Ryan Van Meter's Monster" (posted for Cece)
In his essay, "Monster", Van Meter utilizes a heavy sense of immersion with strong descriptors and vivid imagery of his haunted “graveyards” each year for Halloween to bring the reader in to the scene and feel as if they are right there with him. His rather poetic descriptions of the houses and items he uses for his graveyards are grandiose, for example: “so it appeared that whatever supernatural force had wrested this coffin from the ground of our landscaped front yard had done so without disturbing the soil, to resurrect a creature in a child’s tiny coffin with an old man’s face.” Lines like this one are powerful and make the scene of a childhood home on Halloween feel more fantastical and almost other-worldly.
I really enjoyed the way this essay was set up, with a story of a child growing up as seen through yearly Halloween scenes, that slowly builds up an underlying meaning of it all with the story really being about masks and how we use them to hide our true selves from the world. Between the immersive nature of the writing and the close attention to detail of a child’s individual experience of growing up and finding himself, the reader can easily relate this story to perhaps some of their own experiences growing up, while still maintaining the unique experience that Van Meter had during his own childhood.
I think that Van Meter did a great job of immersing his readers in the story while subliminally feeding them a deeper, more important underlying meaning that they can take away from this story. Which leads to my questions: At what point does immersing your readers in your story begin to take away from the deeper meaning that you wish to propose? Can a story become too personal to the point where your readers may not get anything out of it?
Great post, great questions. As far as the first question goes, I don't think a writer should ever worry about immersing their reader too much, and I'd argue that the further you can immerse them the more likely you are that they do come away from the story with a good understanding of the underlying meaning. I think Van Meter did such a great job drawing the reader into his childhood world of decorating for Halloween. I felt like I was right there with him and felt deeply sad when the other boys hit him with the water balloons. I don't think I was too immersed in the Halloween narrative to know what Van Meter meant by "He thinks he can hide behind a mask, but he can't," or "I like through my mask, which I couldn't take off." As far as the second question goes, that's something I was once worried about too when I turned an essay in for class. I was worried my story that people probably haven't experienced themselves would be too unrelatable to pull anything from, but I was dead wrong. Either the experiences we write are going to be something the reader can relate to, or are going to shed light on a new perspective, and both are worthwhile for the reader. I was never into decorating for Halloween, but that personal side of the story doesn't detract from the overall meaning. You can't write a story that that every reader relates to the personal side of it, but everyone can to some degree relate to wearing a metaphorical mask. I believe what is important is to utilize our personal stories to reach at an idea that universally relatable or idea the reader may not have considered.
ReplyDeleteIn my humble opinion, the imagery used in this story was a bit much for me, actually taking away from the immersion. This may be more of a me problem, however, because I am generally pretty quick to create an image when I read, so I don't particularly care for an entire paragraph describing the texture of some fake spiderwebs. That being said, this didn't stop me from really appreciating the underlying story of little boy growing up and dealing with his identity/desire for a different one. I loved the way Meter described his discovery of being a jump-scare guy on Halloween, and how he never realized this was a mask to avoid problems he faced the rest of the year. In this sense, while the level of imagery was a bit much for my personal taste, I think this is proof positive that immersion won't make the story "too personal" as long as the story being told still holds enough structure and intrigue to keep the reader going. I also wonder if it would be worth-while to go further into depth of what Halloween means to them after their teenage years, if it still holds that level of escapism that the night did in their teenage years?
ReplyDeleteAwesome post Cece! As far as your first question, I don’t think too much immersion should be something that any writer has to worry about, but maybe instead should concern themselves with the question description equal immersion. I think in Van Meter’s essay he came awfully close to using too much description in some of his larger block paragraphs. In that first scene where Van Meter is taking us through the haunted house with his father, I was hooked and in love, but as the essay went on and we kept getting these killer scenes of description I found myself wondering what we were doing. Are we talking about how haunted house look or is this a journey of self-discovery? And I think Van Meter saves the piece (not that he really needed to) by bringing his personal account back into the essay. Those moments where I found myself totally invested and immersed within his story were the moments leading up to a Van Meter scare and the ensuing reflections after. For me, the immersion didn’t come from the haunted house scene but Van Meter’s place within it.
