"As near as I can figure, an essay can be... a query, a reminiscence, a persuasive tract, an exploration; it can look inward or outward; it can crack a lot of jokes. What it need not be is objective. An essay can certainly present facts and advocate a position, but that seems quite different from the objectivity, whereby a writer just delivers information, adding nothing in the process. Instead, essays take their tone and momentum form the explicit presence of the writer in them and the distinctiveness of each writer's perspective. That makes essays definitely subjective -- not in the skewed, unfair sense of subjectivity, but in the sense that essays are conversations, and they should have all the nuances and attitude that any conversation has. I'm sure that's why newspapers so rarely generate great essays: even in the essay- allowed zone of a newspaper, the heavy breath of Objective Newspaper Reporting is always blowing down the writer's neck. And certainly there is no prescribed tone that is "correct" for essays. Sometimes it seems that they have a sameness of manner, a kind of earnest, hand writing solemnity. Is this necessary? I don't think so. Many of the essays that intrigued me this year were funny, or unusually structured, or tonally adventurous -- in other words, not typical in sound or shape. What mattered was that they conveyed the writer's journey, and did it intelligently, gracefully, honestly, and with whatever voice or shape fit best." (Antwan 24)
- Susan Orlean
I found Susan Orlean’s quote on an essay’s subjectivity interesting. I understood what she was saying and agreed to a certain extent. When I read an essay I like to get a sense of the writer, which is why she says that it can be like a conversation. The times when I can almost hear the essayist are when I enjoy reading an essay the most.
I like how she states that an essay “… need not be is objective.” When she goes on to say that an essay is objective, but the writer should be able to deliver the facts and still get across a sense of themselves and their ideas. She doesn’t want essayist to just state facts but to discuss them. I think that sometimes when I write essays and utter facts I tend to do just what she doesn’t want an essayist to do.Orleans’s believes that the reasons newspaper’s don’t generate great essays is because they focus too much on the facts. Their essays loose the sense of the author and the quirks of a conversation.
I like that essays are so diverse so there is one for everybody’s interest. Orlean said that many of the essays that intrigued her this year were not typical in sound or shape. That way people who like the more traditional essays have something to read and then others can read essays that are “tonally adventurous” and “unusually structured”. I’d have to say that I like to read essays that have something that stands out about them. It might just be the subject matter, the way it was structure, the tone, or maybe the presentation that catches my eye.
I think I’d have to agree with Orlean’s quote. Essays that have something that catches the eye, are objective to a certain extent and have the quirks of conversation are some of the more interesting essays to read.
I like how she states that an essay “… need not be is objective.” When she goes on to say that an essay is objective, but the writer should be able to deliver the facts and still get across a sense of themselves and their ideas. She doesn’t want essayist to just state facts but to discuss them. I think that sometimes when I write essays and utter facts I tend to do just what she doesn’t want an essayist to do.Orleans’s believes that the reasons newspaper’s don’t generate great essays is because they focus too much on the facts. Their essays loose the sense of the author and the quirks of a conversation.
I like that essays are so diverse so there is one for everybody’s interest. Orlean said that many of the essays that intrigued her this year were not typical in sound or shape. That way people who like the more traditional essays have something to read and then others can read essays that are “tonally adventurous” and “unusually structured”. I’d have to say that I like to read essays that have something that stands out about them. It might just be the subject matter, the way it was structure, the tone, or maybe the presentation that catches my eye.
I think I’d have to agree with Orlean’s quote. Essays that have something that catches the eye, are objective to a certain extent and have the quirks of conversation are some of the more interesting essays to read.
(318)
