All of our in-class discussions about a novel [is it a novel?] and its form/structure/wording/lettering/etc. made me ask the question: are the adjectives and flowery descriptions really the flesh of the text, or are they really the skeletal structure?
I mean, pure fact with no description does not usually make for an interesting read. So which came first, which is more important, which holds the other up?
Personally, I think that the two go hand in hand, and are really quite inseparable. In a good novel [and by this I mean a novel/book/essay/whatever that the reader ENJOYS or gets something out of] there needs to be the perfect mix of fact and fluff, just to keep the reader interested. The facts of the novel rely on the descriptions to draw the reader in, while adversely, the details rely on the facts for their reliability. One simply cannot exist in harmony without the other.
I think that's a really interesting question: how separable are form and content? Does structure exist without content? Or, can structure be content itself??
ReplyDeleteInteresting question..
ReplyDeleteIn think the facts are the bones
the fiction is the flesh
Bones are more concrete. They determine the structure. Facts do this for the story.
Flesh is squishy. It's up to the reader what he or she makes of it.
As to which comes first, who knows.