ReplyDeleteAnd that brings me to your second question. I always get super annoyed anytime I hear that we can’t just throw a torrent of emotion on the page, and I get it. I mean I can’t just scream at a piece of paper until my face turns blue, but… what if I want to? I know we need perspective, as in stories like “the world is always dark, depressing and filled with mires of tragedy” are always better with, “but I remember a really beautiful sunrise and today a stranger held the door open for me.” I don’t know, I just feel like it has to always be about the expression (and that isn’t exclusively sad stuff) any and every way I can get at it. That’s the allure of writing for me; just being as honest with a piece of paper so that I might actually exist. I have a few really great friends who love me and all of them only know a sliver of who I am. The other week after one of my classes I was driving home in the dark and blaring “Rockin’ In the Free World”. I was driving down these residential streets and all the lights on the houses were off and no one was around, and the absurdity of the moment just smashed into me like an out of body experience. Here I was, after class, driving on the brink of tears and totally alone with this desperate need to be seen because at that moment I felt so excruciatingly close to exactly who I am. This was followed by the insatiable urge to write it in the hopes that one day someone I don’t know might know something true about me. Was this too personal?
Great analysis and questions! I agree with Jake on the first question. Van Meter is certainly skillful in his use of descriptive language, and he really immerses us in his childhood world. However, at times, this borders on style over substance for me. For example, he very descriptively tells of his “stolen” game board pieces in his second paragraph, but this paragraph makes me wonder where he is going with this piece. We don’t learn the real “meaning” of this piece until the second-to-the-last page. (I learned well in Dr. Thompson’s Critical Studies course that no work ever has a single “meaning,” so I have the rather annoying habit of always enclosing that word in quotation marks.)
ReplyDeleteAs readers, I believe we grant greater creative license to writers of fiction. We expect that a novel will take us down many paths, and even a few dead ends. And we may finish a novel and still wonder about its “meaning.” However, I tend not to grant the same degree of creative license to writers of nonfiction (although perhaps I should). I do not expect the nonfiction writer to “hide the ball,” which I believe Van Meter does to a certain extent in his piece. That said, I should consider that Van Meter is perhaps “blurring the boundaries” rather than “hiding the ball.”
In response to the second question, I believe that a story can be too personal and thus jeopardize the writer’s intended “meaning.” Last semester I read Two Lucky People: The Memoirs of Milton and Rose Friedman, a nearly 700-page doorstop of a book. (Okay, I skipped parts.) Milton, a Nobel Prize winning economist, relates every petty slight and every accolade ever received over his long career. It was information overload, and for me it was too personal. I just didn’t want to know that much about the Friedmans. Few of us lead such interesting lives that we can fill a 700-page memoir and keep the reader engaged.
And, no, Robert, your Neil Young-inspired writing is not too personal. I'd enjoy reading it!
Thanks for the post Cece :)
ReplyDeleteI've read Ryan Van Meter before and while I think he's really talented at crafting setting through imagery I think the main issue that comes from using too much of it is that it compromises pacing and plot. This essay is carried more by moves and scene transitions more so than character action. Because of this we have a hard time getting to the heart of the essay and have a hard time keeping our investment in the story. There's a strong sense of theme carried throughout his prose but the idea he's trying to convey gets a bit muddled in the abstract. That being said, I think that this essay has a lot to teach us regarding specific elements of writing. BJ's podcast mentions that Van Meter's very specific descriptive language creates some very immersive and unique worldbuilding and I couldn't agree more. This essay utilizes some tools that are more typical of fiction writing that I'd never thought to include in a personal essay.
I only think a story becomes "too personal" when it reveals specific details that overwhelm the audience and takes them out of the narrative. While a lot of non-fiction delves into subjects like trauma, sex and death and can be meaningful and cathartic, it can risk upsetting your audience before building any sort of connection with them. So I think the Goldilocks standard of being just personal enough depends on where in the essay you introduce that information. If it's clear from the start of the essay you'll be covering a subject like sexual trauma, it'll be up to the reader on whether or not they're on-board to engage with your piece (which is a pretty good argument for trigger warnings). If you introduce it at the end of your piece after building a strong emotional connection with your reader, it can generate a great deal of sympathy, anger or whatever reaction you're trying to provoke which will be the sentiment that your reader will forever associate with your writing.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen a writer is immersing the reader I think it is important to give enough background and detail to ground the reader in the atmosphere intended but that being said it is also important to keep it light. You don't want the reader focusing too much on the focal point that they lose sight of the intended meaning. I think that Van Meter is a wonderful writer and that his essay created a great environment for the reader. He creates the best scenes from Halloween but I almost feel like he is too focused on the Halloween narrative that I missed a lot of the intended meaning behind hiding our true selves. When it comes to immersing the reader be detailed but broad at the same time to prevent your reader from missing the bigger meaning. This was a fun piece to read and I could even picture myself as a child walking through haunted house and seeing different graveyards while trick-or-treating but I wanted more about how everyone hides who they are even when it isn't Halloween. I mean Halloween they really wear masks but even on a day to day basis people pretend to be something or someone they are not to impress someone or act a certain way to get a job.
