Exam-useful questions from this chapter, grouped by marks, each with a full model answer. Try writing the answer yourself first, then check it against this one.
1 1-Mark Questions
Q. From which book is Part I of this chapter taken?
Answer: From Christopher Silvester’s introduction to The Penguin Book of Interviews, which he edited.
Q. How old is the interview as a journalistic form, according to the essay?
Answer: It is a little over 130 years old.
Q. What does Umberto Eco call the empty spaces in a day that he fills with work?
Answer: He calls them interstices.
Q. At which university did Umberto Eco teach?
Answer: The University of Bologna, in Italy.
Q. In which year was The Name of the Rose published?
Answer: It was published in 1980.
Q. Who interviewed Umberto Eco in this chapter?
Answer: Mukund Padmanabhan, from The Hindu, interviewed him.
Q. What is a linker, as this chapter defines it?
Answer: A linker is a word or device, such as a reference pronoun or a repeated word, that links the utterances of the interviewer and the interviewee to one another.
Q. What is a signaller, as this chapter defines it?
Answer: A signaller is a phrase that prepares the listener for a shift to a new topic.
2 2-Mark Questions
Q. Why does Lewis Carroll never consent to being interviewed?
Answer: Lewis Carroll, the creator of Alice in Wonderland, was said to have had ‘a just horror of the interviewer.’ This horror of being lionised made him repel interviewers and autograph-seekers, which he would later relate ‘with much satisfaction and amusement.’
Q. What irony does the essay point out about Rudyard Kipling?
Answer: Kipling condemned interviewing to two reporters as ‘immoral’ and ‘a crime,’ calling it as bad as an assault. Yet the essay points out that Kipling had himself interviewed Mark Twain only a few years before making that remark.
Q. What irony does the essay point out about H. G. Wells?
Answer: Wells called being interviewed ‘the interviewing ordeal’ in 1894, even though he was himself a fairly frequent interviewee. Forty years later, he went on to interview Joseph Stalin.
Q. Explain Eco’s idea of ‘interstices’ in your own words.
Answer: Eco says that if all the empty spaces in the universe (even inside atoms) were removed, the universe would become as big as his fist. Similarly, he says, “we have a lot of empty spaces in our lives”, such as the time spent waiting for a lift. He calls these interstices, and he works in them: “I work in empty spaces.”
Q. Why did Eco begin writing novels only at about the age of 50?
Answer: At 22, after his doctoral dissertation, Eco understood that scholarly books should be written by telling the story of the research. He says, “This is why my essays always have a narrative aspect. And this is why probably I started writing narratives [novels] so late — at the age of 50, more or less.” He began by accident, having “nothing to do one day”, and “Novels probably satisfied my taste for narration.”
Q. What does Eco say about most people knowing him only as ‘the novelist’?
Answer: Eco says it does bother him, because he considers himself “a university professor who writes novels on Sundays. It’s not a joke.” He identifies with the academic community rather than with Pen Clubs and writers. He accepts, though, that by writing novels he reaches a larger audience: “I cannot expect to have one million readers with stuff on semiotics.”
Q. Why was Eco’s American publisher surprised by the sales of The Name of the Rose?
Answer: She loved the book but expected it to sell no more than 3,000 copies in a country ‘where nobody has seen a cathedral or studies Latin,’ and gave Eco an advance based on that figure. Instead, the novel sold two to three million copies in the United States.
Q. Distinguish between a linker and a signaller, using the book’s own examples.
Answer: A linker connects a new turn back to what was just said, often through a reference pronoun like ‘that’ or through repeating a word, for example ‘Novels…’ followed later by ‘Talking about novels.’ A signaller instead prepares the listener for a shift to a new topic, for example ‘But let me tell you another story…’
3 4-Mark Questions
Q. Do you think Umberto Eco likes being interviewed? Give reasons for your opinion.
Answer: Yes, Eco seems at ease being interviewed. He answers questions candidly and at length, tells personal anecdotes (his doctoral dissertation, Roland Barthes, his American publisher), admits to ordinary habits like watching television, and laughs at points; to “Which is?” he gives a hesitant reply (“Aah, now that is more difficult to explain”). He does not share Part I’s hostility to interviews, though he says being known to most people only as “the novelist” bothers him.
Q. How does Eco find the time to write so much?
Answer: Eco explains that he works in what he calls “interstices”: “we have a lot of empty spaces in our lives. I call them interstices.” His own example is writing an entire article while waiting for a visitor’s lift to travel from the first floor to the third. Just as removing all empty space from the universe would make it “as big as my fist”, our lives too have many empty spaces, and he says, “I work in empty spaces.”
