Sarah Vowell has a very particular style of writing, one that you must really be a fan of to enjoy her work. She follows historical fact with quirky pieces of her own little humor. It's like she is trying to be annoying and sarcastic about serious stuff. While reading her book I felt as though Vowell despite talking about a very serious subject did not really consider speak of it as seriously as she should. She introduces the characters of people as important as Winthrop as if no one has ever heard of them. She treats an important piece of American history as her independent study.
After all these smart ass remarks you realize she isn't even a good writer, she can't even stay in the same tense throughout the entire book. Switching between past, and present. She is a good writer but too spastic and confusing for my liking, her work didn't flow the way I like things to.
I read the New York Times review of her and they seemed to be in the same mindset as me that Vowell, is somewhat a spastic writer which I definitely do not like. I myself am a sarcastic kid but she just doesn't seem to take anything seriously it could be she is arrogant it is something that makes her write the way she does.
I read the New York Times review of her and they seemed to be in the same mindset as me that Vowell, is somewhat a spastic writer which I definitely do not like. I myself am a sarcastic kid but she just doesn't seem to take anything seriously it could be she is arrogant it is something that makes her write the way she does.
While I like Vowell's writing style for the most part, I can acknowledge that it rubs many people the wrong way.
ReplyDeleteI will say, though, that Vowell is a technically gifted writer - when she changes tense, it may be jarring, but it is grammatically correct.
I completely agree on your opinions on Vowell's writing style. I like the way she puts her own quirky humor into her writing but everything else about it is really off putting, and confusing. Interesting thoughts and ideas.
ReplyDelete