There seems to be a movement afoot to read Moby Dick, so I thought I'd jump on the bandwagon. I listened to the first chapter this morning on the way to work. This probably won't endear me with my fellow readers, but my first impression of the book is, This guy needs to take a writing class. When I arrived at work and thumbed through what I'd just listened to, I couldn't believe it was only a few pages. He went on--literally when listening--for ten minutes extolling the virtues of water. It was like some rhetorical argument crossed with flowery language. Way too much detail and description in general. One of the most important lessons for a writer--both from what I've been taught in writing classes and what I appreciate as a reader--is "show, don't tell." If water is so great, let the action convince us of it instead of your pretty words; let us experience it instead of hear about it. So my first reaction to Moby Dick is slight annoyance. I hope to have something deeper to share before long.
Besides that, I've always thought it has a great opening line: "Call me Ishmael." It's simple and short and foreboding. I also liked this little passage: "For my part, I abominate all honorable respectable toils, trials, and tribulations of every kind whatsoever." I think that's a sentiment everyone can relate to.
Technorati tag: Moby-Dick06
10 comments:
While I haven't read it, I'd have to agree. I think Tolkien's LOTR is much the same way, except Tolkien was one of the first to write fantasy, so he had to go into detail and history of the land.
If Moby Dick is the same, then it wouldn't be pleasure reading to me, it'd be more reading for the sake that you've read it.
I've been puzzled by this recent Moby Dick-y-ness floating around the local blogosphere. It strikes me as kind of an impromptu bookclub. Anyway... I started the book many years ago and enjoyed it--up to a point. The extended section right there in the middle that reads like a cetology textbook bored me to death. Up until that point I had really liked it, but I never got past the big list o' whales. One of these days I'm going to try again. (Just like with War and Peace, The Brothers Karamazov, Emma, etc. I am notorious for not finishing books.)
As for "show, don't tell", well my friend with that you've hit one of my buttons. I hate that expression, and the idea that lies behind it. If I wanted to show you I'd write a fucking screenplay, not a novel. I think the entire "show don't tell" idea is the product of a dumbed-down video culture, and one that thinks there is only one acceptable style of writing. I for one, enjoy having the story told once in a while, with all of the opportunities for verbal flourish and philosophical wanderings that that implies (see de Botton, Alain). Okay, relinquishing the soap box now.
But TV make book no good. Man fall down, funny......
Although I'm sure it's overused (and perhaps improperly used) to the point of becoming a cliche, I find the sentiment behind it generally true for good writing. And I'm speaking here as an overanalytical person. Sure there is a place for wanderings and there are exceptions to every rule, but I find it generally good advice. So if you truly understand "the idea that lies behind it" as I do--although the screenplay comment makes me wonder--this is one of those things we might have to agree to disagree about. We should discuss it in person sometime.
But the whole point is I'm not impressed with Moby Dick yet. I think Erica is the instigator behind the current movement. It's her favorite and she has challenged everyone to read it with her. It's always been on my one-of-those-books-I-should-read-for-cultural-literacy-and-because-it-must-be-a-classic-for-a-reason-but-will-probably-never-actually-get-around-to-reading list, so I figured this might give me an incentive to go through with it. If I were reading it for pleasure I might have quit by now.
"although the screenplay comment makes me wonder"... hmm I thought I was the snide one around here. Okay then, explain the idea.
Um, ok, a really bad attempt at an example off the top of my head:
"Unconsciously wiping the palms of his hands on his pants, he took one final look in the rear view mirror to adjust his tie for the countless time before getting out of the car. Halfway up the steps, he muttered, "stupid, stupid," under his breath and ran back to the car for the flowers he had left in the passenger seat. Haflway up the steps a second time, he dropped his keys trying to get them back in his pocket. Flushed red and a little breathless, he grabbed the keys and looked around to see if anyone had noticed. Then he continued on his way and, taking a few deep breaths, rang the doorbell."
(That's why I'm not a writer, but) I could have simply told you he was nervous, but instead tried to find a way to show you by describing his actions and state of mind. You might have logically understood the idea of nervousness, but a well-written description will make you feel it at a deeper level. You can identify with the character more and end up taking more from it. Going back to the screenplay reference, a good actor will make voice-over narration unnecessary; you won't have to be told what the person is thinking because you can see it. But in writing it can be much more than just character description--something you can see/be shown by acting it out. It's an approach (that I'm not very good at describing) that communicates with the readers at a deeper level than analytical discourse. Sometimes it's more work for the reader because they're not told what to think/feel and have to make sense of it on their own, but the connection is there and they end up knowing what the writer means at a more personal level.
This makes me wonder exactly what you meant by the "although the screenplay comment makes me wonder" remark. What you meant by "show don't tell" and what I took it to meant are exactly the same thing. I just take issue with the idea that that is the end-all-be-all definition of good writing.
lol. From the Wizards of the Coast book submission FAQ:
"The first, and most important piece of advice, is: "Show, don't tell." The best way to achieve this is to write cinematically. Your writing sample should play like a movie inside the reader's head. In movies we can see what a character is thinking by what he or she does, and by how the character interacts with others."
I had to wonder because we hadn't taken the time to define it and I didn't know what your experience with the phrase was. Now we know, and we perhaps come down on different sides of the issue. But I do agree that there's more to good writing than that and there are always times to disregard it. But it's generally good advice (as described by WotC--and proof that it's an overused cliche), and I'm not getting that yet from Moby Dick.
I love the water discussions, but I'll admit that it's a bit surprising to me that M-D is my favorite book, because normally, I like vacuum-packed, so-tight-it-hurts writing, and my dear Melville is so not that writer. But, the philosophies and observations really speak to me. It's everything and nothing at once. And somehow, he speaks to everything that torments me.
Post a Comment