Interview 2020-001: Melissa Maerz
The following is an interview of Melissa Maerz that was conducted via email. Melissa is, most recently, the author of Alright, Alright, Alright: The Oral History of Richard Linklater’s Dazed and Confused (Harper, 2020).
I highly recommend this one and hope that if you do purchase it, you do so via your local indie bookseller or via Bookshop.
Dan:
Thank you, Melissa, for taking time out of your schedule and answering some questions. I’m a huge fan of oral histories, often reading articles that are oral histories of movies, or sporting events, etc. that I’m not familiar with, or maybe simply not a great fan of, simply because of the format. You open the book with an Author’s Note that begins with an explanation of oral histories—was this book always intended to be an oral history, or was it a decision to go that route during the process?
Melissa:
Well, I have a particular fondness for oral histories because I love that they allow everyone involved in the story to have an equal voice, from the big stars to the behind-the-scenes folks. I also feel like there’s something very honest about any format that allows people to tell their own story, as directly as possible, and still makes space for their memories to conflict with one another.
The book was always intended to be an oral history. The movie just seemed very suited to that format, because it’s an ensemble film, and it’s so conversational. I wanted the conversational rhythms in the book to mirror the ones in the movie.
Dan:
Do you have any favorite oral history books or articles?
Melissa:
Yes, there are so many good ones! The first oral history I remember reading (and loving) was Please Kill Me: The Uncensored Oral History of Punk, by Legs McNeil and Gillian McCain. More recently, I’ve really enjoyed Everybody Loves Our Town: A History of Grunge, by Mark Yarm; I Want My MTV: The Uncensored Story of the Music Video Revolution by Craig Marks and Rob Tannenbaum; and Meet Me in the Bathroom: Rebirth and Rock and Roll in New York City 2001-2011 by Lizzy Goodman. I’ve been meaning to read Daisy Jones and the Six, which is a fictional oral history of a ‘70s rock band. My sister says it’s great.
Dan:
Sounds like a new stack for my table (who am I kidding, floor). What I think is a key to a great oral history is the structure that goes beyond rolling a bunch of interviews together. You were able to take the large volume of responses you got while interviewing nearly 150 people that had at least something tangential to the movie and create a story with arcs. You capture director Richard Linklater’s youth, his career, 90’s American cinema, careers of numerous actors, many who were in a debut, or early bigger role in their career, and so much more. Was there a point that you had a solid idea of an outline of the chapters and how they’d be ordered before you were done conducting interviews? If so, did it affect how you talked to those involved after that time, especially as compared to how you may have questioned those from before that moment?
Melissa:
When I approach a project like this, I usually start with one central question I want to answer, and the structure follows from there. The original idea for this book came from an interview I’d read with Richard Linklater where he said he’d wanted the movie to be an “anti-nostalgia movie.” So many period pieces show the past in a glamorous light. He said he didn’t want to do that. He wanted Dazed to show that the ‘70s kind of sucked. I found that interesting, because so many people watch Dazed and Confused because they’re nostalgic for high school, or nostalgic for the ‘70s, or even for the ‘90s. So the first question I wanted to answer was, how did this anti-nostalgia movie become the ultimate nostalgia film?
As I began to interview people for the book, I realized that I couldn’t answer that question just by focusing on the movie itself. I wanted to talk about Linklater’s own real-life memories of high school, and how they’re reflected in the film. I also wanted to talk about why the cast is still so nostalgic for the summer they spent making the movie, and that meant I had to compare their experience on Dazed with their experience in Hollywood directly after making the film.
Over time, it evolved from a book that was hyper-focused on one summer in 1992 into one that now covers nearly four decades. And, in the process, it also evolved from being a book about one movie to a book that deals with broader topics: Hollywood in the ‘90s, the evolution of independent cinema, and how it feels to look back on your youth. Many of Linklater’s films are about time, so it’s probably inevitable that this became a book about time, too.