ReplyDeleteGreat post and questions Cece!
ReplyDeleteAs far as immersion goes, like a few people have said, I don't think that a writer needs to worry to a great extent about immersing the reader too much. Some of the best stories I've read are ones that make me forget about absolutely everything else and really engage with the scene or subject matter. Where the worry lies, I think, is in the way the writer pulls the reader out of the immersion. If done correctly, it should flow naturally and not feel too sudden, but it also should not feel like the reader has to come up for air, if you will, after reading a one page paragraph on the color of the wall, for example. Like Charlie mentioned, I found myself thinking of the Van Meter essay as possessing some hallmarks, craft-wise, of a fiction piece, rather than a non-fiction piece. These hallmarks certainly aid in creating an image in the readers mind, which may be especially important when considering that the events are ones that actually happened, and not necessarily up for reader interpretation.
As for whether a story can become too personal or not, I find myself wondering where the line has to be drawn, and who gets to draw that line. I don't think it's realistic to imagine that a writer can please every reader; there will always be someone who doesn't agree, someone who doesn't relate, or someone who refuses to read the work. There's no telling if including trigger warnings or writing the work in a different or more censored way would've caused people to pick up or put down the piece. If a writer is going to talk about potentially personal topics, such as trauma, it's the responsibility of the reader to make the decision to read the work or not. If the writer can be upfront about the content, (without using trigger warnings) then the reader can either decide to read the piece or not. I agree with Charlie about introducing any potential personal or traumatic topics towards the end of the narrative, when the reader has likely already become invested in the piece. If someone doesn't like a piece, it is doubtful that they will continue to read it. But it is important to note that the author is not responsible for the feelings that their writing evokes within the readers. If they were, then reader-response criticism wouldn't be reader-response criticism, and no one interpretation would have any more value than the next, because the writer would be directly responsible for every single emotion, every single reader feels. On a related topic, trigger warnings have a similarly diminishing effect on pieces. If included and heeded, trigger warnings serve their purpose. But if they are included and not heeded, triggered readers cannot decry the writer for including potentially triggering content; they have removed themselves from the discussion by choosing not to engage with the piece. Also, there is no way to truly know what topics will trigger which readers. A writer can avoid largely graphic topics, but this limits the writer to topics which still may trigger readers. Some may argue that trigger warnings, if used and heeded correctly, do no harm; it is only when they are used incorrectly when they become problematic. This, however, is not always the case. Including trigger warnings suppresses academic freedom by creating a space where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own. In this way, readers never address new or triggering topics, which is not only detrimental in a learning environment, but also ineffective psychologically, as avoiding triggering topics only reinforces and represses the feelings that caused the trigger in the first place.
I loved this style of writing. I am huge on imagery and immersion within writing, and I do a lot of it in my own. I do though understand how it can be a bit much. Some parts of the audience have very specific tastes, while others have other tastes. When writing an essay with so much immersion involved, I think an author needs to expect that some people will not like that, especially when it is supposed to be nonfiction and at times can feel a bit more like fiction. This to me is that aspect of creative nonfiction that leans heavily on that creative side, which is a side I think a lot of us lean to, as a lot of us are creative writers.
ReplyDeleteI do think immersion does have those limits though, as as far as your first question, I think it entirely depends on who is reading this type of work. Some people can pick that deeper meaning up right away, some it takes a few reads, and some cannot get past the immersion. It is all about the style of reader, what they enjoy, and what they are used to. This is not a bad thing in the slightest, to me it is actually a fantastic thing. It brings a big area for discourse on the style of writing, and how different perspectives can interpret that writing. I think there is a time when a story becomes too personal, but again I believe it depends on who is reading it. If we are putting our everything into describing these things that we go through, we leave no room to connect it to anything bigger, anything with our audience. Sometimes people like reading that, but I know we have discussed wanting to connect, and a lot of readers do want to connect, but it is difficult to do so when everything is so specific to that persons life. Sometimes it is hard to draw that line though, because I know I have gotten to caught up in describing me that I forget about the audience, or I write so much if what I want I forget that people are supposed to want things too. It is a very complicated cycle that I think writers need to make sure they keep in the back of their head. No matter how badly we want to be selfish with it, sometimes the audience matters more, especially if we want to make any money.
As usual, great discussion and questions to start us off, Cece!
