Jad!
"Wrap those thoughts in a good yarn and all is forgiven."
Prior to the Lab, Jad spent thirteen long years in Tennessee, walking the land, and then four years in windy Oberlin, Ohio, studying creative writing and music composition. After graduating, Jad wrote music for films, reported for a variety of local and national radio programs and produced radio documentaries. He was a member of the team that launched The Next Big Thing and has been a teacher for WNYC's Radio Rookies.
PRX:
What do you think the zeitgeist was that allowed Radio Lab to come into existence?
Jad:
The zeitgeist was nothing more than WNYC PD Mikel Ellcessor having the idea to clear some space on the Sunday night schedule for a new show, and then me happening to pass him in the hall at precisely the moment he had that idea. Maybe there was more to it that that, but that's how I like to think of it.
Beyond that, the zeitgeist was institutional patience. For the first two years, I fumbled around trying to figure out what a "host" should sound like and in the process experimented with all kinds of bizarro approaches to sound design. No one listened. That was a good thing. Didn't feel like it at the time of course, but it's sometimes good to be ignored. I think of it now as a period of Benign Neglect. The permission to suck for long stretches in the slight possibility that you might one day suck only occasionally is a luxury hard to come by these days.
Jad enjoys the latest episode of Dawn and Drew on his iPod.
Anyhow, fast forward a few years and the Lab is a one hour show about science & ideas. That change was gradual and natural. Co-host Robert Krulwich and producer Ellen Horne coming along had something to do with it. My parents being scientists also contributed. Whatever the case...here we are.
PRX:
Something I've noticed in a lot of mediocre art and music is that attempts to tackle really huge issues ultimately become unwieldy and fall flat on their face. What's so impressive about Radio Lab is that it wraps its arms around so much--science, philosophy, art, and storytelling--and yet still manages to come together extremely well. How do you avoid the pitfalls normally associated with such ambitious topics, and while producing each episode, are you ever nervous that you've bitten off more than you can chew?
Jad:
Yes. I'm always nervous about that...about sounding like a bunch of liberal arts weenies who like to think big thoughts. That thought plagues me, actually.
So we try to strike a balance between breadth and depth. We pick spots in the programs to really dig deep, then pull way out and make wild insane connections. And most importantly, we tell stories. At the end of the day, that's our job. Without a narrative, the big lofty thoughts can feel pretentious. Wrap those thoughts in a good yarn and all is forgiven.
As to the first part of your question: the reason I think we're able to venture into all these different forms and styles and topics and rhythms is because we work very hard to define the answer basic questions: What is Radio Lab? What is a Radio Lab story? What isn't? If you'd asked me those questions two years ago, I wouldn't have been able to tell you. Now I can. It's tedious, making all these lists that end up looking not unlike the public radio core-values card, but that's what we do, and it's made all the difference.
PRX:
Does your work require a certain kind of obsessive personality?
Jad:
I'm not sure obsessiveness is required, but all three of us (Robert, Ellen myself) are deeply obsessive.
PRX:
What's the process for creating dialogue with Robert Krulwich? How much of it is scripted?
Jad:
Difficult question to answer. Our process is a weird dance between order and chaos. We do architect the story-lines of the conversation in detail but stop short of actual scripting, because we both agree that when it comes to jibber jabber, the beats within the conversation should feel real and discovered in the moment (people can smell a fake a mile away). So we intentionally go in circles, starting with: 1) make an outline, 2) improvise on that outline until we hear something that works, which leads us to 3) toss out the old outline and make a new one, bringing us back to (1) again. It's a constant tension between having the plan and then being ready at any moment to throw the plan away. When our interaction works (and it doesn't sometimes), the conversation feels real and breezy... and yet somehow not at odds with the very tightly structured thing the conversation sits upon.
"Artwork" by Christina Heller.
PRX:
Top five Radio Lab-related albums:
Jad:
1. Britney Spears - Greatest Hits
2. Motley Crue - "Red, White and Crue"
3. Yanni - "Live at the Acropolis"
4. Il Divo - "The Christmas Collection"
5. Tron - Soundtrack
PRX:
When it comes to scoring a piece, what are most popular sins committed by producers today?
Jad:
Sin is a strong word, but there are a few things we producers could be better at recognizing: first, there's a subtle but important difference between using music to 'channel previously created emotion' (to quote [Academy Award-winning movie sound editor] Walter Murch) and using music to inject previously absent emotion. We too often use music 'the way an athlete uses steroids' (again, Murch). And we do it for a good reason: It works. Music is powerful. But maybe that's not what's healthiest for the organism in the long run. Second, it would serve us to better recognize the cultural associations tied to particular genres of music. At this point in our mediated lives, music = lifestyle. So when you choose a piece of recognizable music, be aware that you're de facto saying something to your audience about who you think you are or who you think they are. Maybe that's why listeners often complain about music choices.
© 2006, The Public Radio Exchange
