“Tell us more about you, why you were there, and what you were doing.”

Jennifer Cook, my lecture on Writing for the Media subject, reminded me during a workshop class. Her response was similar with some of my classmates: I need to tell more about myself in the story.

I was writing a story about Palestinian’s generosity that I had experienced during my assignment in Gaza Strip after the 22^nd days of war in 2009. I wrote this piece in first-person point of view.

Jennifer and my colleagues’ input leads me to a notion that writer existence in a narrative journalism writingis not only about using the “I” word. Writers need to tell readers their personality, character, and identity.

We may have been discussing techniques to produce the highest quality of writing. We may have been referring to theories and examples that have been elaborated by the experts, such as Tom Wolfe in promoting the using of novel style into narrative journalism (Wolfe, 1973); Joseph M. Williams in developing sentences by making the character (subject) and the action (verb) clear (Williams, 1995); and Don Watsonin choosing a punchy and accurate word and use it to make a sentenceclearer(Watson, 2009). We may squeeze our mind and skill to implement those theories and adapt their examples into our first-personnarrative writing. But, do we use those theories and examples to enliven ourselves in the story?

We are aware that narrative journalism gives way for writers to immerse themselvesin a story. We realize that the more immersed we are, the more vivid the story can be told. In doing so, we equip ourselves with kits which can help us to eternalize any details: a recorder, a pen, a note book, a steady mind, and a pair of sharpeyes and ears.We persevere to capture all the details: from the smell of the grass that was just washed by the rain drops, to the scorching heat of the sun that pull outsweat; from tears shedding from a weeping mother’s eye to a hidden smile implying from a lips;from a mere “dry”factual object to a subtle symbolical message of the object. But, do we also observe and recordourselves as part of the story? What do we feel, think, and do?

First-person point of view has the ability to convince readers the truthfulness of a story. It usually tells readers that we, as the story teller, were at the location at the time it was happening. We place readers to our eye socket. We invite readers to sense the gravity of the story. By getting closer, readers can also sense the tense that was felt by the subject. We are the eyewitness.

We choose to drag ourselves as part of the story when we are using first-person narrative. We put testimonies of our eyes, ears, nose, skin, and tongue into the story. We reconstruct a sequence of images that we have seen. We replay sounds that we have heard or listened. We re-exhale scents that we have smelled. We left no room for readers to doubt the story. But again, after all those efforts, we might be missing to tell readers, who we are.

I have observed that narrative journalism with first-person point of view can only be successful if we tell readers about ourselves. But it is not merely putting the “I” in the story. It is beyond the “I”.

We need to make sure that the “I” in the story is reflecting our identity and our character as the writer. In other words, we are not only telling readers about: what the story is; who the character in the story is; where the story happened; when the story happened; why the story happened; and how the story happened. But, it is also telling readers about: what we think, feel, and view about the story. It shall tell readers: who we are; what we were doing, where we were in the story; when the story happened; why we wrote the story; and how we perceived the story.

We are aware that narrative journalism contrasts to the “inverted pyramid” concept which provides journalist a skeleton of writing to deliver a story and let the (considered) most important information goes first.But, narrative journalism is actually a freestyle writing. Therefore, it enables us to surprise readers with our unpredictable angle, explosive words, and rhythmic sentences. It is more than just what, who, when, where, why, and how, the 5W + H1 recipe. As Matthew Ricketsonhas eloquently described, in literary journalism, who becomes character, what becomes action, where becomes setting, when becomes chronology, why becomes motive, and how becomes narrative(Ricketson, 2004).

Based on those ideas, I adopt and adapt Matthew Ricketson’sconcept to bring the writer on the stage, not just as a story teller, but also as one of the “who”: the “character” in the story.Therefore, I will emphasize the essay on the “who becomes character” aspect. I view that this aspect is the most crucial in first-person point of view narrative journalism.

Who becomes Character

Let’s talk about ourselves but keep focus on the story. This information is crucial because only by understanding the writer, the readers can fully grab the whole message in the story. However, it’s not about us, but the story. As it has been argued that the worst writings[using first-person singular point of view] are those that seem to have been written only to satisfy the writer’s ego(Hochschild, 2006).

