by Alan Leftridge
January/February 2009
I was happy with the campfire program I had conducted. By reading the postures and the facial expressions of my audience, I knew they had been engaged. I felt justified to be proud of my presentation as the visitors began exiting the amphitheater. At least a dozen people approached to thank me, another group huddled around me asking questions and commenting. Then, off to my left, I overheard a woman reporting to her husband as she walked away, “He sounded just like a teacher.”
I was deflated. While I was a teacher by profession through most of the year, I wanted to be recognized as an interpreter during the summer season. I felt I had succeeded in making the transition. After the visitors left to return to their campsites, I turned to my companion, who also heard the comment, and asked, “What did she mean?”
“You asked too many questions,” was the response. “Teachers often overuse questions as a technique to structure a lesson.”
My use of questioning strategies was open to debate, but the debate did not matter. What mattered to me was the comment, which I took as a criticism. Even considering all the positive feedback, I could not shake the impact of the statement as I packed my campfire-program belongings to return home. I discussed the episode with some friends, and they reminded me that several visitors approached me with strong positive comments. Why would one criticism cancel all of the positive remarks?
It does not seem rational to focus on negative remarks at the expense of the positive. In fact, most of us do. We might conduct a great program, design a wonderful panel, or craft a superlative web site, but it can take just one negative remark to color the perceptions of our performance. One person’s disapproval of our work may have a lasting impact. It seems to be human nature to discount positive responses, focusing instead on the minority of negative comments. This introduces self-doubt. How do we learn to process feedback that produces emotional responses, in a productive way?
Pop-music icon Frank Sinatra recorded “My Way,” suggesting that he sought affirmation from no one but himself. I have never met an interpreter who is that self-assured. Everyone I know would be dejected if the group they looked to most for confirmation rejected their interpretation in total. Interpreters look for positive responses from four origins: visitors, peers, supervisors, and mentors. These foundations are not mutually exclusive. The affirmations we are looking for come from a combination of the sources, though one may be dominant.
There are good reasons to evaluate visitors’ outlying comments with caution. Most interpretation takes place where visitors elect to participate. That does not mean they are happy to be there. Troublesome travel itineraries, stressful family dynamics, and nagging travel discomforts sometimes affect visitor experiences. The frontline interpreter can be the unwitting target of discontent. It is important to remember, too, that the visitor is not the expert on your narrative. The small minority who voice criticism may not be the most qualified to assess any interpretive effort. You and your interpretive team are the experts.
Continually modifying programs to meet the challenges of far-flung negative visitor comments can cause programs to suffer. This can begin an ill-advised pattern of making changes to meet minority interests, at the expense of maintaining the good structural elements of the presentations. In time, programs take on the defensive characteristics of just addressing criticisms.
The people who should be the experts about your narrative, and know how to artfully communicate the story to visitors, are your peers, mentors, and sometimes your supervisors. A mentor has an intimate understanding of your purpose and how to communicate it with diverse audiences. A mentor is your closest ally, and, by virtue of being a supportive colleague, has the responsibility of giving valid feedback.
I learned a lesson at that campfire program 20 years ago—to be attentive to how I choose questions in frontline and non-personal interpretation. From that night forward, I also began to realize that, while negative visitor comments should be considered, the people best qualified to provide constructive feedback are those in our own profession who are most familiar with the narrative. Finally, I learned that knowledge of the resource, honoring audiences’ interests, and applying interpretive skills builds confidence. It is confidence that helps us place into balance the minority of negative comments we sometimes receive.
