What does interior design mean to you? What led you to choose this field? Has your professional identity evolved into a form of self-expression over time?
I’ve always felt that my mind sits at the intersection of the scientific and the creative, and I was searching for a field that could connect both. It led me to architecture. I started observing buildings more, sketching them, and it became a source of inspiration. This field requires a deep respect for knowledge and structure: you need to understand the rules in order to break them with intention. For me, this is what distinguishes architectural design from other forms of art. When designing a space, I try to weave self-expression with functionality – something I see myself getting better at with experience. I enjoy the process of letting each project become an evolving conversation between these two forces.
How have the cultural landscapes of London, Warsaw, and Palermo influenced your aesthetic approach? In what ways have the textures and architecture of these cities left traces in your spatial compositions?
These cities have significantly shaped my sense of aesthetics. Each of them speaks a different language – through culture, materials, textures, and lifestyles. Together they have broadened my approach to design. After experiencing them, and observing how they each carry this dialogue between self-expression and functionality, I’m taking what inspired me into my own practice.
In London, I worked on high-end renovations of Victorian houses in a conservation area. That experience was about designing contemporary interiors and structures with respect for heritage, and rules, while also engaging with the city’s modern, multicultural identity. I love how each neighbourhood there is unique, letting you get a variety of experiences depending on where you go. Through both my work and my studies at UAL, I learned to approach design in a multidisciplinary way. London sharpened my awareness of sustainability and encouraged me to think beyond conventional solutions, which continues to influence how I shape spaces today.
Warsaw, by contrast, feels more urgent, driven by speed and ambition. My work there was fast-paced, I often created practical yet elevated interiors for new developments or the renovation of post-Soviet buildings. The city’s landscape reflects this duality. It has also transformed in recent years into a place of growing international appeal. It was surprising but now I find this ongoing change very inspiring.
Palermo offered me a completely different perspective. At first, its apparent chaos felt like the opposite of Warsaw’s order, but over time I learned to embrace its rhythms. I love its nature and vibrant streets. What stands out to me is the strong sense of community and the openness of the people. The architecture here is a unique mix of different styles, particularly Arab and Norman influences. In interior design, I notice an appreciation for vintage pieces, art, and natural materials, often nicely incorporated into contemporary spaces. I find this, along with the city’s ability to slow down and remain present, deeply inspiring.
I’m excited to continue bringing these influences into my future projects.
Which emotion or conceptual theme influences your design process the most? How do concepts like melancholy, belonging, memory, or calmness manifest in your interior projects?
It’s a beautiful, and also difficult question. In my final project at university, I explored the idea of designing experiences rather than just spaces through sensory pods – each designed with a focus on one sense, to bring calmness as a response to a problem of overstimulation in public spaces. That research showed me how much design can go beyond appearance: it can become a multisensory experience that shapes memory, emotion, and well-being.
I carry this thinking into my work, where I try to design not just spaces that function well or look beautiful, but spaces that people can truly dwell in, places that resonate with intimacy, belonging, calmness. Gaston Bachelard in his book “The poetics of space” describes a home as a shelter for the most intimate parts of our identity. It’s important to have that in mind when designing interiors people will live in but also very exciting to take part in creating this unique atmosphere.
How do you connect photography, portraiture, and visual storytelling with your practice in interior design? Are there moments when a frame, a body, or a certain light gives you an idea for a new spatial arrangement?
I believe exploring various media of art helps in finding your personal voice. It shapes creativity, stimulates the senses to form new concepts, and pushes boundaries. In my practice, I always think about the user’s experience. I love lighting design, as it has a huge influence on the final atmosphere of a space. I observe my surroundings and get inspired by reflections of light, shifting shadows, colours, and the movement of sunlight. Working with photography and portraiture also taught me about framing and perspective, how even small shifts can completely change a composition. It showed me the importance of moving between attention to detail and the ability to step back and see the whole picture.
How do digitalization, social media, and algorithmic visibility affect your creative process? Do you find this transformation exciting and full of potential, or do you see it as limiting in certain ways?
It’s an interesting phenomenon. On one hand, it can be limiting as certain styles go viral and quickly become trends, which makes it feel safer to follow rather than question them. However, I’ve noticed that what resonates with me more and what gains more meaningful recognition, is staying true to your own voice. Not being afraid to stand out creates a stronger connection with your audience – that’s what I’m currently working on. By embracing individuality, it becomes easier to attract clients who are drawn to your unique perception of space. For me, the dream is to be recognised for my own design style, and to work with clients who choose me precisely for that reason.
Do you have a dream project you’d like to realize in the future? Are you excited by the idea of creating not just interiors, but immersive spaces that speak to emotions and memory?
I’m at a stage now where, after gathering many different experiences, I always carry new ideas in my head. While I don’t have a single defined concept yet, I’ve long dreamed of creating a space where people can connect, build community, and support local artists – while also making a positive impact on people and the planet. At different times this vision has taken the form of a café, a speakeasy with an art gallery, or something in between. Although it’s not my main focus right now, it’s always there in the background as an open possibility. So yes, I’m definitely excited by the idea and maybe one day you can all step into that space and experience it with me 🙂
Interview Series: “The Ecology of Narrative Between Writing and Nature”
You mentioned that Fallout was the result of a nine-year-long effort. Which phase of this process was the most challenging for you?
I didn’t write it in one pass. It was a process of starting and stopping as the ideas unfolded, and I made time in between my work and childrearing. I think the hardest part was figuring out how I was going to bring the story to a satisfying conclusion without being predictable, or too complicated or stretching plausibility.
