On quotes and veracity
The next time you read a magazine article, ask yourself, “Do people really talk like this?”
I’m referring to the paragraph-long quotes in long pieces where the truth of the story matters even more than the nitty-gritty accuracies. If you’re going to keep your reader submerged in the narrative of your work, how can you serve them “uhs” and “ums?”
You can’t. Every writer makes his or her decision on how to shape quotes so they fit as seamlessly as possible into the larger tale. It might be harsh, even revolting, to accept at first. Big features? Well known authors? Massaging quotes to fit the piece? Oh, woe is me and my literary fondnesses! But no, I can’t agree with these imagined histrionics.
The fact is, long form journalism is has some art to it. You’ve got to keep your reader turning the pages, all the while remaining loyal to the truth, both observed and discerned. This is the challenge. When quoting sources, then, you’ve got to synthesize. Subtly notify the reader when you’ve condensed a quote. If you use two quotes sequentially, but your source said much in between them, break up those quotes with attribution.
And there are other methods too, of remaining true and accurate while not reproducing verbatim your sources’ speeches. These are the creative spots in journalism; this is where it gets fun. But underlying it all is that fealty to truth.
When you write a long journalistic piece, whether a profile or a feature or a narrative, the bottom line is truth. See and comprehend the truth of a story, use evidence to analyze those elements of human nature that bore the truth of a story.
To use a hackneyed expression, get to the heart of the matter. In all its triteness, this is the essence of good journalism.
No Responses to “On quotes and veracity”
No comments yet