A word to authors being interviewed

[charlie_cochrane]

I conduct a lot of author interviews, both for my blogs and for The Big Thrill, the International Thriller Writers' magazine. Most people provide responses which are interesting, amusing, informative, etc. Responses which are a real advert for their books. Some people, however - well, it's like getting blood from a stone. I receive answers which are shorter than the questions, which can't be good, and ones which are badly written (repetitive, grammatically poor or the like) that I end up redrafting in the case of The Big Thrill, where I feel responsibility for the quality of content.

So, my fellow authors, think of this. If your interviews are naff, doesn't it suggest that your books are naff, too?

Contemplate this wonderful zebra while you're at it.

Comments

[marasmine.livejournal.com]

It always amazes me how much trouble authors (including me!) have stringing a few words together in an entertaining answer to a question - even when it is about their work rather than themselves.

Maybe we really are all badly-socialised introverts incapable of behaving rationally in public? :)

[charliecochrane.livejournal.com]

Could be. Except that 80% of my interviewees manage it, normally - I suspect - by just treating it like a conversation. Or somehow twisting the question to fit what they want to say (which is no problem for me). It's the 'I don't know.' answers which bug me. :)