Monday, September 11, 2006
"Literary fiction", "Popular fiction", what's good, what's not...
well if i've put some effort into writing something, i'd like to preserve it...won't you? even if it's just a response to a discussion thread originating on a different platform somewhere else...a thread that discusses literary fiction vs popular fiction; and in some arbitrary sense, the respectability of one over the other! for all the heated debate and the scholarly debaters, here's what i have...
media is a platform for public communication, expression of ideology and sharing of ideas. at the content source, it satisfies the human desire of expressing oneself; at the audience end, it satisfies the human desire to educate oneself, be well-informed, obtain intellectual stimulation and also, to get entertained.
the forms of media are simply determined by the 5 human faculties. for sight, we have the visual arts. the various sub-categories range from fine arts and paintings, popular paintings and murals to less serious types like caricatures, comics etc (should i hazard porno..?)
for hearing, we have music. again, one doesn't need to be a connoisseur to recognize gradations ranging from classical music to the fast numbers played on the dance floor.
i won't deliberate on the other faculties of taste, smell and touch, since most of the "art" forms and other public expression is present in the previous two domains. though one can certainly identify such levels of expression in these faculties too, if one really wants. just to site an instance, imagine the distinctive smell exuding from the ground just after the first few drops of rain - (ohh...i just remembered, there is actually a word for it: petrichor!) you could actually identify this as the analogue of an "art" form, while at the entertainment end are all the commercially manufactured frangrances and perfumes.
the point i'm trying to put across is that every channel of expression has within it the presence of "levels". just to prevent any misinterpretation, this term is not intented to put anyderogatory/appreciative judgement. now this level is essentially dictated by the basic motivation that the content producer has when he/she produces the creation in the first place. it could be a genuine desire to arouse a subjective emotional response in the audience, or it could be to simply titillate the senses and create excitation to achieve popularity among the populace.
having explained the above in a media-independent sense, let me now hit upon the channel that is the subject of this discussion. "literary fiction" then is essentially an art form, while "popular fiction" falls at the other end. let me also acknowledge and affirm that only a very few works of writing fall neatly into one category - literature and creative writing is by definition subjective. most of the works, especially of more recent times include a mixture of elements from multiple "levels" and can only be said to "predominantly" pertain to one level.
finally, "looking down upon" an audience of "popular fiction" is then a non-issue. it is simply a matter of what the reader is looking to achieve by reading the particular piece of writing.
having said that, i would also like to mention one last thing that is known and taught by the learned. it is a sign of education and intellectual elevation when, after continued reading of the popular reading and the mid-levels, the individual starts to slowly transcend the need for entertainment and moves towards the "artistic" side.
any comments/disagreements would be welcome...
Friday, September 08, 2006
"Improper Use of Language"
i just happened to come across a discussion - a debate on whether "sms language" and in general any kind of modification or customization constitutes an "improper" use of language. that "purity" of language must be observed. that "correct" use of language is sacred. i drafted out my response initially as a reply to the discussion, but of course, as it always happens, it over-ran the length limit of a reply! and well, i thought a better platform for my views would be a personal blog.
so there, well, let me hit upon the basics.
what is the meaning of language? it's a symbology - spoken or written or using any kind of medium - whose purpose is communication. obviously, communication between two or more people.
allow me to picture a simple scenario. a man and a woman. they enter into a relationship. maybe they get married...etc etc. over their interaction right from the beginning, they discover several commonalities in their pattern of thinking and the way they express things through language. they develop sweet personal ways of saying things to each other. ways that only they know and use. new and short words that they take pleasure in using - in their personal talks. they "develop a language of their own".
this is not a hypothetical scenario, it's world reality. the point i'm trying to put across is, *natural* language is essentially a system of communication between two people, that they learn and then "develop" amongst them according to how their "chemistry" or relationship proceeds.
two things here. firstly, it's natural language that we're talking about. a computer programming language or a formal language must not be what you're trying to confirm your natural language to. they are formal systems. humans are not. a natural language is thus, subject to nurturing and maturing under the influence of cultural, personal and relationship aspects. secondly, the meaning of the word "develop" used above must be carefully understood. development of a natural language in the context of interaction between two people is really a natural process of inventing higher level constructs that enable them to express their thoughts/feelings/ideas more and more concisely and with a more "personal" touch that is basically a reflection of the relationship they share. by this meaning, even sms language might, depending on the people involved in communication, lead to "development" of language.
so then keeping in mind the above meaning of language that i've attempted to describe, all the negative connotations that people associate with modifying and "personalizing" language is obviously a non-issue. it is, at most, an invariable response but expected from "language nerds" and compulsive puritans. i'll admit, sometimes i myself get irate of stupid short-cuts used in sms language. but then that is simply a matter of the other person over-estimating the level to which the language between us has developed. as for purity of language, i myself am a fan of beautiful use of language; one of my favourite authors is p g wodehouse. but i'm sure a woman would throw a fit if i were to make the following proposal in the hope of fixing up a date with her: "with the all-intoxicating beautiful pleasant weather and the sweet romance that i smell in the air tonight, it would be my most desired pleasure on this delightful evening to have your time and your lovely company for a dinner my dearest lady..." ^_^
