« Final picture | Main | Something to blog home about »
Saturday night’s alright… for working
September 17, 2006
I think I have probably talked to five of my friends tonight, none of whom made even vague gestures to the question “what are you doing tonight?” because they, like me, are home working. Indeed, each of these phone calls has been work-related. The joys of freelance insanity.
As I’ve been interviewing people (at the rate of about two a day) and writing words to piece together my next book chapter, I’ve been thinking a lot about different issues the book brings up for me – not just the subjects I’m writing about, but also the metaimplications of the work I’m doing, and what I and my many interviewees can expect to get out of it.
Especially since I’m working on the chapter about sex work at the moment, I’ve been thinking an awful lot about story-telling versus life-living. This came up in the last chapter I wrote (on porn) too – my editor made note of the fact that sometimes I skimp on the personal details of the women I’m writing about. This is intentional – for example, one of the porn performers I interviewed made brief mention of being an authentic MILF, and so my editor wanted more details about her kids and family life. But – this just can’t happen, because the performer wants that information protected. This makes for a less interesting story, I know… but I really can’t justify pushing people past their comfort zone so I can get a good story.
This softness, this protective urge, could mean small death for my writing career and/or my porn directing career, or it could be my strength – or it could be something I get over. I really don’t know. But for now, I feel intensely in tune with the experience of being represented by someone else in the written word (and image), and how exhilarating and horrifying that can be. And so, I want to make sure that I take care of business, treat people fairly, all that good stuff.
Another thing I think about a lot, as I write a book about the internet, is this: why should this be a book and not a website?
Books, where URLs look unwieldy and the text isn’t searchable except in this old-fashioned thing called an “index,” are my first media-love, before movies or music or magazines or websites. It’s kinda cool to be writing something that when its done, could hurt someone if I threw it at them (hypothetically speaking, of course). And there’s an interesting air of legitimacy with a book. Maybe I’ll be taken “more seriously” (or whatever) when I have a book as opposed to a blog. After all, anyone can have a blog. But the funny thing about books is that while I don’t believe that they’ll become extinct anytime soon, they are increasingly less permanent than a website, as they go out of print. With projects like Archive.org, digital culture is becoming much less delete-able, the the internet is just plain more searchable and interconnected than books.
Reading about the process of making a porn movie was a lot more fun than reading about book writing, eh? Yeah yeah. Well, with any luck there will be more of the porno, so hold your horses while I’m typing away madly.
Posted by Dacia at September 17, 2006 02:09 AM
Comments
“I really can’t justify pushing people past their comfort zone so I can get a good story.”
Well, see, that’s ‘cause you actually have a conscience, and ethics, and stuff.
Posted by: Amber at September 17, 2006 10:17 AM
“I really can’t justify pushing people past their comfort zone so I can get a good story.”
It’s easy to get tricked into thinking the choice is between being true to yourself, what you want to do and how you want to do it, and being successful.
Don’t believe it!
You got where you are being who you are, doing what you do the way you want to do it. That’s why you got the chance to make a movie, that’s why you got the chance to write a book; and staying true to yourself is your best chance of making a good movie and making a good book.
Stick to your guns. The only reason to struggle and sacrifice is to do it the way you want to, and saying the things you know need to be said.
Posted by: Tony Comstock at September 17, 2006 04:57 PM
Do you have the option of actually discussing this in a sort of methodology chapter or afterword or just section in the introduction? Because I’m thinking that, for me, such chapters always make the book, this is what authenticates the author (and I know this is perverse) it means she gives a crap. this is probably the biggest problem I had with levy — why I had a hard time swallowing that she was a feminist. not one word discussing the issues involved in listening to women, hearing them, protecting them where they need to be protected b/c we really still do live in a shite society in spite of all the claims about raunch sending us to hell in a handbasket. a society where these sorts of revelations can still ruin people.
Barbara Enrenreich’s Nickled and Dimed was a good model — where she situates herself and discusses some of the methodological issues in plain language.
Also, for an academic version of the issue of protecting identity, Judith Stacey’s Brave New Families.
People have been known, even in academic sociology, to make composites of the people interviewed in order to discuss certain issues without revealing identity. The problem, of course: you’re not so obscure an academic and you’re interviewing people like you. Which already gives people plenty of clues as to who might be behind the IDs.
Really, I’m saying to your editor: you should write a chapter on just these issues alone. academic feminists would love it!
Posted by: Bitch | Lab at September 17, 2006 06:33 PM
I don’t know that it will be an entire chapter - though who knows with my verbosity - but I have been working on a note about methodology that includes writing about not only the interview process, but the means by which I chose to interview people.
In general I’m using the oral history model, which is very self-reflexive and gives the interviewee a lot of room to talk back and analyze the document he or she is creating with the interviewer. Its a tough balance to reach between giving the interviewees space to think about what they are saying and not giving over control over the shape of the final product, which by nature of the beast has my authoritative voice imprinted all over it.
Posted by: Dacia at September 17, 2006 07:31 PM
