Author Archives: Christene

Form Informs Content

Form informs content. I always assumed this means that the form in which something is written intones the type of writing; poetry has a specific form, essays conform to a different style, and so forth. That all made sense. But apparently I missed the most important point in all of this; form supersedes content. If a perceived correct form is not practiced, then content becomes irrelevant. And here, form, takes on its most basic meaning. It is not overall structure, or literary awareness, but reduced to the usage of proper punctuation. One mislaid comma, or worse, dash or semi colon, completely derails an argument. It becomes so distracting it no longer matters what is being said as the focus is shifted from the writing to the mechanics of writing. Or, the choices engaged when creating these mechanics.

There is a school of thought that has somehow decided which punctuation marks are appropriate, while the rest are “unnecessary” or “pretentious.” I completely understand the criticism if these punctuation marks are being misused. In which case, please let me know. But to eliminate them from writing altogether simply because they are somehow deemed inferior sounds absolutely ridiculous. In fact, after all the rules have been taken into account, I am left with the comma and the period, with an occasional colon or perhaps question mark. The latter two are generally useless most of the time, and the former are great, but if used too often can produce either short, truncated, choppy sentences, or complete run-ons that never seem to end.

Why can’t I just have every valid form of punctuation at my disposal and then moderated for propriety? If I go overboard, or misuse something, let me know. If I continuously do it, grade me down. And while you are doing it, feel free to comment on the content parallel to the form.

While everyone is in a tizzy counting my commas, I would actually like to know if my argument works, and whether I read the text correctly.

Decadence At Its Finest

The Great Gatsby movie is coming out this weekend. Like many other people, I am very excited, and have been waiting for its release since December when I saw the first previews. However, as opening day draws near, and more are discussing the film in person, online, and through various forms of print, I realize Fitzgerald’s message has somehow been lost. Either that, or few have actually read the book.
One of my friends posted an article today that presented this very problem. I know it is hard to focus away from the lavish soiree scenes and the decadence on display, but the focus is actually in those moments when these things are absent. Despite what many believe, the novel did not condone this behavior, but rather used it to broadcast the decay brought about through unmitigated wealth and status, particularly in the upper class. Further the moments when these trappings are removed, the characters are shown in their most natural demeanors.  The desperation and depression becomes apparent, and the failure despite a fabricated reality is made starkly clear. It is a personal failure that money cannot remedy.
This ideology comes in the most purist form, based on the maxim that money does not buy happiness, taken to the extreme. I have my opinions on the matter, but seeing as how no one has ever handed me immeasurable sums of money, I cannot draw an informed conclusion. While I may not necessarily agree with these points of the novel, I do see the plight of the characters. I understand that some things are more important than monetary wealth.
Gatsby’s money brings around many people, but in the largest crowds he is alone. His guests are not his friends. Before he recreated himself as Gatsby he was not acceptable in the kind of company he keeps, and he has little in common with those surrounding him. One person yesterday incorrectly interpreted the society scenes implying that he catered these events to which he rarely showed up because he was a philanthropist and wanted to see others happy. He was no philanthropist. While I don’t doubt this person read the book, they must have missed the part where he explicitly states he threw parties night after night hoping Daisy would come. That is all. No philanthropy involved. I think the most telling scene which epitomizes his solitude along with Fitzgerald’s social commentary comes towards the end. I will not mention it in the hopes that enough people will be curious enough to read the book, and for those who simply want to watch the film.
Honestly I am curious to see how the film touches on these issues, and how the main points come across. From the previews I have no doubt that the visuals will be quite spectacular. I am just very much hoping the entire film isn’t just an exhibit of sartorial elegance, glamorizing the very points Fitzgerald attempted to critique.