How did you craft the psychological connection between Justine’s involvement with the eco-anarchist group and the loss of her child?
The character of Justine already has a connection to the eco-anarchist group before the loss of her child, but it seemed to clear to me that as a character who has suffered her worst fear and greatest loss, she now has “nothing to lose” in a sense. So it made sense that she is now freed in a new way to pursue this group that takes huge risks in pursuit of their goals. But it’s all, in its own way, a part of her avoiding her grief. The book is essentially trying to get her to face that grief.
The novel questions the “dirty” decisions that environmental movements sometimes must make. Do you think activism inherently involves such moral grey areas?
I don’t think of activism as requiring moral grey areas, per se—I think of it as answering and addressing the moral gray areas of larger systemic issues and systems of power that dominate. To undermine systems of power of means to “look” morally grey when really it’s that they’re forced to sidestep traditional, societal and even sometimes “legal” means of achieving their ends because they don’t have the power.
What kind of sensitivity did it require to address ecology and motherhood together?
I wrote from my own experiences as a mother (while not one who experienced child loss directly, I could quite easily connect to that feeling), and as someone watching climate change ravage my own state and the World. Where other kinds of “sensitivity” came to play was to make sure I wasn’t representing anyone of a different race or experience in a harmful way, so I engaged a sensitivity reader.
Your nonfiction books, especially Make a Scene and Writing the Intimate Character, focus on scene creation and character depth. Which of these techniques did you particularly try to implement in your novel Fallout?
I’ve written about writing craft and taught writing for over 20 years, so I think I’ve pretty much internalized these concepts now. Thus I’m not “focusing” on these particular techniques as I write—the story is just playing out in my mind. I think, if anything, I’m starting to focus more intentionally at the sentence level lately, however, as I feel I have the others pretty dialed in.
Your upcoming book, The Sound of Story, focuses on voice and tone. What aspects did you pay attention to when crafting character voices in Fallout?
It was important to me that the characters sounded unique, different from one another, particularly my three main co-protagonists, but also the many women of Project Nemesis. So, for example, I made Zoe a little more terse and to the point, and Justine more longwinded, and Hannah to sound like her youthful age. I tried to think about their lexicon and syntax given their experiences and jobs, etc. But I wrote Sound of Story after Fallout (Though I have been teaching courses on the topic).
Your novel highlights issues faced by low-income and Black communities in the context of environmental justice. What motivated you to include this theme in your fiction?
I credit my parents for always caring about justice of all kinds, and for raising me with maybe a little more awareness than the average person in my position. I also credit a lot of activists and writers that I’ve been exposed to over the last say 15-20 years for having really taught me how to fill in gaps in my own white privileged knowledge. But also reading. When you read widely and by people of all ethnicities and life experiences, it hopefully expands your mind to look at the realities of injustice all around us.
What narrative possibilities did writing an ecological crisis story through a journalist character offer you? How do you think a journalist character adds depth to an ecological crisis-themed narrative?
Well, I think writers are always creating ciphers for the experience of being a writer and I am a journalist, though not an investigative one like Justine, so it wasn’t a total stretch. I needed her to be persistent, someone who doesn’t give up easily, who has tenacity and strives for the truth. Journalism worked on several levels. It also gave her a way “in” to a group that otherwise would probably never have accepted her.
How did you maintain long-term creative motivation while writing your novel? Did your book, A Writer’s Guide to Persistence, serve as a guiding resource during this process?
Long term creative motivation is a process of coming back to my writing practice again and again. In in fact, part of what it means to me now (at nearly age 51) to be a writer is that: you start and stop, and start and stop, and sometimes the stopping goes on longer than before, but I have always always returned to it. I think A Writer’s Guide to Persistence was one of the ways I came back to my writing after my son was born (he’s now 17).
You have taught creative writing courses through the University of Oslo and Brown University’s summer program, as well as teaching online classes and keeping the Substack newsletter, Writing In the Pause. How do you discuss novel writing alongside technical writing practices within these platforms? How do they complement each other?
I teach many aspects of novel writing through my classes, and through my writing books. My Substack blog is where I process aspects of writing craft and personal experiences at the same time, hopefully in ways that keeps it from being dull. I like to talk about process almost more than craft these days, because I’ve grown very interested in the different ways we approach writing, and how we can keep ourselves creatively fulfilled even when so many terrible things are going on in the World around us.
In case you would like it, here is my most current bio: Jordan Rosenfeld is author of seven books on the craft of writing including How to Write a Page-Turner, the bestselling Make a Scene, Writing the Intimate Character, A Writer’s Guide to Persistence, Writing Deep Scenes and Write Free. She is also the author of three novels Fallout, Forged in Grace and Women in Red. Jordan’s articles and essays have been published in hundreds of publications, such as The Atlantic, LitHub, The New York Times, The Rumpus, Salon, and Scientific American. She teaches online writing classes and at numerous writing conferences, such as the Writers’ Digest Conference, the San Francisco Writers Conference, and the Redwood Writers Conference. She is a freelance manuscript editor and writing coach, and author of the popular Substack, Writing in the Pause. http://www.jordanrosenfeld.net
1. Entering Journalism and Professional Experience
How did you first get involved in journalism?
My high school in Vermont was a student news bureau.
Was there a pivotal moment that inspired you to pursue this path?
I used to watch the local news with my dad every evening.
Having worked at outlets such as Fox News, CBS News, Reuters, and CoinDesk, how have these different experiences shaped your perspective on journalistic practices?