We can tell readers who we are by putting our identity clearly or subtly in the writing through the choice of verb, adjective, and perspective. However, we need to be careful in choosing what kind of information that is fit into the writing. We needto make sure its relevancy to the story.I can put my family’s religion background when I am writing a story about religion. I may put my journalism education background when I am writing a story about journalism.

Some writers hesitate to put themselves in the story. They distance themselves from the story to give more room for the subject or to keep the objectivity intact. However,they have created a hole in the story. Something is missing. Readers need to know the writer.It is plausible if in some cases, writersadd other information to fill the hole, the missing information.

“The mango tree” which is published in “Personal Best 2” book is a good example to illustrate it.The mango tree writer, Janette Turner Hospital, gave readers “behind the story” in “Author’s note” section(Hospital, 1991). In the section she was explaining about herself, her background, her family, and values she accustomed with.That section has enabled readers to comprehend the big picture, the complete story which brings readers to say, “Ok, that makes sense….”

This idea might be irrelevant for some prominent writers. But, sometimes, the popularity of a writer is bounded by certain localities. Writer, who wants to write for different audiences, should consider a possibility of his/her unpopularity.Writer need to adjust its story to the new audience. This is not only retelling the story in different way, but also by inserting information about the writer in order to make the audience easily gets the message.

Therefore, the challenge is how to make sure the writer’s identity and character is explained enough in the story. By addressing this matter, we may prevent ourselves to write more words about ourselves in other section such as the case of “the Mango Tree” in “Personal Best 2”.

Some people may argue that putting the above mentioned ideas may be harmful for the objectivity.But, what is objectivity?

Wolfe argued that the voice of narrator was a big problem in non-fiction writing. There was a tendency when a narrator put his/her voice, the tone of voice should be calm, cultivated, and genteel (Wolfe, 1973, p. 17). This is the way, in my opinion, of how the writers try to avoid their subjectivities polluting the story. However, the technique has made the narrator voice to become flat, in Wolfe’s term, “wrote in a century-old British tradition.” It has uprooted the full picture of the writer in the story.

Tom Wolfe has offered a more energetic tone and style in writing. He encourages narrators to show their personalities in the writing. I view that his idea is becoming more crucial when we use first-person point of view.This is not about the objectivity or subjectivity. This is about enlivening the story. As Wolfe said:

“This has nothing to do with objectivity and subjectivity, or taking a stand or ‘commitment’—it was a matter of personality, energy, driven, bravura,…style, in a word…. The standard non-fiction writer’s voice was like the standard announcer’s voice… a drag, a droning….” (Wolfe, 1973, p. 18).

This notion has offered plenty of rooms in narrative journalism to explore the personalities of a writer and put it into the writing without being bothered about maintaining the objectivity. This notion enables us to writea narrative journalism story that stands out from one another. Althoughwe are covering the same story, we will not have the same story.Again, it has nothing to do with objectivity. Moreover, the subjectivity has crafted the objectivity. Because only by telling ourselves, we can make readers understand the whole picture. If there is bias, readers can understand because writers disclose themselves in the story.

About this matter, as a journalist, we need to be honest and truthful. Not only about the facts we have, but also about ourselves as long as it is relevant to the story. I view that this argument is in line to the number one Media Alliance Code of Ethics.

(1) Report and interpret honestly, striving for accuracy, fairness and disclosure of all essential facts. Do not suppress relevant available facts, or give distorting emphasis. Do your utmost to give a fair opportunity for reply(Media, 2012).

I want to focus on the use of word “interpret” in the ethic above.Based on Oxford Online dictionary, the meaning of Interpret is to understand (an action, mood, or way of behaving) as having a particular meaning: or to perform (a dramatic role or piece of music) in a way that conveys one’s understanding of the creator’s ideas(Oxford, 2012).I argue that the use of “interpret” word in the ethic is recognition to the inherent subjectivity within the journalist.

