|
Earlier
this week, someone I don't even know challenged my ability
to judge quality writing. It was rather amusing, actually.
The person was attempting to differentiate between storytelling
and quality writing, essentially claiming that writing cannot
be judged on subjective things such as content and originality.
Surprised by the remark, I told her that good writing is
judged on content and originality, as well as style. For my
trouble, I was snappishly asked if I was a judge and told
that I couldn't decide what good writing is unless I was.
Well…good
thing I'm a judge!
Obviously,
this stranger did not know that writing is my life. She did
not know of my writing degree…or the years I've spent teaching
writing to middle school and high school students…or my tenure
as a professional journalist, editing articles and telling
others how to improve their work…or, of course, the role I
play in a certain book reviewing website which you all know
and adore.
But never
mind my credentials. I'm still baffled by the implication
that good storytelling and good writing can be isolated from
each other, and I'm mystified by the idea that one can't judge
the latter by such broad but essential terms as content and
originality. Isn't the content and originality what we love
about To Kill a Mockingbird? Infinite Jest?
A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius? Or maybe
it's what some of you hate about A Heartbreaking Work of
Staggering Genius?
Of course,
the divisive opinions of AHWOSG just prove the point: The
judgment of writing, like the judgment of music or beauty,
is subjective. If it weren't, we wouldn't weep for
the decline of newspaper book reviews and simply worship at
the shrine of Michiko Kakutani. If writing weren't subjective,
I wouldn't have to explain to fans of The Da Vinci Code
that the book had given me a headache before I'd finished
one page, and I certainly wouldn't feel like the only person
alive who hated Juno's smug, unrealistic, reaching
attempts at generic indie-flick wit.
Certainly,
there are standards. A few stylistic aspects of the craft
must be covered in quality writing: things such as the clarity
of voice or skill with literary devices. But thankfully, there
is no Pritchard Scale like in Dead Poets Society, measuring
quality with plots on a graph. Such a thing could never be
taken seriously. A purely objective view of literature makes
it a science instead of an art-it takes the soul out
of reading.
Of course,
if you are an avid reader, none of this is new. You're probably
just as perplexed as I am at the idea of judging writing without
considering its originality or content. And if you're a regular
here at the HBC, I probably don't have to assure you that
we judges of writing have sworn to use our powers for good
instead of evil. For trusting in us, I thank you. This month
marks issue number 12 of the HBC, and in it, I'm proud to
offer you a variety of choices, all of which examine content
or originality, if not both. Among other things, we are offering
a famous comedian's memoir (Born Standing Up), some
rock 'n' roll historical fiction (Sway), a review of
a bestseller about a teenager (The Brief Wondrous Life
of Oscar Wao), and a review written by a teenager of a
bestseller (The Sweet Far Thing).
Thanks
again for stopping by. Come by next month for our one year
anniversary. Kyle and I are planning a swanky birthday party
that may or may not include David Sedaris jumping out of a
very large cake. Ideas on how to explain this to our teenage
reviewer's parents are currently being accepted.
Judiciously
yours,
Yennie
(February,
2008)
|
