![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Speaking of Style...
May. 10th, 2011 10:06 pmI just learned in the last few days about a whole literary movement I'd not previously encountered -- or, at least, don't remember having encountered it during my lit classes in high school and college. (No doubt it was covered, but as it's most often associated with poetry, it's garbled in my memory along with iambs and anapests.) The style is called, simply (as is sensible), Puritan plain style. Since this is new to me, I've looked up descriptions from some experts. Laura Kuske von Wallmenich of Alma College writes that much literature was suspect in the Puritan viewpoint. Keeping language plain and simple -- "unornamented" -- was best, and though poetry was often questioned, poetry that served as a spiritual meditation and introspection was approved of. Ann Bradstreet is one of the best-known writers of this style (I do remember having her on a syllabus at some point), but people continue to use plain style in poetry.
Something that I think is not often discussed in terms of this literary movement are the genre writers who also keep their language simple, so as not to get in the way of telling the story. There's always some debate about style vs. content -- some readers will forgive a book not having much in the way of plot or characterization so long as it's beautifully told. Others prefer to cut straight to the chase: give it to me in plain style so I can get to the meat of the thing, what happens next, and to whom it's happening. I confess to identifying with the latter oftentimes, though I do like a tale that's told with some pizazz -- so long as the language doesn't distract me from the story being told. Caitlin Kittredge's (![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
blackaire) Black London books are a great example of this: the setting is really gritty, but her use of language is just beautiful. Felix Gilman's Half-Made World strikes me this way as well. But the novels that hit that balance tend to be somewhat few and far between in my own reading, and I gravitate toward the tell-it-like-it-is novels in the genre, because I want good stories.
Science fiction and fantasy, of course, are probably not what the Puritans had in mind.
Something that I think is not often discussed in terms of this literary movement are the genre writers who also keep their language simple, so as not to get in the way of telling the story. There's always some debate about style vs. content -- some readers will forgive a book not having much in the way of plot or characterization so long as it's beautifully told. Others prefer to cut straight to the chase: give it to me in plain style so I can get to the meat of the thing, what happens next, and to whom it's happening. I confess to identifying with the latter oftentimes, though I do like a tale that's told with some pizazz -- so long as the language doesn't distract me from the story being told. Caitlin Kittredge's (
blackaire) Black London books are a great example of this: the setting is really gritty, but her use of language is just beautiful. Felix Gilman's Half-Made World strikes me this way as well. But the novels that hit that balance tend to be somewhat few and far between in my own reading, and I gravitate toward the tell-it-like-it-is novels in the genre, because I want good stories.Science fiction and fantasy, of course, are probably not what the Puritans had in mind.