These different experiences showed me how universal newsrooms can be: same shit; sifferent newsroom.
2. Digital Media and Storytelling
In your view, how have digital platforms transformed the way we tell stories in journalism?
Every new method of storytelling gets journalism closer to telling the truth: from oral communication to TV news and digital platforms.
What do you think is the most critical element for a story to be impactful in a digital environment?
Know who you are speaking to and decide the audience you wish to engage.
3. Education and the New Generation of Journalists
You teach a course titled “Journalism and the Machine” at The New School. What core issues or themes do you focus on in that course?
I focus on technology and its influence on the journalism industry.
What skills or competencies do you find most important to instill in emerging journalists today?
Storytelling: it’s more important than learning any emerging journalism technology.
4. Women Journalists and Representation
Could you share more about your work with the Women Do News project?
I promote digital gender equality by writing Wikipedia articles for women journalists.
How would you describe the key challenges women journalists face in terms of visibility in digital spaces?
Digital gender inequality stems from a systematic devaluing of women in all industries.
5. Wikimedia Activism
What kind of content do you produce through your collaboration with Wikimedia NYC, and what kind of impact do you aim to achieve?
My journalism career helped me identify key news influencers to speak on panels at Wikimedia events.
How does open access to knowledge intersect with journalism today?
Journalism is the underlying source code of the open knowledge movement. One is not possible without the other.
6. Ethics and Editorial Principles
Have you encountered ethical dilemmas while working in different newsrooms? If so, how did you approach them?
Yes, I don’t approve of any work done without a livable wage and healthcare; it is a herculean task to find such work in newsrooms.
How do you prioritize ethical principles when developing content strategies?
A content strategy is most effective when it is developed with clear ethical principles outlined beforehand.
7. Future of Journalism
What are your thoughts on the growing impact of AI and algorithms in journalism?
Journalism pivoted to other tech hype in the past: AI is just the current tech obsession.
How do you envision journalism evolving in the next decade?
THE EVOLUTION OF DIGITAL ART AND THE ROLE OF CULTURA INQUIETA
What has been the most impactful transformation you’ve witnessed in the development of Cultura Inquieta as a digital platform for culture and art?
Seeing how Cultura Inquieta has become a community—growing larger and more emotionally connected—has been the most impactful transformation. We don’t just share art, we share sensitivity, conversations, doubts, beauty, and critical thinking. We’ve learned to listen as much as we publish, and that has allowed the platform to evolve with a soul of its own.
How has the way people connect with art changed through digital platforms?
The connection is now more immediate. People don’t just consume art—they comment on it, reinterpret it, and share it as part of their identity. It’s become more democratic, more everyday… and also more emotional. There’s a lot of information, a lot of stimuli, but also more opportunities to be creative, to make and share the beauty around us with the rest of the world.
AESTHETICS AND NARRATIVE IN CONTENT CREATION
What aesthetic and narrative elements do you prioritize when creating content for Cultura Inquieta?
Emotion—always. The first thing we look for is something that stirs us. Aesthetically, we value whatever has soul: it can be minimalist or baroque, but it must speak. Narratively, we prioritize the beauty of simplicity, poetry, and honesty. We care about substance, but also about how we tell the story—above all, it must have humanity.
ALGORITMS VS. CREATIVITY
How do you think algorithms affect creativity and originality in digital media?
They’re a double-edged sword. On one hand, they can amplify what we do and connect valuable content with more people. But they also sometimes push us to repeat formulas, to play the game of “what works.”
The key is not to lose our center. At Cultura Inquieta, we ask ourselves: Does this add something? Does it make sense for us to tell this? If the answer is yes, we trust it will find its way, even if the algorithm doesn’t bless it right away.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND DIGITAL STRATEGY
What strategies do you use to keep the audience engagement alive and meaningful at Cultura Inquieta?
We talk. We ask questions. We listen. We make those on the other side feel involved. Sometimes it’s with an open question, sometimes with a story we know resonates with all of us. Our commitment is born out of respect: we don’t treat the community as a passive audience, but as a chorus of voices with whom we build something together. And we also leave room for silence—where reflection often takes root.
THE FUTURE OF DIGITAL ART
What trends or directions do you think will shape the future of digital art?
I see art becoming increasingly hybrid, sensory, and participatory. Artificial intelligence, immersive environments, augmented reality… they’re going to change how art is created and experienced. But I also believe the future lies in reclaiming emotion, even in the digital realm: works that challenge us, that make us feel human amidst the code.
PERSONAL CREATIVITY AND SOURCES OF INSPIRATION
What inspires your own creative process? Are there digital platforms, artists, or themes that especially influence you?
I’m inspired by whatever makes me pause. A photograph I can’t stop looking at for no clear reason. A sentence that sticks in my chest. I draw a lot from everyday life: from the silences in a conversation, from the way someone talks about what they love. I’m also inspired by artists who cross disciplines—people who write through music, who paint through words. Digitally, I like platforms that care for both visuals and text equally, like It’s Nice That or Another Magazine. But above all, I’m inspired by the Cultura Inquieta community: what they share, what they comment, what moves them.
ART AND SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION
How do you see Cultura Inquieta’s role in contributing to cultural or social transformation through the public visibility of art?
Cultura Inquieta is a loudspeaker for beauty, but also for justice. We believe art is not only about contemplation—it can also be a form of resistance, of protest, of embrace. Our mission is to shine a light on stories that matter, on artists who give voice to the unspoken. If we can get someone to look at the world with a little more empathy after reading or watching us… then we’re already transforming something.
