My name is Scott the interpreter. I interpret.
My subject today is the Trolljägarn. Recently joining the University of Essex, he was assigned a task of reviewing an opinion someone had (a task he favours, and of course takes to with great zeal). The opinion in question was that of 'Sam Leith''s, and on the topic of short stories and why theya re popular. However, as always, there were the usual passages and phases in his writing which needed review themselves, and first of course need to be interpretted. This is where I come in *applause and cheering ensues*.
This is how I have interpreted and reworked his original piece:
Sam Leith’s article ‘A life in six words’ explained:
Sam Leith’s article is an attempt to outline the phenomena that ‘short stories’ have been, their roots, their popularization, and their current position and purpose in prose. His explanation for their popularity, the appeal that writers have for writing them and the readers desire to consume the literary product lies mostly in their concision. He terms this as ‘the economy of effect’. The physical strictures on the writer in this subgenre is what he suggests makes the achievement of writing a piece of prose in this genre an object of respect.
Although the article also suggests that some of the desire to write in the limits and confines of this genre can come from the self promotion aspect of its publication. Leith explains how, inspired by Ernest Hemingway’s famous story written in only 6 words (in order to win a 10 pound bet), a literary magazine based website received over 11,000 short pieces of literature in a competition they set up in which their readers could enter their own work. This is attributed to how the publication of these offered them a chance to get their name noticed.
It seems that the best standard short story needs the following:
- Concision of illustrating the image, in order to allow the reader to envision it.
- Lack of detail in the plot, in order to force the reader to consider its implications.
- A punchline or twist that gives the story its purpose.
Leith finishes by outlining its credibility as a serious art form. He suggests that short stories are a versatile art form, saying of them that they: ‘can be the glorious occasion for a cheap laugh, also offers the chance for real artistry’. His conclusion The original piece did not read as easily as this hopefully has. The first corrections I found myself making were in the commas. My preference happens to be the 'oxford comma', which is when a list uses a comma on the penultimate item as well as the necessary 'and', and the reasons why these are my preference are observable in the first list.
Without and oxford comma it reads as such:
'Sam Leith’s article is an attempt to outline the phenomena that ‘short stories’ have been, their roots, their popularization and their current position and purpose in prose'
Read it aloud... if you're struggling to get your head around all the 'and's at the end then perhaps you can see why an oxford comma is a useful tool in the English language. Go back and read the first one as well for the sake of comparison. Both are entirely legitimate but an oxford comma makes a complicated list simpler to understand and is therefore my preference.
Onwards, and the next items I find myself correcting are the order of words in some of the Trolljägarn's sentences. This is a highly typical fault of the Trolljägarn. It seems that often he finds himself writing as a highly confused and convoluted person speaks, despite the validity of the point itself. This makes for difficult reading, a useful illustration would be:
'Although the article also suggests that some of the desire to write in the limits and confines of this genre might at times come from the opportunity of promotion that they also offer.'
No, the look of confusion on your face IS to be entirely expected. I changed the order of these words. If you like you can see how I reworded it in my tuned version (first sentence of the second paragraph). I hope the illustration he was trying to achieve can be understood now.
Now to move away from the criticism (this is, after all, the realm of the Trolljägarn himself). What he has done effectively is address the two needs of the response to the article in a reasonably neat manner. The two needs were to summarize the criteria necessary for an effective short story, and to explain what 'Leith' thinks about why short stories became popular and their credibility as a serious art form. It makes a natural progression from one to another in his work without appearing to be two entirely separate pieces.
All in all the response to the article was a reasonable effort... albeit perhaps a confusing and at times contrived effort. When the Trolljägarn reads my response he will with any luck be able to take my ideas forward into his next piece of work.
For your patience I am thankful,
S. The Interpreter.
