Linda Davis’s style of writing isn’t trying to be overly dramatic or exhortative. However, it is convincing. The first sentence is a direct address to her reader, “We all have these favorite shows coming on every evening.” Second person functions nicely on a topic as relatable as television; furthermore, she offers a unique perspective on it by addressing that we are consumed by television, and in some ways we live vicariously through the lives of those characters we see on the screen. She also does a good job of covering a variety of shows we flip through every day. Those channels we truly have no interest, yet we watch anyway. Probably because we’re a part of the sensationalist generation. Insatiable. Bored. She brings up prominent notions we don’t always address, like why we watch TV and how we watch it, especially considering that the average Americans watch 34 hours of TV per week. The story evokes the feeling that TV has essentially taken over our lives. “We” rather unplug the phone, ignore the knock at the door, and isolate ourselves. She confuses the honking of wild geese for the blare of a TV near by, disassociating herself with the natural.
Another element of the story that intrigued me was the structure of it. By separating the work into three small sections, with each numbered accordingly, it feels almost as if the reader asked her to describe her life through the means of television, and she is directly responding to us. The first section begins with a more general overview of “our” fascination with television, then briefly mentions her mother and husband’s in that respect. I’m not entirely sure what the speaker’s feelings are towards her husband. Perhaps apathetic.
With the second section the speaker’s tone changes to slightly more distracted. There are more line breaks. She first describes documentaries or reality shows, then admits her satisfaction with the weather channel because it’s not trying to prove anything but fact. By the third section, the style is less choppy. The speaker seems to step out of the philosophy of why and how “we” watch TV and moves into first person. The last section carries the most weight because we finally understand her personal frustration with television: it leaves out the hours of dull moments in-between excitement and major events, essentially not depicting real life at all. It gives us a better sense of her feelings towards her own life, posing the idea that the real issue is something deeper than we may have first assumed. The structure in this fashion works for me. Even though it’s subtle, the character overcomes something. There is a sort of self-awareness that I can appreciate.
With the second section the speaker’s tone changes to slightly more distracted. There are more line breaks. She first describes documentaries or reality shows, then admits her satisfaction with the weather channel because it’s not trying to prove anything but fact. By the third section, the style is less choppy. The speaker seems to step out of the philosophy of why and how “we” watch TV and moves into first person. The last section carries the most weight because we finally understand her personal frustration with television: it leaves out the hours of dull moments in-between excitement and major events, essentially not depicting real life at all. It gives us a better sense of her feelings towards her own life, posing the idea that the real issue is something deeper than we may have first assumed. The structure in this fashion works for me. Even though it’s subtle, the character overcomes something. There is a sort of self-awareness that I can appreciate.
1 comment:
Glad you liked the piece -- I can see how someone who likes Chuck P. would like Davis's work.
Post a Comment