There was a trending hashtag
today on Twitter for notebook. As someone who once wrote something
that got published in the NYTimes, I found it especially hilarious.
My suggested title for my essay, "Winnie the Pooh and Baggage, Too," was
clearly not right for that publication, but the title it was actually
published under, "Fuzzy, Purple and Full of Thorns," didn't seem right
for the essay (not that I'm complaining, considering I was ecstatic to
have a piece in the newspaper at all. They could have called it "Not
Worth Your Time to Read" and I still wouldn't have complained).
What's so interesting to me about the hashtag and its popularity is
that, while the exercise poked fun at the obvious stylistic pattern of
the headlines, it was at the same time a nod of appreciation. That the
New York Times has a style so recognizable can only be a good thing. It
calls to mind what they say about the media: there's no such thing as
bad publicity. Writing style may be the same way.
I'm not suggesting some writing styles aren't subjectively (and even
possibly objectively) better than others. I am, however, noticing that
authors with a very distinct style tend to be more popular. Whether you
want to praise a writing style or disparage it, you are still talking
about it. It's an idea that these days, for better or for worse, seems
to be even more crucial for writers to consider. I'm not necessarily
alluding to a certain book with a neutral color in its title, but if I
am, I'm still giving it extra attention, so its author must be doing
something right.
没有评论:
发表评论