As much as I love to read, I am immediately turned off by dialogue filled with scientific language and an lecture-like format. It is bland and boring. I struggle to stay awake. In order to capture my attention, I need a more descriptive and narrative format that can provide much more excitement for my eager mind. What is most clever about Don Stap's "Flight of the Kuaka" is that he conceals the science underneath a layer of descriptive narration. He begins the passage with his experience in New Zealand and then drifts off into the scientific nature of the passage. He also manages to decrease the amount of superfluous and technical language that science articles so often require. The appeal to the subject of the E7 is change dramatically just by altering a few boring words into more descriptive and lively phrases.
Although many scientific journals are educational, I find myself not learning anything because of the dryness and complex articulation of the information. But the information presented by Stap's is much more fascinating. First, he classifies the different bird species by introducing their proper names, which are easily pronounced and slightly humorous. For instance, there is the Bar-Tailed Godwit, the Black-Tailed Godwit, Bristle-thighed Curlew, Whimbrel, and the Eskimo Curlew. Sometimes I wonder if scientists could come up with better names.
Before I forget, the tone of Stap's is also tweaked a bit. The way he described the feat of the E7 implied a voice of incredulity that I was able to feel myself. How he emphasized that the E7 flew for eight days without stopping made me stop in bemusement. Scientific articles usually don't provoke any reaction, but the way the author formed his work made this experience very, very different.
The drifting you describe evokes the ease with which the reader can follow Stap's (beautiful) writing.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your thoughts about how his narration was a lot more intriguing to a reader who is not familiar with the subject. I didn't understand your point about his use of the birds' proper names - wouldn't that be a more "dry" part of his writing?
ReplyDelete