Interviewer: Academician, Author and Pr Carnet Editor Semay Buket Şahin
Dear Barry, how would you define philosophy? In your opinion, is philosophy a part of science, or is it a discipline that goes hand in hand with science?
Defining philosophy is a philosophical question itself, so any answer presumes something about philosophy, and tends towards circularity. In terms of etymology it means love of wisdom, but one major philosopher, Hegel said that complete philosophy is what becomes wisdom. Despite the etymology, we might also think of philosophy as something different from wisdom, as philosophy is a form of inquiry, while wisdom presumes a state of mind, or a way of being, in which the thinker is identical with wisdom and passes it on rather than engaging in inquiry. If philosophy is related to science, is maybe the science of sciences, then that turns philosophy into essentially epistemology, the philosophy of knowledge, which is a branch of philosophy, so that philosophy is something within philosophy.
If philosophy is not knowledge the obvious alternative is that it is a form of deductive reasoning about abstract principles which tells us something about the structure of reality, which may be a kind of knowledge, but is not the same as the gaining of knowledge in specific science, and is not even the same as the most general form of science. Another possibility is the phenomenological approach in which philosophy reveals some kind of essential reality which is not covered by the scientific pursuit of knowledge or deductive reasoning. Alternatively, returning to Hegel we mighty regard it as the practice of a particular reason which is ‘speculative’ (recognises that identity is also always difference) and dialectical (proceeds through negation of particular universals from an absolute perspective).
This is just a sketch of some of the contours of any debate about what philosophy is. Despite what some philosophers have hoped, philosophy cannot realistically be regarded as just the most general form of scientific method, or the results of a method of abstract reasoning which might be deductive or speculative, or as an access to a kind of pre-theoretical grasp of the cosmos preceding epistemology, metaphysics, logic and speculation. Some have regard philosophy as a form of clarification of problems using the tools of logic or linguistic concepts, but clarification is not the same as resolution. All the approaches mentioned, and others, can be regarded as legitimate parts of philosophy, but if we thinking about what philosophy in its most general sense, I believe it must be something do with the search for universality in explanation and definitions, which always runs into tension between singularity and universality, parts and wholes, particularity and the absolute, subjectivity and objectivity, fragmentary ideas and complete system. This is a list that can be constantly extended. The point is that philosophy is what explores the gaps, inconsistencies, paradoxes and contradictions which emerge in trying to resolve the oppositions just listed. I particularly like Kierkegaard’s suggestion that paradox is the passion of thought, and believe it can be adopted without assuming anything much of what makes up Kierkegaard’s philosophy.
According to your book chapter “Tragedy, Myth, and Liberty in Interstate Theory” in Liberty and Security in an Anarchical World Vol- I how does your polycentric model of sovereignty address the challenges posed by modern globalized conflicts, particularly those involving non-state actors?
A polycentric approach to sovereignty recognises inevitable realities, with regard to the competitive, changeable and localisable nature of institutions designed by humans. While it seems just about possible to have a kind of large centralised imperial nation, these depend on the existence of external threats or anxieties about the external world, which give some basis to a very vigorous exercise of hard power within state boundaries. We might hope for more peace and stronger international institutions, but it seems to be structurally impossible to have a unified global sovereign which either rules in a centralised way or has a coherent structure of devolved sovereignties covering the whole world.
The first option is always going to be disturbed by localised resistance and power competition at the sub-global level. Even if in some way, it is possible to have very integrated uniform sovereignty actglobal level, we are clearly far from such a situation. It could only emerge in a long term way in the far future. This possibility seems to be me to be very abstract, and in reality there could never be a global community possessing a sufficiently dense consensus on interests and principles, to make anything possible more than a very limited form of global sovereignty, which would be in a kind of shifting unstable balance with the sovereignty of nations or the partially shared sovereignty of blocs of nations. Even small nations face periodic challenges to inner sovereignty from the sharper forms of citizen dissent or various kinds of flows of information, population movements economic activity which spill over national boundaries. Completely self-contained sovereignty of nations is impossible as is a completed integrated global sovereignty.
How would rationalistic and homogenizing tendencies of transnational institutions might accommodate the need for global responses to issues like climate change and pandemics? What are your thoughts about that?
Rationalistic and homogenising tendencies in international institutions provide for some basis for international al action on climate change and pandemics. The rationalising and homogenising tendencies also create problems. A single centre trying to impose a unique approach for the whole world will not allow for the benefits of localised experimentation, comparison of solutions, and full debate of polices. Realistically national governments will be a necessary location for information gathering, policy formation and actions.
There may be some grouping of this as in the European Union , but even this is not an exercise of fully integrated sovereignty commanding a cross-European administration. In reality it is based on compromise between elects of European decision making and what nations agree. It is very clear that global co-ordination cannot go any further than this model and is likely to be less. The facts of climate change and the conditions for future pandemics don’t tell us what the best solutions are. These are fields which include unpredictable feedback, at the natural level enhanced by collective human action producing its own feedback. We can’t know in advance what the best possible solution is. We don’t know what the best solution is for different parts of the world given different conditions. There is no perfect solution there is just a variety of trade offs between various actions with various consequences outside the fields of climate and pandemic control. We cannot possibly have perfect knowledge of how to compare the results of a multitude of trade offs in a variety of possible feedback loops. Even if we did have a perfect rational solution based on perfect knowledge of the future, we would still not be able to perfectly control the politics about which kinds of costs populations are likely to tolerate. Some global co-ordination is desirable but we should not deceive us that there can bear perfect global coordination on perfect solutions.
