One of Poe's ideas is the single effect. As Poe puts it, "In the whole composition there should be no word written, of which thetendency, direct or indirect, is not to the one pre-established design." There's actually some controversy about this one, with some theorists and critics arguing against Poe's unity and for multiple ideas.
I guess I come down somewhere in the middle. I do like the idea of―if not a single effect―then a singular one: something this story does that is unique to it. And in art there is value to having an overall unity, a distinct emphasis. But I'm nowhere near as much a planner as Poe...claimed to be. Sometimes there are happy accidents. Once they happen you can arrange things to emphasize them.
2 comments:
I remember being taught the 'single effect' method when we studied story forms in high school English classes. Considering there'd be few characters and a fairly straightforward plot it made sense that a brief composition would maintain a single thread narrative that would conclude when the climactic knot was finally tied. I agree with Poe's assertion that a short story is best read in a single sitting in order to maintain a powerful effect on the reader.
The opposing view written by Aatif Rashid argues that individual readers will tend to read and understand a short story depending on their own interpretation of the words chosen and the phrasing. Of course this is true of any prose and certainly always true in works of poetry.
When I think of Poe's poem 'The Raven' I can't help but see he was doing exactly that - using language with a distinct emphasis on maintaining a unified picture. It's likely something he fell into naturally in all he wrote that he never thought the need to explain.
Your plan of keeping to the middle way is reasonable and has shown some good results already.
There is a good reason for reading short stories in a single sitting. That lets you know if the author is doing their job. There should be a cumulative effect, something you can feel and sense. Too much time taken in the middle can flatten the effect even if it's there. Although there've been a couple of exceptions in my memory.
There's something to Rashid's counterpoint as well. In art as in life it's nearly impossible to say something so clearly that people can't take a very different interpretation of it. I would say some aspects will be more subjective than others. And hopefully, again, you can make the cumulative effect you want even though a few details may be ambiguous.
"The Raven" is a very memorable poem, isn't it? I'm not sure why trochees hit the ear differently from iambs. It might simply be that we're not as often exposed to them, or maybe there's something else. But Poe did know what he was doing on that one.
You have my sincere thanks. I'm really still just finding my way.
Post a Comment