Analyzing and Comparing Distinct Prose Styles of the Twentieth Century Including the Unambiguous Narration of Ernest Hemingway and the Verbose Writing Styles of Woolf and Baker: Is It More Beneficial to Have Concise Descriptions or to Write Wordy, Erudite-Sounding Sentences When You Could Have Just Said the Same Thing in a Few Words Like This Stupid Title

Perhaps one of the most important qualities of a novel is the prose; often, the author uses this aspect to distinguish themselves in a generally competitive literary market, and every single author we’ve explored in class thus far has been an example of unique writing styles. If we look at the various authors’ writing styles from the perspective of a spectrum, Hemingway and Woolf/Baker would represent vastly different ends.

Baker is definitely an example of unique narrative voice; I can’t think of another book that delves into the minutiae of everyday life as interestingly as Baker’s novel. The narration is like a meandering river that keeps infinitely flowing; the water carries all the sediment and details throughout its course. Unlike most other novels or works of art, Baker’s book leaves the reader with no room for interpretation, since he describes everything with such precision, and relates pretty much every single one of his thoughts to the audience.

Virginia Woolf follows a similar, but still characteristic approach: her long-winded sentences also carry detail and description, but the perspective is from a third person, omniscient narrator who somehow has access to every character’s mind and can explicate their thoughts. Woolf’s rapid jump from topic to topic and person to person is somewhat like Baker’s deluge of thinking, however her style allows her to leave more information out. Since she has the capacities of several different characters at her disposal, she can also withhold any information, since it’s impossible to describe every single character’s thoughts at one given moment. Basically, in terms of length and expressiveness, Woolf has a similar style of narration to Baker, but unlike Baker, she’s able to pick and choose what narration to show the reader because of her multiple character perspective.

Hemingway, on the other hand, is incredibly different in that he writes mostly in short phrases and dialogue. To revisit the previous metaphor, it’s like Hemingway is describing the surface level of the river, and what is visible, leaving the possibilities beneath the surface to the reader. However, his prose still evokes an equal level of emotion compared to more lengthy, descriptive styles, because it relies heavily on inference and interpretation. While character thoughts are rarely directly expressed, the reader can easily assume them from actions or dialogue that Hemingway writes. In terms of pace and plot, Hemingway’s novel moves much more quickly, and the characters progress in a more dynamic way.

When comparing the three, the aspect of reliability is important to discuss. I would characterize Baker as being fairly reliable- despite the first person, single character perspective, the reader gets a sense of trust because he describes everything in such a matter-of-fact and pragmatic way. Woolf, on the other hand, is incredibly reliable as a narrator because her multi-character, fly buzzing around the room perspective presents everything in a non-biased way. Hemingway, on the other hand, is unclear; having the entire narration set from Jake’s perspective is obviously going to skew things, but also, we occasionally see moments where Hemingway could be projecting his own character onto the pages (e.g. the unclear usage of the n word a billion times in succession). This one character narration is different from Baker’s, however, since Jake only tells the reader what he wants us to know, while in The Mezzanine, we get the sense that Howie tells us everything.

How does the reliability of the narrator affect how impactful the prose is? I think that the level of accuracy correlates with the descriptiveness of the prose: along with short sentences, Hemingway uses Jake’s unreliable narration to further complicate the story. Woolf and Baker’s relatively straightforward narration is more clear, but also adds detail that makes the story more compelling. The result of different prose styles is most apparent on the reader: simple, direct sentences like Hemingway’s leave much to the imagination, while long, winding descriptions are more immersive and lively.

Which style works better? I think the question can be answered by the reader: if you’re the imaginative type or tend to form unconventional ideas, then Hemingway’s prose may fit you better. If you want to just ride the roller coaster and enjoy the book for what it is, then maybe you’d find Woolf or Baker more interesting.