Do you think that if we had adopted the Roman educational system of the Septem Artes Liberales, regardless of race or religion, we could have achieved a more civilized, globalized, and intellectually advanced society today?
The Septem Artes Liberales combine a quadrivium of astronomy, geometry, arithmetic and music with a trivium of rhetoric, grammar and logic. Whatever merits this may have had for the ancient, medieval and early modern worlds, it is not an adequate way of defining basic knowledge for the present. It certainly never produced I can’t right now say how this compares with classical education in southern, central and eastern Asia, which is the obvious point of comparison. It maybe worked in the Roman Empire, then Catholic (later Catholic and Protestant) Europe for providing some common understanding, but it has never been a global model and chant be now.
There is an issue now of global communications, travel and economic flows, which does make the issue of a broad global consensus on the basics of education relevant for present times. That is not the same as arguing that a rigid seven-fold structure can be universally applied. A broad universal education at pre-university level should presumably include mathematics and some high quality of understanding of your own language. This requires some study of literature and history.
The greatest understanding comes from doing something like this one more language, some study of at last one foreign language should be part of any education core, which also serves needs of communication. A well shaped education core should really introduce everyone to the starting elements of all major sciences, natural and social, which means physics chemistry, geography, biology, psychology, sociology and economics. For contemporary life, we should probably add communications studies and information technology. Philosophy provides a way of thinking about foundations and connections between these ares of knowledge. It is rather difficult to study before 16. Before 16, I favour studies of values and critical reasoning. Ideally this should absorb and replace classes specifically devoted to religion, which can be best studied in a critical and comparative environment. Increasing globalization suggests more elements of comparative studies in these areas where applicable. So I don’t have anything as compact as seven areas of study. What I have suggested above covers 14 areas (before getting into foreign languages), so that is a doubling of the old septet. How this is worked out in practice will inevitably vary between global regions, countries and even within countries, allowing for different circumstances along with the benefits of experimentation and comparison.
There is no way of studying all 14 of these things simultaneously throughout the years of compulsory schooling. Schooling should introduced all of them to all students at some point. Constant study is necessary for mathematics and any foreign language (at least one, and in some multi-lingual countries this can be complicate by requirements to study more than one language of that nation). This should be combined with constant study of at least one area of natural science and one area of social science, along with national literature and history (preferably with comparative elements for both). That makes a core sextet, though of a more variable kind than the classical septet. At sixteen this can be joined by philosophy, as once you start to study any field in any real depth, philosophical questions do arise, so that would make a septet, though at this point maybe some choice should be allowed regarding whether to study both social science and natural science.
Six subjects enough for pre-university study and maybe that could drop further in the final year of pre-university study. All countries of the world following something like this patterns probably a prerequisite for properly educated people throughout a global community, equipped to cope with life in any part of the world.
What would you like to say about philosophy education in Turkey? How would you interpret it in terms of language, culture, and history? Do you think Latin and Ancient Greek education should be introduced at earlier stages in Turkey to support the development of free thought?
It is difficult for me to generalize about philosophy education in Turkey. I understand there is less of it at high school level than there used to be which is unfortunate. As with other countries, I favour making classical languages more available as subjects of school study, but it is not possible to make this compulsory. Experimentation in schooling should be allowed in which some schools could specialize in offering classical languages. I certainly think there should be far more departments in this area in Turkish universities, though equally there should be more departments concerned with ancient languages and literatures of the Near East and Asia, as this is the obvious major alternative to the Graeco-Roman-western tradition. None of these traditions should be seen as isolated and self-contained. The complete study of the history of liberty certainly requires some awareness of ancient history and texts, but I don’t think we can make liberty as a way of thinking influencing education too dependent on study of ancient sources. Some element of this is necessary in philosophy and some other humanities, but in general, liberty has to appear through education in emphasis on the development of individuality of a kind which is free thinking, critical and responsible. Some element of classics in the world of education is a significant part of this, but it cannot be the full story. Philosophy has to be understood primarily in terms of a cross-national tradition across centuries in which nations have greatly changed, so it cannot possibly be understood in terms of national tradition or culture or history. Good philosophy in any country depends on having an internationalized and comparative sense of tradition, culture and history.
What types of research can be conducted in the field of philosophy today? What are the studies you have undertaken in relation to philosophy? Do you believe that alternative learning methodologies can be developed in this field?
I don’t have a strong view about new ways of learning philosophy. I teach in fairly old fashioned ways without much resort to tech ology in the class. Philosophy is inevitably affected by new forms of technology and communication, but I can’t see this changing the core. Different instructors can have different views about use of technology. This should be let opt individual choice. In the end all philosophy education has to be directed towards philosophical texts and forms of reasoning which are not obviously greatly changed by technology. I studied most aspects of western philosophical tradition as an undergraduate, making a special effort to study Continental European Philosophy after Kant since this could only be studied as an option (elective), not as part of the core courses. In my postgraduate work, I was very oriented towards Continental Philosophy and its relationship with literary studies.
I also developed interests in political theory, during that time, as an area of academic writing, though I have always read in that area anyway. There are some other things I came across then to do with philosophers who have a very literary aspect to their work, who still interest me, particularly Giambattista Vico and Michel de Montaigne. There was a period in which I was concerned with Wittgenstein, along with connections between Continental and Analytical Philosophy (that is philosophy very oriented towards science, logic, and conceptual analysis). Though that is till of some interest to me, it is not an area where I aim to write much anymore. I have been interested for some time on Foucault and theories of liberty, but have been slow to really consolidate my writing in that area and getting it published. Something similar applies to Vico’s contribution to thinking about philosophy as the philosophy of the human world, in which history and literature are central.
