"Writing a book is a horrible, exhausting struggle, like a long bout of some painful illness. One would never undertake such a thing if one were not driven on by some demon whom one can neither resist nor understand. For all one knows that demon is simply the same instinct that makes a baby squall for attention. And yet it is also true that one can write nothing readable unless one constantly struggles to efface one's own personality. Good prose is like a window pane" -- George Orwell, Why I Write
Hmmm, do we agree with this? Not the first bit but the "one can write nothing readable unless one constantly struggles to efface one's own personality" bit. Really not sure about that George. Certainly, if enforced, this edict would eliminate 90 percent of Great Rock Writing from consideration as even "readable".
As for "good prose is like a window pane"....
I actually am generally into the idea of lucidity and directness as virtues and find it easy to switch between newspaper-style writing and bloggoid infolded type stuff -- and also kinda enjoy the challenge of seeing if you can get ideas across without them seeming capital "i" Ideas -- but for some writers Style=Voice=the Message = something they don't want to sacrifice. It's that old idea that a writing about rock'n'roll should be rock'n'roll.
If you think about it "style" = anything in a piece of prose that is an impediment to instant understanding, clear transmission of data. a totally style-less piece would be utterly lucid but lack all flavour and personality (utter lucidity = US Today type writing). Conversely, the more stylish / styled a piece of writing, the harder it is to read at speed and the smaller its readership will be.
It's a trade-off
I think Orwell runs together 2 different things. One can have a strong, distinct personality and yet still have clear, transparent prose. The window pane does not have to open onto a white picket fence. It can open onto a supernova exploding in space or a Dali-esque vista of mayhem.
ReplyDeleteThere's a risk that highly-stylized and personalized writing provides a window pane that only shows the writer (and their obsessions) rather than anything else. The opposite risk is who wants to read about a boring subject written in a boring way?
And unless it was a famous quote, I'm not sure I could recognize a chunk of prose as by Orwell. Whereas I could probably recognize Nietzsche, HP Lovecraft, or Martin Amis.
Orwell was a big defender of Joyce, and a big denouncer of Ezra Pound, so I don't think he quite means intelligibility. It's worth considering the whole essay, since he earlier states that the four reasons writers write are money, ego, art and political purpose (read the last one as broadly as possible). Taken as a whole, Orwell seems to be calling for authors (especially himself) to strip themselves of self-regard when writing. Good prose is like a window pane, not a mirror.
ReplyDeleteAlso, laconic prose represents as much a destination on the stylistic map as one seeking parts with greater floridity. Hemingway and Faulkner.
Oh, I forgot to mention: the Happy Mondays were good, weren't they?
Delete