 | | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Right. Plus I think that by coming to the conclusion that THIS is what the book is about, she exposes her inability to think outside the boundaries of what she herself is interested in. As I said in my reply to Dan, in my view, the book is (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Mark the above sentence as "exhibit A" (...) It's not "freaky". Really. Trust me. I won't go into why, except to say you would have to read it, and accept the premises. (...) That's unfortunate. I suspect that these novels would not translate (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Sounds kind of freaky. I've never been much of a novel reader so I'll probably never get to it. But I imagine the author's choice to use little tykes as protagonists serves his commentary on modern societal values (or lack of)? (...) "South (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Granted. It's listed as an "interview," but it's only an interview in the most basic sense. (...) That's a good point, too. Caveat Interviewee, I guess, though I expect Card is sharp enough to have picked up on her agenda during the course of (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) OK... Wasn't billed that way though. (...) But did she let the *subject* in on this intent? I don't think so, it looks like to me that it was billed (to Card) as just a normal interview. Card, in a perfect world, would have read some of her (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
