Zestful Blog Post # 203
Welcome to the fourth installment of Close Reading, where I
analyze a passage of published writing as to why and how it works or doesn’t.
[Passage begins:]
So much of the war is sitting around and doing nothing,
waiting for somebody else. With no guarantee of the amount of time you have
left it doesn’t seem worth starting even a train of thought. Doing what they
had done so often before, the sentries moved out. Anything that stirred ahead
of us now was enemy. The lieutenant marked his map and reported our position
over the radio. A noonday hush fell: even the mortars were quiet and the air
was empty of planes. One man doodled with a twig in the dirt of the farmyard.
After a while it was as if we had been forgotten by war. I hoped that Phuong
had sent my suits to the cleaners. A cold wind ruffled the straw of the yard,
and a man went modestly behind a barn to relieve himself. I tried to remember
whether I had paid the British Consul in Hanoi for the bottle of whisky he had
allowed me.
[Passage ends]
--Graham Greene, from Chapter 2, part 1 of The Quiet American
I chose this paragraph of description because of its
mastery. If you’re not familiar with Greene’s novel, it’s about a love triangle
and international intrigue during the early stages of what became known to
Americans as the Vietnam War. The novel was published in 1955.
The narrator, Fowler, talks here of doing nothing, but
actually we learn that much—very much—is going on, and we learn what it’s like
to be in the middle of it. What is going on is a mission within a war, a war
over territory. Fowler, a journalist, is embedded within a fighting unit. Greene
demonstrates enviable style and economy in this passage. “Doing what they had
done so often before—” He could have explained that this unit had been on
countless missions all over the place, how busy they’d been. Not necessary, the
way he does it.
“...it doesn’t seem worth starting even a train of thought.”
And indeed Fowler does not: he describes what he sees; he wonders if his
girlfriend has sent his suits out; half a minute later he tries to remember
about the bottle of whisky.
This passages sets mood, and it builds subtly our
understanding of Fowler. This last, from what he chooses not to tell us. He
does not tell us he’s scared stiff—he’s not. Neither is he excited to be part
of this operation. He doesn’t speak of any feelings of admiration for the
soldiers of either side—he hasn’t any. Fowler, we are shown, is a
dispassionate, probably jaded, observer of the complex multinational conflict the roots of which ran back at least to the 1850s, when France began its colonization of Indochina.
What else do we learn here? We learn the ambient conditions:
it’s cold and windy. (How to tell us it’s windy? Show the wind doing something:
ruffling the straw in the yard.) We learn what time it is: around noon. We
learn that a lieutenant is in charge, thus—if we have any knowledge of military
ranking—we can deduce that this fighting unit is fairly small, on the level of
a platoon. They’re hiding out on a farm. No one is excited or agitated; these
are professional soldiers, and though they’d doubtless rather be smoking cigars
and fishing, or banging tail in Saigon, they’re here and they don’t have much
choice than to be resigned to it. We learn that Fowler expects to return from
this engagement (the suits to the cleaners).
This is the kind of passage I call generous. (See Zestful Blog post March 27, 2014.) The passage is not absolutely necessary, but because
Greene was a serious writer—he strove for beauty of style, depth of expression,
and economy—he felt it important to give us this paragraph, to help us inhabit
the scene and the character. And we are richer for it. As a writer you do these
things so that later you can do more things, and the reader is with you
beautifully, deeply, and economically.
What do you think? To post, click below where it says, 'No
Comments,' or '2 Comments,' or whatever.
If you'd like to receive this blog automatically as an
email, look to the right, above my bio, and subscribe there. Thanks for looking
in.
"...to help us inhabit the scene and the character." This is something I am hearing/reading of recently. I would like to learn more. Have you written other blogs on this concept?
ReplyDeleteHey Liz, great to see you here! The theme of anchoring the reader into your scenes and characters is something that flows through this blog, but moreso in the articles I write for Writer's Digest. Here's one online that might be helpful:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.writersdigest.com/writing-articles/by-writing-goal/improve-my-writing/8-ways-to-write-better-characters
Because we don't want live links in the comments (too easy for spammers) you'll need to copy and paste that into the address bar of your browser. Let me know if you find it of value!
Fascinating passage. I've never read that book and probably won't, but quite fascinating what he says without saying it. Learn something new every day!
ReplyDeleteThanks for another interesting piece.
Welcome, BJ, & thanks for checking in.
ReplyDeleteOne of my very favorite writers. He began as a movie critic, so he had a well-developed visual sensibility. His writing is very much informed by the grammar of film. His books are full of perfectly formed images. He never tells the reader how his characters feel. He shows us in describing his characters' responses to those images.
ReplyDeleteTerry, I actually didn't know that Greene wrote film reviews; thanks for stopping by and mentioning that. I only knew of his journalism/espionage background. I want to read more of him.
Delete