So I drank a full pot of coffee, things began to rumble, things were shaking down south. Off I whisked to the bathroom, my den of silence, the place where I get most of my best reading and for that matter thinking done.
What am I reading right now? I am reading Invisible Monsters by Chuck Palahnuik. Truth be told I am not sure I like it. It's not the content, his premise is solid. It is a story about the fashion industry: super models, trannies, flashing cameras, oh my. No, I am digging the plot. It's his style. I am finding the whole damn thing too gimmicky. He is trying too hard, too many tricks. I wish he'd tell the story, I am already dizzy and I have read only 20 pages. So there, no offense Mr. Palahnuik, you're brilliant, I am a huge fan. It's just that the first 20 pages of Invisible Monsters had me reaching for the Gravol. Maybe that's the point. But what is my point? Is this a book review? Heavens no, this is a rant about style.
Style versus substance. I used to write raw, I abhorred the shackles of grammar and structure. I thought them false constraint; I believed my mind and my words were too wild to be caged. Blame Kerouac and his beats. Then thank them for the inspiration. I eventually began to blog, which meant that my words were being 'published' with the potential for all to read. The perfectionism sunk in. I was now playing a writer on the Internet. I had better buck up, edit, edit, spell check, worry. I took it one step further. I enrolled in journalism classes. British journalism classes at that. I wanted my words and the structure of them scrutinized like only the British could. I wanted to be as good as I could get. Style be damned.
Guess what? The words then stopped. It was no longer fun writing. It became a task, something too clean, more akin to washing the dishes than art. I was in a creative funk. The old me- raw, poetic, rebellious vs the new me- polite, structured, tight. I have been writing through that battle now for the last couple of years. The poet versus the journalist. Perhaps I am a new breed of poetic journalist. But I will let Matt comment about that- he is, of course the expert in all things gonzo.
So there. Not a book review, not an attack on Chuck Palahnuik, just some observations on literary style, from a guy still searching for the best belt to match with his literary hat. Now off I waddle to the bathroom on a quest for the next grand subject. Excuse me a moment.
Hi Joe... I agree that spelling and grammar, puncuation and all that boring stuff is important. I think though, most importante is your writing. Sit down and let whatever it is spill from your fingers and onto the paper. You have to get out what is in your head first, then worry about perfection. I've never been to college nor have I taken any writing classes, and I totally botch the English language. You guys who have been to school scare me. Sometimes it seems you are all trying to cram yourselves into the same little box. I've just picked up writing again, it's been years for me... I'm not going to step into that box. The best writer's are the ones who stand out, not blend in. Amen.
ReplyDeleteThanks Valerie.
ReplyDeleteI am not all that educated. Yes 4 years of university (an advanced degree in public drunkenness), and a diploma in journalism...but I like to think I was a writer (like you) well before, and despite the deprogramming.
I am not anti-style. I like to think I am a pretty stylish writer. My point was, that there has to be a balance. If not the story descends into a rambling poetic bit of chaos.
I eschew the confines of structure and grammar (and even spelling at times) when I write. Poetry is a great way to train yourself to break boundaries, because there are NO rules in poetry (even in haiku).
ReplyDeleteWith fiction, however, I do find myself checking my spelling more, watching my commas, and definitely checking my continuity. But at the end of the day - I only care whether I told my story and whether someone else with similar intelligence can understand it ;-).
You write the chaos, then edit for readability, later, when the rush of inspiration has trickled and you feel like housekeeping. :-)
ReplyDeleteSounds like you're walking the ridgepole quite well now.
Advanced degree in PD? So, you went to SMU too??
Your right Heath. Oh and thanks for playing. I was thinking about knocking on your door and asking if we you could come out and play.
ReplyDeletePoetry is lawless. I love it, but only when I really have nothing of any substance to write. I use poetry as practice. Like tossing a ball up in the air and catching it, not really baseball, but a good way to keep one's skills sharp.
Hahaha, noooo SMU was the enemy, I am an Acadia boy. Ya, one of those rich pricks from up the valley.
ReplyDeleteYes, it's always a short distance between structure and chaos any time I sit behind a keyboard. That's what makes it so damn fun.
Invisible Monsters is actually my favorite Palahniuk book. It just seems so 'different' from his other stuff, if that makes sense? lol
ReplyDeleteExcellent post, though. I can commiserate. I have trouble switching back and forth from creative hodge podge craziness to non-fiction journalism type stuff. I guess I just haven't decided which I like doing better yet and have been trudging through this...whatever it is...for a few years as well!
Thanks Steph,
ReplyDeleteI haven't completely given up on Invisible Monsters, it was more a matter of a bash to bash. I should thank Chuck for the inspiration for this post.
I think that it is good to have the ability to hodge podge, why pigeonhole oneself to a specific genre, especially this early in the game.
Thank you for that post I might be just a spectator but it nice to see a writers insight on their struggle with decisions everyday Including the choice of style in which to word their concepts and thoughts
ReplyDeleteFor me it is like style of painting and which style to choose from comes secondary to be creative but becomes primary when wanting to convey a message or sentiment
Colourmatrix13
YES! THE GREAT BATTLE!! Style vs. Structure!
