The Sentence Revisited

The Sentence Revisited

Review / Response commentary by Lone Cypress Workshop

Review of The Colloquial Essay Discussion Page (#2245828)

daninidaho has reviewed "The Colloquial Essay Discussion Page"

(LCW) I believe that this is in response to The Interminable Sentence (#2249457)

Well, here goes.


Sentence length can be a touchy subject- at least for those still in the mood to quibble about such things. In a few words, Hemingway would say to keep it simple. Henry James would advocate saying things until one is understood, and in many more than a few words, the trouble being that the more old Henry speaks, the harder he is to understand. (Some say that Henry James cared little for whether or not readers understood him- that he'd go on as long as he cared to, and if his verbal cart hit a big bump, passengers who ended up in the ditch would just have to try and get back on board.)

Truly excellent! My sentiments exactly.

I am not sure exactly how many remain that wish to ‘quibble’, but I have certainly had my fair share of those that made their point known. And I appreciate it, I really do. As long as one understands that I may not agree in part or in full and may or may not find it relevant or welcome. I try to listen and there is a perpetual process of contemplation that takes place. I respect words and I try to understand. It may seem that I ignore or dismiss but that would be a misnomer. I am always prepared to make my perspective known, but not as a demonstrably disrespectful conflict, only as a reasoned and even aggressive argument, provocative in nature, but always with the intent and expectation of the sharing of ideas and information that hopefully results in understanding and growth. Learning is the objective, perhaps with a little sprinkling of knowledge and wisdom in the mix. I find one of the fundamental tenets of Objectivism to be compelling and desirable; “Mutual benefit through mutual agreement”.

Many have made the point that we should keep it simple, and to some degree, I might agree, but what is simple to you may not be that simple to me. I find that language and words fascinate me, and I want to use them all, whenever and wherever they seem to fit. My perspective, my fit. I would have to agree with ‘old’ Henry that we need to write or speak until we are understood. Otherwise, I am not sure what we are trying to do.

You can say that it was an indescribably beautiful sunset, but we are not looking at it together, so the need for evocative and descriptive words seems to be intrinsically required. Why? Because otherwise we only know that an event of the sun setting happened, but know nothing of the smell of the water and the sand and the dead denizens of the area. We can see the sun, I am assuming one is in front of us, but no one can understand the hues and variations that exist on the canvas of sky. How does one explain the sound of the waves or the birds, and what about the caress of the soft breeze, perhaps interminably warm or maybe cool and crisp?

You can say these things in a few words, but who really cares? Not Hemingway I presume, but he is entitled to his opinion. He also said that "There is nothing to writing. All you do is sit down at a typewriter and bleed," again, it may have been easy for him, but not so simple for many of the rest of us.

I did not know that Henry James said that, but I would agree wholeheartedly. I want to share my thoughts until every last concept is bled dry. Yes, it can be an interminable journey for the reader, but what if the writing is done well? What if you can lose yourself in the scenes presented, and travel to a time long ago or yet to come, or perhaps share in a memory of the writer and experience that which you have never experienced?

I am enthralled with the cadence of language and words, and the concepts that can be explained at times when we can’t even explain them to ourselves. When the subject comes up I tell others to write until it hurts. Write about whatever comes into your mind. Write until you cannot write anymore, which I have never been able to do. You can always edit but the work sometimes becomes voluminous and you become possessive and don’t wish to give up any of your creation, even if it is not really all that good. Therein lies madness, which has its own benefits and downsides. I reside on the edge of that abyss.

I find it more than a little amusing that you make the comment that the more old Henry speaks the more difficult he is to understand. I can identify with that on so many levels. Truly funny.

I also agree that you write for yourself and for those that are interested, so be it, and for those that don’t, it really doesn’t matter unless you are trying to make a living at writing and I gave up on that a long time ago.

It would be interesting to read a roundtable discussion between the likes of Henry James, Shirley Jackson, Raymond Carver, Montaigne, and others to see what they have to say about word economy, brevity, verbosity, and comprehension. But I digress. For the moment, I want to focus on the issue of sentence length as it related to postings here on WDC.

