Lolz, I'm creative with my titles. But really, have any of you noticed how formal the prose is in Devil in the White City?
Bina commented quite accurately (and I'm waiting for her to post about this) that there is little to no dialogue in the book.
Formal, no dialogue, it's kinda like one of the dudes from the History channel lecturing you about the Chicago World's Fair. Granted, it's a very interesting lecture, but this is what intrigues me the most: For something so formal, why does it hold my interest for so long?
I usually grow impatient with books laden with heavy formal speak, but I think that the formal tone in this book contributes to the reader's immersion in the time period. You feel enraptured in the Chicago of the early 1900's and start to anticipate how Larson will describe a certain person or place. The formal tone (in my opinion) is definitely an attribute to Devil.
Entonces, que piensas? (So, what do you think?)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
As Becca mentioned, I found the removed and formal tone of DWC to contribute greatly to the mood and message of the book. The book contains practically no dialouge and is nararrated in the past tense, creating an almost "documentaryish" feel to the book. In addition,Larson frequently employs phrases such as "a later report by a Chicago building inspector noted", referencing later additions to what??? This style makes the story sound like an investigation, as if the nararrator is searching for more clues and some answers pop up along the way. Larson also includes quotes from witnessesque characters such as, "a bricklayer George Bowman said", also emphasizing this detective like tone.
Adding to the suspense,sentences such as, "he first worked for Holmes as a common laborer, but soon proved to possess a talent which Holmes found particularly vulnerable", leave the reader on a cliffhanger, eluding to some seemingly important element of the story, but not disclosing the full story until much later. Personally, this has made the book much more enticing to read for me. I wonder if this will continue as the plot developes...
I didn't find the tone to be a hindrance to my understanding of the story. I didn't find it especially formal, either. Larson was simply presenting me facts. I guess that is what a documentary is supposed to be, but I'm very happy with that!
Post a Comment