Respecting the Personal Cultures of Authors
In the daily world of business, media, and academia we find ourselves to be oppressed in our writing styles and communication to be criticized for a variety of “reasons” that constitute why they aren’t “suitable” to be released to the public eye or even our peers. The article, Should Writers Use They Own English by Vershawn Ashanti Young, introduces the basis for arguing that we should celebrate our diversity in ideas and styles in writing. I find it quite interesting that he makes this argument in a personal manner for the reader as it feels more to the likeness of a conversation, which although it’s the subject of his argument I do not feel that it is the complete basis for this reaction. I however very much agree that his writing feels personally delivered rather than attempting to impress with words like those used in “fantastically crafted literature.” I also agree that the dialects, particularly those of African, Latin, or Asian Americans who have learned English as a second language must be respected for their uniqueness in stylistic choices as well as eliminating the assumptions and stigmas associated with them. I understand the arguments made that speak to the nature that “‘how would peeps who aint from yo hood understand you?’”(Young), but as he outlines it will make us rich in cultural appreciation for us to learn to understand the written dialect rather than having them learn “Standard English”; I definitely had to think about the meanings of some the words when reading them, but after saying them aloud it made it easier to comprehend. I think it is also important to understand the intended audience for the given piece of writing. I feel that in communication with those who are native speakers of a language then use of dialect should be required of those on the receiving end as well, but if the intended audience is those who have difficulty speaking english, it may be easier to write in a “standard” format. However, Young might argue that this is an example of “code-switching” and I feel that such an interpretation is fair, but disrespectful to those who already have difficulty understanding English pronunciation, therefore “fo sho” might not come across as “for sure” to them. I do nonetheless appreciate the craft of “code-meshing” as it is purely characteristic of beauties that make an individual who they are. It is truly important to appreciate writing as a form of expression and as a form of art; much to the nature of theatre, painting, and music there are various genres and movements that each follow their own set of conventions with the meanings of those conventions stretched in different directions by the specific artist. Why then if we accept the extremely broad variety of art movements to be considered art, but not include the use of words to paint a picture of a story or communicate a message? Young also makes a point in defense of students in describing, “And further, grad students also be tryin too hard to sound smart, to write like the folk they be readin, instead of usin they own voices”(Young). It is drastically important for writer to express themselves by the aura of their personal voice and explore their ideas.
I must make clear that I do not believe in outlawing the use of larger words and it is completely against my beliefs to call larger words convoluted, but to my appreciation I find them to explore deeper meaning that must be felt to truly be read. In presentations that must be made clear it is understandable that words should be made blatant and clear as in the case teaching a class or making a speech to a given audience. When it comes to novels and stories painting an adventure with characters who are radiant individuals with inner inspirations and inner monologues it is integral to allow the reader to feel their emotions and understand the complexity of adventure. Larger words such as “continuum” and “phosphorescence” retain a magical plasticity to them that allows the author to stretch their meaning and apply them to an idea and a derivative emotion rather than simply stating something bluntly. The molding of words to form a whole world within a novel, I feel is not in the efforts to “sound smart,” but to merely make it more rich experience to understand. Paintings are painted with a given meaning or inspiration in the minds of artists, but do you see plaques with blunt explanations in art museums? No, you don’t; I feel that this also applies to writing in all forms, but especially novels. When one goes to observe the beauty of art in a museum they look to find their own personal meaning and if it’s different from that of the artist, it doesn’t necessarily make it wrong; such a concept applies to writing and reading as well. But, as I mentioned prior presentations that are made clear must not use such ambiguity.
In coming to view writing in a more general sense, I also wish to point out the changes of language across history. In modern day English speaking countries we place the works of William Shakespeare atop pedestals as if they are the standard we should reach to achieve. This is quite ironic in comparing them to the speech of common folk at the time which is very much comparable. Shakespeare’s plays also made use of writing in verse and that was not how people spoke at the time, yet the words that were used were those that common people understood as they were the most common audience to the shows. Of course years later works that were originally in protest of the harsh standards now become the highly held standards of today as is apparent with many art movements such as the protests of Impressionism of the Romanticism Movement following the Renaissance. Let writing be held in the nature of the individual not those of the standard.
“William Shakespeare Quotes.” BrainyQuote.com. BrainyMedia Inc, 2020. 30 August 2020. https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/william_shakespeare_125207
Young, Vershawn Ashanti. “Should Writers Use They Own English?” Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 12, no. 1, 2010, pp. 110–117., doi:10.17077/2168–569x.1095.
