Can you give an examples of looking for inconsistencies in The Final Stitch and Soar?
Sandra asked: I am having a bit of a hard time understanding when to consider talking to multiple people for their thoughts AND when to let the story be purely driven on its own. In both these examples the story was told by the "heart", with an added VO help in The Final Stitch. But regardless, I don't see the relationship with "inconsistencies" and the process of creating these two stories. It seems like the stories were taken at face value. Listening and asking questions during the interview plays such a vital role in the plot that I'd like to know: How was this aspect applied to the two examples to reach a more meaningful insight during the interview process?
A lot of those inconsistencies were discussed in the pre-interview and helped us get a much better understanding of the people and their potential plot points. Some of the best moments come from challenging them, though you'd never know in the final edited piece as the story is now woven together.
I'd suggest you check out the 'Conducting Remarkable Interviews' and watch some of the full uncut interview to get a sense of the inconsistencies that are brought up there and how that is what helps us get at some of the strongest points.
But, more specifically, Jane said she wanted to go on the field. Here's a girl who has been to a TON of games and several Super Bowls. We challenged her on this 'dream' she wants so badly with the reality that she HAS been to a ton of Super Bowls and been so very close to the field; does it really make a difference? It's there when she came to the insight that it doesn't feel real, but it would on the field, and would add so much to what her life's work means to her.
Now, when we just said 'Why do you dream of that?' she didn't have anything all that noteworthy to say. It was in challenging her— in going, 'Hey, you've been so close to the field, does it really make a difference?' — that helped uncover the deeper story within her that she hadn't fully realized.
It also meant we took what she said about her work and her values and checked that with what we saw at the factory and how others spoke of her. We also, in many ways, are fact-checking by looking at inconsistencies too.
In Dave Jacka's story, I would say that asking questions about 'inconsistencies' helped us form a much deeper relationship much quicker and made David much more comfortable with how we wanted to tell his story. One example in particular related to his wife Linda mentioning that they met on an online dating site. That's certainly not what a lot of us would expect; it's inconsistent with what we might imagine an able-bodied person to be looking for on a dating site. Asking her what she saw, what drew her in, what hesitations she had, really helped us have a much deeper conversation and understand them so much better.
So, in summary, I'd suggest that looking for inconsistencies really means pushing deeper than face value and not taking the first answer they give. Often there is more to explore, and you can bring them to additional insights.