72395873289

and emotional environment all around it. The way a person is dressed, the way he’s behaving, the
weather, the natural environment—none of that is captured by a tape recorder. Whereas in a notebook,
you can take down all these kinds of details.
Third, when I’m interviewing a person it is often in an environment where a tape recorder is
simply not going to work: three hundred feet above the ground in a tree, or in a space suit handing
deadly viruses. When I was writing First Light, I found that the best time to interview one of the
astronomers was in the middle of the night when he would pace around the catwalk on the Hale
telescope. He would only open up to me in the moonless, pitch-black darkness. It was way too dark
for me to take any notes, but I’d listen intently and remember what he was saying. Then I’d sit down
immediately after our conversation and write down the important remarks.
But wouldn’t that be the perfect situation for a tape recorder?
Perhaps, although then there is the hassle of transcribing all those tapes. With a notebook, I do a lot
of transcribing and editing while the interview is taking place. I don’t miss the really important things
people say. And people tend to repeat the really important points. If it is important to them they will
usually say it more than once.
How do you know when the interview phase of the piece is done and you’re ready to begin
writing?
It’s never done. I conduct what I call “fact-checking interviews” up until literally the moment
before the article or book goes to press. The people in the production department hate me because I’m
always making changes at the very last second. And if they won’t let me make changes I tell them that
it is a legal issue, which always scares them. I say, “I’ve been doing more fact-checking. I’ve
encountered new information, and if I can’t put it in the book we’re all going to be sued!”
Tell me more about these fact-checking interviews.
Fact-checking is a crucial part of my writing. Starting with First Light, I got into the habit of
calling my subjects on the phone while the piece was in draft form. I find that I can’t often get a
passage right until I’ve read it aloud to a real expert. I sometimes spend hours and hours on the phone
with an expert. My phone bills have been known to top $1500. I never show written material to my
subjects, but I always read it to them over the phone.
If you are willing to read passages of your writing, and even your subject’s quotes back to them,
why not just send them the text itself ?
Because if they read it on the page, they get upset or want to make all sorts of changes. But if they
hear the flow out loud on the phone—and I’ll read it as many times as they want to hear it—they help
me make it more accurate. I’ll ask, “Is this correct? Have I got the letter correct, but missed the
spirit?” If so, we’ll work on it until we are both satisfied.
I write about a lot of scientists, and the problem is that they are so used to dealing with peer-