"The Drama Bug" is not my first exposure to David Sedaris. A friend and I bought one of his books together before we left the country. When You are Engulfed Flames. I thought it was brilliant. Easy to read, simple, and hilarious. Sedaris has the incredible ability to write about everyday occurrences yet make them flat funny. I think what makes him a bite better than other humor authors is that we can still learn something, still see small insights into life and humanity in his work. It's not only humor, but humor with substance. That's how I feel, at least.
I'm not a humor writer myself, so I see it more objectively, I feel, than others who are familiar with the craft. Reading "The Drama Bug" more critically, I picked up a few things about humor writing. For one, I can't imagine it in the third person. No, first person makes it conversational, in the moment, and personal. I'm sure third-person humor is out there, but it's sure not Sedaris' style.
The second thing I noticed was that it's not about what you write, but how you write it. A mime visiting school–this isn't such a big event. Somehow, though, Sedaris writes about it and it's funny. It's worth reading. I'd bet he could make me want to read about his daily tooth-brushing routine, or perhaps his commute to work. The mundane isn't so in the hands of a humor writer. It's not about what, but how.
The third thing I noticed was the hyperbole. I can't believe that Sedaris wrote one hundred percent fact. That's okay with me, though. It's expected, even. The funniest part was when young David was running around, practicing his Elizabethan English. That was the part I felt was least true to fact, though. From the start, I doubt that he could remember the exact sentences he said. He might, though, and even if he doesn't, if he is only guessing or paraphrasing, that's totally fine. I don't see that as being at all dishonest. I did question whether he really did speak like that to that extent. Was he really that clever and witty at that age? Perhaps. But again, it doesn't matter. It was hyperbole, expected and used well.
So when is hyperbole okay? To what extent? To be honest, if other authors tried to pull it off, I'd be critical. Perhaps it's okay if you can pull it off, if you can get away with it by doing it well. Perhaps it's okay in humor writing only. Maybe both. To accept creative writing, you have to accept creative license. How to define and judge that, though, might just come down to who you are.
It would be interesting to learn to write humor, like David Sedaris. The best way of course, is to read it and write it.
-Alexander Hirata
Humor is one of the most difficult genres to write, as it is not supposed to be forced or made up. It must come naturally, and David Sedaris is already an expert at that. I liked this piece as it had natural humor and actually led to a good outcome.
ReplyDeleteHae-Lim Lee
So, how much CAN a writer use hyperbole before it's too much? That really is a good question to think about. I think as writers, we need to check ourselves every now and then. Sometimes I want to dramatize something because it's important to ME only to read it again and realize that it's not vital to the story at all.
ReplyDeleteI did find all the Elizabethan English tedious, though. And I'm sure Sedaris had to take quite a bit of creative license when he wrote it, and though it adds flavor to the scene, it took so long to read. So I think, I'll have to say Sedaris could have used less of it because the illusion was broken in that moment and this would be a case when there was little too much hyperbole.
Justyne Marin