This story is divided into two parts. In the first part the author tells us about the advantages and disadvantages of the interview. The story starts with a view that an interview has become a commonplace of journalism. Some people consider this to be the highest form, a source of truth and in its practice of arts. Some understands this as a intrusion into lives of an interviewee, which diminishes their personal lives. In second part an Interviewer Mukund Padmanabhan and an interviewer Umberto Eco. Umberto Eco was a professor with a formidable reputation as an academic scholar for his ideas on Semiotics, literary interpretation and medieval aesthetics before he turned into writing fictions. He achieved superstardom with his publications “The Name of the Rose”.
In the past 130 years Interview has a became a inherent part of journalism. It is very useful to get an job in nowadays and it is considered to be an art, and acts as a evidence of truth.
Celebrities who see themselves as a victims, might despised the interview as an unwarranted intrusion in their lives, or feels that it is diminishing them, it is just like in some primitive cultures it was believed that if anyone takes photographic portrait of somebody then one is stealing that person’s soul. V.S. Naipaul ‘feels that some people are wounded by interviews and loses a part of themselves’.
In earlier times some primitive cultures, it was believed that if anyone takes photographic portrait of somebody then one is stealing that person’s soul from his body and leave them slighted.
The expression is defined by being strangled. And this expression refers to the pressure and discomfort felt by a celebrity while giving an interview.
Nowadays the chief source of information on personalities is the interviewer who, assaults his power and influence, collects information and provides us with best possible information on the interviewees.
Yes, Umberto Eco likes to being interviewed. He always be calm and communicate with the interviewer easily and confidently. He Patiently gives all the answer without being in hurry. He told his achievements in a good manner and explained his philosophical views and interest clearly. He had a good sense of humour and well responsive to the interviewer.
He generally didn’t had lot of time but he explained that the generally everybody has lots of time with no important jobs. He says that he spend his free time by writing only. He says that people gets shock that Eco has written so much on various subjects but the reason is that he was writing on the same lines and same interests-peace, etc. His all works were linked with the same lines. This thing saves his time and in this way he was able to write so many stories in a short period of time.
Umberto Eco had very different point of view which he uses in his stories by a good manner. His story was quite interesting and very different from regular academic style, which is usually depersonalized and often dry and boring.
Umberto Eco considered himself to be an academic scholar first and a novelist later. He cleared this thing by stating that he consider himself a university professor who used to write novels on Sundays. And on week days he used to attend academic conferences.
‘The Name of the Novel’ was very successful novel as it was a very different novel as compared to normal novels. It was a quite serious and interesting novel telling about the story of a Detective story. But it also consists of a theology and medieval history. But the actual reason for the success of this story is still a mystery.