Different Writing Styles, Same Travel Writing Genre

In another English class that I am taking, we write blog responses to readings much like we do in this class. The very first response was about genres; looking at the creation of genres, what they are, and the significance of them in writing. The prompt for this week calls us to look at three readings, Metthiessen, Cahill, and Dalrymple and evaluate the difference styles that each have adopted, while staying within the boundaries of the travel writing genre.  

The Cloud Forest, written by Matthiessen, is done in the diary style. Each day is recorded and the ability to significantly analyze what he is going through it lost because of this. Although, he does have a keen ability to describe to the reader what he sees, hears, and experiences, so that they too can feel as if they are present with him. The quote we discussed in class is the perfect example of this. “There came a sudden avalanche of tropical rain, crashing to earth, and immediately, in a small stream, small fish like sun-fish leaped and whirled.” His imagery is what brings the reader along.

In Xandu, written by Dalrymple, is done by intertwining historical accounts with his own. I am not sure if this would count as a writing style, but for me it does. Dalrymple, who is following Marco Polo’s journey to Asia, compares Polo’s experiences to his own. At the beginning of the reading he talks about his experience at the Holy Sepluchre. He described the tension and awkwardness between the Greeks, Armenians, and other groups that worship there. He then goes on to explain how Marco Polo, who also visited the Holy Sepluchre in 1217, would have felt that same awkwardness since Jerusalem had been taken over by Islam just thirty years before. This mix of contemporary and historical writing helps to put both experiences into perspective.

Pecked to Death by Ducks, written by Cahill, I think, was the most interesting style out of these three. I would say that Cahill’s style seemed to be a serious-humor. He didn’t travel out of the country to a faraway place, he was within American borders experiencing and observing a barrio on the west coast. He was taking a serious issue, mainly drugs, and writing about the people that live their life under that influence. Although it is serious, like I said, he takes an almost humorous tone with his descriptions. “I saw it all in my mind's eye: thousands of chronic PCP users stumbling and lurching through the parking lot, all of them sweating and drooling, growling and barking, attacking anything that moved in their delirium, stumbling after their prey with glazed, marble eyes. And you couldn't hurt them, these zombie assassins. They'd just keep coming for you, like creatures out of the Night of the Living Dead.”

These three styles of writing are completely different and as we found out in class discussion, some people gravitate towards specific styles. This might have been predictable but I would say that I enjoyed Dalrymple’s In Xandu the most, both in writing style and in content. Matthiessen’s style, for me, is too much. It’s too descriptive and I think that takes away from the content. There has to be a balance. As for Cahill’s piece, I enjoy a good laugh and I would say it came in a close second for me, but there’s a time and a place for humor. Not everything can be funny. Even though I didn’t enjoy every piece we read, it is cool to think that such different styles fit into the same genre.