Daemon Voices

[Ecurb]

I'm reading "Daemon Voices", by Phillip PUllman. Pullman is the author of the "Dark Materials" trilogy and other children's fantasies, and is also an expert on traditional literature. I've read only the first two chapters.

The book is about "stories and story telling",and I like it already. For one thing, Pullman doesn't like present tense narratives (which is also one of my prejudices). He thinks them awkward and limiting. He talks about "phase space", a bit of jargon from dynamics, that refers to the profound complexity of changing systems. "Two roads diverged in a wood...." and the author, like the poet, has to choose to take on or the other. Each sentence (Pullman thinks) is surrounded by the ghosts of sentences that COULD have come next.

One of the story teller's key decisions is (as one film director said) where to put the camera. When you write in the present tense, you limit those options in terms of time -- time that was, or is, or might some day be. As an example, Pullman turns to "Vanity Fair", where "Jos seldom spent a half hour in his life which cost him so much money." With this sentence, the narrator stands back and examines the present, past, and future all at once.

Pullman says, "Reading a novel written entirely in the first person and the present tense seems to me like being in a room where they have those Venetian blinds that go up instead of across -- you can only see out in vertical strips, and everything else is closed to you."

I remember an excellent Oregon western novel called "Little Century" written in the first person and present tense -- and at the end it turned out to be the memories of an old woman (who was the heroine). Huh? It was about her past!

Our recent discussions on the Jane Austen board here had relevance to this chapter. For Austen, the point of view is constantly changing -- sometimes the narrator is reporting a character's point of view, sometimes an external observer's.

Pullman also talks about Gnosticism, and the myth of the expulsion from Eden. We have eaten the fruit of the tree of knowledge, and are thus expelled from the Paradise of ignorance. We can't return; there is no path back to innocence and ignorance. An angel with a fiery sword bars the gate. However, we can go FORWARD, perhaps returning to Eden when we have circumnavigated the entire world. "Be as wise as serpents, and as harmless as doves," Jesus told his disciples. But wisdom is not compatible with innocence.

So far, it's and interesting book, with lots of good tips about writing tactics and techniques. I'll post more as I read on, if anyone is interested.

[ennison]

There are no prescriptions for writing. The present tense is hard to do well. One of the reasons I ditched a Faber novel (was it the Victorian one?) was the irritation induced by the present tense. But Tennant manages it ok in his recent novel (His only novel?) I have never been tempted to read anything by Pullman as I find his persona (personality maybe) so repulsive. It doesn't surprise me that he wants to set limits. All these failed evangelicals retain their fundamentalist narrowness; it's why they were evangelicals in the first place.

[Ecurb]

There are no prescriptions for writing. .

I don't know bout that. Of course prescriptions are often ignored, sometimes fruitfully, but Strunk and White (for example) aren't afraid to lay down the law. They almost yell at their readers: "Omit needless words." "Use the active voice." "Place the emphatic words of a sentence at the end." For this last, they use the example: "Through the middle of the valley flowed a winding stream." This construction leads the reader's eye to the stream. The normal construction (A winding stream flowed through the middle of the valley) draws the reader's attention to the whole valley.

Effective writing often ignores Strunk and White's prescriptions,of course. But they offer good advice and have (at least) the courage of their convictions. No mamby pamby hints for them.

Of Pullman's novels, I have read only "The Golden Compass",and I know nothing of his evangelical or fundamentalist bent (although all his discussion of Eden and Gnosticism suggests an interest, at least).

[ennison]

Yes there are those who seek to set rules. But take the passive voice. It exists for a reason. It removes the writer from the scene. It is particularly useful then in objective reporting. In descriptions of scientific experiments for example. Where the subject is having the action done to it, rather than doing the action, then the passive voice comes into its own.

[Ecurb]

When a doctor prescribes a drug, it doesn't always work. Perhaps the diagnosis is incorrect, or the drug works for some people but not for others. That doesn't mean doctors shouldn't prescribe drugs.

If a writer is aware of literary prescriptions, he can choose to ignore them, just as a patient can refuse to take a pharmaceutical drug. But the teacher charged with offering students "prescriptions" (Strunk was White's teacher at Cornell) should not (surely) shirk his duties. Some people are allergic to penicillin, and it kills them. Soldiers are killed by "friendly fire". Nothing is perfect. I enjoy reading about the techniques and tactics of experts -- however little their advice might help my writing. Also, we all learn grammar and vocabulary from those more expert than we, without which we wouldn't be able to write (or speak) at all. Language is learned, and language skills are learned.

Pullman claims that film writers discuss technique more than the authors of books, because film is a collaborative art and the writers need to pitch scripts, work with other writers, and explain techniques to directors. That makes sense, although I have no idea if it's true, and plenty of novelists have written extensively about writing.

[Ecurb]

By the way, as a corollary to "Place emphatic words at the end of the sentence", Stunk and White suggest that the start of the sentence also provides emphasis, especially if the object is placed first, as in, "Home is the sailor", or "Deceit or treachery she could never forgive." If Stevenson had written, "The sailor is home", his poem would have remained at sea.

[Ecurb]

In the next chapters, Pullman analyses "Paradise Lost", which he loves. He talks about how his high school teacher had the class read it aloud, and how he loved the sounds even when the meaning was a mystery to him. Then he talks a bit about how poetry differs from its "meaning". He thinks (its a great image) that "The classroom is a torture chamber, interrogating poetry until it confesses." Great quote!

[ennison]

Yes inversion works in English if done sparingly and not like Yoda. I'm not surprised that fellow liked the sound of Paradise Lost but I reckon that's where he stopped.