Dan:
You interviewed the people in this book in-person, by phone, and by email. Did you find any major differences between those actions? Were people more, or less, open in-person, or one of the other interview methods?
Melissa:
I always prefer to do interviews in person. I’ve found that people give much more interesting, thoughtful, honest answers when they don’t have a phone or a computer screen adding this extra layer of detachment from the person they’re talking to. And I think that works both ways. I’m way more sympathetic to someone’s point of view when I’ve met them in real life, and I think it’s probably easier for us to understand each other when we can see each other’s face. I’ve had many times when people’s expressions told me much more than their words.
I almost never conduct interviews over email unless there’s a very good reason why it can’t happen in person or over the phone. Especially when you’re working on an oral history, I think you lose the conversational tone when you’re quoting something from an email. Of the hundreds of interviews I did for this book, I believe only two interviews were conducted over email, and both were follow-up interviews with people I’d already interviewed in person.
That said, when someone else is interviewing me, I’m always happy to follow their lead on whatever interview format they prefer. Everyone has different preferences.
Dan:
How important was it for this project for you to have had access to script drafts, letters Linklater wrote to the cast, articles he penned once the movie had come out, etc.? How much, if any, did seeing that information get you thinking of the specific version of the movie Linklater put together as opposed to what might or could have been?
Melissa:
In the beginning, I needed those things for practical reasons. I’d interview someone, and they’d mention a scene that was cut from the movie, or a letter that Linklater had written to the cast, and I wanted to double-check their memories against the original source. But once I read the original documents, Linklater’s voice as a young director came through so vividly that I knew I wanted to quote directly from them in the book. His voice is so raw and so funny, and also so different from how he talks now. I wanted to capture that. I’m very thankful to Linklater, and his longtime editor, Sandra Adair, and everyone else who opened their Dazed archives to me for the book.
Dan:
You spend some time showing just how fastidious Linklater was in protecting his vision once he’d finalized it—how he handled studio suggestions, test audience reactions, etc. Curious as to how that might compare to your putting your book together—were their editing or publicity suggestions you had to fight off in order to keep your own vision for the book?
Melissa:
I’m very lucky that I love my editor, Jennifer Barth, and the publicity and marketing team at Harper. If we had creative disagreements, they were minor enough that they don’t stick in my memory. Jennifer actually made some really crucial suggestions for trimming this book down from 600-something pages to closer to 400, which really needed to be done. Also, she convinced me to keep the title, which I had used as a placeholder title and always intended on changing. I’m glad she convinced me otherwise, because many people tell me they love the title. Jennifer’s instincts were right.
Dan:
Did you find yourself watching the movie during your interviewing and writing process? If so, how did it help, and did it ever cause any issues for you?
Melissa:
Yes! I’ve watched this movie a million times, and the way in which I watch it has changed, probably permanently. Linklater often says it’s hard for him to appreciate Dazed purely as a movie, because watching it brings up all of his memories of making the film. I think the same is true for me. I can’t watch the movie anymore without thinking about writing this book. But I don’t have PTSD like Linklater does. My experience writing the book has only made me love watching the movie more.
Dan:
So, an oral history doesn’t frequently have an author sitting together with multiple respondents to the questions posed, but there are frequent, I’ll call them near conversations, between various contributors. I assume reactions to what another actor may have said about a situation stems from you having read to them what the other person said. Was this something that telescoped in size during the process as you talked to more people and had the conversations of more and more people behind you? Did you find yourself able to go back and forth and have multiple conversations with many of the contributors? What exactly was your information or filing system that allowed you to a) maintain all of the information you received, but also b) cross-reference it with other interviews, and be able to bring up that so-and-so mentioned…?
Melissa:
I interviewed most of the main cast members multiple times. The first time I talked to them was usually in person, with a few exceptions, and I tried to limit my own questions and let them guide the conversation toward the things they most wanted to discuss. Certain subjects kept coming up over and over again with many different people, so I knew those subjects would be important to the book. Early on, I started to compile quotes according to theme.
