The Year of the Flood, Margaret Atwood, chapter 17, page 84 in the library binding:
"
They were thieves, said Amanda, looking for stuff they could lift, but they said they'd take Amanda and her mother to dry land and a shelter if they'd do a trade.
"What kind of trade?" I asked.
"Just a trade," said Amanda.
"
OMG.
Sometimes I see brilliant writing and my can fathom the differences in writing quality between me and them. Orwell or Scalzi are both examples of this: I can see what they are doing as they lead up to it and I'm impressed with the skill. This isn't to compare the two, but to say they give me a similar feel and I see them expertly using the same type of tools I have access to. Though, if I have access to, say, blunt scissors then Scalzi has a chainsaw and Orwell a scalpel.
With Atwood, I'm having a different reaction, a feel more like: look what genius has wrought. A sense of awe.
Atwood is using entirely different tools, and I'm seeing just the barest glimpses of what those are. Instead of a cutting implement, she's got fire tamed and at her disposal.
It's inspiring the way Victor Hugo was inspiring. Not to be a better writer, as the gulf is extreme and unknowable, but perhaps something better: to strive for a better world.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If writing were a zombie apocalypse, Scalzi might have the winning tool there. That /was/ your point, right? >.>
ReplyDeleteBeing able to summon forth fire, from a zippo to a raging inferno, with but a few words sounds pretty dang good versus zombies.
ReplyDeleteDepends on the zombies... it's not like they experience pain, so they can turn into a bunch of wandering bonfires until the fire actually does enough damage. Very dangerous....
ReplyDelete