Too Clever?
One of the most alarming trends in writing today is the emergence of a style of writing so overly filled with pop-culture references and soaked in its own overblown sense or irony and "pat myself on the back for being oh so clever smarminess" that the actual subjects of the text are lost in the mishmash. Two books, Sore Winners by John Powers, which focuses on life in the era of Bush, and Sex, Drugs and Cocoa Puffs: A Low Culture Manifesto by Chuck Klosterman, a collection of previously published material that surveys the pop-culture landscape in a sort of scatter-gun approach, are two recent examples of this type of writing.

When writers produce works that are dense in language, absent of traditional narrative, and focusing primarily on larger ideas and concepts, critics often point out that the author does this intentionally in an effort to stymie the readers and make them fell lost, confused, and without any real clue as to what is taking place or what they're supposed to derive from these lanugos passages. In many ways both Powers and Klosterman operate in the same manner but with fluffier prose and inane references. The approach is different, but the intention is still the same: only people who are "with it" will "get" your work.

The problem with this type of writing is that there's never any room for breathing easier and dropping the pretense of trying to be "cool." Much like writing that struggles to chronicle the mundane aspects of narrative flow that just can't be avoided or spruced up significantly, these types of books are always "on." Every sentence is tinged with the above characteristics. Writers unfamiliar with the concept of overkill thrive in this fashion.

Klosterman is the worst of the two offenders, and I must confess that I couldn't stomach his work. A few sentences were enough to turn me off from consuming an entire book of his uncharismatic hodge-podge of forced Real World allusions, and his inability to just stick to the subject at hand without tangential excursions into media-soaked miasma. Klosterman is one of those writers, much in the same vein as Dave Eggers, who just happens to be everywhere right now. Where Eggers used a book as a springboard into journal and magazine writing, Klosterman apparently writes for every magazine that's willing to print his long-winded escapades into whatever pop moment that catches his fancy. Overkill is too kind a word for this type of over saturation of print. Klosterman seems like he's trying to ape the style of David Sedaris but he can't quite come up with the memorable, entertaining language that makes Sedaris such a better writer.

Powers, on the other hand, seems to know a little about maintaining his focus. Occasional references will be mentioned during passages about Bush, Cheney, or Ashcroft, but you still know what he's talking about. He seems to indulge more in references as adjectives and not just name dropping filler. Klosterman does the same, but he's nowhere near as skilled at keeping it to a minimum and splurges on the latter more than using the former with reservation.

The most troubling problem with this pop-culture reference as adjective writing is that it's destined to be dated. This leads me to wonder whether writers today are even concerned about the staying power of their work. However many years from now, mentioning Survivor or American Idol will most likely be greeted with a blank stare or bewilderment. Or, most likely, the books will languish on the shelves, unread, unnoticed, and totally without cache.