The second time I interviewed people, I had more follow-up questions and I asked people to respond, often fairly generally, to things other people said. The third or fourth time, I found myself reading actual quotes to some people and asking them to respond more specifically.
It was slightly different with Linklater, because I interviewed him many more times than the others, and so much of this book is really about him. Most times I talked to him, I ended up asking him about things other people had said. He also read and responded to people’s comments.
Dan:
In the cases of those that weren’t interviewed—did you know all along you weren’t going to get a chance to do so? Was it made obvious to you early in the process or did you really have some hope to hold onto while you talked to others and wrote? (Note—there were a couple of key behind the scenes people that opted not to be interviewed and two main cast members in Shawn Andrews, who played Pickford, and Milla Jovovich, who played Michelle were unavailable per their publicist and manager respectively).
In the case of one of them in particular, Shawn Andrews, a lot of negative comments from other actors and behind the scenes contributors were thrown about. Did you have any concerns about including them knowing there was no return point of view or explanations?
Melissa:
This probably shows how naive I am, but I really did think everyone would end up talking to me! I thought enough time had passed that everyone would be eager to discuss Dazed.
Before I even started working on this book, I’d heard that Shawn Andrews didn’t get along with many of the other Dazed cast members and might not want to participate. I still hoped that he would agree to be interviewed, because I’m genuinely interested in his perspective, and also because it would obviously be more fair to him if he got the chance to respond to some of the allegations in the book. But Shawn Andrews knew people were saying negative things about him in the book, and he ultimately decided not to respond, and I respect that decision. If he changes his mind, I’d still love to talk to him, and Milla Jovovich, and anyone else who originally declined to be interviewed or didn’t get back to me in time.
Dan:
I keep saying contributors because you didn’t just interview the cast. You interviewed people from Linklater’s hometown of Huntsville, people involved in his other movies, the vast majority of the crew from Dazed and Confused, I believe all but three members of the cast, industry people and so many others. What was your method to determine who else you needed to talk to once you began and had maybe a starting list?
Melissa:
At the end of every interview, I always asked people, “Who do you think knows Richard Linklater best?” Or: “Who do you think I should interview next?” The same names came up again and again, so I tracked those people down.
With the Huntsville folks, it started with me wanting to talk to Linklater’s high school friend Tony Olm. Someone had told me the Abraham Lincoln dream in the movie was inspired by a real dream Tony had in high school. But when I talked to Tony, he told me so many illuminating things about Huntsville that I ended up tracking down other people he mentioned in that interview. Basically, any time anyone mentioned a proper name during an interview, I wondered if I should give that person a call.
Dan:
You saw the movie yourself in a theater as a high school freshman—one of the bigger attractions, I believe, to this film is that it’s easy to find yourself in the characters Linklater wrote and developed with his cast. Maybe there’s one in particular, or a blending of 2 or 3. Did you spot yourself up on that screen when you first saw the film? In your watchings over the years since then, has that changed at all?
Melissa:
Oh, I definitely identify with Tony, Anthony Rapp’s character. I was kind of geeky and earnest in high school. Obviously, I still am. And I was always happiest when I was driving around with my best friends, discussing our theories about politics or music or other kids we went to school with. The scene where Tony and Mike are talking about why the freshmen submit themselves to these dumb initiation rituals? That feels like a conversation I had in high school many times. But I was also a feminist like Kaye, and I was just as awkward and fidgety as Mitch. That’s what’s great about Dazed: I can see a bit of myself in so many of the characters. And I think that’s partly because no one in this movie is a type. No one is only a stoner or a geek or a popular kid. Everyone’s a little bit of everything. I think that’s why Dazed still holds up in a way that many high school movies don’t.
Dan:
Each of the chapters has an introduction. Your own words and not those of the individuals you interviewed, and they’re really excellent. Did you write these as you put the book together, or were they add-ons after structuring the book and putting the chapters together?