I am aiming to make progress in these projects, along with other writing commitments, which currently include work on Foucault’s view of seventeenth thought. Recently I have published on philosophy and literature and Derrida’s ethics. I aim to keep working on ethics as well as philosophy and literature. I have thoughts about tragedy related to both fields and that may express itself in future writing.
Interviewer: Academician, Author and Pr Carnet Editor Semay Buket Şahin
Would you like to talk about the short films you shot while you were a cinema student?
All my short films so far have featured elements of magical realism or fantasy—whether it’s TV characters confronting you from the screen, catching lice in your girlfriend’s hair, or women laying eggs. I tend to dive into my most bizarre ideas, and I’m grateful to have an outlet for them, as well as the support of those around me on this unconventional storytelling journey. Writing, directing, and editing my films have been invaluable experiences, not only for honing my craft but also for the meaningful human connections I’ve made along the way.
What kind of experience did the films you shot give you in terms of directing?
Directing actors was initially the most intimidating part for me. Having experience as an actor on other projects helped me realize that actors seek trust from their directors, which is built through communication. Instead of feeling like I needed to have all the answers—like in an exam—I learned to approach directing as a collaboration. A particularly positive experience was working on my final university film, “The Egg”, where I had the chance to rehearse with actors on location before shooting. This made the process less stressful and allowed us to be more open. Before film school, I hadn’t fully grasped that directing extends beyond working with actors. It involves making decisions across every department and ensuring the entire team is aligned with the creative vision. I’m so excited to explore this even further in my upcoming projects.
In your opinion, what are the most important features that make a short film successful?
I can’t yet speak to the commercial success of short films from personal experience (though one of mine has been selected for three festivals so far, which I’m very happy about). One thing I can say is that the audience’s response was incredibly positive. It’s always a pleasure to hear people share their interpretations and explore what the film meant to them.
One particularly encouraging piece of advice came from a workshop I attended with Argentine director Marco Berger. He said, “Make the films you want to see, because people are similar. If you like something, chances are others will too.”
How to edit a good movie? What is done before editing?
It’s no secret to filmmakers that editing begins before shooting. Understanding editing helps immensely with blocking and shot choices, but doesn’t fully protect you from post-production challenges. For example, in my short film “Lice”, a lack of coverage forced me to find a creative solution. I used fades to black between shots, which not only smoothed the edit but also reinforced the film’s dark, cave-like setting.
What would you like to say about the cinema industry when you evaluate it in terms of popular culture today? Is the most popular the best movie?
As a film graduate, I’ve been exposed to a wide range of non-mainstream films. Being from Europe and having international friends also influences my viewing habits, so I don’t always focus on the most popular films. That said, I find incredible films in both mainstream and indie cinema, just as I sometimes come across films—popular or obscure—that don’t resonate with me.
What are the shortcomings you see in the cinema industry and movies today? Do you think cinema has become monopolized?
Like many, I value creative freedom in storytelling. However, I’ve noticed that many mainstream films follow a checklist of politically correct themes and characters. While these topics are important, they should feel organic to the story rather than forced and I believe that a genuine, natural approach leads to meaningful art. That said, I understand that funding often dictates creative choices. One movement I’m especially excited about is the push for greener filmmaking practices. As a nature lover, I was disheartened to learn about the film industry’s environmental impact. While the industry still has a long way to go, it’s encouraging to see more productions adopting sustainable practices. I fully support this movement and strive to make every project I work on as eco-friendly as possible. I believe embracing green filmmaking is becoming essential for staying relevant in the industry. I’m also very excited about the emerging green storytelling movement and eager to see what stories grow from it.
Who is Alisa Gorokhova? Can you tell us a little about yourself?
I am a Ukrainian-Canadian documentary filmmaker, writer, and journalist – in no particular order. I spent the first 10 years of my career in commercial copywriting. Unlike most people, I actually enjoyed the peace and quiet the pandemic brought because it gave me time to re-evaluate my life thus far and priorities going forward. I was in my early 30s, a perpetual expat living in a foreign country, with a handful of close friends, no family nearby, and a career I wasn’t in love with. After months of deliberation during lockdown, I decided to change everything about my life until it had not only more meaning, but love and joy within it.
I decided to move back to North America from Europe after 10 years, and to begin investing in building a network and support system that would be with me for the rest of my life. I also applied to the University of California, Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism to study documentary filmmaking. I had always considered documentaries to be the highest art form. Most importantly, I decided to wholeheartedly embrace the creativity within me that I had been running away from my entire life. I graduated with a Master of Journalism degree from Berkeley in May 2024. What’s next? I wish I knew. What I do know is that I am finally fulfilling my full potential and that alone is a priceless investment.
Could you tell us about your work as a Documentary Filmmaker?
I started filmmaking relatively late in life – in my mid 30’s. But I do sincerely believe that my life experiences thus far saturate my work on every level. Berkeley encouraged us to make films that were important to us, and that permitted us to explore topics that were important to us. And when what was close to my heart was too painful to address, I learned to shift focus to a similar issue but within a different community. For instance, I have family that, due to the war in Ukraine, were forced to flee to Germany as refugees. Emotionally, I felt unable to produce a narrative about Ukrainian refugees as it was too painful. Instead, I made a short film about an Iranian refugee to the US and his experiences entering a new country with nothing except the clothes on his back in 1979. With that piece, it was important to me to show that refugees, regardless of their point of origin, are unique, complex individuals, and that more often than not, they would prefer to live in peace in their homeland given the opportunity.
