Some little distraction here before we get on with rebooting the universe.
I heard some comments about the writing style of that post (Reboot the Universe - part 1) from various channels. The notable one came from Dhaks, universally recognized as Maams. He said, “hmm...u were alright when I met you last...”. The genius-unexplored Henry was seconding Maams that “its the usual (weird?) Raja”. Hahhaha. Well, my sanity seems to have left with you Maams. Hereafter, please don’t leave me and go! (Nah, this is not a marriage proposal by any means :P).
But honestly, I had my serious doubts about how that style would be received.
Actually, I don’t have any fixed style of writing. Nor themes or subject matters. I deliberately keep it that way. In acting, there is such a thing called ‘method acting’. I gathered that its where the characters prevailing above and over the identity or the mannerisms of the actor himself. Daniel Day Lewis! Check him out in IMDB and compare (his real looks with) his characters from “The Gangs of New York” or “There will be blood”. He is one of the finest contemporary method actors. I think, in writing also, it gets pretty boring if your personality keeps sticking so much above the subject being discussed. Besides, it would be refreshing if there are variations in styles.
I let the style from the latest book I read to take over me before I do my blog posts. Just before the Reboot post, I was reading a couple of pages from my daughter’s collection. The title of that book was something like, “My pants were haunted…”. I was enchanted with the funny style there. Check out the author – Jim Benton. You know there are few things in this world that are made for the kids but the adults get to enjoy them more? The mammary glands for one. This book falls into that category. Anyway, that explains the style that I adopted.
The question now is – why choose the “funny/lighter/non-factual” style to discuss a serious topic? In the past, I have meandered serious things in a serious style. And no one gave two hoots about them in the end. That’s my biggest peeve. Fact is, we all need easy reads. Sweeping big statements, excitement, surrealsim and drama from the otherwise dull subjects that we deal at work daily. Written colorfully and yet briefly. Anyway, there is post-modernism in it when you break a traditional style-subject pattern.
But irrespective of that, the substance or the moral shall come out undiluted still. The stunts in my part 1 is just to grab the attention. Will get to the part 2 and 3 next….
I heard some comments about the writing style of that post (Reboot the Universe - part 1) from various channels. The notable one came from Dhaks, universally recognized as Maams. He said, “hmm...u were alright when I met you last...”. The genius-unexplored Henry was seconding Maams that “its the usual (weird?) Raja”. Hahhaha. Well, my sanity seems to have left with you Maams. Hereafter, please don’t leave me and go! (Nah, this is not a marriage proposal by any means :P).
But honestly, I had my serious doubts about how that style would be received.
Actually, I don’t have any fixed style of writing. Nor themes or subject matters. I deliberately keep it that way. In acting, there is such a thing called ‘method acting’. I gathered that its where the characters prevailing above and over the identity or the mannerisms of the actor himself. Daniel Day Lewis! Check him out in IMDB and compare (his real looks with) his characters from “The Gangs of New York” or “There will be blood”. He is one of the finest contemporary method actors. I think, in writing also, it gets pretty boring if your personality keeps sticking so much above the subject being discussed. Besides, it would be refreshing if there are variations in styles.
I let the style from the latest book I read to take over me before I do my blog posts. Just before the Reboot post, I was reading a couple of pages from my daughter’s collection. The title of that book was something like, “My pants were haunted…”. I was enchanted with the funny style there. Check out the author – Jim Benton. You know there are few things in this world that are made for the kids but the adults get to enjoy them more? The mammary glands for one. This book falls into that category. Anyway, that explains the style that I adopted.
The question now is – why choose the “funny/lighter/non-factual” style to discuss a serious topic? In the past, I have meandered serious things in a serious style. And no one gave two hoots about them in the end. That’s my biggest peeve. Fact is, we all need easy reads. Sweeping big statements, excitement, surrealsim and drama from the otherwise dull subjects that we deal at work daily. Written colorfully and yet briefly. Anyway, there is post-modernism in it when you break a traditional style-subject pattern.
But irrespective of that, the substance or the moral shall come out undiluted still. The stunts in my part 1 is just to grab the attention. Will get to the part 2 and 3 next….
I insist "So typical of u :-)))"... seriously come back to us with the rest of the parts of the rebooting universe....
ReplyDeleteYeah, whatever Vinodha said.
ReplyDeleteI didn't think it was a serious post as you have used serious three times in the post!!!
ReplyDelete[From Facebook]
ReplyDeleteDhaks : Dude, post-modernism, anything beyond 140 chars is dead meat... unless u give a pad to read with...
keep it coming. anyways coming from u - i should be wary of ur not so subtle marriage proposals..
btw, why did u delete the comments from S?
@ Vinodha and Kitcha : Still stuck in hanoi with very little personal time left. Besides I have to do justice to the topic and your time. Feels like a drunken gorilla on my back :))
ReplyDelete@ Anty : Here you are! How lovely to see you. With your logic-automaton still intact.
@ Dhaks : Absolutely agreed on the 140 chars. I do always strive to keep my blabbering short. You will find this interesting - http://www.very-short-story.com/
I dint delete comments from S. Its between her and blogger.com. I dont know how she managed to do it but it appeared after sometime automagically.
"And no one gave two hoots about them in the end. That’s my biggest peeve. Fact is, we all need easy reads."
ReplyDeleteHow true is that!! Life, my friend, is already serious business - why add more seriousness to it? :) Have you ever wondered then, why Govinda's films are huge hits - I am a huge fan, btw, so don't you dare say a word against him!
Coming to your writing style, I for one, liked it - you should continue to experiment.
But tell me, who uses the word "enchanted" anymore? :)) So quaint!
Now answer the niggling question - If I am not the Master of the Universe, who is? I think I'm more interested in that, than what happens on your reboot! :)
@ S : Thanks for encouraging. But wait, you are a Govinda fan! Should I rethink accepting the compliment :P ?
ReplyDeleteLet your delusions drop to one level lower than the cosmic magnitude. I will introduce the master of the universe.
Seriously, Hi-Five!! I am a huuuuugggeeee fan of Govinda too.