literary forensics

maa32 · 14 Apr 2002, 23:39 · from urth-v0204.mbox · original

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: maa32 <maa32 at dana.ucc.nau.edu>
Subject: (urth) literary forensics
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 16:39:24 -0700
Message-ID: <urth-v0204-602 at digest.urth.net>
X-Urthmirror-Source: http://www.urth.net/urth/archives/v0204/602.txt.shtml
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

A bit off any discernible topic, I was home last weekend and read an=20
interesting article in Reader's Digest entitled "Word Sleuth", which detail=
s=20
the literary forensics of the man who successfully identified the Unabomber=20
and the author of Primary Colors based on style comparisons with candidates=
. =20
The fascinating thing about the whole thing was the manner in which he=20
identified the Unabomber - Ted read a lot of British novels and used some o=
f=20
their spelling, coupled with several of their expressions: "You can eat you=
r=20
cake and have it too."

However, as I thought about the novels we read affecting our style (obvious=
ly=20
there are still some individual differences), I was even more intrigued aft=
er=20
making my mother read Mr. Gevers' article praising Wolfe.  She said, "Are y=
ou=20
sure you didn't write this?"  (I will take that as a compliment to my writi=
ng=20
rather than an insult to yours, Mr. Gevers). "You write almost exactly like=20
this." (The list is a rather poor place to see examples of my writing style=
,=20
since here I strive for clarity rather than beauty in prose - and my very f=
ast=20
and inaccurate typing (coupled with no spell check)often leaves me=20
disappointed in the quality of my posts).

I wonder how much of the echo in our styles (the maternal eye would be able=
 to=20
catch those similiarites, right?) can be caused by our exposure to Wolfe?  =
And=20
do we in turn owe our style to some dim source that we could not possibly=20
comprehend directly? (like, say, C.K. Scott Moncrieff or even Constance=20
Garnet)
Obviously, the article stresses that we all have a unique, distinctive=20
composition style, but I wonder how much is ripped unconsciously from outsi=
de=20
sources.  For example, for years I realize I tried to fashion the opening=20
lines of any story I thought about writing after Mike Moorcock's introducto=
ry=20
sentence to The War Hound and the World's Pain, which went something like, =
"It=20
was in that year when the fashion in cruelty demanded not only the crucifix=
ion=20
of small peasant children, but also their small animals, that I was=20
transported to Hell; it seems Lucifer wanted to strike a bargain with me."=20
(Obviously, another paraphrase, but isnt' that a great line?)  I've also=20
always admired the closing lines of Zelazny's Lord of Light.

I just thought it was kind of interesting to think about how much our style=20
might be shaped by what we emulate (and Wolfe also made the claim that his=20
style hasn't changed over the years, I believe, which seems odd when thinki=
ng=20
about the choppy sentences that proliferate throughout The Book of the Shor=
t=20
Sun in comparison with the longer and more difficult to follow sentence=20
structures Wolfe employed frequently throughout Peace and The New Sun books=
).

Marc Aramini

--=20

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net