Creatively speaking, I love films that explore different styles, themes and formats of storytelling. I try to bring that into everything I do. Rather than adapt something that has already been made to my taste, I try to push myself into a storytelling style that is unexplored. In that regard, Stanley Kubrick is a hero of mine, as he is to so many filmmakers, from Denis Villeneuve to George Lucas. Obviously, I have a long way to go until I’m in the same dimension as those three, but one can dream. 🙂
What would you like to say about Documentary Films made today? What deficiencies do you see in terms of content and technique? What do you think about the future of Documentary Filmmaking?
Documentaries today are bigger than they have ever been. In fact, I don’t understand how people can say that they don’t like documentaries in this day and age – docs come in every genre, on every topic matter, in every language. How can one dislike them all? That said, there are documentaries made today that should never have been made, let alone screened before a global audience. A recent example, I’m sad to say, is “Russians at War” which does not shy away from acknowledging that it is Russian propaganda about the war they themselves started, made by a journalist who worked for the main propaganda channel in Russia – RT. And yet it was screened at the Toronto International Film Festival. As a Canadian, and as a Ukrainian, it was a slap in the face to the entire Ukrainian diaspora in Canada. Documentaries, unlike fiction films, have to be held to a higher standard of reporting and storytelling overall.
As journalists, we must fight disinformation and propaganda head on, especially when it is produced and funded by a country that uses propaganda as a weapon of war. In spite of the financial struggles rocking the filmmaking industry overall today, I believe that the future of documentary filmmaking is bright. The more people there are that watch docs today, the more future generations of journalists and filmmakers will want to make them. People tend to forget content and filmmaking technique, but they will not forget how a film made them feel. A documentary can make you feel smart, it can make you weep, it can make you feel involved in an important cause, it can make you feel educated, and, most importantly, it can make you fall in love with a topic. As long as documentaries like that continue to be made, the future of doc filmmaking is limitless.
What is the importance of documentary films in raising awareness about social problems?
People are visual beings. It is one thing to learn about a social issue by reading about it, it is another thing to witness it with your own eyes, even if it is on a screen. To see the pain on the face of someone, anyone, suffering massive injustice – that sticks with you. Anyone with an ounce of empathy can find a documentary they relate to emotionally that spurs them on to make a change in their life, to fight for a social cause. That is why, stylistically, we as filmmakers must continue to explore themes and genres. Society evolves, and so must we with it.
Are films festivals effective in promoting documentary films? Do you think that cinema students can promote their films at festivals and famous film studios? Should universities collaborate with film festivals, film studios and famous producers?
Yes and no. I have seen films made by classmates get the attention they deserve at film festivals, and I have witnessed films that I felt absolutely deserved attention be passed over by film festivals. Realistically speaking, film festivals have agendas and they have themes. A film can be excellent, but if its topic is not in tune with the mood of the festival that year, it will not be picked.
I don’t think festivals are very invested in collaborating with universities and film students, and that is their prerogative. Festivals are a for profit business, after all. Universities are there to instill a higher level of knowledge than what is in the mainstream and on the festival circuit. If film students stick to what film festivals want, we will never push the industry forward, expand its boundaries creatively, and it will never grow as a result. And creative sgrowth and exploration is ultimately what keeps us all employed.
But, of course, all students would love to promote their films at festivals. I just don’t think that should be our key goal as student filmmakers. Good films, student or otherwise, will live on regardless, and we have our entire lives left to create. University is the time to learn and better yourself – not necessarily the time to succeed.
Are you considering shooting a documentary film in Türkiye? What topics would you choose for a documentary film shoot in Türkiye?
I would love to shoot a documentary in Türkiye! And not just because of the food, the culture, and the cats 🙂 I have a personal connection to the country that I have never been able to explore. Just last week, I got DNA confirmation (to my utmost surprise) that my ancestors were Pontic Greeks who immigrated from Anatolia in northeastern Türkiye to Crimea, a peninsula in southern Ukraine, in the early 20th century.
They spoke a dialect which is now all but extinct in Crimea because of Stalin’s purges of ethnic minorities in the 1930’s, but is still found in Anatolia. The collapse of the Ottoman Empire is abundant with stories, and this is mine. It would be an honor to go to Anatolia, explore the region, learn about the language and maybe even my family history. My family was forced to hide their Greek ancestry during the years of the Soviet Union – my great-grandmother even had to change her Greek name to a Russian one to avoid deportation of the entire family to a Gulag.
I owe my existence to them and so many others like them who had to abandon their ethnic roots in order to survive Soviet fascism. Especially since Russia once more is targeting ethnic minorities in Ukraine en masse.
Most people outside of Ukraine don’t know, but Mariupol is a city populated by Greek-Ukrainians that originally immigrated to Ukraine from Türkiye centuries ago. Mariupol has been all but destroyed by Russia, its ethnic Greek culture decimated. A genocide within a genocide. It is a story that must be told, whether by me or not, or it will keep happening again and again. I would love to work with Turkish filmmakers, historians, linguists and journalists to discover the stories of Anatolia and its significance on global history and culture in Eastern Europe.
What is the importance of documentary filmmaking for the journalism profession? Do you think documentary journalism is given importance today?
