Test of Sanity

Everything has changed. An interview has become such a confrontational thing. It makes you very defensive. ~ Francesca Annis

Can somebody please tell me why we need interviews in our lives? The last interview I had was like 13 years ago. I never thought I’d had to go through interviews again but as usual, what I think is always at odds with reality. Sigh.
This year alone I have to go through three interviews. One would think that at my age, and with the kind of experience I have, interviews are kacang putih. Not so, as I'd discovered.

The first one I had was in February. Well, it was actually an Oral Test, part of the IELTS evaluation. I thought I did all right. After being interrogated about my childhood, I thought I scored big time (A case of overconfidence?). But I really don’t know what went wrong, I got a mere 7.5. Oh, please! The lady examiner herself was not speaking but reading! How ironic.
After that test, or interview, as I’d like to refer to it, I summed up a few things.

An interview requires you to answer questions. Your answers must please the interviewers. Sure, there are no right or wrong answers, but the interviewers already have specific answer schemes at the back of their mind, right? If your answers do not come close to the answers in the answer schemes, it’s the end of the road for you.

An oral test is not different from an interview. The questions that I got for the Oral Test are mostly personal; and one answer led to another question to another answer and so on and so forth. So, all these equal to: interrogations. Well, of course, interrogations take on a slightly different meaning, in the sense that violence or threats are often used in the process, but come to think of it, don’t we feel threatened when we are bombarded with all kinds personal questions? So,

Oral Test = Interview = Interrogation?

Put it another way: Interview = Oral Test = Interrogations.

Another way: Interrogation = Oral Test = Interview.

What is the ****ing difference? These words have three separate but overlapping meanings, anyway.

A week back I had another interview. This time it was with Greg Garrard (my PhD supervisor-to-be in UK), Richard Kerrige and William Hughes. All three are experts in the field that I intend to study for my PhD. Having come up with the two conclusions above, I did not prepare for the interview (again, overconfidence was the case, plus, why prepare when all they were going to do was interrogate and I’d have to explain myself to people I don’t know over and over again?) But 5 minutes before the interview, my stomach was churning and looking at the phone alone sent zillions of chill down my spine! I was a nervous wreck before I even picked up the phone! The 35-minute phone interview was quickly over; with me playing the role of a tongue-tied quivering wreck! But my conclusion about this interview has altered:

Interview = Oral Test = Interrogation = Nerve-wrecking

After this interview, I figured that would be my last interview. Yeay!!! But it turns out that I have to go for another interview. This time it’s with the US Embassy, visa-related. Oh man! Is there an end to this acute torture? And is there another interview lurking in the shadows?
I guess if the outcome of this interview were disappointing (God please help me!) my conclusion of interviews, in general, would be:

Interview = Oral Test = Interrogation = Nerve-wrecking = Test of Sanity.