tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8952558748920814228.post7064715729427859870..comments2012-12-11T05:49:23.431-08:00Comments on lux lucas: In Praise of Marblelux lucashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11489593460004999879noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8952558748920814228.post-26833261733365106222011-07-14T07:45:26.537-07:002011-07-14T07:45:26.537-07:00Throught-provoking post! If you hadn't told us...Throught-provoking post! If you hadn't told us, I would have guess that you prefer marble to glass from your own style. :-)<br /><br /><i> You have me pegged! Thanks for reading and commenting. </i><br /><br />Thinking about it, my metaphor of choice would be architectural, e.g., Tudor v. Georgian, or International Style v. Art Moderne. In romance I much prefer clean/uncluttered to ornate simply because it's less painful to read unless the author is really gifted. <br /><br /><i> I love this idea about architecture--and I totally agree--bad Marble is the worst! Very, very difficult to do well... </i><br /><br />You talk about clarity (which presumably everyone wants) and restraint as useful functionally, and I agree they can make books easier to understand. But think of James Salter, or Marilynne Robinson. Their work has an elegant spareness whose intent goes beyond the desire to be clear. It's definitely an aesthetic choice. <br /><br /><i> Absolutely--even if the author isn't necessarily making that choice "consciously," there are some really interesting assumptions about language going on there (Housekeeping's pretty great, yes?)...I suspect this goes back to various fashionable modernist styles at the beginning of the 20th c.--Hemingway's spare, journalistic prose versus ostentatiously marbled writers like Woolf and Fitzgerald. </i><br /><br />Some of us, like me, DA Janine, and Robin, have talked about language quite a bit over the years, but I agree that it's not a regular feature of reviews in romancelandia. I'll refer to writing style but I don't generally go into detail. But I'm not trained in literary analysis.<br /><br /><i> Yes, those conversations (at least what I've caught of them) seem really nuanced and great. I love that they're out there--and I don't at all fault readers/reviewers for not talking more (and more explicitly) about language. I expect I have something of a fetish about it! Hence, my writing here. Do you have any favorite posts/essays/comments I ought to read?<br /><br />One doesn't, of course, need to be trained in literary analysis in order to have worthwhile and interesting thoughts about words. That's the thing about language, despite our best efforts, it remains stubbornly, unrepentantly democratic--even worse--anarchic! Vive l'anarchie. </i>lux lucashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11489593460004999879noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8952558748920814228.post-32146107605988973562011-07-13T14:31:29.941-07:002011-07-13T14:31:29.941-07:00Ack, my inability to self-proofread is exposed aga...Ack, my inability to self-proofread is exposed again! I meant to write guessed, not guess, of course.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8952558748920814228.post-4903725890640024512011-07-13T14:29:34.272-07:002011-07-13T14:29:34.272-07:00Throught-provoking post! If you hadn't told us...Throught-provoking post! If you hadn't told us, I would have guess that you prefer marble to glass from your own style. :-)<br /><br />Thinking about it, my metaphor of choice would be architectural, e.g., Tudor v. Georgian, or International Style v. Art Moderne. In romance I much prefer clean/uncluttered to ornate simply because it's less painful to read unless the author is really gifted. <br /> <br />You talk about clarity (which presumably everyone wants) and restraint as useful functionally, and I agree they can make books easier to understand. But think of James Salter, or Marilynne Robinson. Their work has an elegant spareness whose intent goes beyond the desire to be clear. It's definitely an aesthetic choice. <br /><br />Some of us, like me, DA Janine, and Robin, have talked about language quite a bit over the years, but I agree that it's not a regular feature of reviews in romancelandia. I'll refer to writing style but I don't generally go into detail. But I'm not trained in literary analysis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com