.
The overall purpose of both interviews is to promote something—in the first case, a movie, and in the second, a record. As you read, look for how the questions are meant to get you interested in what is being promoted. But also pay attention to the tone of voice: how does the tone of voice of the questions set the tone of the response?
- After you read, compare the two interviews through these questions:
- Do either of the interviews attempt to place you bodily at the scene of the interview? If so, how, if not, why not?
- In what ways do the interviews help you picture the interviewees?
- Interviews obviously use quotes as the basis for their written presentation. Interviewers ask questions and record (in one way or another) the answers. In the answers, we get our best look at the person speaking, mostly through their tone of voice (but also from what they say). Compare the tones of voice of each interviewee: How much do we learn about each from the way they answer questions?
- The interview with Paul Dreux Smith is somewhat longer than the interview with Jon Heder. Do we hear enough of Smith’s voice to learn more about him than we learn about Heder?
- How does the picture of the band affect the way you read the Smith interview? Compare this to the use of a pull quote for the Heder interview.
-
We have noted that these interviews serve to promote the recent release of a movie and a record, respectively. At the time you read them, the movie and record will have been “out” for some time. Do the interviews have any lasting interest or value to you? Or is their use-value tied to the release of the movie and record?
- Which of the interviews expects you to know something about what the interviewee has done? How can you tell?
- Compare the length of the answers to the questions in each interview. How do you account for the differences, especially for the large number of very short answers in the Smith interview? Is it a result of the questions being asked, or is it something else?
- Are both these interviews mainly about the product (movie or record), mainly about the person being interviewed, or mainly about something else? What do the titles of the interview pieces tell you about the main subject?
