How long have you been a teacher? Twenty years. What is your favourite subject? Maths. Where do you teach? At a small school. Do you like your job? Yes, very much. Why? I like helping children.
INTERVIEWER: Hello, Mr Park. Thank you for meeting me.
MR PARK: Hello. You are welcome.
INTERVIEWER: How long have you been a doctor?
MR PARK: For twenty-five years.
INTERVIEWER: Why did you become a doctor?
MR PARK: My grandmother was a nurse. I wanted to help people, like she did.
INTERVIEWER: What is the hardest part of your job?
MR PARK: Telling people difficult news. It does not get easier.
INTERVIEWER: What advice would you give to young people who want to be doctors?
MR PARK: Listen to your patients. They often know more than they think they do.
INTERVIEWER: Thank you for your time.
MR PARK: Thank you. It was a pleasure.
Last week, I met the chef Maya Patel at her small restaurant on Hill Street, where she has been cooking for nearly twenty years. She is forty-seven. Her new cookbook, Slow Mornings, came out last month. We talked at a small table near the kitchen.
INTERVIEWER: Maya, thank you for meeting me. How are you?
MAYA: I'm well, thank you. A little tired — I cooked all morning.
INTERVIEWER: Your new book is called Slow Mornings. Why?
MAYA: Because most cookbooks are about dinner, and dinner is when people are most tired. I wanted to write about breakfast, which is when most of us are quiet and ready for something good.
INTERVIEWER: What is the hardest recipe in the book?
MAYA: The bread. I wrote it five times. Bread is always the hardest.
INTERVIEWER: What advice would you give to people who want to cook more at home?
MAYA: Start small. Cook one thing well before trying ten things. And listen to your kitchen — to the sound of the oil, to the smell of the bread.
INTERVIEWER: Thank you, Maya. I look forward to trying the recipes.
MAYA: Thank you. Cook slowly.
After Maya left, I sat for a few minutes with the menu. She was warmer in person than I had expected. I ordered breakfast.
Last week, I met the writer Hassan Ali at the small flat where he has lived for the past twenty years. He is sixty-four. His new collection of short stories, The Slow Road, came out last month — his fifth book in a forty-year career. He met me at the door in slippers, made tea, and led me to a small room with one window and several thousand books.
INTERVIEWER: Hassan, thank you for meeting me. How are you?
HASSAN: Well, thank you. A little anxious about being interviewed, as always.
INTERVIEWER: This is your fifth book in forty years. Why are you a slow writer?
HASSAN: Because I cannot work any other way. I write a sentence and then think for an hour and then write the next one.
INTERVIEWER: The new book is called The Slow Road. Is that a comment on writing, or on something else?
HASSAN: Both, I think. I am also less interested than I was in destinations.
INTERVIEWER: Many of these stories are about characters returning to places they once knew. Why?
HASSAN: I have been doing that myself for some years. The stories are not autobiographical, but they share the activity.
INTERVIEWER: Is there anything you wish you had done differently in your career?
HASSAN: Several things. Most of them are not for an interview. The one I will say is that I wish I had written less in my forties.
INTERVIEWER: Thank you, Hassan. I look forward to reading the book again carefully.
HASSAN: Thank you. I hope it rewards a second reading.
After Hassan saw me out, I stood for a moment on the small landing outside his flat. He had given me, in the careful way of writers being interviewed, a few good answers and several that I would have to read twice to fully understand. I went home and started.
I met the architect Sarah Hassan in the small studio she has worked in for the past fifteen years, on a quiet Wednesday morning when the city outside was unusually still. She had agreed to talk about her recent shift towards designing smaller buildings — the most recent of her completed projects, a small library extension, has been received with what reviewers have called 'a kind of nervous admiration', as though they were not entirely sure what to do with a building so deliberately modest.
She is fifty-four. She made tea. We sat at her drawing table.
SARAH: Sorry — the studio is a bit chaotic.
DANIEL: It looks well-used. Are you working on something now?
SARAH: Always. A house, this time. A very small one.
DANIEL: Your last few projects have been smaller than your earlier work. Why?
SARAH: When I was younger, I wanted to make things that would be visible from a distance. I now want to make things that would be useful when you were inside them.
