The key theme that I took away from the readings this week is that there is no “one size fits all” for journalism. This was especially communicated in the Rosenthal article with different napkin drawings, and how varied the designs were. It also demonstrates the more abstract thought that goes into a piece, with dips and gradients representing how a reader could be feeling, not necessarily the specific words that they are receiving.
I found the New Yorker piece by John McPhee especially impactful for my own reporting right now. It is hard to believe that an author, after having published many successful works, still feels so unsure about their own abilities when starting a new assignment. It almost gives me a little more confidence, knowing that even the best of the best can struggle with issues like writer’s block and an overall confusion with the amount of information that must go into a piece. I liked the quote that “you’re last one is not going to write your next one,” because it speaks to the shifting nature of journalism. Every story is unique to the characters, and just as your content is varied, so must be the structure.
The feeling McPhee described, not knowing how to structure a story after having collected interviews and research, feels somewhat like my current position, though on a very different scale. Now that we have returned from Germany and I have enough content to fill more than enough pages, I am struggling to find the through-line for my piece. McPhee wrote the perfect metaphor for this moment, it is like returning from the grocery store, and setting all the materials out on the table. The biggest challenge and asset is the main character. As McPhee described, once he figured out who was going to tell the story, the rest came to him much more easily. Notecards of information fell into place, almost like a giant puzzle knowing which cards needed to be touching, close, or sequential, fitting them all together for the final structure of the article.
The last piece by Stewart gave strong general tips for using chronological order in any article. Oftentimes when I am writing my own stories, it makes the most sense to lay every detail on a timeline just to get a better sense of the story before I begin writing. I liked how this article discussed elements that never really need to be in chronological order, like background info or small events outside the script. This is because a story that is scene driven has specific elements that are the most important and other details can be worked in where relevant. There was also a strong emphasis on how a writer is shifting to be inside different characters’ minds, and to be intentional in how this tool is being used.
