Let's Talk

“Personal essayists converse with the reader because they are already having dialogues and disputes with themselves” (XXIV). I’m afraid if I could’ve worded it better I would’ve, but as an “essayist”—and I laugh at the thought of calling myself such—I am a talker, which is paradoxical in itself. 

Let’s be frank, though. I don’t always write this way it’s just my default setting. In my natural habitat I examine my thoughts, refine them, define them, and piece them together. It’s all a scientific process and a lot of times writing down helps me understand where I’m going and where I’ve been. See, I’m still discovering myself. I guess I’m a little behind the curve in that area…maybe that’s why I write in questions? And am never really sure what I’m saying? I’ll declare it’s to engage you, but who are we kidding? The conversational style would bother me more, but I think it’s better to insight a feeling of partiality in the reader; this way they feel as if they have a say even if your words are clearly black and white. It’s all so intriguingly ironic. I could really say I exhibit several of the characteristics of the various personal essayists. For example, I don’t mind sharing semi-private details to aid in the discovery of a grander universal truth, I can definitely discuss my flaws openly (even though I didn’t choose to in my last post—this is because the pancakes were too monumental to overlook), cheek and irony are definitely devices I enjoy, and I really feel that it’s fun to meander from point/place to place. Writing is like thought, sometimes you arrive at the best destinations by taking a longer, more scenic route! Still, I exhibit the conversationalist the most, I would say. I actively include you don’t I? We’re talking/discussing. Yeah. We worked it out together.