Melissa:
The introductions were a bit of an afterthought. I’d originally planned on writing this book without them, because I wanted to let the people who worked on Dazed speak for themselves. But my friend Rob Tannenbaum, who wrote a fantastic oral history of MTV, read an early draft of the book, and he told me, “You can’t assume that people already know the context that makes these quotes interesting.” So he convinced me to add introductions. I’m so glad he did. Now I can’t imagine the book working without them.
Dan:
What is it like to wake up one day and read a positive review of a book you wrote in the New York Times? And to have it written by Patton Oswalt?
Melissa:
I don’t know if I can properly convey how much that review means to me. Like every other writer on Earth, I have always daydreamed about having a book reviewed in the New York Times Book Review, but I never imagined it would actually happen. I’m so thankful that Tina Jordan at the New York Times assigned that review, and to have Patton Oswalt be the one to review it? I just about died. His review is so beautifully written. The last paragraph still chokes me up, when he says the book is about “people looking back with joy, bewilderment and sometimes anger at a time when they were not only young, but when their youth blazed. And the fire was caught on film. For better or worse, forever.”
Dan:
It was a really nice review. You’ve held various positions as a journalist (with a ton of excellent reviews over the years) and as an editor. How did past jobs help out with your writing this book? Did those past jobs in any way hinder your writing of the book?
Melissa:
I actually think it’s the stuff I didn’t know that helped me the most with this book. I didn’t start my career as a journalist until the ‘00s, so I went into this without a lot of first-hand knowledge about how the industry actually worked back in the ‘90s. On a basic level, I wanted to know, how does a movie like Dazed get made? How does an indie filmmaker from Austin, Texas, who doesn’t have a lot of Hollywood connections, end up making a film for a major studio like Universal? Why would a corporate-minded institution like Universal want to take a chance on a very personal film like Dazed, especially at a time when they were making massive blockbusters like Schindler’s List and Jurassic Park? I think when you start from a vantage point of telling people, “Explain this to me as if I know nothing about it,” you get the most illuminating answers.
Dan:
A question not really having anything to do with this book---have any of the Golden Globes since, caused you to come close to reminiscing fondly about the 2016’s?
Melissa:
I had totally forgotten that I’d panned the 2016 Golden Globes until you brought this up. And I’m embarrassed to re-read the review I wrote. Ugh. I think, now that I don’t have to file a review two seconds after the broadcast ends, I’m enjoying awards ceremonies more. Actually, I’m enjoying everything more. After the year we’ve all had, my standards for television have, shall we say, evolved. Come February, I’m gonna watch the hell out of the Golden Globes.
Dan:
Well, your commentary wasn't wrong. The dreaded desert island question, Emerging Writers Network version---if you were a character in Fahrenheit 451, what book(s) would you memorize for posterity?
Melissa:
My first impulse is to say my all-time favorite book, Ulysses. But I think memorizing 730 pages of a stream-of-consciousness novel would melt my brain. I just started Isabel Wilkerson’s Caste, and it’s blowing my mind, so that might be a better choice.
Dan:
Thanks again, Melissa. I absolutely loved the book and consider it my second favorite oral history behind only Terry Pluto’s Loose Balls: The Story of the American Basketball Association, and to be honest, you were kind of doomed to fall behind that one because Marvin “Bad News” Barnes had nothing to do with Dazed and Confused. The book is a great read, very difficult to put down. It feels like it could be used as a template for how to be a movie director, how to develop a solid career, how to NOT act as an actor on the set of a movie, an explanation of 90’s American cinema and how the festivals merged the independent and big company films, and truly so much more. And you were able to flush out even long-“known” stories like how McConaughey was “discovered” via discussions with multiple people. It’s a book I’ll be recommending to many and re-reading for sure.
Melissa:
Thank you so much, Dan! And thank you for asking such thoughtful questions. I really enjoyed this conversation.
Comments