On Writing

There is a certain lack of style that seems prevalent in general journalism these days. I even sense it in creative non-fiction writers who write essays, for example. I’ve even noticed it, albeit in small amounts, in the works of David Sedaris, which annoyed the hell out of me because I hadn’t expected it. I guess with word processing its easy to write and keep what you write and to not think about how what you write will sound before actually writing. It’s as if we’re now simply used to pulling down our mental pants and just shitting whatever is in us onto whatever is under us.

Now, I don’t recall specific writers except perhaps Martin Amis, who have such a unique and beautiful style when they write that I wonder if more people who actually write are simply ignoring them. I suppose even in E. B. White’s days, he was unique among writers. And then there is H. L. Mencken. I often wonder what White thought about Mencken.

Of course I’m no literary critic. Either I like something or I don’t, and I seem to never be able to say just exactly what it is that I like or dislike. I suppose I think in general terms. If a piece flows smoothly and sounds elegant to my ear, then I like it. Well, I like how it was written. Then I judge the content. But I’ve read some pieces that have been horribly written (mostly by academics who seem prone, if not actually forced, to write in such a way) where the content was very good, thought provoking in fact, if you could stick with the prose, which tends to be difficult. But I suppose that those types of writers are expected to write in such a way because their peers expect a certain level of dryness to be achieved before it can be considered “well written” and authoritative.