ReplyDeleteI thought “Monster” was a fun, Halloween-appropriate piece, and very relatable considering my own love for the holiday (?). My birthday is in late October, so I usually celebrate with a Halloween party instead, and reading Van Meter’s descriptions of his annual graveyards brought me back to making “potions” with fallen leaves and food coloring in bottles bought from Goodwill. In this nostalgic way, I loved reading “Monster.”
I also felt that Van Meter did a good job of establishing the importance of this holiday (?) in his own life, where he made it an opportunity to be in control of his own world and to escape from the person he usually was (or was seen as). He is reflective on this throughout the piece, recognizing that “normal” kids would be out trick-or-treating with their friends, while he was perfectly happy sitting deadly still in his lawn, waiting for the next unsuspecting, costumed kid.
That said, there were some places where I felt my eyes shifting down the page, looking for more than just description. Like Scott mentions, details like the game pieces seem trivial and even excessive—why does he steal the pieces? Why doesn’t he talk about them afterwards? Why should we care where he keeps them? Throughout the story, I was waiting for the game pieces to make their return; instead, I was bombarded with descriptions of rubber bats and wadded newspapers and his mother’s clown mask.
However, Van Meter’s discussion of masks as devices of escape were quite compelling. Even as a kid in the haunted house, he realized that most everything around him was fake, but he allowed himself to see the magic of it all instead. While this seems a little contrary to his later-life reflection on our reliance upon masks and our fear of being our genuine selves, I think the beauty of hiding behind a mask and making pretend is still important to Van Meter and anyone else who is not (or has not always been) comfortable in their own skin.
I love your questions, Cece!
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I think that the quesiton of immersion/meaning is a very delicate one. Because you're absolutely right! Too much immersion means that the reader isn't thinking about the story as a story, and isn't paying attention to any deeper themes that the author deliberately put in the piece. However, if the reader isn't immersed at all, I've found it makes for a very boring reading experience! For me, at least, the trick is to think about meaning as something that periodically surfaces throughout the story. Like as you progress through the story, I think there do need to be a couple moments where the immersion lessens a little, and the meaning almost breaks through the surface. That way, when you finally get to the point where the meaning fully surfaces within your piece, it's a welcome moment for the reader!
As for your second question, I think it really depends on how the author chooses to handle the personal details they choose to divulge! For me at least, I think those personal details are almost always welcome, because they allow the audience to further sympathize with the pov character (which is almost always the author, in creative nonfiction). However, I do think that there are some issues that need to be handled somewhat delicately. If an author is going to divulge some really heavy details, it's probably best to handle that moment very carefully. Typically, you want to share enough to get your audience invested, but you don't want to share so much that they become genuinely concerned for you as a person, because then that breaks the immersion, and lessens the impact of your story.
Great starting post!
ReplyDeleteI've never really thought of the amount of imagery in a story taking away from the meaning of it, though it seems obvious to me now. Too much imagery can confuse me or cause me to become bored in a reading, and ultimately, yes, these things do take away from the meaning of a story. I did really like the essay "Monster" but I did find myself drifting focus at times with the long descriptive parts. My eyes started skimming and I thought about what homework I had due this week before I snapped out of it. Then I had to reread sections a couple of times. I found myself most interested at the very end, when more of the meaning of the essay was revealed, and I liked the small memory moment that the mom gives. Even tying in that Van Meter didn't want his mother in particular to come outside and see him after the water balloon incident because of embarrassment was very impactful to me. I find myself hiding from the people who are closest to me when I'm found in an embarrassing moment, because their perception of me really matters.
Anyway, that's an aside, but I think it leads into the next question of how personal is too personal? I'm really drawn to personal pieces, so I'm usually not thrown off by personal detail. I would rather it be personal and meaningful to the author than distant and vague. These personal stories need to have meat to them, though. If you write a piece that's personal but altogether unrelatable to an audience to the extent that it makes it uninteresting, then maybe that piece should stay in your notebook. I get writing for catharsis, but we need something beyond that to have a compelling piece for a broader audience.
ReplyDeleteGreat post Cece! To answer your questions, I think immersion can be an unseen balance in a lot of writing. It might be a hard balance to come by especially if the stories are very descriptive in nature. One thing I think Van Meter did a good job at was telling his story and dropping subtle hints that this story has a much greater meaning to it than what he was telling us. At times though, I was a little bored while reading the story because his use of description was very precise but I noticed that we would almost always come back and recenter his writing on the greater premise of the story. So yes, I think it’s a hard balance but if the writer goes back to the deeper meaning or routes his story back to it I think the immersion of the writing has the potential to go anywhere.
