|
Focus on Books
Some thoughts on 'readability' and 'awardability'
Prof. Sunanda MAHENDRA
"Did you read my new novel?" Asked the writer from the reader.
"I am trying to read it," replied the reader.
"Do you mean to say my novel is unreadable or...?"
 "No. I am trying to read but I must say that some pages don't move.
Well, yes it's unreadable sometimes."
The reader who was scholarly and had read quite a number of works,
did not want to show any signs of unreadability. But he felt that this
basic feeling had to be transferred in some way. As such the scholar
reader just said:
"Sorry to say that it is not a page moving novel. But I got to read
and tell you what I feel."
The writer may have felt that his learned friend is hinting at the 'unreadability'
of his work. But the dialogue did not proceed, as there was an
interlocution gap based on readability and unreadability . What then is
actually readability depends on the framing of a particular page or a
cluster of paragraphs.
The readability of a book depends largely on how the words are
sentences are framed or structured. One cannot expect readability merely
on the factor. There is also the reader's ability to read and that
depends on his personal whims and fancies.
Perhaps I am tempted to write these notes, as I feel that some of the
Sinhala novels I tried to read, and found unreadable have been awarded
literary awards by the Perhaps I am tempted to write these notes because
of some Sinhala novels I have been reading. I have tried to read these
novels, which have been awarded literary awards by the State as well as
other units. May it be said in good earnest that the readability
matters, but it is not the sole guiding factor, in the ultimate literary
assessment of merits. But the modern reader is evolved to the extent
that his inner urge may not be 'hard page browsing' to gauge what the
writer has written down. His eyes and mind should move in two levels:
the upper text and the inner text or the subtext.
Dan Brown and Ken Follett may have exhibited these merits as against
a creative writer like D. H. Lawrence or Thomas Hardy. But I don't want
to generalize by stating that brown and Follett are superior than
Lawrence or Hardy.
The intended message which the writer wants to express should come
within him or her in the creative process. As such mere speculations on
the creative nuances are impossible. With the dawn of an era of new
journalism, the readability emerged to the forefront as a style. It was
the investigative reporting that had an impetus on other creative
writings. This has largely happened in the expression modes of the
present day creative writers. The use of the writing technology too had
an impact on the creative writer, especially the use of the computer
typesetting.
It is said that computer had made writing and thereby reading made
more easier than it used to be. The BBC companions of mine used to coin
a term called 'recapulation' of material, which results in an entire
change in the format, yet retaining the essence of the source material.
In the present day creative works such as short story, and novel quite a
number of dialogues, as well as monologues or the accepted psychological
techniques of the stream of consciousness is rediscovered. This
rediscovery tends to develop as a trend to the point that it sometimes
look like a scrambled page.
Then perhaps a reader may tend to comment that there is a certain
degree of dishonesty in the name of 'modernism'. The term 'modernism' in
the Sinhala literary circles is either misunderstood or made to
misrepresent a literary enigma. These literary enigmas unknown by the
general reader have gone a long way that the works concerned have earned
literary awards too. Their stance is once again questionable Is
awardability of merits depend on literary modernisms?
I have been trying to read some of the Sinhala novels that won
acclaim from the so called literary judges as high calibred works. Then
I found that the concept of awardability of merits have been largely
based on the misunderstood modernisms. This then is a mere rediscovery
on my part. But I am not too sure whether others are clear about what I
say. The awardability of literary prizes to my mind should be
transparent. Even then who are selected on the board of judges should be
capable of the judgment without being swayed by extraneous factors. What
I acclaim as good may mean bad for another. But I have sufficient
reasons to say so.
[email protected]
|
