![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Little words surprise
Apr. 13th, 2005 08:41 pmWith the exception of Emerson, my favorite writers are the hardest to quote. My preferred style is writers who build up to a point, word by unassuming word, working their way to it without indication. Perhaps they aren't sure of the point themselves till they get there. I'm sure there must be a word for that style. Revelationary? Who knows?
The reason I like this style is because it's how I write. It's how I think. Often, if I forget to control myself, it's how I talk. Easwaran says you can control every thought; they need not flow without your permission. If that's true, I don't know how to do it. It's not the same as rambling; it's preparatory. Rambling is pointless and disconnected. The best writers I've read are always leading up to something. Each word by itself is inconsequential, but taken altogether they make the whole world seem new.
Case in point: Saramago. You try to pull a passage from one of his books to show someone else how great he is - good luck! You copy off like three pages and even then you feel compelled to say, "Well, you have to read the book to get the gist of it."
The reason I like this style is because it's how I write. It's how I think. Often, if I forget to control myself, it's how I talk. Easwaran says you can control every thought; they need not flow without your permission. If that's true, I don't know how to do it. It's not the same as rambling; it's preparatory. Rambling is pointless and disconnected. The best writers I've read are always leading up to something. Each word by itself is inconsequential, but taken altogether they make the whole world seem new.
Case in point: Saramago. You try to pull a passage from one of his books to show someone else how great he is - good luck! You copy off like three pages and even then you feel compelled to say, "Well, you have to read the book to get the gist of it."