Q. What was distinctive about Eco’s academic writing style?
Answer: As Mukund puts it, Eco’s non-fiction writing has “a certain playful and personal quality”, a marked departure from the regular academic style, which is “invariably depersonalised and often dry and boring.” Eco explains that when he presented his first doctoral dissertation, a professor said that scholars “make a lot of false hypotheses, then they correct them and at the end, they put the conclusions”, whereas Eco had told the story of his research, “Even including your trials and errors.” This taught him at 22 that scholarly books should be written by telling the story of the research, which is why his essays “always have a narrative aspect.”
Q. Did Umberto Eco consider himself a novelist first or an academic scholar? Explain with reference to the text.
Answer: Eco clearly considers himself an academic scholar first. He calls himself ‘a university professor who writes novels on Sundays’ and insists, “It’s not a joke.” He says he participates in academic conferences rather than meetings of Pen Clubs and writers, and identifies with the academic community. He admits that being known to most people only as ‘the novelist’ does bother him, but he accepts that by writing novels he reaches a larger audience: “I cannot expect to have one million readers with stuff on semiotics.”
Q. What is the reason for the huge success of the novel, The Name of the Rose?
Answer: According to Eco, the success is “a mystery. Nobody can predict it.” Asked whether it had to do with the novel’s medieval setting, he concedes, “That’s possible,” but notes that “A lot of books have been written about the medieval past far before mine.” He says that if he had written it ten years earlier or later, “it wouldn’t have been the same. Why it worked at that time is a mystery.” He also points out that it is exactly the kind of readers he reached who “don’t want easy experiences”.
Q. Explain the contrast the essay draws between writers who despised interviews and the interview’s own defenders.
Answer: On one side, the essay lists writers who disliked or feared being interviewed: Lewis Carroll had ‘a just horror of the interviewer,’ Kipling called it ‘immoral’ and ‘a crime,’ and Bellow compared it to ‘thumbprints on his windpipe.’ On the other side, some make ‘extravagant claims’ for the interview as a source of truth and an art, and Denis Brian is quoted defending it as the medium through which ‘almost everything of moment reaches us,’ giving the interviewer ‘unprecedented power and influence.’ The essay does not resolve this tension neatly; it presents both views and lets the reader see the interview from each side.
Q. What does the essay’s treatment of Kipling and Wells suggest about the writers who criticised interviews?
Answer: Both are shown to be inconsistent. Kipling condemned interviewing as a crime and an assault, yet had himself interviewed Mark Twain a few years before saying so. Wells called being interviewed ‘the interviewing ordeal’ but was a frequent interviewee himself, and forty years later interviewed Joseph Stalin. The two examples show the inconsistency of the interview’s harshest critics.
Q. Explain, with examples from the chapter, how a signaller helps a conversation flow.
Answer: A signaller is a phrase that warns the listener a new topic is about to be raised, so the shift does not feel abrupt. The book gives two examples from the Eco interview: ‘Which brings me to another question…’ and ‘But let me tell you another story…’ Without such phrases, the book notes, ‘the flow of ideas in a conversation will not be smooth and continuous.’ A listener with no such warning would be caught off guard by a sudden change of subject. This matters especially in a structured conversation like an interview, where the interviewer must move between topics without losing the thread.
4 6-Mark Questions
Q. Denis Brian, quoted at the close of Part I, says the interviewer ‘holds a position of unprecedented power and influence.’ Using both Part I and Part II of the chapter, discuss how this chapter as a whole presents the interview as both a risky and a valuable form of communication.
Answer: Part I presents the risky side: the interview can feel, to its subjects, like an intrusion or a diminishment, compared even to the primitive fear that a photograph steals the soul; writers such as Carroll, Kipling and Bellow are shown reacting to it with horror, condemnation or discomfort. Yet the same section shows that some make “quite extravagant claims” for it, calling it, in its highest form, ‘a source of truth’ and ‘an art,’ and closes with Denis Brian’s view that the interviewer today holds ‘a position of unprecedented power and influence’ because ‘almost everything of moment reaches us through one man asking questions of another.’ Part II then shows this value realised in practice: Mukund Padmanabhan’s interview lets Umberto Eco explain, clearly and in his own words, ideas that might otherwise stay locked in academic writing, such as ‘interstices’; on why his most famous novel succeeded, he admits it ‘is a mystery. Nobody can predict it.’ Read together, the chapter suggests the interview is genuinely double-edged: capable of feeling like an intrusion to a reluctant subject, but also capable, in the right hands, of being the clearest way for a complex thinker to reach a wide audience.
