INTERVIEWING EXTRAORDINARY.
WE have not much reason to be proud of the new journalism that is flourishing among us at home, but at least we may congratulate ourselves that it has not yet reached the pitch of folly and audacity at which it seems to have arrived in France. The French journalist has long enjoyed an almost boundless license, and an equally complete immunity from the consequences of the freedom in which he indulges, save on the occasions when policy or a wish for advertisement induces him to fight innocuous duels with his friends or colleagues. This freedom, added to the spirit of enterprise and inventive genius, that is characteristic of all his nation, seems to have carried him at last even beyond the bounds that are tolerated by his countrymen. Indeed, his last feat is of too embarrassing a nature to be borne. The Bompard- Eyraud trial for murder, after a prolonged agony of conflicting evidence, confessions, and recantations, was at length drawing 'to a close. While it lasted, journalists had drawn immense capital out of it. They had interviewed the prisoners, the rela- tions of the murdered man, the doctor, the witnesses, and the prison officials, and had been able to gratify the morbid curiosity of their patrons in the most satisfactory manner ; so that, in a measure, one can understand their reluctance to let so produc- tive a subject die out without some farther effort on their part to profit by it. There was nothing left to be made known but the verdict ; therefore they privately and separately interviewed the jurors, and published their verdict before it was asked for, the consequence apparently being that a fresh jury will have to be called, and the trial recommenced. An excellent invention, says the Charivari ; but, it adds, if the public is to be allowed to interview the jurors after this fashion, why should not the prisoner be allowed to interview them also P Why should he not visit them all in turn, and sue for their favourable votes, after the manner of a would-be Academician, who personally solicits the good-will of his future colleagues P Why not, indeed P But why have any formalities of trial, Judge and jury, at all P These enterprising interviewers and reporters seem so capable of collecting evidence and commenting on it, of correcting the pleadings of the counsel, and observing the demeanour of the prisoner, that the whole trial might be carried on free of cost in the sheets of a newspaper ; a plAiscite of its readers might be published in place of a jury's verdict, and sentence might be passed in accordance with a similar popular vote; so that the whole costly and cumbrous machinery of Law and Justice might be done away with in favour of an arrangement which would add immensely to the profits of journalism and the pleasure of newspaper readers. After all, the justice of the case is quite a secondary con- sideration in the mind of the public. The only drawback would be that it would be impossible to get a sentence of capital punishment passed, or probably to get any punishment inflicted at all; bnt that would be amply compensated for by the enormous increase of murder and crime, and the conse- quent abundance of pleasant subjects for public discussion. It is rather amusing to remark that in the present case, one of the jurors who had been entrapped into giving his verdict, has been obliged to submit to further interviews, in order to assert the innocence of his intentions ; a strange case of " the hair of the dog that bit him." So far, we have seen no attempt on the part of English journalists to tamper with the jury- men and extract their opinions by means of interviews; but in other ways they are by no means blameless. Every day the salutary law that forbids the discussion of a case that is still sub judice, is evaded in one way or another. In a dreadful case of murder that is now being tried, pretty -nearly the whole of the evidence was put before the public long before the case came into Court at all. Policemen were interviewed, cross-examined, and generally hampered and embarrassed by the determination of the public to assist in the hunt. Judging from the accounts in the papers, the husband of the victim must have been interviewed a dozen times a day, in order that a curious public might view his grief, and listen to his sobs and broken utterances. Even the mother of the prisoner was put upon this intolerable rack, and tortured into giving information that might perhaps be used as evidence against her own daughter. The more horrible and inhuman the crime, the more eager is this insatiable .curiosity ; the more sordid and hateful its details and sur- roundings, the more lovingly does the reporter describe and the reader gloat over them. In the case of the unhappy wretch who was lately hanged for murder in Canada, hardly an hour of his life from the time of his imprisonment was left unre- ported ; his idle words, his way of walking, his clothes, the very food that he ate, everything, down to his last death- struggle on the scaffold, was made known for the public benefit. To what end P What possible good can come of a practice that degrades both the journalist and his reader? The gratification of an unhealthy, of an unnatural and morbid appetite, brings no good with it. It is a practice among certain African tribes to commit suicide by eating dirt. Surely it is a form of moral suicide that is committed by those people who willingly batten upon this garbage.