DANIEL: Has anything in your career taught you that?
SARAH: Several things. I am not sure they translate well in interview form.
DANIEL: What advice would you give a young architect starting now?
SARAH: Two things, briefly. Listen to the people who will use the building, particularly the ones who will not be at the meetings. And do not, if you can help it, design from a position of wanting to be admired.
DANIEL: Is there something you wish you had done differently?
SARAH: Several things. Most are private. The one I would say is that I wish I had refused more commissions in my forties. Some of the buildings I made then are not, on inspection, buildings I would now defend.
DANIEL: Thank you for the morning. I look forward to seeing the small house when it is built.
SARAH: Thank you. I look forward to building it.
After Sarah saw me out, I stood for a moment on the pavement outside her studio. The interview, as is often the case with thoughtful people, had given me a few good answers and several managed ones — answers that were, in any reasonable sense, sincere, and that were also handled with the small careful awareness one applies to anything that might be misread. The line about her forties — about buildings she would not now defend — was the most interesting thing she said and probably the line I will not be able to use as the centre of the piece. Centring the article on what she had said was 'private' would, I suspect, betray the careful conversation we had had.
I walked the long way back to the office, past one of her early buildings — a large bright glass thing from the 1990s. It was, in its way, still impressive. I thought, looking at it, that I could see, slightly, what she had meant.
I met the painter Helena Park at the small studio she has worked in for the past twenty years, on a Wednesday morning when the city was unusually still. She had asked, through her gallery, to meet at the studio rather than at the gallery itself — a request I had at first read with the lazy interpretive shorthand of journalists, as a small piece of artistic positioning, but which I came to suspect was simply a matter of her not wanting to be far from the work she was in the middle of.
She is sixty-one. Her new exhibition opens next week — twelve small paintings, smaller than her earlier work, each focused on a single domestic object. The exhibition has been received with what critics have called 'a kind of nervous admiration'.
She made tea. We sat at her drawing table.
DANIEL: Helena, thank you for meeting me. How are you feeling before the opening?
HELENA: Anxious, as usual. I always think the paintings are not finished.
DANIEL: The new paintings are smaller and quieter than your earlier work. Why?
HELENA: I think I had said most of what I had to say at scale. The smaller paintings ask for a different kind of attention. After thirty years, I wanted to try.
DANIEL: What would you say to a young painter starting now?
HELENA: I am careful about advice. The conditions have changed. Two things, briefly: be patient, and look at things you do not understand for longer than you think you should.
DANIEL: Is there anything you wish you had done differently?
HELENA: Several things. Most are private. The one I would say is that I wish I had refused more commissions in my forties.
DANIEL: Thank you, Helena. I look forward to seeing the paintings.
HELENA: Thank you. I hope you can sit with them.
After Helena saw me out, I walked the long way back to the office. The interview, like most interviews with thoughtful people, had given me a few good answers and several managed ones — true answers carefully shaped, in the precise sense in which one carries a piece of valuable cargo. The line about her forties was the most interesting thing she said and probably the line I will not be able to use as the centre of the piece. By her framing, I have no licence to make her refusal the article's anchor; doing so would betray the careful conversation she had agreed to.
It is necessary, here, to say something briefly about that. Writing about thoughtful subjects involves a small invisible territory — an ethics rarely articulated, in which the reader will sense what is not said, and the article must honour what was given on condition. The piece I write will probably mention Helena's line in passing and move on, leaving it as a small unilluminated space at the centre of the article — visible but not turned over. The reader will register it. What the article does not say will be part of what the article does.
Later that week, I went to the opening. The paintings were small — most no larger than a sheet of writing paper. They hung in a small bright room, well spaced. Helena was talking quietly to a friend in a corner; she did not, on the whole, seek out journalists at her own openings. I stood in front of one of the paintings — a small careful study of a folded grey cloth — for what was, on inspection, considerably longer than I had originally planned. The cloth, painted with what I can only describe as a sustained refusal of drama, was, in its way, exactly the same kind of thing as her answer about her forties: a careful, true, managed presentation of something that, examined at length, could not be entirely contained.
How useful did you find this text? Leave a rating and a comment to help other teachers.