All of these things are important in their own way, but the fundamental demand of writing, for me, is that it is good, by my standards, it is interesting, again by my perspective, it entertains and engulfs the reader and that they enjoy it. Does anything else really matter? That is the essence of writing, not pushing out a series of books that are intrinsically the same product. Mankind is different from the other animals because he likes to investigate and explore the unknown, he likes to analyze and discover the world around him, and likes to question everything. Words allow him to do just that and gives him the opportunity to share what he has found with others.

As for WDC it is but one of a thousand forums within which to practice the craft of writing, the essence of communication and knowledge.

I too have been "advised" to cut down on sentence or article length- to which I would like to say "That's too damned bad"- but for purposes of civility have instead said little or nothing aside from acknowledging that the piece in question is a work-in-progress, so the length will probably change as I finish editing it. While that's a cowardly response, it does contain some truth and gets me off the hook- for now.

Who is doing this ‘advising’?

I listen to all the criticisms and attempt to give them the benefit of the doubt and to take their perspective into account. I ignore myself often so they have to understand that I may well do so with many of their comments. I analyze what they say, and there may be truth in much of what they say, but they often don’t give compelling or irrefutable evidence for their own opinions, and I am easily distracted, so it gets lost in time. I question the veracity and authority of many who seem to want me to do as they say, but not as they do. Without reasoned conversation, so much of what could have been instructional is mistaken or ignored.

I did, at one time, have some long sentences and paragraphs, and have made at least an honest attempt to give consideration to those that seem unduly long. It really doesn’t take that much effort to break a sentence into two or three and reduce or split a paragraph when necessary. Personally, I don’t reject a paragraph or sentence because it is too long, but because it was not able to keep my attention, it did not fulfill my expectations, and it did not continue to entertain. But as a counterpoint, I found that someone like David Foster Wallace, and there are many others, consistently had sentences that were over a hundred and twenty words long. I never realized it before and I had to question the reality. I was told that he could do so because he was an accomplished writer. I wonder if they ever read anything that he wrote.

So it is not the sentence length under discussion, it is the ability of the writer. It is nothing more than a subjective opinion, based on subjective criteria. If you like the writer and what they present, there is no problem. So what do you do? You become a better writer, or die trying. I see no need for conflict.

The trouble is that a request to trim off verbose limbs can be tough to take seriously. Unless I understand the reader's request (or intent), I don't intend to act on said request. Maybe the reader is an accomplished writer and should be taken seriously. (Of course, a decent reviewer will offer suggestions for improvement.) I could see taking their advice to heart. But if a reviewer says a piece is too long and leaves it at that, I begin to suspect that they're only in it for the GPs. The only way I'll know for sure is if I question the reviewer further.

Even if done with good intent, there is an imperative that you give a reasoned insight as to why something is not working. This does not even address the fact that it can be very difficult to be a competent ‘reviewer’. I often find that it is more difficult to critique than it is to write. There must be a valid issue that compels them to make a comment, so let the writer know. The problem is that they normally do not have their own position but reference someone else who says it is not appropriate, such as an editor or some teacher in some University or even a Community College. I don’t wish to denigrate many of these individuals, but they need to understand, for their own reputation, to have something relevant to offer as to why we should do anything at all.

I agree as to acting on ‘critters’ observations. It doesn’t happen often, but one instance was poignant. I had just finished reading some criticism about a certain passage in one of my pieces, and it was brutal. Coercive, condescending, and hurtful, and it takes a whole lot of enmity to hurt my feelings. I was full of doubt and questioning much of what I had written (maybe not that much) but the next day a woman sent some comments and told me how beautiful she thought the same words were, and how they had made such an indelible impression upon her. What was I supposed to think?

