This week’s optional reading struck me the most.

Michael Roemer, philosopher and filmmaker, makes the controversial suggestion that “plot is really the rules of the universe at work”. In other words, the way that life unfolds follows a similar structure to that of film, and it is for that reason that we relate most profoundly to heroic characters, because each of us as human beings has audaciously overcome a form of hardship on some scale, from womb to tomb.

The reading goes on to discuss the Greek’s theoretical layout to theatrical performances, that which almost every linear film follows: establishment, the rise of an issue, and conflict resolution.

That is where I begin to disagree with Roemer’s notion about plot.

In everyday life, some problems do not have resolutions, and there aren’t always happy endings. Problems rise and we, as a protagonist in our own story, aren’t always able to solve them.

Life is non-linear, and that makes it so much more entertaining.

So now that I have made a decision on who I will be interviewing and have received permission from both Connie and Darren to pursue this interview, it is now time to start working around both my production constraints and the personal constraints that come with an interview of this nature. I comprised a list of things that I must be mindful of when constructing interview questions and subsequently when I am asking the questions. I had to make decisions about the kind of answers am I looking for without showing interviewee bias, in order to give the video a structural flow.

• Due to the obvious sensitivity of the topic, it is important that I approach the questions in a careful way that isn’t too direct, blatant, or harsh.
• The interview will be conducted in Connie and Darren’s home, in order for them to feel as comfortable as possible, in addition to conveying a sense of voyeuristic insight to the viewer.
• The questions will be posed in an almost conversational manner, however, they must be open ended enough for the interviewees to speak candidly without restraint, but also guided enough so that the responses ultimately all relate to the same topic.
• When editing the interview, I will not include my questions, only their answers. Upon my request they will repeat my questions in their answers so that the interview is central to their responses and emphasises the importance of what they have to say.
• Also when editing, I have decided to layer a melancholy piano piece that is fully licensed over the interview, and adjust the levels to be softer when there is dialogue.

Following Louise’s lecture on The Art of the Interview, I had a really hard think about the kind of person or people whom I wanted to give insight into. I thought about the way that I wanted my audience to feel and the kind of information that I wanted to provide. I thought about how I was going to incorporate licensed or found footage into the interview in a way that was relevant and didn’t take away from what the interviewee had to say.

And then I had an idea.

Losing my best friend to cancer at the beginning of last year was the most emotionally-challenging ordeal I have ever had to overcome, but there was no one who was more traumatised by Ricky’s death than his beautiful parents, Connie and Darren Taylor. In the aftermath of his passing, Ricky’s parents started a foundation to aid teenagers in hospital and provide the kind of resources and support that Ricky needed when he was fighting his hardest battle.

I want to shed light on the hardship that his parents have endured since, the effect of the Ricky Taylor Foundation even in it’s early days, and especially the legacy that Ricky has left behind, and there is no better way to do so than providing a platform through which his parents can speak about their son openly and hopefully provide closure not only to them, but to me also.

Today Louise gave a really interesting and engaging lecture on interview etiquette and the kind of content we must include in our PB3 interviews.

I’m so grateful that our lectures aren’t dry content and our lecturers actually make the effort to keep our attention throughout. It makes me significantly more obliged to want to learn, which I think is really important in uni, when no one is ‘forcing’ you to do so.

The most daunting thing for me at this point is deciding who I will interview and whether or not they will deliver in front of a camera. According to Louise, as an interviewer, you must give your interviewee questions of an open-ended nature, in order to get the most interesting and wholesome answers. The following are notes that I took during her lecture:

The Who:

• Do they have something to say?
• Are they credible?
• Can they deliver on camera?
• Are they good “talent”?
• Who is my audience?

The What:

• What are you going to ask them?
• Research: reading, speaking, observing
• Write questions: simple, as short as possible, open ended, check wording (bias)
• Practice

The Where:

• Location – Home, work, other? Why? Permissions?
• Things to think about:
• Light: is there enough? Will it change?
• Sound: background noise, interruptions
• Background: What does it say? Will it change? Artworks?

The When:

• Remember to brief the subject (clothing, questions and answers, repeat your question in the answer)
• Maintain eye contact
• Listen (use nods and facial expressions)
• Be flexible/adaptable
• Be respectful and show empathy
• Stay focused
• Be quiet, it’s not about you