Interviewing, however, has its comic side as well as this painful one, from which one willingly turns away. The inter- viewer may be actuated by very different purposes. He may wish to collect information on a subject of general interest by consulting authorities who would otherwise be backward in offering an opinion,—a praiseworthy intention which is not often followed by any good results. Or he may be anxious, by dint of cross-examination, to extract opinions which the owner has not the courage to avow publicly. Or, again, he may look upon himself as a kind of interpreter, who, knowing exactly what questions the public is anxious to ask, undertakes to provide them with suitable answers. But the most general and common form of interviewing is that which is simply occupied in satisfying the eternal, restless curiosity of the world with regard to trifles. Should some eminent divine come prominently before the public, that public is anxious to learn many things of him. They do not care to know what his theological tenets may be, nor what is the extent of his learning, nor what are his views as to Church policy ; but they are hungry for information as to his personal appearance, to know if gaiters are becoming to his legs, whether he drinks port or is a teetotaler, whether or not he approves of dancing on or off the stage, what is his private opinion of his Archbishop, and in how many minutes he can run a mile. On all these points the interviewer enlightens them ; points upon which the good man, if left to himself, would never have thought of discoursing. In one daily journal such interviews seem to form its chief attraction. We have seen in its pages an interview with an African traveller, with the object of ascertaining his opinion as to the com- parative merits of English novelists ; an interview with a hang- man, containing a dissertation upon various kinds of rope; an interview with a tight-rope dancer, in which, strangely enough, no mention was made of the rope, but the most curious specula- tions were advanced on the subject of dress ; an interview with a fasting-man, with a view to finding out his ideas upon every- day diet, to which was appended a most learned discourse on the dangers of eating too much; an interview with a boot- maker, savouring rather of advertisement ; an interview with a bishop, with a socialist, with a private soldier, with a preacher, a criminal, a champion boxer, and a man who had been born without joints. In all of these interviews, the personal ap- pearance, dress, and manners of the victim are carefully described ; his furniture, his pictures, his manservant or his maidservant, and, if the interviewer gets a chance, his bedroom and wardrobe too. But here we may remark that not all their victims are unwilling ones, and that there are many people who are even more eager to be interviewed than the public is to interview them. The garment of reserve and reti- cence which the world seems so anxious to tear away from its public characters, is one of which some people are only too glad to strip themselves, laying bare their most private life for universal inspection. The idle, morbid curiosity that is for ever wishing to pry behind the curtain—to tear off the coverings and see what is underneath—is fully equalled by the huge and preposterous egotism that prompts so many people to give up themselves for its food, and so gain a doubt- ful notoriety. Some, of course, cannot help themselves; hard fortune has deprived them of privacy of life, and they have to submit to be interviewed, or perhaps even endure worse things; but they form but a small minority of the great number of personages who are continually being turned inside-out for our edification. If one was only sure that one saw the real lining, the process would be at least a more entertaining one ; but the truth of these revelations depends chiefly on the interviewer, and he is by no means infallible.
In interviewing as a fine art., we are still far behind our American cousins. The first tender that boards the ship upon which a distinguished visitor arrives at their shores, swarm with interviewers. Scarcely has the object of their attentions set his foot on land, when the newspapers are informing their readers of his clothes, of his luggage, his sea-sickness, his gait, his moral character, his favourite oath, the amount of money in his pocket, and how much he lost at whist during the passage. If the distinguished traveller is a wise man, he will give himself up to the tender mercies of his inquisitors, and they will deal with him honestly and kindly after their own lights; but should he be restive and obstructive to this inquisition, his torture will only be prolonged, and the information which is ultimately offered to the public—for the public must have information, whetherhe bewilling or not—will be considerablyless than kind. On the whole, we prefer the American style of interviewing, disagreeable as it is, because it is more honest, and makes no pretences. There is no question with them of seeking a serious and valued opinion upon a serious and debateable subject; they simply say to their celebrity,—when they have caught him,—" You are a great man, and we are a set of frivolous fools ; give us something that is both foolish and frivolous to talk about,"—whereas the English interviewer puts on a grave face, pretends that he is acting as a channel for conveying momentous and weighty instruction to a public that is anxious to be enlightened, and has the air of fulfilling a solemn mission while he babbles inanities. It must be a sorry trade, that of the interviewer ; and we would that there were no occasion for it : if it were only to save some of our fellow-creatures from being forced to play the humiliating and discreditable role of Paul Pry.
Previous page
