Thoughts on the Author Interview
One of the things I like best about my work at All About Romance is interviewing authors. Over the years, I’ve gotten to ask questions about books I loved or at least liked. In fact, my main two criteria for an author interview these days are these: I’ve read their most recent book and I enjoyed it.
When I began doing author interviews here, I didn’t have those two guidelines. Then several years ago, I agreed to interview an author before I’d read one of her books. I read her latest and couldn’t stand it. I’d already committed to the interview, so, I did it. And hated it. I didn’t have any interesting questions about the book and the whole thing seemed to be a waste of time for all concerned.
Ever since then, I’ve–with the exception of interviews at national conferences where my interest is in letting our readers know what authors are up to–limited my interviews.
I don’t think this is a bad policy but I have decided it’s one I should be clear about, especially to our readers. For me, an interview is not a review. In a review, I assess a book and share that assessment. I’m a cheerleader for books I’ve read and loved and a basher of those I’ve loathed. In an interview, I have a different role. I’m interested in learning, from the author, how they write and why. I’m asking them to take the time to share their secrets with me and AAR.
And it does take time. I do my interviews via email. I usually contact an author rather than the other way around. I’m usually interested in asking about her latest book. I send her questions–more than six, less than sixteen. I try and ask questions that I’ve not seen answered elsewhere. The author then sends me back the answers, by the date we’ve agreed on. I look them over and see if the interview feels complete. If it doesn’t, I send back more questions or variations of the questions I’ve already asked. Once I’ve gotten all the answers, I add formatting and info about the author, send it to her again in order for her to make sure she’s said exactly what she wants to, and then I publish it.
I’m uncomfortable doing this about a book I didn’t like. I’m also uninspired to do it about a book I didn’t like.
This all seems reasonable to me. Does it to you? I’m genuinely curious. I’d appreciate your feedback.
Thanks.
Dabney Grinnan
What’s the criteria of the blog? I notice some authors have blog tours, so I assume the interviews here are a combination of these tours and/or of the blog reaching out to an author.
I actually don’t want the interviewer to be a cheerleader. I’ve seen too many interviews (on other blogs, not here) where I wondered if the interviewer really liked the book that much or if they were friends with the author. With Twitter and conferences, authors and bloggers interact and it must be difficult to keep one’s objectivity. I think this became a problem over at DA when it was revealed Meljean Brooks did some of Jen Frederick’s covers and also did an interview at DA without any disclosure.
We don’t have a set criteria. This article is just about my criteria. I don’t do interviews as part of blog tours. If I know an author before I interview her, I always state what our relationship is. As I said in this article, what currently pushes me to do an interview is reading a book and falling for it. That process then makes me want to know more. I’ll contact an author and ask if they’d be willing to be interviewed. The blog does upon occasion participate in blog tours but not with interviews and, increasingly, with guest columns by authors whose connection to the blog tour is clear.
If nothing else, it’s surely very awkward to interview someone who’s work you don’t enjoy. As a reader, I certainly enjoy an interview more if the enthusiasm for the subject comes through – enthusiasm rather than gushing, and you don’t do the latter.
An interview of this sort is certainly promotional, but that’s no reason out can’t be informative or pose the odd more insightful or difficult question when warranted.
Gah! – no reason IT can’t be…
A reason why I avoid those author “”blog tours”” like the plague. I’ve seen some awkward times where the interview came first and then the review the next day, and the blogger clearly hated the book but couldn’t come out and say it!
Too many popular romance sites “”love”” everything, and they’re totally useless. On a site like this I trust that if there’s a feature on an author, it’s because the people here enjoy and recommend their books.
In other words, this plan for interviews is better than doing them for authors you don’t want to read!
I think it’s very reasonable, in a webpage like this, that loves and promote this genre. As a reader, that’s what I expect, and it’s the perfect way to perform an interview with a romance author. That way, I read the interviews with the writers I love and ignore those that I’m not interested in.
Because -I think, but you can correct me if I’m wrong- this is not exactly journalism. I mean, a journalist has to ask the uncomfortable questions. The rest, as George Orwell pointed out, is just PR. But that’s what I expect in this kind of webpage, to enjoy and rejoice in the books I love.
I think it’s safe to say I’m rarely holding myself to the standards of professional journalist when I write blog posts. I do think the point of AAR is to connect readers with books and authors. That includes warning readers about books or issues we have concerns about.
I really dislike fandom and the fan culture that surrounds public figures, including authors, and so the last thing I want to read is a gushing blog entry devoid of probing or informative questions. The author interviews at AAR tend to be on the “”lite”” side for my taste, but generally, as a reader I’m curious what an author’s working on, future book plans, stylistic preferences they care to share, etc. But I agree that less of the interviewer and more of the author works best for this format.