I realized that day that I can in fact reach other people the way I intended, and there will be those who will never comprehend what I attempt to do, and I will never be able to understand or predict when this will happen. Life is truly a bitch. The constructive criticism is always accepted at face value and remains a consideration whenever I write something new, but I write for myself, and those few that connect with me in a way I don’t particularly understand, but will always strive to achieve. When you write you truly have to learn how to bleed. Nothing else works.

As for GP’s here and elsewhere, I don’t even think about them much. When I remember I pass some on, especially when it is something I like, or to be sociable, but otherwise it is about learning and growing. My only purpose is to be a better writer and to learn how to improve every aspect of what I do. Nothing else matters.

As for WDC, I've already made up my mind: I'm going to write until my point is made. Site format restraints aside, if sentences are too long, maybe that's a test a good reviewer has to pass. If they make it to the end of a piece, it shows that I didn't bore them to death, or they have a decent attention span or both. It's not that I'm a particularly good writer, but I do crank out the long section from time to time. (The risk I run is being tempted to get verbose and stay there- a road that can lead to pomposity, and the overuse of words like "pomposity.")

What are these site restraints that you speak of?

I find that to be an extremely healthy perspective. I don’t disrespect reviewers, and I deeply appreciate anyone that puts in the time and effort to offer me the feedback that I so strongly desire. Even those that are doing it primarily for the GP’s can’t help but provide some good comments every now and again. They don’t understand my focus and my objectives. That is one of the reasons that I attempted to create a group to discuss and share insights and perspectives. Honest discussion and respectful commentary can make anyone a better writer. A great one? Not for me to say. I don’t like many of the greats or the classics. Different time, different focus, different product. Like philosophy, it’s all about you, personally and unequivocally. Understand yourself and work to make yourself comprehensible to yourself primarily, and others as a secondary objective. The rest is serendipity. If you are like me, it works some of the time, but most of the time, not so much.

I am not sure, I may be pompous, but I don’t think I ever used the word pomposity. Does that count for anything? I may be opinionated as well, but I make a real attempt at never telling someone else that I am right and they are wrong. I don’t think I have the inside track at discovering or knowing what truth is, so I keep the directives to myself. I don’t know what works for other people. I do think my positions work for me, so yeah, I do think I am right, but only for me, and no one else.

I believe there's a place for short statements and long ones; to me, the key is whether or not they make sense. And if a reader at WDC would rather do hit-and-run reviews, more power to them- but they risk never being taken seriously or reviewed much, if they keep it up.

Can’t argue with that. I come to my own conclusions and act accordingly. I don’t control others so I put the time and effort into directing ‘self’.

Thanks for your feedback. These are the kinds of things that I was hoping to discuss when I started the group. Maybe we can find some others to participate.


NOTE: A bit of confusion on my part. Your item seems to suggest that it is a Review of The Colloquial Essay Discussion Page (#2245828) but that is simply the splash page for the message board for the group. I am guessing that it was in response to The Interminable Sentence (#2249457) which is in the Colloquial Essay Folder in my portfolio or in the library which is on the Colloquial Essay group page (#2245402). It’s the only place where I speak of long sentences and paragraphs. It doesn’t really matter but if it is that confusing perhaps I need to rethink how I am setting up the group itself. I will always welcome any assistance I can garner in making the endeavor something that is less complicated and somewhat intuitive.

NOTE: I would like to discuss how you might format anything other than a review to reflect the intent to have the review, response, and continuing responses so they can be accessed as independent stand-alone items with their own titles, identity and item numbers. I envision making a string of related engagements available as a continuous ongoing conversation that refers back to one another. As an example, your piece here would have had a title so it could be logged into the group library and easily understood and accessed. If you look at the library in a week or so you will have some idea of what I am thinking and if you are interested, you can comment and suggest whatever seems appropriate.

To that end, this response to your piece I am calling ‘Sentences Revisited’ to differentiate it from any other commentary. I see the original piece as whatever the author calls it, followed by a ‘review of X’, and however many additional responses may be created. Can’t really call it the review of the response of the review of the response of the review, can we? In any case, I hope we can talk about it at some time in the future.