Critical definition - 'self-conscious' prose

Question

Is there any agreement on what it means to say that something is 'self-conscious writing'?
Sometimes it appears as a compliment - 'My writing only started to improve once I worked at
self-conscious writing'
More usually a criticism. 'I can't stand this modern self-conscious writing'
It seems to mean one of the following. Maybe there are more:
1. Writing that is too descriptive, flowery, literary.'Lawrence Durrell produces heavily descriptive
self-conscious writing'
2. Writing where the writer is too aware of being inthe process of writing (how can you tell?).
3. Writing where there are authorial asides
4. Writing that is full of writerly devices. 'TristamShandy is entirely self-conscious writing'
5. Writing that complex, difficult to read or usesunusual words
6. Writing that the critic does not like, but can't bearsed to explain why
What other definitions are there?
Is something so vaugue a useful term to use in
criticism?
What is the most likely meaning?
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]Is there any agreement on what it means to say that something is 'self-conscious writing'?[/nq]
There is always some agreement on everything, but never universal agreement on anything.
[nq:1]Sometimes it appears as a compliment - 'My writing only started to improve once I worked at self-conscious writing'[/nq]
Nah. I don't buy that. This sentiment would be more correctly and appropriately phrased as, "My writing only started to improve once I realised how hard good writing is, and started making an appropriate effort."
[nq:1]More usually a criticism. 'I can't stand this modern self-conscious writing'[/nq]
Well, by-passing the standard argument of what "criticism" means, I would say that this phrase is usually used in the denigratory sense, such as what is called in England "Sixth Form writing", where the writer has achieved fluency but not maturity or style. This form uses ponderously correct grammar and pretentious vocabulary. The main problem with it is that the reader is kept constantly aware of the act of composition rather than the subject matter of the writing.
[nq:1]It seems to mean one of the following. Maybe there are more: 1. Writing that is too descriptive, flowery, literary. 'Lawrence Durrell produces heavily descriptive self-conscious writing'[/nq]
Yes, I would sorta buy that, except that writing can be too descriptive, flowery, or literary without being self-conscious. In some cases, I would judge, there's a crying need for greater self-consciousness in this area (to limit the output of this kind of writing).
I almost mounted my Lawrence Durrell hobby-horse, for one perilous moment, but let it pass, let it pass...
[nq:1]2. Writing where the writer is too aware of being in the process of writing (how can you tell?).[/nq]
Yes, I would also buy this. It is, to some extent, a restatement of #1.

Answer option #1: You can't tell; this is what editors are for.

Answer option #2: It only comes with experience (preferably involving editors).
[nq:1]3. Writing where there are authorial asides[/nq]
Nah. This is a separate thing, which can be done well or badly (and is).
[nq:1]4. Writing that is full of writerly devices. 'Tristam Shandy is entirely self-conscious writing'[/nq]
Yes, I would also buy this. It is, to some extent, a restatement of #2.
[nq:1]5. Writing that complex, difficult to read or uses unusual words[/nq]
No; some writing (for example, on complex subjects) is legitimately complex, and some writing (for example, on specialist subjects to an informed audience) legitimately uses unusual words. And much writing is hard to read for all sorts of reasons. This option opens too many independent cans of worms.
[nq:1]6. Writing that the critic does not like, but can't be arsed to explain why[/nq]
Well, kinda, except that he did explain why (it's self-conscous).
[nq:1]What other definitions are there? Is something so vaugue a useful term to use in criticism?[/nq]
(hollow, cynical laugh) This is a poorly-formed question, inviting snide discussion on how critics critically (ha, ha) depend on vague terms to survive.
But, that said, I don't see it as a very vague term. It is reasonably descriptive, I think.
[nq:1]What is the most likely meaning?[/nq]
#2, in my opinion.

Usenet · Answer

Ferdinand R Tertan wrote on 09 Mar 2005:
[nq:1]Is there any agreement on what it means to say that something is 'self-conscious writing'? Sometimes it appears as a ... writing' 2. Writing where the writer is too aware of being in the process of writing (how can you tell?).[/nq]
A combination of 1-5. Then, too, there're all the allusions to other writers and works in the "modern self-conscious" writers of the 1960s-80s. What writing is like after that I don't know. I lost interest.
[nq:1]3. Writing where there are authorial asides 4. Writing that is full of writerly devices. 'Tristam Shandy is entirely self-conscious writing'[/nq]
Maybe so, but it seems to me that it is intentionally full of writerly devices.
[nq:1]5. Writing that complex, difficult to read or uses unusual words 6. Writing that the critic does not like, but can't be arsed to explain why What other definitions are there? Is something so vaugue a useful term to use in criticism?[/nq]
Probably not for readers, but I'd say it's awfully useful for writers like those you mention in number 6.
[nq:1]What is the most likely meaning?[/nq]
I'd say that when a writer is more concerned about letting the world know that he's a writer than he is about telling a good story in the best language he's capable of, the result is bound to be self- conscious. Self-conscious people cannot lose themselves in what they're doing; they're always aware that other people are watching, listening, making judgments. They try too hard, lose control even if only slightly and show themselves rather than the persona they ought to be showing to their audience. They aren't able to stay naturally in character, so what they write or do or say is sometimes (or often) slightly (to very) off.
But the phrase is just vague enough to require a definition and examples when it's used, IMHO.

Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet.
'Henry Kissinger once justified U.S. support for the Pinochet coup in Chile by saying "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people."' Time Magazine article

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Is there any agreement on what it means to say that something is 'self-conscious writing'? Sometimes it appears as a ... writing' 2. Writing where the writer is too aware of being in the process of writing (how can you tell?).[/nq]
With respect to the first two proffered definitions, the word "lucubration" and the related phrase "this smells of the lamp" come to mind. Both refer to working and re-working your literary effort long after you should have gone to bed.
Barbara Herrick

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Is there any agreement on what it means to say that something is 'self-conscious writing'?[/nq]
[nq:1]There is always some agreement on everything, but never universal agreement on anything.[/nq]
You can agree with some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time but you can't agree with all of the people all of the time. Except you're a puppy.

John Dean
Oxford

Usenet · Answer

Barbara filted:
[nq:1]With respect to the first two proffered definitions, the word "lucubration" and the related phrase "this smells of the lamp" come to mind. Both refer to working and re-working your literary effort long after you should have gone to bed.[/nq]
Bear in mind that the cut-off point varies with one's audience...case in point: yesterday I forgot momentarily that I was talking to someone in real life and not AUE...said I felt like Theseus without his yarn...last time I saw him he was still scratching his head..r

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I'd say that when a writer is more concerned about letting the world know that he's a writer than he ... stay naturally in character, so what they write or do or say is sometimes (or often) slightly (to very) off.[/nq]
Should all writing seek pure realism? If painters can have the heads showing their sides and the face all at once, why can't writers do something similar? I would take the Heller of "Catch-22" to the Heller of "Closing Time".

Personal accounts are good because they lessen the liability against future taxes of the retiree while sequestering the funds he's been paying in so they cannot be used to mask current general fund deficits.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Is there any agreement on what it means to say that something is 'self-conscious writing'?[/nq]
No.
[nq:1]It seems to mean one of the following. Maybe there are more:[/nq]
There are many more.
In how many ways can someone want the opposite of a particular quality they possess?
And in how many ways can someone artlessly attempt to attain the opposite of a particular quality they have?
[nq:1]Is something so vaugue a useful term to use in criticism?[/nq]
Only insofar as you treat it without context as a vague term.

Joseph

Usenet · Answer

Bill Bonde wrote on 11 Mar 2005:
[nq:2]I'd say that when a writer is more concerned about ... or say is sometimes (or often) slightly (to very) off.[/nq]
[nq:1]Should all writing seek pure realism?[/nq]
If you think that staying in character is "pure realism", then you've got a lexicographical problem.
[nq:1]If painters can have the heads showing their sides and the face all at once, why can't writers do something similar? I would take the Heller of "Catch-22" to the Heller of "Closing Time".[/nq]
I haven't read Closing Time but I have read Catch 22 a couple of times. I don't think that Heller was self-conscious in that novel. I thought he was brilliant and exquisitely funny. I don't think he lost control. I don't think he tried too hard. I don't think any of the novel was off. Heller told a terrific story in the best language he was capable of. It's a masterpiece.

Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet.
'Henry Kissinger once justified U.S. support for the Pinochet coup in Chile by saying "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people."' Time Magazine article

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Bill Bonde wrote on 11 Mar 2005:[/nq]
I'm not sure exactly what that means. Of course "Catch 22" is funny. I did think that the part where they bomb their own airfield did go over the top in the book but in the movie was one of the better bits.
[nq:1]I don't think he tried too hard. I don't think any of the novel was off. Heller told a terrific story in the best language he was capable of. It's a masterpiece.[/nq]
If you read "Closing Time", you see fewer of those 'big words' that some people claim must mean you used a thesaurus. Is this Heller's "mature style"? Is it immature to use obscure words?

Personal accounts are good because they lessen the liability against future taxes of the retiree while sequestering the funds he's been paying in so they cannot be used to mask current general fund deficits.

Usenet · Answer

Bill Bonde ( The chamber was in confusion, all the voices shouting loud ) wrote on 12 Mar 2005:

I have an American friend here in Taiwan who has an MA in TESOL. He's been teaching EFL here for at least a dozen years. When I first met him, I used my normal vocabulary in conversations with him. After he kept stopping me to ask me what all those big words meant, I started speaking to him as if he were an EFL student; i.e., I simplified everything, especially my vocabulary. I have to be very self-conscious when I speak to him, but that is the opposite of what "some people claim must mean" I use a thesaurus when I speak to him.

I think "some people" are inadequately educated and vindictive because of it. They are the ones who want to make the world safe for children, the ignorant, and the stupid at the expense of adults, the knowledgeable, and the not-stupid. Some of us know big words and how to use them without having to consult a thesaurus.

Franke: EFL teacher & medical editor
For email, replace numbers with English alphabet.
'Henry Kissinger once justified U.S. support for the Pinochet coup in Chile by saying "I don't see why we need to stand by and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people."' Time Magazine article

Critical definition - 'self-conscious' prose

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions