How and why do certain writers create a relationship with a reader that involves trust and believability? I’ve often pondered this question, especially while reading the work of composition scholars (fiction writers have to do this. It’s the Comp. scholars that don’t have to, but I believe they miss out on truly connecting with us when they don’t develop a rapport with the reader). The question resurfaces while reading Irit Rogoff’s Studying Visual Culture (1998), and rather than concentrating on the media focus of her essay, at the moment this question attracts me more (since I write four blogs per week, once in a while I can afford to wander off). I feel the answer lies in Rogoff’s voice and tone. Rogoff doesn't take an authoritarian stance, in other words, she sets up her word choice and syntax in such a way that we do not feel we are being talked down to. Indeed, she brings us into her world through her humility. The essay’s first line creates the mood, “How can we characterize the emergent field of “visual culture”? (italics added, 381). The word “we” is the key that opens the door. I went back and reviewed some of the other essays in this anthology, and most begin with an authoritative sentence by the writer that seems to declare “This is what I think, and it is right.” However, Rogoff’s humility through the use of “we,” and the question itself shows she is confident and doesn’t need to convince us—she believes her thesis, she trusts its efficacy, and she is confident in her ability to share it. Further, and we know this from psychology, humility actually contains elements of strength, not arrogance or hubris, as Rogoff and her essay demonstrate.
Breaking off, this concludes my short foray into the reader/writer relationship (no scrolling if possible). Also, in the end, I do think this topic pertains to class. Aren’t we always seeking to create a good rapport with a reader generous and kind enough to actually take the time to read our work?…
No comments:
Post a Comment