I don't buy into the whole of post modern literary theory, nor into the ultimate conclusions of neo-orthodox theology. Nevertheless, I can't escape at least one important point that I have learned most strongly from those two philosophical beds: reading is an encounter experience and the context in which that encounter takes place can dramatically influence a reader's experience.
To wit:
There's a specialty food store in Michigan, that my wife's family has introduced me to to the point where we have not only shopped the store but put in some mail-orders. Because of that, we get the catalogs. Like many catalogs shooting for a warm, homespun feel, the pages are fully not only of products but of little story-lets scattered here and about. Most of these stories are about the history of the store, the deliciousness of the food product around which their theme is built, or some quaint Reader Digest-style half-joke-half-moral.
In the most recent catalog there's a story in which the writer talks about a driveway they had, how much of a pain it was to shovel, and how obnoxious the winter therefore was.
And I said, "Um, that's it? What's the point? Nothing happened in that story."
Oops.
I hate when people say that about a story. I know this catalog isn't literature, and the writing is professional and not craft writing. Still, if it had been on a flash fiction website or printed as a short or on a writer's friend's blog, I would have thought about the story, the way it was told, and the possible layers of meaning behind it.
But since it was "just" in a catalog, and because I had certain expectations of what the story would be... I reacted completely unlike myself.
Made me think about a lot of the ways in which context might impact a reader's experience of my own writing: what magazine a short story is published in, what the branding and marketing package of my book establishes, how I present the story to prospective agents or editors, what a reader's own expectations are based on association with the some word in the title, what a reader was told by their friends, how the reader does when reading with a headache, who knows what else. And readers are lay readers, crit partners, agents, editors, whoever is reading your story and making a decision or giving you comment or telling others about your work. They're all susceptible to context.
It's one thing to tell a good story.
It's another thing altogether for people to receive it as the good story you meant to tell.
I needa go reread that guy's story about the driveway now.
.Nevets.
Before college, I didn't realize how much a reader could put into reading a story. Now because of college and literature classes I have learned not only how to read a story, but how to make myself better at telling a story. Good luck with your reread I hope it's worth it.
ReplyDeleteLOL! J. Peterman much? This is a very good point, and I think it emphasizes the need for good beta readers and crit partners, yes? :o)
ReplyDeleteI think this is very true. I've started writing a story that includes instructions for where the reader should be when they read certain sections. It's a playful idea, but it also excites me to think that the overall reading experience could become more controlled.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting the way people see things one way if they're in one situation, but completely differently if they're in another.
ReplyDeleteInteresting. Sometimes it can be hard to turn off that inner critic-- I find myself getting mad at restaurant menus on occasion!
ReplyDeleteYeah, you're right. Having the right context does mean a lot. Great example... and funny!
ReplyDeleteCD
It's always a difficult thing, but perhaps you should consider that because you are writing, you notice certain things that normal readers don't.
ReplyDeleteWe learn to be critical to ourselves, and the habit spreads to other people's work as well.
I'm sure that if you have written that story, you would have picked up that it wasn't going anywhere...
If you read your work "from a distance".
I might be wrong though.
Anyway... Back to the point you were making. I sometimes wonder if people get what I am writing for them to read. But then I realize that nothing you ever do will make people understand, since their understanding is based on experiences and thoughts and beliefs that are their own. As such, not even close to how you think.
So the best one can hope for is that his/her work will at least make the reader consider the standpoint taken in the book.
Great post. I find myself constantly analyzing stories, articles, and even things on TV.
ReplyDelete@Summer - One of the great things a writer can learn from is a deeper understanding of reading. Sounds like you're getting that out of your college, and that's great!
ReplyDelete@Leigh - haha Yes, sir, Mr. Peterman.
@Domey - I actually dig that idea. As a reader I've played around some with context, like the physical setting and even mood of my reading, and it really does transform the experience.
@G'Eagle - Yep, makes things fun, but also hard to predict.
@LT - haha Yes, indeed. I can't turn off my inner analysis either. Not sure if I've gone off on menus before, but I have gone off on fortune cookies.
@Clarissa - Thanks! It amused me, anyway. :)
@Misha - So well said! I hope others read this in the comments, but I think you've made a great point.
@Raquel - Crazy, isn't it? Hard to just turn it off and let stuff go? lol