It seemed to me that in volumes two and three of “Desmond,”
Smith changed the tone and sentiment of the book. While I said before that
Austen’s version seemed more trustworthy because of the variety of
voices/writers, Smith changed the game in the second and third volumes of
“Desmond” by adopting a similar approach. The first volume of “Desmond” left me
with a variety of questions: Does Geraldine return Desmond’s sentiments? Is she
manipulating him? Am I ever going to find this story interesting? Why does
Desmond even like this woman? It paid off though, Smith’s boring setup just
contributes to the drama and intrigue in the second/third volumes. By
introducing more writers, Smith is able to expand the story and the reader is
less skeptical about what is really going on. I was, however, left wondering
about the number of omitted letters. What was the reasoning behind leaving out
letters? There seem (to me) to be a number of letters that could have been
shortened to allow for their room.
Based on the way these books were printed, I wonder if volume one was
interesting enough to ensure readers bought the second and third volumes? I,
for one, was pleasantly surprised at the decidedly personal turn the second and
third volumes took (as opposed to the strongly political messages in the first
volume).
I totally get that. While my attention was wandering, it reminded me of an old, ooold movie I once saw called Battleship Potemkin from like 1920. It took ten minutes for a tank to raise its gun. Unbearably slow action, but I guess to contemporary audiences it was actually quite fast. Perhaps the same principle can be applied to the rather ponderous writing style Smith uses and they still bought the second and third volumes. We are, after all, the product of a Twitter and Michael Bay time period.
ReplyDelete~Carol
I was also incredibly excited to see the change of writing in the later volumes. I do not think I personally would have made it through the slow moving first volume wanting more; however Carol made a great point- we do live in a society that desires constant updates, upgrades, and action which was not the case in that time. Also, the strongly political and historical narrative in the first volume may not have seemed as randomly juxtaposed to the drama of the second and third volumes as in this time period books were often interspersed with lessons and information besides simply the story to provide a more encompassing reading experience, which is rare in today’s leisure reading.
ReplyDelete