I thought that the two readings played nicely off of one another for today. The Bowden piece blew me away with the detail and work that he put into the story. I can't imagine how much research and intense interviews must have gone into the piece. He manages to let us in Saddam's work, personal life, and mind all without a direct interview from the man himself. I wonder if the class thinks that a direct interview with Saddam would have helped the piece at all. I would argue that his strange personality would translate to a strange, probably bare-bones interview. I like it just the way Bowden did it. The editing piece in Telling True Stories shed some light on the Bowden piece for me, and made me think of things that I hadn't before. The Nazario section on Enrique's Journey was particularly interesting for me, because I applied it to the Bowden story. I would imagine that his piece took just as long to organize as Nazario's, because of the huge amount of information. There must have been just as many drafts, edits, comments, and restructurings for Bowden. The editing section reminded me that it's always better to have to much than too little while reporting.