The idea is conceivable as each individual has been raised in different families; practice different values; attenddifferent schools;socialize in different communities and cultures;believe in different faith/religion;accustom to a certain law and rules. They have been shaped by different circumstances.Even, siblings and people who have been raised in the same structural and cultural environment have a great variation of performance(Hollingsworth, 2007, p. 145). As each individual is unique, as well aswe are as a writer, a journalist.

Based on that understanding, it is unavoidable if each one of us will have different approaches, understanding, and perspective towards an issue. In a case of a war for example, one of us might be interested more on the human right issue, while the other on its political issue. The differences among themselves that have lead writers to tell a different piece of story.It occurs in the context of travel writer. How can travel writers avoid their cultural background to influence his reportage about different places around the world(Taylor, 2005, p. 120).

We can also strengthen our identity and personality as a writer by choosing the media in which we want to publish our story. It has been argued that every media has identity, personality, and ideology(Van Dijk, 1998). And they strive to projects it.Therefore, there is a tendency that a certain media will only hire a like-minded journalist. The Washington Post decision to hire and fire David Weigelas its blog contributor is among of the examples.Eric Alterman wrote that Weigelwas hired by the post because he was assumed as a right-winger. As the time goes, the Post found out that Eric was a left-winger. Alterman concluded, “… in other words, the journalistic quality of Weigel’s work was irrelevant to his hiring and his (effective) firing. What mattered was his ideology”(Alterman, 2012).

The What, Where, When, Why and How

What becomes Action

Every individual may react differently in a certain circumstances. Using the first-person point of view, journalists puttheir action into the story: what was the Journalist doing; what was the journalist feeling; and what was the journalist thinking during the reportage.A specific action and/or reaction inherently tell a certain character and personality of the journalist. And again, the action itself relates to the “who becomes character” aspect that have been discussed above.

Where becomes setting

It is clear that a writer who is using first-person point of view will drag readers to his/her eye socket. Writer invites readers to witness every details of the story. Therefore, readers can fell the sadness, happiness, horror, and suspense embedded in the story.Subtly, writer drags readers to be part of the story. Journalist needs to tell readers where he/she was when the story happened. Was he/she at the location?We cannot write a story with a first-person narrative journalism if we have never been at the location. The Jayson Blair case who had worked for the New York Timesmay explain this precisely.

Blair had habitually filed stories from places he never visited, quoted people he never talked to, described details he never saw (Rosen, 2003).

When becomes chronology

There are writings that are written after the story had happened long before.And most of the narrative journalism pieces are written long after the actual event. This is plausible as writers need to put a lot of works to gathering the details of the story, crosschecking the data and information, processing all the materials, and stitching story carefully.Using first-person point of view, these circumstances should be embedded into the story.Through their eye sockets, writers should be honest about the actual chronology of the story.

Why becomes motive

Readers always want to know each motive behind an action, not only subjects’ motives, but also our motive.Why we are doing this or that. Giving the context make the story clear.

How becomes narrative

Readers also want to know how the story had happened.What the narration of the story is. How the writer develop the narration. Writers need to make sure that the flow of the story goes well.

Conclusion

Narrative journalism provides writers enough space to tell a story completely. We, as the narrator, have enough space to reconstruct details of the story and bring them to the readers. We put a lot of effort to make subjects in the story vivid and clear. We strive to portray their character, explain their actions, tell the location, elucidate the chronology, disclose each motive, and stitch the narrative.

But when it comes to first-person narrative journalism, we tend to build a wall that divides the writer and the subject.We distance ourselves from the story although we are actually part of the story.We decide to use the “I” with shy. We are haunted by the urgent need that a journalism piece should be objective. But, how can we be objective if we don’t tell who we are as the writer. We cannot deny that we are the writer and the subject at the same time.Ricketson’s concept on “who becomes character, what becomes action, where becomes setting, when becomes chronology, why becomes motive, and how becomes narrative”, therefore, should be applied to ourselves as the writer and the subject. We are actually approaching the objectivity itself when we are disclosing ourselves.