We live in a visual world. Without expanding into video in some capacity, whether feature docs or even social media content, I’m fearful for the future of journalism in general. Gen Z doesn’t read newspapers, all their information is obtained digitally. Instead of blaming young people for the natural progression of technology, or clinging on to a past that simply isn’t there anymore, we should be leaning into the new forms of media. Documentaries are a huge aspect of that. Whereas 20 years ago people might have read an investigative piece 20 pages in length several times per week, people don’t have the attention span for that nowadays. Documentaries can bridge that gap by still telling complex investigative narratives in a way that is visual and works with a contemporary attention span. In this way, narrative journalists can work with visual journalists to create masterpieces in storytelling.
Of course, I am hugely biased 🙂 I am truly obsessed with documentaries. A writer will have their own opinion on the matter and that’s as it should be.
Are woman journalists limited to storytelling in war journalism? Does this traumatise women journalists?
The war in Ukraine has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that female journalists – war correspondents – are capable of anything men are and then some. Not only are we capable of reporting on the most horrific aspects of war, I believe we also bring an empathy that encourages vulnerability in our sources that male journalists have a harder time achieving.
People like to say that war is a man’s game, but that has never been the case. My grandmother was a nurse in World War II. She was also a sergeant in the army. Women are often forced into supporting their families when men leave to fight, and they are often left trying to rebuild families after their warriors return home wounded in ever sense of the word. Not to mention the horrors women go through under occupation. The pure savagery Ukrainian women go through under Russian occupation to this day could and will fill hundreds of war crime tribunals in The Hague one day soon.
Women journalists are well acquainted with all of this, both professionally, and often from their own personal family stories. What we bring to the table is storytelling, yes, but also visions of war that men perhaps don’t often see. As important as it is to see the pure violent destruction war causes, something male journalists tackle beautifully, it is also important to bear witness to the emotions of the soldiers put into inhumane conditions where they have to watch their friends’ bodies rot around them while they lie injured and helpless. Or dig up mass graves of women and children with hands tied behind their backs. Or listen to the stories of psychologists working with women who manage to escape occupation which, when it comes to Russia and Russian soldiers, is akin to sexual slavery.
I have personally interviewed veterans from the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Ukraine. Things have been shared with me that have been shared with no one else, thing they would never have shared with other men or even their families. There are things that I have not been able to put in my films because they are too traumatic for audiences to watch. And all I do is listen to these stories – there are female journalists out there actually living them.
A Ukrainian female journalist and prisoner of war actually died in Russian captivity only a week ago. In terms of trauma, I don’t believe women and men put through the same circumstances get different levels of trauma because of it. There are men that are more sensitive to trauma than I am, and women that are less so. It comes down to the uniqueness of the individual. I will say this, though. Women are much more likely to seek professional help for their trauma than men are. If anything makes us better war journalists, it’s that.
What do you think of YouTube? What are the effects of YouTube on the journalism profession? Has YouTube become an alternative media space against the male-dominated mainstream media?
I love YouTube! And Instagram and even TikTok. I’ve also fallen in love with podcasts lately, and am planning on starting my own soon which would explore the world of media today. There is a place for all social media and other forms of media in journalistic storytelling. TikTok and Instagram in particular have really democratized the spread of news media. And I’m not just talking about influencers, although we should not ignore their importance in the grand scheme of modern day media.
Journalistic content created for modern media forms is a new industry and as such there is no prejudice as to who may or may not participate in it. For instance, opinion pieces in the New York Times are more often than not penned by a certain class of men because that is the legacy of the NYT. This is not the case for new media. Anyone can become influential based on a confluence of factors. And not just in terms of gender, but also age, race, nationality, geography… you name it. Anything that functions as a democratizer is a good thing in my book.
One thing that I feel I must add though, as a journalist. Misinformation is much easier to spread across new media because new media doesn’t hold itself to the same standards as traditional media. Traditional media requires two independent sources for verification of a fact. Obviously, this is not a requirement for new media. Which is why one of the most important things we learn as student journalists is trust but verify, always.
Do you think that the media and the journalism profession are dominated by men? What kind of psychological trauma are women journalists exposed to in a male-dominated media?
You would be hard-pressed to find a profession that is not dominated by men to some extent. So, yes, of course it is. If you hear the word “journalist” you don’t visualize someone like me. You think of someone like Bob Woodward. I have personally encountered tremendous misogyny in all aspects of journalism and media overall. A sports editor assuring me that women are simply not smart enough to edit sports, which… no. Or renowned Pulitzer winning investigative reporters hobnobbing with male journalists who have been outed as sexual predators, even going so far as introducing them to young female journalists. And then of course the endless complaining among men about hiring quotas, as well as their inability to even recognize their innate privilege in an industry built by them and for them. All of that is traumatic to women, whether in journalism or another industry, undoubtedly. But I will tell you a secret. Something I have personally witnessed among millennial and Gen Z women specifically is that we will go to the ends of the Earth to support each other, both emotionally and professionally.
Traditionally, men like to think that most women are competitive with each other, but that is almost never the case in my experience. There are so few of us in journalism and filmmaking that we will support each other just so that, eventually, there will be more of us. The reason for this evolution is that women can no longer stomach tokenism – the idea that one token woman per team is enough. Instead, if there is one woman on a team, more often than not she will work to bring other women on board. THAT is the future of women in journalism. Girlhood. Girl’s girls. Girl code. Whatever you want to call it. We are here to stay and we are here to slay.
prcarnetworld.com 