Q. Write a character sketch of Umberto Eco as he presents himself in this interview.
Answer: Eco presents himself as candid, self-aware and quietly humorous. He resists being pigeonholed as either purely an academic or purely a novelist, insisting he is ‘always doing the same thing’ across his scholarly work, his novels and even his children’s books, all built around the same philosophical and ethical interests. He is disciplined and inventive about time, explaining his idea of ‘interstices’, the empty spaces in our lives in which he works. He is also honest about the limits of his own understanding, refusing to give a false explanation for The Name of the Rose’s success and instead calling it ‘a mystery.’ A touch of self-deprecating humour runs through his answers, from his insistence that he is ‘a university professor who writes novels on Sundays’ (‘It’s not a joke’) to his admission that he too relaxes with ordinary television in the evening. Overall, he comes across as a serious thinker who does not take himself too seriously.
Q. ‘Every famous person has a right to his or her privacy. Interviewers sometimes embarrass celebrities with very personal questions.’ Discuss this statement with reference to the views on interviews presented in Part I of the chapter.
Answer: Part I of the chapter gives strong support to this view through its list of writers who felt harmed or intruded upon by interviews: some celebrities see themselves as the interview’s ‘victims’ and might despise it as ‘an unwarranted intrusion’ or feel that it ‘somehow diminishes them’, a fear the essay compares to the primitive belief that a photograph steals a person’s soul. V. S. Naipaul is quoted saying interviews wound people and make them ‘lose a part of themselves.’ At the same time, the chapter does not present this as the whole truth: some writers who complained about interviews, such as Kipling and Wells, went on to interview others themselves, suggesting the discomfort is not always consistent. Silvester’s own conclusion is that, despite its drawbacks, the interview is ‘a supremely serviceable medium of communication’, and Denis Brian’s observation that the interviewer ‘holds a position of unprecedented power and influence’ shows why the form matters, though the chapter gives no verdict on whether personal questions should be asked. A balanced answer should acknowledge both the genuine risk to privacy the chapter documents and the real value in the information interviews provide, rather than taking only one side.
Q. Explain, with examples, the difference between a linker and a signaller, and discuss why the chapter treats this as an important skill to notice in conversation.
Answer: A linker is a word or device that ties a new utterance back to what was said immediately before it, using either a reference pronoun (such as ‘that,’ ‘this,’ or ‘which’) or the repetition of a word; for example, Eco’s line ‘I am always doing the same thing’ is picked up by Mukund’s ‘Which is?’, and Eco’s reply begins, ‘Aah, now that is more difficult to explain.’ A signaller, by contrast, is a phrase that prepares the listener for an upcoming change of topic altogether, such as ‘Which brings me to another question…’ or ‘But let me tell you another story…’ The chapter treats this as important because an interview is a ‘structured conversation,’ and without either device the exchange would feel disjointed: a listener suddenly presented with an unrelated question, with no signaller to prepare them, would struggle to follow the shift, and a reply that does not link back to the previous line would feel disconnected from the conversation as a whole. Understanding both devices helps a student both read an interview transcript more carefully and write connected, natural-sounding dialogue or reported speech of their own.
5 Case Studies
(A) 1 mark According to the passage, what do some celebrities see themselves as, in relation to the interview?
Answer: They see themselves as the interview’s ‘victims.’
(B) 2 marks According to the passage, apart from seeing the interview as an intrusion, what two attitudes might some celebrities have towards it?
Answer: They might despise the interview (as an unwarranted intrusion into their lives), and they might feel that it ‘somehow diminishes them’.
(C) 3 marks Explain, in your own words, the comparison the passage draws with primitive cultures.
Answer: The passage compares the feeling that an interview diminishes a celebrity to the belief, in some primitive cultures, that taking a photographic portrait of a person is ‘stealing that person’s soul’. In both cases, something personal is felt to be taken away by the act of being captured, whether on film or in an interviewer’s words.
(A) 1 mark What does Eco call the empty spaces he describes in this passage?
Answer: He calls them interstices.
(B) 2 marks What comparison does Eco use to explain how much ’empty space’ actually exists?
Answer: He says that if all the empty spaces were eliminated from the universe, even the empty spaces in all the atoms, the universe would become as big as his fist; similarly, he says, we have a lot of empty spaces in our lives.
(C) 3 marks Based on the passage, explain how Eco actually uses an interstice, with his own example.
Answer: Eco says, ‘I work in empty spaces.’ His example is that while waiting for a visitor’s lift to come up from the first to the third floor, he has already written an article, showing how much can be done in a short gap in the day.