ReplyDeleteBut see, we're not posting work from the 1950's, are we? We ARE a new generation of writers. Plain and simple. We can integrate many of our favorite authors' style's, but to really get the meat of the message out it has to come from the brain & heart.
Of course spelling and punctuation is important, as it dictates the professionalism and CADENCE of the piece. On the other hand, would any of your favorite writings be any less great with a misused apostrophe or mispeled word?
The line needs to be drawn, but not within our minds. ONLY in print and on paper. The subject of GOOD writing super cedes the etiquette of proper grammar.
Gonzo journalism, is, in effect, what TRUE journalism is all about: a truly unbiased and realistic report of the scene. Be it gross, lame, mad chaos, or frightening to the journalist, it is his duty to allow the pen to function as the "mind's eye". And THAT, I think, is where we'll find the the real story and truth. How's that Joe?
Spot on as usual Matt. Thanks for joining in on the fun.
ReplyDeleteWhat? No comment from Mr. Hunter on the post?! He must have been lost at sea with all a my left socks...fuckers and hounds....
ReplyDeleteLike a true professional I think he might be forming a grand rebuttal. I figured such a post would be right up David's ally, yes he is a tad conspicuous in his silence.
ReplyDeleteConspicuous my ass. How do I follow a great post like that? I'm letting the words speak for themselves.
ReplyDeleteComing soon: a 50,000 word comment/dissertation on "On Style". Stay tuned...
Ye gods, that 50,000 behemoth of a post will have to be published in segments...the Nad couldn't handle that much content all at once. I'd need a larger server.
ReplyDeleteBruce Lee once stated that no one could beat his style of fighting because he had no style. that's the secret; style as no-style. Literature is a grand melting pot, so why not dip into everything all at once? Why write prose in such a rigid fashion, what is this, an army? Is George S. Patton our editor? Are we in danger of being hung by a yard arm?
ReplyDeleteIt's the words man, and what they mean, how they make you feel. When I read something I'm not noting how well a writer has handled his participles, but what images can be evoked through the power of suggestion; imagery, sensory input, all that good stuff.
Gentlemen, I volley the verbal ball back into your court..
David with a solid overhand SMASH! Like a gazelle, this intrepid author rushes to the far end of the literary court, lines up David's volley. SMACK! But did he clear the literary net? Is this in fact an amazing return volley, or has he hit it into the over-stylized net?
ReplyDeleteLike John McEnroe I always have my eye on the referee.
If David "hit it into the over-stylized net" I'd sure be confused. What style exactly is he over doing? An "A" for bravado, sir. And a poignant, lesser-known, and SUPERB Bruce Lee quote. Thats one example of when having NO style can be dangerous. Like a Gonzo journalist, Bruce Lee didn't react with a specific set of rehearsed protocol, but just translated whatever came his way into his OWN form...making him the terrifying and unstoppable legend we know him as...
ReplyDeleteMatt, you are awesome. The ball now careens into Joe's corner...
ReplyDeleteIn a daze, not as light on his feet as usual, Joseph trips, regains control, then dives towards the rapidly tumbling ball... did he hit it? Or is he nothing more than a bloodied, wheezing mass, crumbled slightly out of bounds?
ReplyDeleteYou have to be like water man! When you put water in a vase it BECOMES the vase! ~ Bruce Lee
ReplyDelete'Wax on, wax off' ~ Mr. Miyagi
ReplyDelete"One hand washes the other...I fear nothing."
ReplyDelete--Dr. HST
Egad... I can't take it. I've just got to spit out my 2 cents & I'll do my best not to create a mess of logorrhea on the page, here.
ReplyDeleteMy opinon - for whatever it's worth - is that the days of Strunk & White are over.
Obviously, if one has the prose of the Elysian Fields endlessly streaming out of their ass, it won't matter much if they haven't yet grasped the concept of how to use quotes, commas & other dandy dots & dashes.
At the same time, the most rigid grammar Nazi isn't necessarily a good writer.
I'm very picky about each & every word when I'm writing a peice of fiction. I'm just as selective with each bit of punctuation & when MSWord (or a human being in my writer's group) tries to tell me that I shouldn't use an ellipses, or a sentence fragment, I ignore it.
Part of writing is using your own voice to make your own style & fuck the rules - THERE ARE NO RULES.
But... it still has to be readable.
So, um... yeah. What I'm saying is, I agree with Matt.
Leave it to an American writer in Paris to set the record straight. Thank you Rasmenia for that eloquent response. Your words are unmatched. I am tempted to cut and paste them, use them as a post... a sort of 'In response to style' bit. Hmmmm?
ReplyDeleteRight on - now you've got me curious & ready to read this post that has you tempted.
ReplyDeletePaste away, sir!
Well, I wouldn't change a word of your comment, it is those words that I am tempted to cut, paste, then post. It might seem lazy, but damn it your original comment deserves a wider audience. Whatya think?
ReplyDeleteBah... you flatter me. I'm a great advocate of laziness, so go for it. :)
ReplyDeleteYAY! Consider it done.
ReplyDeleteGO RASMENIA!! I'm agreeing with you for 2 reasons: you are absolutely correct and you agreed with me. Undoubtedly the best 2 reasons on Earth if you are gonna try to make a case with me! But in all seriousness, EXCELLENT post!
ReplyDelete