The Elusiveness of the BeautifulE. B. White, in a chapter that he added to the famous style manual of his mentor William Strunk, Jr., contends that "style is something of a mystery" and that we can never "confidently say what ignites a certain combination of words, causing them to explode in the mind" (The Elements of Style, 4th ed. [New York: Longman, 2000], pp. 66–67).There is a certain amount of truth in what White says, but, on the other hand, a good many people make a living from distinguishing good art from bad art or from attempting to tell students why some authors deserve to be honored and remembered long after they are dead and others deserve to be consigned to oblivion. Literary fame depends not only on what an author says but also on the way in which he or she says it. Neither a synopsis of the plot of Hamlet nor a detailed explanation of Shakespeare's intentions or the play's meaning is the same as Hamlet itself.At the same time, we cannot rest content forever with saying, "Hamlet must be a good play because lots of people still read it or go to see it performed 400 years after it was written" or even that "the words of Hamlet's soliloquies 'explode in the mind.' " There have to be grounds on which we can justify our good opinion of certain literary works. Preferably, those grounds should be as objective as possible, but if, in the final analysis, there has to be an element of subjectivity in them, so be it. After all, in the final analysis, the criteria by which we judge the style of works of literature are going to be essentially the same criteria by which we judge the success or otherwise of our own efforts, whether or not these have an artistic purpose.Much can be done by analysis. As an example of powerful, but ultimately undefinable style White takes Thomas Paine's famous statement "These are the times that try men's souls." He then offers four alternative versions of the statement and concludes, not surprisingly, that although none of the alternatives can be faulted for grammar or clarity, none of them measures up to the original. He takes this as proof of the mystery that is at the heart of inspired writing and comments: "We could, of course, talk about 'rhythm' and 'cadence,' but the talk would be vague and unconvincing" (ibid.). But we may feel that White gives up too easily. Such talk need not be altogether vague and unconvincing. Paine's statement sticks in the mind partly at least because it contains subtle alliteration ("These are the times that try men's souls") and because it has a clear rhythm (/UU/U///, where / represents a stressed and U an unstressed syllable). In particular, it ends with three strongly stressed syllables. If we said they were like three drumbeats, we might be heading into the realms of the fanciful, but the simile is not entirely inappropriate. Using three stressed syllables is undoubtedly an effective way of concluding a statement, for one of the extracts from poems that were quoted earlier ends in exactly the same way:"I do not know much about gods; but I think that the river
Is a strong brown god…." "Try men's souls" / "strong brown god": the rhythm is exactly the same in both cases and in both instances brings the statement to a powerful close.Now, it would be perfectly possible to write an utterly unremarkable statement in the same rhythm that Paine employs:Give me a pound of good strong cheese. orSuch are the sighs from sore men's bowels. But the fact that you can extract the rhythm from a great saying and reuse it to write nonsense, does not mean that the rhythm contributes nothing to the greatness of the saying in the first place. To construct his great heroic statement, Paine uses simple resonant words full of meaning with a powerful rhythm and some unobtrusive alliteration to bind them together. Whether the statement was pure inspiration or the result of careful thought and revision may be a mystery, but the statement itself is not wholly beyond analysis.The Use of AnalysisIn order to progress further in our discussion of style, we have to believe that the aesthetic qualities—for they are, principally, aesthetic qualities—are not figments of the imagination or purely subjective. Clarity, elegance, beauty, and similar concepts are not too difficult to define in dictionary terms, but they can be difficult to grasp and difficult to relate to your own writing. To the extent that they exist in the eye of the beholder, the beholder's eye has to be opened to their existence and their nature. If you can develop a feeling for language, as described above, you will be well on the way to appreciating the subtler qualities of writing. To the extent that the definition of these qualities rests on consensus, you will have to read widely among writers on style and writers whose style is generally regarded as admirable. To the extent that they have an objectively verifiable basis, you will have to learn how to perform and use literary analysis.The brief exercise conducted in the previous subsection is intended, firstly, to show that analysis is possible and can go some way toward explaining why some pieces of writing work well and others do not and, secondly, to prepare the way for further similarly analytical passages later in the book. It is not sufficient to state that this or that example of style is faulty or faultless; some effort has to be made, and will be made, to prove the point. Some people draw back from analysis on the basis that if something is lovely, its loveliness should be left untouched. They perhaps recall Wordsworth's line "We murder to dissect" ("The Tables Turned," first published in Lyrical Ballads [1800]) and feel that it applies to literary criticism as much as to 18th-century science. Anyone is entitled to feel that about great literature, and it is no concern of this book to conduct lengthy analyses of great works of the past or present in any event. No one, though, is entitled to feel that way about his or her own productions, which should always be subjected to careful scrutiny, dissected when necessary, and even murdered if they do not come up to expectations.It is not to be expected that everyone should conduct a full-scale analysis of every sentence that he or she writes. It is advisable that everyone should be in a position to analyze any particular sentence or paragraph that he or she is not happy with and to use aesthetic as well as practical criteria to determine the reason for dissatisfaction and to find a remedy. That is what this text exists to assist you with.
|
Email
Print
Save
Citation
Record URL