To answer the second part of your question, I think that readers connect to vulnerability. I think the more vulnerable and personal you are in a story, the more potential you have to connect to a variety of readers. I think Van Meter also did a good job at being personable in this story and he gave us readers good hints about his life and had us see what it was like for him to grow up and who he was as a person. I think at times when writers want to reveal something about their life that is very personable it’s good to drop character hints and build up to the moment of revealing what it is, and he did a great job at that in his story. But for other writers that want to reveal very personable things, I think trigger warnings at the beginning of stories are important.
Hey Cece, great post and questions! I found Van Meter’s piece very interesting and full of great details! As I read the intense and specific details I think helped to enhance and pull the reader in without being too overwhelming, I think without these details it would take away from the story and the creepy Halloween feel he brings to his piece. Having said that, I did have trouble wondering what the deeper meaning of the piece was and how this was supposed to contribute to his self-discovery later. For example, the mentioning of his mother knowing he was gay when he was young seemed out of the blue and aburpt compared to all the intricate and intense details of the graveyard and his thrill of scaring the trick or treaters every year.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I found his piece very well-written and I loved the details and description of putting up the graveyard and scaring kids every year, but the personal reasons for it (which even Van Meter seemed confused about) were a little lost on me and weren’t conveyed/tied up at the end to make full sense to me as a reader. I didn’t see the ending as Van Meter had ended it and I felt disappointed almost at the outcome because I was expecting a big scare or something learned. If Van Meter had wanted to pull in more about his self-discovery and how he was different, which he did but it felt less emphasized as he dedicated himself to the graveyard each year, I would have liked to see more self-reflection through this time to emphasize his point. This might have helped readers to see why he was doing the graveyard and was so dedicated (not caring about anything else) to it as well as maybe bringing in more information about his father that was linked to this than the small snippets of information that Van Meter gives us in his piece. The personal effect to this piece may be a bit much and explanation or further exploration of Van Meter’s discovery that happened at the end may help the piece to be more relatable for readers.
Hi, Cece!
ReplyDeleteFirst I would like to thank you for your great response and questions! I agree that Van Meter really utilized a lot of vivid imagery in his writing and I am not sure how I feel about it because there are some parts that I believe could be left out because I simply could not see how any of them relate to his overall story. However, I still enjoyed reading the vivid description of the character's experiences and so on, it is just that the author can sometimes go overboard with it and as a reader i did experience a little cognitive overload while reading the piece!
To answer your first question, the main important thing to consider as a writer is to find the perfect balance, and that might not be the most easiest thing to do, but it is sure important for writers to do so! I think BJ mentioned this in class during the first few weeks, although I cannot remember the exact words that he said, it was something along the lines of, "will the readers care about this?". By keeping that in mind, we can ensure that the plot of the story can be smooth and organized. Moving on to the second question, I think context is fairly important here. I think it is very important that writers control what needs to be put out there because it can really have a huge impact on the entire flow of the essay or the story. Again, finding the perfect balance is key.
Thank you for these great questions!
ReplyDeleteWith immersion, I feel that the story did go into some unneeded detail that took away a bit from the story, as adam mentioned the fake spider web description was a bit much and seemed to not play much of a part. However, I do feel that the detail used worked really well for the setting and atmosphere of the story and it served a great purpose there.
For your second question, I don't believe there is a clear answer. that being said, all writers and readers have different styles. Writers can use detail in a metphorical sense that could be even more beneficial than just stating a fact. Readers also are going to see things differently and they appreciate the style that appeals to them as readers. I think finding a good balance is crucial but that can look different for anyone!
Great questions and insight Cece. I enjoyed Van Meters extensive description. I think in doing so he makes his essay stand out. We don't always see essays that put us quite so deep into the shoes of the author. I also think the poetic nature of the piece mimics how the author viewed the world as a child. He loved Halloween and scaring people so much that it almost feels poetic to him. However, I do think Van Meter walked the fine line of "over doing it" a few times when it comes to his descriptions and almost set foot into too much territory. For example, after him and his father got out of the haunted house at the school Van Meter described everyone flushed with their hands on their chest as if they were about to talk to the flag. I took me a second read over to realize that he was talking about them saying the pledge of allegiance. I really like the way he didn't outright say this, but coupled with every other time he doesn't say something outright, it almost falls into too much.
ReplyDeleteTo answer your second question, can writing every become too personal, I don't think so. I think the personal is how we relate to our readers, and I think people appreciate authenticity and genuine experience. However, another question that comes from this then is, who cares? You can get personal, and people can appreciate it, but none of that matters if your personal story can't give rise to something larger and more relatable to the masses. Our personal stories is the pathway to understanding or cooping with larger issues, and that seems to be what readers what to engage with.